(Source: www.catholicherald.co.uk) Fr Aidan Nichols said that Pope Francis’s teaching had led to an ‘extremely grave’ situation
A prominent theologian has proposed reforming canon law to allow a popeâs doctrinal errors to be established.
Fr Aidan Nichols, a prolific author who has lectured at Oxford and Cambridge as well as the Angelicum in Rome, said that Pope Francisâs exhortation Amoris Laetitia had led to an âextremely graveâ situation.
Fr Nichols proposed that, given the Popeâs statements on issues including marriage and the moral law, the Church may need âa procedure for calling to order a pope who teaches errorâ.
The Dominican theologian said that this procedure might be less âconflictualâ if it took place during a future pontificate, rather as Pope Honorius was only condemned for error after he had ceased to occupy the chair of Peter.
Fr Nichols was speaking at the annual conference in Cuddesdon of an ecumenical society, the Fellowship of St Alban and St Sergius, to a largely non-Catholic audience.
He said the judicial process would âdissuade popes from any tendency to doctrinal waywardness or simple negligenceâ, and would answer some âecumenical anxietiesâ of Anglicans, Orthodox and others who fear that the pope has carte blanche to impose any teaching. âIndeed, it may be that the present crisis of the Roman magisterium is providentially intended to call attention to the limits of primacy in this regard.â
Fr Nichols has written over 40 books of philosophy, theology, apologetics and criticism. In 2006 he was appointed to Oxford Universityâs first lectureship since the Reformation in Catholic theology.
He has not publicly commented on Amoris Laetitia until now, but was a signatory to a leaked letter from 45 priests and theologians to the College of Cardinals. The letter asked the cardinals to request a clarification from the Pope to rule out heretical and erroneous interpretations of the exhortation.
In his paper Fr Nichols mentioned some of the same concerns as the letter: he noted, for instance, that Amoris Laetitia could seem to imply that the monastic life was not a higher state than marriage â a view condemned as heretical by the Council of Trent.
The exhortation has also been interpreted as arguing that the divorced and remarried can receive Communion without endeavouring to live âas brother and sisterâ. This contradicts the perennial teaching of the Church, reaffirmed by Popes St John Paul II and Benedict XVI.
Fr Nichols said that this interpretation, which Pope Francis has reportedly approved, would introduce into the Church âa previously unheard-of state of life. Put bluntly, this state of life is one of tolerated concubinage.â
But Fr Nichols said the way in which Amoris Laetitia argued for âtolerated concubinageâ (without using the phrase) was potentially even more harmful. He quoted the exhortationâs description of a conscience which ârecognizes that a given situation does not correspond objectively to the demands of the Gospelâ but sees âwith a certain moral securityâ¦what for now is the most generous response.â Fr Nichols said this seemed to say âthat actions condemned by the law of Christ can sometimes be morally right or even, indeed, requested by God.â
This would contradict the Churchâs teaching that some acts are always morally wrong, Fr Nichols said.
He also drew attention to the statement â presumably referring to attempts to live continently â that someone âmay know full well the rule yetâ¦be in a concrete situation which does not allow him or her to act differently and decide otherwise without further sinâ. Fr Nichols noted that the Council of Trent had solemnly condemned the idea that âthe commandments of God are impossible to observe even for a man who is justified and established in grace.â Amoris Laetitia seemed to say that it is not always possible or even advisable to follow the moral law.
If such general statements about moral acts were correct, Fr Nichols said, âthen no area of Christian morality can remain unscathed.â
He said that it would be preferable to think that the Pope had been merely ânegligentâ in his language, rather than actively teaching error. But this seemed doubtful, given the reports that the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith had suggested corrections to Amoris Laetitia, and was ignored.
Cardinal Raymond Burke has publicly discussed making a formal correction of the Pope. However, Fr Nichols said that neither the Western nor Eastern Codes of Canon Law contain a procedure âfor enquiry into the case of a pope believed to have taught doctrinal error, much less is there provision for a trial.â
Fr Nichols observed that the tradition of canon law is that âthe first see is judged by no-one.â But he said that the First Vatican Council had restricted the doctrine of papal infallibility, so that âit is not the position of the Roman Catholic Church that a pope is incapable of leading people astray by false teaching as a public doctor.
âHe may be the supreme appeal judge of Christendomâ¦but that does not make him immune to perpetrating doctrinal howlers. Surprisingly, or perhaps not so surprisingly given the piety that has surrounded the figures of the popes since the pontificate of Pius IX, this fact appears to be unknown to many who ought to know better.â Given the limits on papal infallibility, canon law might be able to accommodate a formal procedure for inquiring into whether a pope had taught error.
Fr Nichols said that bishopsâ conferences had been slow to support Pope Francis, probably because they were divided among themselves; but he said that the Popeâs âprogramme would not have got as far as it has were it not the case that theological liberals, generally of the closet variety, have in the fairly recent past been appointed to high positions both in the world episcopate and in the ranks of the Roman Curia.â
Fr Nichols said that there was âa danger of possible schismâ, but that it was unlikely and not as immediate a danger as âthe spread of a moral heresyâ. The view which Amoris Laetitia apparently contains would, if it passed without correction, âincreasingly be regarded as at the very least an acceptable theological opinion. And that will do more damage than can easily be repaired.â
He concluded that the law of the Church will live on, because of those who âgive the law life by faithfulness in loveâ (Source: www.catholicherald.co.uk)