The Year of Mercy is over!
1. It is asked whether, following the affirmations of "Amoris Laetitia" (nn. 300-305), it has now become possible to grant absolution in the Sacrament of Penance and thus to admit to Holy Communion a person who, while bound by a valid marital bond, lives together with a different person "more uxorio" (in a marital way) without fulfilling the conditions provided for by "Familiaris Consortio" n. 84 and subsequently reaffirmed by "Reconciliatio et Paenitentia" n. 34 and "Sacramentum Caritatis" n. 29. Can the expression “in certain cases” found in note 351 (n. 305) of the exhortation "Amoris Laetitia" be applied to divorced persons who are in a new union and who continue to live "more uxorio"?
2. After the publication of the Post-synodal Apostolic Exhortation "Amoris Laetitia" (cf. n. 304), does one still need to regard as valid the teaching of St. John Paul II’s Encyclical "Veritatis Splendor" n. 79, based on Sacred Scripture and on the Tradition of the Church, on the existence of absolute moral norms that prohibit intrinsically evil acts and that are binding without exceptions?
3. After "Amoris Laetitia" (n. 301) is it still possible to affirm that a person who habitually lives in contradiction to a commandment of God’s law, as for instance the one that prohibits adultery (cf. Mt 19:3-9), finds him or herself in an objective situation of grave habitual sin (cf. Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts, Declaration, June 24, 2000)?
4. After the affirmations of "Amoris Laetitia" (n. 302) on “circumstances which mitigate moral responsibility,” does one still need to regard as valid the teaching of St. John Paul II’s Encyclical "Veritatis Splendor" n. 81, based on Sacred Scripture and on the Tradition of the Church, according to which “circumstances or intentions can never transform an act intrinsically evil by virtue of its object into an act ‘subjectively’ good or defensible as a choice”?
5. After "Amoris Laetitia" (n. 303) does one still need to regard as valid the teaching of St. John Paul II’s encyclical "Veritatis Splendor" n. 56, based on Sacred Scripture and on the Tradition of the Church, that excludes a creative interpretation of the role of conscience and that emphasizes that conscience can never be authorized to legitimate exceptions to absolute moral norms that prohibit intrinsically evil acts by virtue of their object?
This set things into motion. According to Edward Pentin, a Vatican reporter for the National Catholic Register, “There has been no formal reaction from the Vatican but I do understand from sources within Santa Marta that the Pope is not happy at all and he is in fact quoted as boiling with rage. So, he’s really not happy at all with this.” In fact, Francis is so upset he decided to cancel the consistory with the college of cardinals he had scheduled to happen on 19 November 2016.
Edward Pentin describing Francis as “boiling with rage”
Francis’ Jesuit buddy, Antonio Spadaro, quickly denied the story, “When I read that #PapaFrancesco was "furious" because of ecclesiastical quarrels I burst out laughing There are many other things that make him "infuriated"”.
Once something has been denied it becomes ‘official’. In an interview with Francis conducted by Stefania Falasca and published in the Italian daily Avennire on 17 November 2016, Francis brings up Amoris Laetitia.
“The Church exists only as an instrument for the communication of God’s merciful plan to the people. At the Council [Vatican II], the Church felt it had the responsibility to be a living sign of the Father’s love in the world. With Lumen Gentium, it returns to the origins of its nature, the Gospel. This shifts the axis of Christianity away from a certain kind of legalism which can be ideological, towards the Person of God, who became mercy through the incarnation of the Son. Some — he (Francis) thinks of certain replies to Amoris Laetitia — still do not understand, or it’s black or white, even though it is in the course of life that we are called to discern. The Council told us this, but historians say that a century needs to pass before a Council is properly absorbed into the body of the Church… we are half way.”
The chutzpah Francis has to suggest that before Vatican II the Church was not living up to the Gospel, it was instead legalistic and without God’s love! It’s little wonder, Francis who promotes himself as ‘humble’ blew his stack when someone dared ask him to clarify a few points in Amoris Laetitia.
Recall last year in October, when Francis went on a rampage in the Vatican after 13 cardinals wrote him raising their objections to the Synod. Sources reported that Francis caught up in a sudden violent outburst of anger, thundered against them saying, “If this is the case, they can leave. The Church does not need them. I'll throw them all out!” In fact, Francis was so worked up, people in Vatican fearing for his life sent for a doctor who diagnosed Francis with tachyarrhythmia (a resting heart rate which exceeds 100 beats per minute).
Perhaps, as an anonymous commentator suggested, Francis wasn’t speaking about himself to the attendees of his Wednesday general audience when giving advice on how to put up with annoying people but was talking about his cardinals particularly; Caffarra, Burke, Brandmuller, and Meisner.
The ‘Jubilee Year of Mercy’ is officially over in two days and it appears Francis ended it just in time as he has exhausted his supply of Mercy. One would have thought that Francis ‘the humble’ would be understanding of these cardinals, especially Burke who despite having a doctorate in Canon Law and an award’s case full of honors pertaining to Canon Law had to have the Vatican explain to him that individuals who have undergone sex-change operations cannot be validly be admitted into a religious institute or society of consecrated life. And also, that if a transsexual is now living in a religious order the transsexual must be expelled from the religious house. Isn’t it reasonable to assume that Francis would show Burke some patience? Here we were thinking that Francis was a bridge builder! Oh, well!
We at Call Me Jorge... believe that Msgr. Adriano Bernardini summed it up best about Francis (who was then only ‘humble’ Cardinal Bergoglio) when he was the nuncio to Argentina,
On Friday morning Mr. Pentin reconfirmed his statement with a tweet.
On a scale from 1 to 10 — zero meaning calm, 10 meaning boiling rage — Here’s Francis with a score of 1
It make us wonder, what would a “boiling rage” look like?