{"id":54504,"date":"2021-02-01T13:44:53","date_gmt":"2021-02-01T17:44:53","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/?p=54504"},"modified":"2021-02-01T14:02:04","modified_gmt":"2021-02-01T18:02:04","slug":"dr-fastiggi-on-amoris-laetitia-pope-francis-aquinas","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2021\/02\/dr-fastiggi-on-amoris-laetitia-pope-francis-aquinas.html","title":{"rendered":"Dr. Fastiggi on Amoris Laetitia, Pope Francis, & Aquinas"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<\/head>

\"\"<\/p>\n

This came about when\u00a0radical Catholic reactionary<\/a> Steven O\u2019Reilly (who thinks the pope is a heretic)\u00a0made a reply<\/a> to me, in an effort to press me to comment further on Amoris Laetitia<\/em><\/a>: Pope Francis\u2019 encyclical from 3-19-16. Previously, yucking it up with fellow pope-basher and advocate of ecclesial defectibility Steve Skojec (who opined that I was \u201cintentionally stupid\u201d) on Twitter, O\u2019Reilly had referred to me\u00a0 as a purveyor of \u201ccrazy labels\u201d and \u201cin denial\u201d and an \u201capologist\u201d only in quotation marks (that is, not at all<\/em>) and (my favorite) a member of the club of \u201cFrancis toadies\u201d. Can I be a \u201cJesus <\/em>toady\u201d too? Sounds about right to me!<\/p>\n

Merriam-Webster<\/em> online defines \u201ctoady\u201d<\/a> as \u201cone who flatters in the hope of gaining favors.\u201d The synonym provided is \u201csycophant\u201d: defined as<\/a> \u201ca\u00a0servile\u00a0self-seeking flatterer.\u201d The obvious problem with this is that I have gotten back only misery and no end of problems, by defending Pope Francis (in everyday terms, I have \u201ccaught hell\u201d), because the fashionable and chic myth and fairy tale today is this false notion that he is a flaming liberal, subversive against the Church, enemy of Catholic moral and theological tradition, and indeed, a heretic.<\/p>\n

So by opposing<\/em> all these lies (and they assuredly, undoubtedly are<\/em> lies, and I can back my assertions up), I somehow gain \u201cfavors\u201d or have any remote \u201chope\u201d of gaining same? My advocacy of what is the plain dogmatic teaching of Vatican I<\/em><\/strong> \u2014 not II \u2014 (that the pope can never even fall<\/em> into heresy, let alone promulgate<\/em> it<\/a>) has certainly harmed<\/em> my apostolate, in terms of followers, contributors, online visibility, etc. I clearly gain nothing by this. I\u2019ve paid a big price. But that\u2019s fine with me. I\u2019m happy to do so. It\u2019s my duty and privilege to do it.<\/p>\n

If anyone<\/em> is gaining favors and self-seeking (and I don\u2019t assert<\/em> this; only rhetorically<\/em> state it), it is the legion of reactionary pope-bashers like Taylor Marshall, Steve Skojec and One Peter Five<\/em>, The Remnant<\/em>, Lifesite<\/em>, Rorate Caeli<\/em>, Peter Kwasniewski et al, ad nauseam<\/em>, who get tons of attention (hits, shares, book sales), and sometimes, tons of money as well (book royalties), for their despicable and harmful efforts. I am simply defending the Holy Father and the institution of the papacy, which I have always thought \u2014 in my 30 + years of Catholic apologetics \u2013, was part and parcel of my field; in fact, obligatory<\/em>.<\/p>\n

I defended Pope St. John Paul II when he was attacked and bashed (and he assuredly was<\/em>), Pope Benedict XVI when he was also trashed (reactionaries now detest him or at least his resignation<\/em>: feeling a bit like jilted lovers), and I defend Pope Francis when he is lied about and slandered as well. And I will defend the next pope who will also<\/em> (mark my words) be lied about. The devil is very active in this respect. He knows who to go after.<\/p>\n

But now all of a sudden doing that is a \u201ccontroversial\u201d thing. I\u2019ve been told in a gossipy, cowardly fashion that \u201cmany\u201d people (of course not mentioned by name) have a \u201clower\u201d opinion of me because I defend the Holy Father and the papacy. That\u2019s how low we have sunk in our pathetic time. So insult away! We\u2019ll see in the end (including on Judgment Day itself) who was on the right side of this. I\u2019m happy to let God be my judge, rather than hundreds of thousands of fawning \u201cfans.\u201d Mere filthy lucre or fame and accolades have never<\/em> been my motivation, and never will<\/em> be.<\/p>\n

Thanks, dear reader, for indulging me and letting me get that<\/em> off of my chest! Despite these rank insults, a few days ago O\u2019Reilly decided he would become serious and try to engage in actual\u00a0dialogue (albeit of an obsessive and \u201cone-note tune\u201d nature) with me. The problem was that I had already reiterated over and over (in my counter-reply<\/a>) that:<\/p>\n

I leave those fine-tuned questions mostly to theologians. . . .\u00a0Fine points are for moral theologians, and neither you nor I are that. . . .\u00a0I stand by everything he [Dr. Fastiggi] argues. He\u2019s a personal friend of mine, and of unimpeachable orthodoxy. . . . Dr. Fastiggi is editor of the revised Denzinger and Ott both. He\u2019s\u00a0the<\/em>\u00a0<\/strong>man for systematic theology, in my opinion.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

In other words, he picked the wrong topic<\/em> to engage with me. I then linked Dr. Robert Fastiggi\u2019s articles defending the theological and moral orthodoxy of\u00a0Amoris Laetitia<\/em>: (one<\/a>\u00a0\/\u00a0two<\/a>\u00a0\/\u00a0three<\/a>\u00a0\/\u00a0four<\/a>).\u00a0Undaunted, O\u2019Reilly kept trying to goad me all the more in his combox underneath it:<\/p>\n

[Y]our \u2018go read Dr. Fastiggi\u2019 is not a sufficient answer. Anyone with common sense can see that. After all, if one were to ask you, a professional apologist, about your opinion of the Petrine Office and the views opposed to it, I assume (and hope) your answer would go beyond simply telling one to \u2018go read Karl Keating\u2019<\/em>\u00a0or \u2018go look at Matthew 16:18, that is all I need to say.\u2019<\/em>\u00a0If that is your approach to honest, good-faith, apologetical questions; my surprise is not that you have written \u201c2,800 papers and 50 books,\u201d it is that you have written any.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

These juvenile tactics don\u2019t work with me. I gave my answer: deferring to a respected theologian. It wasn\u2019t good enough for O\u2019Reilly. That\u2019s his<\/em> problem, not mine. I have no qualms in expressing that I am not sufficiently qualified to delve into the depths of a particular controversial and complex issue, and that it is best left to the expertise of theologians, canonists, and bishops gathered in synod, as it were. But\u00a0Amoris Laetitia<\/em> happens to be a virtual obsession with O\u2019Reilly, by his own report:<\/p>\n

I contented myself with wearing out my local archbishop, pastor, friends and family with my screeds over developments in the Church, especially during these past few years following the issuance of\u00a0Amoris Laetitia<\/em>. (his \u201cAbout\u201d<\/a> page)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Note how he even wore out his own \u201cfamily.\u201d This is the mark of a fanatic, for sure. But apart from his own overly aggressive shortcomings, we understand that there are a lot of folks out there like O\u2019Reilly who think that Amoris Laetitia<\/em> is a terrible, heretical document, that sought to overthrow constant Catholic moral and theological tradition. They\u2019re confused and disheartened, yet they need not be at all<\/em>. We totally disagree with their assessment. There is plenty of clarifying material out there.<\/p>\n

In my own effort to soothe fears and hysteria, I have collected many substantive articles from others, who defend the orthodoxy of the document. A search of my collection of 266 pro-Francis articles<\/a> yields fifteen with \u201cAmoris\u201d in their titles. And there are others in the same collection that deal with the same topic (without \u201cAmoris\u201d in their titles), such as:<\/p>\n

Pope Francis\u2019s New Document on Marriage: 12 Things to Know and Share<\/a>\u00a0(Jimmy Akin,\u00a0National Catholic Register<\/i>, 4-8-16)<\/p>\n

Pope Francis Shatters Reformers\u2019 Dreams with \u2018Modern Family\u2019 Document\u00a0<\/a>(Thomas D. Williams,\u00a0Breitbart<\/em>, 4-8-16)<\/p>\n

Pope Affirms Traditional Marriage<\/a>\u00a0(Bill Donohue,\u00a0Newsmax<\/em>, 4-8-16)<\/p>\n

Pope Francis\u2019s revolution has been cancelled\u00a0<\/a>(Damian Thompson,\u00a0The Spectator<\/em>, 4-8-16)<\/p>\n

Pope Francis on love in the family<\/a>\u00a0(Archbishop Charles J. Chaput,\u00a0CatholicPhilly.com<\/em>, 4-14-16)<\/p>\n

Pope Francis is a social conservative<\/a>\u00a0(Tim Stanley,\u00a0The Telegraph<\/em>, 4-18-16)<\/p>\n

Pope okays Argentine doc on Communion for divorced and remarried<\/a>\u00a0(In\u00e9s San Mart\u00edn,\u00a0Crux<\/em>, 9-12-16)<\/p>\n

What Pope Francis said about Communion for the divorced-and-remarried<\/a>\u00a0(Catholic News Agency<\/em>, 9-13-16)<\/p>\n

Not heretical: Pope Francis\u2019 approval of the Argentine bishops\u2019 policy on invalid marriages<\/a>\u00a0(Dr. Jeff Mirus,\u00a0Catholic Culture<\/em>, 9-15-16)<\/p>\n

Cardinal Sch\u00f6nborn: Pope Francis follows John Paul II\u2019s teaching on communion<\/a>\u00a0(Catholic Herald<\/em>, 4-8-16)<\/p>\n

Recent Comments of Pope Francis Should Help to Quiet Papal Critics\u00a0<\/a>(Robert Fastiggi,\u00a0La Stampa<\/em>\u00a0\/\u00a0Vatican Insider<\/em>, 11-28-17)<\/p>\n

Pastoral Charity is the Key to Pope Francis\u2019s Endorsement of the Buenos Aires Bishops\u2019 Document\u00a0<\/a>(Robert Fastiggi,\u00a0La Stampa<\/em>\u00a0\/\u00a0Vatican Insider<\/em>, 11-28-17)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

So that is at least 27 in-depth articles regarding Amoris Laetitia<\/em> and closely related issues, that I have provided for my readers. But it\u2019s not good enough for Steven O\u2019Reilly. All he appears to care about is my<\/em> opinion. Well, just because I appealed to others more knowledgeable than myself on the issue (which is what I always<\/em> do as an apologist if I feel that others have points to make that are above my pay grade), it doesn\u2019t mean I have completely ignored<\/em> it, either. A perusal of my own collection of my own 184 defenses of Pope Francis<\/a> yields eight relevant articles:<\/p>\n

Amoris Laetitia<\/em>: Pope Francis\u2019 \u201c1968 Moment\u201d<\/a>\u00a0[4-8-16]<\/p>\n

Defenses of Pope Francis\u2019\u00a0Amoris Laetitia<\/em><\/a>\u00a0[4-9-16]<\/p>\n

More Defenses of\u00a0Amoris Laetitia<\/em>\u00a0& Pope Francis\u00a0<\/a>[4-26-16]<\/p>\n

Satan Loves Divisions Re\u00a0Amoris Laetitia<\/em><\/a>\u00a0[5-2-16]<\/p>\n

Dialogue:\u00a0Amoris Laetitia<\/em>: Confusing or No?<\/a>\u00a0[5-3-16]<\/p>\n

Amoris Laetitia<\/em>, \u201cTrads\u201d & Reactionaries<\/a>\u00a0[5-4-16]<\/p>\n

Buzzing, Mosquito-Like Trashers of\u00a0Amoris Laetitia<\/em><\/a>\u00a0[5-6-16]<\/p>\n

Amoris Laetitia<\/em>\u00a0Has\u00a0Already\u00a0<\/em>Been Clarified Many Times, Including by High-Ranking Cardinals<\/a>\u00a0[11-16-16]<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

So now we\u2019re up to 35 articles about Amoris Laetitia<\/em>, hosted or prominently linked on my site, including eight of my own, and Steven O\u2019Reilly is still<\/em> trying to figure out what I believe on the issue, and why? It is a very odd thing. But this is what people do<\/em> when they are obsessed. Nevertheless, in a sincere and charitable attempt to deliver Mr. O\u2019Reilly from his existential misery (and others, too, who are of the same opinion, and read this article), I did contact my good friend, Dr. Robert Fastiggi<\/a>, and he was kind enough to clarify his opinions (and the pope\u2019s as an extra bonus). What follows are his letter to me last night, and accompanying material from then-Cardinal Ratzinger that he sent with it.<\/p>\n

*****<\/p>\n

I thought that I would offer some brief thoughts.<\/div>\n
*<\/div>\n
Steven O\u2019Reilly seems to be on a crusade to show that defenders of\u00a0Amoris Laetitia<\/i>\u00a0hold contradictory positions and, therefore, the Pope cannot be defended. I can only offer my own understanding, and it seems that Mr. O\u2019Reilly is familiar with my articles on the subject. The best interpreter of\u00a0Amoris Laetitia,\u00a0<\/i>however, is Pope Francis himself. In his recent book,\u00a0Let Us Dream, The Path to A Better Future<\/a><\/i>\u00a0(New York: Simon & Schuster, 2020)\u2014written in conversation with Austen Ivereigh\u2013Pope Francis explains how he decided to deal with the question of whether divorced and civilly remarried Catholics could receive Communion ([see] pp. 87-89 in which he discusses his approach).<\/div>\n
*<\/div>\n
He notes that the media tried to make this question the focal point of the Synod on the Family, and it led to some unfortunate divisions among the Synod fathers, which Pope Francis believes manifested\u00a0the influence of the \u201cbad spirit.\u201d\u00a0 The Holy Father then states that \u201cthe Spirit saved us in the end, in a breakthrough at the close of the second (October 2015) meeting of the Synod on the Family. The breakthrough came from those with a deep knowledge of the true moral doctrine of St. Thomas Aquinas, especially Cardinal Christoph\u00a0Sch\u00f6nborn.<\/div>\n
*<\/div>\n
The teaching of Aquinas was his insight that, \u201cbecause of the immense variety of situations and circumstances\u00a0people found themselves in \u2026no general rule could apply in every situation.\u201d This Thomistic insight \u201callowed the synod to agree on the need for a case-by-case discernment.\u201d As Pope\u00a0 Francis explains \u201cthere was no need to change Church law, only how it was applied.\u201d It was a matter of discerning how \u201cGod\u2019s grace was operating in the nitty-gritty of people\u2019s lives.\u201d Thus, there was \u201cneither a tightening nor a loosening of the \u2018rules\u2019 but an application of them that left room for circumstances that didn\u2019t fit neatly into categories.\u201d<\/div>\n
*<\/div>\n
The key texts of Aquinas are cited in the footnotes\u00a0to AL, 304. I had noticed the importance of AL, 304 and the citations of Aquinas before. This is why in my\u00a0Vatican Insider<\/i>\u00a0article on answering the\u00a0dubia<\/i>, I stated that \u201cin principle\u201d divorced and civilly remarried Catholics cannot receive Holy Communion unless they are living in continence. Pope Francis is also aware of the need for \u201cgeneral principles\u201d since\u00a0 they are mentioned by Aquinas in the passage cited, viz.\u00a0Summa theologiae\u00a0<\/i>\u00a0I-II, q. 94, art. 4. Pope Francis is also aware that discernment \u201ccan never prescind from the Gospel demands of truth and charity, as proposed by the Church\u201d (AL, 300). He also insists on the need to avoid \u201cevery occasion of scandal\u201d (AL, 299).<\/div>\n
*<\/div>\n
The approach taken by Pope Francis is very traditional and in perfect harmony with Catholic moral teaching. There must be adherence to the general principles and rules but also discernment of how these rules apply in particular cases. I\u2019ve attached a file showing\u00a0possible cases that might apply to footnote\u00a0351 of AL noted by three Cardinals: Ratzinger, M\u00fcller, and Vallini. [Dave: see \u201cattachment\u201d below]<\/span><\/div>\n
*<\/div>\n
There are other documents of the Magisterium that note the need for discernment of culpability. For example, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, in its 1975 Declaration on Sexual Ethics (Persona Humana<\/i>), states that with regard to homosexuals, \u201ctheir culpability will be judged with prudence\u201d (no. 8). The\u00a0Catechism of the Catholic Church<\/i>, when addressing the sin of masturbation, takes\u00a0note of various factors \u201cthat can lessen, if not even reduce to a minimum, moral culpability\u201d (CCC, 2352).<\/div>\n
*<\/div>\n
In light of what the Holy Father says in \u201cLet US Dream<\/i>,\u201d it\u2019s clear that in\u00a0Amoris Laetiia<\/i>\u00a0there is no change in Catholic moral teaching. Pope Francis simply wishes pastors to handle difficult cases with discernment, which priests do all the time as confessors.\u00a0 He also wishes \u201cevery occasion of scandal\u201d to be avoided.<\/div>\n
*<\/div>\n
To my mind, Catholics who accuse Pope Francis of heresy are guilty of objective\u00a0grave sin and scandal because they are contradicting the teaching of Vatican\u00a0I about the charism of truth and never failing faith enjoyed by the successors of Peter.\u00a0 The Catholics who accuse Pope Francis of heresy, however, might be misled or misinformed. Their culpability must be judged with prudence, discernment, and charity.<\/div>\n
*<\/div>\n
I hope these reflections help.<\/div>\n
*<\/div>\n
***<\/div>\n
*<\/div>\n
Attachment<\/em><\/strong>: Difficult cases possibly intended by Amoris Laetitia<\/em>, footnote 351<\/div>\n
*<\/div>\n
\n

1). From Cardinal Ratzinger\u2019s 1998 essay, \u201cCONCERNING SOME OBJECTIONS TO THE CHURCH\u2019S TEACHING\u00a0ON THE RECEPTION OF HOLY COMMUNION\u00a0BY DIVORCED AND\u00a0REMARRIED MEMBERS OF THE FAITHFUL\u201d<\/p>\n

3 c. Admittedly, it cannot be excluded that mistakes occur in marriage cases. In some parts of\u00a0the Church, well-functioning marriage tribunals still do not exist. Occasionally, such cases last\u00a0an excessive amount of time. Once in a while they conclude with questionable decisions. Here it\u00a0seems that the application of epikeia<\/em> in the internal forum is not automatically excluded from\u00a0the outset. This is implied in the 1994 letter of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, in\u00a0which it was stated that new canonical ways of demonstrating nullity should exclude \u201cas far as\u00a0possible\u201d every divergence from the truth verifiable in the judicial process (cf. No. 9). Some\u00a0theologians are of the opinion that the faithful ought to adhere strictly even in the internal forum\u00a0to juridical decisions which they believe to be false. Others maintain that exceptions are\u00a0possible here in the internal forum, because the juridical forum does not deal with norms of\u00a0divine law, but rather with norms of ecclesiastical law.<\/p>\n

This question, however, demands further\u00a0study and clarification. Admittedly, the conditions for asserting an exception would need to be\u00a0clarified very precisely, in order to avoid arbitrariness and to safeguard the public character of\u00a0marriage, removing it from subjective decisions<\/p>\n

This essay is found in the third part of Cardinal Ratzinger\u2019s Introduction to Volume 17 of the series\u00a0produced by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, entitled \u201cDocumenti e Studi\u201d,\u00a0On the\u00a0<\/em>Pastoral Care of the Divorced and Remarried<\/em>, LEV, Vatican City 1998, pp. 20-29. It\u2019s posted on the Vatican website<\/a> after the 1994 letter of the CDF on this matter.<\/p>\n

2). This same difficult case is mentioned by Cardinal Gerhard M\u00fcller in his introductory essay (Saggio\u00a0introduttivo<\/em>) to Rocco Buttiglione\u2019s book, Risposte amichevoli ai critici di Amoris Laetitia<\/em> (Milano:\u00a0Edizioni Ares, 2017), 23\u201325. With respect to cases in which the nullity of the prior bond is impossible to\u00a0prove, Cardinal M\u00fcller writes:<\/p>\n

If the second bond were valid before God, the marital relations of the two partners would not\u00a0constitute a grave sin but instead a transgression against the public ecclesiastical order for\u00a0having irresponsibly violated the canonical rules and therefore a light sin. This does not obscure\u00a0the truth that relations more uxorio<\/em> with a person of the other sex, who is not the legitimate\u00a0spouse before God, constitute a grave fault against chastity and against the justice owed to the\u00a0proper spouse.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

3). Cardinal Agostino Vallini, the former Prefect of the Apostolic Signatura under St. John Paul II and the\u00a0Vicar of the Archdiocese of Rome, issued some guidelines on Amoris Laetitia<\/em> on Sept. 19. 2016, as the\u00a0Vicar of Pope Francis for the Archdiocese of Rome.\u00a0These guidelines were by means of a relazione\u00a0<\/em>(relation or report) entitled \u201cLa letizia dell\u2019amore\u201d: il cammino delle famiglie a Roma<\/em>\u201d (\u201cThe joy of\u00a0love\u201d: the way of families in Rome\u201d). In his guidelines, Cardinal Vallini refers to footnote 351, and he\u00a0notes that the footnote (in Italian) uses the conditional and reads: \u201cIn certain cases there could (potrebbe<\/em>)\u00a0also be the help of the sacraments.\u201d<\/p>\n

The use of the conditional shows that Pope Francis is not saying that\u00a0divorced and civilly remarried Catholics must be admitted to the sacraments. The Holy Father is only\u00a0noting that they are not excluded from the sacraments in some cases and under certain conditions. What\u00a0are these conditions? Cardinal Vallini mentions the case in which there is moral certitude that the first\u00a0marriage was null but there are no proofs to demonstrate this in a judicial setting. In such a case, the only\u00a0opening to the sacraments would be with a confessor who, at a certain point\u2014in his conscience and after\u00a0much reflection and prayer\u2014must assume responsibility before God and to the penitent and request that\u00a0access to the sacraments take place in a reserved manner (in maniera riservata<\/em>).<\/p>\n

4).The philosopher, Rocco Buttiglione, in his 2017 book, Risposte amichevoli ai critici di Amoris Laetitia\u00a0<\/em>[Friendly responses to the critics of Amoris Laetitia<\/em>], notes that Pope Francis is not admitting the divorced\u00a0and remarried to communion but to confession (p. 68). The confessor must use discernment to decide\u00a0whether to give absolution, which allows the penitent to receive communion.<\/p>\n

Buttiglione\u2014who was a\u00a0friend of St. John Paul II and an expert on the late Pontiff\u2019s thought\u2014recognizes that absolution can only\u00a0be given when there a resolve not to commit a sin that is materially grave (pp. 180\u2013181). The confessor,\u00a0though, must be aware of mitigating factors that might limit the responsibility of the penitent for\u00a0committing acts that are gravely sinful. Buttiglione gives the example of a woman who is in a condition\u00a0of total economic and psychological dependence on her civil partner, and this man imposes sexual\u00a0relations on her against her will (p. 171).<\/p>\n

Here it\u2019s not a matter of judging a sinful act not to be sinful but\u00a0of discerning whether the penitent is fully culpable for the sin. Buttiglione notes: \u201cThis does not imply\u00a0that the unmarried can legitimately engage in sexual acts. The acts are illegitimate, but persons (in some\u00a0cases)\u2014through the absence of full awareness and deliberate consent\u2014can be free from incurring mortal\u00a0sin\u201d (p. 172). For absolution to be given there must be the resolve to leave the situation of sin even if the\u00a0penitent (in the case mentioned) cannot promise to avoid immediately the objective act of sin because\u00a0she\u2019s living in a situation that exposes her to the irresistible temptation to commit the act (p. 172).<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

***<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
Photo credit:<\/strong> cover of book by Pope Francis<\/span> [GoodReads.com<\/em>]<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
***<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n<\/body><\/html>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

This came about when\u00a0radical Catholic reactionary Steven O\u2019Reilly (who thinks the pope is a heretic)\u00a0made a reply to me, in an effort to press me to comment further on Amoris Laetitia: Pope Francis\u2019 encyclical from 3-19-16. Previously, yucking it up with fellow pope-basher and advocate of ecclesial defectibility Steve Skojec (who opined that I was […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2331,"featured_media":54508,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[138],"tags":[2613,2589,2587,1341,4056,12933,2588,2591,1477,365,156,1848,74,2590,4433,12930,1441,12928,896],"class_list":["post-54504","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-papacy-infallibility","tag-amoris-laetitia","tag-annulments","tag-apostolic-exhortation","tag-aquinas","tag-cardinal-ratzinger","tag-catholic-moral-theology","tag-catholics-marriage","tag-catholics-the-family","tag-divorce","tag-holy-communion","tag-pope-francis","tag-pope-bashing","tag-radical-catholic-reactionaries","tag-remarried-catholics","tag-robert-fastiggi","tag-sacramental-practice","tag-st-thomas-aquinas","tag-steven-oreilly","tag-synod-on-the-family"],"yoast_head":"\nDr. Fastiggi on Amoris Laetitia, Pope Francis, & Aquinas Dr. Fastiggi on Amoris Laetitia, Pope Francis, & Aquinas<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"This came about when\u00a0radical Catholic reactionary Steven O'Reilly (who thinks the pope is a heretic)\u00a0made a reply to me, in an effort to press me to Reactionary pope-basher Steven O'Reilly asserts internal contradictions in defenders of Pope Francis & Amoris Laetitia. Orthodox systematic theologian Dr. Robert Fastiggi responds.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2021\/02\/dr-fastiggi-on-amoris-laetitia-pope-francis-aquinas.html\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Dr. Fastiggi on Amoris Laetitia, Pope Francis, & Aquinas Dr. Fastiggi on Amoris Laetitia, Pope Francis, & Aquinas\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"This came about when\u00a0radical Catholic reactionary Steven O'Reilly (who thinks the pope is a heretic)\u00a0made a reply to me, in an effort to press me to Reactionary pope-basher Steven O'Reilly asserts internal contradictions in defenders of Pope Francis & Amoris Laetitia. Orthodox systematic theologian Dr. Robert Fastiggi responds.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2021\/02\/dr-fastiggi-on-amoris-laetitia-pope-francis-aquinas.html\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Biblical Evidence for Catholicism\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:author\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/dave.armstrong.798\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2021-02-01T17:44:53+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2021-02-01T18:02:04+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/572\/2021\/02\/FrancisBook.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"640\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"981\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Dave Armstrong\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Dave Armstrong\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"16 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2021\/02\/dr-fastiggi-on-amoris-laetitia-pope-francis-aquinas.html\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2021\/02\/dr-fastiggi-on-amoris-laetitia-pope-francis-aquinas.html\",\"name\":\"Dr. Fastiggi on Amoris Laetitia, Pope Francis, & Aquinas Dr. Fastiggi on Amoris Laetitia, Pope Francis, & Aquinas\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2021-02-01T17:44:53+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2021-02-01T18:02:04+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/471eaa20e441eca4bb1ea50393cf632e\"},\"description\":\"This came about when\u00a0radical Catholic reactionary Steven O'Reilly (who thinks the pope is a heretic)\u00a0made a reply to me, in an effort to press me to Reactionary pope-basher Steven O'Reilly asserts internal contradictions in defenders of Pope Francis & Amoris Laetitia. Orthodox systematic theologian Dr. Robert Fastiggi responds.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2021\/02\/dr-fastiggi-on-amoris-laetitia-pope-francis-aquinas.html#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2021\/02\/dr-fastiggi-on-amoris-laetitia-pope-francis-aquinas.html\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2021\/02\/dr-fastiggi-on-amoris-laetitia-pope-francis-aquinas.html#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Dr. Fastiggi on Amoris Laetitia, Pope Francis, & Aquinas\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/\",\"name\":\"Biblical Evidence for Catholicism\",\"description\":\"Catholic biblical apologetics\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":\"required name=search_term_string\"}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/471eaa20e441eca4bb1ea50393cf632e\",\"name\":\"Dave Armstrong\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/820e6db89734ae7a9e5dac8d498f5ac7?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/820e6db89734ae7a9e5dac8d498f5ac7?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Dave Armstrong\"},\"description\":\"Dave Armstrong is a Catholic author and apologist, who has been actively proclaiming and defending Christianity since 1981, and Catholicism in particular since 1991 (full-time since December 2001). Formerly a campus missionary, as a Protestant, Dave was received into the Catholic Church in February 1991, by the late, well-known catechist and theologian, Fr. John A. Hardon, S. J. Dave\u2019s articles have appeared in many influential Catholic periodicals, including \\\"This Rock\\\" (now called \\\"Catholic Answers Magazine\\\"), \\\"Envoy Magazine\\\" (Patrick Madrid), \\\"The Catholic Answer,\\\" \\\"The Coming Home Journal,\\\" \\\"Gilbert Magazine\\\" (American Chesterton Society), and \\\"The Latin Mass.\\\" He also writes a featured column for every issue of \\\"The Michigan Catholic\\\": published by the archdiocese of Detroit, and was editor for most of the apologetics tracts published by the St. Paul Street Evangelization apostolate. Dave\u2019s apologetics and writing apostolate was the subject of a feature article in the May 2002 issue of \\\"Envoy Magazine.\\\" He served as the staff moderator at the Internet discussion forum for The Coming Home Network, from 2007-2010. Dave has been interviewed on many nationally syndicated Catholic radio shows, including \\\"Catholic Answers Live\\\" (twice), \\\"Faith and Family Live\\\" (Steve Wood), \\\"Kresta in the Afternoon,\\\" \\\"Son Rise Morning Show,\\\" \\\"Catholic Connection\\\" (Teresa Tomeo), and \\\"The Catholics Next Door.\\\" His large and popular website, \\\"Biblical Evidence for Catholicism,\\\" was online from March 1997 to March 2007, and received the 1998 Catholic Website of the Year award from \\\"Envoy Magazine.\\\" His blog of the same name (now transferred to Patheos), begun in February 2004, contains more than 1,500 papers, at least 500 debates or dialogues, and over 50 distinct \\\"index\\\" web pages. Unsolicited correspondence has indicated many hundreds of conversions (or returns) to the Catholic faith as a result, by God's grace, of these writings. Dave's conversion story was published in the bestselling book \\\"Surprised by Truth\\\" (edited by Patrick Madrid; San Diego: Basilica Press, 1994). Sophia Institute Press has published six of his books: \\\"A Biblical Defense of Catholicism\\\" (Foreword by Fr. John A. Hardon, S. J., 1996 \/ 2003), \\\"The Catholic Verses\\\" (2004), \\\"The One-Minute Apologist\\\" (2007), \\\"Bible Proofs for Catholic Truths\\\" (2009), \\\"The Quotable Newman\\\" (editor: 2012), and \\\"Proving the Catholic Faith is Biblical\\\" (2015). He is co-author (with Dr. Paul Thigpen) of the inserts for \\\"The New Catholic Answer Bible\\\" (Our Sunday Visitor: 2005), and editor for \\\"The Wisdom of Mr. Chesterton: The Very Best Quotes, Quips, and Cracks from the Pen of G. K. Chesterton\\\" (Saint Benedict Press \/ TAN Books: 2009). \\\"100 Biblical Arguments Against Sola Scriptura\\\" was published by Catholic Answers in May 2012. His \\\"Quotable Wesley\\\" compilation was published by (Protestant \/ Wesleyan publisher) Beacon Hill Press in April 2014. Several of his 49 books are bestsellers in their field. Dave maintains a popular personal Facebook page, a Facebook author page, and has a Twitter account as well. He offers almost all of his books in e-book form on his own Biblical Catholicism site (http:\/\/biblicalcatholicism.com\/), at a permanent deep discount: only $2.99 for ePub, mobi, and AZW, and $1.99 for PDF. His writing has been enthusiastically endorsed or recommended by many leading Catholic apologists, authors, and priests, including Dr. Scott Hahn, Fr. Peter M. J. Stravinskas, Marcus Grodi, Patrick Madrid, Steve Ray, Tim Staples, Devin Rose, Mike Aquilina, Al Kresta, Karl Keating, Fr. Dwight Longenecker, Brandon Vogt, Marcellino D'Ambrosio, and Fr. John A. Hardon, S. J. Dave has been happily married to his wife Judy since October 1984. They have three sons and a daughter, and reside in southeast Michigan (metro Detroit).\",\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/biblicalcatholicism.com\/\",\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/dave.armstrong.798\",\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/@LuxVeritatisApologetics\"],\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/author\/davearmstrong\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Dr. Fastiggi on Amoris Laetitia, Pope Francis, & Aquinas Dr. Fastiggi on Amoris Laetitia, Pope Francis, & Aquinas","description":"This came about when\u00a0radical Catholic reactionary Steven O'Reilly (who thinks the pope is a heretic)\u00a0made a reply to me, in an effort to press me to Reactionary pope-basher Steven O'Reilly asserts internal contradictions in defenders of Pope Francis & Amoris Laetitia. Orthodox systematic theologian Dr. Robert Fastiggi responds.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2021\/02\/dr-fastiggi-on-amoris-laetitia-pope-francis-aquinas.html","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Dr. Fastiggi on Amoris Laetitia, Pope Francis, & Aquinas Dr. Fastiggi on Amoris Laetitia, Pope Francis, & Aquinas","og_description":"This came about when\u00a0radical Catholic reactionary Steven O'Reilly (who thinks the pope is a heretic)\u00a0made a reply to me, in an effort to press me to Reactionary pope-basher Steven O'Reilly asserts internal contradictions in defenders of Pope Francis & Amoris Laetitia. Orthodox systematic theologian Dr. Robert Fastiggi responds.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2021\/02\/dr-fastiggi-on-amoris-laetitia-pope-francis-aquinas.html","og_site_name":"Biblical Evidence for Catholicism","article_author":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/dave.armstrong.798","article_published_time":"2021-02-01T17:44:53+00:00","article_modified_time":"2021-02-01T18:02:04+00:00","og_image":[{"width":640,"height":981,"url":"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/572\/2021\/02\/FrancisBook.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Dave Armstrong","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Dave Armstrong","Est. reading time":"16 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2021\/02\/dr-fastiggi-on-amoris-laetitia-pope-francis-aquinas.html","url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2021\/02\/dr-fastiggi-on-amoris-laetitia-pope-francis-aquinas.html","name":"Dr. Fastiggi on Amoris Laetitia, Pope Francis, & Aquinas Dr. Fastiggi on Amoris Laetitia, Pope Francis, & Aquinas","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#website"},"datePublished":"2021-02-01T17:44:53+00:00","dateModified":"2021-02-01T18:02:04+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/471eaa20e441eca4bb1ea50393cf632e"},"description":"This came about when\u00a0radical Catholic reactionary Steven O'Reilly (who thinks the pope is a heretic)\u00a0made a reply to me, in an effort to press me to Reactionary pope-basher Steven O'Reilly asserts internal contradictions in defenders of Pope Francis & Amoris Laetitia. Orthodox systematic theologian Dr. Robert Fastiggi responds.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2021\/02\/dr-fastiggi-on-amoris-laetitia-pope-francis-aquinas.html#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2021\/02\/dr-fastiggi-on-amoris-laetitia-pope-francis-aquinas.html"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2021\/02\/dr-fastiggi-on-amoris-laetitia-pope-francis-aquinas.html#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Dr. Fastiggi on Amoris Laetitia, Pope Francis, & Aquinas"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/","name":"Biblical Evidence for Catholicism","description":"Catholic biblical apologetics","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":"required name=search_term_string"}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/471eaa20e441eca4bb1ea50393cf632e","name":"Dave Armstrong","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/820e6db89734ae7a9e5dac8d498f5ac7?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/820e6db89734ae7a9e5dac8d498f5ac7?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Dave Armstrong"},"description":"Dave Armstrong is a Catholic author and apologist, who has been actively proclaiming and defending Christianity since 1981, and Catholicism in particular since 1991 (full-time since December 2001). Formerly a campus missionary, as a Protestant, Dave was received into the Catholic Church in February 1991, by the late, well-known catechist and theologian, Fr. John A. Hardon, S. J. Dave\u2019s articles have appeared in many influential Catholic periodicals, including \"This Rock\" (now called \"Catholic Answers Magazine\"), \"Envoy Magazine\" (Patrick Madrid), \"The Catholic Answer,\" \"The Coming Home Journal,\" \"Gilbert Magazine\" (American Chesterton Society), and \"The Latin Mass.\" He also writes a featured column for every issue of \"The Michigan Catholic\": published by the archdiocese of Detroit, and was editor for most of the apologetics tracts published by the St. Paul Street Evangelization apostolate. Dave\u2019s apologetics and writing apostolate was the subject of a feature article in the May 2002 issue of \"Envoy Magazine.\" He served as the staff moderator at the Internet discussion forum for The Coming Home Network, from 2007-2010. Dave has been interviewed on many nationally syndicated Catholic radio shows, including \"Catholic Answers Live\" (twice), \"Faith and Family Live\" (Steve Wood), \"Kresta in the Afternoon,\" \"Son Rise Morning Show,\" \"Catholic Connection\" (Teresa Tomeo), and \"The Catholics Next Door.\" His large and popular website, \"Biblical Evidence for Catholicism,\" was online from March 1997 to March 2007, and received the 1998 Catholic Website of the Year award from \"Envoy Magazine.\" His blog of the same name (now transferred to Patheos), begun in February 2004, contains more than 1,500 papers, at least 500 debates or dialogues, and over 50 distinct \"index\" web pages. Unsolicited correspondence has indicated many hundreds of conversions (or returns) to the Catholic faith as a result, by God's grace, of these writings. Dave's conversion story was published in the bestselling book \"Surprised by Truth\" (edited by Patrick Madrid; San Diego: Basilica Press, 1994). Sophia Institute Press has published six of his books: \"A Biblical Defense of Catholicism\" (Foreword by Fr. John A. Hardon, S. J., 1996 \/ 2003), \"The Catholic Verses\" (2004), \"The One-Minute Apologist\" (2007), \"Bible Proofs for Catholic Truths\" (2009), \"The Quotable Newman\" (editor: 2012), and \"Proving the Catholic Faith is Biblical\" (2015). He is co-author (with Dr. Paul Thigpen) of the inserts for \"The New Catholic Answer Bible\" (Our Sunday Visitor: 2005), and editor for \"The Wisdom of Mr. Chesterton: The Very Best Quotes, Quips, and Cracks from the Pen of G. K. Chesterton\" (Saint Benedict Press \/ TAN Books: 2009). \"100 Biblical Arguments Against Sola Scriptura\" was published by Catholic Answers in May 2012. His \"Quotable Wesley\" compilation was published by (Protestant \/ Wesleyan publisher) Beacon Hill Press in April 2014. Several of his 49 books are bestsellers in their field. Dave maintains a popular personal Facebook page, a Facebook author page, and has a Twitter account as well. He offers almost all of his books in e-book form on his own Biblical Catholicism site (http:\/\/biblicalcatholicism.com\/), at a permanent deep discount: only $2.99 for ePub, mobi, and AZW, and $1.99 for PDF. His writing has been enthusiastically endorsed or recommended by many leading Catholic apologists, authors, and priests, including Dr. Scott Hahn, Fr. Peter M. J. Stravinskas, Marcus Grodi, Patrick Madrid, Steve Ray, Tim Staples, Devin Rose, Mike Aquilina, Al Kresta, Karl Keating, Fr. Dwight Longenecker, Brandon Vogt, Marcellino D'Ambrosio, and Fr. John A. Hardon, S. J. Dave has been happily married to his wife Judy since October 1984. They have three sons and a daughter, and reside in southeast Michigan (metro Detroit).","sameAs":["https:\/\/biblicalcatholicism.com\/","https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/dave.armstrong.798","https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/@LuxVeritatisApologetics"],"url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/author\/davearmstrong"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/54504","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2331"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=54504"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/54504\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/54508"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=54504"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=54504"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=54504"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}