There’s been a lot of hootin’ an’ hollerin’ over the appointment last week of Archbishop Víctor Manuel Fernández to the top spot at the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith. I get it, I really do. Frankly, it’s tempting to take it as a master class in trolling. Let’s resist the temptation, or at least refuse to take the bait. Instead, consider the thing with some cold analytical acuity and brass-tacks practicality.
Pope Francis finally has “his” theologian in the job now, and that’s fine. Only, what is the job for Fernández?
In his letter laying out the mission profile for Fernández, Francis says he doesn’t want the DDF prefect to tie up the dicastery’s resources in doctrinal police work but prefers that he foster theological dialogue. A doctrinal watchdog that doesn’t worry overmuch about doctrine doesn’t sound like the most useful outfit imaginable.
It’s also the case that Pope St. John Paul II called Joseph Ratzinger to Rome and kept him there largely against Ratzinger’s druthers if not exactly against his will for nearly a quarter-century, precisely because he knew that Ratzinger had been appalled at the politicization of theology faculties in his native Germany and around the world, and was confident Ratzinger wouldn’t be the guy to go off half-cocked on anyone.
Despite his reputation as der Gottes rottweiler, Ratzinger was in the job precisely because John Paul II knew he would be reluctant to bite and rarely bark or even growl.. Even when CDF did censure someone under Ratzinger, it was gentle and mild—disappointingly so for many folks—and occasionally raised the profile of the censured thinker. Hans Kung is a household name largely because of the notoriety his censure brought.
Like it or not, there’s a discernible sense in which Francis is only saying the quiet part out loud.
It’s also worth saying, up front and out loud, that La Suprema—as the Dicastery formerly known as the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith used to be styled—couldn’t ever hope to keep every bit of heresy out of print. DDF couldn’t hope to do that with a staff a hundred times the size of its current complement.
Also, there’s a lot of not-properly-heretical dreck out there as may be somehow harmful to folks who read it, but few real people ever will, only theologians. No outfit, no matter how well funded and staffed, could possibly hope to read it all, let alone sort it. Here’s Francis, in his own words, on the task to which he would see Fernández bend himself:
[T]o verify that the documents of your own Dicastery and of the others have an adequate theological support, are coherent with the rich humus of the perennial teaching of the Church and at the same time take into account the recent Magisterium.
In real practical terms, that means the Dicastery will either jazz up whatever comes from either the DDF or the other curial departments with buzzwords drawn from Francis’s idiosyncratic lexicon, or else keep documents tied up while staffers debate whether and to what extent they are properly or sufficiently Franciscan. Either way, it isn’t going to make either DDF or the rest of the curia more efficient.
“It’s not only inserting a phrase from Pope Francis,” Fernández said in a recent exclusive with Crux, “but allowing thought to be transfigured with his criteria.” In other words: Por que non los dos?
The far more important takeaway from the letter Francis wrote to Fernández was the line about letting “discipline”—i.e. the investigation and prosecution of abuse cases—take care of itself.
I mean, I get that doctrine is important—even supremely so—but it is important in an “Is the Earth still orbiting the sun?” sort of way. The crisis of abuse and coverup in the Church—the larger and broader and deeper crisis of leadership of which the abuse and coverup crisis is only the most gruesome and appalling symptom—is more of the “Is the house on fire?” variety.
The house is on fire.
In the Crux interview, Fernández revealed that the outgoing prefect, Cardinal Luis Ladaria SJ, had told him during an ad limina visit how “disciplinary matters absorbed most of the time, and that there was hardly any time left for theology.”
Ladaria is a serious intellectual of unimpeachable orthodoxy and a fellow much beloved of students and colleagues alike at the Pontifical Gregorian University before he got the secretary’s job at the then-CDF. When Francis let Cardinal Müller go in 2017, it’s likely few were as surprised as Ladaria himself when Francis tapped him to replace the outspoken German.
Ladaria was neither trained for forensic work nor of a temperament well-suited to criminal investigation. Whatever you think of the job he’s done—and there is lots to criticize—he had a hard time of it.
Fernández does not have what one could fairly characterize as a pristine record on abuse and coverup investigation, either. So, it is neither surprising that he originally turned the job down because he felt himself ill-suited to the task of directing the disciplinary side of the office, nor shocking that Francis told him not to worry himself over that.
“[T]he Holy Father’s decision for me to concentrate on doctrinal matters in no way minimizes the importance of the fight against abuse,” Fernández told Crux. “[I]t is showing his confidence in those who know [best in these matters] so that they continue on the right path, which little by little is being consolidated.”
In his letter to Fernández, Francis says: “[A] specific Section has recently been created with very competent professionals, I ask you as prefect to dedicate your personal commitment more directly to the main purpose of the Dicastery, which is ‘keeping the faith’.”
The discipline section of DDF is overworked, underfunded, and chronically short-staffed. It has also been directly implicated in several cases that have the appearance of more than mismanagement, viz. Rupnik, and seems either incapable or unwilling to right itself on its own. Putting discipline on autopilot is not the move one would expect from a man presumably interested in getting or keeping a reputation as a forward-thinking, pro-active visionary reformer.
Maybe the heat’s gotten to all of us, Francis included.
We call them the “dog days of summer” because Sirius, the brightest star in the Canis Major constellation, rises before the sun and is visible just before dawn, beginning in the bottom of July in the northern hemisphere. Canis is Latin for dog, and the ancient Romans called these the dies caniculares—“the dog[gish] days”—and so do we.
The turn into the dog days used to mark the start of Rome’s great summer vacation—literally a mass-vacating of the city—that would leave the place mostly empty. Everyone who could get out of town did so, at least during the day. By August, the place was usually quiet, even in the evenings.
The last few years I lived there, it seemed to me that the city wasn’t as empty as it used to be in summer, not even under the mid-August feragosto holiday, the origins of which reach into Pagan antiquity. I always liked being there in feragosto, because I had the city to myself.
Fernández is slated to arrive and take up his job in September; I hope for his sake after the worst heat of the dog days has passed. Roman days are still hot in September, but the evenings are delightful.
We may be entering the twilight of the Francis pontificate. We may not be. But it’s hot out, all the time, and soon the Dog Star will rise in the small hours.
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.
Ma che sta di’…che pazzia…
A pundit once claimed that all politics is local. I acknowledge that our Catholic Church is hierarchical. But I am, at the same time, a notorious proponent of the notion of subsidiarity. I care little about what Pontiff Francis says, where he goes and who he invites for lunch. I care little about what the CDF says or does. I care even less what a bunch of people gathered under the banner of Synodadolotry say as it amounts to nothing more than Synod Babble and a recrudescense of the original Tower of Bable.
I am coming to appreciate more and more my local Church as the core of my religion. I will seek out and practice my faith among those Catholics who I believe share in a common orthodoxy and orthopraxy. Getting back to the comparison with politics, I’m less and less concerned with who gets elected president than I am with who gets elected to the local town council, the local school board and to local judgeships. I’m more concerned about electing honest and Constitution-abiding State reps than what goes on in Washington. Similarly, I am more concerned with who my pastor is and that he faithfully reflects all that the Catholic faith professes and believes and leads fellow parishioners in following Christ crucified for our sins. The Vatican is driving itself into irrelevancy these days – no less so that Washington DC. Top-heavy bureaucratic structures are destined for their eventual demise because they are unmanageable.
Regarding doctrine, we read: “the house is on fire.” So, let the earth continue to orbit meaningless around the sun…
But wait–does the fireman negotiate with the fire? Does the fireman only conduct a synodal block party, such that doctrine can deferred to whomever, and who by signaling and omission can replace a doctrinal sin-thesis with a focus group “synthesis”? And, is the gravity of weighty questions now to be upstaged by mere disciplinary decisions?
After all, Cardinal Tagle is Fernandez’s counterpart within the DDF, and is well-positioned on the doctrinal side of the divided house to continue to waffle on such doctrinal issues as homosexual activity and clarity on marriage stuff, like sequential bigamy. The Vatican game-board is about strategy and chess, not about the simple give and take of narrow-focus checkers.
Fernandez is in one silo for show time, and doctrine is segregated into the second silo under Cardinal Tagle, who likely might defer silently to polyglot synodality as the heir-apparent/post-Catholic Defender of the Faith.
It worked for the monarch Henry VIII, so what the hell. Today, an inverted-pyramid (c)hurch.
The house *is* on fire!
And Archbishop Víctor Manuel Fernández has arrived with his tanker of gasoline, just in time for the Synod on Synodality.
What could possibly go wrong?
Regarding doctrine, we read: “the house is on fire.” But, not to worry, the world still orbits around the sun.
So, Fernandez can stick to disciplinary stuff. But wait, there’s more! The DDF now is divided into two silos, and the doctrinal side belongs to Cardinal Tagle, who then is likely to continue to cater to the homosexual narrative and novelties related to the indissolubility of marriage. On these matters he might even defer in silence to a divided synodality which is set to replace a “traditional” and doctrinal sin-thesis with a progressive and block-party “synthesis.” Not the monarchic Henry VIII this time around, but an up-to-date and inverted pyramid!
Doctrinal matters might even be cross-dressed to look like only disciplinary matters. So, contexting the Fernandez appointment, Vatican musical chairs is not one-move-at-a-time. Chess, not checkers!
Butt, does the fireman negotiate with the fire?
Sorry about the redundancy; a screen message said that my first post didn’t go through. But, as long as I’m hogging the website electrons, here’s an additional thought…
It is asked, what does Pope Francis mean in his letter when he asks Archbishop/now Cardinal Fernandez (new head of the disciplinary half of the Dicastery on Christian Doctrine) to square the circle: to sustain “…the rich humus of the perennial teaching of the Church [Cardinal Tagle’s silo] and at the same time take into account the recent Magisterium.”
Not merely a hint toward discerning blessings of gay marriages, but maybe something much more omnivorous from a redefined and fully “welcoming” Church? Boundary-free–and clericalist! –disciplinary “decisions” under Fernandez?
And, no longer this from St. Paul on matters which are BOTH disciplinary AND doctrinal (as with the Eucharistic Church, itself, and as with moral theology!):
“Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord (1 Cor 11:27). So, porously, what does it really mean, a “welcoming” redefinition of the Church?—first with Pach-a-mama and soon (?) with Mock-a-Papa?
“Be not deceived, God is not mocked” (Galatians 6:7).
“T]o verify that the documents of your own Dicastery and of the others have an adequate theological support, are coherent with the rich humus of the perennial teaching of the Church and at the same time take into account the recent Magisterium.” What hubris!
To begin with, the “recent Magisterium” is so incoherent and disconnected from “the rich humus of the perennial teaching of Church” as to be laughable if it were not so serious, as for example:
The Abu Dhabi statement that all heretical “religions” are willed by God; “who am I to judge” stated with incomplete context so as to mislead; patchamama pagan idol venerated in the Vatican; promotion of civil unions for same-sex couples, promotion of the Eucharist for those in an objective state of mortal sin, etc. These “recent Magisterium” offenses are all violations of God’s law and “the rich humus of the perennial teaching of the Church.”
thank you Maggie, and all these heresies are swept under the rug while Bergoglio without any opposition from the present day apostles makes ready for the death blow against the Truth of Christ in defiance and rebellion against God. Come LORD JESUS CHRIST to the rescue of your holy bride.
Correct me if I misunderstand, but perhaps the new Dicastery for the Doctrine of Fernandez (DDF) can help us better synodal this October? And with the name change, we will never need to think that the DDF is in hermeneutical continuity with the CDF of the Church before Pope Francis. More, perhaps simply reading the poetry of the new Prefect will teach us all we need to handle Rupnik and Zanchetta? Ah, synodaling is such a pleasure.
Doctrines = Truths. Truth either matters or it doesn’t. I believe that it does.
Crusader, you are clearly a rigid Catholic and deserve to be cancel-cultured by Bergoglioism along with the remnant of the Divine Institution. Truth is today relative, and the only thing that counts is human fraternity of the Argentinian masonic kind. The new source of Revelation- The Masonic Spirit of our long awaited age – is the only truth Synodal Rupture requires. Get with it or go find one of those extremist, nostalgic groups that still believe in the rigid old-fashioned “Catholic Truth”.
Sexual organs are not a far away sidelines to theological and dogmatic purity matters, they are at the very center of them. Sexual organs are theological and dogmatic organs, as all the effect and efficacy for us of the Revelation in Christ, all legitimate theology and dogmas depend in our holy or unholy use of these organs. God created, designed and gave us those sexual organs to keep us directly connected to Reality, to Himself, and to all Beauty, Truth and Love.
This permeates the whole body in every cell, mind, heart, soul and spirit and so much so, that the accidentally, criminally or ideologically castrated don’t lose this blessed connection. Jesus obviously had sexual organs and they are with him in Heaven forever. Think about that. Altieri here uses his usual novelistic style to create a dichotomy an to say that the clerical sexual abuse deserves more attention while ignoring that that abuse came from the core homosexual dichotomy against Reality, God, Dogma, and True Goodness, Beauty, Love and Truth, written in our very DNA. Change Altieri’s “don’t worry,
we’ll focus on the abuse” for “Resist and stay faithful to God’s Truth in everything and all the way back to your sexual organs”. Doing otherwise, we become enablers and empower the enthronement of the diabolical abusers.
“Hans Kung is a household name largely because of the notoriety his censure brought.”
No. Perhaps Mr. Altieri is too young to know (in which case he should have the humility not to make such a statement) but I am old enough to remember that Kung’s “The Church” (Das Kirch) was sold in most Catholic and many secular bookstores. He was quite broadly known before the censure, which made the censure necessary (this is not to say that Das Kirch was itself necessarily one of the problematic texts. I don’t recall it being so when I read it but memory may fail me.)
Funny you should mention Kung, I literally saw one of his books in a bargain bin at my local theological bookstore.
Mark,
My recollection of Hans Kung’s popularity before the censure matches yours. Thank you for the reality check.
All of his stupid and blatantly heretical books were problematic.
If I may help translate, ma chere padre, please let us note some Scriptural references. Isaiah 14:12, Revelation 22:16, and 2Peter 1:19 all mention or allude to Lucifer as the bright/est star. As Sirius is the brightest star in the canine constellation, as Lucifer was in the heavens, so Fernandez is to Francis’ pontificate. Also, hell is hot as Rome is hot in August and perhaps until October. Or until morning turns to evening or truth becomes false.
Cardinal Fernandez, please do not judge me for asking a question:
Is it intrinsically (always and in every circumstance and situation) wrong to violate God’s negative prohibition to judge others, like Rupnik or Zanchetta?
If yes, why do you teach that it can be good to violate God’s other negative prohibitions to commit intrinsically evil acts, like taking a concubine, using artificial contraception or blessing homosexual unions, etc?
If no, I could be right to judge you for teaching others to act against God’s law.
Synodaling is such fun.
The precept proscribes judging souls, not behavior. It is never wrong to judge evil behavior, or even stupid behavior, both of which have been very public in the life of the Cardinal. (and myself)
“The far more important takeaway from the letter Francis wrote to Fernández was the line about letting “discipline”—i.e. the investigation and prosecution of abuse cases—take care of itself.”
What Pope Francis means, is let his new Synodal lbgt morality take care of the the great Catholic clergy sex offender problem, by making lbgt man-boy-lover sex now moral in the Catholic Church. Catholic Synodal leaders see sex offender priests as the victims.
The Vatican Synod on Synodality speaks nothing about the great Catholic clergy scandal of child sex offender Priests. The Vatican does not reprimand Joe Biden for giving the lbgt man-boy-lovers the right to marry, or Joe Biden working hard on giving the lbgt man-boy-lovers the ability to modify children’s genitals. Helping Catholic clergy sex offender Priests avoid justice and continue having sex with children is what the Vatican means by ‘radical inclusion’.
German Bishop Must Face Vatican Investigation, Abuse Council Demands
“we still perceive in the actions of Bishop Bode a more perpetrator-oriented than victim-oriented attitude,” the victims’ advisory council said on Monday.”
“Several prominent German prelates have been accused of mishandling cases of sexual abuse. They include Synodal Way initiator Cardinal Reinhard Marx, Synodal Way president Bishop Georg Bätzing — the successor to Marx as president of the bishops’ conference — and Hamburg’s Archbishop Heße. All of them have so far remained in office.”
Hello CWR, please add link to the quote at the end of my comment above.
https://www.ncregister.com/cna/german-bishop-must-face-vatican-investigation-abuse-council-demands?
Cardinal Fernandez is too modest when he says that his book Heal Me with Your Mouth is not high level theology. It is well researched! After all, he confessed that he interviewed over a thousand young adults about kissing. My guess is that not even former Cardinal McCarrick talked to so many young people. Having said this, the Pope is probably right that Cardinal Fernandez is unqualified to deal with discipline cases. He is far too merciful. But let no one say that Tucho is not an expert on what young people and sex. He’s lit. Synodalling is so yeet.
“The new Dicastery for the Doctrine of Fernandez (DDF)”. Special thanks to “God’s Fool”.
Five years after the McCarrick scandal, as the Church continues to be impeded by its ability to teach a world that needs that teaching because of those scandals, Francis gives us a thin-skinned DDS Prefect about whose theological orthodoxy and profundity there is doubt AND then expects the disciplinary section of DDS to run on auto-pilot. I’m not surprised: Francis has been far more talk than action on the sex abuse crisis, witness the sorry dance between the Apostolic Palace, Roman congregations, and the Jesuit Curia about “what do you do with a problem like Marko?”
https://www.catholicculture.org/news/headlines/index.cfm?storyid=59222
https://www.catholicculture.org/news/headlines/index.cfm?storyid=59236
More heroic scholarship to add to the study of Amoris Laetitia.
https://www.tradimentodellasanadottrina.it/en/libro/