The Maltese Straw that breaks the Church's back

Everyone knows about the debate over Pope Francis' Amoris Laetitia, and whether it is ambiguous in places, and whether it needs to be clarified. Many -- four prominent cardinals in particular -- have publicly asked for clarification, saying that without clarification, the ambiguities in the document will invite distortions or even implicit denial of constant Catholic teaching and practice. Others have responded by dismissing, and in some cases, ridiculing, this concern.

Well, it appears a document from the bishops of Malta may have gone exactly where Cardinal Burke and others' worst fears dreaded.

From the "Criteria for the Application of Chapter VIII of Amoris Laetitia,
just issued, we find this paragraph:
Paragraph 10: If, as a result of the process of discernment, undertaken with “humility, discretion and love for the Church and her teaching, in a sincere search for God’s will and a desire to make a more perfect response to it” (AL 300), a separated or divorced person who is living in a new relationship manages, with an informed and enlightened conscience, to acknowledge and believe that he or she are at peace with God, he or she cannot be precluded from participating in the sacraments of Reconciliation and the Eucharist (see AL, notes 336 and 351).

If so, then why shouldn’t the following likewise be true:

If, as a result of the process of discernment, undertaken with “humility, discretion and love for the Church and her teaching, in a sincere search for God’s will and a desire to make a more perfect response to it” (AL 300), a separated or divorced person who is living in a new relationship same-sex attracted person who is living in a ‘same sex marriage’ manages, with an informed and enlightened conscience, to acknowledge and believe that he or she are at peace with God, he or she cannot be precluded from participating in the sacraments of Reconciliation and the Eucharist (see AL, notes 336 and 351).

Or indeed, why not:

If, as a result of the process of discernment, undertaken with “humility, discretion and love for the Church and her teaching, in a sincere search for God’s will and a desire to make a more perfect response to it” (AL 300), a separated or divorced person who is living in a new relationship any person persisting in a state of mortal sin who manages, with an informed and enlightened conscience, to acknowledge and believe that he or she are at peace with God, he or she cannot be precluded from participating in the sacraments of Reconciliation and the Eucharist (see AL, notes 336 and 351).

In short, doesn't this mean that all those who, in confession, says they are committing mortal sin of any sort, and because they believe they are "at peace with God" about it, they won't change that behavior, they are to receive absolution, and then can receive communion?

In other words, priests must grant absolution in such cases? What happens if a priest refuses to do so?

Are you telling me this isn’t a break from Catholic teaching?

Tell me what I'm missing here. Specifically, please explain how this is not in direct conflict with the Catechism, paragraph 1650, and the explicit teachings of Pope Benedict and Pope St. John Paul II.

(Note: I understand many people are upset about this, and are upset with Pope Francis over this. Injudicious comments will be deleted. Expressing unhappiness at the pope's decisions is one thing; calling the pope a heretic is something else. Be wise, be charitable, please.)

Update: I see my friend Father Zuhlsdorf has addressed this, and he links Canon Law expert Ed Peters.