A Message of Mercy: The Delicate Dance Between Doctrine and Pastoral Practice in Amoris Laeticia

When I heard the first news report on Pope Francis’ summary of the Synod of the Family in the form of an Apostolic Exhortation, Amoris Laetitia, I listened to one of the Catholic news analysts claim that even though the Pope held to traditional doctrines, he opened potential doors to pastoral change. He further commented that adjustments in pastoral practice can lead to evolution in doctrine. As a pastoral minister who trends toward the side of black and white, I was intrigued by this thought which took me back to the well-known adage of Prosper of Aquitane – let the rule of prayer establish the rule of belief (lex orandi, lex credendi).

From the earliest years of the Church‘s history, theology and liturgy have demonstrated a strong bond. Numerous recent scholars, among them Dr. Kevin Irwin, have focused on the above saying to exemplify this foundational connection.^[1] It may be logical to think that what we believe is what we pray, yet this classic theological adage affirms that what we pray is what we believe. Also in his book Context and Text, Irwin identifies a third term, lex vivendi, which is intimately connected to the two terms above. He describes lex vivendi as the living out of the Paschal Mystery in our own lives. Liturgy, with its profound theological insight, ultimately aims at putting people in communion with Jesus Christ, the only one who can lead us to the love of the Father in the Spirit and make us share in the life of the Holy Trinity. The intended effect of this encounter is mission and discipleship – lex vivendi –living out the gospel message. Thus, there is a delicate interplay between how we pray, what we believe and how we embody these beliefs in daily living.

When reading the exhortation, I was intrigued to explore this interrelationship between doctrine and pastoral practice. In Amoris Laetitia, Pope Francis proposes a transformation in perspective toward couples in “irregular situations,” while maintaining traditional Church doctrine as it pertains to the indissolubility of the sacrament of marriage. This article will explore the relationship between changes in pastoral practice and its potential effect on the traditional doctrine of marriage; in otherwords, how lex credendi and lex vivendi are related and interact in the Pope’s merciful vision for those heretofore excluded from the life of the Church.

Pope Francis touches upon this balance in paragraph three of the exhortation where he says:

I would make it clear that not all discussions of doctrinal, moral or pastoral issues need to be settled by interventions of the magisterium. Unity of teaching and practice is certainly necessary in the Church, but this does not preclude various ways of interpreting some aspects of that teaching or drawing certain consequences from it. This will always be the case as the Spirit guides us towards the entire truth (cf. Jn 16:13), until he leads us fully into the mystery of Christ and enables usto see all things as he does.

Within this quote lie two important emphases of the Pontiff: the decentralization of decision making in the church and the role of personal conscience. It is clear from earlier statements that he favors a certain decentralization of the decision-making process of the magisterium. Discernment under the guidance of the Holy Spirit is a bedrock of his Ignatian spirituality. The statement quoted above is strongly connected to the solutions and goals he presents in Chapter 8 as regards those in ‘irregular situations.” Throughout the exhortation, but in this last chapter in particular, Pope Francis highlights the importance of pastoral practice which emphasizes mercy. In this view, the lex vivendi is in a constant state of evolution towards the true lex credendi, a transformation that will not be complete until the fulfillment of the Kingdom.

This line of thought is explicitly elucidated in paragraph 295 when he references the connection between the demands of doctrine -- “law” -- and the ability of the faithful to fulfill its requirements:

Along these lines, Saint John Paul II proposed the so-called “law of gradualness” in the knowledge that the human being “knows,loves and accomplishes moral good by different stages of growth”.323 This is not a “gradualness of law” but rather a gradualness in the prudential exercise of free acts on the part of subjects who are not in a position to understand, appreciate, or fully carry out the objective demands of the law. For the law is itself a gift of God which points out the way, a gift for everyone without exception; it can be followed with the help of grace, even though each human being “advances gradually with the progressive integration of the gifts of God and the demands of God’s definitive and absolute love in his or her entire personal and social life”.324

Pope Francis espouses a pastoral practice in which the Church, and specifically her pastors, accompanies the faithful on a journey of patient guidance toward the fulfillment of the law. Does the gradual nature of this journey have an effect upon the absolute nature of the law? This is a question that will play out in the future. What does the experience of the past indicate?

In referencing the past the Pope mentions the Council of Jerusalem.He states that the Church has historically embraced two methods of response: the path of casting off and the path of reinstating. Jesus way was always that of reinstating. In the early Christian communities a practical form of the sacrament of Reconciliation had not yet been formulated under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. Expulsion from the community was the course of action in the case of serious sin. We see in 1 Corinthians 5:5 that Paul urges the community to expel a man engaging in incest, most especially so that he will repent and be saved, but also out of concern for the holiness of the community. When the Church did follow the path of casting off, particularly in these early years, it was with reluctance, because, like Pope Francis, the early Church knew well that Jesus way was “the way of mercy and reinstatement.” 296 It was out of the desire for a practical means of reinstatement that the early penitential practices developed.

If Jesus’ way is the way of reinstatement, how do we reconcile the indissolubility of marriage with the message of mercy captured by the Pontiff’s statement that “No one can be condemned forever for that is not the way of the Gospel!” 297 The doctrine of indissolubility seems to be in a conflict with the belief in the potential of infinite forgiveness. Pope Francis is eloquent in his deep desire to reconcile the demands of these views with pastoral concern and mercy. A mercy he calls “unmerited, unconditional and gratuitous.”297 His pastoral solution in this merciful path is mature Christian discernment: discernment which requires humility and the profound desire to do God’s will. Sincere, mature discernment does not seek the guidance of the Spirit in the hope that one’s desire will be met, but in the hope that God’s divine desire will be known. It requires a “relinquishment of self-will” that is difficult in the best of circumstances.

Recognizing the influence of such concrete factors, we can add that individual con science needs to be better incorporated into the Church’s praxis in certain situations which do not objectively embody our understanding of marriage. Naturally, every effort should be made to encourage the development of an enlightened conscience, formed and guided by the responsible and serious discernment of one’s pastor, and to encourage an ever greater trust in God’s grace. Yet conscience can do more than recognize that a given situation does not correspond objectively to the overall demands of the Gospel. It can also recognize with sincerity and honesty what for now is the most generous response which can be given to God,andcome to see with a certain moral security that it is what God himself is asking amid the concrete complexity of one’s limits, while yet not fully the objective ideal 303

This reflects an air of optimism that may or may not be borne out in experience. Surely there will be discernment that takes place in less than perfect circumstances. Just as one is limited by the complexity of life’s circumstances, one will be limited by one’s ability to act in true humility and surrender. Ultimate honesty on the part of the couple and the pastor is necessary and required for effective discernment. Pope Francis has deep hope and confidence in this solution.[2]

This pastoral methodology emphasizing mercy and discernment has the goal of integrating those in “irregular situations” into the active life of the Church, the lex vivendi. Whether these pastoral changes will effect evolution in the official doctrine of the Church as regards marriage is doubtful. The Pope has declared that even he does not have that authority. Bishops in Germany have written that they see this document as approval of restored Holy Communion for those in “irregular situations.” Bishops in Poland strongly disagree. Thus, even among the magisterium there are differences in perspective. What will it mean for the Church if the doctrine remains as written, but the pastoral practice evolves to reflect a completely different reality? Time will tell.

The Pope’s counsel will be a key factor in encouraging or moderating what transpires in the future and the effect that his vision has on the lived experience of the Church. It is hard to turn back change. As he challenges his flock to rely on the mercy of the Lord and the guidance of the Holy Spirit in the case of “irregular situations,” the faithful are encouraged not to judge, but to see with the merciful eyes of their Savior. May the lex vivendi continually evolve toward the lex credendi, as married couples journey toward the end of time when prayer, belief, and life will come to their ultimate fulfillment in Christ.

[1] Kevin W. Irwin, Context and Text: Method in Liturgical Theology (Collegeville: Liturgical Press, 1994), 3-6.

[2] Something that is less than completely clear in the discussion of discernment is whether or not the discernment is only to discover how the couple can better live up to the ideal of the Church. Is it also to determine whether the Church can meet the couple where they are, given that we are not to condemn anyone forever? Footnote #351 mentions the possibility of return to sacraments.