Trent, I think,recognizes the biggest problem with his re-definitions. He urges Catholics that just because doctrines can change, we still have to accept them as true submissively. But by saying doctrine can change, he has obliterated the trustworthiness of the magisterium.

/9

Why bother to submit to the doctrines of the Church if they can be changed? If we can’t trust them, why bother with Catholicism at all? We know many in the Church want to change doctrines in terrible and heretical ways; our ability to resist them is now undercut.

/10

The way forward is to recognize two truths: (1) Doctrine *can* develop, but never in a way contrary to its essence; and (2) Not every teaching of the Church is a doctrine. When the Church makes political or economical recommendations, for example, those can change over time.

/11

We must be clear that doctrine *cannot* change, only develop, and we can have legitimate debates about exactly which teachings are doctrine and which are not.

/12

But by caving to the current zeitgeist to explicitly declare that doctrine can change, Trent is giving a massive weapon to those in the Church who want to overturn even our most cherished beliefs.

/13 (fin)