LifeSiteNews interview on the ‘Death Penalty’ address of Pope Francis with Dr. Claudio
Pierantoni, Professor of Medieval Philosophy at the University of Chile.
October 20, 2017
Read report here: Scholars raise concerns over Pope Francis remarks on how doctrine
develops
LifeSiteNews: Can there ever be a "new understanding" of Christian truth that is
contrary to a previous understanding?
Pierantoni: Definitely not: if the principle of noncontradiction is not respected, Christian
truth would not be “true” in any rationally verifiable sense. Of course there can be
contradictions which are only apparent because they refer to different aspects: in that
case, it must be clearly stated to which different aspects the apparently contradictory
statement refer. For example, I can say that a man is both black and white: but I must
specify that he is black as to his skin, but has white teeth. I can say that the Pope is
both fallible and infallible, but then I must specify under which conditions he is infallible.
LifeSiteNews: What is the deposit of faith?
Pierantoni: The word “deposit” has here a juridical meaning: it is a metaphor taken from
a juridical technical term. To make a deposit, legally speaking, means an agreement by
which the person who receives the thing deposited must faithfully keep it and return and
deliver (tradere, traditio) exactly the same thing when asked. So, when the New
Testament refers to this concept (e.g. I Tim 6,20: ”Timothy, guard what has been
entrusted to you (depositum custodi). Avoid the profane chatter and contradictions
(antithéseis) of what is falsely called knowledge (pseudonymou gnóseos)” it stresses
precisely the point of guarding faithfully its content. But, because what is to be guarded
here is not something material, but it is a set of intelligible propositions, the first and
most important enemy to be avoided is precisely contradiction to the content of the
deposit. Otherwise, we fall into a “false science” (pseudónymos gnosis). The self-called
“gnosis” (which modern historians mostly call “gnosticism”) was in fact already a
movement of thought that tried to introduce in the deposit of Faith meanings contrary to
the original ones, appealing to “secret revelations”.
LifeSiteNews: Is the deposit of faith something static, or can it be added to?
Pierantoni: The deposit of Faith is in itself perfect and definitive. So, nothing can really
be added to it. What the Church does is to clarify and make explicit its contents through
the Magisterium. But it must be a clarification of what is already there. That’s why, in
Christian tradition, “novelty” is practically a synonym of “heresy”. It is interesting to note
that in his quotation of the classical passage by Vincent of Lérins (Commonitorium,

 23.9: PL 50) about the “development” of doctrine, the Pope mentions only the first part
of the sentence:
“In like manner, it behooves Christian doctrine to follow the same laws of progress, so
as to be consolidated by years, enlarged by time, refined by age…”.
But the passage goes on:
“…and yet, withal, to continue uncorrupt and unadulterated, complete and perfect in all
the measurement of its parts, and, so to speak, in all its proper members and senses,
admitting no change, no waste of its distinctive property, no variation in its limits”.
Therefore it is problematic to state that “the Word of God is a dynamic reality, always
alive, that progresses and grows”. We, of course, all agree that the Word of God is
“always alive”, and also “dynamic”, if this is taken in the sense of “powerful”. But what is
in itself perfect –and the Word of God certainly is- obviously cannot “progress” nor
“grow”. We may note here an implicit equivalence between “alive and dynamic” on the
one hand, and “progress and growth” on the other. But this equivalence is fallacious.
The Word of God cannot “grow”, for it is perfect, and was given to us in Christ once and
for all. What progresses and grows is our understanding of it. And, this cannot be in
contradiction with past understanding, otherwise, it would be false that the Church as a
whole is faithful and infallible in bearing testimony to the Word of God.
LifeSiteNews: What is doctrine?
Pierantoni: Doctrine is a set of statements rationally ordered and connected with one
another. The Greek Fathers used the word “akolouthía” (from the same stem as the
liturgical word acolyte, “he who follows”) to express the fundamental importance of
consistency and harmony among the different statements of Christian doctrine. The true
elements of Christian doctrine are handed down from Christ himself through the
Apostolic Succession.
LifeSiteNews: How does doctrine genuinely develop? Examples?
Pierantoni: It genuinely develops when a truth that was already there is made explicit in
a further statement, without adding or subtracting anything to or from the original truth.
For example, when the Creed of Nicea- Constantinople stated that in God there is only
one Substance (Ousía) but three Persons (Hypostáseis), it used technical Greek
philosophical terms, that are not used in the Holy Scripture. So it needed a hard and
long work and a solid argumentation to really make clear that these were the best-suited
words to express the truth of what the Bible already says about the unity of God and
that Jesus reveals to us through his words about his relation to the Father and to the
Holy Spirit.

 LifeSiteNews: Is it true that doctrine cannot be tied to an interpretation that is
immutable?
Pierantoni: If the interpretation you mention is part of the Magisterium, that is, it has
what is required for it to be part of the Magisterium, for example, an interpretation of a
biblical passage that is held unanimously or by the great majority of the Church Fathers,
we call it a “traditional” interpretation, not because each Father of himself has a kind of
infallible authority, but because as a whole they stand as a testimony of a doctrine that
the Church as a body has always believed. Once a doctrine has so reached the status
of an infallible statement, it is held as “true” in the strict sense, and truth is, as such,
necessarily immutable.
So, when the Pope says that something is supposedly “against the Gospel”, we have
the right to ask what Tradition says about this topic. In fact, he limits himself to saying,
(1) on a natural philosophical ground that the death penalty is generically against
“human dignity”, and (2) it is contrary to the Gospel because “life is always sacred in the
eyes of the Creator, and God is the only true judge”.
Now that there exists a “human dignity” and that “human life is sacred”, and that “God
is the only judge” are truths that are, of course, not denied by the Tradition which
supports the death penalty: in fact, the same Tradition gives arguments that show that it
doesn’t contradict these truths (see for example Feser’s recent book here.)
So these arguments should be accurately analyzed and responded, not superficially
liquidated as “a mere memory of a historical teaching”. I think this statement, in
particular, betrays a basic attitude that considers the truths contained in Christian
doctrine just as “historical teaching” without taking the trouble of distinguishing what has
the characteristics of “infallible teaching”, and therefore cannot by definition, be
considered as a “mere memory”, but is clearly something always true.
LifeSiteNews: So, do you think we have here a problematic statement?
Pierantoni: Yes, I think that we have here a double problem: in rational terms, to
produce an argument to disprove something which was previously considered as
proved, one must take the trouble to show why the specific reasons given for it don’t
hold. It is not enough to state some general principle we all accept and then pretend
that from it necessarily follow the consequences I wish. And, in theological terms, one
must show how it is that a doctrine unanimously subscribed by the whole Church for two
millennia is not to be taken as infallible.
In short, the foundations Pope Francis here offers for his statement, both theologically
and philosophically, are extremely superficial. No student of theology or philosophy at a
basic level would give credit to this statement by the mere appeal to such general
principles. Once more, he seems to be asking us to believe what he says just “because
he is the Pope”.

 LifeSiteNews: What do you think is really going on here when you read between
the Pope’s lines?
Pierantoni: My basic impression is that a fundamentally rhetorical technique is being
used here. There is a steady and continuous reference to “progress”, “harmonic
development” and to “inspiration from the Holy Spirit”, together with an assurance that
we don’t have here “any change of doctrine”, but without a rational explanation of why
and how a contradictory statement can be “harmonized” with a pre-existing truth. He
says: “Tradition is a living reality and only a partial vision can think of the deposit of
Faith as something static”. I observe that certainly, Tradition is a living reality that can
progress in the clarity with which it expresses the depositum fidei. But “Tradition”, strictly
speaking, is not the same as the “Deposit of Faith.” The latter is what cannot change,
nor progress, nor grow, because it is the immutable Word of God, given once and for all.
In this sense, we must not fear to say it is “static”. It is precisely that which stays, that
which doesn’t pass away. As Jesus says, “Heaven and earth will pass away, but my
words will not pass away” (Matt. 24,35).