https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_risposta-dubia-2023.pdf
Provisional translation by Vatican News: https://www.vaticannews.va/en/pope/news/2023-10/pope-francis-responds-to-dubia-of-five-cardinals.html

DEAR brothers,

Queridos hermanos,

Although I believe it is not always prudent to respond to questions directly addressed to me, and it would be impossible to answer all of them, in this case, given the proximity of the Synod, I have deemed it appropriate to do so.

si bien no siempre me parece prudente responder las preguntas dirigidas directamente a mi persona, y sería imposible responderlas a todas, en este caso me pareció adecuado hacerlo debido a la cercanía del Sínodo.

1

 DUBIUM 1

1. Dubium regarding the assertion that the Divine Revelation should be reinterpreted based on current cultural and anthropological changes.

1 Dubium circa l’affermazione che si debba reinterp•etare la Divina Rivelazione in base al cambiamenti cultural” e antropologici in yoga.

Following the statements of some bishops, which have neither been corrected nor retracted, we ask whether the Divine Revelation should be reinterpreted in the Church according to the cultural changes of our time,  and the new anthropological vision promoted by these changes. Or if, on the contrary, the Divine Revelation is binding forever, immutable, and therefore not to be contradicted, in accordance with the dictum of the Second Vatican Council, which states that “the obedience of faith” must be given to God who reveals, (Dei Verbum 5); that what is revealed for the salvation of all nations must remain “forever whole and alive”, and be “handed on to all generations” (7), and that progress in understanding does not imply any change in the truth of things and words because faith is “handed on once and for all “ (8), and the Church’s Magisterium is not above the Word of God, but only teaches what has been handed on (10).

Dopo le affennazioni di alcuni vescovi, che non sono state né corrette né ritrattate, si chiede se nella Chiesa la Divina Rivelazione debba essere reinterpretata secondo i cambiamenti culturali del nostro tempo e secondo la nuova visione antropologica che questi cambiamenti promuovono; oppure se la Divina Rivelazione sia vincolante per sempre, immutabile e quindi da non contraddire, secondo i1 dettato del Concilio Vaticano II, che a Dio che rivela é dovuta “l’obbedienza della fede”(Dei Verbum 5); che quanto é rivelato per la salvezza di tutti deve rimanere “per sempre integro” e vivo, e venire “trasmesso a tutte le generazioni” (7) e che il progresso della comprensione non implica alcun mutamento della veritá delle cose e delle parole, perché la fede é stata “trasmessa una volta per sempre” (8), e il Magistero non é superiore alla parola di Dio, ma insegna solo ció che é stato trasmesso (10).

Response of Pope Francis to the FIRST DUBIUM

Pregunta 1

(a) THE answer depends on the meaning you give to the word “reinterpret.” If it is understood as “interpret better,” the expression is valid. In this sense, the Second Vatican Council affirmed that it is necessary that with the work of exegetes - and I would add of theologians - “the judgment of the Church may mature” (Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution Dei Verbum, 12).

a) La respuesta depende del significado que ustedes den a la palabra “reinterpretar”. Si se entiende como “interpretar mejor” la expresión es válida. En este sentido el Concilio Vaticano II afirmó que es necesario que con la tarea de los exégetas —yo agrego de los teólogos— “vaya madurando el juicio de la Iglesia” (Conc. Ecum. Vat. II, Const. dogm. Dei Verbum, 12).

(b) Therefore, while it is true that the Divine Revelation is immutable and always binding, the Church must be humble and recognize that she never exhausts its unfathomable richness and needs to grow in her understanding.

b) Por lo tanto, si bien es cierto que la divina Revelación es inmutable y siempre vinculante, la Iglesia debe ser humilde y reconocer que ella nunca agota su insondable riqueza y necesita crecer en su comprensión.

(c) Consequently, she also matures in her understanding of what she has herself affirmed in her Magisterium.

c) Por consiguiente madura también en la comprensión de lo que ella misma ha afirmado en su Magisterio.

(d) Cultural changes and new challenges in history do not modify Revelation but can stimulate us to express certain aspects of its overflowing richness better, which always offers more.

d)  Los cambios culturales y los nuevos desafíos de la historia no modifican la Revelación, pero sí pueden estimularnos a explicitar mejor algunos aspectos de su desbordante riqueza que siempre ofrece más.

(e) It is inevitable that this can lead to a better expression of some past statements of the Magisterium, and indeed, this has been the case throughout history.

e) Es inevitable que esto pueda llevar a una mejor expresión de algunas afirmaciones pasadas del Magisterio, y de hecho ha sucedido así a lo largo de la historia.

(f) On the one hand, it is true that the Magisterium is not superior to the Word of God, but it is also true that both the texts of the Scripture and the testimonies of Tradition require interpretation in order to distinguish their perennial substance from cultural conditioning. This is evident, for example, in biblical texts (such as Exodus 21:20-21) and in some magisterial interventions that tolerated slavery (Cf. Pope Nicholas V, Bull Dum diversas, 1452). This is not a minor issue given its intimate connection with the perennial truth of the inalienable dignity of the human person. These texts need interpretation. The same applies to certain considerations in the New Testament regarding women (1 Corinthians 11:3-10; 1 Timothy 2:11-14) and other texts of Scripture and testimonies of Tradition that cannot be materially repeated today.

f) Por otra parte, es cierto que el Magisterio no es superior a la Palabra de Dios, pero también es verdad que tanto los textos de las Escrituras como los testimonios de la Tradición necesitan una interpretación que permita distinguir su substancia perenne de los condicionamientos culturales. Es evidente, por ejemplo, en los textos bíblicos (como Éx 21, 20-21 ) y en algunas intervenciones magisteriales que toleraban la esclavitud (cf. Nicolás V, Bula Dum Diversas, 1452). No es un tema menor dada su íntima conexión con la verdad perenne de la dignidad inalienable de la persona humana. Esos textos necesitan una interpretación. Lo mismo vale para algunas consideraciones del Nuevo Testamento sobre las mujeres (1 Cor 11, 3-10; 1 Tim 2, 11-14) y para otros textos de las Escrituras y testimonios de la Tradición que hoy no pueden ser repetidos materialmente.

(g) It is important to emphasize that what cannot change is what has been revealed “for the salvation of all” (Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution Dei Verbum, 7). Therefore, the Church must constantly discern between what is essential for salvation and what is secondary or less directly connected with this goal. In this regard, I would like to recall what St. Thomas Aquinas affirmed: “The more one descends to matters of detail, the more frequently we encounter defects” (Summa Theologiae I/II q. 94, art. 4).

g) Es importante destacar que lo que no puede cambiar es lo que ha sido revelado “para la salvación de todos” (Conc. Ecum. Vat. II, Const. dogm. Dei Verbum, 7). Por ello la Iglesia debe discernir constantemente entre aquello que es esencial para la salvación y aquello que es secundario o está conectado menos directamente con este objetivo. Al respecto me interesa recordar lo que Santo Tomás de Aquino afirmaba: “cuanto más se desciende a lo particular, tanto más aumenta la indeterminación” (Summa Theologiae q. 94, art. 4).

(h) Finally, a single formulation of a truth can never be adequately understood if it is presented in isolation, detached from the rich and harmonious context of the entire Revelation. The “hierarchy of truths” also implies placing each of them in proper connection with the central truths and with the entirety of the Church’s teaching. This can ultimately lead to different ways of presenting the same doctrine, even though “for those who long for a monolithic body of doctrine guarded by all and leaving no room for nuance, this might appear as undesirable and leading to confusion. But in fact such variety serves to bring out and develop different facets of the inexhaustible riches of the Gospel” (Evangelii gaudium, 40). Every theological current has its risks, but also its opportunities.

h)      Finalmente, una sola formulación de una verdad nunca podrá entenderse de un modo adecuado si se la presenta solitaria, aislada del rico y armonioso contexto de toda la Revelación. La “jerarquía de verdades” implica también situar cada una de ellas en adecuada conexión con las verdades más centrales y con la totalidad de la enseñanza de la Iglesia. Esto finalmente puede dar lugar a distintos modos de exponer la misma doctrina, aunque “a quienes sueñan con una doctrina monolítica defendida por todos sin matices, esto puede parecerles una imperfecta dispersión. Pero la realidad es que esa variedad ayuda a que se manifiesten y desarrollen mejor los diversos aspectos de la inagotable riqueza del Evangelio” (Evangelii gaudium, 49). Cada línea teológica tiene sus riesgos pero también sus oportunidades.

22

 DUBIUM 2

2. Dubium regarding the assertion that the widespread practice of blessing same-sex unions is in accordance with Revelation and the Magisterium (CCC 2357).

2 Dubium circa l’ajlermazione che la diffirsa pratica della benedízione delle unioni con
persone dello stesso sesso, concorderebbe con la Rivelazione e il Magistero (CCC 2357).

According to the Divine Revelation, attested in Sacred Scripture, which the Church teaches, “listening to it devoutly, guarding it scrupulously and explaining it faithfully in accord with a divine commission and with the help of the Holy Spirit” (Dei Verbum, 10),  ”In the beginning,” God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them, and blessed them to be fruitful (cf. Genesis 1:27-28) and hence, the Apostle Paul teaches that denying sexual difference is the consequence of denying the Creator (Romans 1:24-32). We ask: can the Church deviate from this “principle,” considering it, in contrast to what was taught in Veritatis splendor, 103, as a mere ideal, and accept as a “possible good” objectively sinful situations, such as unions with persons of the same sex, without departing from the revealed doctrine?

Secondo la Divina Rivelazione, attestata nella Sacra Scrittura, che la Chiesa “per divino mandato e con l’assistenza dello Spirito Santo piamente ascolta, santamente custodisce e fedelmente espone” (Dei Verbum 10): “In principio” Dio creó I’uomo a sua immagine, maschio e femmina Ii creó e li benedisse, perché fossero fecondi (cfr Gen 1, 27-28), per cui 1’Apostolo Paolo insegna che negare la differenza sessuale é la conseguenza della negazione del Creatore (Rom 1, 24-32). Si chiede: puó la Chiesa derogare a questo “principio”, considerandolo, in contrasto con quanto insegnato da Veritatis splendor 103, come un semplice ideale, e accettando come “bene possibile” situazioni oggettivamente peccaminose, come le unioni con persone dello stesso sesso, senza venir meno alla dottrina rivelata?

Response of Pope Francis to the SECOND DUBIUM

Pregunta 2

(a) THE Church has a very clear understanding of marriage: an exclusive, stable, and indissoluble union between a man and a woman, naturally open to procreation. Only this union can be called “marriage.” Other forms of union realize it only in “a partial and analogous way” (Amoris Laetitia 292), so they cannot be strictly called “marriage.”

a) La Iglesia tiene una concepción muy clara sobre el matrimonio: una unión exclusiva, estable e indisoluble entre un varón y una mujer, naturalmente abierta a engendrar hijos. Sólo a esa unión llama “matrimonio”. Otras formas de unión sólo lo realizan “de modo parcial y análogo” (Amoris laetitia 292), por lo cual no pueden llamarse estrictamente “matrimonio”.

(b) It is not just a matter of names, but the reality we call marriage has a unique essential constitution that requires an exclusive name, not applicable to other realities. It is undoubtedly much more than a mere “ideal.”

b) No es una mera cuestión de nombres, sino que la realidad que denominamos matrimonio tiene una constitución esencial única que exige un nombre exclusivo, no aplicable a otras realidades. Sin duda es mucho más que un mero “ideal”.

(c) For this reason, the Church avoids any type of rite or sacramental that might contradict this conviction and suggest that something that is not marriage is recognized as marriage.

c) Por esta razón la Iglesia evita todo tipo de rito o de sacramental que pueda contradecir esta convicción y dar a entender que se reconoce como matrimonio algo que no lo es.

(d) However, in our relationships with people, we must not lose the pastoral charity, which should permeate all our decisions and attitudes. The defence of objective truth is not the only expression of this charity; it also includes kindness, patience, understanding, tenderness, and encouragement. Therefore, we cannot be judges who only deny, reject, and exclude.

d) No obstante, en el trato con las personas no hay que perder la caridad pastoral, que debe atravesar todas nuestras decisiones y actitudes. La defensa de la verdad objetiva no es la única expresión de esa caridad, que también está hecha de amabilidad, de paciencia, de compresión, de ternura, de aliento. Por consiguiente, no podemos constituirnos en jueces que sólo niegan, rechazan, excluyen.

(e) Therefore, pastoral prudence must adequately discern whether there are forms of blessing, requested by one or more persons, that do not convey a mistaken concept of marriage. For when a blessing is requested, it is expressing a plea to God for help, a supplication to live better, a trust in a Father who can help us live better.

e) Por ello la prudencia pastoral debe discernir adecuadamente si hay formas de bendición, solicitadas por una o por varias personas, que  no   transmitan una
concepción equivocada del matrimonio. Porque cuando se pide una bendición se está expresando un pedido de auxilio a Dios, un ruego para poder vivir mejor, una confianza en un Padre que puede ayudarnos a vivir mejor.

(f) On the other hand, although there are situations that are not morally acceptable from an objective point of view, the same pastoral charity requires us not to simply treat as “sinners” other people whose guilt or responsibility may be mitigated by various factors affecting subjective accountability (Cf. St. John Paul II, Reconciliatio et paenitentia, 17).

f) Por otra parte, si bien hay situaciones que desde el punto de vista objetivo no son moralmente aceptables, la misma caridad pastoral nos exige no tratar sin más de “pecadores” a otras personas cuya culpabilidad o responsabilidad pueden estar atenuadas por diversos factores que influyen en la imputabilidad subjetiva (cf. san Juan Pablo II, Reconciliatio et Paenitentia, 17).

(g) Decisions that may be part of pastoral prudence in certain circumstances should not necessarily become a norm. That is, it is not appropriate for a Diocese, a Bishops’ Conference, or any other ecclesial structure to constantly and officially enable procedures or rituals for all kinds of matters, because not everything that “is part of a practical discernment in particular circumstances can be elevated to the level of a rule “as this “would lead to an intolerable casuistry” (Amoris laetitia, 304). Canon law should not and cannot cover everything, nor should Episcopal Conferences with their varied documents and protocols claim to do so, as the life of the Church flows through many channels other than normative ones.

g) Las decisiones que, en determinadas circunstancias, pueden formar parte de la prudencia pastoral, no necesariamente deben convertirse en una norma. Es decir, no es conveniente que una Diócesis, una Conferencia Episcopal o cualquier otra estructura eclesial habiliten constantemente y de modo oficial procedimientos o ritos para todo tipo de asuntos, ya que todo “aquello que forma parte de un discernimiento práctico ante una situación particular no puede ser elevado a la categoría de una norma”, porque esto “daría lugar a una casuística insoportable” (Amoris laetitia 304). El Derecho Canónico no debe ni puede abarcarlo todo, y tampoco deben pretenderlo las Conferencias Episcopales con sus documentos y protocolos variados, porque la vida de la Iglesia corre por muchos cauces además de los normativos.

3

 DUBIUM 3

3. Dubium regarding the assertion that synodality is a “constitutive dimension of the Church” (Apostolic Constitution Episcopalis communio, 6), such that the Church is by nature synodal.

3 Dubizan circa l’affernzaz ione che la sinodalitá é “dimensione costitutiva della Chiesa” (Cost.Áp. Épiscopalis Communio 6), si che la Chiesa sarebbe per• sua natura sinodale.

Since the Synod of Bishops does not represent the episcopal college but is merely an advisory body of the Pope, as bishops, witnesses of the faith, cannot delegate their confession of the truth, it is asked whether synodality can be the supreme regulatory criterion of the permanent governance of the Church without distorting its constitutive structure desired by its Founder, whereby the supreme and full authority of the Church is exercised both by the Pope by virtue of his office and by the college of bishops together with their head, the Roman Pontiff (Lumen gentium, 22).

Dato che il Sinodo dei vescovi non rappresenta ii collegio episcopale, ma é un mero organo consultivo del Papa, in quanto i vescovi, come testimoni della fede, non possono delegare la loro confessione della veritá, si chiede se la sinodaliá puó essere criterio regolativo supremo del governo permanente della Chiesa senza stravolgere il suo assetto costitutivo voluto dal suo Fondatore, per cui la supremae piena autoritá della Chiesa viene esercitata, sia dal Papa in forza del suo ufficio, sia dal collegio dei vescovi insieme col suo capo il Romano Pontefice (Lumen gentium 22).

Response of Pope Francis to the THIRD DUBIUM

Pregunta 3

(a) ALTHOUGH you acknowledge that the supreme and full authority of the Church is exercised both by the Pope by virtue of his office and by the college of bishops together with their Head, the Roman Pontiff (Cf. Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution Lumen gentium, 22), with these very questions, you manifest your need to participate, to freely express your opinion, and to collaborate, thereby requesting a form of “synodality” in the exercise of my ministry.

a)      Si bien ustedes reconocen que la suprema y plena autoridad de la Iglesia es ejercitada, sea por el Papa debido a su oficio, sea por el colegio de los obispos junto con su cabeza el Romano Pontífice (cf. Conc. Ecum. Vat. II, Const. dogm. Lumen gentium, 22), sin embargo con estos dubia ustedes mismos manifiestan su necesidad de participar, de opinar libremente y de colaborar, y así están reclamando alguna forma de “sinodalidad” en el ejercicio de mi ministerio.

(b) The Church is a “mystery of missionary communion,” but this communion is not only affective or ethereal; it necessarily implies real participation. Not only the hierarchy but the entire People of God in various ways and at different levels can make their voices heard and feel part of the Church’s journey. In this sense, we can say that synodality, as a style and dynamism, is an essential dimension of the Church’s life. On this point, St. John Paul II said some very beautiful things in Novo millennio ineunte.

b)      La Iglesia es “misterio de comunión misionera”, pero esta comunión no es sólo afectiva o etérea, sino que necesariamente implica participación real: que no sólo la jerarquía sino todo el Pueblo de Dios de distintas maneras y en diversos niveles pueda hacer oír su voz y sentirse parte en el camino de la Iglesia. En este sentido sí podemos decir que la sinodalidad, como estilo y dinamismo, es una dimensión esencial de la vida de la Iglesia. Sobre este punto ha dicho cosas muy bellas san Juan Pablo II en Novo millennio ineunte.

(c) It is quite another thing to sacralize or impose a particular synodal methodology that appeals to one group, turning it into a norm and an obligatory path for everyone, because this would only “freeze” the synodal journey, ignoring the different characteristics of the particular Churches and the varied richness of the universal Church.

c)      Otra cosa es sacralizar o imponer una determinada metodología sinodal que agrada a un grupo, convertirla en norma y cauce obligatorio para todos, porque esto sólo llevaría a “congelar” el camino sinodal ignorando las diversas características de las distintas Iglesias particulares y la variada riqueza de la Iglesia universal.

4

 DUBIUM 4

4. Dubium regarding the support of pastors and theologians for the theory that “the theology of the Church has changed,” and thus, the sacramental ordination of women can be conferred.

4 Dubium circa il sostegno di pastori e teologi cilla teoría che “la teologia della Chiesa é cambiata” e quindi che l’ordinazione sacerdotale possa essere conferita alle donne.

Following the statements of some prelates, which have neither been corrected nor retracted, claiming that with Vatican II, the theology of the Church and the meaning of the Mass have changed, it is asked whether the dictum of the Second Vatican Council is still valid, which states that the common priesthood of the faithful and the ministerial priesthood differ essentially and not only in degree (Lumen gentium, 10), and that priests, by the “sacred power of the order to offer sacrifice and forgive sins” (Presbyterorum ordinis, 2), act in the name and person of Christ the Mediator, through whom the spiritual sacrifice of the faithful is made perfect? It is also asked whether the teaching of St. John Paul II’s Apostolic Letter Ordinatio sacerdotalis is still valid, which teaches as a truth to be held definitively the impossibility of conferring priestly ordination on women, so that this teaching is no longer subject to change or free discussion by pastors or theologians.

In seguito alle affermazioni di alcuni prelati, che non sono state né correrte né ritrattate, secondo cui col Vaticano II sarebbe cambiata la teologia della Chiesa e il significato della Messa, si chiede se é ancora valido il dettato del Concilio Vaticano II, che “il sacerdozio comune dei fedeli e quello ministeriale differiscono essenzialmente e non solo di grado” (Lumen Gentium 10) e che i presbiteri in virtú del “sacro potere dell’ordine per offrire il sacrificio e perdonare i peccati” (Presbyterorum Ordinis 2), agiscono in nome e nella persona di Cristo mediatore, per mezzo del quale é ceso perfetto il sacrificio spirituale dei fedeli? Si chiede, inoltre, se é ancora valido l’insegnamento della lettera apostolica di san Giovanni Paolo II Ordinatio Sacerdotalis, che insegna come veritá da tenere in modo definitivo l’impossibilitá di conferire l’ordinazione sacerdotale alle donne, per cui questo insegnamento non é piú soggetto a cambiamento né alla libera discussione dei pastori o dei teologi.

Response of Pope Francis to the FOURTH DUBIUM

Pregunta 4

(a) “THE common priesthood of the faithful and the ministerial priesthood differ essentially” (Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution Lumen gentium, 10). It is not appropriate to assert a difference in degree that implies considering the common priesthood of the faithful as something of a “second class” or of lesser value (“a lower grade”). Both forms of priesthood illuminate and support each other.

a)        “El sacerdocio común de los fieles y el sacerdocio ministerial difieren esencialmente” (Conc. Ecum. Vat. II, Const. dogm. Lumen gentium, 10). No es conveniente sostener una diferencia de grado que implique considerar al sacerdocio común de los fieles como algo de “segunda categoría” o de menor valor (“un grado más bajo”). Ambas formas de sacerdocio se iluminan y se sostienen mutuamente.

(b) When St. John Paul II taught that we must affirm “definitively” the impossibility of conferring priestly ordination on women, he was in no way denigrating women and giving supreme power to men. St. John Paul II also affirmed other things. For example, when we speak of priestly authority, “we are in the realm of function, not of dignity and holiness” (St. John Paul II, Christifideles laici, 51), words that we have not sufficiently embraced. He also clearly held that while the priest alone presides at the Eucharist, the tasks “do not favour the superiority of one over the other” (St. John Paul II, Christifideles laici, note 190; cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Inter insigniores, VI). He also stated that if the priestly function is “hierarchical,” it should not be understood as a form of domination but “is totally ordered to the holiness of the members of Christ” (St. John Paul II, Mulieris dignitatem, 27). If this is not understood, and practical consequences are not drawn from these distinctions, it will be difficult to accept that the priesthood is reserved only for men, and we will not be able to recognize the rights of women or the need for them to participate in various ways in the leadership of the Church.

b)   Cuando san Juan Pablo II enseñó que hay que afirmar “de modo definitivo” la imposibilidad de conferir la ordenación sacerdotal a las mujeres, de ningún modo estaba menospreciando a las mujeres y otorgando un poder supremo a los varones. San Juan Pablo II también afirmó otras cosas. Por ejemplo, que cuando hablamos de la potestad sacerdotal “nos encontramos en el ámbito de la función, no de la dignidad ni de la santidad” (san Juan Pablo II, Christifideles laici, 51). Son palabras que no hemos acogido suficientemente. También sostuvo claramente que si bien sólo el sacerdote preside la Eucaristía, las tareas “no dan lugar a la superioridad de los unos sobre los otros” (san Juan Pablo II, Christifideles laici, nota 190; cf. Congregación para la Doctrina de la Fe, Declaración Inter Insigniores, VI). Igualmente afirmó que si la función sacerdotal es “jerárquica”, no debe entenderse como una forma de dominio, sino que “está totalmente ordenada a la santidad de los miembros de Cristo” (san Juan Pablo II, Mulieris dignitatem, 27). Si esto no se comprende y no se sacan las consecuencias prácticas de estas distinciones, será difícil aceptar que el sacerdocio esté reservado sólo a los varones y no podremos reconocer los derechos de las mujeres o la necesidad de que participen, de diversas maneras, en la conducción de la Iglesia.

(c) On the other hand, to be rigorous, let us recognize that a clear and authoritative doctrine on the exact nature of a “definitive statement” has not yet been fully developed. It is not a dogmatic definition, and yet it must be adhered to by all. No one can publicly contradict it and yet it can be a subject of study, as with the case of the validity of ordinations in the Anglican Communion.

c)   Por otra parte, para ser rigurosos, reconozcamos que aún no se ha desarrollado exhaustivamente una doctrina clara y autoritativa acerca de la naturaleza exacta de una “declaración definitiva”. No es una definición dogmática, y sin embargo debe ser acatada por todos. Nadie puede contradecirla públicamente y sin embargo puede ser objeto de estudio, como es el caso de la validez de las ordenaciones en la Comunión anglicana.

5

 DUBIUM 5

5. Dubium regarding the assertion that “forgiveness is a human right” and the insistence of the Holy Father on the duty to absolve everyone always, so that repentance is not a necessary condition for sacramental absolution.

5 Dubizun circa l’a ermazione “il perdono é un diritto milano” e l’insistere del Santo Padre sul dovere di assolvere tutti e sempre, per cui il pentimento non sarebbe condizione necessario per l’assoluzione sacramentale.

It is asked whether the teaching of the Council of Trent, which states that contrition of the penitent, consisting of detesting the sin committed with the purpose of not sinning again, is necessary for the validity of sacramental confession, is still in force, such that the priest must defer absolution when it is clear that this condition is not met.

Si chiede se sia ancora vigente l’insegnamento del Concilio di Trento, secondo cui, per la validitá della confessione sacramentale é necessaria la contrizione del penitente, che consiste nel detestare i1 peccato commesso con iI proposito di non peccare piú (Sessione XIV, Capitolo IV: DH 1676), cosicché iI sacerdote deve rimandare Passoluzione guando sia chiaro che questa condizione non é adempiuta.

Response of Pope Francis to the FIFTH DUBIUM

Pregunta 5

(a) REPENTANCE is necessary for the validity of sacramental absolution and implies a resolution not to sin. But there is not mathematics here, and once again I must remind you that the confessional is not a customs house. We are not masters but humble stewards of the Sacraments that nourish the faithful because these gifts of the Lord, more than relics to be preserved, are aids of the Holy Spirit for people’s lives.

a) El arrepentimiento es necesario para la validez de la absolución sacramental, e implica el propósito de no pecar. Pero aquí no hay matemáticas y una vez más debo recordar que el confesionario no es una aduana. No somos dueños, sino humildes administradores de los Sacramentos que alimentan a los fieles, porque estos regalos del Señor, más que reliquias a custodiar, son ayudas del Espíritu Santo para la vida de las personas.

(b) There are many ways to express repentance. Often, in people who have a very wounded self-esteem, declaring themselves guilty is a cruel torment, but the very act of approaching the confessional is a symbolic expression of repentance and of seeking divine help.

b) Hay muchas maneras de expresar el arrepentimiento. Frecuentemente, en las personas que tienen una autoestima muy herida, declararse culpables es una tortura cruel, pero el sólo hecho de acercarse ala confesión es una expresión simbólica de arrepentimiento y de búsqueda de la ayuda divina.

(c) I also want to recall that “sometimes we find it hard to make room for the unconditional love of God” in pastoral care (Amoris laetitia, 311), but we must learn to do so. Following St. John Paul II, I maintain that we should not demand from the faithful overly precise and certain resolutions of amendment, which ultimately become abstract or even narcissistic, but that even the predictability of a new fall “does not prejudice the authenticity of the purpose” (St. John Paul II, Letter to Card. William W. Baum and participants in the annual course of the Apostolic Penitentiary, March 22, 1996, 5).

c) Quiero recordar también que “a veces nos cuesta mucho dar lugar en la pastoral al amor incondicional de Dios” (Amoris laetitia 311), pero hay que aprenderlo. Siguiendo a san Juan Pablo II, sostengo que no debemos exigir a los fieles propósitos de enmienda demasiado precisos y seguros, que en el fondo terminan siendo abstractos o incluso ególatras, sino que aun la previsibilidad de una nueva caída “no prejuzga la autenticidad del propósito” (san Juan Pablo II, Carta al Card. William W. Baum y a los participantes del curso anual de la Penitenciaría Apostólica, 22 marzo 1996, 5).

(d) Finally, it must be clear that all the conditions usually attached to confession are generally not applicable when a person is in a situation of agony, or with very limited mental and psychological capacities.

d) Por último, debe quedar claro que todas las condiciones que habitualmente se ponen en la confesión, generalmente no son aplicables cuando la persona se encuentra en una situación de agonía, o con sus capacidades mentales y psíquicas muy limitadas.

Provisional translation by Vatican News: Unofficial working translation.