Press Review: Lively Controversy Surrounding the Dubia About Amoris Laetitia

There have been numerous statements since the publication on November 14, 2016 of the dubia about the Apostolic Exhortation Amoris laetitia submitted by Cardinals Walter Brandmüller, Raymond L. Burke, Carlo Caffarra and Joachim Meisner (see DICI no. 345 dated November 25, 2016). On November 21, the progressive Vaticanist Marco Politi wrote in the Italian newspaper Il Fatto quotidiano that the importance of the critique by the four cardinals is not to be underestimated; he even drew a parallel between the isolation of Pope Francis and the discrediting of President Barack Obama that became evident during the recent elections in the United States.

Marco Politi.

“To dismiss their letter [addressed to the Pope by the four cardinals]—to which Francis responded indirectly in an interview with L’Avvenire, in which he denounced a ‘certain legalism that may be ideological’—as a [military] surge by four ‘ultra-conservatives’ is to fail to understand the underground confrontation that has developed in the Catholic Church over the past two years. The four prelates are the tip of an iceberg that is broadening and spreading. They speak also for many who are not going public.

“For years, the media did not understand the depth of the anti-Obama movement, which led on November 8 to the defeat of his policies. Today, they run the risk of repeating the same error with Francis. Dazzled by his charism and by the global consensus that he enjoys, even among agnostics and nonbelievers, many are ignoring the systematic escalation of those among the clergy, the bishops and the College of Cardinals who dispute the Pontiff’s theology of mercy[.]

“In two years there has been a crescendo of dissident activities. Before the Synod in 2014, five cardinals wrote a book in defense of the traditional doctrine on marriage (Remaining in the Truth of Christ, Ignatius Press, 2014. See DICI no. 301 dated September 26, 2014). Then eleven cardinals from all over the world, among them important dignitaries who are well known among the clergy and the episcopate, intervened with another book [Eleven Cardinals Speak on Marriage and the Family: Essays from a Pastoral Viewpoint, Ignatius Press, 2015 – Translator’s note]. During that time, almost 800,000 Catholics, including 100 bishops, signed a petition to the Pope to block the innovations. After the 2015 Synod had started, 13 cardinals wrote to Bergoglio questioning whether the assembly was being conducted according to the rules.

“This was a systematic protest movement to which the reforming faction responded with nothing but timidity. And indeed—although many would like to forget it—in the votes at the 2015 Synod on the Family, the theses about a penitential path openly recognizing the possibility of Communion for divorced-and-remarried persons (sic) were rejected. The traditionalist majority of that global parliament of bishop said No. Meanwhile a network has appeared, made up of cardinals, bishops, priests, theologians and committed laymen who signed a “Declaration of Fidelity to the Church’s Unchangeable Teaching on Marriage.” Subsequently 45 theologians wrote (anonymously) to the College of Cardinals, insinuating that some interpretations of Amoris laetitia could be ‘heretical’.” Marco Politi notwithstanding, the list of the 45 theologian signers is public; it can be consulted at the DICI website, the September 8, 2016 issue)

“The anti-Bergoglio movement is working slowly, over time. In the United States, the underappreciated groundswell against Obama led to the defeat of the Democrats. In the Catholic Church, what is at stake is the next conclave. Today, the Church historian Alberto Melloni (a progressive historian of Vatican Council II from the Bologna school) speaks about the Pontiff’s “isolation”. And Andrea Riccardi (founder of the Saint’Egidio Community, which gave rise to the interreligious meetings in Assisi), who is also an historian, says that never during the twentieth century did a pope meet with so much opposition among the bishops and the clergy.

“In the civil war playing out in the Church, the target is the post-Francis papacy: a man who brings to their conclusion the reforms that have been started must not ascend to the papal throne.” – Which Marco Politi, a fervent advocate of Francis, regrets, after being the fierce critic of his predecessor.

Msgr. Pio Vito Pinto.

The Four Cardinals are said to be at Risk of Losing Their Hats

On November 28, Msgr. Pio Vito Pinto, Dean of the Tribunal of the Roman Rota which decides on appeal cases of nullity of marriage, declared incidentally during a conference in Madrid, Spain, that the four cardinals who call into question the orthodoxy of the Apostolic Exhortation Amoris laetitia do nothing less than call into question “two Synods of Bishops on marriage and the family; not one Synod but two! One ordinary and the other extraordinary.” “No one has the right to doubt the action of the Holy Spirit,” he insisted. “What Church are these cardinals defending, then? The Pope is faithful to Christ’s teaching. What they have done is a very grave scandal that could even lead the Holy Father to take away their cardinal’s hat, as has already been done on another occasion in history,” the Roman prelate declared, adding: “That does not mean that the Pope will take away their cardinalatial dignity, but he could do so.”

Three days later, Msgr. Pinto asked Religion Confidential (RC), which had reported his remarks, to issue the following correction: “The sentence, quoted from an interview with RC in which Msgr. Vito answered in Italian, is not correct. The recording was checked and it was determined that what he declares is that Pope Francis is not a pope from another age when they did in fact resort to this sort of measure, and that he would not take away their cardinalatial dignity.” But in an interview granted on December 1 to the website of the Catholic Church in Germany, Katholisch.de, the dean of the Roman Rota bluntly returned to the question, declaring: “It is insane. There could not be such a thing as an advisory council of cardinals that could demand an accounting from the Pope. The job of the cardinals is to help the pope in the exercise of his office, and not to interfere with him or to give him rules.”

Yet the four cardinals have ardent defenders, and on that same day, December 1, in the Nuova Bussola quotidiana, Riccardo Cascioli denounced the “new inquisitors” as authors of an “intolerable aggression”. “This is a disturbing attitude, a defense of the Pope that is suspicious at least coming from those who openly protested against Francis’ predecessors. And merely for having made simple requests for clarification about the Apostolic Exhortation Amoris laetitia which, as everyone can see, has given rise to contradictory interpretations that are certainly not reconcilable. In this regard it is necessary to recall that the dubia are an instrument often utilized in the relation between the bishops and the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (and through it, with the Pope). The novelty in this case is simply that these dubia have been made public, but only after two months of waiting in vain for a response, which the four cardinals legitimately interpreted as an invitation to continue the discussion.

“Those who today are flying into a rage in defense of the Pope on account of simple requests for clarification which ought to be normal procedure, until yesterday were openly protesting again Francis’ predecessors. . . . Which one of them was scandalized when Cardinal Carlo Maria Martini crudely wrote (in Le rêve de Jérusalem [a book-length interview with Georg Sporschill on the faith, young people and the Church], DDB, 2009) that Humanae vitae caused ‘considerable harm’ by forbidding contraception, with the result that ‘many people left the Church and the Church left the people?’ Or when he called for a new papal document that would make the Encyclical obsolete, especially after John Paul II followed ‘the path of a strict application’ of Humanae vitae? No one, certainly, because what matters here is not the objectivity of the Magisterium (the reference point of which is Divine Revelation), but rather the ideological project of this avant-garde that claims to represent the popular will.”

Cardinal Gerhard Ludwig Müller.

On the Part of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith

On December 3, Riccardo Cascioli reported the remarks made by Cardinal Gerhard Müller, Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, to the Austrian news agency Kathpress on December 1. In them the German prelate declares that “officially the Congregation takes no position, and it even asks Catholics not to polarize the debate, not to raise their voices, but at the same time it clearly indicates—within the limits determined for it by its assigned task—what the Church’s Tradition affirms, namely that communion for divorced-and-remarried persons is clearly ruled out.”

The Italian journalist comments: According to Cardinal Müller, “Amoris laetitia ‘must not be interpreted by saying that the previous positions taken by the popes and the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith are no longer valid.’ He explicitly refers to the official response that the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (then headed by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger) gave in 1994 to three German bishops who had announced in a pastoral letter their intention to admit divorced-and-remarried Catholics to Communion. The response was that, although such persons are not excluded from ecclesial communion, they nevertheless cannot go to Holy Communion. With no ifs, ands or buts. And just in case he was not clear, Cardinal Müller emphasizes that ‘the indissolubility of marriage must be the unfailing doctrinal foundation of all pastoral care.’”

On December 4, the [retired] German Catholic university professor Robert Spaemann was interviewed by Luisela Scrosati in La Nuova Bussola quotidiana. He gave unconditional support to the four cardinals: “With the dubia, the cardinals are performing their duty to support the Church in the person of the Holy Father with their advice, as ‘senators.’ The supreme judge in the Church is the Pope. Nevertheless it is regrettable that only four cardinals have taken the initiative in this story. . . . The four cardinals have chosen the right path. The Pope is the first addressee of the dubia, even though in my opinion the document ought to go through the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. Be that as it may, the senders did not write an ‘open letter’ but rather addressed the Holy Father directly. The publication was intended only in a second phase, after the Pope refused to respond.

“The Pope’s refusal to respond to the appeal of the four cardinals fills me with great dismay, because, in this way, the authority of the supreme Magisterium sinks. The Pope clearly has a deep aversion to decisions that require a yes or a no. But Christ, the Lord of the Church, often confronts His disciples with decisions of this sort. Precisely in the question with reference to adultery, He startles the apostles with the simplicity and clarity of His teaching.”

Robert Spaemann then explains concerning communion for divorced-and-“remarried” persons: “It is a major error to think that subjectivity is the ultimate criterion for the administration of the sacraments. It is true that every action against conscience is bad, but it is just as bad to act with an erroneous conscience. This is the clear teaching of Saint Thomas Aquinas. This can result in a casus perplexus [perplexity]. One cannot get out of this dilemma except by a ‘conversion’, by opening one’s conscience to the objective truth. The place where truth is rediscovered is on the one hand reason, and on the other—Revelation.”

(Sources: IFQ/NBQ/RC/Katholisch/Kathpress – DICI no. 346 dated December 9, 2016)

Read also:
The Amoris Laetitia Controversy in the Light of the Arian Crisis
Four Cardinals deprived of their hats?
Reactions to the Four Cardinals’ Request to the Pope to “Clarify” Amoris laetitia
Four Cardinals deprived of their hats?