The "smoking adulterist gun": Cardinal Cottier outlines the plan to Fr. Spadaro S .J. ~ the new heresy of PASTORALISM

Fr. Antonio Spadaro S.J., in an interview with Georges Cardinal Cottier (published in the ultra-modernist Jesuit run, America) receives this response from the aged prelate on if and how Holy Communion may be given to adulterers. We see this type of prudential judgment being floated by bishops by people like Paul-Andre Durocher; or Thomas Rosica promoting what Anglican heretics call "Regional Autonomy" in deciding which adulterers may receive Holy Communion. Likewise, it was only recently that Cardinal Baldisseri spoke with Fr. Thomas Rosica about an update for the Church

Fr. Spadaro: We are thus faced with a methodological problem. Generic classifications [he is promoting Nominalism]  ignore a considerable number of concrete aspects [subjectivism] that are, however, crucial for the formulation of an equitable judgment.

Cardinal Cottier:  The moral theology of St. Thomas is one based on prudence, which, in an existential way, applies the right judgment to the affective dynamism to which it orients. Every judgment of prudence is unique [yes, but not to be used to erase objective truth]. This is because, on the one hand, every action is unique and, on the other, because the subject that carries out this action is also unique. I am personally involved in my choices; they are mine. One single action is not a repetition of a similar action that I have carried out at some other moment or that someone else has carried out. The judgment of prudence must bear in mind the circumstances surrounding the act to be carried out. And in this objective consideration there is no trace of relativism or of “situation ethics.” The judgment of prudence involves the person in that person’s uniqueness [being is different than acting, Eminence]; it is an objective judgment, in the sense that it refers to objective norms. Emphasizing the subjectivity of the moral act does not at all mean giving in to subjectivism [it does, if you consider "concrete aspects" as the "formulation of an "equitable judgment"] . Thus, during the recent debate on the possible admission to the Eucharist of the “divorced and remarried,” an oversimplified generalization that leaves out the diversity of situations [you have just contradicted yourself, Eminence. Is diversity now an "objective judgment"? ] has been an obstacle to wise and well-considered conclusions.

Thus, moving from the "concrete aspects" of a divorce and remarriage, and taking into consideration the "diversity of situations", we are now left with...!

Fr. Spadaro: From whom can we expect a judgment of prudence?

Cardinal Cottier: I believe that the solution to some of the problems should come from the prudential judgment of the bishop. I say this not without hesitation and doubts, in view of the division among the bishops. My judgment is to be applied, first of all [and then what, Your Eminence, expand Holy Communion to MORE adulterers?], to certain situations where there is a high probability that the first marriage was null but for which it is difficult to provide evidence that is canonically acceptable [They are STILL married, Your Eminence!] .

So there we have it friends!! Gone is St. Pope John Paul II's 'Veritatis Splendor, where we read: "circumstances or situations can never transform an act intrinsically evil by virtue of its object into an act "subjectively" good or defensible as a choice".The local Ordinary will decide that a civilly "re-married" Catholic really is entitled to an annulment, but canonically it is still impossible due to lack of evidence. He will thus give the go-ahead that this adulterer can receive Holy Communion.

Notice how these adulterists have technically left intact indissolubility? Notice how they are now declaring themselves; their new heresy: the heresy of PASTORALISM. 

THE CHURCH AWOKE WITH A GROAN TO FIND HERSELF PASTORALIST