The conference by Cardinal Víctor Manuel Fernández on “contextual theology” raises important theological and ecclesiological questions, especially regarding the interpretation of the Notification issued in 2006 by the then Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith on the works of Jon Sobrino, under the authority of the then Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger.
Although Cardinal Fernández seeks to portray the Notification as excessively restrictive or disconnected from Latin American pastoral reality, a careful reading of the document shows precisely the opposite: the Congregation’s central concern was not to deny the importance of the poor, of historical experience, or of cultural context, but to preserve the objective primacy of divine Revelation over any sociological, political, or existential mediation.
The fundamental issue was never whether the poor possess theological significance. The Catholic tradition has always recognized this. The Gospel itself places the poor at the center of Christ’s mission. The Church’s social doctrine, especially from Pope Leo XIII to Pope Leo XIV, constantly reaffirms the preferential option for the poor.
The problem identified by the Congregation concerned a methodological inversion: when the historical experience of the poor ceases to be an object illuminated by Revelation and instead becomes the determining hermeneutical principle of Christological faith itself.
The 2006 Notification correctly insisted that “the fundamental theological locus is solely the faith of the Church.” This statement does not exclude historical reality but recalls a classic principle of Catholic theology: divine Revelation ontologically precedes all human experience. The faith of the Church does not arise from historical experience; rather, historical experience must be judged, illuminated, and purified by the Revelation received from the Apostles.
On this point, the Congregation’s position finds solid grounding in the Dogmatic Constitution Dei Verbum, which teaches that the deposit of faith was entrusted to the Church and transmitted apostolically. Theology does not create Revelation from human experience; it deepens the understanding of the Revelation already given by God in Christ.
Cardinal Fernández cites the instruction Libertatis Conscientia to argue that the Congregation had previously admitted a theology “starting from a particular experience.” However, such an interpretation requires precision.
The 1986 instruction legitimately recognizes that concrete historical experiences can help to make explicit aspects of the Word of God that have not yet been fully perceived. Nevertheless, this does not mean granting historical experience the status of a constitutive norm of faith. The document itself insists that all reflection must remain rigorously subordinate to Revelation, the Magisterium, and apostolic tradition.
There is, therefore, a decisive difference between:
- a theology illuminated by historical experience;
- and a theology whose normativity arises from historical experience.
The Congregation rejected the second hypothesis.
This point is particularly important because certain currents of liberation theology ended up absorbing Marxist categories of historical analysis, in which social praxis tends to become the criterion of theological truth. It was precisely against this risk that the Congregation intervened repeatedly in the documents Libertatis Nuntius and Libertatis Conscientia.
Furthermore, Cardinal Fernández’s reference to Benedict XVI’s phrase — “whoever closes his eyes to his neighbor also becomes blind to God” — does not contradict the position of the Notification. On the contrary: Benedict XVI never claimed that human suffering could replace or relativize the revealed foundation of faith. Throughout his theological work, Ratzinger vigorously insisted on the priority of the Logos over praxis, of Revelation over experience, and of apostolic faith over transient sociological constructs.
Also noteworthy is the fact that Fernández himself acknowledges that he later needed to reformulate his positions, explicitly reaffirming that the faith of the Church is “the most solid and profound foundation” for seeing the poor as God sees them. This correction aligns precisely with what the Congregation sought to safeguard from the beginning.
In summary, the Notification on Jon Sobrino did not represent a rejection of the preferential option for the poor, nor a denial of the historical dimension of theology. Its aim was to protect the integrity of Catholic Christology against the risk of subordinating the mystery of Christ to variable historical categories.
The Catholic tradition has always recognized that the poor evangelize the Church, challenge its conscience, and manifest in a privileged way the suffering face of Christ. However, they do not replace apostolic Revelation as the constitutive foundation of faith. The Church contemplates Christ in the poor precisely because it first received Him in the Revelation transmitted by the Apostles.
Separating the option for the poor from the priority of Revelation inevitably leads to a sociological reduction of Christianity. On the contrary, when the poor are viewed in the light of apostolic faith, charity and social justice find their true supernatural and Christological foundation.
Note: Articles published as Tribuna express the opinion of their authors and do not necessarily represent the editorial line of Infovaticana, which offers this space as a forum for reflection and dialogue.