As with the great Denzinger-Bergoglio; the best way to oppose Francis, and get it through to our Catholic brothers and sisters that something is terribly wrong with this Pope and his thinking, is to directly compare what he says with what came before him.
Jorge Bergoglio is a man, he is not a god. Get off of this papolatry treadmill that some are
on. We have every right to oppose him when he says that which contradicts the Magisterium of teaching which came before. In fact, we have a duty to oppose him for our own sake and for the sake of others.
Today, he called clarity on the Law and the choice between good and evil as "heretical." This Pope believes in situational ethics. He has now dared in his arrogance to call those who follow Our Blessed Lord's statement, "if you love me, keep my commandments," as heretics.
Well, we know what that is, don't we?
(1) Either John Paul II and all the Popes who came before him are right, by emphasizing the "absoluteness" of the Church's moral law and by classifying as a "very serious error" that the doctrine of the Church is only an "ideal"...
It would be a very serious error to conclude... that the Church's teaching is essentially only an "ideal" which must then be adapted, proportioned, graduated to the so-called concrete possibilities of man, according to a "balancing of the goods in question".
But what are the "concrete possibilities of man"? And of which man are we speaking? Of man dominated by lust or of man redeemed by Christ? This is what is at stake: the reality of Christ's redemption. Christ has redeemed us! This means that he has given us the possibility of realizing the entire truth of our being; he has set our freedom free from the domination of concupiscence. And if redeemed man still sins, this is not due to an imperfection of Christ's redemptive act, but to man's will not to avail himself of the grace which flows from that act....
In this context, appropriate allowance is made both for God's mercy towards the sinner who converts and for the understanding of human weakness. Such understanding never means compromising and falsifying the standard of good and evil in order to adapt it to particular circumstances. It is quite human for the sinner to acknowledge his weakness and to ask mercy for his failings; what is unacceptable is the attitude of one who makes his own weakness the criterion of the truth about the good, so that he can feel self-justified, without even the need to have recourse to God and his mercy. An attitude of this sort corrupts the morality of society as a whole, since it encourages doubt about the objectivity of the moral law in general and a rejection of the absoluteness of moral prohibitions regarding specific human acts, and it ends up by confusing all judgments about values.
John Paul II in Veritatis Splendor of August 6, 1993
...or (2) Francis is right, by qualifying as "heretical" a rejection of the "Doctrine of the Ideal" as well as any affirmation of the absoluteness of moral prohibitions ('or this or nothing').
“This (is the) healthy realism of the Catholic Church: the Church never teaches us ‘or this or that.’ That is not Catholic. The Church says to us: ‘this and that.’ ‘Strive for perfectionism: reconcile with your brother. Do not insult him. Love him. And if there is a problem, at the very least settle your differences so that war doesn’t break out.’ This (is) the healthy realism of Catholicism. It is not Catholic (to say) ‘or this or nothing:’ This is not Catholic, this is heretical. Jesus always knows how to accompany us, he gives us the ideal, he accompanies us towards the ideal, He frees us from the chains of the laws' rigidity and tells us: ‘But do that up to the point that you are capable.’ And he understands us very well. He is our Lord and this is what he teaches us.”
Francis' Homily at Santa Marta on June 9, 2016