The Pope’s Loyal Critics

Last updated on: October 31, 2014 at 7:15 am by David Mills

The Pope’s Loyal Critics 2014-10-30T16:21:47-04:00 David Mills

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.

In contrast to the sour traditionalists I described yesterday in Traditionalists on Francis, Philip Lawler offers an example of sane concerns about Pope Francis’ views and desires, in Could respect for the papacy mean resisting the Pope?

Pope Francis might wish to change the Church’s teaching, but he realizes that he cannot do so unilaterally. He needs the full support of his brother bishops, to assure him that he is not merely promoting his own personal preferences. If he is contemplating an important change (as in this case he is), he needs much more than a voting majority; he needs an expression of support so overwhelming that it trumps what Chesterton called “the democracy of the dead”—the consistent witness of faithful Catholics across the centuries.

Nothing approaching that level of support materialized at the October meeting of the Synod. In his closing address (which I strongly encourage everyone to read, Pope Francis tacitly acknowledged as much and signaled that he wanted above all to preserve the unity of the Church.

Lawler is responding to Ross Douthat’s NYTimes column on the Extraordinary Synod, which was another sane conservative response. But not necessarily right. Another response is offered by my Patheos colleague Artur Rosman in Doubt Douthat’s Donatist Precipice. Artur writes (there are lots of useful links in his column):

What I see in Douthat’s article instead is the specter of a shapeless, because baseless, fear.

First of all, nothing was decided at the Synod. What we see is the sausage being made up close in ways that weren’t possible before social media. Vatican I was a sausage factory, as I’ve mentioned elsewhere. But so was Paul opposing Cephas. The early Christians were probably not as heroic as we think of them and possibly doctored their accounts of martyrdom. Constantine adopting Christianity was its own mess, as was the takeover of the bishoprics by corrupt Roman aristocrats afterwards. The Byzantine side was, and still is, Byzantine (there so much more than 1054!). Douthat mentions the middle ages with the kind of aversion you’d expect from Zmirak. But it is true they were a mess, and what a productive one!

Everything before, during, and after Trent followed the same pattern. There is not a period in Church history that exhibits the kind of neat conservative unanimity and equilibrium Douthat measures the Synod (so far) against.

“God writes straight with crooked lines” is a cliche because most of us, being misshapen by the Fall, like the last part, but it’s worth remembering the first.

The papacy & the pope

Previous Post

October 30, 2014

Russell Kirk, Ghost

Next Post

October 31, 2014 The Apolitical Episcopal Church

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Abortion & life American Life Anglican Affairs Apologetics Art and artistry Beer Capitalism's downside Catholic converts Catholic issues Catholicism & public life Catholicism in general Christianity & culture Christianity & the Jews Conservatism Conservative problems Death Do unto others Dogs Ecumenical friendship Evangelicalism Evil in the world Family Friendship Heroes How we should live Islam It's a funny old world Jews Judaism Israel Judaism justice Liberalism Life issues Marriage Mary Mass Media Modern culture good & bad Modern life as it is lived Modern Religion Mormonism People Personal reflections Politicians Protestantism Race Rand & Randiansm Secularisms Sexualities Society justice equality freedom The papacy & the pope Uncategorized Worship Writing & Language

Select a Month January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

Who sat at the Beautiful Gate begging before Peter healed him?

Select your answer to see how you score.

A blind man A lame man A rich ruler A Roman centurion