What is a “couple”?

In my recent article on the controversy over Fiducia Supplicans, I noted three problems with the document’s qualified permission of blessings for “couples” of a same-sex or other “irregular” kind.  First, the document is not consistent with the Vatican’s 2021 statement on the subject, which prohibited such blessings, nor consistent even with itself.  Second, its incoherence makes abuses of its permission inevitable, despite the qualifications.  Third, the implicature carried by the act of issuing this permission “sends the message” that the Church in some way approves of such couples, even if this message was not intended.  In an interview with The Pillar, Cardinal Fernández addresses the controversy, but unfortunately, his remarks exacerbate rather than resolve the problems.

The scandal of Fiducia Supplicans

By now many readers of this blog will likely have heard about Fiducia Supplicans and the worldwide controversy it has generated, which may end up being even more bitter and momentous than the many other controversies sparked over the last decade by the words and actions of Pope Francis.  The Declaration, issued by the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith (DDF) under its new Prefect Cardinal Víctor Manuel Fernández, for the first time allows for “the possibility of blessings for couples in irregular situations and for couples of the same sex.”  This revises the statement on the matter issued in 2021 under Fernández’s predecessor Cardinal Ladaria, which reaffirmed the Church’s traditional teaching that “it is not licit to impart a blessing on relationships, or partnerships, even stable, that involve sexual activity outside of marriage… as is the case of the unions between persons of the same sex.”

The Aristotelian proof on Within Reason

Some time back, Alex O’Connor and I recorded a discussion of the Aristotelian argument from motion for the existence of God, for his Within Reason podcast.  The episode is now available on YouTube.

On Vallier, Vermeule, and straw men (Updated)

Over at his Substack, Kevin Vallier responds to my recent review at The Josias of his book All the Kingdoms of the World.  Vallier claims that I “mislead the reader” vis-à-vis his characterization of the views of Adrian Vermeule.  In particular, says Vallier, “Feser… makes several claims that make it sound as if I think Vermeule endorses violence and authoritarianism.  Feser does note at one point that I say Vermeule does not want coercion.  But that leaves the impression that I only say this in passing.”  He then cites five remarks from his book that he says show that he clearly acknowledges that Vermeule does not endorse violence.

Contra Vallier on integralism

Over at The Josias, I critique Kevin Vallier’s new book All the Kingdoms of the World: On Radical Religious Alternatives to Liberalism.