Sunday, July 21, 2019

Is Francis a Jansenist who doesn't believe in Love and Free Will?

It appears Francis has joined Martin Luther in believing in the heresy of imputed grace justification which denies free will and love which as we will see apparently has lead him to to affirm Jansenism.

Luther's image of imputed grace was that man was a pile of dung covered with snow.

Protestant "justification" for him was totally corrupted man being covered by grace and with no free will because of his corruption to fulfill the moral law.

The pro-Francis Bishop Robert Barron wrote Martin Luther is "a mystic of grace" and "the religious movement he launched was 'a love affair.'"

Francis's love affair with Luther's justification heresy goes even farther than Barron who said "I disagree with lots of his ideas."

Francis referring to Luther said:

"Lutherans and Catholics, Protestants, all of us agree on the doctrine of justification. On this point, which is very important, he did not err." (patheos.com/blog/scotticalt, "Pope Francis is Wrong about Luther and Justification," April 5, 2017)

Barron and Francis need to explain what part of man being a pile of dung covered with snow (grace) so corrupt that he isn't free to fulfill the moral law is "not err" and a "love affair."

Apparently, Francis by his Lutheran denial of free will affirmed a Protestant-like heresy called Jansenism which denied love for "love under compulsion is hardly love."  It appears that Francis "removes the very essence of love—freedom."

The theologian Jessica M. Murdoch, a associate professor of fundamental and dogmatic theology at Villanova University, explains:

"Thus the Jansenists reduced morality to meaninglessness. There is no hope here—one inescapably acts according to a delectation that does not in any way correspond to one’s free will. Both merit and damnation are possible without true freedom."

"By rendering the will passive, Jansenius removes the very essence of love—freedom. For love under compulsion is hardly love. In the view of Jansenius, our storm-tossed souls merely crest and fall with no possibility of self-control. The upshot: Sin is ultimately God’s fault, rather than ours, because God could place the irresistible love of virtue in our souls, yet chooses not to."

"... But [Francis's Amoris Laetitia Lutheran and Jansenist] moral and anthropological pessimism do not do justice to God’s mercy. For God’s superabundant mercy extends to redemption in Christ, who takes on our very nature in the hypostatic union and truly sanctifies our nature interiorly. By sanctifying us in a startlingly intimate way, the merciful God creates love in us—makes us lovable, draws our hearts into his own, and makes us fully free and capable of living the Christian life with vigor and joy. The moral norms of the Church are grounded, therefore, in what we might call a supernatural realism. Contrary to the sentiments of our age, realism is not found in an anthropological pessimism that settles for the 'grey' of continually 'missing the mark' and denies God’s transformative love. Rather, through faith we know that God’s grace makes us capable of virtue, even at times heroic virtue, as we see in the lives of the saints, who we might say are the most real among us."

"We are, indeed, plagued by a new sort of Jansenism, one rooted in presumption rather than despair. The 'old' Jansenism arose from both anthropological and theological despair—the Catholic absorption of total depravity, and the loss of hope in the possibility of salvation. Ironically, those who criticize the four cardinals—and anyone who believes that Amoris Laetitia is in need of clarification—often fall into a new form of Jansenism. This 'new' Jansenism is marked by a similar pessimism with respect to human nature—total depravity under a new name, whether 'weakness' or 'woundedness' or 'greyness.' And like what preceded it, the new Jansenism articulates a loss of hope in the power of grace to regenerate the soul. The difference is that the new Jansenism tends towards presumption. Whereas the Jansenism of old despaired that anyone could really be loved by God, be good enough to receive Holy Communion, or be saved, its newer version has so little faith in the power of God to change hearts that it presumes God does not care for something so insignificant as the human heart. No, God is too busy to care about my paltry sins. None are loved personally as they are, but rather all are loved in a great, amorphous mass of humanity that could not but be saved. One need not be in a state of grace to receive Holy Eucharist, because the state of grace is not a real possibility for most people."

"At first blush, the new Jansenism sounds encouraging—none are guilty, all are saved! In truth, however, a pessimism that would canonize all is only a shade less pessimistic than one that would condemn all to hell. As St. Thomas notes, both despair and presumption are sins against hope."
[https://www.firstthings.com/web-exclusives/2017/02/the-new-jansenism]

It appears that Francis's Amoris Laetitia as confirmed by the Argentina Letter teaches the sin against hope which is the heresy of presumption taught by Luther.

The theologian Dr. Lawrence Feingold explains the heresy:

"[T]he original doctrine of Luther presumed to be certain of salvation without the necessity of contrition."
(Course Notes for Fundamental Moral Theology, December 2009, p. 160)

Amoris Laetitia and the Argentina Letter declare that those committing adulterous sexual sin can receive Communion and hope to be saved without contrition or are "hoping to obtain forgiveness without conversion."

The Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches:

"[P]resumption... [is] hoping to obtain forgiveness without conversion."
(CCC, n. 2092)

Francis apparently teaches the heresies of Luther and the Jansenists which deny free will and deny of love. Remember:

"By rendering the will passive, Jansenius removes the very essence of love—freedom. For love under compulsion is hardly love."

 Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church. 

No comments: