By Lavoisier Fernandes –
We live in an age increasingly suspicious of objective truth and universal moral authority. In a culture shaped by postmodern thinking, truth can become intensely personal—something determined less by what is true than by what I believe to be true. Social media has amplified this tendency, giving everyone a platform, an audience and, sometimes, the illusion that every opinion carries equal authority.
St John Paul II anticipated this crisis of truth in Fides et Ratio (1998), warning against reducing the search for meaning to “merely human argumentation”. For Christianity, truth is not simply an idea to be constructed or a preference to be asserted. Truth has a face: Jesus Christ.
Yet a crisis of truth inevitably becomes a crisis of authority. If truth is reduced to personal conviction, a fundamental question follows: Who has the authority to tell me what is true?
“Cafeteria Catholicism” in a Polarised Church
That question has not remained outside the Church. “Cafeteria Catholicism”—the tendency to accept some teachings of the Church while setting aside those that challenge us—has become another expression of the wider culture of individual choice. Catholics can find themselves constructing a personal version of the faith, embracing what fits their convictions while quietly dismissing what does not.
This becomes particularly dangerous in a polarised Church. Political labels—left, right, liberal, conservative, progressive, traditionalist—have increasingly found their way into Catholic conversations. There is also a danger when we begin to look at the living Magisterium through the same political lens. A Pope becomes “progressive” or “conservative”; a teaching is welcomed because it appears to support our political position and dismissed when it does not.
Pope Francis confronted this mentality in 2022 when commemorating the Second Vatican Council. He asked how often Catholics had preferred to cheer for their own party rather than serve everyone; to be “progressive or conservative” rather than brothers and sisters; and to stand on the “right” or “left” rather than with Jesus. He later put it bluntly: “Polarisation is not Catholic.”
This does not mean Catholics cannot hold different political opinions. They can and do. The Church does not prescribe one political party, economic system or electoral strategy.
But Catholicism cannot be reduced to a political ideology. The question is not whether a teaching is “left-wing” or “right-wing”. The question is whether it belongs to the faith of the Church.
Social media has intensified the problem. Catholics are increasingly exposed to commentators, bloggers and online personalities who can become trusted authorities in their own right. A compelling video or confident, sensationalised opinion can sometimes carry more weight than the actual teaching of the Church.
The danger is obvious: the Magisterium becomes something we cherry-pick rather than something that can challenge us
Understanding the Petrine Ministry
The Petrine ministry is a ministry of service. The Pope has real authority, but that authority is not arbitrary. He does not create the faith; he receives it, safeguards it and hands it on.
A 1998 document of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, issued under Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (future Pope Benedict XVI), made this clear. The primacy of the Pope is not a political monarchy. The Roman Pontiff, like all the faithful, remains subject to the Word of God and the Catholic faith. His authority exists to serve the unity of faith and communion.
That is why one of the Pope’s ancient titles is servus servorum Dei—servant of the servants of God.
This corrects two opposite misunderstandings. One treats the Pope as an absolute ruler whose every statement must automatically be regarded as equally authoritative. The other treats papal teaching as optional, accepting it only when it agrees with one’s theological or political preferences.
Neither is Catholic.
The Magisterium has different levels of authority. A definitively taught doctrine is not the same as a prudential judgement about a political question. A papal encyclical is not identical in authority to an off-the-cuff comment. A disciplinary decision is not automatically a doctrinal definition.
Understanding these distinctions does not weaken fidelity. It helps us understand what fidelity actually requires.
Fidelity Is Neither Selective nor Blind
This becomes especially important when Catholics encounter a Pope with whom they disagree.
There is a tendency to construct a personal hierarchy of popes: to embrace St. Pope John Paul II but reject Francis, celebrate Benedict XVI while dismissing Leo XIV, or invoke Vatican II when it supports our argument and ignore it when it does not.
That is not fidelity to the Magisterium. It is selective Catholicism.
Cardinal Ratzinger made a similar point in his correspondence concerning the excommunication Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre. He warned against making a personal interpretation of the Magisterium the final authority. The problem was not legitimate theological questioning; it was allowing private interpretation to stand above the Church’s authentic teaching authority.
Fidelity does not mean surrendering reason or conscience. It means allowing reason and conscience to be formed within the faith of the Church rather than making personal preference the final measure of truth.
But Catholicism also asks something more demanding: Can I allow the Church, through her Magisterium, to challenge me?
The Church Has Authority to Change Her Own Laws
Fidelity to the Magisterium also requires Catholics to distinguish between doctrine and discipline. They are not the same, yet they are often spoken of as though they were, creating unnecessary confusion.
Doctrine concerns what the Church teaches concerning faith and morals: what we believe and how we are called to live. Discipline, by contrast, concerns the laws and practices established by the Church to govern her life and mission. The Catechism itself makes this distinction when it speaks of the profession of faith and the moral life (CCC 26).
The Church therefore has the authority to change her own disciplinary laws when circumstances warrant it. This authority is rooted in Christ’s promise to Peter and the apostles: “Whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven” (Matthew 16:19; and 18:18).
The living Magisterium also has the task of faithfully presenting and applying the deposit of faith in changing circumstances. As human knowledge develops and new questions emerge, the Church must discern how those developments can be understood in the light of Scripture, Tradition and the enduring truths of the faith (CCC 85).
Understanding these distinctions does not weaken fidelity. It helps us understand what fidelity actually requires.
Tradition is living, not frozen
Fidelity does not require Catholics to treat the Church as incapable of development. The Catholic faith is not a museum exhibit. Tradition is living.
Leo XIV’s 2026 encyclical Magnifica Humanitas describes Catholic social doctrine as having a “dynamic character” and as a living reality in dialogue with history, cultures and the sciences. The circumstances change; the Gospel does not.
But speaking to new circumstances is not inventing a new faith. Authentic development preserves continuity with what has been received. The Church can deepen her understanding without abandoning the apostolic faith.
The Magisterium in the age of social media
That challenge is even greater in the digital age. We are constantly surrounded by quotations, reactions, headlines and competing interpretations. A thirty-second video can generate thousands of comments before anyone has even read the document being discussed.
Fidelity therefore requires a certain basic intellectual discipline. We need to fact-check what we encounter, consult trusted sources and, where possible, read the actual Church document rather than relying on someone else’s interpretation of it. We should ask: What is the Church actually teaching? What is the context? And what level of authority does the teaching carry?
We must also distinguish doctrine from discipline, authoritative teaching from theological opinion, and the Magisterium from the commentary that surrounds it.
Most importantly, do not allow an algorithm to become an unofficial magisterium.
Fidelity to the Magisterium is ultimately fidelity to Christ
Catholicism is a received faith— handed down through the centuries through apostolic succession. It is not a collection of beliefs we select according to personal preference, political instinct or theological style.
Catholics can have questions. They can struggle with particular teachings, disagree with prudential decisions and hope for legitimate development. But the faith is not ours to reinvent. We trust that Christ continues to lead His Church into a deeper understanding of the truth, through the Holy Spirit and the living Magisterium.
In an age that constantly asks us to choose a side, the Catholic answer is not left or right. Not progressive or conservative. Not traditionalist or modernist. Not “my pope” against “your pope.”
Our fidelity is not to a faction. It is to Christ and His Church.
That is why fidelity to the Magisterium is ultimately fidelity to Christ.
And as Pope Benedict XVI once said: “Humble fidelity to Jesus and obedience to the Magisterium is what brings true change in the Church.”
————
Lavoisier Fernandes, born and raised in Goa, is currently based in West London. His faith is “work in progress”- and a lifelong journey. He has always been fascinated by the Catholic faith, thanks to his Salesian schooling. He’s passionate about podcasting, theology, the papacy, and volunteering. He has hosted ‘Talking Faith’ series for Heavens Road FM, Catholic Radio, connecting with ordinary men and women within the Catholic faith, other faiths and examining issues affecting both the Church and society. He has also been a host on Shalom World Catholic TV for two episodes of the ‘Heart Talk’ series. He presently contributes for the Goa Diocesan magazine Renevacao.