The Papacy is Not One Pope

The Chair of Peter, St. Peter’s, Rome; Gian Lorenzo Bernini (1598-1680)


OVER the weekend, Pope Francis added to the Acta Apostolicae Sedis (the record of the papacy’s official acts) a letter he sent to the Bishops of Buenos Aires last year, approving their guidelines for discerning Communion for the divorced and remarried based on their interpretation of the post-synodal document, Amoris Laetitia. But this has served to only further stir muddy waters over the question of whether or not Pope Francis is opening the door for Communion to Catholics who are in an objectively adulterous situation.

The reason is that #6 of the Bishops’ guidelines suggests that, when couples have remarried (without an annulment) and do not abstain from sexual relations, the possibility of recourse to the Sacraments may still be possible when ‘there are limitations that mitigate responsibility and culpability.’ The problem lies precisely in how one, who knows that they are in an objective state of mortal sin, with no intention to change that state, can still have recourse to the Sacraments of Reconciliation and the Eucharist. The Bishops’ guidelines provide no concrete examples of such a ‘complex’ situation. 

Given the nature of this “official act” of Francis and the ambiguity of both the guidelines and Amoris Laetitia, Thomas Pink, professor of philosophy at King’s College London says, given that the Bishops’ document…

…is not entirely clear, does not meet conditions for infallibility, and comes without any accompanying explanation of its relation to previous teaching,” it can scarcely “oblige Catholics to believe anything inconsistent with what the Church has so far taught and which they were already under an obligation to believe.”Catholic Herald, December 4th, 2017

As Dan Hitchens of the Catholic Herald points out in a refreshingly respectful article:

The Church down the ages has taught that the divorced and remarried, if in a sexual relationship, cannot receive Communion. You’ll find it in the Church Fathers; in the teaching of Popes St Innocent I (405) and St Zachary (747); in the recent documents of Popes St John Paul II, Benedict XVI and the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. All the teaching of the Church about sin, marriage and the Eucharist would have been understood by those promulgating it to have excluded the sexually-active divorced and remarried from Communion. This has also become part of the Catholic mind: the prohibition is casually referred to by the likes of GK Chesterton and Msgr. Ronald Knox (1888-1957) as Catholic doctrine, and there can’t be much doubt that if you picked a random saint from the history of the Church and asked them what the Church taught, they would tell you the same thing. —Ibid. 

That teaching was made explicit again by Pope St. John Paul II in his Apostolic Exhortation Familiaris Consortio:

The Church reaffirms her practice, which is based upon Sacred Scripture, of not admitting to Eucharistic Communion divorced persons who have remarried. They are unable to be admitted thereto from the fact that their state and condition of life objectively contradict that union of love between Christ and the Church which is signified and effected by the Eucharist. Besides this, there is another special pastoral reason: if these people were admitted to the Eucharist, the faithful would be led into error and confusion regarding the Church’s teaching about the indissolubility of marriage.

Reconciliation in the sacrament of Penance which would open the way to the Eucharist, can only be granted to those who, repenting of having broken the sign of the Covenant and of fidelity to Christ, are sincerely ready to undertake a way of life that is no longer in contradiction to the indissolubility of marriage. This means, in practice, that when, for serious reasons, such as for example the children’s upbringing, a man and a woman cannot satisfy the obligation to separate, they “take on themselves the duty to live in complete continence, that is, by abstinence from the acts proper to married couples. —Familiaris Consortio, “On the Role of the Christian Family in the Modern World”, n. 84;

This is all to say that the papacy is not one pope…. 


The following was first published February 2nd, 2017:


THE papacy of Pope Francis is one that has been dogged from nearly the beginning with controversy after controversy. The Catholic world—in fact, the world at large—is not used to the style of the man who presently holds the keys of the Kingdom. Pope John Paul II was no different in his desire to be with and among the people, touching them, sharing their meals, and lingering in their presence. But the papal saint was also very precise whenever he addressed matters pertaining to “faith and morals”, as was Benedict XVI.

Not so their successor. Pope Francis is unafraid to take on any question from the media, including those outside the mandate of the Church on matters of “faith and morals”, and address them in the most colloquial terms, and sometimes, with open-ended thoughts. This has forced many a listener, myself included, to make sure that the entire context of his thoughts are taken into consideration. Sometimes this means going over more than one interview, homily, or papal document. But it must go beyond that. Any teaching of the Holy Father must be filtered and understood in the context of the entire body of Catholic teaching called Sacred Tradition, which is derived from the “deposit of faith.”

For the papacy is not one pope. It is the voice of Peter throughout the centuries.



The primacy of the Pope is rooted in Sacred Scripture when Jesus declared to Peter alone that he was the “rock” on which He would build His Church. And to Peter alone, He gave the “keys of the Kingdom.”

But Peter died, while the Kingdom did not. And so, the “office” of Peter was handed on to another, as were the offices of all the Apostles after their deaths.

May another take his office. (Acts 1:20)

What these successors were charged with was handing on the “apostolic faith”, all that Jesus entrusted to the Apostles, and to…

…stand firm and hold fast to the traditions that you were taught, either by an oral statement or by a letter of ours. (2 Thessalonians 2:15; cf. Matt 28:20)

As the centuries unfolded, the early Church grew with an unshakable understanding that they were custodians of the Faith, not its inventors. And with that conviction, there also grew a deeper comprehension of the indispensable role of the successor of Peter. In fact, what we see in the early Church is not an exaltation of the individual man, but of the “office” or “chair of Peter.” In the late second century, the bishop of Lyons stated:

…the tradition which that very great, oldest, and well-known church, founded and established at Rome by those two most glorious apostles Peter and Paul, received from the apostles… every church must be in harmony with this church [in Rome] because of its outstanding pre-eminence. Bishop Irenaeus, Against Heresies, Book III, 3:2; Early Christian Fathers, p. 372

Evoking that first and “prime” Apostle, St. Cyprian, bishop of Carthage, wrote:

It is on [Peter] that He builds the church, and to him that He entrusts the sheep to feed. And although he assigns power to all the apostles, yet he founded a single chair, thus establishing by His own authority the source and hallmark of the churches’ oneness… a primacy is given to Peter and it is thus made clear that there is but one church and one chair… If a man does not hold fast to this oneness of Peter, does he imagine that he still holds the faith? If he deserts the Chair of Peter upon whom the church was built, has he still confidence that he is in the church? —”On the Unity of the Catholic Church”, n. 4;  The Faith of the Early Fathers, Vol. 1, pp. 220-221

This common understanding of the primacy of Peter’s office led to St. Ambrose famously stating, “Where Peter is, there is the church,” [1]“Commentary on the Psalms”, 40:30 and St. Jerome—the great biblical scholar and translator—to declare to Pope Damasus, “I follow no one as leader except Christ alone, and therefore I want to remain in union in the church with you, that is with the chair of Peter. I know that on this rock the church is founded.” [2]Letters, 15:2



Again, the Fathers of the Church readily aligned themselves with the Chair of Peter, and thus, in unity with the man who held that office.

…the pope is not identical with the entire Church, the Church is stronger than a singular erring or heretical Pope. —Bishop Athansius Schneider, September 19, 2023;


The pope isn’t an absolute sovereign, whose thoughts and desires are law. On the contrary, the ministry of the pope is the guarantor of the obedience toward Christ and His word. —POPE BENEDICT XVI, Homily of May 8, 2005; San Diego Union-Tribune

That is to say that not even a pope can change what has been derived from the “deposit of faith”, revealed in Christ, and handed on through apostolic succession to this present day.

Cardinal Gerhard Müller is Prefect for the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (note: since this was written, he has been removed from this position). He is the Vatican’s doctrinal chief, a kind of gatekeeper and enforcer of the Church’s doctrine to help individual churches maintain orthodoxy and the unity of faith. In a recent interview underscoring the immutable nature of the Sacrament of Marriage and all its implications, he stated….

…no power in heaven or on earth, neither an angel, nor the pope, nor a council, nor a law of the bishops, has the faculty to change it.Catholic Herald, Feb. 1st, 2017

That is consistent with the teachings of the Councils of both Vatican I and Vatican II:

The Roman Pontiff and the bishops, by reason of their office and the seriousness of the matter, apply themselves with zeal to the work of enquiring by every suitable means into this revelation and of giving apt expression to its contents; they do not, however, admit any new public revelations as pertaining to the divine deposit of faith. —Vatican Council I, Pastor aeternus, 4; Vatican Council II, Lumen Gentium, n. 25

…even if we or an angel from heaven should preach [to you] a gospel other than the one that we preached to you, let that one be accursed! (Galatians 1:8)

The implication is immediately apparent. Any question of interpretation of a papal statement pertaining to matters on faith and morals must always be made through the lens of Sacred Tradition—that constant, universal and infallible voice of Christ heard in unity with all the successors of Peter and the sensus fidei “on the part of the whole people, when, from the bishops to the last of the faithful, they manifest a universal consent in matters of faith and morals.” [3]Catechism of the Catholic Church, n. 92

…the Roman Pontiff does not utter a pronouncement as a private person, but rather does he expound and defend the teaching of the Catholic faith as the supreme teacher of the universal Church… —Vatican Council II, Lumen Gentium, n. 25

In Pope Francis’ own words:

The Pope, in this context, is not the supreme lord but rather the supreme servant – the “servant of the servants of God”; the guarantor of the obedience and the conformity of the Church to the will of God, to the Gospel of Christ, and to the Tradition of the Church, putting aside every personal whim, despite being – by the will of Christ Himself – the “supreme Pastor and Teacher of all the faithful” and despite enjoying “supreme, full, immediate, and universal ordinary power in the Church”. —POPE FRANCIS, closing remarks on the Synod; Catholic News Agency, October 18th, 2014

This is why you will see, particularly in papal documents of previous centuries, the popes addressing the faithful in the pronoun “we” rather than “I”. For they are speaking, also, in the voice of their predecessors. 



Thus, Cardinal Müller continues, expounding on Pope Francis’ recent Apostolic Exhortation on the family and marriage that is causing controversy in how various bishops are interpreting it with regard to allowing the divorced and remarried to receive Communion:

Amoris Laetitia must clearly be interpreted in the light of the whole doctrine of the Church… it is not right that so many bishops are interpreting Amoris Laetitia according to their way of understanding the Pope’s teaching. This does not keep to the line of Catholic doctrine.Catholic Herald, Feb. 1st, 2017

Since the interpretation or definition of doctrine is “co-extensive with the deposit of faith”, the Second Vatican Council taught that, among the roles of bishops of which “preaching the Gospel has pride and place” in order to “inform [the faithful’s] thinking and direct their conduct”, they are to watch over those in their care and “ward off whatever errors threaten their flock.” [4]cf. Vatican Council II, Lumen Gentium, n. 25 This is really a call for every Catholic to be a servant and faithful steward of God’s Word. It is a call to humility and submission to Jesus who is the “Prince of shepherds” and “supreme cornerstone” of the Church. [5]cf. Vatican Council II, Lumen Gentium, n. 6, 19 And this also includes submission to the pastoral practices of the Church that are intrinsically linked to doctrine.

For all the bishops have the obligation of fostering and safeguarding the unity of the faith and of upholding the discipline which is common to the whole Church… —Vatican Council II, Lumen Gentium, n. 23

As we see bishops in various parts of the world begin to interpret Amoris Laetitia in ways that are contradictory to one another, it can rightly be said that we are facing a “crisis of truth.” Cardinal Müller warned against “entering into any casuistry that can easily generate misunderstandings” adding:

“These are sophistries: the Word of God is very clear and the Church does not accept the secularization of marriage.” The task of priests and bishops, then, “is not that of creating confusion, but of bringing clarity.” Catholic World Report, Feb. 1st, 2017



In conclusion, faced as we are with a papacy that is not always as precise as some may like, the mistake is to panic as if the “rock” is crumbling. It is Jesus, not Peter, who is building the Church.[6]cf. Matt 16:18 It is Jesus, not Peter, who guaranteed that the “gates of hell” will not prevail against it.[7]cf. Matt 16:18 It is Jesus, not Peter, who guaranteed that the Holy Spirit will lead the Church “into all truth.”[8]cf. John 16:13

But what Jesus did not guarantee is that the road would be easy. That it would be free of “false prophets”[9]cf. Matt 7:15 and wolves in “sheep’s clothing” who would use sophistries to “deceive many.”[10]cf. Matt 24:11

…there will be false teachers among you, who will introduce destructive heresies and even deny the Master who ransomed them, bringing swift destruction on themselves. (2 Peter 2:1)

But watch out too for those who are sowing dissension against Pope Francis. There are many good intentioned “conservative” Catholics who have taken almost a default position of viewing anything Francis says under a pall of suspicion (see The Spirit of Suspicion). This is dangerous, especially when it is carelessly published. It is one thing to raise concerns in a spirit of charity with the desire to achieve deeper understanding and clarity. It is another to simply criticize under a veil of sarcasm and cynicism. If the Pope is sowing confusion by his words as some allege, than many are also sowing discord by a constant negative approach to the Holy Father.

For all his personal faults or sins, Pope Francis remains the Vicar of Christ. He holds the keys of the Kingdom—and not a single Cardinal who elected him has suggested otherwise (that the papal election was invalid). If something he says is uncertain to you, or even seems to be contrary to Church teaching, do not quickly assume that to be the case (I have already in the past provided exhaustive examples of  how the mainstream media has misquoted or re-framed the pontiff’s words). Also, reject the temptation to immediately spout your frustration on Facebook, in comments, or on a forum. Rather, keep silent and ask the Holy Spirit to give you clarity before speaking.

And pray for the Holy Father. I think it is rather signficant that there is not a single credible prophecy in Scripture or from Our Lady that says, someday, the office of Peter should not be trusted. Rather, she calls us to pray for the Pope and all our shepherds and to remain in steadfast unity, while still upholding and defending the truth.

And that is relatively easy to do since the truth has been passed on, not by a single pope, but through the one office of the papacy, the Chair of Peter, and those bishops in communion with him… in 2000 years of unbroken written and oral Tradition.

The Pope, Bishop of Rome and Peter’s successor, “is the perpetual and visible source and foundation of the unity both of the bishops and of the whole company of the faithful.” Catechism of the Catholic Church, n. 882




That Pope Francis!… A Short Story

That Pope Francis!… Part II

Francis, and the Coming Passion of the Church

Understanding Francis

Misunderstanding Francis

A Black Pope?

The Prophecy of St. Francis

A Tale of Five Popes and a Great Ship

First Love Lost

The Synod and the Spirit

The Five Corrections

The Testing

The Spirit of Suspicion

The Spirit of Trust

Pray More, Speak Less

Jesus the Wise Builder

Listening to Christ

The Thin Line Between Mercy and HeresyPart IPart II, & Part III

The Scandal of Mercy

Two Pillars and The New Helmsman

Can the Pope Betray Us?


Bless you and thank you.


To journey with Mark in the The Now Word,
click on the banner below to subscribe.
Your email will not be shared with anyone.





Print Friendly, PDF & Email


1 “Commentary on the Psalms”, 40:30
2 Letters, 15:2
3 Catechism of the Catholic Church, n. 92
4 cf. Vatican Council II, Lumen Gentium, n. 25
5 cf. Vatican Council II, Lumen Gentium, n. 6, 19
6 cf. Matt 16:18
7 cf. Matt 16:18
8 cf. John 16:13
9 cf. Matt 7:15
10 cf. Matt 24:11

Comments are closed.