Cardinal Joseph Zen By Alfredoko / Wikimedia Commons (Left), Michael Lofton / Faceboook (Right)
CV NEWS FEED // Cardinal Joseph Zen, archbishop emeritus of Hong Kong, has published a blog post responding to American Pope Francis apologist Michael Lofton, who claimed the cardinal accused the Papal Magisterium of heresy when he critiqued the Vatican document Fiducia Supplicans.
In his July 1 blog post, Cardinal Zen called for listeners of Lofton’s podcast “Reason & Theology” to cease donating and listening to his podcast, and said that Lofton does not understand the authoritative hierarchy of documents published by the Vatican.
In December 2023, the Vatican published the Declaration “Fiducia Supplicans,” or “On the Pastoral Meaning of Blessings.” Cardinal Victor Fernandez, prefect for the Dicastery for the Doctrine of Faith, issued the document, signed by Pope Francis, about blessings for same-sex couples and couples in irregular situations.
On January 23, Cardinal Zen penned a critique of “Fiducia Supplicans” on his blog, arguing that the document causes confusion. According to Catholic News Agency, Cardinal Zen also wrote that if Cardinal Fernandez has committed “a heresy by claiming a serious sin as ‘good,’ then shouldn’t the prefect resign or be dismissed?”
On January 25, Lofton analyzed Cardinal Zen’s response to “Fiducia Supplicans” in an almost hour-long episode titled “Cardinal Zen Accuses Vatican of Heresy” on his podcast. In the episode, Lofton emphasized that “Fiducia Supplicans” is not confusing and is very clear. He also spoke about the “hermeneutic of rupture,” a term used often by the late Pope Benedict XVI when warning against reading Vatican documents as in conflict with Church tradition or previous documents.
Pope Benedict XVI used the term “hermeneutic of continuity” to describe the lens through which Catholics should read the documents of Vatican II. The hermeneutic, or principle, of continuity reads the documents in such a way that they are in harmony with previous Church documents and teachings, rather than in such a way that suggests they conflict with one another.
Pope Benedict XVI simultaneously warned against “the hermeneutic of rupture,” which views Vatican II’s documents as a break from the Church’s teachings and tradition. The phrase has been extended to apply to documents issued by the Vatican after Vatican II as well.
Lofton’s January 25 episode addressing the hermeneutic of rupture and Cardinal Zen has over 5,800 views as of July 1. In the episode, Lofton also noted that Cardinal Zen has been featured on Reason & Theology before.
Lofton’s YouTube platform has over 106,000 subscribers, and he is widely turned to as the de facto American apologist to explain Pope Francis’ confusing or controversial statements.
Before Lofton’s channel grew in popularity, the website “Where Peter Is” was largely seen as the most current and up-to-date papal apologist platform. In 2021, Where Peter Is published an article on reading Pope Benedict XVI and Pope Francis’ documents through a lens of a hermeneutic of continuity, rather than of rupture.
On July 1, Cardinal Zen published a blog post that addresses Lofton’s accusation that he does not follow the hermeneutic of continuity in criticizing “Fiducia Supplicans.”
Beginning his blog post, Cardinal Zen said that he has “often wasted” time watching Lofton’s show, and described Lofton as “this big man with a little beard (who would do well to hide his tattoo when he speaks like a theologian),” according to an unofficial translation of the blog.
“With great seriousness, [Lofton] is scandalized that I, who insist so much on the hermeneutics of continuity, now dare to criticize the ‘Fiducia supplicans,’” the Cardinal continued.
Cardinal Zen wrote that Lofton’s arguments against his criticism of Fiducia Supplicans show that Lofton “does not even know how to distinguish” the implications of the documents and pronouncements from Rome, which vary by authoritative degree depending on the level at which they are published.
“If I remember well, Mr. Lofton has sometimes confessed that he is not a theologian, but it seems to me that he understands the differentiated authority of the Vatican documents less than anyone of my catechumens,” Cardinal Zen continued. “I speak of the hermeneutics of continuity when speaking of the Ecumenical Councils, the highest degree of authority of the Magisterium.”
In Lofton’s January 25 podcast episode, he questioned what Cardinal Zen has done to clear up the confusion caused by Fiducia Supplicans, and said that Cardinal Zen has viewed the Declaration with a hermeneutic of rupture.
Lofton reviewed Cardinal Zen’s statement that Cardinal Fernandez should resign or be dismissed from his position as Prefect of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith because he may have committed a heresy in Fiducia Supplicans.
Lofton claimed that Cardinal Zen did not truly intend to accuse Cardinal Fernandez of heresy, but rather the Magisterium of the Catholic Church, including Pope Francis, because Pope Francis approved Fiducia Supplicans.
In his July 1 blog post, Cardinal Zen wrote, that the Declaration “is obviously the work of” Cardinal Fernandez, “even if rubber-stamped by Pope Francis.”
He used the phrase “rubber-stamped,” Cardinal Zen explained, because Pope Francis several years ago responded “no” to the question of if it is possible to bless same-sex couples, and more recently appeared to say “yes” by signing Fiducia Supplicans.
Cardinal Zen wrote that he did not sense Pope Francis’ hand in Fiducia Supplicans, but instead detected the penmanship of Cardinal Fernandez.
“It will be said that Mr. Lofton is defending the Pope, and nobody can blame him for that, but I am sure his nonsense will not help the Holy Father in any way,” Cardinal Zen concluded: “I am wasting these minutes of time, not to defend myself from Mr. Lofton’s accusations, but to invite those who frequent his site to stop wasting their time and perhaps also their money.”
In his response to Cardinal Zen’s blog post in July, Lofton doubled down in his allegation that while Cardinal Zen does use the hermeneutic of continuity in regards to the Ecumenical Councils, such as Vatican II, he does not do so for the Papal Magisterium.
