More On Cardinal Wuerl And Amoralis Lamentia

The thing is entitled "Sharing In The Joy Of Love".  Many progressives are just giddy with joy over it - understandably so, for now immorality and heresy can be formally foisted upon unsuspecting Catholics.  For instance, we see this tweet from Cardinal Cupich; please read some of the replies under it, for some Catholics aren't afraid to speak truth to him.

Then we see Michael Sean Winters from the Not-At-All Catholic Reporter gush that "Cardinal Wuerl's Pastoral Plan On Amoris Laetitia Points The Way Forward", begging the question "forward to where?".  He answers his own question by opining, "We cannot, as some guidelines issued by other bishops, such as those from Archbishop Charles Chaput, skip over the process of accompaniment and discernment and simply repeat the certainty that the divorced and remarried, all of them, without exception and no matter their circumstances, can never be brought to the Eucharistic table."  News flash!  There is no authentic "discernment" whatsoever without the proclamation that adulterers may not receive Holy Communion on pain of sacrilege.  Winters goes on to mock EWTN, First Things and other faithful Catholics.

Canon Lawyer Ed Peters wrote a very cautionary piece on Wuerl's so-called "implementation".  He states that it can be used to justify disobedience to Canon 915.  He leaves open the question as to whether or not that is the intention of the plan.  However, Cardinal Wuerl's past actions leave little room for doubt as to the intentions behind this SJL piece.

I will post more developments as I learn them.

Did The Pope Just Answer the Dubia In The Worst Way Possible?

As way of review, I link to my post in which I published the original letter of the four Cardinals.  In that letter are the five dubia as they were formally promulgated.

In September of 2016, the pope wrote a letter to some Argentinian bishops in which he said that "in some cases", divorced and civilly remarried Catholics (that is, Catholics living in the mortal sin of adultery) could receive Holy Communion.  Furthermore, that letter stated that there was "no other interpretation" of Amoralis Lamentia possible.

Comes now the news that the pope has declared that this letter that he wrote to the Argentinian bishops is "authentic Magisterium".  That is, he has attempted to change the teaching of the Catholic Church that she received from Jesus Christ Himself centuries ago.  See here for another analysis.

Does the meme to the right depict the current state of affairs of the Church?  Does this new "magisterium" rise to the level of formal heresy?  If not, why?  If so, it would seem that we may not have a pope, save the Pope Emeritus.

At any rate, it would appear that the pope has indeed answered the first of the five dubia incorrectly.  Now will Cardinals Brandmuller and Burke issue the formal correction immediately?  How much more damage must ensue before that happens?

One Bright Spot In The USCCB Gabfest In Baltimore This Week

The USCCB held their annual Baltimore meeting this week.  What were the issues being considered by the shepherds of the Church in the US?  Here's a line from the Not-At-All Catholic Reporter: "The longest and most passionate discussion on the first day of the fall assembly of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops Nov. 13 focused on immigrants, on how to help them but also how to drive home the point that they, too, are our brothers and sisters and should not be demonized."

Got that?  The emphasis was not on the large-scale apostasy from the faith by so many Catholics, not the abysmal state of catechesis and priestly formation, not baby-murder and the encroachment of homosexuality in our culture - but immigrants.  Also notice the de facto demonization that occurred, that was directed at those of us who do not coddle the illegal border-crashers.  Cardinal Cupich slandered us by insinuating that we engage in "poisoning rhetoric".  Ladies and gentlemen, that was before he lost the Pro-Life Chair election to Archbishop Naumann.  One can only imagine how he might have been railing against our "rhetoric" with some choice rhetoric of his own!  More on that below.

We do know that the bishops are going to issue a "presidential statement", since they don't appreciate that President Trump is actually behaving as, well, a president.  Goodness!  With all this passion and angst expended to flout the nation's immigration laws, why, the bishops haven't had much time to devote to their other pet issues - like "climate change and "gun control".

But this event hasn't been a complete progressive jabber-jaw session.  The USCCB's Pro-Life Office will be headed by Archbishop Joseph Naumann of the Kansas City Archdiocese and not by the uber-progressive Cardinal Cupich.  I cannot think of two many other bishops who are more polar opposites than these two.  The former has chided pro-aborts, obeyed Canon 915 and expelled the Girl Scouts for their moral lapses whereas the latter has done his utmost to bog down the pro-life cause in seamless-garbage morass.  Cucpich, when Bishop of Spokane, went so far as to forbid his priests to participate in the 40 Days for Life campaign.

The vote is a curious one.  Cupich is clearly a darling of the progressive Vatican.  Yet he was defeated in his bid for this rather influential post.  Usually a cardinal occupies that position, but this time tradition has not been followed.  Yet the vote spread itself still remains a bit troubling; a 54% to 46% split cannot be called a landslide.

Let's go on to other matters, one of which is particularly nonsensical.  Bishop Richard Malone of Buffalo NY spoke as a representative of the Bishops' Committee on Laity, Marriage, Family Life and Youth.  He was asked by a member of the American Society for the Defense of Tradition, Family and Property whether or not Amoris Laetitia allows Catholics living in adultery to receive Holy Communion.  Malone refused to answer the question, saying (among other things), "it is not in my providence to respond to that question right now".  Remember - Malone is on a committee for marriage and family life, and he refuses to answer a question that the average Catholic of 50 years ago could answer in a flash.  The answer (of course) is that Church teaching has always forbade those living in mortal sin to receive Holy Communion.  Period.  This committee is tasked with coughing up a "pastoral plan" to implement Amoralis Lamentia, i.e., to devise some "wiggle room" to cajole Catholics to accepting sacrilegious Holy Communions.  The ones who would be the most imperiled are those adulterers who would be given false comfort while they commit sacrilege on top of their adultery, confirming the trajectory of their souls towards hell.

I believe this year's extravaganza is over.  If it wasn't financed by our donation dollars, it was by federal lucre (they receive quite a few bucks in government grants) which stems from our tax dollars.  Either way, we footed the bill for it.  What a waste!

Pope Francis Appoints Pro-Abort To Pontifical Academy For Life

The maxim "personnel is policy" contains much truth.  With that in mind, faithful Catholics are aghast at the appointment of a known pro-abort to the Pontifical Academy for Life.  Recall that last autumn, Pope Francis dismissed all the members of that academy.  Now he is starting to reconstruct it to his liking.

The pro-abort's name is Nigel Bigger.  He is an Anglican minister who believes that baby-slaughter should be legal until 18 weeks.  He tried to diffuse our incredulity by claiming that is views on euthanasia conforms to Church teaching (forgive us if we look askance at that claim).  However, all who rightly claim the label "pro-life" are opposed to all forms of murder (murder being defined in Catholic moral theology as "the deliberate taking of innocent human life").  So clearly Pope Francis could have selected from thousands of faithful Catholics who adhere completely to the Church's Traditions regarding life and family.  He might have simply reappointed some former PAL members who were dismissed last autumn.  Why, oh why, did Pope Francis see fit to select someone who is at clear, sinful variance with the Church?  It's worth a reminder that last autumn Pope Francis did away with the requirement that all PAL members adhere to the Jerome Lejeune Oath.  When I wrote that post last November, I asked why the pope saw fit to eliminate that requirement.  I think we now have the answer to my earlier question.

One Peter Five has details of others who were (re)appointed to the PAL.  Two of the more vocal critics of Amoralis Lamentia were not reappointed.  Cardinal Caffarra, one of the four dubia cardinals, was reappointed; but his omission would have stunk to high heaven and would have been a public relations black eye to the pope.  Another troubling appointment was made: that of Anne-Marie Pelletier, a professor who joins the pope in dissenting from Church Tradition on family and marriage.

More and more the progressives at the Vatican are abandoning their facades of fidelity to Sacred Tradition.  In related news, Rorate Caeli informs us that this past Sunday, the Bishop of Santa Fe in Argentina (a Pope Francis appointee) conducted a Mass that can only be called sacrilege.  He announced during Mass that according to the norms of AL, adulterers would be admitted to Holy Communion at that Mass.  Indeed they were.  While he committed mortal sin, as did all those who received unworthily, he was correct in stating that his sacrilege was in conformity with Amoralis Lamentia.

To my friends who insist on wearing rose-colored glasses with regards to this pope, who persistantly think that starry-eyed naivete is a virtue: please cease lying to yourselves and each other.  The sooner you admit the truth, the sooner you can start praying and acting to preserve the Faith in yourselves and those around you.

Blasphemies And Outrages Pouring From The Vatican

Three months ago, I wrote that the bishops of Malta are allowing divorced/remarried Catholics, that is, Catholics embroiled in the mortal sin of adultery, to receive Holy Communion while continuing with their adultery.  They compounded their sin by ordering their priests, on pain of suspension, to imperil their own souls by thus complying with mortal sin and sacrilege.  What was Pope Francis' response to it?  Why, he thanked them for their interpretation of Amoralis Lamentia.  If nothing else, he at least removed any reasonable doubt as to what he intends Amoralis Lamentia to do.

Just days later comes the news that one of the Maltese bishops, Archbishop Charles Scicluna, is stating that contraception is permissible.  Oh, yes, right now he's stipulating that only married couples should use it, but we see how that worked out in 1930 for the Anglicans, didn't we?  Remember - this is just days after the Pope approved their interpretation of Amoralis Lamentia.  It is reasonable to believe that this lurch into immorality also meets with the Pope's approval.  Has Amoralis Lamentia paved the way for the Catholic version of the 1930 Lambeth Conference?  Remember - at that time, the Anglicans allowed for disobedience to God's commands for sexuality and marriage "only in limited circumstances.  Eighty years later they celebrate baby-murder, sodomy, etc.  They've gone so far as to recognize lesbian "bishops".  God forbid that this poison progresses much further in Holy Mother Church.

But the poison has manifest itself in another, more insidious way.  One Peter Five has news of a troubling homily that the pope gave within this past week.  I ask you to read it in its entirety as it features a translation of the homily by my friend Andrew Guernsey.  Both men are correct in saying how the theology is mostly accurate, but for the gross error thrown in there.  In other words, we're talking of a healthy, nutritious meal laced with just a little bit of arsenic.  In a nutshell, the pope isn't merely saying that Christ took on our sins for our redemption, he's saying that Christ became the devil.  This is both a horrid blasphemy and a logical absurdity.  Let's not kid ourselves.  He knows exactly what he is saying.  While he may wish to hide under the "lovable bumpkin who gets his words jumbled sometimes" veneer, one must admit that excuse is getting rather old.  You might recall that the pope once said that the boy Jesus probably had to beg forgiveness from His parents when He remained behind in Jerusalem.  Last month he joked that "the Holy Trinity is arguing behind closed doors".

Yes, these quips are blasphemous, but they also betray an abysmal lack of appreciation for Who God is.  If that is lacking, is it any wonder that doctrinal errors spew forth from the Vatican on a regular basis?  Without an adequate intellectual and philosophical understanding of God and His Holy Nature, there will be no sound basis for proclaiming the laws dictated by God.  With that kind of willful ignorance at the helm of Holy Mother Church, it behooves us all to pray, frequent the Sacraments and educate ourselves regarding the tenets of our Faith.  We will also have to actively resist error as it slaps us and our loved ones in the face.  Read some words of wisdom from Venerable Fulton Sheen on this topic.  Now I'll end with a recording of a homily regarding Amoralis Lamentia.

Amoralis Lamentia Defenders Demonstrate The Necessity For The Dubia

Last Friday I alluded to facebook discussions in which I'm currently embroiled.  Many of the participants are of the mindset that: 1) no doing or saying of the pope can ever be subject to scrutiny and debate and (even more troubling) 2) if the current pontiff says anything then it must be blindly accepted regardless of the Teachings of the Church promulgated before the current papacy.

Such is the discussion regarding Amoris Laetitia.  On the one hand, they state that of course all must read AL in light of Church teaching.  Then in the next breath they say, "the pope is opening the doors for mercy", "the priest can act as a tribunal and proclaim a marriage dissolved", "not all situations fit into the rules", etc.  Doesn't that first one make you wonder just what "doors for mercy" have been closed these previous 2000 years of Church history?  Anyway, they are inadvertently providing clear evidence of why the dubia need to be answered.  They are infected with the very confusion that Cardinal Burke et al are trying to prevent - confusion that can actually lead to the damnation of immortal souls.  Below I post an interview given by Cardinal Arinze, during which he points out that no one may change Divine law.

Diocese Of Rome Lures Adulterers Into Mortal Sin And Sacrilege

LifeSite News reports that Cardinal Agostino Vallini, Vicar General of the Diocese of Rome, has released guidelines based on Amoralis Lamentia that lure adulterers into greater mortal sin by receiving Holy Communion while carrying on in that state.  Cardinal Villini is merely the Vicar General of that diocese.  The Chief Shepherd of that diocese is none other than Pope Francis himself.

These directives fly in the face of the Teachings of the Church.  They most certainly contradict Humanae Vitae, Familiaris Consortio and others.  Supposedly this is to be allowed for limited cases and only when the adulterers are consulting with a confessor.  But think about this for a minute.  If these adulterers are conferring with a confessor, is not that confessor explaining to them the gravity of both adultery and receiving Holy Communion while in that state?  Therefore the adulterers should know that their sins are grave.  The confessor is supplying them with knowledge of the Church's teaching.  If they continue their sin, they are thus doing so in full knowledge of the sin and in deliberate disobedience to the Church.  Therefore we see: 1) grave matter, 2) full knowledge 3) deliberate consent.  The educated Catholic will know that these three conditions determine mortal sin.  It only takes one mortal sin for a soul to be damned to hell if he/she doesn't rectify the matter within the Sacrament of Confession.  If adulterers receive Holy Communion while in a state of mortal sin, they commit yet another mortal sin, that of sacrilege against Holy Communion.  No Amoralis-Lamentia-based double-talk will erase that reality.

Now in order for a valid Confession to occur, the penitent must have the firm purpose of amending their sinful ways.  That means they must actually quit the sin, not merely give lip service to it.  If they approach the Confessional while having no intention of correcting their fault, they commit a sacrilege against the Sacrament of Confession.

Again, this is the Diocese of Rome.  Does anyone really believe that this guideline, which is in reality an outright temptation to mortal sin, would ever have been promulgated without the permission - if not instigation - of its bishop Pope Francis?  We see more seduction to mortal sin coming from Cardinal Francesco Coccopalmerio, president of the Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts.  This is the Vatican office charged with interpreting Church law.  He stated that adulterers who "want to change their situation but cannot" can receive Holy Communion.  He gave an example of a woman shacking up with a man and his children.  He states that she may be unable to leave lest she neglect her duties to the children.  But what "duties" are discharged by flaunting adultery before the children's eyes?  See this post from Toronto Catholic Witness for some analysis of Coccopalmerio's heresy.

We also see the following developments:

• The news of Cardinal Burke's being dispatched to Guam
• The long knives coming out for Cardinal Muller after he declared that sanctifying grace and mortal sin cannot coexist in a soul.
• The persecution of Father Peter West

These developments seem to be the attempts to silence those clergy who hold fast to Christ's words to us through Tradition.  I suspect we'll see more such persecutions and more blatant moral heresies.  Pray that either the dubia are answered or that the four cardinals take their next steps with all alacrity.

Amoralis Lamentia Oozing Through The Archdiocese Of Washington

Long-time readers of this blog will recall the key roles that Pope Francis gave to Cardinal Wuerl during the two synods that were the cover for culminated in Amoralis Lamentia (see here and here).  Therefore it is no surprise that the Cardinal is singing the dubious praises of AL, giving great cause for concern for the over-emphasis on the role of subjective "conscience".

In the online version of the Catholic Standard, an article was released today dealing with a letter that the Cardinal sent to archdiocesan priests regarding Amoralis Lamentia.  As you read it, note the incorrect exaltation of subjective conscience.  Basically what he says is that all priests can do is remind their parishioners of what the Church teaches, but at the end of the day each person will do what he/or she wants based on their "conscience".  Completely lacking is any mention of the fact that if these "consciences" run counter to the Teachings of Jesus Christ, then any acquiescence to these "consciences" (in a saner time, they were called "temptations to sin") would be sinful - perhaps mortally sinful.

Note this quote from the Standard: "Our task as pastors of souls is to provide the guidance that we hope will lead the person to more fully grasp the teaching and make a right judgment,” the cardinal wrote. Noting the catechism’s teaching on forming and following one’s conscience, he added that priests “are called to walk with the faithful so that they might grasp, understand and make their own the teaching of the Church… But the person, not the priest, makes the final personal conscientious judgment.”

Do you notice how there's no mention of any remedy when these "final personal judgments" lead to mortal sin?  Please note that if a person continues in an action that he/she knows goes counter to the Teachings of Jesus in matters of marriage and sexuality, they already know it's a grave matter and they most likely have deliberated on it.  I believe those are the elements of mortal sin.  Remedy most certainly is needed in those cases for these people imperil their own souls and those of others (including their accomplices in adultery).

The article ends with a thinly-disguised dig at the four cardinals who issued their dubia.  It's not too surprising that Wuerl might do that since he most likely had some hand in the proceedings of the sin-nods, if not the crafting of Amoralis Lamentia itself.  However, not all share his opinion.  Last month Msgr Charles Pope of the Archdiocese of Washington wrote a piece that appears in the National Catholic Register.  In that piece the Msgr stated his support of the dubia and restated clear teaching that de facto adulterers cannot be admitted to Holy Communion, "consciences" notwithstanding.

Faithful Catholics, Msgr Pope is quite correct.  Precisely because he's correct and is a priest of the Archdiocese of Washington, we need to lift him up in prayer and to make plain to the DC chancery that our eyes are open, lest he be subject to retribution, much like Father Guarnizo was five years ago when he withheld Holy Communion from a practicing lesbian.  I've also written before about the harassment being inflicted on the Knights of Malta.  Today things there took an ugly turn as we learned that the pope demanded the resignation of the Knight's Grand Master, Fra Matthew Festing.  All Festing did was what was required of him in dismissing the condom-dealing official.  Might Msgr Pope suffer similar vindictiveness?  We must watch and pray.

Akita And Fatima Prophesies Playing Out Before Our Eyes

Our Lady of Akita warned that bishops would be pitted against bishops.  Again Our Lady of Fatima she prophesied that the final battle would revolve around the family.  Today we are seeing both these words bear fruit as we see the smoke of Satan issuing forth - with some of it coming from the pope.

Today Catholic Herald published details of an exchange between the pope and some Lutheran pilgrims from Finland.  He told them that "the intention of Martin Luther 500 years ago was to renew the Church, not divide her".  How he divines such an intention is beyond me.  Luther's rebellion spawned many wars, but that's not the worst of it.  His errors led countless millions into eternal damnation as souls cut themselves off from the One True Church.  Unless there is evidence of Luther's repentance and reversion to the Faith, we have reason to believe he's not in a good place.  His life is a lesson to us, true, but it is a lesson in the sorry effects of rebellion, disobedience and deliberate eschewing of the Sacraments.

That being said, why, oh why, is the Vatican commemorating Luther by having its post office issue stamps commemorating him?  Can it be because Luther, who was an ordained priest, jettisoned his vows of celibacy and married?   Well, if they really want to showcase people in Church history who have made mockeries of marriage, perhaps they should issue stamps commemorating King Henry VIII of England.  They could make several of him, showing him with different wives.  Maybe they'll want to go back to the time Christ walked the earth and have one commemorating Herod and Herodias.  Perhaps I shouldn't be saying these things because I might just give them ideas.

Meanwhile, dissident bishops are becoming more brazen.  We heard last week of the scandal being instituted by the bishops of Malta in permitting adulterers to receive Holy Communion to the detriment of their eternal well-being.  One of them, Bishop Mario Grech of the Diocese of Gozo, is compounding his disobedience, heaping disgrace upon his miter, by ordering his priests, under pain of suspension, to distribute Holy Communion to known adulterers.  This insult to Our Lord Himself has precedence, some of it stemming from my own parish almost five years ago.  Recall how the Archdiocese of Washington ejected Father Marcel Guarnizo when Father would not give Holy Communion to a flagrant lesbian.  I've no doubt that had Father Guarnizo been incardinated in this diocese, that he would have been suspended.

In contradiction of the bishops of Malta and in standing for the teachings of Jesus Christ, three bishops of Kazakhstan - including Bishop Athanasius Schneider - released a letter urging that we pray for Pope Francis to revoke "guidelines" such as those issued by the Maltese bishops.  The letter reiterates that God's teachings on marriage and the Eucharist are sacrosanct and immutable.

The bishops of Malta are again being quite flagrant - so flagrant that they cannot be ignored.  If the pope pretends not to notice, I believe we will know where he truly stands on these matters.

Maltese Scandal - Exemplifying The Need For The Dubia

The Catholic blogosphere is alight with the scandalous statement of the bishops of Malta, erroneously claiming that adulterers can be admitted to Holy Communion.  LifeSite News has details of the scandal, with links to the original document AND to the Vatican's L'Osservatore Romano.  The latter published the Maltese heresy, giving it an unmistakable aura of approval from the Vatican.

The sections of the Maltese heresy to which LSN refers are paragraphs 9 and 10.  Notice how it's peppered with references to Amoralis Lamentia (my name for the AL heresy seems most appropriate in this context).  I'm going to unpack this in "bullet format".

• "divorced person, living in a new relationship, manages, with informed and enlightened conscience,  to acknowledge and believe that he or she are at peace with God, he or she cannot be precluded from participating in the sacraments of Reconciliation and the Eucharist".  That's a mouthful, not to mention a mountain of pure spiritual poison.
• "informed and enlightened conscience"  In the context of justifying both mortal sin and sacrilege, this phrase is a misnomer.  It is God's teachings, as communicated through the Catholic Church in her 2000-year old tradition, that is the only true enlightenment.  What the Maltese bishops are calling "informed and enlightened conscience" is one that has been seduced and deformed by progressivism.
• "he or she cannot be precluded"  These bishops, in addition to thumbing their noses at both Canons 915 and 916, are setting souls, already mired in mortal sin, on the road to sacrilege and (if the situation isn't soon corrected) eternal damnation.  They are doing the same for their own souls.
• "manages..to acknowledge and believe"  Doesn't that sound like a bit of a process involving some effort?  It's a tacit admission that it takes some considerable mental gymnastics and convolution to pretend that God's Holy and Immutable Law now allows for mortal sin to continue and for that sin to be compounded by sacrilege.
• "There are complex situations where the choice of living as brothers and sisters becomes humanly impossible and gives rise to greater harm."  More poison
• "complex situations"  The only time complexity would arise is if someone did not want to obey the Sixth Commandment.  The Ten Commandments are very simply stated.  They are not complex at all.
• The commandments are simple to understand.  But they often are not easy to obey.  The words "simple" and "easy" are not synonyms.  God's grace is needed to obey the Commandments.  God's grace will only be available to those who will submit to His will and who will do what is necessary to obey Him.
• "greater harm"?  What harm can exist that is greater than the loss of salvation and the condemnation to hell for all eternity?  One unrepentant mortal sin will condemn a soul to hell.  Adultery is one such sin.  These Maltese bishops, by this "guidelines", will numb the consciences of such adulterers so that they have no incentive to take serious stock of their lives.  Again, these bishops not only imperil the souls of their flocks, but their own as well.

My previous sentence might just apply to Pope Francis himself if he continues to stonewall the four cardinals and ignore the dubia.  He is trifling with the souls of millions of people - perhaps his own, as well.

There is one tiny silver lining in this cloud.  I've seen talk in traditional Catholic circles of people wishing to flee to a Catholic land and not fight this sick culture any more.  Malta was high on many of their lists.  I hope this most recent event has served notice on them that they cannot attempt to run from this fight.  We must stand and act like the Church Militant that we are.  If we keep running and ceding ground to progressivism and evil, eventually there will be nowhere else to hide.

Glaring Evidence Shows The Need For The Dubia

If there are lingering doubts as to the necessity for clarification of the mess known as Amoris Laetitia (or as I call it, Amoralis Lamentia), let these facts show why the dubia must be taken seriously.

Today it was announced that Bishop Robert McElroy of San Diego has ordered his priests to give Holy Communion to adulterous Catholics.  In other words, he is ordering his priests to commit mortal sins of sacrilege in offering Holy Communion to unrepentant adulterers AND to contribute to the mortal sin of sacrilege on the part of those who desperately need the medicine of repentance.  Of course no faithful priest can do that.  Such is the way that Amoralis Lamentia is emboldening those who care not one whit for the Sacraments of Matrimony, Eucharist and Penance.  Recall that one of the dubia questions deals with this very topic.  We pray for these priests as they are being put into a horrible position, that they have the courage to withstand the evil even as it emanates from their own bishop.  We pray even more who will acquiesce to this sinful suggestion with glee.

This same bishop also ordered his priests to welcome "LGBT families".  That phrase in quotes is an oxymoron.  Two same-sex adults in a perverted relationship can never constitute a true family.  No real "family" can exist in a situation based on mortal sin.  Again, McElroy is commanding his priests to validate sinful situations - something that no priest can ever do.

We see similar affirmation of mortal sin in the Archdiocese of New York.  Joseph Sciambra has details of a "retreat" being offered to those embroiled in perversion at St. Francis of Assisi parish.  Apparently that parish is quite a cesspool in that regard.  And let's not ever forget what happened in my own parish over four years ago when Father Marcel Guarnizo withheld Holy Communion from a flaming lesbian and was punished by Cardinal Wuerl for being a faithful priest.

So now one can see the confusion that Amoralis Lamentia is causing.  I believe this confusion is being intentionally created.  The progressives in the Vatican do not want to overtly state their intentions to junk the Traditions of Jesus Christ so they wish to do so by subterfuge. This is why so many of them hate the dubia-letter posted by the four cardinals; it is forcing the progressives to be up front about their goals, and they understandably find themselves threatened.

We saw the utter defensiveness of some a few days ago.  Today we saw a reaction from the Vatican that can only be called "lashing out in fear and guilt".  The Dean of the Roman Rota, Archbishop Pio Vito Pinto, actually threatened the four cardinals by saying that they could have their cardinalates stripped from them - for daring to ask for clarification.  Jeff Mirus of Catholic Culture also took note of the fear and guilt that seems to be all over Pinto.  Cardinal George Pell came to the defense of the four cardinals, wondering how anyone could actually disagree with a question.  He's right; by definition, a question is not a statement of fact or opinion so there's nothing in it with which one can disagree.  Will we soon hear that Pinto is drawing aim at Pell's cardinalate?

We must continue to pray.  Pray that the pope indeed does clarify AL to be in conformity with the timeless teachings of the Church.  But if he won't let us pray that the festering boil of heresy will come to a head so that it can be lanced and healed quickly.