[Mrs. Don-o]

Good summary, thanks all around. I would only add that

• Since no pope can straight-out change doctrine, Pope Francis has consistently mapped-out a strategic policy of ambiguity, equivocation, implication, wink-and-nod, and fudging. This utterly lacks intellectual, let alone spiritual, integrity.

  Francis tries to maintain "plausible deniability," which makes it hard to pin him for intentional doctrinal mutiny and malpractice (a term I am using as a synonym for formal heresy.)

• The "presenting issue" may seem prim and technical: the question of whether people living in a "second marriage" while a valid first marriage still exists, (i.e. objective adultery or bigamy) can be permitted to receive Communion.

  BUT the implications, which are now roaring out like water from a busted dam, are inundating everything: ALL Catholic moral discourse, ALL Catholic sacramental practice, ALL Catholic doctrine, is being swept away in the flood. This is because the principle of radical subjectivism is being deeply embedded into pastoral practice ("What if they don't feel as if they're doin' wrong?" etc.)

  This is enough to tear down the entire edifice of religious truth since it undermines the eternal and objective nature of God's Law.

I myself had been very slow to take an "alarmist" view of the Francis pontificate, but now I think it's practically impossible to overstate how serious this is.

What is at stake? Whether God is God.

[Fantasywriter]

Greetings, Mrs. Don-o. For anyone asking, ‘Why is this so serious?’, they need look no further than your post.

I must say, the part where you described Francis’ intentional ambiguity and plausible deniability rang a bell. Obama was like that. He wanted to fundamentally undermine (he called it ‘change’) America, but he never came close to being honest about it. We can’t be too watchful around these wink-and-nod people; their very lack of clarity and straightforwardness tells you all you need to know about the nature of their motives.