On April 8, 2024, Cardinal Víctor Manuel “Tucho” Fernández and his Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith released their Declaration on Human Dignity, Dignitas Infinita. Although Catholics celebrated the transferred Feast of the Annunciation on April 8th, we can draw a more apt comparison to Dignitas Infinita from the solar eclipse in America also taking place. Almost everyone witnessing the solar eclipse understood that the sun did not actually vanish even though it was temporarily blocked by the moon — but who will recall the Catholic teaching that has been eclipsed since Vatican II? Do we still recall enough about the actual Catholic teaching on human dignity to see the way in which Tucho’s Dignitas Infinita obscures it?

To properly assess Dignitas Inifnita, it is worthwhile to recall the battle that took place at Vatican II over the Council’s Declaration on Religious Freedom, Dignitatis Humanae, upon which Tucho’s new declaration relies. Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre’s July 8, 1987 letter to Cardinal Ratzinger identified the opposing sides of that battle and the consequences of the Liberal victory at the Council:

“It appears that we can conclude that the Liberal doctrine of Religious Liberty and the traditional doctrine are radically opposed. A choice had to be made between the draft of the schema of Cardinal Ottaviani and that of Cardinal Béa, on the same subject. At the last meeting of the Central Commission preparatory to the Council there was a heated opposition between these two Cardinals. Cardinal Béa then affirmed that his thesis was absolutely opposed to that of Cardinal Ottaviani. Nothing has changed since. The traditional magisterium is opposed to the Liberal thesis founded on a false conception of human dignity and on an erroneous definition of civil society. The problem is to know who is right—Cardinal Ottaviani or Cardinal Béa. The practical consequences of the Liberal thesis adopted by the Holy See after the Council are disastrous and anti Christian. It is the uncrowning of Our Lord Jesus Christ, with the reduction to an equal status before the law of all religions leading to an apostate ecumenism as that of Assisi.”

If many educated Catholics no longer have the ability to discern the way in which Tucho’s new declaration deviates from what the Church has always taught, we can trace the primary cause back to this forgotten battle between the sides represented by Cardinals Ottaviani (upholding Church teaching) and Bea (promoting a new vision, ostensibly motivated by ecumenical concerns). It is also timely for purposes of the ongoing debate on Christ the King to note that Archbishop Lefebvre linked the adoption of Bea’s Liberal thesis to “the uncrowning of Our Lord Jesus Christ.”

Because God is the ultimate judge of our worth — and thus our dignity — the Catholic Church has a fundamental duty to tell souls that their human dignity depends on how well they correspond with God’s grace to learn the true religion and follow it.

What, though, were the actual substantive issues at stake in the battle between Cardinals Ottaviani and Bea? We can get a relatively complete picture by considering Archbishop Lefebvre’s November 26, 1963 intervention at Vatican II, in which he objected to the following statement that was then in the draft of the document that would become the Council’s Declaration on Religious Freedom:

“Thus the man who sincerely obeys his conscience intends to obey God Himself, even though sometimes in a confused way and without knowing it, and that man must be judged worthy of respect.”

As we will see below, this language resembles Tucho’s declaration. Here is Archbishop Lefebvre’s response from his intervention at the Council:

“My pure and simple reply to accepting such a statement as it stands is no. . . . From where, in fact, does the person derive his dignity? He draws his dignity from his perfection. Now the perfection of the human person consists in the knowledge of the Truth and the acquisition of the Good. This is the beginning of eternal life, and eternal life is ‘that they may know Thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom Thou hast sent’ (Jn. 17:3). Consequently, so long as he clings to error, the human person falls short of his dignity. The dignity of the human person does not consist in liberty set apart from truth. In fact, liberty is good and true to the extent to which it is ruled by truth.”

So whereas the Liberal thesis posits that being in error has no effect on a man’s dignity, the Catholic Church has always taught that dignity depends upon knowing the truth and pursuing God’s will. This corresponds to what Pope Leo XIII wrote in his 1885 encyclical on the Christian Constitution of States, Immortale Dei:

“Liberty is a power perfecting man, and hence should have truth and goodness for its object. But the character of goodness and truth cannot be changed at option. These remain ever one and the same, and are no less unchangeable than nature itself. If the mind assents to false opinions, and the will chooses and follows after what is wrong, neither can attain its native fullness, but both must fall from their native dignity into an abyss of corruption.”

Thus, according to Catholic teaching as it was understood prior to Vatican II, human dignity is impaired to the extent that we cling to error and fail to do God’s will.

No organization other than the Catholic Church, however, has been entrusted by God to tell souls that their human dignity depends on how well they follow the Catholic religion.

Why is it important for the Catholic Church to insist on this aspect of human dignity? Quite simply, Catholics believe that Our Lord Jesus Christ has entrusted the Church with the unparalleled task of teaching all people the ways in which they must follow God’s will to honor Him and save their souls. Because God is the ultimate judge of our worth — and thus our dignity — the Catholic Church has a fundamental duty to tell souls that their human dignity depends on how well they correspond with God’s grace to learn the true religion and follow it. God gave the Church this mission, and so whenever the Church purports to speak about “human dignity,” this must absolutely be the most salient message.

Because we have to a large extent forgotten this, most people (even Catholics) will focus on the way in which Tucho’s declaration handles issues such as abortion, gender theory, the death penalty, etc. But any organization in the world can speak about these things — and almost any Christian denomination that sincerely seeks to follow the Bible can do a more or less satisfactory job of discussing most of the issues handled in Dignitas Infinita. No organization other than the Catholic Church, however, has been entrusted by God to tell souls that their human dignity depends on how well they follow the Catholic religion. On that point, though, here is what we see from Dignitas Infinita:

• “Every human person possesses an infinite dignity, inalienably grounded in his or her very being, which prevails in and beyond every circumstance, state, or situation the person may ever encounter.”
• “In their relationship of equality and mutual love, both the man and the woman represent God in the world and are also called to cherish and nurture the world. Because of this, to be created in the image of God means to possess a sacred value that transcends every distinction of a sexual, social, political, cultural, and religious nature. Our dignity is bestowed upon us by God; it is neither claimed nor deserved. Every human being is loved and willed by God and, thus, has an inviolable dignity.
• “Even today, in the face of so many violations of human dignity that seriously threaten the future of the human family, the Church encourages the promotion of the dignity of every human person, regardless of their physical, mental, cultural, social, and religious characteristics. The Church does this with hope, confident of the power that flows from the Risen Christ, who has fully revealed the integral dignity of every man and woman.”

So, according to Tucho’s Dignitas Infinita, all people have an infinite, inviolable dignity that is not contingent on whether or not we follow the religious truths God has entrusted to the Catholic Church.

Any reader of Dignitas Infinita who mistook it for Catholic teaching would assume that the Church no longer believes that our human dignity depends on whether we follow the supernatural truths Our Lord taught.

Defenders of Dignitas Infinita could argue that the document does in fact speak of the distinction between “ontological dignity” (which cannot be lost) and “moral dignity,” which it describes as follows:

“When we speak of moral dignity, we refer to how people exercise their freedom. While people are endowed with conscience, they can always act against it. However, were they to do so, they would behave in a way that is ‘not dignified’ with respect to their nature as creatures who are loved by God and called to love others. Yet, this possibility always exists for human freedom, and history illustrates how individuals—when exercising their freedom against the law of love revealed by the Gospel—can commit inestimably profound acts of evil against others. Those who act this way seem to have lost any trace of humanity and dignity. This is where the present distinction can help us discern between the moral dignity that de facto can be ‘lost’ and the ontological dignity that can never be annulled. And it is precisely because of this latter point that we must work with all our might so that all those who have done evil may repent and convert.”

Does this rectify the assertions that man cannot lose his dignity by virtue of following false religions? No, quite the contrary: by suggesting that souls can lose their moral dignity by acting against their conscience — but not by failing to abide by the Catholic truth God wants all souls to follow — this document is quite possibly the most wicked statement possible on human dignity. Any reader of Dignitas Infinita who mistook it for Catholic teaching would assume that the Church no longer believes that our human dignity depends on whether we follow the supernatural truths Our Lord taught.

Elsewhere, Dignitas Infinita blasphemously asserts that Jesus will judge us solely on whether we have acted with kindness to our neighbors:

“The glorious Christ will judge by the love of neighbor that consists in ministering to the hungry, the thirsty, the stranger, the naked, the sick, and the imprisoned, with whom he identifies (cf. Mt. 25:34-36). For Jesus, the good done to every human being, regardless of the ties of blood or religion, is the single criterion of judgment.”

By claiming that corporal works of mercy — whether or not performed in the Name of Jesus — are the “single criterion for judgment,” Dignitas Infinita teaches heresy. Moreover, if we take these words seriously, we must logically conclude that Christ would judge Judas more favorably than Mary Magdalene, for Judas claimed that he wanted to help the poor with the costly ointment with which she anointed Jesus’s feet: “Why was not this ointment sold for three hundred pence, and given to the poor?” (John 12:5).

Will Catholic shepherds finally insist that any attempt by Vatican II to eclipse the Catholic teaching as it existed before the Council was evil and must therefore be repudiated? If not, there is not much logical basis for objecting to Tucho and Francis as they continue to try to demolish the Church and lead souls to hell.

This is indeed a fitting image for Dignitas Infinita and the entire Francis Synodal Ape Church. Like Judas, Francis and Tucho have no patience for those who want to honor God with all they have — we must instead focus on man, and man alone, whose dignity is infinite whether or not he honors God. In this light, we can understand why they do all they can to silence Traditional Catholics for their backward insistence that God actually cares whether we accept the teachings He entrusted to us. Tucho tells us that everyone has infinite dignity “regardless of religious characteristics,” but he and Francis treat Traditional Catholics as though we are worthy of the utmost scorn and persecution.

Will this blasphemous nonsense be the final straw that causes Catholics to realize that we have been deceived for sixty years? Will Catholic shepherds finally insist that any attempt by Vatican II to eclipse the Catholic teaching as it existed before the Council was evil and must therefore be repudiated? If not, there is not much logical basis for objecting to Tucho and Francis as they continue to try to demolish the Church and lead souls to hell. Conversely, Our Lord and all the saints rejoice whenever a Catholic opens his eyes to see and proclaim that, despite what the innovators told us, Christ is still King and wants us to follow Him. Immaculate Heart of Mary, pray for us!

Latest from RTV — THE GOD INFUSION: Richard Dawkins Goes Cultural Christian, Candace Owens Blasts Contraception