How does Leo compare to John Paul II? Was Pius XI's "Social Justice" terminology "problematic"? Did John Paul II correct Leo XIII's encyclical with ambiguous Lockean rights language while adopting non-Thomistic Kantian-like ideas?
Pope Leo praises Francis’ Amoris Laetitia, asks for ‘courage to persevere on this path’
[https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/pope-leo-praises-francis-amoris-laetitia-asks-for-courage-to-persevere-on-this-path/]
Google AI:| Feature | Pope John Paul II | Pope Leo XIV |
|---|---|---|
| Primary Document | Familiaris Consortio (1981), Paragraph 84 | Amoris Laetitia (2016) via 2026 Endorsement |
| Core Stance | Strictly barred from Holy Communion unless living in complete continence. | Permitted in certain cases following pastoral accompaniment and discernment. |
Fr. Le Floch, superior of the French Seminary in Rome, announced in 1926:
The heresy which is now being born will become the most dangerous of all; the exaggeration of the respect due to the pope and the illegitimate extension of his infallibility."
One of his students was none other than the future, Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre. [https://sspx.org/en/clear-ideas-popes-infallible-magisterium-30434]
Douglas Kries, a professor of philosophy at Gonzaga University, gave an important overview of how the prominent political philosopher Fr. Ernest Fortin examined Pope John Paul II's 1991 encyclical which apparently corrected Pope Leo XIII's ambiguous Lockean rights language. But he says that John Paul unfortunately seemingly fall into confused ambiguities and adopted "nonteleological personalism... [which was] something like Kantian human rights":
The confused scholars... are Taparelli d'Azegolio and Matteo Liberatore, who, lacking familiarity with medieval theories of property, unwittingly adopted the position of John Locke... Because the authors of the encyclical had relied, according to Fortin, upon Locke, he mentions Locke in his thesis statement in the essay itself. However, he turns back to Hobbes...
... Fortin again quotes chapter 14 of Rerum Novarum and argues, quote, "What distinguishes the new notions from the old is not the understanding of rights as powers, but the concentration on rights rather than duties, or law as absolute moral phenomenon." He continues, "I do not wish to imply that Hobbes' view of morality is the one that Rerum is trying to pass off as authentic Catholic doctrine", but it certainly seems that is exactly what Fortin is doing...
... Fortin comments that with communism collapsing, John Paul gently resolved the excesses of Rerum Novarum, at least in respect to sacred and inviolable rights of property... But the basic problem with Fortin's interpretation is that the 1991 encyclical abandons Thomism and any other form of theological thought in favor of nonteleogical personalism. John Paul winds up with something like Kantian human rights and suggests the gist as Leo's letter seemed unwittingly to follow the times rather than address from a higher standpoint, so does John Paul. Why is one led by Fortin to wonder, cannot the Church herself get clear on what her allegiances lie? (Leo Strauss and his Catholic Readers, Pages 131-132)
Moreover, Fr. Fortin shows that the first pope to use the "problematic" ambiguous term "social justice" was Pope Pius XI. He was also sadly the pope of the Cristero "Mexican Massacre" and "fell under the influence of the progressives" according Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre.
Fortin suggests that this term came in some sense from Jean-Jacques Rousseau who said we will be "forced to be free" by the state:
The notion of social justice is itself problematic for a variety of reasons, not the least troublesome of which is that no one has yet to be able to find it with any degree of precision. The first author to use the term is thought to be the Roman Catholic theologian Taparelli d' Azeglio, who devoted a chapter in his theological essay on natural rights, based on facts.... The oddity of this in this instance is that Taparelli himself showed no awareness of the novelty of the expression and seemed to have assumed that its meaning was self-evident, something which could hardly have happened if the complex ideas associated had not already been part of the intellectual landscape of that period...
... The question was taken up by numerous theologians and social theorists, including the members of the Freiburg Union, whose discussion over a ten years period in 1980 supplied the background for Leo XIII's Rerum Novarum, to which the three hitherto known forms of justice, legal, distributive, and commutative, did social justice correspond, or if it did not correspond to any of them, in what way was it different? The opinions were different, so scholars opted for legal justice and other distributive justice, but not without some hesitations, since the use of the adjective social to qualify a virtue that is preeminent social, to begin with, evoke a different set of connotations. The hesitation were fully justified. As nearly as I can make out, social justice, encountered distinction to either legal or distributive justice, does not refer to any special disposition of the soul, and hence cannot properly be regarded as a virtue. Its subject is not the individual being, but a mysterious society named "X", which is said to be unintentionally responsible for the conditions of its members, and in particular for the lot of the poor among them. It makes complete sense only in the context of the new political theories of the seventeenth century, and the thrust of which was to shift the focus of attention from virtue or social character to the reordering of our social structures in such a way as to ensure the security and freedom of the atomic individuals who chose to enter society and accept and remain in it for that reason and that reason alone. As such, it is at peace with the modern rights theory, which is concerned only with the perfection of the social order, as distinguished from that of the individual. Yet it goes beyond the early modern view in that it seeks to equalize social conditions as much as possible, with an eye for guaranteeing the freedom of individuals to promote equity required for its exercise...
... Rousseau's egalitarian scheme and politics of compassion go hand in hand with it. It is thus best understood as part of an all-out endeavor to ground politics in something more fundamental than the desire for self-preservation, namely freedom, or in more recent parlance, the sacredness of the individual qua individual. Rousseau himself never used this expression, "social justice", but it is not unreasonable to think that he prepared the ground for it in his radical critique of civil society and his rearticulation of virtually all the fundamental problems in terms of the distinction between nature and history, as opposed to the classic distinction between body and soul...
... If society's and its action structures are the primary cause of corruption of human beings and the evil attendant upon it, they must be changed. Social reform takes precedence over personal reform. It constitutes the first and perhaps the most moral imperative: better institutions will give us better individuals, not vice versa. Under such circumstances, the premodern emphasis on education and moral character as true cause of happiness of both the individual and community would itself be laid in sight. The only true evil is social evil. As such sin is social sin. (Classical Christianity and the Political Order: Reflections on the Theologico-Political Problem by Ernest L. Fortin, Pages 233-235)
Notes:
1. "Pius XI used to recommend the study of Taparelli’s works in conversations with his friends and colleague." [https://isi.org/the-origins-of-social-justice/]
2. Monsignor Joseph Clifford Fenton was the editor of the American Ecclesiastical Review, served as a peritus for Cardinal Ottaviani at the Second Vatican Council and secretary of the Catholic Theological Society of America. Monsignor Fenton is quoted from his diaries by author David A. Wemhoff in his book, "John Courtney Murray, Time/Life and the American Proposition: How the CIA's Doctrinal Warfare Program Changed the Catholic Church" saying that Pope Pius XII and Pope Pius XI apparently held some questionable "opinions as a personal theologian[s]":
"As far as I can make out at the moment, the contentions of Lieber are true, even if his statements, as I explained in note, are scandalous as a betrayal of trust. Apparently, the Pope, as a private theologian, does approve of Murray, or at least is not unsympathetic with him. But this is not a doctrine which he attempts to teach or support, even in his capacity as a private theologian. On the other hand, the one authoritative statement which has come from him has upheld the Ottaviani thesis. There is a parallel in the case of Pius XI. According to Yele, an old rector, the old man held some weird opinions as a personal theologian. The Pius XII case seems to be a case in which the divine protection of Catholic doctrine has become, for all intents and purposes, visible." (Pages 461-462 from Fenton Disries, "Entry June 12, 1954, "Ninth Trip to Rome." 112-116)
3. Google AI: The debate over "structures of sin" highlights a major shift in how the modern papacy connects individual morality to global systems. Pope John Paul II used structural language but strictly tethered it to individual accountability to avoid the pitfalls of collective guilt. In contrast, Pope Francis expanded structural sin into a broader, prophetic critique that moves away from tight, bounded definitions of personal culpability. [1, 2, 3]
- John Paul II (Strictly Subordinate): In his 1987 encyclical Sollicitudo Rei Socialis (On Social Concern), John Paul II introduced the phrase "structures of sin." However, he explicitly stated that these structures are "the expression and effect of personal sins." He insisted that a structure cannot sin, feel guilt, or seek forgiveness on its own. For him, systems are merely mirrors of the human heart. [1, 2, 3]
- Pope Francis (Prophetic and Multivalent): Influenced by Argentine Theology of the People, Francis treats structural sin not just as a byproduct of individual choices, but as an independent, toxic environment. In encyclicals like Fratelli Tutti and Laudato Si’, structures—like the global financial system or consumer culture—act as forces that actively shape, trap, and corrupt human behavior. [1, 2, 3]
| Attribute | Pope John Paul II | Pope Francis |
|---|---|---|
| Root Cause of Structural Sin | Specific personal sins, mainly the "all-consuming desire for profit" and the "thirst for power." | Pervasive, global ideologies like the "throwaway culture" and technocratic capitalism. |
| Who is Responsible? | Bounded Culpability: Only those who introduce, strongly support, or fail to modify the structures when they have the direct power to do so. | Universal Complicity: Anyone who benefits from, participates in, or silently tolerates an unjust global economy. |
| The Nature of Guilt | Legal and moral precision; firmly rooted in individual human actions. | Diffuse and collective; an ongoing state of social and ecological blindness. |
- John Paul II (The Confessional): Because John Paul II believed structures are rooted in specific personal choices, the primary remedy is traditional: individual moral conversion and the Sacrament of Reconciliation. If you want to fix an unjust system, you must first convert the individual hearts of the people running it.
- Pope Francis (Structural Disruption): Francis places a heavy emphasis on social and political action. While personal conversion matters to him, he argues that waiting for every individual heart to change takes too long while the poor suffer. He calls for immediate structural disruption—changing laws, changing economic policies, and dismantling exploitative institutions alongside spiritual renewal. [1]
4.
Abp Lefebvre on Mexican Massacre because of the Cristeros' "Rash Obedience" to "Pope Pius XI...influence[d]...[by] Progressives": "[S]alvation of souls—over blind submission"
Mexico, 1931: The Vatican and the “just war”
Is it right for a Christian to take up arms against a government that persecutes the Church? Two years before the end of the Cristera War in Mexico, Cardinals Pacelli, Gasparri, and Boggiani discussed the subject at the Secretary of State
"Aquinas, and the whole theological tradition insist that laws which harm the common good should not be obeyed." - Rash Obedience: a Virtue in a time of Crisis, Joseph Shaw, PhD [https://onepeterfive.com/obedience-disobedience-rash/]
Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre in a 1982 conference gave a summation of the Catholic Mexican disaster that happened apparently because of the Cristeros' "Rash Obedience" to "Pope Pius XI himself fell under the influence of the progressives":
"Pope Pius XI [who] himself fell under the influence of the progressives who were already present in Rome. For we see a distinct difference from the Popes before and after. But nevertheless Pope Pius XI at the same time wrote some magnificent encyclicals. He was not a liberal. “Divini Redemptoris,” his encyclical against Communism was magnificent. So also was his encyclical on Christ the King, which established the feast of Christ The King and proclaimed the Social Kingship of Our Lord Jesus Christ. His encyclical on Christian Education is absolutely admirable and remains today a fundamental document for those who defend Catholic schools."
"If on the level of doctrine Pope Pius XI was an admirable man, he was weak in the order of practical action. He was easily influenced. It is thus that he was very strongly influenced at the time of the Mexican Civil War and gave the Cristeros, who were in the process of defending the Catholic religion and fighting for Christ the King, the order to have confidence in the government and to put down their arms. As soon as they had put down their arms they were all massacred. This horrifying massacre is still remembered today in Mexico. Pope Pius XI placed confidence in the government who deceived him. Afterwards, he was visibly very upset. He could not imagine how a government, which had promised to treat with honor those who defended their Faith, could have then gone on to massacre them. Thus thousands of Mexicans were killed on account of their Faith." (Christian Order June-July 2023, page 42)
I ask all The Catholic Monitor readers to also pray for the end of this war. Watch "Trump Calls Putin To Get Iran War Offramp! w/ Scott Ritter" on YouTube: ...Read more Please Pray for Trump to end the Iran War: Watch "Trump Calls Putin To Get Iran War Offramp! w/ Scott Ritter" on YouTubeFranklin & Graham calls on Christians to pray for 'end to the bloodshed' ahead of Trump-Putin summit...7mo
|
Conclave Notes:
-- Open letter urges Pope Leo XIV to correct ‘scandalous incoherence’ in Amoris Laetitia...[Wow! Even notorious Popesplainer Fr.] Harrison warns that Pope Francis taught a ‘dangerous self-contradiction’ on Communion for the divorced and ‘remarried,’ petitioning Pope Leo to correct the record. [https://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2025/08/open-letter-urges-pope-leo-xiv-to.html]
-- Are the Cardinals who will participate in the upcoming conclave authentically appointed & morally justified in voting, or will the shadow of Francis's possible illegitimacy cast itself over the next papacy? [https://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2025/04/are-cardinals-who-will-participate-in.html]
-- 5 Dubia Questions for 1P5's Steve Skojec & All faithful Catholics especially Francis is definitely Pope Cardinals, Bishops & pundits [https://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2019/06/5-dubia-questions-for-steve-skojec.html]
Francis Notes:
l– Doctor of the Church St. Francis de Sales totally confirmed beyond any doubt the possibility of a heretical pope and what must be done by the Church in such a situation:
“[T]he Pope… WHEN he is EXPLICITLY a heretic, he falls ipso facto from his dignity and out of the Church, and the Church MUST either deprive him, or, as some say, declare him deprived, of his Apostolic See.”
(The Catholic Controversy, by St. Francis de Sales, Pages 305-306)
Saint Robert Bellarmine, also, said “the Pope heretic is not deposed ipso facto, but must be declared deposed by the Church.”
[https://archive.org/stream/SilveiraImplicationsOfNewMissaeAndHereticPopes/Silveira%20Implications%20of%20New%20Missae%20and%20Heretic%20Popes_djvu.txt]
– “If Francis is a Heretic, What should Canonically happen to him?”: http://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2020/12/if-francis-is-heretic-what-should.html
– “Could Francis be a Antipope even though the Majority of Cardinals claim he is Pope?”: http://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2019/03/could-francis-be-antipope-even-though.html
– If Francis betrays Benedict XVI & the”Roman Rite Communities” like he betrayed the Chinese Catholics we must respond like St. Athanasius, the Saintly English Bishop Robert Grosseteste & “Eminent Canonists and Theologians” by “Resist[ing]” him: https://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2021/12/if-francis-betrays-benedict-xvi.html
– LifeSiteNews, “Confusion explodes as Pope Francis throws magisterial weight behind communion for adulterers,” December 4, 2017:
The AAS guidelines explicitly allows “sexually active adulterous couples facing ‘complex circumstances’ to ‘access the sacraments of Reconciliation and the Eucharist.'”
– On February 2018, in Rorate Caeli, Catholic theologian Dr. John Lamont:
“The AAS statement… establishes that Pope Francis in Amoris Laetitia has affirmed propositions that are heretical in the strict sense.”
– On December 2, 2017, Bishop Rene Gracida:
“Francis’ heterodoxy is now official. He has published his letter to the Argentina bishops in Acta Apostlica Series making those letters magisterial documents.”
Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church by the bishops by the grace of God.
Election Notes:
– Intel Cryptanalyst-Mathematician on Biden Steal: “212Million Registered Voters & 66.2% Voting,140.344 M Voted…Trump got 74 M, that leaves only 66.344 M for Biden” [http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2020/12/intel-cryptanalyst-mathematician-on.html?m=1]
– Will US be Venezuela?: Ex-CIA Official told Epoch Times “Chávez started to Focus on [Smartmatic] Voting Machines to Ensure Victory as early as 2003”: http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2020/12/will-us-be-venezuela-ex-cia-official.html
– Tucker Carlson’s Conservatism Inc. Biden Steal Betrayal is explained by “One of the Greatest Columns ever Written” according to Rush: http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2021/01/tucker-carlsons-conservatism-inc-biden.html?m=1
– A Hour which will Live in Infamy: 10:01pm November 3, 2020:
http://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2021/01/a-hour-which-will-live-in-infamy-1001pm.html?m=1
What is needed right now to save America from those who would destroy our God given rights is to pray at home or in church and if called to even go to outdoor prayer rallies in every town and city across the United States for God to pour out His grace on our country to save us from those who would use a Reichstag Fire-like incident to destroy our civil liberties. [Is the [J6] DC Capitol Incident Comparable to the Nazi Reichstag Fire Incident where the German People Lost their Civil Liberties?: http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2021/01/is-dc-capital-incident-comparable-to.html?m=1 and Epoch Times Show Crossroads on Capitol Incident: “Anitfa ‘Agent Provocateurs‘”:
http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2021/01/epoch-times-show-crossroads-on-capital.html?m=1]
Pray an Our Father now for the grace to know God’s Will and to do it.
Pray an Our Father now for America.
Comments