Rebuke
Francis
Situation Ethics was thoroughly criticized by Pope John Paul II, in the left column of the chart below. However, this has not stopped Pope Francis and/or Cardinal Fernandez from employing it repeatedly , in order to dissimulate and hide the truth, and thereby seem to appease both sides of moral issues. To more-perfectly master and understand the component parts of Situation Ethics, watch the appropriate section of the video, here.
| JPII's Veritatis Splendor (1993) | Pope Francis’ Amoris Laetitia (2016) | Pope Francis’ Responses to the 2023 Dubia | Cd. Fernandez’ Fiducia Supplicans (2023) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| COMPLEXITY | 54 – "[General moral] norms, they [i.e, Situational Ethicists] continue, cannot be expected to foresee and to respect all the individual concrete acts of the person in all their uniqueness and particularity. These authors also stress the complexity typical of the phenomenon of conscience, complexity profoundly related to the whole sphere of psychology and emotions, and to the numerous influences exerted by the individual's social and cultural environment.” | 295 – “. . . subjects who are not in a position to understand, appreciate, or fully carry out the objective demands of the law." 296 – “Consequently, there is a need to avoid judgments which do not take into account the complexity of various situations" and "to be attentive, by necessity, to how people experience distress because of their condition.” 298 – “The divorced who entered a new union, for example, can find themselves in a variety of situations, which should not be pigeonholed or fit into overly rigid classifications . . . One thing is . . . There are also . . . Another thing . . . or the case . . . We know that no 'easy recipes' exist.” 300 – “. . . the immense variety of concrete situations . . . neither the Synod nor the Exhortation could be expected to provide a new set of general rules, . . . applicable to all cases. What is possible is simply . . . pastoral discernment of particular cases, . . . Since ‘the degree of responsibility is not equal in all cases’, . . . a rule need not necessarily always be the same.” 302 – “’doubtless there can occur situations which are very complex and obscure from a psychological viewpoint’, . . . ‘Under certain circumstances people find it very difficult to act differently.’” 304 – ". . . the more we descend to matters of detail, the more frequently we encounter defects. . . . The principal will be found to fail, according as we descend further into detail.” |
1g – (quoting AL 304) “I would like to recall what St. Thomas Aquinas affirmed: “the more we descend to matters of detail, the more frequently we encounter defects” (Summa Theologiae 1-11, q. 94, art. 4).” 2g – (quoting AL 304) “Decisions which, in certain circumstances, can form part of pastoral prudence, should not necessarily become a norm. . . . it is not appropriate for a diocese, an episcopal conference or any other ecclesial structure to constantly and officially authorize procedures or rites for [blessing] all kinds of matters, since all “that which forms part of a practical discernment in particular circumstances cannot be elevated to the level of a rule, ‘because this “would lead to an intolerable casuistry.”’ Canon law should not and cannot cover everything, nor should the episcopal conferences claim to do so with their various documents and protocols, because the life of the Church runs through many channels in addition to the normative ones.” [A doubly specious objection, 1st because the context wasn’t talking about universal Canon law or bishops-conference-protocols, but about “pastoral charity” by individuals; any 2nd because AL 304’s original warning against casuistry emerged in the negative context of penances for repentant individuals, whereas this new warning against casuistry here, is in the positive context of new “rites” of blessing for unrepentant individuals.] 5a-b – “a) Repentance is necessary for the validity of sacramental absolution, and implies the intention not to sin. But there is no mathematics here. . . b) There are many ways to express regret . . .” 5d – “Finally, it should be clear that all the conditions that are usually placed on the confession are generally not applicable when the person is in a situation of agony, or with very limited mental and psychological capacities.” |
25 – “The Church, moreover, must shy away from resting its pastoral praxis on the fixed nature of certain doctrinal or disciplinary schemes, especially when they lead to ‘a narcissistic and authoritarian elitism, whereby instead of evangelizing, one analyzes and classifies others, and instead of opening the door to grace [not real Grace, but just feel-good-experiences], one exhausts his or her energies in inspecting and verifying [minutiae].’ Thus, when people ask for a blessing, an exhaustive moral analysis should not be placed as a precondition for conferring it.” |
| CREATIVITY | 55 – “[Conscience], it is said [by Situation Ethicists] leads men not so much to a meticulous observance of the universal norms as to a creative and responsible acceptance of the personal tasks entrusted to him by God.
In their desire to emphasize the ‘creative’ character of conscience, certain authors no longer call its actions [intellectual] ‘judgments’ but [existential, amoral] ‘decisions’: only by making these decisions ‘autono-mously’ would man be able to attain moral maturity.” 56 – “. . . based on a certain more concrete existential consideration . . . An attempt is made . . . to justify a ‘creative’ hermeneutic according to which the moral conscience is in no way obliged, in every case, by a particular negative precept." |
293 – “Gradualness in pastoral care: . . . pastoral care with a view to the eventual celebration of the sacrament of marriage. . . . elements that can foster evangelization and human and spiritual growth." 295 - "St. John Paul II proposed the so-called ‘law of gradualness’ in the knowledge that the human being ‘knows, loves, and accomplishes moral good by different stages of growth’. This is not a ‘gradualness of law’ but rather a gradualness in the Prudential exercise of free acts on the part of subjects who are not in a position to understand . . . . For . . . each human being advances gradually with . . . the demands of God . . . in his or her [life].” 299 – “Such [divorced and civilly remarried] persons need to feel not as excommunicated . . . but instead as living members, able to live and grow in the Church, and experience her as a mother who . . . encourages them along the path of life . . .” 300 – "Priests have the duty to accompany them [the divorced and remarried] to understand their situation according to the teaching of the Church. . . . What we're speaking of is a process of accompaniment and discernment which ‘guides the faithful to an awareness of their situation before God.’" 301 – “A subject may know full well the rule, yet have great difficulty in understanding ‘its inherent value’, or be in a concrete situation which does not allow him or her to act differently and decide otherwise [i.e, to cease sinning] without further sin. As the Synod Fathers put it, ‘factors may exist which limit the ability to make a decision'. St. Thomas Aquinas himself recognized that someone may possess grace and charity yet not be able to exercise any one of the virtues well; . . . [i.e,] infused moral virtues [i.e, stable habits of acting] . . . .” 302 – “Under certain circumstances people find it very difficult to act differently. . . . responsibility with respect certain actions or decisions is not the same in all cases. . Even the consequences of actions taken are not the same in all cases.” 303 – “. . to encourage the development of an enlightened conscience, formed and guided . . . and to encourage an ever greater trust in God's grace. Yet conscience can do more than recognize that a given situation does not correspond [to the] Gospel. It can also recognize . . . what for now is the most generous response which can be given to God, and, come to see with a certain moral security that it is what God himself is asking amid the concrete complexity of one's limits, while yet not fully the objective ideal. 305 – “Discernment must help to find possible ways of responding to God and growing in the midst of limits. By thinking that everything is black-and-white, we sometimes close off the way of grace and growth, and discourage paths of sanctification which give glory to God. Let us remember that ‘a small step, in the midst of great human limitations, can be more pleasing to God than a life which appears outwardly in order, but moves through the day without confronting great difficulties.’” 306 – “. . . when dealing with those who have difficulties in living God’s law to the full, the invitation to pursue the via Caritas must be clearly heard.” 308 – “. . . there is a need to accompany with mercy and patience eventual stages of personal growth as these progressively appear, making room for ‘the Lord's mercy, which spurs us on to do our [pretended] best.’" |
2e – “For when a blessing [of sin] is requested, one is expressing a request for help from God, a plea for a better life, a trust in a Father who can help us to live better.” 3b-c – “b) The Church is a “mystery of missionary communion,” but this communion is not only affective or eternal, but necessarily implies real participation: that not only the hierarchy but all the people of God in different ways and at different levels can make their voice heard and feel part of the Church’s journey. c) It is quite another thing to sacralize or impose a particular synodal methodology that pleases one group, to make it the norm and obligatory channel for all, because this would only lead to “freezing” the synodal journey, ignoring the diverse characteristics of the different particular Churches and the varied richness of the universal Church.” [Notice: What Situation Ethicists demand for individuals, Pope Francis is demanding for the entire church!] 4b – “. . . the rights of women or the need for them to participate, in various ways, in the [decision-making] leadership of the Church.” [Totally un-Biblical.] 5b - There are many ways to express regret. Often, in people who have a very wounded self-esteem, pleading guilty is a cruel torture, but the very act of approaching confession is a symbolic expression of repentance and seeking divine help. |
23 – “When considered outside of a liturgical framework, these expressions of faith are found in a realm of greater spontaneity and freedom. Nevertheless, ‘the optional nature of pious exercises should in no way be taken to imply an under-estimation or even disrespect for such practices. The way forward in this area requires a correct and wise appreciation of the many riches of popular piety, [and] of the potentiality of these same riches.’ In this way, blessings become a pastoral resource to be valued rather than a risk or a problem.”
35-38,40 – “. . . should . . . perform blessings spontaneously . . . simple gestures that . . . should not become a liturgical or semi-liturgical act. Indeed, such a ritualization would constitute a serious impoverishment because it would subject a gesture of great value in popular piety to excessive control, depriving ministers of freedom and spontaneity in their pastoral accompaniment of people’s lives. . . . In this regard, there come to mind the following words of the Holy Father, already quoted in part: ‘Decisions that may be part of pastoral prudence in certain circumstances should not necessarily become the norm. . . . For this reason, one should neither provide for nor promote a ritual for the blessings of couples in an irregular situation. At the same time, one should not prevent or prohibit the church’s closeness to people in every situation in which they might seek God’s help through a simple blessing. In a brief prayer preceding this spontaneous blessing, . . . Indeed, through these blessings, . . . there is no intention to legitimize anything.” 30 – “Pastoral prudence and wisdom— . . . may suggest that the ordained ministry join in the [creative] prayer of those persons who, although in a union that cannot be compared in any way to a marriage, [yet shamelessly] desire to entrust themselves to the Lord’s mercy, . . .” |
| RUDIMENTARYNESS | 56 – “A separation or even an opposition is this established in some cases between teaching of the precept which is valid in general, and the norm of the individual conscience, which would in fact make the final decision. On this basis, an attempt is made to legitimize so-called ‘pastoral' solutions contrary to the teaching of the Magisterium . . .” | 294 – "The choice of a civil marriage or, in most cases, a simple cohabitation, is often not motivated by prejudice or resistance to sacramental union, but by cultural or contingent situations [a total euphemistic excuse]." 295 – "For the law is itself a gift of God which point the way, a gift for everyone without exception; it can be followed with the help of grace, even though each human being ‘advances gradually with the progressive integration of the gifts of God and the demands of God's definitive and absolute love in his or her entire personal and social life'. 302 – “For this reason, a negative judgment about an objective situation does not imply a judgment about the imputability or culpability of the person. . . . Under certain circumstances people find it very difficult to act differently. Therefore, while upholding a general rule, it is necessary to recognize that responsibility with respect to certain actions or decisions is not the same in all cases. Pastoral discernment, while taking into account a person’s properly formed conscience, must take responsibility for these situations [presumably to admit them to the sacraments]." 301 – “. . . [in light of] mitigating factors and situations. . . . Hence it can no longer simply be said that all those in any ‘irregular’ situation are living in a state of mortal sin and are deprived of sanctifying grace. More is involved here than mere ignorance of the rule. A subject may know full well the rule, yet have great difficulty in understanding ‘its inherent values’, or be in a concrete situation which does not allow him or her to act differently and decide otherwise without further sin. [Absolutely specious objections!] 303 – “. . . individual conscience needs to be better incorporated into the Church's practice in certain situations which do not objectively embody our understanding of marriage.” 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 . . . ” [Another specious objection!] "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." 307 – "To show understanding in the face of exceptional situations never implies dimming the light of the fuller ideal, or proposing less than what Jesus offers to the human being. Today, more important than the pastoral care of failures is . . .” 308 – “I understand those who prefer a more rigorous pastoral care which leaves no room for confusion. But I sincerely believe that Jesus wants a Church . . . who, while clearly expressing her objective teaching, “always does what good she can, even if in the process, her shoes get soiled by the mud of the street.” 312 – “. . . a framework and a setting which help us avoid a cold bureaucratic morality in dealing with more sensitive issues. Instead, it sets us in the context of a pastoral discernment . . . which is ever ready to understand, . . . and above all integrate. 293 – “ . . . they can provide occasions for pastoral care with a view to the eventual celebration of the sacrament of marriage. . . . [Fornicators] too need pastoral care that is merciful and helpful. For the Church’s pastors are not only responsible for promoting Christian marriage, but also the “pastoral discernment of the situations of a great many who no longer live this reality. Entering into pastoral dialogue with these persons [can lead to eventual conversion.]” 299 – ". . . the baptized who are divorced and civilly remarried need to be more fully integrated into Christian communities . . . . The logic of integration is the key to their pastoral care, a care which would allow them . . . to know that they can have a joyful and fruitful experience in it. . . . Their participation . . . necessarily requires discerning which of the various forms of exclusion currently practised in the liturgical, pastoral, educational and institutional framework, can be surmounted." |
1f – “. . . the texts of Scripture and the testimonies of tradition need an interpretation that allows us to distinguish their perennial substance from cultural conditioning. It is evident, for example, in . . . some New Testament considerations on women (1 Cor 11:3-10; 1 Tim 2:11-14). . . . that cannot be repeated literally today. [Yes they can, for Paul explicitly calls these verses “a command of the Lord” (1 Cor. 14:37)] 2c-e – “c) For this reason the Church avoids any kind of rite or sacramental that could contradict this conviction and give the impression that something that is not marriage is recognized as marriage. d) In dealing with people, however, we must not lose the pastoral charity that must permeate all our decisions and attitudes. The defense of objective truth is not the only expression of this charity, which is also made up of kindness, patience, understanding, tenderness, and encouragement. Therefore, we cannot become judges who only deny, reject, exclude. e) For this reason, pastoral prudence must adequately discern whether there are forms of blessing, requested by one or more persons, that [bless the sin, but at least] do not transmit a mistaken conception of marriage.” 2f – “On the other hand, although there are situations that from an objective point of view are not morally acceptable, pastoral charity itself demands that we do not simply treat as ‘sinners’ other people whose guilt or responsibility may be due to their own fault or responsibility [yet] attenuated by various factors that influence subjective imputability (cf. St. John Paul II, Reconciliatio et Paenitentia, 17).” 5c - I maintain that we should not demand from the faithful overly precise and certain proposals for amendment [such as exiting the lifestyle of temptation], which in the end end up being abstract or even egotistic, but that even the predictability of a new fall [can be tolerated, since at least it] “does not compromise the authenticity of the intention [here & now].” |
The Church’s Conscience: “. . . pastoral . . .” [Repeated 20 times, as the 3rd most used word]. 4 – “It is a matter of avoiding that something that is not marriage is being recognized as marriage.” The Priest’s Conscience: 12 – “One must also avoid the risk of reducing the meaning of blessings to [just formal, liturgical blessings], for it would lead us to [wrongly] expect the same moral conditions for a simple blessing that are called for in the reception of the sacraments. [Oh, what an intolerable burden!] Such a risk requires that we broaden this perspective further. Indeed, there is the danger that a pastoral gesture that is so beloved and widespread will be subjected to too many moral prerequisites, which, under the claim of control, could overshadow the [assumed to be] unconditional power of God’s love [in the priest’s heart] that forms the basis for the gesture of blessing.” The Sinner’s Conscience: 13 – “Pope Francis urged us not to ‘lose pastoral charity,’ . . . and to avoid being “judges who only deny, reject, and exclude [sinners’ seared consciences from the Church].” 26 – “For, the [2023] Respuestas invite discernment concerning the possibility of ‘forms of blessing, requested by one or more persons, that [at least (so Francis can feign doctrinal vigilance)] do not convey an erroneous conception of marriage’ and [yet (so Francis can let every other sin run amok)], in situations that are morally unacceptable from an objective point of view, account for the fact that ‘pastoral charity requires us not to treat simply as “sinners” those whose guilt or responsibility may be attenuated by various factors affecting subjective imputability.’” |
| CONSCIENCE | 55 – “On the other hand, they [i.e, Situational Ethicists] give maximum attention to the value of conscience.” | [See all Pink, Orange, and Bold Black words above, which also emphasize conscience.] 300 – "Useful in this process is [not a statement of the indissolubility of marriage but] an examination of conscience through moments of reflection and repentance. The divorced and remarried should ask themselves: how did they act toward their children when the conjugal union entered into crisis; whether or not they made attempts at reconciliation; what has becoming the abandoned party; what consequences the new relationship has on the rest of the family and the community of the faithful; and what example is being set for young people who are preparing for marriage. . . . What we are speaking of is a process of accompaniment and discernment . . . . Conversation with the priest in the internal forum contributes to the formation of a correct judgment . . . . For this discernment to happen, the following conditions must necessarily be present: humility, discretion and. . . . These attitudes are essential to avoid the grave danger of misunderstandings . . .” 304 – "At the same time, . . . What is part of a practical discernment in particular circumstances cannot be elevated to the level of a rule." 305 – "’. . . Natural law could not be presented as an already established set of rules that impose themselves a priori on the moral subject; rather, it is a source of objective inspiration for the deeply personal process of making decisions." |
