This article serves as an often-overlooked reference point, containing, for example, rich concepts that are attested in Emmanuel Falque’s lesser-known works. However, this article is important because it helps readers grapple with the shape of his thought, not only as it incorporates key elements of Catholic spirituality but also as it shows how Falque the philosopher sometimes discerns his thought by “thinking with the church” in a very Ignatian sense. Falque believes that writing is a personal disclosure, and his reflections on Pope Francis demonstrate this by highlighting his own interest in the Jesuit and Franciscan charisms.

Dissent, understood as a public rejection of the authoritatively pronounced rules, verdicts, and truth claims within a given community, although disruptive, can offer multiple benefits to the life of the community. However, the Roman Catholic Church (RCC) effectively leaves no other option for dissenters than to adopt a stance of obedient silence. This article emphasizes a need for a shift in the magisterial attitude toward dissent, one in which Catholic truth claims can bear the collective scrutiny and questioning expressed through dissent and thus be more fully integrated into the life of the community. To do that, the article divides the discussion into two parts. First, the article offers an analysis of the concept of dissent, its potential benefits, and its entanglement with the other concepts more broadly. Second, it scrutinizes the construction of power, tradition, and dissent in the RCC specifically.

Dignitas Infinita highlights “the indispensable nature of the dignity of the human person in Christian anthropology” and warns of “ambivalent ways in which the concept is understood today.” Among those “ambivalent ways” are plural definitions of human dignity in official Catholic teaching. There is ambivalence in definitions of Catholic sexual human dignity and Catholic social human dignity, which lead to inconsistencies in the foundation and justification of moral doctrine. In this article, we first present Catholic definitions of social and sexual human dignity. Second, we explain Pope Francis’s anthropological nuances that provide an alternative definition of human dignity, which we label holistic human dignity. Third, we evaluate and describe the harm deriving from statements in the document and by Pope Francis, a harm that results from inconsistent definitions of human dignity in doctrinal teaching.

In their response to the declaration Fiducia Supplicans, many African bishops used culture as an argument to reject the possibility of blessing same-sex couples. This article probes and shows the extent of the inconsistency of the appeal to culture by the African bishops. It uses the issue of polygamy as a point of contrast: appeals to African culture are never used to justify this widespread practice among Africans or any pastoral flexibility toward it. The article also compares Vatican II’s understanding of culture (Gaudium et Spes) with that of the African bishops. It shows that the African bishops’ understanding of culture tends to be narrow and focused on the past. Finally, the article looks at culture as a source of Christian morals and demonstrates that culture can be only a secondary source.

In terms of their interests and methodologies, Bernard Lonergan and Henri de Lubac seem at first blush to be incommensurable worlds apart. Closer examination shows their basic positions on the theology of history to be not only compatible but also complementary. Both place Christ’s redemptive act as the constitutive meaning of history, with all that follows as the expansion of this act through Christ’s Mystical Body. De Lubac’s account of Christ as the bestower of novel meaning provides a more intensive christological focus to Lonergan’s construal of the unified continuity of human agency. Lonergan, in turn, provides greater theoretical controls of meaning to the Lubacian account.

Pope Francis’s 2023 motu proprio, entitled Ad Theologiam Promovendam (“To Promote Theology”), calls for theology to be rethought methodologically and epistemologically in light of existential wounds. In response, I argue that the developing field of ethnographic ecclesiology presents one important theological method for studying the synodal church in a more synodal manner. By reorienting the ethnographic habits of participation, reflexivity, and listening to the synodal vision of communal discernment, the theologian is better able to perceive the trinitarian imprint that shapes the witness and discipleship of distinct ecclesial contexts that constitute the global church in via.

The aim of this study is to evaluate the relationship of synodality and charisms in
Catholic teaching from a Pentecostal perspective. Although a consideration of the
charisms is implied in the discussion on synodality in Catholic documents, there
exists no comprehensive theology of the nature and function of charisms in their
contribution to the synodal journey. A critical identification of the role of charisms,
specifically in conversation with the role of hierarchical gifts, and brought into
dialogue with the new charismatic movements and communities within Catholicism
and Pentecostal Christianity, reveals an imbalance in the exercise of hierarchical and
charismatic gifts in the church that presents a foundational problem for the future of
synodality

Focusing on the Christian side, the author applies Bernard Lonergan’s three-fold structure of progress, decline, and redemption to Christian-Muslim history. The author identifies moments of each vector in the wider history—Arab-Christian apologetics (progress), demonization of Islam (decline), nonviolent witnesses (redemption). The author then highlights a twentieth-century example of development-progress and redemption, namely the cumulative insights of Charles de Foucauld, Louis Massignon, and Christian de Chergé, which led to and built upon the Vatican II statements about Muslims-Islam.

Signs of the times are best understood as significant historical transitions, motivated by social goods, which the church must discern and respond to in the light of the Gospel. The argument proceeds in three steps. First, Charles Taylor’s interpretive understanding of historical transitions is expounded. Second, Chenu’s and Vatican II’s understandings of the signs of the times are examined, and Taylor’s approach to historical transitions is applied to Chenu’s and Vatican II’s central insights about signs of the times. The third section considers the movement for gender equality as an example of a sign of the times.

Large-scale and widespread social and ecclesial upheaval results in the experience of “dislocation,” a feeling of homelessness flowing from the loss of certainty and stability. This article considers how dislocation might provide an opening to creativity and hope, especially in the life of the ecclesial community. Synodality can be an instance of such creativity and hope, even though, paradoxically, synodality itself can be a catalyst for dislocation. To make its case for synodality, the article highlights the church’s eschatological orientation, its graced pilgrimage of faith.

This article traces the development of Catholic ecological hermeneutics over fifty years, leading to Pope Francis’s encyclical Laudato Si’ (2015). Analyzing key church statements, it reveals the expanding biblical sources used and efforts to reinterpret them. The interdisciplinary nature of sustainability and Christian churches’ involvement in academic, ecumenical, and interreligious fora have driven this “hermeneutical effort.” Although not critically examining difficult passages or revising Scripture systematically, Catholic ecotheological reflection has integrated multiple sources into a fruitful dialogue with the Bible, contributing significantly to sustainability. This study underscores the evolution of Christian social thought, emphasizing its capacity to update biblical insights and adapt Catholic Social Teaching for public theology.

Christian Washburn has questioned my claim that the idea of a publicly heretical pope was formally excluded in Pastor Aeternus, by equating Bellarmine’s “fourth proposition” with the extreme Ultramontanist school of Albert Pighius. Washburn argues that Gasser had merely indicated that Bellarmine’s “fourth opinion” would be raised to dogmatic status, rather than the “fourth proposition.” I attempt to address this critique by demonstrating how Bellarmine’s own school of thought within the “fourth opinion” was markedly different from that of Pighius.

In a recent article, Emmet O’Regan has argued that the First Vatican Council not only defined dogmatically that the papal Magisterium is infallible under certain conditions but also “definitively excluded the possibility of a heretical pope” by elevating St. Robert Bellarmine’s “fourth proposition” to the “dignity of a dogma.” This article argues that when Pastor Aeternus is read in light of the official Relatio, it is clear that the council was not intending to exclude the possibility of a heretical pope, that is, the opinion of Albert Pighius. Instead, Gasser makes it clear that the council was intending to define what Bellarmine called the “most common and certain opinion,” which is “whether the pope is able to be a heretic or not, he is not able in any way to define a heretical proposition that must be believed by the whole Church.” O’Regan has misidentified which view of Bellarmine the council intended to define.

Contemporary interpreters of the mystical body movement in the early twentieth century often refer to works therein as mystical body “ecclesiologies” and tend to identify distinctions among them according to the author’s language or nationality. In this article, I argue that the differences among mystical body theologies in that era are better understood according to theological locus—of “mystical body” as either an ecclesiological or a christological-soteriological concept. This framework best explains the paradoxical evaluations of the mystical body movement more broadly, and the encyclical Mystici Corporis Christi in particular, as simultaneously too vague and too juridical.