The refusal of Pope Francis to directly respond to the dubia (questions) by four cardinals asking him to clarify the ambiguities of Amoris Laetitia—the Apostolic Exhortation on love, marriage, and the family—unleashed a wave of disappointment, distrust, and unjust hyper-criticism. That’s unfortunate.
During an April 2023, meeting of priests in Budapest, an unnamed Jesuit asked Pope Francis, “I would like to offer the compassion and love that the Gospel asks for everyone, even the enemy. But how is this possible?” The response of the Holy Father sparked the scorn of several conservative websites. He explained:
- Sexual abuse scars victims in ways that stay with them their entire lives.
- “The abuser is to be condemned, indeed, but as a brother. Condemning him is to be understood as an act of charity. There is a logic, a form of loving the enemy that is also expressed in this way. And it is not easy to understand and to live out.”
- “The abuser is an enemy. Each of us feels this because we empathize with the suffering of the abused.”
- “Even talking to the abuser involves revulsion; it’s not easy. But they are God’s children too. They deserve punishment, but they also deserve pastoral care. How do we provide that? No, it is not easy.”
Despite widespread concern, there isn’t much of a problem with the Pope’s off-the-cuff remarks on the tension between justice and mercy. His basic points are rooted in traditional Catholic teaching. A more thorough response would have stressed the gravity of the sin before God, the need to seek forgiveness, and the duty of reparation—as summarized in the Act of Contrition.
God created us in His image and likeness (cf. Gen. 1:27). Jesus teaches us to forgive our enemies. “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I say to you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you” (Mt. 5:43-44). Jesus also teaches just punishment. “If your right eye causes you to sin, pluck it out and throw it away; it is better that you lose one of your members than that your whole body be thrown into hell…” (Mt. 5:27-30).
Unfortunately, the Pope’s previous comments on capital punishment and hell undermine confidence in his words and stimulate hyper-critical reactions among many Catholics.
In 2018, Pope Francis ordered a change in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, in which he vaguely termed the death penalty “inadmissible.” In 2020 encyclical Fratelli Tutti, the Pope wrote:
The firm rejection of the death penalty shows to what extent it is possible to recognize the inalienable dignity of every human being and to accept that he or she has a place in this universe. If I do not deny that dignity to the worst of criminals, I will not deny it to anyone.
Circumstantial recourse to the death penalty is always open to debate. But Tradition and the Scriptures permit the death penalty as an unpleasant moral necessity. The Roman Catechism teaches:
Another kind of lawful slaying belongs to the civil authorities, to whom is entrusted power of life and death, by the legal and judicious exercise of which they punish the guilty and protect the innocent. The just use of this power, far from involving the crime of murder, is an act of paramount obedience to this Commandment which prohibits murder. The end of the Commandment is the preservation and security of human life.
The principle of non-contradiction requires that Tradition, Scriptures, and Magisterium agree.
In 2018, Pope Francis appeared to deny the existence of hell in an interview with atheist journalist Eugenio Scalfari. The Catholic News Agency downplayed the report as a likely misunderstanding by Scalfari. The Vatican “clarification” was unsatisfactory and merely explained, “the literal words pronounced by the pope are not quoted.”
Early in 2023, Pope Francis suggested that hell is a state of mind, not a place. “Hell is a state, it is a state of the heart, of the soul, of a position towards life, towards values, towards family, towards everything. There are people who live in hell because they ask for it, there are others who don’t, who suffer. And who goes to hell, to that hell, to that state? It is already living from here.”
The Holy Father’s theological speculation has metaphorical merit (comparable to the Twilight Zone’s episode, “A Nice Place to Visit”) but falls short of affirming the disturbing teachings of Jesus: “Then he will say to those at his left hand, ‘Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels’” (Mt. 25:4).
In contrast to these imprecisions, Pope Francis’ predecessor Pope Benedict spoke of hell and its existence with spontaneous clarity during a 2008 Q&A with priests.
- The Pope [Benedict] called heaven, hell, and purgatory “fundamental themes that unfortunately appear rarely in our preaching.”
- “When one is not aware of the judgment of God, when one does not recognize the possibility of hell, of the radical and definitive failure of life, then one does not recognize the possibility and necessity for purification.”
- He noted that ideologies, such as communism, which prided themselves on worldly action that would correct all injustices, promising “to build the world the way it was supposed to have been,” instead destroyed the world.
- “Today we are used to thinking: What is sin? God is great, he understands us, so sin does not count, in the end, God will be good toward all.”
- “…there is justice, and there is real blame. Those who have destroyed man and the earth cannot sit immediately at the table of God, together with their victims.”
Clarity is charity because it serves the truth. We can easily interpret papal ambiguity as permission to reject received teaching, accept contrary opinions, and even believe or commit evil. Needless ambiguity does not serve the truth.
If you value the news and views Catholic World Report provides, please consider donating to support our efforts. Your contribution will help us continue to make CWR available to all readers worldwide for free, without a subscription. Thank you for your generosity!
Click here for more information on donating to CWR. Click here to sign up for our newsletter.
I couldn’t agree more Father! Thank you! I hope those in authority are listening. These comments of the Pope are creating great difficulty in the actual lives of the lay faithful. They are causing division and strife within families that does not need to exist. It is not helpful to have everyone interpreting what he says in different ways. This is the actual lived experience of the last 10 years. Division because everyone is hearing something different! The Body of Christ is being destroyed by disunity. We are being scattered.
St. Faustina offers clarity about hell and its alternative, and our “despair which is a foretaste of hell and makes [the soul] unable to draw near God.”
“Jesus calls the soul a third time, but the soul remains deaf and blind, hardened and despairing. Then the mercy of God begins to exert itself, and, without any co-operation from the soul, God grants it final grace. If this too is spurned, God will leave the soul in this self-chosen disposition for eternity [!]. This grace emerges from the merciful Heart of Jesus and gives the soul a special light by means of which the soul begins to understand God’s effort; but conversion [!] depends on its own will [!]. The soul knows that this, for her, is final grace and should it show even a flicker of good will, the mercy of God will accomplish the rest” (n. 1486).
But, let’s now consider the soul steeped in the lifetime habit of its own bubble… Consider the soul on the edge, whom when given the final choice is not habituated toward the “other” or the “Other,” and simply slouches into “well, I think I’ll just stick with what I know.”
When we know not what to pray for, we should pray for such souls on the edge (maybe even ourselves?), that they might be shown our fleeting prayer on their behalf, and not quite so alone might feel safe to jump into total conversion: “take me home, Lord!” As in, “Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom” (Luke 23:42). Something like the day laborers who receive a full day’s wages for only a late hour in the field—because they do say yes and the Lord is “generous” (Matthew 20:14).
But, yes, the absolute hurdle of conversion, and charitable clarity about the alternative of real hell as our “self-chosen disposition for eternity.”
I remember an article with Pope Francis walking through Rome ‘alone’, praying for victims of the Corvid pandemic. In the picture of Pope Francis ‘walking alone’ there were at least eight men in suits with dark sunglasses and a black sedan. I know St. Pope John Paul II had two confirmed kills, via men he had hired to kill to protect himself. Can we at least confirm that Pope Francis and St. Pope John Paul II have no problem with killing to protect themselves?
Well, there ARE Orinces of the Church, right. And need bodybguards…
They are Princes…
Creating confusion in the minds of those entrusted to one’s care is contrary to a Gospel where charity forms the bedrock. But faithful Catholics know that already.
How can clarity come from the confused? How can godliness come from a cultural Marxist?
1 Corinthians 14:33 For God is not a God of confusion but of peace. As in all the churches of the saints,
Proverbs 3:5-6 Trust in the Lord with all your heart, and do not lean on your own understanding. In all your ways acknowledge him, and he will make straight your paths.
2 Timothy 3:5 Having the appearance of godliness, but denying its power. Avoid such people.
Psalm 52:2-4 Your tongue plots destruction, like a sharp razor, you worker of deceit. You love evil more than good, and lying more than speaking what is right. Selah You love all words that devour, O deceitful tongue.
To Proud Protestant and anti-Papist Brian Young:
Clarity in these matters cannot come from you or any other Protestant because you embrace and teach heresies as a matter of course. As such, you are supremely confused in your anti-Catholic beliefs and other things that you preach in opposition to Catholic doctrine.
Next, godliness and error do not co-exist together. As such, all Protestant doctrines that do not coincide with Catholic doctrines are erroneous and the opposite of any kind of godliness. Accordingly, godliness cannot come from you in your error-filled teaching and ongoing despicable efforts to undermine the Catholic faithful in these comboxes.
As for your biblical quotations from your illegitimate bible, to the extent that they coincide with legitimate Catholic bibles, the words pertain much, much more to you and other Protestants than they do to the Pope. So “good” of you to lambast yourself and your ongoing evil deceptions by providing quotations that fit you extremely well.
In matters of religion a cogent argument is put forward by quoting scripture. When there is an issue, God has the answer for us. Instead of vague generalities, specifics that address the point in question give credibility. Verity is truth and truth is the domaine of God.
What “heresies”do you speak of? Bring particulars!
“Personal attacks” are frowned upon at CWR, yet you are permitted a great deal of liberty. Will permission be granted to yours truly in attempting to offer a counterpoint?
Jude 1:20-21 But you, beloved, building yourselves up in your most holy faith and praying in the Holy Spirit, keep yourselves in the love of God, waiting for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ that leads to eternal life.
1 Peter 3:16 Having a good conscience, so that, when you are slandered, those who revile your good behaviour in Christ may be put to shame.
Matthew 5:11 “Blessed are you when others revile you and persecute you and utter all kinds of evil against you falsely on my account.
James 1:26 If anyone thinks he is religious and does not bridle his tongue but deceives his heart, this person’s religion is worthless.
Let all who have breath exalt the Lord.
To Proud Protestant and anti-Catholic Brian Young:
As they say in the scientific community, you are so far off the mark that you are “not even wrong.” 🙂
For starters regarding your statement about matters involving religion, the quoting of scripture is absolutely no guarantee of cogent arguments, and, in fact, such is often done to present incoherent and erroneous arguments. This is frequently demonstrated by you in many of your quotes from an illegitimate bible that are often used by you to support your incoherent and heretical arguments in opposition to Catholic doctrine. Specifics provided by you (when such are provided) also demonstrate your complete lack of credibility.
As a proud Protestant, your heresies have been exposed by me and other Catholics in these comboxes. These include your false beliefs regarding the Papacy, especially Papal Infallibility, the Blessed Virgin Mary, the Holy Eucharist, and so on.
And when it comes to particulars, you reveal your own hypocrisy as many others engaging you have repeatedly asked you for more particulars only to be ignored or dodged by you, but I will try one more time to see if you will spin or ignore or actually set forth your specific beliefs.
1. What is your specific position on Catholic Church teaching involving the Blessed Virgin Mary? Do you agree that she was immaculately conceived? Do you agree that she has been assumed into Heaven? Do you agree that she can intercede with her son for all of us?
-If you decide to respond to these and the following questions, honesty requires specifics and not just quoting scripture and act as if that is sufficient.
2. What is your specific position on Catholic Church teaching on the Papacy? Do you agree that the Pope is infallible in specific matters as set forth by the Catholic Church? Do you agree that the One True Church (Catholic Church) was founded by our Lord Jesus Christ on Peter the Rock, the first Pope, and all of his successors inherit and continue this leadership?
3. What is your specific position on Catholic Church teaching involving the Holy Eucharist? Do you agree that the host, by the power of God, becomes the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Jesus Christ upon consecration by a Catholic priest? Do you agree that the consecrated host is really Christ and not just a symbol? Do you agree that no Protestant has the power to consecrate a host so as to bring about its transubstantiation by God into the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Jesus Christ?
___
When it comes to so-called personal attacks, by labeling you as a proud Protestant and anti-Catholic and/or anti-Papist and demonstrating why, this is simply stating the unvarnished truth about you that you would rather hide in the dark, especially since you are reluctant to identify your specific religion while you despicably attempt to undermine the Catholic Faith of others in these comboxes.
Accordingly, you engage in ongoing personal attacks on me and all other Catholics in these comboxes by attacking the Catholic Church and Catholic Church doctrines repeatedly. If you did not do this, you would not be called out and criticized by me and others who see through your dishonest efforts that you also deceptively try to disguise through occasional fulsome language and “who, me?” whining when your errors and undermining efforts are rightly exposed and criticized.
Here’s an interesting exchange from A Man For All Seasons that is quite applicable to you:
More: Roper, the answer’s “no.” (Firmly) and will be “no” so long as you’re a heretic.
Roper: (Firing) That’s a word I don’t like, Sir Thomas!
More: It’s not a likable word. (Coming to life) It’s not a likable thing!
___________________________
As a committed and proud Protestant, Brian, you are, like Roper was, a heretic. If you wish to no longer be a heretic and criticized by me and other faithful Catholics committed to the truth found only in the Catholic Church, give up your heretical Protestantism and fully exalt and honor the Lord by becoming a member of his one and only Church – the Catholic Church. But continue your efforts to spread your heretical beliefs, and you will be rightly criticized and exposed by me and other faithful Catholics.
By the bye regarding the quotes you set forth from your illegitimate bible, note that 1 Peter 3:16 does Not pertain to you, nor does Matthew 5:11. However, James 1:26 most definitely applies to you, and here is how it is more accurately rendered from a legitimate Bible:
James 1:26: If any one thinks he is religious, and does not bridle his tongue but deceives his heart, this man’s religion is vain.
Your proud and heretical Protestantism is indeed vain. Even more, it is a personal attack on Jesus Christ by insisting it knows better than Jesus Himself when it comes to how He wishes to be worshipped, which is done by belonging to His One and Only True Church – the Catholic Church. Indeed, Protestantism proudly repeats the Satanic defiance of God in its ongoing exaltation of Non Serviam shouted from the rooftops.
To Proud Protestant Brian Young:
As they say in the scientific community, you are so far off the mark that you are “not even wrong.” 🙂
For starters regarding your statement about matters involving religion, the quoting of scripture is absolutely no guarantee of cogent arguments, and, in fact, such is often done to present incoherent and erroneous arguments. This is frequently demonstrated by you in many of your quotes from an illegitimate bible that are often used by you to support your incoherent and heretical arguments in opposition to Catholic doctrine. Specifics provided by you (when such are provided) also demonstrate your complete lack of credibility.
As a proud Protestant, your heresies have been exposed by me and other Catholics in these comboxes. These include your false beliefs regarding the Papacy, especially Papal Infallibility, the Blessed Virgin Mary, the Holy Eucharist, and so on.
And when it comes to particulars, you reveal your own hypocrisy as many others engaging you have repeatedly asked you for more particulars only to be ignored or dodged by you, but I will try one more time to see if you will spin or ignore or actually set forth your specific beliefs.
1. What is your specific position on Catholic Church teaching involving the Blessed Virgin Mary? Do you agree that she was immaculately conceived? Do you agree that she has been assumed into Heaven? Do you agree that she can intercede with her son for all of us?
-If you decide to respond to these and the following questions, honesty requires specifics and not just quoting scripture and act as if that is sufficient.
2. What is your specific position on Catholic Church teaching on the Papacy? Do you agree that the Pope is infallible in specific matters as set forth by the Catholic Church? Do you agree that the One True Church (Catholic Church) was founded by our Lord Jesus Christ on Peter the Rock, the first Pope, and all of his successors inherit and continue this leadership?
3. What is your specific position on Catholic Church teaching involving the Holy Eucharist? Do you agree that the host, by the power of God, becomes the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Jesus Christ upon consecration by a Catholic priest? Do you agree that the consecrated host is really Christ and not just a symbol? Do you agree that no Protestant has the power to consecrate a host so as to bring about its transubstantiation by God into the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Jesus Christ?
___
When it comes to so-called personal attacks, by labeling you as a proud Protestant and anti-Catholic and/or anti-Papist and demonstrating why, this is simply stating the unvarnished truth about you that you would rather hide in the dark, especially since you are reluctant to identify your specific religion while you despicably attempt to undermine the Catholic Faith of others in these comboxes.
Accordingly, you engage in ongoing personal attacks on me and all other Catholics in these comboxes by attacking the Catholic Church and Catholic Church doctrines repeatedly. If you did not do this, you would not be called out and criticized by me and others who see through your dishonest efforts that you also deceptively try to disguise through occasional fulsome language and “who, me?” whining when your errors and undermining efforts are rightly exposed and criticized.
Here’s an interesting exchange from A Man For All Seasons that is quite applicable to you:
More: Roper, the answer’s “no.” (Firmly) and will be “no” so long as you’re a heretic.
Roper: (Firing) That’s a word I don’t like, Sir Thomas!
More: It’s not a likable word. (Coming to life) It’s not a likable thing!
___________________________
As a committed and proud Protestant, Brian, you are, like Roper was, a heretic. If you wish to no longer be a heretic and criticized by me and other faithful Catholics committed to the truth found only in the Catholic Church, give up your heretical Protestantism and fully exalt and honor the Lord by becoming a member of his one and only Church – the Catholic Church. But continue your efforts to spread your heretical beliefs, and you will be rightly criticized and exposed by me and other faithful Catholics.
By the bye regarding the quotes you set forth from your illegitimate bible, note that 1 Peter 3:16 does Not pertain to you, nor does Matthew 5:11. However, James 1:26 most definitely applies to you, and here is how it is more accurately rendered from a legitimate Bible:
James 1:26: If any one thinks he is religious, and does not bridle his tongue but deceives his heart, this man’s religion is vain.
Your proud and heretical Protestantism is indeed vain. Even more, it is a personal attack on Jesus Christ by insisting it knows better than Jesus Himself when it comes to how He wishes to be worshipped, which is done by belonging to His One and Only True Church – the Catholic Church. Indeed, Protestantism proudly repeats the Satanic defiance of God in its ongoing exaltation of Non Serviam shouted from the rooftops.
Say what you mean, mean what you say.
Great article Father! Sadly, our beloved Pope has said outright uncharitable things to his flock as well; hurtful things that reveal an internal disdain for many faithful Catholics. For example, when referring to Catholic couples with large families he indicated that they should not “reproduce like rabbits”. In referring to those clergy that offer the TLM, “the men that wear lace”; to anyone desiring the holy latin mass, he accuses them of engaging in “backwardism which is sinful”. Indeed, our Pope had been clear sometimes and it is exactly during those times, I wish he had exercised the prudence to be charitable.
The actions of His Holiness are not atypical, but are quite common among the clergy. When confronted with a situation that could prove embarrassing, from a minor issue concerning practice of the faith, to heresy, to sexual abuse, the tendency is to sweep it under the rug as fast as possible, then ignore it thereafter. This turns what in many cases was a slight misunderstanding that could have been resolved quickly and amicably into a major confrontation, and a minor embarrassment into a major scandal. As a result, from the parish level on up to the Vatican, ordinary Catholics see a virtual tsunami of what Hilaire Belloc is alleged to have called “knavish imbecility,” and either grit their teeth and try to ride it out, or leave the Church in utter disgust.
I also prefer Benedict’s clarity, but I was raised on such teaching. Was Jesus’ audience perhaps also more familiar with the place that is hell? “Sheol” in particular would have been familiar to Jews of the time. More of a “place” for the dead.
By contrast the Holy Father’s audience is the 21st century world less familiar with the metaphysical. Indeed I find outside my religious friends if I’m too direct in affirming my belief in the place and reality of hell they are quick to perceive me as a bit of a crackpot!
The concept of hell as described by CS Lewis in the Great Divorce and I feel a similar angle the Holy Father is describing here, is more relatable and a better tool of evangelism. A way for man of 21st century to understand, and later go deeper perhaps into the faith and come to understand too God’s judgement.
It appears further the Holy Father didn’t say his description of hell is the *only* way to see it, nor that there is no physical place, we’re adding those words to a degree I think?
That said I feel your frustration Father. I’d love to see different sides of the Holy Father, one reaching out to the world and another to the faithful reassuring us in no uncertain terms he’s orthodox and fully understands our faith. For that perhaps we will have to wait for the next Pope!
He does pay undue time to the abstract and speculative! To re-interpret clear teachings of our Lord is not expected.
Hebrews 4:12 For the word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing to the division of soul and of spirit, of joints and of marrow, and discerning the thoughts and intentions of the heart.
John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
Isaiah 40:8 The grass withers, the flower fades, but the word of our God will stand forever.
James 1:17 Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights, with whom there is no variation or shadow due to change.
Psalm 119:105 Your word is a lamp to my feet and a light to my path.
Thank you father, well said. Sometimes I think our dear Holy Father would make a good Anglican for his wooliness. May God bless his successor with wisdom and clarity.
Vagueness and ambiguity are hallmarks of the heresy of modernism.
This isn’t a matter of charity, but of justice. Those in a teaching position, MUST be clear. Granted that mortal sin destroys our friendship (i.e. charity) with God, with regards to humans there is an obligation to clarity on the part of those who teach.
I can’t recall the name and it might be very difficult for me to find it, but in the 19th century there was something written by – perhaps – Pope Leo XIII. In it he mentions the importance defining terms and he criticizes those who don’t do so. He did so define in this writing those terms that he needed to.
Maybe this from Leo XIII’s Rerum Novarum:
“It is no easy matter to define the relative rights and mutual duties of the rich and of the poor, of capital and of labor. And the danger lies in this, that crafty agitators are intent on making use of these differences of opinion to pervert men’s judgments and to stir up the people to revolt” (n. 3).
I have rarely heard such theological nonsense. Pope Francis is absolutely right when he describes hell as being separated from God. We are made to spend eternity with God. To be separated from him surpasses any agony of the human heart.
“We can easily interpret papal ambiguity as permission to reject received teaching, accept contrary opinions, and even believe or commit evil.”
Weaponized ambiguity, intentional to destroy.