All Christians—not just the pope—have the duty to cling to the Word of God, preserving the integrity of the Faith, but bishops, the primary teachers of the Faith, have a special obligation. If the pope is spreading unrest and confusion, local bishops must allay the fears of the faithful and restore clarity.
Even if Pope Francis is not personally responsible for the confusion that now prevails—even if his teaching is perfectly sound, but some people have misinterpreted it—other bishops are morally obliged to step in. The undeniable differences within the college of bishops must be resolved for the sake of the integrity of the Faith.
Unfortunately, few bishops have acknowledged the divisions opened up by this pontificate. Although scores of them, recognizing the confusion caused by conflicting interpretations, have quietly expressed misgivings about Amoris Laetitia, only four cardinals were willing to sign a public call for clarification. Cardinal Kevin Farrell, the prefect of the Vatican’s new Dicastery for Laity, Family, and Life, told a reporter in 2017 that of all the bishops who have met with him during their visits to Rome, “no one had anything negative” to say about the papal document.
Perhaps these bishops fear that the pope will retaliate against anyone who challenges him, or that public opposition will weaken the prestige of the papacy. But the papacy is weakened when one pontiff contradicts another. The damage done by Francis cannot be repaired unless it is recognized. Denying problems and papering over the differences only amplifies the confusion.
It is not enough to say that Amoris Laetitia should be read in the context of constant Church teaching if the intention behind the document is to change Church teaching. Several American bishops have gone out of their way to praise the solid portions of Amoris Laetitia while skipping lightly past the problems of the notorious eighth chapter. That diplomatic approach, too, is confusing, because the document has been so widely interpreted as a break from the magisterial tradition.
Yes, there are some fine passages in Amoris Laetitia. But on the whole it fails as a teaching document because, as the saying goes, what is good is not new, and what is new is not good. St. John Paul II enriched the Magisterium on marriage and family life incalculably with a body of teaching innovative in its approach yet fully in accord with the constant traditions of the Church. Francis’s apostolic exhortation has undermined that teaching so seriously that now, only a dozen years after John Paul’s death, we face the task of rebuilding it from the ground up—a vexing waste of effort at a time when this teaching is so desperately needed.
The Role of the Laity
How can loyal Catholics help to restore Catholic unity while we wait for stronger leadership by our bishops?
First, foremost, and always, by prayer. The pope needs the wholehearted support of the faithful when he promotes the constant teaching of the Church. When he does not, the faithful should pray that he will change his approach. Pray that the pope will lead the Church toward greater unity. If he must change his approach in order to do that, so be it. Stranger things have happened.
Pray, too, for the next pope. Whoever he is and whenever he will ascend Peter’s throne, he will face a prodigious task of restoring unity of faith and clarity of teaching while pursuing the necessary but unfinished work of Vatican reform. If he approaches that task boldly, he will encounter opposition, disobedience, and the threat of schism. Unlike Francis, he will not enjoy the sympathy of the non-Catholic world and the secular media. A good pontiff, striving to clear up the muddle that Francis is likely to leave behind, will have to rely solely on the help of the faithful.
For now, calls for the pope’s resignation are futile. He is not likely to step down. Even if he did, the presence of two former pontiffs—one with a record of imprudent public remarks—would guarantee further confusion. The challenge is to preserve the teaching authority of the papacy, not to dilute it.
Nor is it useful to look to Benedict XVI to allay the reigning confusion. The retired pontiff, determined to live out his remaining years in silence, has taken a vow of fidelity to his successor; he will not and should not violate that vow. He knows that any comment he makes about Vatican affairs, no matter how innocuous, will be scrutinized for the subtlest disagreement with the current pope. The counsel of the greatest living Catholic theologian would surely be invaluable, yet Benedict is the very last Catholic who can offer his opinions today.
The Catholic Church holds that a Roman pontiff is infallible when, in union with the world’s bishops, he solemnly defines Catholic teaching on faith and morals. Francis has eschewed formal definitions, preferring impromptu comments. His most enthusiastic supporters, who in the past have been notably skeptical about papal authority, now demand that the faithful ascribe magisterial weight even to the pope’s offhand comments. But if an offhand comment appears to contradict the formal teaching of a previous pontiff, they cannot both be right. So the confusion grows. The magisterial confusion of this papacy has, strangely enough, expanded the claims of papal infallibility—often invoked where it does not apply—while weakening its foundations.
No precept of the Faith compels Catholics to believe that the Roman pontiff is always wise in his judgments, prudent in his statements, and clear in his thinking. Nor, of course, do questionable statements by one pope call into question the whole history of Catholic teaching. The Church has survived uncertain leadership in the past and, with the certain promise of God’s grace, can weather the latest storm.
A proper understanding of the limits of papal authority would help to resolve the current crisis. The bishop of Rome is not a solitary potentate but the leader of the College of Bishops. The Second Vatican Council’s dogmatic constitution on the Church, Lumen Gentium, explains, “Just as the office which the Lord confided to Peter alone, as first of the apostles, destined to be transmitted to his successors, is a permanent one, so also endures the office, which the apostles received, of shepherding the Church, a charge destined to be exercised without interruption by the sacred order of bishops.” If the pope himself has gone astray, the duty falls upon the other shepherds to bring the Church back to safe pastures.
Pope Francis has not taught heresy, but the confusion he has stirred up has destabilized the universal Church. The faithful have been led to question themselves, their beliefs, their Faith. They look to Rome for guidance and instead find more questions, more confusion.
For thirty-five years, loyal Catholics were accustomed to looking to Rome for guidance, to ease the confusion that arose from uncertain leadership at the local level. Now the situation has been reversed, particularly in the United States. Some American bishops have become bolder in their defenses of orthodoxy, more willing to risk the disapproval of the secular world. Today they need the encouragement of faithful Catholics, as their duty requires them to risk disapproval from Rome.
Lost Shepherd Page 21