A former consulter to the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith has said he believes that because Fiducia Supplicans “does not belong to the authentic Magisterium,” it is not binding and so “one cannot even adhere to it with religious assent of will and intellect.”
He has also called for the resignation or dismissal of its principal author, Cardinal Víctor Manuel Fernández, as “suspicion of ignorance and bad faith will weigh on [him] in any document he signs later.”
In a Jan. 18 interview with this site, Father Nicola Bux, a respected theologian and friend of the late Pope Benedict XVI, discussed the fallout following the publication of the declaration that allows same-sex blessings under certain conditions.
Fiducia Supplicans, approved by Pope Francis, was signed by Cardinal Fernández, prefect of the Dicastery of the Doctrine of the Faith, and dicastery Secretary, Msgr. Armando Matteo, and published Dec. 18.
Father Bux explains how the document has been received in Italy, what he thought of the Jan. 4 press release aimed at clarifying the declaration, and what this might all mean for the future of the Church and the next conclave.
“The drama of the Church today is the separation of the pastoral from doctrine, that is, of love from truth,” Father Bux says. “And we are paying dearly for it, as John Paul II predicted.
“Pope Francis should cancel Fiducia Supplicans and replace the prefect with a man of ‘sure, sound and pure doctrine,’ to use the Apostle’s words to Titus.”
Father Bux, what has been the general reaction to the Fiducia Supplicans in Italy – mostly contrary, in your opinion, supportive or ambivalent?
Because of their proximity to the Apostolic See, Italian bishops seem to be like dumb dogs: they approve or they dissent, or they fear “reprisal.” Among the faithful and the non-practicing are those who consider Fiducia Supplicans, and the attempts to justify it, an insult to their intelligence. Then there are those who know the doctrine of faith and morals, especially the norms of Revelation, and ask the first dubium [doubt or question] of the five cardinals sent last summer: Is it possible for the Church today to teach doctrines contrary to those she has previously taught in matters of faith and morals, whether by the Pope ex cathedra, or in the definitions of an ecumenical Council, or in the universal ordinary magisterium of bishops scattered throughout the world (cf. Lumen Gentium 25)?
For sure, Fiducia Supplicans does not belong to the “authentic Magisterium” and is therefore not binding because what is affirmed in it is not contained in the written or transmitted word of God and which the Church, the Roman Pontiff or the College of Bishops, either definitively, that is by solemn judgment, or with ordinary and universal Magisterium, proposes to believe as divinely revealed. One cannot even adhere to it with religious assent of will and intellect.
What do you think of the January 4 press release aimed at clarifying the statement? Did it resolve anything?
Ignorance predominates in the majority of the baptized, due to the fact that for decades, social issues have been preferred to catechesis; for irregular heterosexual and homosexual couples what now applies is: love is love. Those who use logic are opposed to it and then the second dubium of the Cardinals arises: Is it possible that under certain circumstances a pastor could bless unions between homosexual persons, thus suggesting that homosexual behavior as such would not be contrary to God’s law and the person’s path to God? Tied to this dubium is another: Does the teaching upheld by the universal ordinary magisterium continue to be valid, that every sexual act outside of marriage, and in particular homosexual acts, constitutes an objectively grave sin against God’s law, regardless of the circumstances in which it takes place and the intention with which it is carried out? So, the January 4 statement is a classic attempt to paper over the cracks.
Do you agree that the statement exposed divisions that were already present but are now out in the open?
Benedict XVI, in his Notes of April 11, 2019, described the origin of the debacle of Catholic morality, and thus also of divisions among Catholics, because of deeming the cohabitation of both a heterosexual and a homosexual couple as not sinful. The division or schism, previously submerged, has now emerged. Whether it will be formally declared at an upcoming ecclesial event, such as a synod or conclave, we shall see. Certainly, the next Pope will have to do an accounting and decide whether to deepen the division or mend it by convening a council. Whoever is a candidate for pope will have to be asked in the pre-conclave congregations to answer the dubia accumulated since 2015, or else the division of the Church will deepen.
Why do you think there has been opposition mainly in Africa, Central/Eastern Europe and not so much in the United States and other mainly Western countries?
Because in these areas, i.e., in the northern and western hemisphere, after Vatican II, the Church contrasted the relativist ideology that had penetrated morality and demolished natural law with formation in doctrine and life in Christ — that is Catholic morality, fighting neo-pagan thinking. Thus, the people remained faithful. Then, ask a Jew if it’s a blessing (berakah) when it does not have a sacredness (let’s say, it’s not liturgical) and whether you can bless something that God curses and abhors, such as a sin against nature. A Jewish friend who heard about Fiducia Supplicans told me: “Doesn’t the Pope know the Bible?” Not to mention the ridicule of Muslims and the distancing of the Orthodox who have now declared unity with Catholics impossible. Fiducia Supplicans and subsequent communiqués are the result of Prefect Fernandez’s ignorance.
What is the best way to resolve the confusion and division resulting from Fiducia Supplicans?
Explain that there’s nothing pastoral without “pasto” (meal) because “doctrine is actually like food, the possessor of which is he who distributes it” (St. Gregory Nazianzen). Doctrine, therefore, is pastoral, but if the shepherd does not have it, he cannot do pastoral work. The drama of the Church today is the separation of the pastoral from doctrine, that is, of love from truth. And we are paying dearly for it, as John Paul II predicted. Pope Francis should cancel Fiducia Supplicans and replace the prefect with a man of “sure, sound and pure doctrine,” to use the Apostle’s words to Titus.
How do you think this affair will affect the next Conclave?
Surely the next Pope, if he does not want to be one only for one part of the Church, will have to ask himself the question: what is the mission of the Church? That of conforming to the world or saving it? The unity of the Catholic Church is compromised by Fiducia Supplicans because, on such an essential moral truth, it accepts, in practice, opposing views among the Churches scattered around the world. One example: The new bishop of Foggia said that his church will be the “church of Francis who blesses all.” But is the Church not Jesus Christ’s?
Fernandez discredited himself by publishing a document that is the opposite of that of his predecessor, [Cardinal Luis] Ladaria, in 2021. Would this be a “development” or rather a heterogenesis of doctrine? The Dicastery and the Holy See have humiliated themselves. Someone has already renamed the Dicastery “for the Destruction of the Faith.” Suspicion of ignorance and bad faith will weigh on Fernandez in any document he signs later. He should resign.
Edward Pentin
edwardpentin.co.uk
(Foto: wikipedia, Di Claudiocaforio)
