The New York Times columnist Ross Douthat mulls the implications of Pope Francisโs controversial cold call to an Argentinian woman a few days ago:
Whatever his intentions, the phone call and the coverage of it suggest two obvious perils for a papacy that leansย tooย heavily on the distinction between the doctrinal and the pastoral, between official teaching and its applications.
One is what you might call the late-Soviet scenario, in which Catholic doctrine is officially unaltered, but the impression grows thatย even the pope doesnโt really believe these things, and that when the churchโs leaders affirm a controversial position theyโre going through the ideological motions โ like Brezhnev-era apparatchiks โ and not actually trying to teach a living faith.
The other is the dashed-expectations scenario, in which the assumption that a church teaching isย aboutย to change creates widespread disaffection when it doesnโt. This happened with contraception in the 1960s, and it could easily happen with divorce and remarriage under Francis.
Indeed, it could happen even if there are some changes to church rules. The Vatican could relax procedures governing annulments, for instance, in ways that (depending on her circumstances) might address the Argentine womanโs situation, and a press expecting something more sweeping might treat the reform as a big nothing.
There is also a third perilous scenario, even if my own assumptions about the nature of the church tend to rule it out. Francis could actually be considering a truly major shift on remarriage and communion, in which the annulment requirement is dispensed with and (perhaps) a temporary penance is substituted.
Such a shift wouldnโt just provoke conservative grumbling; it would threaten outright schism.
Read on to find out why.