Ordinary Magisterium

Regarding “Amoris Laetitia and the Constant Teaching of the Catholic Church” by Cardinal Raymond Burke (In Depth, May 1 issue): Could Cardinal Burke have erred? His Eminence is right to say, “The only key to the correct interpretation of Amoris Laetitia is the constant teaching of the Church and her discipline that safeguards and fosters this teaching.” The controversial footnote (351) in Amoris that might seem to imply a permission to admit couples not married sacramentally to Eucharistic Communion should definitely be interpreted in the light, for example, of Pope St. John Paul’s explicit teaching (Familiaris Consortio, 84) and Pope Benedict XVI’s (Sacramentum Caritatis, 29) that they should not be admitted. (Couples refraining from sexual intercourse would, of course, be the exception.)

Cardinal Burke, however, may err when he calls Amoris Laetitia a “non-magisterial document.” He is right that not every utterance of the popes is infallible, but to deny the magisterial nature of this papal document is to diminish its relevance and to diminish the relevance of similar documents published by earlier popes. Familiaris Consortio, for example, by St. John Paul, is a masterpiece of papal teaching that will help us interpret Amoris Laetitia. It, too, was a post-synodal apostolic exhortation, as were Pastores Dabo Vobis on the priesthood and Vita Consecrata on consecrated life by Pope John Paul. We can’t call into question the weight of the recent exhortation without diminishing the authority of the teaching of Pope St. John Paul and Pope Benedict. What is more, the very title “apostolic exhortation” speaks of the magisterial nature of the writing.

What is Catholic “magisterium”? It is the moral and doctrinal teaching of the pope and the bishops in union with him directed to all Catholics. There are more or less formal modes of magisterium that participate more and less in the gift of infallibility granted to the Church, but as the Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches, even the ordinary papal magisterium teaches the faithful the truths that they should believe and the charity that they should practice (2034). Apostolic exhortations are admittedly low in the hierarchy of authoritative magisterial documents, behind the teaching of ecumenical councils, the formal papal proclamation of dogmas, the Catechism and papal encyclicals, but the explicit intention of this papal writing is to teach bishops, priests, deacons, consecrated persons, Christian spouses and all the lay faithful. These are the people to whom Pope Francis formally directs his magisterium on the title page.

                        Father Antonio Anderson, SOLT

                        Nuevo Laredo, Mexico

 

Cardinal Burke responds: In response to the letter of Father Antonio Anderson, SOLT, STD, regarding my article in the May 1 edition of the Register, I offer the following response: Although Amoris Laetitia is a post-synodal apostolic exhortation and other post-synodal apostolic exhortations have, in the past, generally belonged to the magisterium, it would be mistaken to conclude that because other such documents, for example, Familiaris Consortio, are magisterial, therefore Amoris Laetitia must also be part of the magisterium in the same way.

The type of document does not make it necessarily magisterial; the content does. Reading Amoris Laetitia in the light of the Catechism of the Catholic Church and in the light of the Church’s magisterium, the parts of the document which illustrate and apply constant Church teaching certainly are magisterial, but those parts that are reflections of personal positions of the Holy Father are not magisterial.

Amoris Laetitia is written in a very different way from magisterial documents. The Pope himself says that the document contains his reflections after the experience of the synod, and those reflections are personal. The Holy Father indicates clearly his own reflections by his use of the first-person singular. Pope Francis explains at the beginning of the document:

“For this reason, I thought it appropriate to prepare a post-synodal apostolic exhortation to gather the contributions of the two recent synods on the family, while adding other considerations as an aid to reflection, dialogue and pastoral practice, and as a help and encouragement to families in their daily commitments and challenges (4).”

The Church has never held that everything that the Pope says or all of his reflections are part of the magisterium. We have not been accustomed to this kind of writing on the part of the Holy Father, and we must, therefore, realize that Amoris Laetitia is a different kind of papal writing.

I cannot reach any other conclusion in the matter. To teach authoritatively in the Church is a very serious matter, in which one understands that he is not speaking personally, not in the first-person singular, but as the Successor of St. Peter. And so this document has to be read as containing the Holy Father’s personal reflections. All of the above being said, it must be added that, while Amoris Laetitia is not a magisterial document, it has an effect in the life of the Church. As a writing which follows upon the synod of bishops and is proposed by the Roman pontiff as “an aid to reflection, dialogue and pastoral practice,” it will have significant effect upon those who read it and study it.

 

Moral Authority

Why is the moral authority of the Church so invisible? Where is the objection to the bullying of Arizona, Indiana, Georgia and North and South Carolina over the pressure brought by the NFL, the NBA, the Disney Corp. and other companies, forcing the vetoes and reversals over religious-freedom laws?

Companies and organizations have usurped the moral role of the Church without a notable peep from Catholic leadership. Such an abdication is a serious violation of moral conscience and an insidious form of evil. The head of the NCAA has said his organization’s objection to the laws was based on social justice! Social Justice is in the moral purview of religion and the Church. What can be done to have our Catholic leaders speak out forcefully on religious-freedom issues? Their silence is deafening and immoral.

         George Garbell

         Phoenix, Arizona

 

The editor responds: The moral authority of the Church hasn’t gone anywhere. Just because it’s often not visible doesn’t mean it’s not there. As many of the Church Fathers have taught, and as it has been borne out throughout Church history, prayer, fasting and penitence are far more effective than a public protest over injustice.

 

God Is the Cure

Some say the upcoming election will determine the moral direction America will take. However, I am beginning to think that America can’t be fixed by mere national elections anymore. It seems our great republic has lost any semblance of common sense. For instance, the pro-choice crowd argues that government cannot force a woman to make decisions regarding her own body. But then they see no problem when that same government forces everyone’s health insurance to include contraception coverage.

It is unconstitutional to say “God bless America” in public schools. Our national motto “In God We Trust” and the phrase “One nation under God” have become politically incorrect. Why do we constantly oppose God? Why are people offended by his name? The greatness of America did not come from being politically correct.

America’s greatness came from being an open society where everyone is permitted to speak his or her mind, regardless of what anyone else believed. I believe America is in need of a spiritual revival. Franklin Graham said it well: “The only hope for America is not the Democratic Party, and it’s not the Republican Party.

The only hope for America is God. We as a nation are in trouble, and only God can fix it.” If God becomes irrelevant, he will not preserve us as a nation.

The upcoming election will definitely determine our future and whether we hold onto our constitutional and moral principles. We need to elect a president who believes in America’s greatest strength: her families. We need a president who will secure our borders and keep America safe; who will abide by the oath of the office and support the Constitution of the United States; who will defend our religious liberty and the God-given right to life of all people, from conception to natural death; who has leadership qualities, integrity, character and virtue.

Above all, we need a president who not only has a strong belief in God, but fears him, as well.

         Ken Sims

         Moorhead, Minnesota

 

Correction

In the June 12 issue story “Saints Who Defend Freedom,” the correct date for the relic tour in the Archdiocese of Philadelphia is June 25. The Register regrets the error.