t would probably be a bad idea if someone at the Vatican were to fix Pope Francis with a device that gave him a small little shock every time he used the word “justification,” or maybe squirted him with a water gun. It might condition him against saying it, but I don’t think you can do that. Maybe someone has a more ethical idea. A few years back, the pope said that Catholics and Lutherans agree on justification now; we’re all copacetic. He said Luther “did not err.” I wrote about it here and here; it was one of the few times you’ve heard me criticize the poor man. Theological chaos occurs any time justification comes up with Frank. But at least in 2016 it was only in an interview; this time, it happened in a homily. Saints preserve us.
This was back on May 4, and you can find the English translation at Zenit. (I’ve checked with someone who knows Italian, and the translation is accurate.) The pope was speaking about Matthew 22, the parable of the wedding feast. In that parable, Jesus tells us that the king invites everyone to the wedding feast. The gift of salvation is for everyone, the pope explains, not just a select few. And then he expands on that thought:
This “all” is … the vision of the Lord, who came for all and died for all. “But did He die also for that wretch who has made my life impossible?” He died also for him. “And for that brigand?” He died for him, for all. And also for the people that don’t believe in Him or are of other religions: He died for all. This doesn’t mean that one must engage in proselytism: no. But He died for all; He has justified all.
No he hasn’t. Justification is a process that begins with baptism. Without baptism, according to the Council of Trent, “no man was ever justified.” Justification continues as we grow in holiness and grace through the sacraments. If we become guilty of mortal sin, we lose our justification, and we are restored only through the sacrament of penance. Our final justification happens only after we have persevered to the end.
One might say the pope means that eventually everyone will receive the final justification; he’s teaching universalism. Even without baptism, God will justify by some other means. But I don’t think that’s what Francis had in mind. He says that God “has justified all,” not that God will justify all. More than that, the pope seems to connect justification to Christ’s death: Christ died for all, he says, and then, with the separation of just a semicolon, “He justified all.” The pope appears to connect justification to Christ’s death, as though every last person’s justification occurred right there on Calvary.
That is why Dr. Kwasniewski speculates that the pope is conflating justification and redemption. Everyone who has ever lived or will ever lived was redeemed on Calvary, but not all will be justified. And it’s possible that the pope meant to say “redeemed” and slipped in a moment of absent-mindedness. It’s probably less likely that the pope doesn’t have any grasp of basic theological concepts and he’s revealing his ignorance. There’s all but zero chance he’s a heretic.
I actually find Taylor Marshall’s explanation more convincing. (As rare as it is for me to criticize the pope, it’s about as rare for me to agree with with Dr. Marshall. My detractors should enjoy this while they have the chance.) Dr. Marshall says that Pope Francis was probably thinking of Romans 5:18:
Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life.
I have put the word “unto” in bold because it’s important in discerning what Paul means here. The free gift is “unto” justification; that means that Christ’s death made our justification possible. It means that he died in order that we may be justified. But it did not guarantee the justification of anyone. We need to cooperate with grace first.
If I may speculate, I think the pope meant something like that. I think he meant that Christ “offers justification to all” or “makes justification possible for all” or “desires the justification of all.”
That’s not what the pope did say, but I should point out that some translations of Romans 5:18 say exactly what the pope did. The translation I used above is the King James; here’s the World English Bible: “So then as through one trespass, all men were condemned; even so through one act of righteousness, all men were justified to life.”
That’s a bad translation. It lacks precision; the King James is more exact. Similarly, I think something got lost in translation between the pope’s brain and his mouth. Francis has always seemed to me prone to stream of consciousness. He is prone, I think, to elide a great deal of theological precision that he takes for granted his audience will already understand.
Dr. Kwasniewski writes:
When listening to or reading transcripts of the homilies of Pope Francis, one often gets the sense of a man who, as soon as he speaks off the cuff, reveals the inadequacy of his own theological training and the sloppiness of his thinking. He seldom sounds like someone deliberately trying to dismantle traditional theology with the cleverness of a Karl Rahner; rather, he comes across as an embarrassing witness to the collapse of sound dogmatic and moral theology in the mid- to late twentieth century.
Popes in general would do well to speak only when their thoughts have been correctly formulated—it was not for any trivial reason that papal speeches and documents of any kind were always carefully reviewed by house theologians—and only on occasions when public speaking is pastorally necessary, rather than doing it day after day like a radio talk show or a tear—off calendar with affirming sentiments. If popes limited themselves in this way, their statements would have a greater resonating force and a greater possibility of fruitful ecclesial reception.
Apart from the part about the pope having “inadequate theological training” and being a “sloppy thinker,” I think this is fair enough. I don’t think the pope has inadequate theological training, and while I agree he’s a sloppy talker, I don’t agree that he’s a sloppy thinker.
The only other thing I would say is this: Although it would be nice if popes spoke only from carefully prepared texts, I don’t suspect you’re going to get Pope Francis to do that. He is who he is. And he’s not unorthodox, or heretical; he’s just sometimes uncareful.
Discover more from To Give a Defense
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.