(LifeSiteNews) — Cardinal Jean-Marc Aveline is widely rumored to be Francis’ preferred successor. But despite his mild and scholarly image, his theology reveals a quiet yet total demolition of Catholic doctrine.
In recent weeks, we have published a five-part analysis of Aveline’s pseudo-theological synthesis, and readers have requested a summary of this series. This is what follows.
‘No Salvation Outside the Church’ redefined into oblivion
Part I of our analysis of Aveline’s thought begins with his dramatic undermining of the dogma that outside the Church there is no salvation.
Aveline asserts that non-Catholic religions have a “positive role” in “the general economy of salvation.” This excludes, he says, “an exclusivist position, which, on the basis of a narrow ecclesiocentrism, would deny non-Christian religions any salvific or revelatory value.” The ideas he excludes are based on what he calls “a hardened, and thus distorted, interpretation of the ancient Patristic adage: ‘Outside the Church, no salvation.’”
Aveline frames this as the teaching of the magisterium. He adopts a methodology of “problematization”: a liberal technique that destabilizes doctrines by presenting them as challenged false dichotomies and objections, and thus in need of “deeper” understanding. This, as the late Cardinal Pietro Parente warned, is the approach of the modernists, who would maintain Catholic terms whilst replacing their meaning with naturalism and vague spirituality.
Aveline’s theology draws on Protestant and Modernist sources, especially Henri de Lubac, Claude Geffré, and Protestants like Tillich and Troeltsch. These sources supply his premise: that all religions are somehow part of God’s plan, and that Christianity must redefine itself in dialogue with them. As a result, Aveline is compelled to redefine supernatural faith—not as assent to revealed truth proposed by the Church, but as an existential “interpretation” of religious experience. Faith, in his view, need not be Catholic, nor Christian, nor supernatural. It is not even clear that he believes faith is necessary for salvation.
All this undermines the nature of the Church herself. Aveline reduces her from the exclusive Ark of Salvation to a vague, cosmic meta-religion that “in a manner known to God,” includes all mankind by default. False religions, far from being dangers to souls, are recast as providentially necessary channels of grace. This directly contradicts Scripture, the Fathers, and defined dogma.
At every point, Aveline masks his rupture with ambiguity. He avoids explicitly denying Catholic doctrine—he dissolves it through doubt, reinterpretation, and sleight of hand. But the effect is the same: the necessity of the Church, the reality of supernatural faith, and the danger of error are all abandoned in favor of a pluralist, horizontal vision grounded not in God’s self-revelation, but in human experience.
The subversion of Christ’s role as mediator
Part II exposes how Cardinal Aveline redefines the traditional doctrine of Christ as the sole mediator between God and man.
His key innovation is the idea of “christic mediation,” a term that might sound acceptable to some, but which subtly redefines Christ’s mediation. Aveline proposes that while other religions may be insufficient in themselves, they are the beneficiaries of universal mediation somehow rooted in Christ.
This attempt to explain how those outside the Church are “really” inside the Church, and thus can be saved, creates significant problems for other areas of theology. It bypasses the necessity of supernatural faith and formal membership in the Church, both of which are defined dogmas.
Aveline draws once more on the Protestant thinkers Tillich and Troeltsch, as well as de Lubac, to construct a system in which all humanity is implicitly united to Christ. This leads him to speak of “vital exchanges” between false religions and the Church, and to reject any insistence on conversion as “pretentious.” In his system, the Church does not call others out of error but listens to their “sources,” seeking mutual enrichment.
The theological consequences are severe:
- Christ’s unique mediation is diluted into a vague, universal process.
- Supernatural faith is rendered unnecessary for salvation.
- The Church becomes one “path” among many, rather than the exclusive Ark of Salvation.
- False religions are further established as possessing “positive salvific value,” in contradiction to Catholic dogma.
Aveline’s ideas lead logically to a form of religious naturalism: salvation becomes a shared human journey rather than supernatural redemption. Religion is reduced to a search for meaning, and dialogue becomes its central purpose.
By redefining Christ’s mediation, Aveline constructs a bridge from doctrinal orthodoxy to apostasy. This bridge will be used, in the next parts, to justify a new mission for the Church: not to teach the nations, but to “dialogue” with them—which is really a code word for affirming them.
The sacramentalization of ‘dialogue’
Having redefined salvation and Christ’s unique mediation, Aveline proceeds to reconstruct the Church’s very mission itself. Part III traces how he elevates dialogue from a pastoral disposition into a foundation for the Church—recasting the Church not as a divine teacher sent to convert the nations, but as a listening participant in religious pluralism. Through this shift, the very purpose of the Church is dissolved.
Aveline’s argument hinges on reinterpreting divine revelation itself. He claims that because God reveals himself in a “dialogical” manner, the Church’s mission must likewise take a dialogical form.
But this is to elevate what is sometimes used as a poetic metaphor into a theological principle. It transforms revelation from a divine command into a mutual exchange, rendering the Church a companion rather than a herald. In this framework, dialogue becomes a quasi-sacrament—an act in which all religions are said to participate, and from which truth is drawn collectively.
This is why Aveline refers to missionary strategies as arrogant and pretentious. He invokes the experience of pluralist societies to delegitimize even diluted, modernist models of evangelization, asserting instead that all peoples “share in the divine mission”—even apart from the Church and the sacraments.
Aveline’s new mission theology leaves no room for anathemas, no urgency for conversion, and no true proclamation of Christ. Instead, he offers a vision in which Christianity itself is reinterpreted in light of the “insights” and “riches” of other religions.
Aveline’s treatment of Judaism and the collapse of Catholic doctrine
Part IV moves from theory to practice. Having analyzed Aveline’s pseudo-theology, we now see how he applies it to the particular case of Judaism—laying the foundation for a wider religious pluralism that empties the Church’s claims of their divine substance.
At the heart of Aveline’s vision is a sleight of hand, obscuring the true nature of Rabbinic Judaism. He presents it as a legitimate continuation of the Mosaic Covenant with a “divine vocation.” In fact, the Old Covenant was fulfilled and brought to an end in Christ; and Rabbinic Judaism is a man-made religion, created after the destruction of the Temple by the Pharisees and their heirs, and maintaining their opposition to Christ.
Aveline asserts that no doctrinal judgment has been made on the Church’s relationship with “the Jewish people”—a rhetorical evasion that dismisses centuries of authoritative Catholic teaching on the Mosaic Law, the mission to convert the Jews, and the completion of the Old Covenant. He then paints the Church’s past fidelity to this doctrine as irrational contempt, blaming her and the Church Fathers for modern antisemitism and even genocide.
In contrast, Aveline extols the “spiritual vitality” of Rabbinic Judaism, praising its resistance to assimilation and its post-Temple Talmudic development. He presents several false dichotomies in order to obscure the reality that Christ fulfilled the Law, and that the Church is the fulfillment of the Mosaic Covenant. He suggests, instead, that the Church shares a “spiritual link” and mutual “vocation” with Rabbinic Judaism—one which requires her to revise her own self-understanding in light of Rabbinic Judaism.
He echoes Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger’s claim that the Church must receive a “service of purification” from other religions. Aveline thus enthrones Rabbinic Judaism as the teacher of the Church, whom he would place at her feet as pupil.
The final inversion: ‘Differentiated unity,’ Islam, pluralism, and the abolition of the faith
The primary lesson that the Church is to learn from her new teachers is that God wills what he calls a “differentiated unity.” And if Aveline claims that God wills this in relation to the religion that explicitly rejects Christ, is it any surprise that he then extends it further?
In Part V Aveline applies this lesson, extending this “differentiated unity” to all world religions.
Under this logic, false religions are no longer seen as deviations from truth, but as divinely intended complements to the Church—necessary not to be converted, but to “purify” her and reveal her identity.
The keystone of this model is the “christic mediation” already discussed. Christ becomes a symbolic placeholder for the spiritual yearnings of all men, while conversion, faith, and the supernatural order are sidelined.
Nowhere is this clearer than in his treatment of Islam. Like Judaism, Islam is praised for its cultural “riches” and its supposed role in salvation history. Catholic students are urged to set aside direct attempts at sharing the Gospel with Muslims, and exhorted to take part in events like Aveline’s “Muslim-Christian Family Days,” which exclude religious leaders and focus on mutual learning about family life and mundane tasks like “how to educate our children regarding water consumption.”
Once again, the Great Commission given to the Church by Christ is inverted, and replaced with passive accompaniment and a focus on natural goods.
This trajectory ends with the replacement of the Church and the Catholic religion—and indeed, with religion itself. Aveline recasts religion as “a way to seek answers to life’s big questions.” This is not Christianity at all, but naturalism.
With this, the circle is complete. Aveline’s system redefines salvation, dissolves Christ, and uses a novel and erroneous understanding of Rabbinic Judaism in order to remake the Church in the image of interreligious fraternity. But the Church is perpetual and indefectible; and the result of such ideas is not the remaking of the Church but rather a departure from the Church, the creation of a counter-Church, and the denial of the supernatural order itself.
