Ross Douthat - The Plot to Change Catholicism

[lynnvinc]

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?

RE the plight of remarried Catholics. Since in places such as India it can take well over a decade to get an annulment, I’m thinking that the idea of welcoming the remarried couple into the Church in various ways – without making them look like sinners, esp in cases in which the 1st marriage was never consummated – is good, at least charitable and merciful.

I have a relative in India, who went ahead after some 6 years of waiting on an annulment and got married again (civil marriage). Some 3 years later they now have 2 children, but he still doesn’t have an annulment.

Perhaps just before they die in decades to come he might finally get the annulment and be welcomed back and receive Communion and get married in the Church.

Or, perhaps they could receive Communion for now.

Maybe there could be some process like a “santio” that would allow them to receive Communion, in cases in which they have applied for the annulment, at least 5 years have passed in that process, and they got remarried – because their biological time clocks are running out and they want children – and are faithful to each other (even tho it was a civil marriage).

Or not.

Best bet, just don’t get divorced no matter what, and most certainly do not get remarried no matter what. People can devote their lives to living celibately and caring for the orphans of the world… When God closes one door, He open another.

 

[Ranp]

Ross Douthat wrote a reply to the theologians: Letter to the Catholic Academy that is spot on.



Ran Pleasant

 

[JimR-OCDS]

So was Ross Douthat at the Synod of Bishops and was he a witness to what took place, or is he merely using the hearsay that leaked out of it, from those with the same political ideology as his ?

Would it not be better as a columnist to wait to see the final document on the Synod, rather than make accusations about the Pope and what took place ?

Jim

 

[FollowChrist34]

Ross Douthat wrote a reply to the theologians: Letter to the Catholic Academy that is spot on.



Ran Pleasant

Love it. Blaise Pascal must be up there with the angels - laughing until tears run down his face…

 

[FollowChrist34]

firstthings.com/media/the-crisis-of-conservative-catholicism

I may be slightly off topic here (not much though) - but I want to post this someplace just for those who are interested. Fantastic talk from Ross Douthat about the state of the Church - he gave it at First Things a week or so ago. It is about 25 mins so you need to set aside time, but he addresses where the Church is at and speaks to the conservative perspective on that, and on the proposed changes in the recent Synod, etc. I am not just idly lavishing praise here, this is critical commentary. Time very well spent. Just for a wider perspective…

 

[Robert_Bay]

MODERATOR NOTE

Here are some guidelines for discussion on this thread going forward:

1. All posts are to be charitable. If you wish to review the subject, please see [thread=132852]Charity[/thread] for specifics, or [thread=116150]CAF rules[/thread] for an overview, both of which are located in the Rules of the Road sub-forum.
2. No personal attacks upon the Holy Father or anyone else
3. No labeling anyone of heresy or suggesting you know what is in someone else’s heart.
4. Follow the discussion guidelines here.

 

[Megan7]

firstthings.com/media/the-crisis-of-conservative-catholicism

I may be slightly off topic here (not much though) - but I want to post this someplace just for those who are interested. Fantastic talk from Ross Douthat about the state of the Church - he gave it at First Things a week or so ago. It is about 25 mins so you need to set aside time, but he addresses where the Church is at and speaks to the conservative perspective on that, and on the proposed changes in the recent Synod, etc. I am not just idly lavishing praise here, this is critical commentary. Time very well spent. Just for a wider perspective…

Hello “Follow Christ 34”

Thanks for the link! I look forward to reading & listening to it all!. Looks interesting!

Do you happen to know if Pope Benedict XVI was there?

Thank you!

God bless you,

+PAX

 

[FollowChrist34]

Hello “Follow Christ 34”

Thanks for the link! I look forward to reading & listening to it all!. Looks interesting!

Do you happen to know if Pope Benedict XVI was there?

Thank you!

God bless you,

+PAX

Hi Megan,

No problem - enjoy. It is really interesting. No idea on Pope Benedict being there, but I doubt it. Hopefully he can catch it here on CAF.

 

[JimG]

Here is another article about the matter. It seems Ross Douthat invited serious theological responses, and one was provided by John Martens, in America magazine. This article from CWR is intended as a response to Martens.
catholicworldreport.com/Item/4350/marriage_and_the_matthean_jesus_a_first_response_to_john_martens.aspx

 

[Vic_Taltrees_UK]

… The ostentatious humility of Pope Francis …

Another thing. Pope Francis isn’t ostentatious. He knows he’s in the public eye and is a good actor like St JP II. He knows he has to live at St Marta’s where witnesses to anything going on are closer at hand

 

[Vic_Taltrees_UK]

If Thomas White’s post 43 is a fair summary of the original Douthat piece, Douthat is just trotting out the Thompson thesis, which is virtually the same as the Magister-Mickens thesis.

In Douthat’s immature view, the Pope is the ultimate dictator and Danneels and Kasper are his mouthpieces.

My computer doesn’t play the lecture, currently. I found this, which perhaps is one man’s very brief summary of it:

wmbriggs.com/post/17165/

I don’t think there is any justification for the last few steps in Douthat’s “logic”, that the Pope is undermining anything. Has Douthat repeated his argument in detail in print?

I also tried the link JimG gave. Not only is it at two removes from Douthat, it appears to be on a somewhat different subject - it doesn’t appear to shed any light on Douthat’s thesis of the Pope undermining anything.

I did find this, a continuation by Douthat:

douthat.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/10/26/who-won-the-synod/?_r=1

He doesn’t adduce any substance to his view, but merely explains how some rather minor jockeying has been going on on the remarriage subject since before 1968.

Bishop Barron like Lucie-Smith has simply supported Douthat’s right to write what he wants to write (as do I) - neither of them has commented on the substance of what he wrote.

 

[FollowChrist34]

If Thomas White’s post 43 is a fair summary of the original Douthat piece, Douthat is just trotting out the Thompson thesis, which is virtually the same as the Magister-Mickens thesis.

In Douthat’s immature view, the Pope is the ultimate dictator and Danneels and Kasper are his mouthpieces.

My computer doesn’t play the lecture, currently. I found this, which perhaps is one man’s very brief summary of it:

wmbriggs.com/post/17165/

I don’t think there is any justification for the last few steps in Douthat’s “logic”, that the Pope is undermining anything. Has Douthat repeated his argument in detail in print?

I also tried the link JimG gave. Not only is it at two removes from Douthat, it appears to be on a somewhat different subject - it doesn’t appear to shed any light on Douthat’s thesis of the Pope undermining anything.

I did find this, a continuation by Douthat:

douthat.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/10/26/who-won-the-synod/?_r=1

He doesn’t adduce any substance to his view, but merely explains how some rather minor jockeying has been going on on the remarriage subject since before 1968.

Bishop Barron like Lucie-Smith has simply supported Douthat’s right to write what he wants to write (as do I) - neither of them has commented on the substance of what he wrote.

This talk I posted is general, not specific. Douthat does not in my view see the Pope as any sort of ultimate dictator or think that he is using Kasper as his mouthpiece. Douthat is just talking about Catholicism as it stands, post Vatican II, conservative and liberal wings, and how the recent Synod and Pope Francis are affecting those dynamics - basically just that liberal Catholicism is a re-invigorated force - not defeated as some in the conservative camp believed. The liberal wing is poised at this time to propose changes to practice/doctrine that may or may not take hold under Francis. The Pope is supportive of some of these changes but not all. Douthat does not necessarily see Francis as a “liberal Catholic.” He also has some interesting views on how various Catholics break into conservative and liberal - what changes in doctrine can the Church make to accommodate modernism in a meaningful way and what changes undercut the integrity of the faith - in other words some “liberal” Catholicism is orthodox while some potentially is not. He calls for a re-evaluation from the conservative side - all sides really - on all of this; how does the conservative respond. I am just summarizing from memory here. It is very thought provoking - I am sorry you can’t hear it. I really like this guy; he thinks.

 

[Jon_Mallory]

 

[Jon_Mallory]

This is a mixture of political opinion and fantasy. Unfortunately, it also supports the notion of division within the Church.

But hasn’t there always been division in the Church? From the Bible, it is clear that Peter and Paul disagreed on an important issue though Peter did repent. I can also think of two great schisms–the one between East and West and the Great Schism in which there were three claimants to the papacy. Division in the Church is no myth. I’m not qualified to comment on the current situation so I am not going to pit “liberal” bishops against “conservative” bishops who I have only read on the internet, which doubtless adds to the confusion. We should watch closely and not rush in to make judgment.

 

[lynnvinc]

But hasn’t there always been division in the Church? From the Bible, it is clear that Peter and Paul disagreed on an important issue though Peter did repent. I can also think of two great schisms–the one between East and West and the Great Schism in which there were three claimants to the papacy. Division in the Church is no myth. I’m not qualified to comment on the current situation so I am not going to pit “liberal” bishops against “conservative” bishops who I have only read on the internet, which doubtless adds to the confusion. We should watch closely and not rush in to make judgment.

My Carmelite (OCDS) president in a previous place used to point out the “sins of the right” (arrogance, lack of love & mercy) and the “sins of the left” (debauchery).

She used to go on an say that the sins of the right (which our members were more prone to, being of the more elderly and conservative type) were much more difficult to overcome.

I guess what is needed is not more “preaching to the choir,” but more “admonishing the choir.”

 

[FollowChrist34]

My Carmelite (OCDS) president in a previous place used to point out the “sins of the right” (arrogance, lack of love & mercy) and the “sins of the left” (debauchery).

She used to go on an say that the sins of the right (which our members were more prone to, being of the more elderly and conservative type) were much more difficult to overcome.

I guess what is needed is not more “preaching to the choir,” but more “admonishing the choir.”

But where do we end up when the debauched admonish the choir?

 

[Thomas_White]

But hasn’t there always been division in the Church? From the Bible, it is clear that Peter and Paul disagreed on an important issue though Peter did repent. I can also think of two great schisms–the one between East and West and the Great Schism in which there were three claimants to the papacy. Division in the Church is no myth. I’m not qualified to comment on the current situation so I am not going to pit “liberal” bishops against “conservative” bishops who I have only read on the internet, which doubtless adds to the confusion. We should watch closely and not rush in to make judgment.

I would say so. While there has long been division in the Church, I don’t see the virtue in contributing to it. And that’s how I see the Douthat article.

 

[FollowChrist34]

I would say so. While there has long been division in the Church, I don’t see the virtue in contributing to it. And that’s how I see the Douthat article.

Isn’t accusing others of being divisive potentionally divisive, or no?

 

[Thomas_White]

Isn’t accusing others of being divisive potentionally divisive, or no?

It was my opinion about the article, that’s all. Sorry if expressing it on a discussion forum is a problem.

 

[lynnvinc]

But where do we end up when the debauched admonish the choir?

That’s an excellent question, bec we all fall short. We all tend NOT to practice fully what we preach.

For nearly 25 years I was relatively silent about climate change, since I wasn’t really doing all I could to mitigate it in my daily life, but I finally decided sinner that I am and falling very short, I should get out there and inspire people to do the needful (do what I say, not what I do – a common refrain of parents to children). Maybe some could become much better than me and actually have a positive effect of reducing our harming and killing of others of God’s creation