Five
“Dubia”
Four
Cardinals obliged a Pope to tell –
His
deep convictions come from deepest Hell.
In
a scandal of a gravity unprecedented even in Pope Francis’ scandal-ridden reign
as Catholic Pope since 2013, when challenged by four honourable Cardinals on
his seeming denial of the very basis of the Church’s teaching on morals, he has
just given answers in public which virtually affirm the freedom of man from the
moral law of Almighty God. With this papal affirmation of the Conciliar
religion of man as opposed to the Catholic religion of God, a schism in the
Universal Church draws that much closer. For half a century since Vatican II,
the Conciliar Popes have managed to remain in a way the one head of two
opposing religions, but that contradiction could not last indefinitely, and it
must soon result in a split.
In
2014 and 2015 Francis held Synods in Rome to consult the world’s bishops on
questions concerning the human family. On March 19 of this year he published
his post-synodal Apostolic Exhortation on “Love in the Family,” the eighth of
whose nine chapters raised controversy from the very start. On September 15
four Cardinals in particular sent to the Pope a private and perfectly
respectful letter in which they asked him as Supreme Pontiff to clear up five
“dubia” or doubtful points of doctrine, left unclear in the Exhortation. Here
is the essence of the five points:—
1.
From the Exhortation’s #305, can a married person living like husband and wife
with a person not their lawful spouse from now on be given sacramental
Absolution and Communion while they continue to live in their quasi-married
state?
2. From #304, need one still believe that there are absolute moral norms which
prohibit intrinsically evil acts, and which are binding without exception?
3. From #301, can one still say that a person living in violation of one of God’s
commandments, e.g. in adultery, is in an objective state of grave habitual sin?
4. From #302, can one still say that the circumstances or intentions surrounding
an act intrinsically evil by its object can never change it into being
subjectively good, or acceptable as a choice?
5. From #303, must we still exclude any creative role of conscience, so that
conscience may still never authorize exceptions to absolute moral norms which
forbid acts intrinsically evil by their object?
To
these five designedly yes-or-no questions the answer of the Catholic Church
from Our Divine Lord onwards has always been clear, and has never changed:
Communion may not be given to adulterers; there are absolute moral norms; there
is such a thing as “grave habitual sin”; good intentions cannot make evil acts
good; conscience cannot make evil acts lawful. In other words, to the five
yes-or-no, black-or-white questions, the Church’s answer has always been, 1 No,
2 Yes, 3 Yes, 4 Yes, 5 Yes.
On
November 16, just ten days ago, the four Cardinals made their letter public (cf. M t.XVIII, 15–17). On Nov. 18, in an interview given to the italian
newspaper Avvenire, Pope Francis gave the exact opposite yes-or-no answers: 1
Yes, 2 No, 3 No, 4 No, 5 No. (He did affirm each time that “Such things are not
black-or-white, we are called to discern,” but he was merely attempting thereby
to confuse the unmoving questions of principle with moving questions of
application of principle, which come after the questions of principle.)
All
credit to the four Cardinals for obtaining light and truth for many confused
sheep that wish to get to Heaven: Brandmüller, Burke, Caffarra and Meisner.
They may be immersed in the Novus Ordo, but they have obviously not lost all
courage or sense of their duty. There can be no question of their having acted
out of any but the best of motives in pressing the Pope to make himself clear.
And where does that clarity leave the Church? It must be on the brink of
schism.
Kyrie
eleison.
No comments:
Post a Comment