I am Spanish, and I come from a Catholic family. More than 45 years ago, I converted to Adventism.
The book The Great Controversy helped my parents (lifelong Catholics) decide before I did. Generally, when I read some pastors or theologians, Adventist or not, talk about Catholicism and its changes, I always wonder: what has their relationship with Catholicism been like? Do they only know about that denomination only from what they have read? From official statements or brief contacts with its leaders? What face of Catholicism have they genuinely experienced in their lives?
Upon reading what Pastor Reinder Bruinsma argues about the changes Catholicism has undergone and the prejudices that Adventists still hold against that denomination, the same question comes to my mind. I am unaware of his experience with Catholicism. I believe that having been born in the Netherlands, a country divided since the 16th century between Catholics and Protestants, his memories must not have been like mine.
In my case, I lived through the final years of a dictatorship that lasted almost forty years (1939-1975). Throughout those years, Franco, the dictator, presented himself as a fervent follower of Catholicism and the Catholic Church became a faithful servant of the dictator’s purposes. It was a tough time for the other churches.
Paradoxically, while the Catholic Church was intolerant of other religious options, within the same Catholic Church, a group of priests became involved in the creation of the terrorist group that has committed the cruelest attacks in Spain: ETA. This group, from nationalist separatist positions and with a left-wing philosophy, consolidated itself as the most visible opposition front within the country.
In more recent years, to give another example, some political leaders in Catalonia (another part of Spain) reignited the flame of independence and held a referendum that the government prohibited. The police had to intervene. In that illegal process, some Catalan Catholic churches, while giving Mass, had ballot boxes for people to vote in favor of independence, even though it was banned.
I have always been surprised by the Catholic Church's ability to show different faces depending on the circumstances and its interests. I have experienced this closely.
Has Rome changed? Opinions vary, and the answer is not simple. When we talk about change, are we referring to words, gestures, rituals, doctrines, or official statements?
In any case, not everyone expresses themselves with the same certainty and conviction that Bruinsma does. For example, Gerald E. Murray, priest of Holy Family Church in New York City, states without hesitation that “Catholicism has not changed. It’s the same yesterday, today, and forever (cf. Heb 13: 8)” (Calming the Storm: Navigating the Crises Facing the Catholic Church and Society, 2022).
In an extraordinary book by the Italian Leonardo De Chirico (Same Words, Different Words, 2021), he refers to a prominent Catholic expert on the subject when evaluating the possible change caused by the Second Vatican Council. He says:
“The church has always been confronted with the issue of change in the understanding of the truth and its accounting of it in teaching, preaching, evangelizing and so on. This is why Guarino looks back to the fifth century at Vicent of Lérins’s distinction between change as profectus (i.e. a development of doctrine that preserves the core) and change as permutatio (i.e. a mutation that alters the core). Without denying the significant changes in language, style and tone that are evident at the council, Guarino argues that ‘Vatican II was in the main a homogeneous profectus of the earlier tradition,’ that is, an advancement and expansion of previous tradition that nonetheless maintained its fundamental landmarks” (p. 89).
About change, it is essential to consider another fundamental aspect. The sociologist and Anglican priest David Martin wrote a book a few years ago titled Religion and Power: No Logos without Mythos (2014). The book is essentially a critique of the "New Atheists" discourse regarding the violent nature of religion. Martin argues that the propensity for violence is not a characteristic particular to religion but occurs equally in other areas of life, such as politics. The roots of that violence can be found, among other things, in the demands for power.
The history of Christianity has taught us that a religious institution with power tends to become intolerant and violent. Similarly, history and sociology have shown us that the same institution tends to moderate its demands and requirements in the absence of power. Even when disadvantaged, it may call for tolerance, freedom, and respect. This moderation does not mean the institution has changed; it has merely adapted to the circumstances. When circumstances become favorable again, the patterns may repeat themselves.
Max Weber founded the German Sociological Society and can be considered the founder of the sociology of religion. Between 1904 and 1906, he wrote a series of essays published as a book titled The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism.
Considering historical data, Weber classified religious institutions into different categories. For him, a "church" when fully developed—one with universalist aspirations—will show itself incapable of assuming the freedom of conscience. Even when it admits such freedom, it does so because it finds itself in the minority, "thus demanding for itself a freedom that, in principle, it cannot grant to others". Ultimately, the church has an "official" duty to save souls, and therefore, it "controls the State and the entirety of secular life".
We understand that Weber's assertions are based on historical facts from the past. However, who can assure us that this cannot happen again? How do we know that the "church" described by Weber will not reappear?
One last issue. This past September, Bruinsma began writing a series of articles titled The Great Controversy Cult, which is in line with what he has been defending for years. He uses the word "cult", which has a clear negative connotation and, in Europe, is equivalent to “sect”. He is European, like me, and he knows this. What he must also know is that, for centuries, the group that has most used this term, in a self-serving manner, to discredit and persecute all other religious alternatives has been the Catholic Church. Adventists have been considered, and often still are a “sect”. This seems quite significant to me.
Pastor Bruinsma, we must all avoid prejudice and unfounded criticism of any individual or institution. I agree. However, I understand that the writings of Ellen White also deserve that same right. Let’s be clear and acknowledge whether we still consider her a prophet.
****
My name is Javier Torrontegui. I'm a Spanish Adventist. I have studied psychology, teaching, and theology. I work as a teacher in a High School.
