The Cardinals’ “Dubia”: Cardinal Zen Criticizes the Pope’s Response

Since the Holy See published the Pope’s responses, the Chinese cardinal explains that it seems “appropriate to me that we respond to those answers, so that the faithful understand why the five of us did not find them adequate as answers.” But he clarifies that he acted on a personal initiative which only involves him.

Cardinal Zen answered the preliminary question: “Isn’t it presumptuous to question the Pope’s answers?” by responding in the negative, for three reasons. First, because no “mature Catholic will believe that ‘anyone who contradicts the Holy Father is a heretic and schismatic’, as His Eminence Víctor Manuel Fernández stated.”

Second, because Zen has “a well-founded doubt that those answers do not come from the pen of the Supreme Pontiff.” And he again cites Cardinal Fernández, concerning a document signed by Pope Francis: “I can’t smell the Pope in it.” And he gives his own impression: “In fact, the incredible promptness of the responses (July 11), especially in contrast to the case of the other famous 5 Dubia of 2016 that were simply ignored, makes one suspect that these responses are part of the arsenal of answers that the organizers of the Synod, probably with the help of the ‘Most Eminent’, had already prepared to respond to the disturbers of their agenda.”

Third, Cardinal Zen accepts a large portion of the responses, but he asserts that they do not respond in the precise manner of dubia.

First Dubium on Dogmatic Development 

The response of the Pope gave as examples the abolition of slavery and the social status of women in the Gospel. Cardinal Zen responds in a precise manner.

“Slavery was an essential part of the order of society. [...] The incipient Christian community could not even think of being able to change all this. But Saint Paul’s Letter to Philemon shows how the concept of human beings as children of God was already beginning to radically change the relationship between master and slave and will end up calling into question the very institution of slavery.”

“The case of the woman. When you understand how precious the Petrine and Marian charisms are, you see that they are two different tasks, but there is no question of different dignity.” Finally, the last sentence of the response to this dubium says: “Each theological line has its risks but also its opportunities.”

This angers Cardinal Zen: when “theology and its ‘risks’ are spoken of as calmly acceptable, I have to ask: does not the authority of the Church have [a] duty to defend the simple faithful from risks that can threaten the purity of [the] faith?”

Second Dubium: On Blessing Same-Sex Couples

Cardinal Zen contests the permission to bless same-sex couples apparently given by the Pope’s response. “Doesn’t such a union imply sexual activity between people of the same sex, which is clearly sinful, just as any sexual activity outside of legitimate marriage is sinful?” he asks.

As for the fact that Pope Francis would not want a precise rule for these blessings, this “is pastorally untenable,” asserts the Chinese cardinal. “How can the Church, in such an important matter, leave the people without a clear rule and trust individual discernment? Isn’t this how a chaos of casuistry very dangerous for souls will break out?”

Third Dubium: On Confusing the Synod with a Doctrinal Assembly

The former bishop of Hong Kong remarks that the Pope’s response says that “all the People of God, in different ways and at different levels, can make their voices heard and feel part of the Church's journey.” The cardinal notes that “it is important not to forget ‘in different ways and at different levels.’”

But he points out that “the same documents also suggest that the hierarchy must not only ‘hear’, but ‘listen’, i.e. obey the voice of the people, that is, the lay people, overturning the pyramid of the hierarchical constitution of the Church founded by Jesus on the Apostles.”

Fourth Dubium: On the Ordination of Women

Cardinal Zen recalls that with “sacramental ordination, the minister acts ‘in persona Christi’, participating in the priesthood of Christ in a higher degree.” He notes that the Pope “recognizes that the exclusive conferral of the ministerial priesthood on males is not a dogma, but a definitive, clear and authoritative statement, which must be respected by all.”

But, he adds, “the answer leaves a tail: ‘yet it can be a subject of study, as in the case of the validity of ordinations in the Anglican Community’.” Thus, the cardinal continues, “despite the definitive declaration, it will still be possible to discuss ‘ad infinitum’?!”

And he remarks that “the comparison used here is not adequate, because the validity of ordinations in the Anglican Community is a historical problem, while our case is of a theological nature.”

Fifth Dubium: On the Necessity of Contrition

Cardinal Zen expresses the confusion caused by the Pope’s warning not to turn confession into “a customs house”; priests who simply do their duty to ensure the validity of the sacrament surely do not abuse it in such a way. The sacrament was instituted by Christ—therefore, “because we are administrators and not masters of the Sacraments, we must follow the rules, ensure repentance and resolution.”

“[T]he penitent must be humble, he must know that it is necessary to express the intention not to sin again (and also to avoid occasions of sin). Yes, a sincere promise does not exclude the foreseeing of possible relapses. But it is important to make people understand that sin distances us from God and from our happiness, not only eternal happiness, but also happiness here and now.”

The cardinal concludes: “We, too, are convinced that we must learn to truly become messengers of God’s infinite mercy, which is capable of making saints even of us sinners.”