A single word in Pope Leo’s homily for the Jubilee of Families, Children, Grandparents, and the Elderly managed to generate quite the buzz online recently.

That word, of course, was “ideal.” Marriage, the Holy Father said, was not an “ideal.”

Over at Catholic Culture, Phil Lawler suggested that it is a sign that Leo has “moved away from some of the controversial teachings of his predecessor,” albeit “in subtle ways.”

Fr Z claimed that Leo had “contradicted” Francis.

The New Daily Compass went so far as to say that he had “corrected” Francis.

In Amoris Laetitia, after all, Francis repeatedly spoke about the “ideal” of marriage.

Don’t jump to conclusions

Such conclusions are rather hasty, however.

While it’s entirely possible that Pope Leo will nuance or even underplay Francis’s fondness for speaking of the “ideal” of marriage, I think there’s a simpler explanation here.

It’s a lesson every student of texts discovers sooner or later: one shouldn’t assume people mean the same thing just because they’re using the same words.

The meaning of ideal

In fact, as far as I can tell, Amoris Laetitia itself tends to use “ideal” in more than one way.

First, there’s “ideal” as the objective moral standard that corresponds to the Creator’s design and Jesus’ teaching.

This includes marriage as between a man and a woman who give themselves to each other freely, faithfully, fruitfully, and for life (Amoris Laetitia 38, 292, 307)—a standard one can choose or reject, live or contradict: the “evangelical ideal” (308).

Then, there’s “ideal” as the goal toward which one journeys within marriage—mutual assistance and support (36, 39), enduring and persevering love (119, 200), giving and receiving love (157).

Finally, there’s “ideal” as a mental image of marriage that conveys an impossibly high standard—overly romantic or simply unrealistic.

Amoris Laetitia refers to this as an “almost artificial ideal” of marriage, “excessive idealisation” (36), and the “stereotype of the ideal family” (57).

What English speakers hear

Of course, this is further complicated by the fact that when most English speakers hear “ideal,” they think “desirable” or “preferable”—an optional extra.

In this sense, it would be preferable for people to marry, and it’s less desirable when they do not.

They do not contradict an objective norm when they do not; at most, they simply fall short of a desirable standard.

Leo’s likely intention

In saying marriage is not an “ideal,” Leo was clearly not thinking of the first, since he immediately went on to describe marriage as the “measure of true love between a man and a woman: a love that is total, faithful and fruitful,” citing Humanae Vitae and echoing Amoris Laetitia.

What, then, did Leo mean?

It’s still too early to say with any certainty.

Perhaps he meant that marriage isn’t simply an optional extra to a couple’s commitment.

Perhaps it was that marriage isn’t an unattainable or unrealistic goal, but, aided by grace, a real path to holiness and true life.

But then, Francis too might have wholeheartedly agreed.

• Errol Xavier Lobo is a priest of the Catholic Archdiocese of Perth. Ordained in April 2024, he currently serves as an Assistant Priest at the Kalgoorlie-Boulder parish, while also providing pastoral care to its Catholic schools and acting as a Visiting Chaplain at Curtin University’s WA School of Mines. He completed his Master of Philosophy by research in the area of Pauline Studies at the University of Notre Dame Australia, after a Bachelor of Theology with High Distinction, and a Bachelor of Engineering (Computer Science), First Class with Distinction. He enjoys reading, listening to music, and long walks, and is particularly interested in New Testament Studies.
• Flashes of Insight is an international publication. The editorial policy is that spelling reflects the country of origin.