Heresy in Amoris Laetitia: 304

 

 

The text: 

Rules and discernment

304. It is reductive simply to consider whether or not an individual’s actions correspond to a general law or rule, because that is not enough to discern and ensure full fidelity to God in the concrete life of a human being. I earnestly ask that we always recall a teaching of Saint Thomas Aquinas and learn to incorporate it in our pastoral discernment: “Although there is necessity in the general principles, the more we descend to matters of detail, the more frequently we encounter defects… In matters of action, truth or practical rectitude is not the same for all, as to matters of detail, but only as to the general principles; and where there is the same rectitude in matters of detail, it is not equally known to all… The principle will be found to fail, according as we descend further into detail”. It is true that general rules set forth a good which can never be disregarded or neglected, but in their formulation they cannot provide absolutely for all particular situations. At the same time, it must be said that, precisely for that reason, what is part of a practical discernment in particular circumstances cannot be elevated to the level of a rule. That would not only lead to an intolerable casuistry, but would endanger the very values which must be preserved with special care.

This paragraph is a preparation for the Mother of All Bombs that is to follow in the next paragraph. The message the Evil Clown here sends is that circumstances can make wrong right. This is another example of “situational ethics”, already examined in previous posts of this series.

The excuse for this is a quote from the Angelic Doctor; a man who, as already stated, would certainly advocate the stake for a man like Francis (after deposition, obviously).   

The quote mention, which should be posed in its right context (not transparent from the quote) does not say that there cases in which what is objectively wrong can become right. It merely states that the application of what is right cannot be the same for every situation, and the way we apply action to the right principle can cause damage at times. This is no other that another explanation of the principle of prudence. It does not mean that objective wrong can be justified depending on the concrete situation.

Once again, we see – albeit here in a more subtle manner – heresy at work. It is heresy to state, or even to imply, that the circumstances can make right what is objectively wrong. Every teenager preparing for confirmation (has to) know that. This paragraph is not only misleading; it is not only ambiguous; it is openly and brazenly subversive of Catholic teaching.

Do not be deceived by misleading quotations. The devil can quote the bible. Be guided by what the Church has always taught. Every Catholic text must be read in light of what the Church teaches, and neither the Angelic Doctor nor any sensible catholic would want it any differently. 

Francis is not a sensible Catholic. Firstly because he is not sensible, and secondly because he is not Catholic. His texts read like those attacks to the Church, allegedly based on Scriptures, made by Protestants and atheists. The man just hates truth. 

May this evil man repent for his blasphemy and arrogance, or may he pay the price for his evil effrontery.

M