![\"\"](\"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/572\/2020\/02\/StBasilCathedralMoscow.jpg\")
<\/center>An Orthodox Christian wrote: \u201cThe Roman Catholic Church has changed a great deal in the past twenty years or so, and can hardly be considered the same Church it was in say, 1965 or before.\u201d<\/span>\n\u00a0<\/p>\n
1) What Catholic dogma was changed by Vatican II? Ecumenism and religious freedom do not have anything directly to do with sacraments (the subject at hand), if that is your answer. How would baptism in particular be affected?<\/span><\/p>\n
2) At what point did the Catholic Church become a \u201cdifferent\u201d Church than it was, and how? Your \u201csay\u201d clearly illustrates your difficulty.<\/span><\/p>\n
3) When did our sacraments cease to be valid in your eyes, and why?<\/span><\/p>\n
4) One can\u2019t say that, for example, a woman is unpregnant at one point and pregnant at another, without recognizing (as unavoidable) some decisive point at which the essential change was achieved. Without such a moment in time in Catholic history, your certainty that we have \u201cchanged\u201d is of little merit and substance. Why, then, make such a momentous charge without adequate grounds at all?<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n
As for ecumenism, I have shown<\/a> that it was increasingly emphasized by the Catholic Church long before 1962 (at least since 1900) \u2014 and can be shown indirectly to have been implied from the beginning<\/a> (e.g., the Donatist controversy about baptism), and certainly in St. Thomas Aquinas<\/a>. If you think we are now heretical to the extent that we have lost apostolic succession, what has happened since 1962 that offends Orthodox sensibilities any more than the papacy and the\u00a0filioque<\/i>\u00a0did prior to 1962 \u2014 enough for us to lose our sacraments, and grace, etc.?<\/p>\n
This whole anti-ecumenical minority Orthodox perspective is radically incoherent, and that is not one of the distinguishing marks of truth, let alone \u201cfullness\u201d or exclusivity of truth, my friend.\u00a0Is Orthodoxy immune from theological liberalism, heterodoxy, nominalism, unbelief, and apostasy, and all the resulting absurdity, folly, confusion, sin, relativism, division, personal unfulfillment, and scandal resulting therefrom?<\/p>\n
One of my primary arguments on this score would be that Orthodoxy has compromised historic Christian moral doctrine concerning\u00a0contraception\u00a0<\/a>(which was strictly prohibited in the early Church<\/a> and in Scripture<\/a>) and\u00a0divorce\u00a0(also prohibited in the Bible<\/a> and the early Church<\/a>). This is very clear-cut and undeniable. So while Orthodox rail about all the admitted and scandalous nonsense which goes on in Catholic\u00a0circles<\/i>\u00a0(as some sort of \u201cproof\u201d of their superiority), meanwhile they are \u2014 in effect \u2014 calling evil good (divorce, contraception), and going against either their own earlier Traditions, the pre-Schism early Church, or both. The bottom line is what any particular religious group\u00a0teaches.<\/i><\/p>\n
Let it be stated forcefully that all is not rosey in Orthodox circles, either. The oft-heard triumphalistic Orthodox criticisms of Catholic liberals and confusion come as rocks from within their own glass house. For example, I have heard or read about (from Orthodox themselves) the following problems in Orthodoxy. If we Catholics can be honest and straightforward about our<\/em> problems, then so should Orthodox<\/em> be. We\u2019re all adults here: we can take it. Hopefully, we\u2019re realists about frail and bumbling human nature:<\/p>\n
1)<\/span>\u00a0Orthodox \u201cunity\u201d is merely a paper fiction (whereas ours resides in actual, institutional allegiance to the pope and conciliar dogma).<\/p>\n
2)\u00a0<\/span>An unwillingness to confront the modern world and its social problems or philosophical questions on equal ground (which the pope \u2014 especially the current one \u2014 routinely and influentially does, and which Vatican II exemplified).<\/p>\n
3)<\/span>\u00a0A tendency to refrain from asking forgiveness, while expecting apologies from Catholics and Protestants (I note the recent apology to the Jewish people by the Catholic Church; Orthodoxy has its own sordid history of anti-Semitism as well \u2014 well-observed in, e.g., Czarist Russia); and I have been told that there is a relative unconcern for historical or current misdeeds (e.g., Serbia; we hear about the sack of Constantinople in 1204 all the time, but little about corresponding Orthodox atrocities<\/a>).<\/p>\n
4)<\/span>\u00a0Inter-Orthodox schisms and excommunications when disagreements arise (including the denial of intercommunion to those of competing jurisdictions).<\/p>\n
5)<\/span>\u00a0The Ecumenical Patriarch is either not respected or openly condemned.<\/p>\n
6)<\/span>\u00a0\u201cRussifying\u201d or Hellenizing non-Orthodox populations before they are evangelized \u2014 if at all (the equivalent to the sometimes justified \u2014 charge of \u201clatinizing\u201d made against us all the time).<\/p>\n
7)<\/span>\u00a0Ethnocentrism (Frank Schaeffer made a wisecrack about Orthodox spirituality being too often measured by how many pounds of baklava one can consume).<\/p>\n
8)\u00a0<\/span>Caesaropapism<\/a> (Solzhenitsyn \u2014 one of my heroes \u2014 has excoriated certain Russian Patriarchs on this score);<\/p>\n
9)<\/span>\u00a0The majority of Orthodox (or many, anyway) are ecumenical. But ROCOR and similar groups consider this a rank heresy. So that fact alone shows that Orthodoxy suffers from radical disunity; this is also indicated by the related controversy of whether to baptize Catholic converts.<\/p>\n
One can\u2019t have it both ways: Orthodoxy can\u2019t be both unified (with no liberals and a vague mystical overarching harmony known only to themselves), and split (ecumenist, westernized liberal vs. \u201ctraditionalist\u201d and \u201cexclusivist\u201d), depending on the utility of either claim for a particular argument at hand (in polemical battle with the heretic westerners or \u201cLatins\u201d).<\/p>\n
And note that this particular disagreement (like #4 above) is one that has become\u00a0institutionalized<\/i>\u00a0within Orthodoxy (it is one of the \u201cplanks\u201d in ROCOR\u2019s \u201cplatform\u201d). That doesn\u2019t happen in the Catholic Church. The liberals haven\u2019t succeeded in subverting (i.e., changing) a single doctrine. If the Catholic Church wasn\u2019t divinely protected from error, surely it would have caved on one itsy-bitsy little matter, say, on contraception \u2014 like practically every other Christian group (including Orthodoxy) has.<\/p>\n
10)<\/span>\u00a0What four things particularly typify an American Catholic \u201cliberal\u201d or self-styled \u201cprogressive?\u201d:<\/p>\n
\n
- \n
\n
- a)<\/span>\u00a0He defies papal authority;<\/li>\n
- b)<\/span>\u00a0He defies the Catholic prohibition of contraception;<\/li>\n
- c)\u00a0<\/span>He defies the Catholic prohibition of divorce, or else calls for more-easily obtainable annulments;<\/li>\n
- d)<\/span>\u00a0He favors a more or less autonomous (\u201cautocephalous?\u201d) American Catholic Church.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
Orthodoxy agrees with all four of these goals! Why, then, are these things not considered \u201cliberal\u201d when an Orthodox believes them? I\u2019ve been told that even such a major figure as Archbishop Kallistos (Timothy) Ware (author of the ubiquitous\u00a0The Orthodox Church<\/i>: the first introduction to Orthodoxy for many) favors women priests!<\/p>\n
What\u2019s good for the goose is good for the gander . . .<\/p>\n
In any event, stories and considerations such as these indicate to me that things are not all\u00a0that<\/i>\u00a0different in Orthodoxy, compared to Catholicism. Nominalism is in all likelihood just as great (it\u2019s hard to objectively measure). All Christian groups (even the Amish and the most fundamentalist Baptist) have to deal with the diabolical scourge of nominalism, liberalism, and unbelief. Orthodoxy tries to retreat from, and ignore modernism, as opposed to the Catholic effort of courageously confronting it, and applying the Pauline injunction \u201cI have made myself all things to all people, so that by all means I may win some.\u201d<\/p>\n
So we would expect Orthodoxy to be a bit less affected by modernism; to have fewer casualties in the battle (since it sends out few to the front lines). But if anyone convinces himself that Orthodoxy is a \u201csafe haven,\u201d immune from all these difficulties, they are simply wallowing in self-delusion. The very \u201cin-group\u201d and oftentimes culturally isolated nature of Orthodoxy merely creates another set of unique problems equally troubling and serious.<\/p>\n
Alas, Orthodox \u2014 like the rest of us \u2014 have to go to work, have friends and relatives of different religious and philosophical persuasions, and are likewise subjected to the usual biases of academia, the media, etc. There is no way to totally escape the age we find ourselves in, short of living in a cave in the desert.<\/p>\n
My point in all this (which I hope no reader loses sight of) is that we should ultimately examine the\u00a0books<\/i>\u00a0and official teaching of any group, and drop the inconsequential and evasive \u201cargument from sin and scandal,\u201d which proves only that hypocrites and dishonest liars can be found in all groups, and the universality of original and actual sin \u2014 truths and realities I would hope we all knew in the first place, without needing demonstrable proof.<\/p>\n
Why can\u2019t we dialogue about our common and differing beliefs on the basis of Holy Scripture and Holy Fathers, rather than endlessly trading horror stories and dusting-off each others\u2019 closet skeletons for yet another needless and unfruitful exhibition? No one would love to see that more than myself.<\/p>\n
***<\/p>\n
<\/p>
The foregoing caused a storm of protest on my Internet discussion group, so I clarified it further:<\/center> ***<\/center>Since some people (both privately and on the list) have\u00a0nearly completely<\/em> misunderstood\u00a0the purpose, intent, and logic of the above, I respectfully ask that such people please pay very close attention to the following. I thought I made this clear in the post itself (especially at the end), but perhaps I didn\u2019t, or else I didn\u2019t do it in a strong-enough manner (I admit there is some subtlety to my approach on this):\n 1. Many Orthodox polemicists (mostly of the anti-ecumenical variety) conclude that the post-Vatican II Catholic Church is a different Church (or should I say, no Church at all?), based on the (freely admitted) scandalous presence of many heterodox Catholics and heterodox practices.<\/p>\n
2. That being the case, I have \u201creturned the favor\u201d by pointing out some scandalous facts about current-day Orthodoxy, not in the sense that such things are necessarily\u00a0officially sanctioned,<\/i>\u00a0but in order to show that no religious group is without its crackpots and heterodox buffoons and corresponding wrong beliefs. In order to do so I brought to the table some anecdotal evidence (never intended for a second as compelling arguments in and of themselves). These were brought to my attention in large part by Orthodox themselves, so this isn\u2019t just my own idle, self-serving speculation.<\/p>\n
3. If these criticisms about the Catholic Church supposedly prove that we have lost our apostolicity, then so do the same observations about Orthodoxy. Therefore, it is a wash \u2014 the two \u201carguments\u201d cancel each other out. If sin and hypocrisy disprove apostolic succession, then there is no historic, divinely established Church at all on God\u2019s green earth and we are all on our own (which is, of course, contrary to Holy Scripture).<\/p>\n
4. This being established, I assert that what I call the \u201csin argument\u201d proves nothing. Some Orthodox have vociferously objected to my critique of their corruptions\u00a0in practice<\/i>\u00a0seemingly without grasping the whole point I was making in the first place. They couldn\u2019t see the forest for the trees. Mine is an\u00a0argument from analogy<\/i>\u00a0(which I am very fond of). Their very crying \u201cfoul\u201d in no uncertain terms is strong proof that my analogy spectacularly succeeded. The trouble is, they didn\u2019t know it was that sort of argument in the first place, so the point was lost on them.<\/p>\n
5. The above being granted, we come back to what I called for at the end of my letter: I wish Orthodox and Catholics (and Protestants) on lists such as these (we are all amateur theologians as far as I can tell, not religious scholars per se) could discuss and dialogue about the Bible and the Fathers and interpretation of same much more often than we do. We all accept the Bible.<\/p>\n
Anyone who places a premium on Christian history and continuity (if not apostolic succession and Sacred Tradition) respects the Fathers and acknowledges their great relevance in the determination of orthodox Christian doctrine and true Tradition. If we are to criticize another religious group, then I suggest that we cite its\u00a0books<\/i>\u00a0(i.e., dogmas) and authoritative pronouncements, rather than point to hypocrites in its ranks.<\/p>\n
6. In other words (to sum up my summary), my whole post was a rhetorical (but absolutely serious and sincere) exercise of showing that the \u201csin argument\u201d:<\/p>\n
\n
- \n
\n
- a)<\/span>\u00a0cuts both ways;<\/li>\n
- b)<\/span>\u00a0therefore proves nothing;<\/li>\n
- c)<\/span>\u00a0perpetuates strife and acrimony, gives offense, and accomplishes little.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
Far from\u00a0adopting<\/i>\u00a0such a method of critiquing Orthodoxy (as if it proved anything in and of itself), I was, rather, trying to show (by example, logic, rhetoric, and analogy) the utter\u00a0futility<\/i>\u00a0of it.<\/p>\n
<\/p>
The following critique actually came from a Reformed Christian (his words in blue<\/span>):<\/center> ***<\/center>As I mentioned in another post, I am a member of the Christian Reformed Church, and thus don\u2019t really have much at stake in a debate between the Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholics (and perhaps have no business being in it at all). So I\u2019m not out to attack Catholics in general or Dave personally.<\/span>\n Granted. You kept to the subject (even though you have entirely misunderstood the nature and purpose of my post \u2014 read on).<\/p>\n
(I like Dave, even though sometimes he seems to try to make it hard to do so\u2026 :) ).<\/span><\/p>\n
:-) That works both ways, too! Maybe \u201cmaking\u201d oneself unpopular is an occupational hazard of the apologist. It is not something I relish, I can assure you. Yet we find that those who stand for something (whatever<\/i>\u00a0it is) are often controversial. Our task is to make sure such opposition is for the right reasons<\/em> \u2014 not as a result of being truly objectionable on a personal or ethical level.<\/p>\n
But some of the charges made against Orthodoxy by Dave seem to me to lack substance, at least as far as acting as an apologetic for Roman Catholicism (which is obviously the intent).<\/span><\/p>\n
Only very indirectly. I have explained carefully how my intent was wildly misinterpreted by now at least three people, including yourself. I don\u2019t claim that it was intentional . . .<\/p>\n
As to the issue of divorce, historically the issue isn\u2019t so clear cut, and it seems to this Protestant that offering a Kennedy with kids an annulment is hardly morally superior to an outright divorce.<\/span><\/p>\n
I\u2019ve been in dialogues about the improper\u00a0comparison of Orthodox divorce with Catholic annulments\u00a0<\/a>several times, and have no wish to revisit it presently.<\/p>\n
[My observation on Orthodox tendencies to overlook their own past and present sins]\u00a0hardly tells us anything about the essence of Orthodoxy vs. the essence of Catholicism.<\/span><\/p>\n
It wasn\u2019t meant to at all, per my explanation above. These are very subjective and broad sociological observations, and difficult to measure, but I think the tendency is undeniable \u2014 enough for it to be considered a fault in practice.<\/p>\n
From what I\u2019ve heard, the hierarchy and monks of Serbia are quite clear in their condemnation of violence. But what does \u201crelative unconcern\u201d amount to?<\/span><\/p>\n
I think the person who conveyed this to me had in mind an unfortunate tendency of too many Orthodox as a whole.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe Ecumenical Patriarch is either not respected or openly condemned;\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n
By some he is, by some he isn\u2019t.<\/span><\/p>\n
I rest my case on this particular point! :-) I don\u2019t have to\u00a0absolutely prove<\/i>\u00a0all these examples I give, as the entire argument was one of analogy: the Catholic Church has problems \/ the Orthodox Church likewise has problems. This was not meant to be an airtight demonstration of each point. We can wrangle over the particulars and their magnitude till Kingdom Come, but to admit that Orthodoxy, too, has serious problems in its ranks is to tacitly acknowledge that the problem of liberalism in Catholicism proves little vis-a-vis relative credibility of Orthodoxy vs. Catholicism.\u00a0That\u00a0<\/i>is my point. I hope I have made it abundantly clear by now. I may have done a lousy job in making that clear, but I know what I\u00a0intended<\/i>\u00a0(and I did state it in the \u201cobjectionable\u201d post as well).<\/p>\n
I don\u2019t see how the Orthodox could deny this as a problem<\/span>\u00a0[of ethnocentrism]\u00a0in the U.S. But we should keep in mind that the immigration of the majority of Orthodox believers in the U.S. came within a century. In the 19th century, German, Irish, and French Catholics were at each others throats (literally, in some cases), with Irish churches refusing and forcing out French priests, etc. And I suspect that some of the ill-treatment shown to many Eastern rite Catholics today stems from ethnocentrism.<\/span><\/p>\n
Again, establishing the same sort of problems in Catholicism doesn\u2019t undermine my overall argument in the least, because it is an analogical argument.<\/p>\n
Someone has already pointed out the incongruity in insisting that Catholicism is defined by what is officially taught while condemning Orthodoxy for \u201cwhat I heard some guy say . . .\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n
I fully agree. In so doing he shows that he entirely misunderstood my reasoning. In fact, if you and he had read my concluding paragraph carefully, you would have understood the point I was trying to make, and all this would have been unnecessary. There I condemn\u00a0precisely<\/i>\u00a0what you condemn here!<\/p>\n
When the happy day comes in which Orthodox polemicists (particularly the non-ecumenical ones) cease attacking my Church by equating excess and corruption in practice with dogmatic and spiritual essence, then I will be utterly delighted and relieved to not have to write posts such as the one you critique. But until then it is my rather unsavory and unpleasant duty as a Catholic apologist. I wouldn\u2019t be much of an \u201capologist\u201d if I didn\u2019t defend my Church against calumny and logically absurd \u201ccritiques,\u201d now would I? It\u2019s pretty silly to complain of crushed toes or a bruise on the shoulder when one\u2019s opponent is contending against an attempted crushing of the head and heart of\u00a0their<\/i>\u00a0religion.<\/p>\n
***<\/p>\n
See many related articles on my Eastern Orthodoxy web page<\/a>.<\/p>\n
***<\/p>\n
(originally uploaded on 11-7-98)<\/p>\n
*<\/p>\n
Photo credit:<\/strong><\/span>\u00a0Weroarnau<\/a>\u00a0(6-29-18):\u00a0Saint Basil Cathedral in the Red Square in Moscow:\u00a0built between 1555 and 1561\u00a0<\/span>[Wikimedia Commons<\/a> \/\u00a0Creative Commons<\/a>\u00a0Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International<\/a>\u00a0license]<\/p>\n
*<\/p>\n
***<\/p>\n<\/body><\/html>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
An Orthodox Christian wrote: \u201cThe Roman Catholic Church has changed a great deal in the past twenty years or so, and can hardly be considered the same Church it was in say, 1965 or before.\u201d \u00a0 1) What Catholic dogma was changed by Vatican II? Ecumenism and religious freedom do not have anything directly to […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2331,"featured_media":45054,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[808],"tags":[1571,1570,3260,2364,308,1888,3261,570,6022,10341,10347,10335,10338,10344,3259],"class_list":["post-45053","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-eastern-orthodoxy","tag-byzantine","tag-eastern-catholicism","tag-eastern-christianity","tag-eastern-orthodoxy","tag-ecumenism","tag-filioque","tag-greek-christianity","tag-orthodoxy","tag-orthodoxy-contraception","tag-orthodoxy-dissent","tag-orthodoxy-divorce","tag-orthodoxy-modernism","tag-orthodoxy-modernity","tag-orthodoxy-scandal","tag-the-orthodox-church"],"yoast_head":"\n
Is Orthodoxy Immune from Modernism and Dissent?<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"If these criticisms about the Catholic Church & modernism "prove" that we have lost our apostolicity, then so do the same observations about Orthodoxy. Therefore, it's a wash.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2020\/02\/is-orthodoxy-immune-from-modernism-and-dissent.html\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Is Orthodoxy Immune from Modernism and Dissent?\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"If these criticisms about the Catholic Church & modernism "prove" that we have lost our apostolicity, then so do the same observations about Orthodoxy. Therefore, it's a wash.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2020\/02\/is-orthodoxy-immune-from-modernism-and-dissent.html\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Biblical Evidence for Catholicism\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:author\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/dave.armstrong.798\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2020-02-28T18:56:53+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/572\/2020\/02\/StBasilCathedralMoscow.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"576\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"768\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Dave Armstrong\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Dave Armstrong\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"15 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2020\/02\/is-orthodoxy-immune-from-modernism-and-dissent.html\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2020\/02\/is-orthodoxy-immune-from-modernism-and-dissent.html\",\"name\":\"Is Orthodoxy Immune from Modernism and Dissent?\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2020-02-28T18:56:53+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2020-02-28T18:56:53+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/471eaa20e441eca4bb1ea50393cf632e\"},\"description\":\"If these criticisms about the Catholic Church & modernism \\\"prove\\\" that we have lost our apostolicity, then so do the same observations about Orthodoxy. Therefore, it's a wash.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2020\/02\/is-orthodoxy-immune-from-modernism-and-dissent.html#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2020\/02\/is-orthodoxy-immune-from-modernism-and-dissent.html\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2020\/02\/is-orthodoxy-immune-from-modernism-and-dissent.html#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Is Orthodoxy Immune from Modernism and Dissent?\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/\",\"name\":\"Biblical Evidence for Catholicism\",\"description\":\"Catholic biblical apologetics\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":\"required name=search_term_string\"}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/471eaa20e441eca4bb1ea50393cf632e\",\"name\":\"Dave Armstrong\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/820e6db89734ae7a9e5dac8d498f5ac7?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/820e6db89734ae7a9e5dac8d498f5ac7?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Dave Armstrong\"},\"description\":\"Dave Armstrong is a Catholic author and apologist, who has been actively proclaiming and defending Christianity since 1981, and Catholicism in particular since 1991 (full-time since December 2001). Formerly a campus missionary, as a Protestant, Dave was received into the Catholic Church in February 1991, by the late, well-known catechist and theologian, Fr. John A. Hardon, S. J. Dave\u2019s articles have appeared in many influential Catholic periodicals, including \\\"This Rock\\\" (now called \\\"Catholic Answers Magazine\\\"), \\\"Envoy Magazine\\\" (Patrick Madrid), \\\"The Catholic Answer,\\\" \\\"The Coming Home Journal,\\\" \\\"Gilbert Magazine\\\" (American Chesterton Society), and \\\"The Latin Mass.\\\" He also writes a featured column for every issue of \\\"The Michigan Catholic\\\": published by the archdiocese of Detroit, and was editor for most of the apologetics tracts published by the St. Paul Street Evangelization apostolate. Dave\u2019s apologetics and writing apostolate was the subject of a feature article in the May 2002 issue of \\\"Envoy Magazine.\\\" He served as the staff moderator at the Internet discussion forum for The Coming Home Network, from 2007-2010. Dave has been interviewed on many nationally syndicated Catholic radio shows, including \\\"Catholic Answers Live\\\" (twice), \\\"Faith and Family Live\\\" (Steve Wood), \\\"Kresta in the Afternoon,\\\" \\\"Son Rise Morning Show,\\\" \\\"Catholic Connection\\\" (Teresa Tomeo), and \\\"The Catholics Next Door.\\\" His large and popular website, \\\"Biblical Evidence for Catholicism,\\\" was online from March 1997 to March 2007, and received the 1998 Catholic Website of the Year award from \\\"Envoy Magazine.\\\" His blog of the same name (now transferred to Patheos), begun in February 2004, contains more than 1,500 papers, at least 500 debates or dialogues, and over 50 distinct \\\"index\\\" web pages. Unsolicited correspondence has indicated many hundreds of conversions (or returns) to the Catholic faith as a result, by God's grace, of these writings. Dave's conversion story was published in the bestselling book \\\"Surprised by Truth\\\" (edited by Patrick Madrid; San Diego: Basilica Press, 1994). Sophia Institute Press has published six of his books: \\\"A Biblical Defense of Catholicism\\\" (Foreword by Fr. John A. Hardon, S. J., 1996 \/ 2003), \\\"The Catholic Verses\\\" (2004), \\\"The One-Minute Apologist\\\" (2007), \\\"Bible Proofs for Catholic Truths\\\" (2009), \\\"The Quotable Newman\\\" (editor: 2012), and \\\"Proving the Catholic Faith is Biblical\\\" (2015). He is co-author (with Dr. Paul Thigpen) of the inserts for \\\"The New Catholic Answer Bible\\\" (Our Sunday Visitor: 2005), and editor for \\\"The Wisdom of Mr. Chesterton: The Very Best Quotes, Quips, and Cracks from the Pen of G. K. Chesterton\\\" (Saint Benedict Press \/ TAN Books: 2009). \\\"100 Biblical Arguments Against Sola Scriptura\\\" was published by Catholic Answers in May 2012. His \\\"Quotable Wesley\\\" compilation was published by (Protestant \/ Wesleyan publisher) Beacon Hill Press in April 2014. Several of his 49 books are bestsellers in their field. Dave maintains a popular personal Facebook page, a Facebook author page, and has a Twitter account as well. He offers almost all of his books in e-book form on his own Biblical Catholicism site (http:\/\/biblicalcatholicism.com\/), at a permanent deep discount: only $2.99 for ePub, mobi, and AZW, and $1.99 for PDF. His writing has been enthusiastically endorsed or recommended by many leading Catholic apologists, authors, and priests, including Dr. Scott Hahn, Fr. Peter M. J. Stravinskas, Marcus Grodi, Patrick Madrid, Steve Ray, Tim Staples, Devin Rose, Mike Aquilina, Al Kresta, Karl Keating, Fr. Dwight Longenecker, Brandon Vogt, Marcellino D'Ambrosio, and Fr. John A. Hardon, S. J. Dave has been happily married to his wife Judy since October 1984. They have three sons and a daughter, and reside in southeast Michigan (metro Detroit).\",\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/biblicalcatholicism.com\/\",\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/dave.armstrong.798\",\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/@LuxVeritatisApologetics\"],\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/author\/davearmstrong\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Is Orthodoxy Immune from Modernism and Dissent?","description":"If these criticisms about the Catholic Church & modernism \"prove\" that we have lost our apostolicity, then so do the same observations about Orthodoxy. Therefore, it's a wash.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2020\/02\/is-orthodoxy-immune-from-modernism-and-dissent.html","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Is Orthodoxy Immune from Modernism and Dissent?","og_description":"If these criticisms about the Catholic Church & modernism \"prove\" that we have lost our apostolicity, then so do the same observations about Orthodoxy. Therefore, it's a wash.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2020\/02\/is-orthodoxy-immune-from-modernism-and-dissent.html","og_site_name":"Biblical Evidence for Catholicism","article_author":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/dave.armstrong.798","article_published_time":"2020-02-28T18:56:53+00:00","og_image":[{"width":576,"height":768,"url":"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/572\/2020\/02\/StBasilCathedralMoscow.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Dave Armstrong","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Dave Armstrong","Est. reading time":"15 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2020\/02\/is-orthodoxy-immune-from-modernism-and-dissent.html","url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2020\/02\/is-orthodoxy-immune-from-modernism-and-dissent.html","name":"Is Orthodoxy Immune from Modernism and Dissent?","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#website"},"datePublished":"2020-02-28T18:56:53+00:00","dateModified":"2020-02-28T18:56:53+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/471eaa20e441eca4bb1ea50393cf632e"},"description":"If these criticisms about the Catholic Church & modernism \"prove\" that we have lost our apostolicity, then so do the same observations about Orthodoxy. Therefore, it's a wash.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2020\/02\/is-orthodoxy-immune-from-modernism-and-dissent.html#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2020\/02\/is-orthodoxy-immune-from-modernism-and-dissent.html"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2020\/02\/is-orthodoxy-immune-from-modernism-and-dissent.html#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Is Orthodoxy Immune from Modernism and Dissent?"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/","name":"Biblical Evidence for Catholicism","description":"Catholic biblical apologetics","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":"required name=search_term_string"}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/471eaa20e441eca4bb1ea50393cf632e","name":"Dave Armstrong","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/820e6db89734ae7a9e5dac8d498f5ac7?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/820e6db89734ae7a9e5dac8d498f5ac7?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Dave Armstrong"},"description":"Dave Armstrong is a Catholic author and apologist, who has been actively proclaiming and defending Christianity since 1981, and Catholicism in particular since 1991 (full-time since December 2001). Formerly a campus missionary, as a Protestant, Dave was received into the Catholic Church in February 1991, by the late, well-known catechist and theologian, Fr. John A. Hardon, S. J. Dave\u2019s articles have appeared in many influential Catholic periodicals, including \"This Rock\" (now called \"Catholic Answers Magazine\"), \"Envoy Magazine\" (Patrick Madrid), \"The Catholic Answer,\" \"The Coming Home Journal,\" \"Gilbert Magazine\" (American Chesterton Society), and \"The Latin Mass.\" He also writes a featured column for every issue of \"The Michigan Catholic\": published by the archdiocese of Detroit, and was editor for most of the apologetics tracts published by the St. Paul Street Evangelization apostolate. Dave\u2019s apologetics and writing apostolate was the subject of a feature article in the May 2002 issue of \"Envoy Magazine.\" He served as the staff moderator at the Internet discussion forum for The Coming Home Network, from 2007-2010. Dave has been interviewed on many nationally syndicated Catholic radio shows, including \"Catholic Answers Live\" (twice), \"Faith and Family Live\" (Steve Wood), \"Kresta in the Afternoon,\" \"Son Rise Morning Show,\" \"Catholic Connection\" (Teresa Tomeo), and \"The Catholics Next Door.\" His large and popular website, \"Biblical Evidence for Catholicism,\" was online from March 1997 to March 2007, and received the 1998 Catholic Website of the Year award from \"Envoy Magazine.\" His blog of the same name (now transferred to Patheos), begun in February 2004, contains more than 1,500 papers, at least 500 debates or dialogues, and over 50 distinct \"index\" web pages. Unsolicited correspondence has indicated many hundreds of conversions (or returns) to the Catholic faith as a result, by God's grace, of these writings. Dave's conversion story was published in the bestselling book \"Surprised by Truth\" (edited by Patrick Madrid; San Diego: Basilica Press, 1994). Sophia Institute Press has published six of his books: \"A Biblical Defense of Catholicism\" (Foreword by Fr. John A. Hardon, S. J., 1996 \/ 2003), \"The Catholic Verses\" (2004), \"The One-Minute Apologist\" (2007), \"Bible Proofs for Catholic Truths\" (2009), \"The Quotable Newman\" (editor: 2012), and \"Proving the Catholic Faith is Biblical\" (2015). He is co-author (with Dr. Paul Thigpen) of the inserts for \"The New Catholic Answer Bible\" (Our Sunday Visitor: 2005), and editor for \"The Wisdom of Mr. Chesterton: The Very Best Quotes, Quips, and Cracks from the Pen of G. K. Chesterton\" (Saint Benedict Press \/ TAN Books: 2009). \"100 Biblical Arguments Against Sola Scriptura\" was published by Catholic Answers in May 2012. His \"Quotable Wesley\" compilation was published by (Protestant \/ Wesleyan publisher) Beacon Hill Press in April 2014. Several of his 49 books are bestsellers in their field. Dave maintains a popular personal Facebook page, a Facebook author page, and has a Twitter account as well. He offers almost all of his books in e-book form on his own Biblical Catholicism site (http:\/\/biblicalcatholicism.com\/), at a permanent deep discount: only $2.99 for ePub, mobi, and AZW, and $1.99 for PDF. His writing has been enthusiastically endorsed or recommended by many leading Catholic apologists, authors, and priests, including Dr. Scott Hahn, Fr. Peter M. J. Stravinskas, Marcus Grodi, Patrick Madrid, Steve Ray, Tim Staples, Devin Rose, Mike Aquilina, Al Kresta, Karl Keating, Fr. Dwight Longenecker, Brandon Vogt, Marcellino D'Ambrosio, and Fr. John A. Hardon, S. J. Dave has been happily married to his wife Judy since October 1984. They have three sons and a daughter, and reside in southeast Michigan (metro Detroit).","sameAs":["https:\/\/biblicalcatholicism.com\/","https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/dave.armstrong.798","https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/@LuxVeritatisApologetics"],"url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/author\/davearmstrong"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/45053","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2331"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=45053"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/45053\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/45054"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=45053"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=45053"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=45053"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}