In 2017, in light of the 500th anniversary of Martin Luther’s so-called Reformation, the Pew Research Center published survey results revealing that Protestants are highly divided on a wide variety of religious beliefs.
In other news, an expert team of wildlife biologists recently conducted a boots-on-the-ground investigation that yielded conclusive evidence that bears do in fact defecate in the woods.
Presumably, you will forgive me for making light of Pew’s “findings” given that differences of opinion on matters of faith and morals are endemic to Protestantism. This, of course, is due to its rejection of the papacy as instituted by Christ to serve as the proximate source of unity in the Church.
Pew further reported that “Protestants now say the two Christian traditions [Protestants and contemporary self-identified Catholics] are more similar than different.”
This too seems obvious enough, at least from the viewpoint of the Protestants.
As for what caused these “two Christian traditions” to appear more similar than different, one might do well to ponder: In what is this Catholic tradition rooted?
For an answer, we will turn to John Paul II, who wrote the following in his inaugural encyclical:
…I am entering into the rich inheritance of the recent pontificates. This inheritance has struck deep roots in the awareness of the Church in an utterly new way, quite unknown previously, thanks to the Second Vatican Council… (Redemptor Hominis – 3)
NB: According to “Saint” Wojtyla, what is widely considered Catholic identity in our day is deeply rooted, not so much in Apostolic tradition, but rather in Vatican Council II. As such, it must be noted that the overwhelming majority of self-identified Catholics today are adherents to the conciliar faith, of which the Protesntatized Novus Ordo, insistence upon religious liberty, and a hyper-focus on social justice are central.
This forms the basis for substantial common ground with Protestantism, but that’s only part of the answer.
I would argue that even more fundamental than this is the plainly observable reality that self-identified Catholics are nearly as divided on matters of faith and morals as their Protestant counterparts. If only on this solitary point alone, one must concede that the two groups are indeed “more similar than different.”
As mentioned, on the Protestant side of the equation, disunity of faith is attributable to their rejection of the papacy as Christ established it, a position well articulated by the following statement:
When the man called “pope” preaches, teaches, or explains some doctrine, principle, or practice, this is but one man’s opinion. It may, or may not be, in keeping with the Scriptures. It may, in fact, be incompatible with faith in Jesus Christ and, therefore, dangerous. It is up to each individual believer to prayerfully consider, to the best of his ability, everything that a “pope” – or any other person for that matter – might propose for our belief and practice, and to exclude from our midst anything that we recognize as a departure from authentic Christian tradition.
Even among those heretics and schismatics that look favorably upon the pope as a noteworthy Christian “religious leader,” the above statement accurately portrays the Protestant mindset relative to papal teaching.
This, as much as anything else, is a fundamental defining characteristic of Protestantism. Stated another way, one can even say that to view the pope and his authoritative teaching as the opinion of just one man, however noteworthy, is to be Protestant.
This being so, one can understand why disunity of faith is inevitable among Protestants; they have no authoritative teacher and guide in whom they can place their trust concerning matters of faith and morals. While they may avail themselves of the wisdom of other learned men, ultimately, they are left to determine for themselves what is true and what is false.
What, however, shall we say about the self-identified Catholic side of the equation? What gives rise to the disunity of faith that permeates so many families, parishes, and dioceses today?
In search of the cause, one may understandably be moved to follow the “deep roots” mentioned by John Paul II, placing blame squarely upon the Second Vatican Council. While it is entirely true that Vatican II provides the soil wherein disunity of faith flourishes like weeds in a long forgotten fallow, all signs point back to the papacy, more specifically, the faithful’s posture toward it.
On examination – and not particularly close examination at that – one finds that the vast majority of self-identified Catholics today hold a view of the pope and his teaching that is nearly identical to that of the Protestants. This being so, one should expect disunity of faith to be prevalent among both, and it is. In this, common ground with the heretics is occupied not only by what we might call conciliar Catholics, but also by those who proudly wave the flag of tradition.
For example, in an article recently published by Rorate Caeli, Professor Roberto de Mattei provided a stellar example as he commented on Fiducia Supplicans (the infamous homo-couple blessing declaration). He writes:
The author of the Declaration is Pope Francis’ close collaborator and ghost writer, Victor Manuel Fernández, who was appointed prefect of the new Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith on July 1st, 2023 and created cardinal the following September 30th. The document is signed ex audientia by Pope Francis, in a manner that makes it unappealable. Normally the document should be an expression of the Church’s ordinary Magisterium, but it is not, precisely because by departing from Church teaching it loses all character of “magisteriality.”
In other words, even though the content of the declaration bears the pope’s signature, i.e., it is published as part of his papal magisterium, Professor de Mattei (and no doubt countless other “trad” leaders) has determined, on his own scholarship, that it is a departure from authentic Christian tradition. And so, contrary to what the pope plainly intends, he has determined that it isn’t magisterial at all.
This is nothing more, nor less, than the Protestant view of the papacy at work.
Of course, de Mattei and others of like mind will object by declaring their allegiance to dogmatic papal pronouncements, as if this alone makes their posture toward the Roman Pontiff sufficiently Catholic.
Ironically, even Protestant apologists recognize the deficiency of such an attitude inasmuch as it renders the papacy useless.
For example, James White, a well-known Baptist theologian, recently mocked many of today’s most vocal Catholics saying, as if speaking in their voice: “Unless the Pope does a dogmatic declaration for faith and morals, we don’t need to pay attention.”
This, my friends, is the tradservative position in a nutshell! Seriously, if Dr. Peter Kwasniewski had said those exact words, would anyone be taken aback?
Addressing those who view papal teaching thus, White went on to observe: “He’s worthless according to your own standards!”
White makes a very good point: If the pope is a trustworthy teacher and guide on matters of faith and morals only when he is speaking ex cathedra, or perhaps when we on our own determine that he has spoken well, then what good is he?
In response to White’s criticism, Trent Horn, an apologist at Catholic Answers, retorted:
I would say the Pope is useful, because he can speak authoritatively when he exercises his teaching office, like through an encyclical or confirming the CDF in their teachings. This allows the Catholic Church to teach on things the Bible says nothing about, like surrogacy or IVF.
To his credit, Mr. Horn is defending Francis’ “usefulness” as pope even in light of the infelicitous Fiducia Supplicans, saying that the document “in principle, is orthodox.”
He’s incorrect, but at least he’s consistent, which is more than I can say for men like Roberto de Mattei and others who address Francis as pope (and even have the gaul to insist that others do the same), but who treat his authoritative magisterium as if it just one man’s opinion, behaving in exactly the same manner as a Protestant.
