With that in mind, I think we need to look seriously at the homily he gave today. He stated that observances of law and discipline are signs of a "weak heart" (please note I corrected the spelling of "weak"). I'm appalled that as an example he used a prior discipline of a Eucharistic fast, going so far as to call it a "very heavy cross". He credits Pope Pius XII for amending the discipline. But..does that mean he thinks that the previous popes, from Pius XI on back, were just a bunch of Pharisaical meanies for instituting the fast in the first place?
After he complains about the inconvenience of the fast, he goes back into a tirade against "rigid" (or is that neo-pelagian?) folks. He "confesses" that he asks the Lord to (I'm not making this up!) "throw a banana peal in front of them". I see little repentance, to be frank, for wishing harm to people with whom he disagrees. I fail to see how slipping on a banana peal is supposed to make people realize they're sinners; perhaps some good old-fashioned "rigid" proselytizing might do the trick.
But let's look at what's being slipped into the discussion and perhaps our thinking. He's using as an example a discipline regarding the reception of Holy Communion. Is he trying to instill questioning mindsets about other Eucharistic disciplines and even dogmas? What happened six weeks ago? The Sin-Nod! What was put into the final relatio despite the vote of the attending bishops? We see in the Italian translation of the preliminary questionnaire some discussion about distribution of Holy Communion to divorced/remarried Catholics who, by definition, are living in the mortal sin of adultery.
What happened today was no unintentional gaffe. When he says he's "teaching" I believe him. It's part of the