Before the 2013 Maltese general election, avant-garde priests were vociferous in their calls for social justice and reform. An eerie silence fell after the election. Their mission to stir up dissent vanished, and what matters to them now is how much Pope Francis is allegedly suffering at the hands of diehard traditionalists obstructing his efforts to modernise the Church.

This argument, being repeated now in Malta, has created a storm in a teacup, after the Maltese bishops sent a set of guidelines elucidating chapter eight of Pope Francis’s exhortation Amoris Laetitia. Vicar-General Joe Galea-Curmi had to intervene on Leħen is-Sewwa (January 28) explaining that there is no substantial change in established Church doctrine because these guidelines are actually quite rigorous.

Indeed if priests were to take the bishops seriously, something they rarely do, and scrupulously follow the guidelines they will find out a list of dos and don’ts inviting divorcees and remarried to undergo a process of conversion in order to awaken the voice of conscience and sincerely seek to follow God’s will. The most bitter pill to swallow here is that this process cannot be undergone alone, but has to be accompanied by a priest.

The effort is laudable, and despite serious flaws in its theology of the sacrament of penance, it is clear that the guidelines aren’t a free ride. To borrow a phrase from Dietrich Bonhoeffer, the time for cheap grace is over. He defined cheap grace as that grace we bestow on ourselves when we think we are at peace with God.

‘’Cheap grace is the preaching of forgiveness without requiring repentance, baptism without Church discipline, Communion without confession... cheap grace without discipleship, grace without the cross, grace without Jesus Christ living and incarnate.’’ (Bonhoeffer, The Cost of Discipleship, 1937).

On many occasions like funerals and weddings, almost everybody receives Communion but very few confess. Priests are helpless spectators to these sacrileges

Priests busy in pastoral life know that most Catholics are doing precisely the opposite. On many occasions like funerals and weddings, almost everybody receives Communion but very few confess. Priests are helpless spectators to these sacrileges. The great majority has silenced the voice of conscience and think they are at peace with God. Theirs, however, is not the true God but a figment of their bourgeois mindset.

If these guidelines are so clear, why are some quarters lambasting them while others deem them a milestone? The causes for this confusion are complex. Apart from having a dodgy understanding of what conscience really means in the Catholic magisterium (see Veritatis Splendor, Chapter 32), this Maltese disaster has its roots in a misunderstanding which Benedict XVI repeatedly warned about.

Addressing the clergy of Rome (February 2013) Ratzinger, while remembering with fondness Vatican Council II, which he personally experienced, also explained how there were two councils: the Council of the Fathers and the Council of the Media. He said that the latter was almost a council apart – but unfortunately, the world perceived the Vatican Council through the latter, and thus the Council that reached the people was that of the Media and not of the Fathers.

And while the Council of the Fathers was conducted in faith, the council of the journalists was captured by the value system of today’s media. Theirs is a political hermeneutic, and for them the council was a power struggle between different trends in the Church.

The Pope concluded that this virtual Council of the Media was stronger than the real council, leading to untold sufferings in the Church like the closing of seminaries and monasteries, and banal liturgy. I dare say that this is exactly what is happening yet again with Pope Francis’s Amoris Laetitia.

Ironically the criteria of the Maltese bishops were published on the solemnity of Epiphany when none of the trained theologians of the Jewish religious establishment of the day goes to Bethlehem unlike the pagan astrologers who make their surprising appearance to worship baby Jesus. The Pharisees’ subtle sin is worse than Herod’s wickedness.

Similarly, modern-day Maltese Pharisees and scribes acquiesce to the Herod of our day by manipulating biblical jargon  and unlike Bonhoeffer or John the Baptist offer cheap grace, to be nice with the LGBT lobby and shrieking feminists.

The urgent threats in Malta now are not just euthanasia and abortion, but widespread shameless corruption and the systematic destruction of our environment. But these hypocrites pretend to support Bergoglio when in fact theirs is a tacit compliance with that bourgeois Christianity which Soren Kierkegaard vehemently abhorred.

This explains their silence, unlike Bishop Charles Scicluna’s clear talk denouncing the ‘Dubaification’ of Malta.

This is why these posh professors will never address the big existential questions of sin and guilt that divorcees with sensitive souls endure. They serve Herod not Christ. Consequently they are unwilling to seriously challenge this dominance of the cardboard values of mass media, and will always fail to address the essential needs of those consciences seeking truth.

The bishops still have time to clear up this mess... unless one of them earns a Cardinal’s hat.

Fr David Muscat was ordained in 2001 and serves in Mosta.