<div dir="ltr">
<header class="entry-header entry-large"><h1 class="entry-title">Interview: Josef Seifert on his Dismissal, Amoris Laetitia, & The Fight For an Authentic Catholic Life Ethic</h1>
<div class="gmail-byline">
<span>
<a href="https://onepeterfive.com/author/mhickson/" title="Posts by">
<img src="https://onepeterfive.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/mhickson-32x32.jpg" alt="Maike Hickson" class="gmail-avatar gmail-avatar-24 gmail-wp-user-avatar gmail-wp-user-avatar-24 gmail-alignnone gmail-photo" width="24" height="24"> </a>
<a href="https://onepeterfive.com/author/mhickson/" title="Posts by Maike Hickson" rel="author">Maike Hickson</a> </span>
<span><a href="https://onepeterfive.com/interview-josef-seifert-on-his-dismissal-amoris-laetitia-the-fight-for-an-authentic-catholic-life-ethic/" rel="bookmark">February 2, 2018</a></span>
<span>
<a href="https://onepeterfive.com/interview-josef-seifert-on-his-dismissal-amoris-laetitia-the-fight-for-an-authentic-catholic-life-ethic/#comments" title="Comments on Interview: Josef Seifert on his Dismissal, Amoris Laetitia, & The Fight For an Authentic Catholic Life Ethic">
10 Comments </a>
</span>
</div>
</header><div class="gmail-sumome-share-client-wrapper gmail-sumome-share-client-wrapper-center gmail-sumome-share-client-counts gmail-sumome-share-client-light gmail-sumome-share-client-medium"><div class="gmail-sumome-share-client gmail-sumome-share-client-header-center-article gmail-sumome-share-client-counts gmail-sumome-share-client-light gmail-sumome-share-client-medium gmail-sumome-share-client-rounded"><div class="gmail-sumome-share-client-animated gmail-sumome-share-client-share gmail-sumome-share-client-share-share gmail-sumome-share-client-count" style="background:rgb(255,255,255) none repeat scroll 0% 0%;color:black;margin-right:3px"><span style="bottom: auto; top: 18.5px;">Shares</span></div><a title="Facebook" class="gmail-sumome-share-client-animated gmail-sumome-share-client-share" style="background:rgb(59,89,152) none repeat scroll 0% 0%;color:rgb(255,255,255);margin-right:3px"><img src="https://sumome-140a.kxcdn.com/static/e3af92008e737ad5457ff4bd5d5e8912c1d743cd/client/images/apps/9e8a4d2a-6f8c-415e-851b-bdfe4c01d5c1/facebook-white-60.png" alt="Facebook"></a><a title="Twitter" class="gmail-sumome-share-client-animated gmail-sumome-share-client-share" style="background:rgb(0,172,237) none repeat scroll 0% 0%;color:rgb(255,255,255);margin-right:3px"><img src="https://sumome-140a.kxcdn.com/static/e3af92008e737ad5457ff4bd5d5e8912c1d743cd/client/images/apps/9e8a4d2a-6f8c-415e-851b-bdfe4c01d5c1/twitter-white-60.png" alt="Twitter"></a><a title="Email" class="gmail-sumome-share-client-animated gmail-sumome-share-client-share" style="background:rgb(170,170,170) none repeat scroll 0% 0%;color:rgb(255,255,255);margin-right:3px"><img src="https://sumome-140a.kxcdn.com/static/e3af92008e737ad5457ff4bd5d5e8912c1d743cd/client/images/apps/9e8a4d2a-6f8c-415e-851b-bdfe4c01d5c1/email-white-60.png" alt="Email"></a><a title="Pinterest" class="gmail-sumome-share-client-animated gmail-sumome-share-client-share" style="background:rgb(203,32,39) none repeat scroll 0% 0%;color:rgb(255,255,255);margin-right:3px"><img src="https://sumome-140a.kxcdn.com/static/e3af92008e737ad5457ff4bd5d5e8912c1d743cd/client/images/apps/9e8a4d2a-6f8c-415e-851b-bdfe4c01d5c1/pinterest-white-60.png" alt="Pinterest"></a><a title="Pocket" class="gmail-sumome-share-client-animated gmail-sumome-share-client-share" style="background:rgb(238,64,86) none repeat scroll 0% 0%;color:rgb(255,255,255);margin-right:3px"><img src="https://sumome-140a.kxcdn.com/static/e3af92008e737ad5457ff4bd5d5e8912c1d743cd/client/images/apps/9e8a4d2a-6f8c-415e-851b-bdfe4c01d5c1/pocket-white-60.png" alt="Pocket"></a><a title="Google+" class="gmail-sumome-share-client-animated gmail-sumome-share-client-share" style="background:rgb(221,75,57) none repeat scroll 0% 0%;color:rgb(255,255,255);margin-right:3px"><img src="https://sumome-140a.kxcdn.com/static/e3af92008e737ad5457ff4bd5d5e8912c1d743cd/client/images/apps/9e8a4d2a-6f8c-415e-851b-bdfe4c01d5c1/googleplus-white-60.png" alt="Google+"></a></div></div>
<div class="entry-content">
<div class="gmail-pf-content"><p><em>Editor’s Note: The following
interview with Dr. Joseph Seifert, founding rector of the International
Academy of Philosophy in Liechtenstein & President of the newly
founded John Paul II Academy for Human Life and the Family was conducted
by Dr. Maike Hickson on behalf of OnePeterFive. </em></p>
<hr>
<p><strong>Maike Hickson (MH): At the end of August of 2017, Archbishop Javier Martínez Fernández, of Granada, <a href="https://onepeterfive.com/spanish-archbishop-fires-professor-seifert-for-amoris-laetitia-critique/">dismissed</a>
you from your Dietrich von Hildebrand Chair at the International
Academy of Philosophy. You decided to take some legal steps against this
unjust treatment which was justified by the Diocese with your public
criticism of Amoris Laetitia. How is now your own situation with regard
to Archbishop Martínez, after he dismissed you from your Chair and you
resisted that step with legal means?</strong></p>
<p>Joseph Seifert (JS): Yes, after my dismissal (first, in 2016, on the basis of my <a href="http://aemaet.de/index.php/aemaet/article/view/35">article</a>; from my teaching some courses in the Seminary, as Professor in the <em>Instituto de Filosofía Edith Stein</em>; and in 2017, after the publication of my second <a href="http://aemaet.de/index.php/aemaet/article/view/44">article</a>,
from my Dietrich von Hildebrand Chair at the IAP-IFES – a new Campus of
the International Academy of Philosophy in the Principality
Liechtenstein together with the Instituto de Filosofía Edith Stein,
created by archbishop Martínez), I defended myself against a declaration
and action which I considered a grave violation of truth and of
justice.</p>
<p>Following the advice of a Cardinal whom I hold in the highest
respect, and who told me that also for the sake of a just treatment of
other Professors and for the good of the Church, I should not leave this
action unchallenged, I took two legal steps. One was an ecclesiastic “<em>remonstratio</em>”,
according to Canon Law (which also upholds free expression of thought
and academic freedom, and demands that before taking any punitive action
one has to give the alleged trespasser the right to defend himself);
the other one a civil complaint based on Spanish law. Since the content
of the two complaints were almost identical, and I did not unnecessarily
want to enter into a long drawn-out legal dispute with an archbishop
and personal friend, I withdrew the ecclesiastical suit and made several
offers for extrajudicial peaceful agreements in order to end the civil
suit as well, before it would come to a judgment of the tribunal,
foreseeably against the diocese and IFES. In my “peace-propoals” I
offered, among other things, to withdraw any demand to be re-instituted
as professor in my chair.</p>
<p>I am happy to inform you that after 4 1/2 months an extrajudicial
agreement that ended the legal proceedings was recently signed by both
parties. While the diocese never retracted, as I had asked for, the
grave (and in my opinion completely unfounded) public charges (that I
confounded and damaged the faith and morals of the faithful, undermined
papal authority, and did not serve the Church but the world), this
agreement gave me and, I believe, did so in truth and justice, the
confirmation that I was not forced to retire “normally” according to a
Spanish retirement law for University Professors, but dismissed on the
basis of my articles on <em>Amoris Laetitia</em>, and that this dismissal was done against justice and law.</p>
<p><strong>MH: What is the content of that peaceful agreement, and how
did it come to such a peaceful agreement? Will you be able to return to
your previous position?</strong></p>
<p>JS: I am not free to reveal the specific contents and conditions
accepted by both sides in the agreement, because we both signed a
clause in the agreement that we would not divulge these to the press.
The same discretion prevents me from answering your questions about the
exact ways through which this agreement came about. As I, before
proposing this agreement through my lawyer, freely abandoned any claim
to return to my previous position, and did not pursue the legal suit to
its end (which would have demanded the nullity of my dismissal and
reinstatement in my chair), I am unable to return to my previous chair
in the Institute (IAP-IFES). However, I have good chances to be offered
a research Institute and Research Professorship in another University
and at present explore four such possibilities.</p>
<p><strong>MH: Being an Austrian, have you ever contacted Cardinal Christoph Schönborn, whom the Pope has named as best interpreter of <em>Amoris Laetitia</em>, to ask him about the actions of archbishop Martínez and his response to your articles critical of <em>Amoris Laetitia</em> that he so strongly defends?</strong></p>
<p>JS: Yes, I had recently a long telephone conversation with Cardinal
Schönborn, who is an old acquaintance and friend of mine (we have been
colleagues in the 1980s as professors, as regular visiting professors,
in the John Paul II Institute for the Studies of Marriage and Family at
the Lateran University in Rome). As is well known, this Institute has
been founded by the holy Pope on the day on which the assassination
attempt was made against him May 13, 1981. (I lived this horrible and
unforgettable day with his friend, his former student and successor in
the chair of Ethics at the Catholic University of Lublin and co-director
of the International Academy of Philosophy in Texas, the ancestor
Institute of the IAP in Liechtenstein: Professor Tadeusz Styczeî in
Krakow in Poland, where both of us had been invited for a lecture.)</p>
<p>I did not contact Cardinal Schönborn in order to ask him about my
situation in Granada, but because the Vice-Rector of a University
Institution under his tutelage had contacted me to ask whether I would
perhaps accept a chair in this Institute. Knowing that Cardinal
Schönborn had been named by the Pope the highest authority in the Church
to interpret <em>Amoris Laetitia</em> correctly as being in line with
the magisterium of the Church, I expected him to be wholly opposed to
the possibility of my professorship at this Institute and totally in
support of Archbishop Martinez’s action against me. Therefore, I was
pleasantly surprised and greatly pleased that he neither was opposed in
principle to a professorship of mine in this International Institute,
nor in support of my having been dismissed for my articles about AL in
Granada. While he certainly thinks similarly to archbishop Martínez on <em>Amoris Laetitia</em>,
he expressed astonishment and some bewilderment about the way of my
having been treated in Granada and observed that in his opinion the only
way to approach such differences of opinion would be an academic
response and dialogue and not a disciplinary action.</p>
<p><strong>MH: Were there some high-ranking prelates of the Church, or
even close collaborators of Pope Francis involved in this peaceful
solution?</strong></p>
<p>JS: Not as far as I know of.</p>
<p><strong>MH: What do you think is the possible effect of the
resolution of your own unjust dismissal for other orthodox scholars in
the Catholic Church with regard to a well-reasoned and faithful
criticism of papal documents?</strong></p>
<p>JS: I greatly hope that my unjust dismissal and the peaceful
resolution of the conflict with Archbishop Don Javier Martínez (who
treated me up to my articles on <em>Amoris Laetitia</em> always as a
friend, whom I admire for many of his actions and to whom I owe much
gratitude) will encourage other philosophers and theologians to express,
according to the judgment of their conscience, the truth even when it
means some criticism of papal documents. It is likewise my hope that my
“case” will free many others from a false papolatry, so as if a Catholic
would not ever be permitted to criticize something a pope said. I think
such an attitude, possibly fostered by the great and holy popes we had
during the last 150 years, is not at all Catholic, as the splendid
examples of Saint Athanasius, Saint Catherine of Siena and others show.
The pope neither is the lord over truth nor the Lord of the Church, but
their servant. Finally I hope that others will be freed by the happy
outcome of my legal complaint from the kind of fear that reigns now in
the Vatican and elsewhere in the Church, as Cardinal Müller impressively
explained in an Interview. For such a fear, especially if it paralyzes
us in the defense of truth, is unworthy of a true Catholic, who should
be ready to give his life for the defense of the truth, and does great
damage to the Church and its credibility.</p>
<p><strong>MH: What are the underlying principles, in short, for a
Catholic academician, to conduct a critical examination of Church
documents, for example of the post-synodal exhortation <em>Amoris Laetitia</em>?</strong></p>
<p>JS: Professor Pierantoni, many others such as Professor Spaemann,
doctors of the Church, and also myself explained these principles in
different articles (I may refer here to two articles and an Interview of
Church historians and to an interview with bishop Athanasius Schneider:</p>
<ul>
<li><a href="http://cfnews.org/page88/files/7d8edade9700c31473df93d12f2c34dc-566.html">De Mattei: First reflections on a catastrophic document – <em>Amoris Laetitia</em></a></li>
<li><a href="http://www.aemaet.de/index.php/aemaet/article/view/46/0">Josef Seifert, Pure Logic, And The Beginning Of The Official Persecution Of Orthodoxy Within The Church</a></li>
<li><a href="https://onepeterfive.com/catholic-scholar-official-persecution-orthodoxy-within-church-begun/">Catholic Scholar: Official Persecution of Orthodoxy Within the Church Has Begun</a></li>
</ul>
<p>Of Bishop Athanasius Schneider see:</p>
<ul>
<li><a href="https://onepeterfive.com/bishop-schneider-prof-seifert-cardinal-caffarra-duty-resist/">Bishop Schneider on Prof. Seifert, Cardinal Caffarra, and the Duty to Resist</a></li>
<li>See also my first article on AL: <a href="http://aemaet.de/index.php/aemaet/article/view/35"><em>Amoris Laetitia</em>: Joy, Sadness And Hopes</a></li>
</ul>
<p>A Pope is absolutely protected against errors and heresies only when
he pronounces dogmas and speaks “ex cathedra”. Therefore it does not
contradict in any way the Catholic belief in the infallibility of the
pope if a true pope (or a false pope, of whom the Church had a few)
commits errors, such as pope Liberius whom Saint Athanasius resisted, or
if a pope even is condemned as heretic like Pope Honorius I, or
stricken from the list of Popes such as John XXIII (not the Saint of the
20th century but the earlier one who was asked by a Council to resign
and actually resigned during the Council of Constance 1414-1418). This
shows that a pope is absolutely not quite generally exempt from error
and therefore each Catholic is free and even obliged to reverently but
courageously examine also papal utterances in the light of Divine
Revelation and the Perpetual Church Teaching. As soon as even an
utterance of the apparently “ordinary magisterium” of the Church
contradicts the <em>depositum fidei</em> and the perpetual Church teaching, it has to be rejected.</p>
<p><strong>MH: The Pontifical Academy for Life just posted an <a href="http://www.academyforlife.va/content/dam/pav/documenti%20pdf/2018/01_Hoever_pdf.pdf">article</a> on their <a href="http://www.academyforlife.va/content/pav/it/the-academics/activity-academics/hoever--amoris-laetitia.html">website</a> which speaks about “a weak point in the traditional moral-theological doctrine of the ‘intrinsically evil action'” in light of <em>Amoris Laetitia</em>. </strong><strong>Would
you comment on this line of argument, also and especially in light of
your own concern about the possible undermining of the moral absolutes
as it is laid out in <em>Amoris Laetiti</em>a?</strong></p>
<p>JS: First, Gerhard Höver has published this article originally in German. He has recently published an <a href="http://www.katholisch.de/aktuelles/aktuelle-artikel/schutz-des-lebens-bis-zuletzt">article</a>
on human dignity and physician-assisted suicide in which he presents
excellent reasons against any compromise through laws that permit
physician-assisted suicide in some cases. Therefore the last sentence of
the abstract of his article and his claim in the article that the
teaching that there are intrinsically evil acts is “too narrow” is
surprising, because Höver seems to state in the other article that any
direct assault on human life is intrinsically evil. Professor Gerhard
Höver is Professor emeritus of the University of Bonn, Germany. From the
way he cites Franz Böckle’s <em>Fundamentalmoral</em>, I assume he was a
student of Professor Franz Böckle, who was also Professor of Moral
Theology at the University of Bonn and a fervent champion of the enemies
of <em>Humanae Vitae</em> and of the teaching that there are
intrinsically evil acts. Höver published several books jointly with
Böckle: Ja zum Menschen : Bausteine einer Konkreten Moral (München:
Kösel, 1993), and <a href="http://www.worldcat.org/search?q=au%3ABöckle%2C+Franz.&qt=hot_author">Franz Böckle</a>; <a href="http://www.worldcat.org/search?q=au%3AHöver%2C+Gerhard%2C&qt=hot_author">Gerhard Höver</a>; <a href="http://www.worldcat.org/search?q=au%3AHonnefelder%2C+Ludger.&qt=hot_author">Ludger Honnefelder</a>,
Der Streit um das Gewissen, (München: Kösel, 1995). The teachings of
the avalanche of Catholic moral theologians who, like Böckle, opposed <em>Humanae Vitae</em>
and introduced a proportionalist ethics that denies not only the
intrinsic moral wrongness of contraception, but any intrinsically evil
acts, was forcefully and, I would say, gloriously refuted and condemned
in <em>Veritatis Splendor</em>.</p>
<p>Secondly, because PAV puts a caveat at the end of Höver’s article: “<strong>The article we publish does not necessarily reflect the opinions of the Pontifical Academy for Life…</strong>”
, we cannot directly attribute this article to PAV, while I would
certainly not agree that our new John Paul II Academy for Human Life and
the Family, whose President I am, publish such an article on our
website, because this can only either suggest consent (despite the
caveat) or confuse the reader.</p>
<p>Thirdly, I would say that this article expresses, in my opinion, an
extremely illogical and weird conclusion from a somewhat obscure
explanation of the difference of Bonaventure’s and Aristotle’s notion of
time and the assertion that “time is greater than space”. This latter
affirmation certainly has some good sense if we recognize that space is
only the medium in which physical reality is located and moves, while
time also encompasses purely spiritual creatures, such as angels, who
have a beginning in time (only God is beginningless), can change in time
(Ezekiel 28: 11 ff. reports that Satan was a beautiful and noble angel
in paradise and only at a later time fell, seduced by bis pride), and
whose higher form of temporality was called aeon by St. Bonaventure and
other philosophers.</p>
<p>After going into this distinction and the medieval notion of the aeon
as being in some ways different from the time of physical movement, but
still including time, and after he affirmed the superior greatness of
time over space, Höver jumps, in a short phrase, into a
moral-theological conclusion against the existence of intrinsically evil
acts that has nothing, but absolutely nothing, to do with St.
Bonaventure’s and Ratzinger’s reflections on time. The author asserts,
in his abstract:</p>
<blockquote><p>“The expanded concept of time, which is theological in
the truest sense of the term, also shows us a weak point in the
traditional moral-theological doctrine of the ‘intrinsically evil
action’, which has its background in the Aristotelian concept of
movement and is thus based on a restricted concept of time. Accordingly,
the principle that ‘Time is greater than space’ demands both a
correction and a constructive development.“</p></blockquote>
<p>In his longer article he explains that Pope Francis as well rejects in <em>Amoris Laetitia</em> the teaching of the ordinary magisterium of Pope John Paul II, solemnly declared in <em>Veritatis Splendor</em>, as ·too narrow,” saying:</p>
<blockquote><p>The Pope warns directly: ‘By thinking that everything is
black and white, we sometimes close off the way of grace and of growth,
and discourage paths of sanctification which give glory to God’ (AL 305)
This makes it clear that the principle that ‘time is greater than
space’ takes on a moral-theological significance that refers to the
level of norm structures and affects the previous teaching about
‘intrinsically evil actions.’ It is not without reason that some have
requested further clarification on this point.</p>
<p>The doctrine in Thomas and Thomism about “intrinsically evil actions” contains the axiom <em>bonum ex causa integra, malum ex quocumque defectu</em>,
that is to say, “goodness” and (in this sense) also “regularity” exist
only when all the factors that constitute the ethical quality of an
action form an integral unity; if even only one element is defective,
the consequence is “badness” and (in this sense) also “irregularity.” If
one looks more closely at the Aristotelian background, one sees that
the theorem is based on the contrary opposition between form and lack (<em>privatio</em>,
“absence”) as a model for the explanation of movements of change in
space. According to Bonaventure’s conception of time, however, this
means that the theorem is based on a <em>coarctata temporis acceptio</em>,
and this means that the definition of that which is “intrinsically
evil” is also affected. It seems that theological reasons lead Pope
Francis to refuse to go on accepting this restriction.</p></blockquote>
<p>In this regard, Höver, in an obscure German language and based on a
wholly unrelated metaphysics of time, supports Father Chiodi’s
“interpretation of <em>Humanae Vitae</em> in the Light of <em>Amoris Laetitia</em>” that stands in direct contradiction to <em>Humanae Vitae</em> and <em>Veritatis Splendor</em>. Chiodi proposes that contraception is not only NOT always forbidden, as <em>Humanae Vitae</em> teaches, but can even be obligatory. Against these claims, see the newly discovered and published <a href="https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/exclusive-pope-john-paul-iis-prophetic-warning-in-defense-of-humanae-vitae">speech</a> of Pope John Paul II. See also my <a href="https://onepeterfive.com/professor-seifert-comments-fr-chiodis-re-reading-humanae-vitae/">critique</a> of Chiodi.</p>
<p>While Father Chiodi pretends that his interpretation of AL proposes a
“new moral theological paradigm” I will show in a new book to be
published this year that this allegedly new moral paradigm is, on the
contrary, an old moral-theological heresy condemned most outspokenly and
clearly by Saint John Paul II and therefore to be condemned again by
Pope Francis, given the unity of Church Teaching.</p>
<p><strong>MH: You are the President of the newly founded John Paul II
Academy for Human Life and the Family (JAHLF). Could you describe to our
readers the goals of this new academy? What do you think is the role
and importance of JAHLF in a time where we have Vatican institutions
such as the PAV publishing articles which put a doubt on essential
concepts of the moral teaching, such as “intrinsically evil acts”?</strong></p>
<p>JS: The task of the John Paul II Academy for Human Life and the
Family is the same that the original PAV has been designed for. We want
to put the whole range of philosophy, theology, science, etc. into the
service of defending and clarifying those fundamental truths about human
life and the family that are under attack from countless sides. We
believe that many of these truths, for example those taught in <em>Humanae Vitae</em> or in <em>Veritatis Splendor</em>
about intrinsically bad acts, are also accessible to human reason.
Therefore we wish to explain these truths also by means of philosophy,
thus aiming at a synthesis between <em>fides and ratio</em> with respect
to human life issues. That the PAV itself again and again attacks these
truths (see Höver’s and Chiodi’s writings) is nothing new that would
have begun only under Pope Francis. The truth about life had to be,
during a number of years under the Presidency of Mons. Fisichella, and
also under that of Mons. Carrasco, also defended under Pope Benedict XVI
against some events organized by the Pontifical Academy for Life and
some publications of its members and even Presidents. As member of PAV, I
wrote two open letters at that time, deploring the direct contradiction
to <em>Evangelium Vitae</em> in an article by Mons. Fisichella in <em>L’Osservatore Romano</em>,
and in a PAV-organized symposium on infertility treatement in which a
large majority of speakers directly opposed fundamental moral teachings
of the Church. And even in the golden times of PAV, under the PAV
Presidency of Mons. (now Cardinal) Sgreggia, its president defended
opinions about “brain death” which all members of JAHLF consider deeply
erroneous. Thus the John Paul II Academy for Human Life and the Family
should have been founded a long time ago. But perhaps this part of our
mission, to defend the truth even against The Pontifical Academy for
Life, is today more relevant than ever, as can be seen when we just
think of the articles of Chiodi and Höver. To this end, we just
published a <a href="https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/breakingnew-laity-led-academy-for-life-corrects-vatican-on-what-church-real">JAHLF statement</a> on a recent conference presented under the auspices of PAV.</p>
<p>The Academy sees it is an especially urgent task, projected as theme
for the first General Assembly Meeting and public Congress planned for
later this year, to present an in-depth analysis and defense of the
encyclicals <em>Humanae Vitae</em> and <em>Veritatis Splendor</em>. Having presented a critical analysis of Father Maurizio Chiodi’s re-interpretation of <em>Humanae Vitae</em> in the light of <em>Amoris Laetitia</em>, an article that constitutes a frontal attack on <em>Humanae Vitae</em> and a negation of the central content of <em>Veritatis Splendor</em> – the teaching of intrinsically evil actions (see <a href="https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/professor-rebukes-new-academy-for-life-members-disastrous-approval-of-contr">this article</a>)
– I wish to publish a large book on the topic, in German, in 2018, on
the theme: “New moraltheological paradigm or old moraltheological
heresy?”, and enlist the work of a number of members and corresponding
members of our new Academy to present these eternal truths which Chiodi
denies (under the title of a new moral theological paradigm he
attributes to Pope Francis).</p>
<p>Thus I do think the JAHLF has a great mission in serving the Splendor
of Moral Truth and in dispelling the darkness that threatens to throw
its shadow, even in the Catholic Church, over Truth’s eternal splendor.
May the Holy Spirit prevent this!</p></div></div>
<br></div>