Post by homeschooldad on Sept 14, 2023 17:54:52 GMT
www.churchmilitant.com/news/article/tucho-pushing-magisterium-of-pope-francis
There have been so many articles, and so much commentary, on this recent issue, that I saw no need to add to all of it here, but there are two things that stand out to me about this article in particular:
First, I have to wonder if people are getting confused, and thinking there is some new doctrine that has been introduced, "the doctrine of the Holy Father". I don't think that's the case. Keep in mind that the Cardinal probably didn't speak or write in English. Thus, something may have been lost in the translation. Fernandez seems here simply to be saying that "what the Pope says goes", that what he teaches cannot possibly be in error, and that he has some kind of special charism that no one else has. That would be problematical given the very real issues with this papacy, as brought out, among other places, in the open letter to the bishops, but that is not the same thing as creating a new "doctrine of the Holy Father".
Second, I could be wrong, and so could Fernandez, but I have questioned before whether acquiescing to the spouse's use of contraception where that spouse refuses to practice NFP is actually a sin on the part of the spouse doing the acquiescing. I have even gone further than Fernandez, and wondered if, in cases where pregnancy can't be risked (but no form of contraception, aside from any moral issues, is 100% foolproof, "oops babies" are conceived all the time), and the aggressor spouse won't abstain, the victimized spouse could use some form of (non-abortifacient) contraception, not willingly, but to protect herself (and it would almost have to be "herself", unless you had an Al Bundy-like situation where Peg is demanding sex and won't abstain, and Peg will hurt Al if he doesn't do it). In such a case, it is more like rape than consensual sex. Nobody denies that a rape victim may take any and all measures to resist an aggressor's fertility. That would be a hellish marriage to be in, but I have no doubt it does happen.
There have been so many articles, and so much commentary, on this recent issue, that I saw no need to add to all of it here, but there are two things that stand out to me about this article in particular:
First, I have to wonder if people are getting confused, and thinking there is some new doctrine that has been introduced, "the doctrine of the Holy Father". I don't think that's the case. Keep in mind that the Cardinal probably didn't speak or write in English. Thus, something may have been lost in the translation. Fernandez seems here simply to be saying that "what the Pope says goes", that what he teaches cannot possibly be in error, and that he has some kind of special charism that no one else has. That would be problematical given the very real issues with this papacy, as brought out, among other places, in the open letter to the bishops, but that is not the same thing as creating a new "doctrine of the Holy Father".
Second, I could be wrong, and so could Fernandez, but I have questioned before whether acquiescing to the spouse's use of contraception where that spouse refuses to practice NFP is actually a sin on the part of the spouse doing the acquiescing. I have even gone further than Fernandez, and wondered if, in cases where pregnancy can't be risked (but no form of contraception, aside from any moral issues, is 100% foolproof, "oops babies" are conceived all the time), and the aggressor spouse won't abstain, the victimized spouse could use some form of (non-abortifacient) contraception, not willingly, but to protect herself (and it would almost have to be "herself", unless you had an Al Bundy-like situation where Peg is demanding sex and won't abstain, and Peg will hurt Al if he doesn't do it). In such a case, it is more like rape than consensual sex. Nobody denies that a rape victim may take any and all measures to resist an aggressor's fertility. That would be a hellish marriage to be in, but I have no doubt it does happen.