[Mrs. Don-o]

Sohrab Ahmari, the author of this review, is a 2016 convert to Catholicism who writes for Commentary and the Wall Street Journal. He's reviewing To Change the Church, a critique of the Francis Revolution by Ross Douthat, the New York Times' surprisingly sage in-house Conservative opinionista who converted to Catholicism in his teens (20+ years ago).

A trenchant analysis of a very important book dealing with Pope Francis' very disturbing, deeply subversive papacy.

Class, discuss.

[heterosupremacist]

Wow. Just, wow!

I need time to digest this, before I can make a coherent reply...

[metmom]

Seems that the Catholic church goes through upheaval, serious upheaval, every 500 years or so.

It really didn’t get established until about 400 AD.

It was about 1054 when the Great Schism happened and the EO were established.

It was during the 1500’s when the Protestant Reformation happened.

We’re at the next 500 year mark and Roman Catholicism is looking to be on the brink of another crisis.

And each time, that part headquartered at the Vatican takes the name of Roman Catholicism and anathema’s those who don’t follow it, just like the did with the EO and those who wouldn’t buckle under in the 1500’s.

FWIW, the EO consider themselves to be the original Catholic church with Rome being in schism.

[ebb tide]

Now, to be clear, Pope Francis has never formally endorsed communion for the divorced and remarried.

Only here do I disagree with the reviewer. I don't own Douthat's book yet, but if Ross has said Bergoglio never formally endorsed communion for the divorced and remarried, I would ask him why Francis, describing them as "authentic magisterium," ordered the official publication of his letter to a group of Argentine bishops and their (heretical) guidelines for the interpretation of "Amoris Laetitia," his apostolic exhortation on the family.

Update: Pope's letter to Argentine bishops on 'Amoris Laetitia' part of official record

[jobim]

I think the most important book is The Dictator Pope followed by The Political Pope.

[amihow]

The Pope’s teachings are not always infallible. They are so in very limited and well defined citcumstaces.

It important not to expand the popular understanding of 3infalliblity beyond the official teaching.

[Ransomed]

“Today some bishops interpret Amoris to abrogate the old teaching while others maintain the traditional position, with the disconcerting result that Catholic truth shifts depending on where the faithful live. “

Truth can’t really be shifted, if it could it wouldn’t be truth. People’s perception of what they believe is true can be shifted. But in 1000 years I think I know what folks who stubbornly bother to call themselves Catholic will still think about civil divorce and remarriage.

“The leading lights of theological liberalism are octogenarians, and there are no successors in the wings.”

Anyone can see it—younger clergy in general are simply more conservative. To choose to become a priest today you have to really care about it to bother with it at all. So are liberals or conservatives more likely to really care about something like that today?

Freegards

[NRx]

I’ve read the book and recommend it highly.