Evangelii Gaudium - Analysis And Opinion - Part 2

Continuing with my thoughts on the Evangelii Gaudium, this entry, too, will quote selected passages from the Evangelii Gaudium.  Following each quoted passage in italics will be my analysis and opinion.

"35. Pastoral ministry in a missionary style is not obsessed with the disjointed transmission of a multitude of doctrines to be insistently imposed."

This is a classic form of a "straw man" argument.  "'Straw man' is one of the best-named fallacies, because it is memorable and vividly illustrates the nature of the fallacy. Imagine a fight in which one of the combatants sets up a man of straw, attacks it, then proclaims victory. All the while, the real opponent stands by untouched." [1] This creature makes the quoted statement above but has no evidence to support it.  The unsubstantiated claim he alludes to is that any pastoral ministry that is not his missionary style is necessarily "obsessed with the disjointed transmission of a multitude of doctrines to be insistently imposed."  In other words, this creature wants to eradicate all existing ministries that he arrogantly assumes are "obsessed with the disjointed transmission of a multitude of doctrines to be insistently imposed" and to force his own style of "pastoral ministry" upon all ministries under him.  In the very next sentence, he tries to cover up his arrogance and unsubstantiated claim by asserting an ideal using flowery prose that truly stink:  "When we adopt a pastoral goal and a missionary style...the message has to concentrate on the essentials, on what is most beautiful, most grand, most appealing and at the same time most necessary. The message is simplified, while losing none of its depth and truth, and thus becomes all the more forceful and convincing." [2]

After criticizing "the disjointed transmission of a multitude of doctrines to be insistently imposed," this creature without so much as taking a pause, transmitted a multitude of doctrines in the next two paragraphs quoted below that I personally find disjointed:

"36. All revealed truths derive from the same divine source and are to be believed with the same faith, yet some of them are more important for giving direct expression to the heart of the Gospel. In this basic core, what shines forth is the beauty of the saving love of God made manifest in Jesus Christ who died and rose from the dead. In this sense, the Second Vatican Council explained, “in Catholic doctrine there exists an order or a ‘hierarchy’ of truths, since they vary in their relation to the foundation of the Christian faith”.[38] This holds true as much for the dogmas of faith as for the whole corpus of the Church’s teaching, including her moral teaching.
37. Saint Thomas Aquinas taught that the Church’s moral teaching has its own “hierarchy”, in the virtues and in the acts which proceed from them.[39] What counts above all else is “faith working through love” (Gal 5:6). Works of love directed to one’s neighbour are the most perfect external manifestation of the interior grace of the Spirit: “The foundation of the New Law is in the grace of the Holy Spirit, who is manifested in the faith which works through love”.[40] Thomas thus explains that, as far as external works are concerned, mercy is the greatest of all the virtues: “In itself mercy is the greatest of the virtues, since all the others revolve around it and, more than this, it makes up for their deficiencies. This is particular to the superior virtue, and as such it is proper to God to have mercy, through which his omnipotence is manifested to the greatest degree”.[41]"

Perhaps one who is erudite will find the foregoing two paragraphs cohesive and "most beautiful, most grand, most appealing" and "simplified." [3]   I am not that person.

I am not erudite and his nonsense is making me nauseous but I want to continue even at the risk of being wrong and being chastised that it is me who is spewing nonsense and not him.  So let me now examine paragraph 39 quoted below:

39. Just as the organic unity existing among the virtues means that no one of them can be excluded from the Christian ideal, so no truth may be denied. The integrity of the Gospel message must not be deformed. What is more, each truth is better understood when related to the harmonious totality of the Christian message; in this context all of the truths are important and illumine one another. When preaching is faithful to the Gospel, the centrality of certain truths is evident and it becomes clear that Christian morality is not a form of stoicism, or self-denial, or merely a practical philosophy or a catalogue of sins and faults. (Emphasis added.)

The first three sentences are "set-ups" to lure the reader into a dizzying trance with pretty prose.  Do not be deceived.  "Hidden" in the middle of the fourth and final sentence of the paragraph quoted above, the ugly truth reveals itself beginning with these words: "Christian morality. "  He never defines "Christian morality" but lets the reader make the almost subliminal connection between that and "the Christian ideal ", "the Gospel message " and "truths ".  The question is how can the "Christian ideal " in the first sentence, "the Gospel message " in the second, and "truths " in the third be so casually grouped together under "Christian morality " without first laying the foundation for such a critical grouping?   When did "the Christian ideal ", "the Gospel message " and "truths " become merely "Christian morality "?  I take issue with this construction because in my mind, the Christian ideal is living the Gospel message which are divine truths.  To dilute such truths embodied in the Christian ideal into a set of rules of proper conduct that is "Christian morality " is to eviscerate the divine truths, making them subject to judgment and compromise.  Truth is never subject to judgment or compromise.

No sooner than this creature groups "the Christian ideal ", "the Gospel message " and "truths " under his "Christian morality " umbrella he attacks it.  He states that "Christian morality is not a form of stoicism, or self-denial, or merely a practical philosophy or a catalogue of sins and faults. " [4]  Let me emphasize part of what he is saying: "Christian morality " which based on my analysis encompasses "the Christian ideal " "is not a form of...self-denial... " [5]  Does that mean that self-restraint is no longer necessary to be a Christian, so that under this creature's papacy, Catholics can binge on alcohol and drugs every morning and indulge in incessant lurid sexual escapades every night with impunity?  He does not answer that.  He leaves that open for interpretation and moves on ever so deftly and insidiously to the topic of love.

On the topic of love, this creature states under paragraph 39 of Evangelii Gaudium that "[b]efore all else, the Gospel invites us to respond to the God of love who saves us, to see God in others and to go forth from ourselves to seek the good of others. Under no circumstance can this invitation be obscured! All of the virtues are at the service of this response of love."

Be very careful what he is alluding to, that the God of love saves us no matter what we do, however many times we sin, however egregious our sins including our rejection of God.  Then without pausing, not even with a punctuation mark, he completes the sentence again with fragrant flowery prose to obscure the stink of his diabolic agenda.  He wants us to be so focused on his "pastoral ministry" that he completely and intentionally omits to speak of repentance.  To further prove my point, he specifically states that "Christian morality" is not a "catalogue of sins and faults" [6] as if we could ignore our sins and would not have to be responsible for them. [7]

One can buy every word this creature has said so far but I am walking the other way and have been since Day 1 of his papacy.  I prefer to follow the path of Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI, one that goes toward the pristine Church where Christ is present and not toward Hell where Satan resides.




[1] http://www.fallacyfiles.org/strawman.html
[2] Evangelii Gaudium, paragraph 35.
[3] Ibid.
[4] Evangelii Gaudium, paragraph 39.
[5] I zoom in on "self-denial " only because it is easiest for me to address even though I have a lot of problems with his choice words like "stoicism " (a "straw man" -- Christ was not stoic), "practical philosophy " (another "straw man"), and "a catalogue of sins and faults " (in his view sins are apparently now just things that belong on a list out of millions and millions of lists made by people of this world and not divine truths that God has decreed).
[6] Evangelii Gaudium, paragraph 39.
[7] Satan always makes things so easy for us by using arguments that are specious and temptations that are appealing and comforting.