There are seven statements contained in the letter: the first six are distilled from passages of AL and the famous dispute over Communion for divorced persons who are living together in a new union more uxorio. Two roads can be taken to affirm that it is licit to give Communion to this category of people. The first would be to deny the indissolubility of marriage. This road was tried in several studies that preceded and accompanied the two synods on the Family (2014-2015), but it was effectively refuted and this strategy was abandoned. The other road is to state that, while marriage remains indissoluble, there are cases in which sexual relations outside a legitimate marriage would still be lawful. To sum up, therefore, I would say that the main heresy resides precisely in the doctrine — today called “situation ethics” — which denies that there are acts that by their very nature are intrinsically evil, and therefore cannot in any case be considered lawful. Once this doctrine is accepted, not only is the doctrine of the indissolubility of marriage at risk but the whole of Christian ethics — and not only it, but the whole of natural ethics. In fact, on the basis of this doctrine we could say, for example, that abortion is indeed a crime, but in some cases it is lawful; that the murder of an innocent person is wrong, but not in some cases; that torture is immoral, but in particular circumstances it could be lawful; that active homosexual relationships are sinful, but not in certain cases, and so on. It is therefore a real “atomic bomb,” which entirely destroys ethics, as Prof. Josef Seifert fittingly called it in a brief but, it must be said, explosive article.
It is important to underline that the battle against this error, i.e. “situation ethics,” was one of the absolute priorities of Pope John Paul II’s pontificate. To it he dedicated one of his most important encyclicals, Veritatis splendor. This is why many thousands of the most serious and committed Catholics — and not just a “tiny fringe of extremists” or “ultra-conservatives,” as some would have us believe — have felt betrayed by this new direction inaugurated by Bergoglio, which threatens to frustrate precisely one of the most important legacies of the saintly Polish Pope. That is why Benedict XVI, in the Notes he published just a few weeks ago, also strongly emphasized that this was one of the chief errors of moral theology in the last sixty years. It is certainly a providential coincidence that these Notes came out at almost the same time as our letter.
- Many people might wonder what authority a group of clergy and scholars has to accuse the Pope — the Vicar of Christ — of heresy. How do you respond?
We do not claim any particular authority, except the theological competence necessary to carry out this study to highlight a factual situation which undermines a fundamental right of all Catholic faithful. The Code of Canon Law attributes to all the faithful, in proportion to their competence, the right to speak in so far as they deem it necessary to do so in order to point out a difficulty or problem in the Church. (Can. 212 §3 reads: “According to the knowledge, competence, and prestige which they possess, they have the right and even at times the duty to manifest to the sacred pastors their opinion on matters which pertain to the good of the Church and to make their opinion known to the rest of the Christian faithful, without prejudice to the integrity of faith and morals, with reverence toward their pastors, and attentive to common advantage and the dignity of persons.”)
Nor, as someone has said (e.g. Fr. Thomas Petri OP), do we run into the prohibition, also recorded in the Code of Canon Law, of “mak[ing] recourse against an act of the Roman Pontiff to an ecumenical council or the college of bishops” (can. 1372). In fact, here it is not a matter of making recourse to the bishops to overrule an act of the Pontiff in the governance of the Church as if they were a higher authority, which is what is forbidden by the canon, but of the very serious situation, in which one must take note of the fact that the Pontiff himself has fallen into heresy, which is expressly indicated by canonical tradition as one of the three causes of loss of the papal office. As we explain in the appendix on the loss of the papal office, it is not a matter of deposing the pope, but only of declaring that he has spontaneously renounced the papacy through his adherence to heresy. Much less do we contravene Canon 1373, which punishes those who“publicly incite animosities or hatred against the Apostolic See […] because of some act of power or ecclesiastical ministry or provokes subjects to disobey […]”. On the contrary we are upholding the dignity of the Apostolic See by desiring that its occupant be free of heresy.
-------
TRADUCCIÓN AL ESPAÑOL
- ¿De qué herejías se acusa al papa Francisco en la carta?¿Cuál es, en su opinión, la más seria?
Hay siete declaraciones contenidas en la carta: las primeras seis se extraen de los pasajes de AL y la famosa disputa sobre la comunión para las personas divorciadas que viven juntas en una nueva unión more uxorio. Se pueden tomar dos caminos para afirmar que es lícito dar la Comunión a esta categoría de personas. El primero sería negar la indisolubilidad del matrimonio. Este camino se probó en varios estudios que precedieron y acompañaron a los dos sínodos sobre la familia (2014-2015), pero se refutó efectivamente y se abandonó esta estrategia. El otro camino es afirmar que, si bien el matrimonio sigue siendo indisoluble, hay casos en que las relaciones sexuales fuera de un matrimonio legítimo aún serían legales.
Por lo tanto, para resumir, diría que la herejía principal reside precisamente en la doctrina, hoy llamada "ética de situación", que niega que haya actos que, por su propia naturaleza, son intrínsecamente malos y, por lo tanto, no pueden considerarse legales en ningún caso.
Una vez que se acepta esta doctrina, no sólo está en riesgo la doctrina de la indisolubilidad del matrimonio, sino toda la ética cristiana, y no sólo ésta, sino toda la ética natural.
- Mucha gente podría preguntarse qué autoridad tienen un grupo de clérigos y académicos para acusar al Papa, el Vicario de Cristo, de herejía. ¿Cómo respondería?
"De acuerdo con el conocimiento, la competencia y el prestigio que poseen, tienen el derecho y, a veces, el deber de manifestar a los pastores sagrados su opinión sobre los asuntos relacionados con el bien de la Iglesia. y dar a conocer su opinión al resto de los fieles cristianos, sin perjuicio de la integridad de la fe y la moral, con reverencia hacia sus pastores, y atentos al bien común y a la dignidad de las personas ".Tampoco, como alguien ha dicho (p. Ej., P. Thomas Petri OP), nos topamos con la prohibición, también registrada en el Código de Derecho Canónico, de “hacer un recurso contra el acto del Pontífice Romano a un concilio ecuménico o el colegio de obispos ”(can. 1372).
Continuará
