Former curial official writes stinging critique of Franciscan pontificate December 9, 2015Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, different religion, disaster, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, paganism, Papa, persecution, scandals, secularism, SOD, the struggle for the Church.
This was written and apparently submitted about a year ago. It does not seemed to have had any discernible effect. The critiques presented are pretty standard, but the source is unique. The critique was presented anonymously to prevent retribution, which, I think, tells us all we need to know about the new “mercy.” Nice submission by One Pyotr Fiver (I just start off with the critique, without the intro. I do not include each item, you can read that at the linka – my comments):
1. An emotional and anti-intellectual attitude of yours which is often tangible and which has difficulties in dealing with theories and doctrines
The alternative to the Teaching Church is the Arbitrary Church, and not the Merciful Church. [Becoming more and more apparent every day] Among not a few of your own chosen employees and close counselors, there is to be found a true lack of competence, both in teaching and in theology; these men .. think rather all too often in pragmatic and political terms. … [ya think?]
You are distancing yourself from the wisdom which is preserved in the Church’s traditional discipline, in Canon Law, and also in the historical practices of the Curia. Together with your disdain for (supposedly) theoretical teaching, this propensity leads to an authoritarianism of which even the founder of your Order of Jesuits, St. Ignatius himself, would not approve. … [I think he put this amazingly gently]
3. A populism of change
Today, it is popular to call for change. However, especially the Successor of Peter has to remind himself and others of that which changes only slowly, and even more so of that which does not change at all. Do you really believe that the approval which you receive from the opinion-makers in the realm of politics and of the media is a good sign? … [Honestly? I think he does. I think that’s the “faithful” he wants to please]
4. Your own conduct is seen as a critique of how your (often canonized) predecessors have lived, talked, and acted
I cannot recognize how this attitude comports with the humility which you have so many times invoked and demanded. … Your conduct implicitly proposes the idea that you intend to re-invent somehow the Petrine Office. … [I think that “somehow” is becoming clearer every day. This is the pontificate Martini always thought he deserved, if it hadn’t been for that danged long lived Wojtyla.]
Only recently, you said that you especially like those parts of the papacy where you can act like a pastor. Of course, neither a pope nor a pastor should raise any doubts as to whether the Church is following the teaching of Christ … [Mee-ow. Spank.]
6. Exaggerated display of the simplicity of your own way of life
7. A particularism which often subjugates the goals and purposes of the Universal Church under the viewpoints of only a part of the Church
This attitude appears nearly comical with regard to a pope. …[An unserious man, for an unserious Church, in an unserious time? But I err, he is most serious, about those things for which he has a strong motivation. Like the legacy of Martini]
9. Lack of clarity about the interconnectedness of religious, political, and economic freedom
Many of your statements indicate that the state should rule more, control more, and be responsible for more areas, … history has proven wrong the idea that the state can take care of everything. … The welfare state can also become too powerful, and with it, too paternalistic, authoritarian, and illiberal. [Leftist gonna do what a leftist gonna do]
On the one hand, you show very little interest in the clergy, on the other hand, you criticize a clericalism which is more of a phantom than something that is real. [Yes and no. The kind of clericalism Pope Francis envisions, which comes across like some lingering phantasm from his youth, of the strict and severe authoritarian conservative cleric literally no longer exists. But there is a real clericalism among the progressive set in the Church, and it is thoroughly entrenched in many a bureaucracy] …. Like me, many others have difficulties with the way you sometimes talk and act. But that can be fixed, if it becomes clear that you listen to what others have to tell you. Unfortunately, I know that you are not yet capable of dealing well with such criticism – that is why I do not put my name on this letter. I want to protect my superiors against your wrath, especially the priests and bishops with whom I have worked for many years in Rome and from whom I have learned so much. You might want to work on taking away such fears – from me and from others – or, even better, to make such letters as this one superfluous, namely, by learning something from others. [Once again, ouch. This letter cuts like a knife. This priest knows this Pope very well. Such a calamity. But maybe now is the time to go ahead and name names, regardless of the consequences?]
So are we seeing the beginning of a broad based backlash against this pontificate? Or too little, too late?
Beats me. We’ve heard a lot of talk regarding a potential schism. I don’t see one, yet. But perhaps the making of one.
What a catastrophe.
So how do you see this playing out? Will it just continue with a growing chorus of criticism, and with an increasing portion of the Church getting to the point where they just ignore – or maybe just mock – the increasing insanity from Rome? And what kind of impact will even that have on the Church? Or do you really think it will come to a hard schism? For myself, I’m skeptical, because schisms aren’t made by laity, they’re made by leaders, and I don’t see any with the cajones to take such an “extreme” course of action, no matter the cost. We’ll probably just muddle along with growing practical schism, with individual nations and even dioceses being increasingly liberal and anti-liberal.