De Omnibus Dubitandum Est.

Further to the story about Fr Weinandy , I was asked earlier today how theologians going public with their letters and 'corrections' square their actions with Donum Veritatis  (the instruction on the ecclesial vocation of the theologian)  which is pretty clear about not going public: 30. If, despite a loyal effort on the theologian's part, the difficulties persist, the theologian has the duty to make known to the Magisterial authorities the problems raised by the teaching in itself, in the arguments proposed to justify it, or even in the manner in which it is presented. He should do this in an evangelical spirit and with a profound desire to resolve the difficulties. His objections could then contribute to real progress and provide a stimulus to the Magisterium to propose the teaching of the Church in greater depth and with a clearer presentation of the arguments. In cases like these, the theologian should avoid turning to the "mass media", but have recou...

The Benedictine Dom Hugh Somerville -Knapman has written an excellent and incisive blog on the Correctio Filialis here . His jumping off point is some of the bizarre rhetoric spouted by Massimo Faggioli as I noted here recently. Quoting Faggioli on Twitter, Dom Hugh exclaims: his breathtaking self-contradiction needs to be noted: accusing those who support the old Mass of being “rupturist”, he then says that what he labels an “extraordinary form of catholic theology” can have “no possible coexistence” with “an ordinary form of Catholic theology”. How can asserting that modern theological opinion cannot exist with doctrine established over the centuries be anything other than “rupturist”! Faggioli really displays his ignorance in this rant and Dom Hugh appears quite astounded by the depth of it! This either/or approach to Church teaching—either you are modern or you are wrong—as well as his subtle and pernicious cooption of the name of Joseph Ratzinger in apparent support o...

I thought this was an interesting article by Dr. Jeff Mirus at Catholic Culture . It is uneccesarily critical of the Correctio filialis , it seems to me, suggesting that, because there is nothing in any sense “official” or “canonical” about the filial appeal, it is a futile effort, in fact, just one of SIX corrections issued to Pope Francis so far as Edward Pentin reports : "This is the sixth major initiative in which both clergy and laity have expressed concerns about the Pope's teaching, particularly emanating from Amoris Laetitia . Despite the repeated pleas and warnings of chaos and confusion, Francis has refused to respond or acknowledge the initiatives which are as follows, in chronological order: In September 2015, just ahead of the second Synod on the Family, a petition of nearly 800,000 signatures from individuals and associations around the world including 202 prelates was presented to Pope Francis, calling on him to issue words of clarity on the Church...

There has not been any substantial academic response to the Filial Correction as I have noted in other posts , but there has been a visceral emotional one. It strikes me that those who support Pope Francis pastoral over doctrinal approach (an approach condemned as Marxist by Cardinal Müller recently) on this is issue are progressives who never mention his stance on the reality of the devil , or gender ideology . That tells me something. It tells me that what they want is not the Gospel of Jesus Christ, but something more in line with the world, more attuned to the social zeitgeist. A something expressly identified in the encyclical Pascendi Dominci Gregis as the synthesis of all heresies and defined as Modernism. The Modernist says that in previous centuries, the dogmas of the Faith, such as the dogmas of the Trinity, were true, but since dogma evolves, it may no longer be true today. For the Modernist, dogma evolves into whatever accommodates the needs of the current culture...

Cardinal Müller speaks to Edward Pentin in this morning's National Catholic Register in what I think is the most important and revealing interview I have read regarding the situation in the Church at the moment. I have felt frustrated with Cardinal Müller who obviously understands the depth of crisis we are in, but has remained quiet and publicly supportive of the Pope when he could have spoken out against Amoris Laetitia and Pope Francis' lack of response to the dubia . Now he has been removed as prefect of the Congrgation for the Doctrine of the Faith, there is a real risk that any comments he makes will be see as sour grapes. HOWEVER, it strikes me that in this interview, the Cardinal is very balanced and very gracious, making his respect for the person of the Pope clear, while also making his opinion on certain controversial issues equally clear. I found his lament:  "I am sure that anybody will denounce me also for this interview, but I hope that the Holy ...

Fr. Andrew Pinsent, B.A., M.A., Ph.D., Ph.B., S.T.B., Ph.L., Ph.D.(again) is one of the most amazing priests I've ever met. He is Research Director of the Ian Ramsey Centre for Science and Religion at Oxford University, a member of the Theology Faculty, a Research Fellow of Harris Manchester College and a Catholic priest of the diocese of Arundel and Brighton. A focus of his present research is the application of insights from autism and social cognition to 'second-person' accounts of moral perception and character formation. His previous scientific research contributed to the DELPHI experiment at CERN and he is a co-author of thirty-one publications of the collaboration. Fr. Pinsent has a first class degree in physics and a D.Phil in high energy physics from Merton College, Oxford, three degrees in philosophy and theology from the Pontifical Gregorian University in Rome and a further Ph.D. in philosophy from Saint Louis University. He is also a member of the United ...