CV NEWS FEED // The archbishop emeritus of Philadelphia recently wrote an op-ed arguing that the theological thought of the current Prefect of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith (DDF) Cardinal Víctor Manuel Cardinal Fernández is “misleading” and “simply wrong in some crucial ways, with big implications.”
Archbishop Charles J. Chaput of Philadelphia wrote an op-ed for First Things titled, “Cardinal Fernández Misleads,” which opened by examining the tone of the pontificate of Pope Francis, and how Fernández has played a role in it.
Pope Francis’ Pontificate and Fernández’s Responsibility
Francis’ “compassion for the poor, his focus on the forgotten people of the world’s peripheries, and his stress on the priority of mercy are not just thoroughly Catholic,” Chaput wrote, “[they’re] also a needed admonition and catechesis for those of us in the self-satisfied ‘developed’ nations.”
Although these aspects of Francis’ pontificate are laudable and warranted, it “becomes hard to avoid the conclusion that an undercurrent of resentment is one of the distinguishing and most regrettable marks of the Francis pontificate,” Chaput wrote:
Regrettable, because it undercuts every pontificate’s central task: providing a credible, faithful source of Catholic unity. And the advisers, apologists, and ghostwriters who surround this pontificate have been instrumental in adding to the problem.
Moving his focus to Fernández, Chaput explained that he is “a close associate, counselor, and sometime ghostwriter in the ministry of Pope Francis,” as well as the current Prefect of the DDF.
The DDF “has the task of protecting the integrity of Catholic teaching and practice, a duty vital to the life of the faithful,” Chaput wrote.
He stressed that the DDF is especially important in protecting and teaching the creed of the Catholic Church, because “how we understand and apply what we believe, constitutes the ‘glue’ that seals Catholics as a distinct people.”
As the prefect of the DDF, Fernández “holds a uniquely important office” that was formerly held by Joseph Ratzinger–later Pope Benedict XVI. “But in his thinking and substance, Fernández is a man very different from his great predecessor,” Chaput wrote.
However, Chaput added that “dismissing Fernández’s thought as superficial would be a mistake. He has a significant body of work to his credit. His thinking isn’t shallow. It’s simply wrong in some crucial ways, with big implications.”
Fernández’s Focus on Sensus Populi, not Sensus Fidelium, in Theology
Spanish priest and theologian José Granados has written on Fernández’s work and has offered an in-depth foundation for this claim, Chaput argued. Granados is currently superior general of the Disciples of the Hearts of Jesus and Mary, and the former vice president of Rome’s Pontifical John Paul II Institute for Studies on Marriage and Family.
Granados wrote an article in 2023 for Communio: International Catholic Review, that “methodically assesses Fernández’s understanding of charity and its application to complex moral situations,” Chaput wrote:
Granados notes that Cardinal Fernández stresses the “immediate unavoidable context” of theology. Thus, for the cardinal, circumstances matter greatly, as does doing theology less from theoretical heights and more from concrete human situations.
Granados highlighted that because Fernández writes with “concrete human situations” in mind, he prefers to use the context of the “sensus populi,” or the sense of the people, rather than the “sensus fidelium,” the sense of the faithful, since the latter implies too much isolation from the rest of the people and culture.
Granados wrote that prioritizing the sensus populi when writing theologically “is insufficient, since it ignores the centrality of faith,’” Chaput noted. “It carries the risk that ‘the sociological vision of the people could take precedence over revelation as the foundation for our knowledge of God.’”
“What Fernández actually proposes, in effect, is ‘not so much a theology of the people but a theology from the people,’” Chaput wrote:
This approach contradicts “the true immediate and inescapable context of Catholic theology [given] by the Church as the Body of Christ, which in turn is rooted in the Eucharist and in the network of relationships that the Eucharist establishes.”
Fernández’s Description of the Virtue of Charity
Chaput also argued that Fernández is lacking in his understanding of charity, since the prefect describes the virtue primarily as materially providing for neighbors.
“[For] the Christian, though a person’s material needs are important, they’re not charity’s primary focus,” Chaput wrote. “Authentic charity, and its expression in mercy, consists of ‘helping [others] to live in union with God, which also includes external acts like fraternal correction.’”
Further, when charity completely omits fraternal correction, there is a risk of condoning sin, Chaput argued: “We rightly feel compassion for persons locked in sinful situations. But compassion is not a license to minimize, or excuse, or bless the destructive behaviors involved therein.”
Granados’s critique “demonstrates the inadequacy of Cardinal Fernández’s views, given the actual work demanded of the DDF: to nourish and defend Catholic doctrine and the faith of committed Catholic believers,” Chaput wrote. “It also raises uneasy questions about the prudence of appointing him in the first place.”
Chaput recalled the words of philosopher Blaise Pascal, who said, “the heart has its reasons, which reason does not know.”
“The human heart is our counterbalance to the brutality of cold logic and truth without love. But it is not infallible,” Chaput concluded:
And feelings—including compassion—when they become sovereign in the discernment of moral good and evil, can be dangerously flawed guides. No “new paradigm” or “development of doctrine” can result in an alibi for sin in the light of God’s Word and the wisdom of the Church’s long experience.
The heart does indeed have its reasons. And sometimes they’re wrong.
