By Robert Royal
Pope Leo travelled to four African countries this month, which included not only the usual calls for peace, justice, and brotherhood, but several touching and poignant moments with local communities. Let's hope that the presence of this Successor to Peter, who possesses a natural gentleness and piety, bears much fruit. Unfortunately, on the way back to Rome on Thursday, we were treated to yet another muddled in-flight papal press conference, which grabbed headlines and has left many Catholics confused – and dismayed. A pope has multiple good channels to express himself. A press conference is not one of them.
By its very nature, these informal Q&A sessions make it seem that the Church's teachings and the words of the pope himself, are like a politician commenting on political issues. One could already see the usual rhetorical and moral tangle coming, for instance, in this exchange with a German journalist:
I would like to know how you assess the decision of Cardinal Reinhard Marx, Archbishop of Munich and Freising, that he gave permission to the blessing of same-sex couples in his diocese, and in light of different cultural and theological perspectives, especially in Africa, how do you intend to preserve the unity of the global Church on that particular matter?
[Pope Leo XIV, in English:] First of all, I think it's very important to understand that the unity or division of the Church should not revolve around sexual matters. We tend to think that when the Church is talking about morality, that the only issue of morality is sexual. And in reality, I believe there are much greater, more important issues, such as justice, equality, freedom of men and women, freedom of religion, that would all take priority before that particular issue. The Holy See has already spoken to the German bishops. The Holy See has made it clear that we do not agree with the formalized blessing of couples.
We "do not agree" is a weak response to a strong challenge. It's not a matter of agreement or disagreement, but of the teachings of Jesus and His Church since time immemorial. And like it or not, sexual ethics – which go deep into the Christian conception of the human person ("male and female he created them') – is a central matter. Not the only one to be sure. But trying to finesse what amounts to rebellion within the Church and surrender to the spirit of the world is a poor tactic for holding the Church together. And it won't work against the global LGBT juggernaut.
The only thing that might is a firm theological and doctrinal stance
Further, while it is true that the Church teaches that there are more and less serious sins (as we often say here, see Dante's Inferno for a graphic image) – and it is in fact an Augustinian theme that has been stated more clearly by other recent popes – is this a good way to speak to our culture today?
[BTW, next month I will be offering a brief course on "Leo and the Augustinian Tradition" (here) in which we will pursue several of the central questions in greater detail.]

What would be better? The pope has his own attractive style, and he could decide about that. But the substance would have to go something like this to remain a good Augustinian, which is to say faithful to the fullness of Catholic reality:
All mortal sins are serious. Indeed, all sins, however venial, take us away from God, our fellow human beings, and our own true selves. The human person has been so created by God that – ever since Cain and Abel – the most obvious way we turn away from God's order and being is through physically harming, even to the point of killing one another.
This would be the barest of openings and at least Biblically grounded.
But it couldn't stop there. It would have to make some distinctions that have always existed in the Church. Something like this:
Sexual sins are the easiest to understand, because they so closely resemble the love God has placed in us to love other persons, especially God Himself. They a...