Cardinals "have a greater responsibility to address their concerns directly to the Pope," he said.
Also, the "dubia" pose "respectful questions for the Holy Father," Wood said, giving him "the chance to answer them as he sees fit." Meanwhile, the letter of filial correction "assumes that we have heretical propositions," he said, which is a matter subject to dispute.
The letter clearly accuses Pope Francis of aiding the spread of heresy, Wood said, but the authors make no specific charges of heresy against the Pope himself.
"The sin of heresy," he said, "is committed when a member of the Catholic faithful knowingly and willingly denies a doctrine of the Christian faith."
However, he said, the authors admit that "they are not in a position to judge" whether Pope Francis "is a formal heretic."
Furthermore, the authors add that they cannot charge the Pope "with the canonical crime of heresy" because they lack "the ecclesiastical jurisdiction" to do so.
Rather, they claim to correct the Pope "on inaction in condemning seven propositions [of heresy]," Wood said, and thus "the title of the filial correction is in some ways misleading."
In the letter, explained Wood, "the Pope is merely being accused by these theologians of inaction in condemning heresy that they don't have the authority to claim that he actually committed."
The letter poses "the danger of scandal," he said, because the authors are "attributing heretical propositions to the Pope, when those heretical propositions are not demonstrated as coming directly from the Pope's writings."
Catholics should remember that the scholars are not members of the Church Magisterium, he said, and Catholics need not agree with their "correctio."
Matt Hadro was the political editor at Catholic News Agency through October 2021. He previously worked as CNA senior D.C. correspondent and as a press secretary for U.S. Congressman Chris Smith.