Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Home
Catholic
History and Religion
Pope Francis: Obsessed with “Change”?

Pope Francis: Obsessed with “Change”?

Last updated on: February 25, 2017 at 3:41 pm by Dave Armstrong

Pope Francis: Obsessed with “Change”? 2017-02-25T15:41:50-04:00 Dave Armstrong

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

ChangeTraffic

Bus rushes by Big Ben in London [Pixabay / CC0 public domain]

***

This exchange is from my Facebook page, with a Catholic. His words will be in blue.

*****

Change. The present hierarchy just wants to change something, anything. The craving for change, for making a unique mark, is behind most Vatican decisions. It’s getting old. And predictable.

What do you mean by “change”? Consistent developments or corruptions and false doctrines / heresies (evolution of dogma)?

Heresy aside, change in general. The simple attitude to change something. To make a mark.

It makes a huge difference what kind of change it is. Consistent development is good and fine. Evolution of dogma is heresy. So which is it?

Of course it does. Newman is my hero and I understand his development of doctrine well. My point is that there is a certain desire to change for the sake of changing something, anything that can be changed without contradicting dogma. I’m not even claiming that anything in particular is heretical but simply a particular attitude to change something is present in the hierarchy. Such an attitude breeds confusion. What we are witnessing is that confusion.

That’s still avoiding the essential issue. If it is consistent development, it’s good. Jesus developed all kinds of things very rapidly. It was part of the reason people thought He was crazy and why He was killed.

St. Paul rapidly developed the relationship of law and grace, old and new covenants. That was hugely — exponentially — more of a change and more “confusing” than anything this pope has done.

Cardinal Newman himself (as you must know if he is your hero – as he is mine) was massively misunderstood for over forty years. It only subsided (and then not totally) after he became a Cardinal in 1879.

He was falsely regarded as a liberal and proponent of evolution of dogma, and not trusted. When he became a Cardinal this is what he talked about. And he continues to be massively misunderstood by anti-Catholics and even some Catholics today, who distort his true teachings.

Lots of that going on with the Holy Father, too, as I have to constantly document and chronicle, as an apologist.

Just because it’s licit to change something does not mean that it should be changed. If said change causes confusion then it is best not to change it. For example, Ad orientem or extraordinary ministers (now ordinary) are harmful to the faithful yet such innovations do not contradict dogma. You’ve stated that any change that does not contradict dogma is good. I think that is where we fundamentally disagree. Dogma does not develop in a void but in a environment. To strip dogma of that environment is dangerous and confusion.

I didn’t say that “any change that does not contradict dogma is good.” I said “Consistent development is good and fine.”

And St. Paul was teaching directly about dogma, the deposit of faith. I’m not speaking of the deposit.

That helps make my argument for me all the more, because if even important doctrines and dogmas in the deposit of faith could be so rapidly developed, causing massive confusion and spinning of heads, then certainly non-dogmatic things can be developed rapidly, by the principle of “if the greater thing can change, so (plausibly and consistently) the lesser, by the same token . .

So what has the Holy Father changed that you don’t like?

St. Paul certainly developed doctrine: the transition from the old covenant to the new: emphasis on law to the emphasis and primacy of grace. And that’s because Christian beliefs didn’t start from scratch. They are developments from Judaism.

Jesus followed pharisaical customs; Paul called himself a Pharisee twice. Jesus even told His disciples to follow pharisaical teaching; just not the example of their hypocrisy. Paul and other Jewish Christians still attended temple and synagogue services.

This is why your contention that change is such a bad thing doesn’t fly, because by analogy it would implicate Paul and Jesus far more than Pope Francis: even if he were in office for 50 years.

Think of the massive changes that Christianity brought! The Trinity, the expansion of the kingdom of God and community of God to the Gentiles, the abrogation of all the dietary laws . . .

Man, if the reactionary types and pope bashers had been around then, they would never have become Christian. Peter (Pope #1) would have been a pariah because he said all foods were clean! This is massive, huge change.

The first Christian council eliminated the necessity of circumcision (the very initiation rite) for Gentile converts.

And you’re worried about stuff that Pope Francis does? What are these huge and constant changes you don’t care for? How about a long list of them, since you think they’re so ubiquitous?

There is a significant difference between the deposit of faith given to the apostles and the subsequent development in the post apostolic era. The New Testament is part of the deposit, not its development.

The New Testament develops the Old and the theology therein. Or do you dispute that? Paul and Jesus rapidly developed the existing Judaism. That was my analogy. Pope Francis develops things; Jesus and Paul did far, far more. If it is “bad” for Francis to do it, it was much more “bad” for Jesus and Paul to do so.

And you’re still avoiding my question. What are these scores of confusing changes from Pope Francis that you find so loathsome?

The litany of alleged changes are well known to you, as you have written about them frequently. Lutheran communion, contraception remarks, celebrating reformation, etc. Confusion is rampant at a time when we need clarity more than ever. I beg you, don’t link me to every article you’ve ever written in the topics above. It’s one reason why I did not want to provide a litany of change for the sake of change.

I would contend that these are all trumped-up tempests in a teapot. I don’t have to link to stuff. Each one of my articles and those by colleagues like Scott Eric Alt that have defended the Holy Father show that each charge is a bum rap and an unjust one.

Each one has to be argued on its own merits. But it’s the easiest thing in the world to just throw a bunch of manure, because it is known that some will always stick. That’s what we have seen with the papal critics. They keep throwing and throwing, despite being systematically contradicted and refuted every time.

So now you come around and object to all this “change” when in fact very little actual change has occurred, because that is the “narrative” that has been created by all this constant nonsense. Lots of supposed, alleged, conspiratorial-type proposed changes. Very little in fact . . .

This current deaconess thing is nothing. He simply said he would be open to a commission to study a thing that was present earlier in Church history. He didn’t take a stand (nor did I in my two posts). His position is rather status quo.

What was the last big “controversy”? Oh, Amoris Laetitia. The critics were soiling themselves day and night (lots of diaper changes), and in the end nothing had changed whatsoever regarding communion, as Cardinals Müller and Schönborn have quite sufficiently clarified.

It was much ado about nothing. And except for a possible handful of things that are not readily explained or understood, that’s how all these silly things are.

He hasn’t changed regarding contraception. Amoris Laetitia itself had very strong remarks against that. He didn’t give Lutherans communion. He wasn’t even there. Someone else did, and it has since been admitted to be a big mistake.

As for celebrating the “Reformation”, that’s a huge discussion, but we can celebrate good things in it; we need not celebrate that which we disagree with. Jesus commended a pagan centurion for his faith, for heaven’s sake. Paul noted the religiosity of the pagan Athenians and commanded us to honor all men, including the pagan Roman emperor. Being diplomatic or conciliatory as much as possible is not necessarily compromise. But this is the usual traditionalist antipathy and profound misunderstanding of legitimate and authentic ecumenism, which is not indifferentism.

So even your dinky little reluctantly provided list has nothing to it, once it is analyzed for five minutes.

The method of papal critics is so much like anti-Catholic methodology, where the non-Catholic will throw out a list of 100 abominable things about the Catholic Church. Of course each one has to be discussed or argued, but the mere list has the appearance of great strength. So many things, after all! How could such a system with that many errors possibly be true???!!

You are assuming that I’m against the development of doctrine. I’ve made clear that I’m a devotee of Newman and I love the Holy Catholic Church so I’m not sure why you keep stating that I should accept development.

I never claimed that you were against development of doctrine, so that is neither here nor there. What you don’t seem to understand, however, is the development from the old to the new covenant; and from Judaism to Christianity.

*****

Meta Description: My opponent stated: “The present hierarchy just wants to change something, anything. … craving for change, … It’s getting old.”

Meta Keywords: Pope Francis, development of doctrine, innovation, corruption, Cardinal Newman, evolution of dogma, change for its own sake, anti-traditionalism, theological liberalism

Development of Doctrine

Papacy & Infallibility

Traditionalism vs. Radical Catholic Reactionaries

anti-traditionalism

Cardinal Newman

change for its own sake

corruption

development of doctrine

evolution of dogma

innovation

Pope Francis

Theological Liberalism

Previous Post

May 13, 2016

Dialogue: Clearness (Perspicuity) of Scripture

Next Post

May 14, 2016 Protestantism: Insurmountable Logical Difficulties

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category & Last Things About Me Anti-Catholicism Atheism & Agnosticism Baptism and Sacramentalism Bible and Tradition Blessed Virgin Mary Books by Dave Armstrong C. S. Lewis Calvinism & General Protestantism Catholic Apologetics Catholic Apologists Catholic conversion Catholic converts Christmas Church (Ecclesiology) Church History Conversion and Converts Development of Doctrine Eastern Orthodoxy Ecumenism & Christian Unity Eucharist & Liturgy Fathers of the Church French Translations G. K. Chesterton Hell Hell & Satan Hell & Satan & Last Things Heresies & Comparative Religion Holistic Health Inquisition & Crusades & Scandals James White Jews & Judaism & Old Testament John Calvin John Henry Newman Liberal / Modernist Theology Life Issues Literary Resume Lutheranism Mariology Martin Luther Music Orthodoxy Papacy & Infallibility Personal Page Philosophy & Science Political & Ethical & Moral Issues Protestant Persecution & Intolerance Protestantism Purgatory Purgatory & Penance Romantic & Imaginative Theology Saints & Purgatory & Penance Salvation Salvation & Justification Satan & Last Things Sexuality and Gender Issues Spanish Translations Traditionalism vs. Radical Catholic Reactionaries Traducciones al español / tradução para português Trinitarianism & Christology Uncategorized Videos

Select a Month October 2026 September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 May 2026 April 2026 March 2026 February 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 September 2025 August 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 June 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 April 2010 March 2010 December 2009 October 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 March 2009 February 2009 October 2008 September 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 May 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 October 2005 June 2005 April 2005 February 2005 July 2004 May 2004 April 2004

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz