Ross Douthat - The Plot to Change Catholicism

  • Thread starter Thread starter Persecuted
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
P

Persecuted

Guest
THE Vatican always seems to have the secrets and intrigues of a Renaissance court — which, in a way, is what it still remains. The ostentatious humility of Pope Francis, his scoldings of high-ranking prelates, have changed this not at all; if anything, the pontiff’s ambitions have encouraged plotters and counterplotters to work with greater vigor.

And right now the chief plotter is the pope himself.

nytimes.com/2015/10/18/opinion/sunday/the-plot-to-change-catholicism.html?rref=collection%2Fcolumn%2Fross-douthat&action=click&contentCollection=opinion&region=stream&module=stream_unit&version=latest&contentPlacement=2&pgtype=collection

As a somewhat recent revert (from Protestantism) I am quite concerned about the actions of the Holy Father. I can see others here are too, and no matter how many times I see Matthew 16:18 quoted I still can’t help but worry.

I wonder what I would do if my beloved Church collapsed.

Thoughts on this article?
 
A perceptive summary of the last year. Don’t worry - there’s no danger of your beloved Church collapsing. She has after all survived 2000 years of clergy ;).

My own take on the two synods is that they have had the excellent effect of clearing the air inasmuch as cardinals, archbishops and other ecclesiastics have come out and stated plainly where they stand on crucial points of Church doctrine and moral theology. There has been a good deal of episcopal straight talk, and we are now seeing some prelates fulfilling their first function as prelates - defending the Faith. The time of a sort of uneasy cohabitation, in which everyone kept quiet because the barque mustn’t be rocked and to rock it got one labelled as a Traditionalist, is past, thank heaven. I pray it stays that way.

Of course the most important part of the process is still to come, the Pope’s Apostolic Exhortation. I suspect that Pope Francis will not repeat the near-impenetrable doublespeak of the Synodal Report’s more controversial passages but will come out plain and clear. I have absolutely no idea which way he will lean, but if there is any time in history in which the Holy Ghost needs to guide Christ’s Vicar it will be then.
 
Persecuted said:
THE Vatican always seems to have the secrets and intrigues of a Renaissance court — which, in a way, is what it still remains. The ostentatious humility of Pope Francis, his scoldings of high-ranking prelates, have changed this not at all; if anything, the pontiff’s ambitions have encouraged plotters and counterplotters to work with greater vigor.

And right now the chief plotter is the pope himself.

nytimes.com/2015/10/18/opinion/sunday/the-plot-to-change-catholicism.html?rref=collection%2Fcolumn%2Fross-douthat&action=click&contentCollection=opinion&region=stream&module=stream_unit&version=latest&contentPlacement=2&pgtype=collection

As a somewhat recent revert (from Protestantism) I am quite concerned about the actions of the Holy Father. I can see others here are too, and no matter how many times I see Matthew 16:18 quoted I still can’t help but worry.

I wonder what I would do if my beloved Church collapsed.

Thoughts on this article?
Click to expand...
The New York Times would be the last place I’d look for an objective, accurate analysis of anything to do with Christianity in general and Catholicism in particular. And I’m curious: is “ostentatious humility” anything like “jumbo shrimp?”
 
Tarpeian_Rock said:
The New York Times would be the last place I’d look for an objective, accurate analysis of anything to do with Christianity in general and Catholicism in particular. And I’m curious: is “ostentatious humility” anything like “jumbo shrimp?”
Click to expand...
Ross Douthat (the author of this piece) is a conservative Catholic, so we should not be so quick to write him off simply because he writes for the NY Times.

I noticed elsewhere that some Catholic theologians were requesting the NY Times to stop publishing articles by Douthat. No doubt they are liberals who want to shut down the debate.
 
I am a big admirer of Ross Douthat. He is very perceptive and articulate on affairs of the Catholic Church. I like the fact that the New York Times has him on staff discussing affairs of the Church - it is so counter-intuitive for the Times as Douthat is clearly “conservative” in his views. But his commentary is always some of the best out there (and I think the Times understands that).

I am amused but quite disturbed (and sadly not surprised) at this effort by liberal Catholic academics to shut him down - they wrote to the New York Times trying to pressure the paper to remove him. That Douthat is the winner in the PR war here is clear. But it is a little sickening to see this from “Catholics.” We need to look at what is at work in our culture and in the walls of our Church that is going by the identifier “Catholic.” I am also glad to see (real) Catholic media stepping up in Douthat’s defense.
This incident came to mind when I read, just recently, about a similarly curious controversy, this one within the groves of academe. The New York Times columnist Ross Douthat has been opining quite a bit about the Synod on the Family in Rome, suggesting, among other things, that clear factions among the bishops have emerged, that Pope Francis favors a more liberal resolution of the key questions, and that heretical viewpoints are afoot in Rome. In response to Douthat’s ruminations, a letter, signed by some of the leading lights of the Catholic academy, was sent to the editors of the Times. The professors and pundits complained that Douthat was proposing a politicized reading of Church affairs and that he was, at the end of the day, unqualified to speak on such complex matters, presumably because he doesn’t have a graduate degree in theology. Their prim closing remark - “This is not what we expect of the New York Times” - was an unmistakable insinuation that views such as Douthat’s simply should not be allowed into the arena of public conversation.
Click to expand...
ncregister.com/blog/robert-barron/ross-douthat-and-the-catholic-academy
 
It looks like they are checking into his background and saying what he says is not accurate. He can say whatever he wants, but he isn’t correct according to many theologians.

“More than many other figures who misrepresent or oversimplify Catholic theology in the mainstream media, Mr. Douthat has tended to portray himself as one who recites Catholic teaching rather than one who interprets it, especially over the course of the past few weeks,” she wrote. “This alone I take issue with.”
“So perhaps rather than calling Mr. Douthat ‘un-credentialed,’ the letter should have asked the New York Times the following question: with what criteria did they determine Mr. Douthat competent to act as an arbiter of theological truth?” she added.
Ultimately, several of the signers defended Douthat’s ability to write as he pleases, but insisted his theological diatribes — which often include condemnations of others — will not go unchallenged.
“I wholeheartedly support fully anyone’s right to write whatever he or she wants, including Ross Douthat,” Martin wrote. “But be sure that whenever you’re reading ad hominem comments, thinly veiled attacks on people’s fidelity to the faith, snide insinuations and malicious twisting of words, you are not reading theology. You are reading hate.”
thinkprogress.org/culture/2015/10/28/3717003/ross-douthat-could-you-not/

The links in this article are interesting.
 
On October 17, New York Times opinion writer and prominent Catholic conservative Ross Douthat penned a scathing critique of Pope Francis entitled “The Plot To Change Catholicism.” In it, he blasted the pope for supposedly endorsing the idea that divorced and remarried Catholics should receive communion without an annulment, and slammed the famously egalitarian pontiff for his “ostentatious humility.”
Click to expand...
The piece is one of several Douthat has written about Pope Francis and Catholicism in recent months, most of which are deeply critical of the Church’s left wing and Francis’ relatively progressive take on various theological issues. This week, however, American Catholics are fighting back.
Click to expand...
On Monday, a group of Catholic theologians published an open letter directly challenging Douthat, who reportedly has little if any formal training in theology or Church history. The signers took particular umbrage with his most recent article, but also appeared to decry Douthat’s larger body of work on Catholicism — especially his tendency to bat about accusations of heresy, often at Catholic theologians.
Click to expand...
thinkprogress.org/culture/2015/10/28/3717003/ross-douthat-could-you-not/

Most interesting. Apparently, “conservatives” can be just as guilty as “progressives” when it comes to putting a political spin on Church happenings.
 
Good_Tidings said:
He can say whatever he wants, but he isn’t correct according to many theologians.
Click to expand...
  1. Yes, he can say whatever he wants. It is called free speech.
  2. I don’t think the vast majority of what Ross Douthat believes is all that different from what many Catholics believe, including myself. Why single him out for attack, or are the rest of us next.
Simple answer: he is good at what he does. I am glad he is getting more exposure.
 
First of all, lol ThinkProgress link.

Second, Bishop Barron had a better article on this: wordonfire.org/resources/article/ross-douthat-and-the-catholic-academy/4967/
And the suggestion that, because he doesn’t have a credential from the academy, Douthat isn’t qualified to enter into the discussion? Please. If a doctorate in theology were a bottom-line prerequisite, we would declare the following people unqualified to express an opinion on matters religious: Thomas Merton, Flannery O’Connor, Graham Greene, Evelyn Waugh, C.S. Lewis, William F. Buckley, W.H. Auden, or to bring things more up to date, Fr. James Martin, George Weigel, and E.J. Dionne. In point of fact, it is often the case that those outside of the official academy often have the freshest and most insightful perspectives, precisely because they aren’t sequestered in the echo-chamber of politically correct faculty lounge discourse.

The letter to the Times is indicative indeed of a much wider problem in our intellectual culture, namely, the tendency to avoid real argument and to censor what makes us, for whatever reason, uncomfortable. On many of our university campuses this incarnates itself as a demand for “safe spaces,” where students won’t feel threatened by certain forms of speech or writing. For the first time in my life, I agreed with Richard Dawkins who recently declared on Twitter, “A university is not a ‘safe space’. If you need a safe space, leave, go home, [and] hug your teddy…until [you are] ready for university.”

So in the spirit of Howard Sudberry, I would say to those who signed the letter against Ross Douthat, “Make an argument against him; prove him wrong; marshal your evidence; have a debate with him; take him on. But don’t attempt to censor him.” I understand that the signatories disagree with him, but he’s playing by the rules.
Click to expand...
 
FollowChrist34 said:
  1. Yes, he can say whatever he wants. It is called free speech.
  2. I don’t think the vast majority of what Ross Douthat believes is all that different from what many Catholics believe, including myself. Why single him out for attack, or are the rest of us next.
Simple answer: he is good at what he does. I am glad he is getting more exposure.
Click to expand...
I don’t have a dog in that fight. I never heard of him until yesterday when Fr. James Martin said he was irritated with his columns. I saw a follow-up today and read it. That is the article I posted. I’ll try to find out Fr. Martin’s remarks that are referred to in the article.
 
ARSpade said:
First of all, lol ThinkProgress link.

Second, Bishop Barron had a better article on this: wordonfire.org/resources/article/ross-douthat-and-the-catholic-academy/4967/
Click to expand...
I don’t have any problem with anyone sharing his or her opinion on Church matters. But it seems really foolhardy and arrogant to ignore the fact that actual theologians have studied Church teachings and scripture in a far more comprehensive way. To claim that there’s some vast conspiracy against conservatives simply because theologians are noting errors in a conservative’s take on Church matters seems pretty blind.

And as far as ThinkProgress is concerned, there’s no opinion being shared in this piece – it’s just reporting. No need to get jumpy about the source, then.
 
gracepoole said:
thinkprogress.org/culture/2015/10/28/3717003/ross-douthat-could-you-not/

Most interesting. Apparently, “conservatives” can be just as guilty as “progressives” when it comes to putting a political spin on Church happenings.
Click to expand...
I believe that you posted an “article” from a blog, and only news articles are allowed…
Maybe I am wrong…

From their ABOUT page:

"Think Progress was voted “Best Liberal Blog” in the 2006 Weblog Awards and chosen as

an Official Honoree in the 2009 and 2012 Webby awards. It was also named best blog of

2008 by The Sidney Hillman Foundation"
 
MODERATOR NOTE

Even though the OP links to commentary by Ross Douthat, not a news article; the publication of this commentary in a major US newspaper has started an Internet wave of interest. I will allow this thread to stay open.

Please keep the posts charitable; discuss items such as the issues presented in the article, the theological soundness of the article, and why this op-ed became controversial. Avoid ad hominem posts attacking the author or any publication or blog.
 
gracepoole said:
I don’t have any problem with anyone sharing his or her opinion on Church matters. But it seems really foolhardy and arrogant to ignore the fact that actual theologians have studied Church teachings and scripture in a far more comprehensive way. To claim that there’s some vast conspiracy against conservatives simply because theologians are noting errors in a conservative’s take on Church matters seems pretty blind.

And as far as ThinkProgress is concerned, there’s no opinion being shared in this piece – it’s just reporting. No need to get jumpy about the source, then.
Click to expand...
Again, from Bishop Barron:
And the suggestion that, because he doesn’t have a credential from the academy, Douthat isn’t qualified to enter into the discussion? Please. If a doctorate in theology were a bottom-line prerequisite, we would declare the following people unqualified to express an opinion on matters religious: Thomas Merton, Flannery O’Connor, Graham Greene, Evelyn Waugh, C.S. Lewis, William F. Buckley, W.H. Auden, or to bring things more up to date, Fr. James Martin, George Weigel, and E.J. Dionne.
Click to expand...
Actual theologians came up with plenty of heresies over the past 2000 years. It would be arrogant and foolhardy to ascribe any special insight into them just because they have letters after their name (most of my immediate family is MA/MS/PhD. They’re not all that hard to get in any non-STEM field).

I’m not jumpy at the source, just amused. After all, plenty of outlets reported on this issue that don’t worship at the altar of abortion and whatnot.
 
Good_Tidings said:
I don’t have a dog in that fight. I never heard of him until yesterday when Fr. James Martin said he was irritated with his columns. I saw a follow-up today and read it. That is the article I posted. I’ll try to find out Fr. Martin’s remarks that are referred to in the article.
Click to expand...
To be honest, I didn’t either until these folks took him on. I don’t read him regularly but I have read his work on both Synods and his commentary is excellent, really great stuff. If you have a problem with what Douthat says you have a problem with me. 😉 It was out of line to “complain” about him and try and get him fired. It is like Trump trying to take down Megyn Kelly. Shameful. And the saddest part is I am not at all surprised.
 
Persecuted said:
THE Vatican always seems to have the secrets and intrigues of a Renaissance court — which, in a way, is what it still remains. The ostentatious humility of Pope Francis, his scoldings of high-ranking prelates, have changed this not at all; if anything, the pontiff’s ambitions have encouraged plotters and counterplotters to work with greater vigor.

And right now the chief plotter is the pope himself.

nytimes.com/2015/10/18/opinion/sunday/the-plot-to-change-catholicism.html?rref=collection%2Fcolumn%2Fross-douthat&action=click&contentCollection=opinion&region=stream&module=stream_unit&version=latest&contentPlacement=2&pgtype=collection

As a somewhat recent revert (from Protestantism) I am quite concerned about the actions of the Holy Father. I can see others here are too, and no matter how many times I see Matthew 16:18 quoted I still can’t help but worry.

I wonder what I would do if my beloved Church collapsed.

Thoughts on this article?
Click to expand...
And Francis himself, in his daily homilies, has consistently criticized Catholicism’s “doctors of the law,” its modern legalists and Pharisees — a not-even-thinly-veiled signal of his views.
Click to expand...
(Though of course, in the New Testament the Pharisees allowed divorce; it was Jesus who rejected it.)
Click to expand...
Nailed it.
 
MODERATOR NOTICE

Also do not make accusations of heresy. It is a very serious accusation (especially aimed at a cleric or theologian) and will be considered uncharitable here and you may receive infractions or suspensions for doing so.
 
Good_Tidings said:
Here we go:
americamagazine.org/content/all-things/theology-and-hate
Click to expand...
I just had that cut and pasted ready to post here. This is a very good reminder for everybody:
Worse, calling people names is disgraceful. Especially in the name of religion. These ad hominem attacks—an attack not on the argument but on the person–has no place in theology. It doesn’t matter if you’re attacking Pope Francis, Antonio Spadaro, Massimo Faggioli, John O’Malley, me, or anyone else. It’s unchristian. Feel free to disagree with us, but questioning our fidelity is out of bounds. Speaking of doctrine, one of Jesus’s lesser known teachings, and completely ignored because it’s so hard to adhere to, is his admonition against calling people names. “If you insult a brother or sister, you will be liable to the council; and if you say, ‘You fool,’ you will be liable to the hell of fire.” (Mt. 5:22) Thus, saying that Antonio Spadaro’s name is synonymous with sophist is sinful.
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top