Go here to read more. This story is spreading like a forest fire. Huge stored up anger at the rampant gaslighting, to put it politely, of the last pontificate.
Lies, Damn Lies and Pope Francis
- Donald R. McClarey
Donald R. McClarey
Cradle Catholic. Active in the pro-life movement since 1973. Father of three, one in Heaven, and happily married for 43 years. Small town lawyer and amateur historian. Former president of the board of directors of the local crisis pregnancy center for a decade.
I’m hoping the growing outrage and frustration will so discredit the holdovers from the previous pontificate that the Holy Father will have an irresistible incentive to sack some of Francis’ more powerful cronies. After all, the first rule of office politics is never make your boss look bad— and Francis’ remaining flunkeys are absolutely making our Pope look bad for keeping them around…
Not sure how Pope Leo might handle these, he could request the exact same survey be taken of Bishops again.
However well this would quell confustion regarding the report, this would put Bishops in an awkward position of in effect saying “yes, PF & company were lying.”
More likely a review of the original survey responses is underway, and a determination will be made. That determination will likely not include a negative for PF, but will likely cause the Dismissal of the Company that shall we say “miss-informed PF.” This has the double effect of providing Leo the means to Dismiss as he likely wishes to.
Maybe it’s Pope Leo the Leaker. Maybe laying the groundwork for the rationale about reversing the actions of his predecessor more quickly. We all know how airtight the Vatican can be when it wants to be. #chicom agreement.
Set aside for a moment whether the suppression of the TLM is good or bad…
Assuming the leak is accurate (I do), the “listening Church” was not listening after all and the pope did what he thought was correct. Good.
However, the pope lied about what the bishops said. Bad.
However, I would much rather deal with the effects of Francis’s personal badness (lying) instead of enduring the structural disaster of Synodality.
Synodality delenda est!
This has been rumored and so no surprise. A vatican that allows the worship of idols and plays footsie with abortionists, homosexuals, and atheists is not above lies either.
@ The Bruised Optimist, I think the correct Latin would be:
Synodalitas delenda est!
The full verse would be rendered as:
Ceterum autem censeo Synodalitatem delendam esse!
So, Francis lied. So did his Curia. I’m not exactly surprised by that. Disappointed, yes. Surprised, no. Pope Francis… more or less violated rules at times. I’ve seen pachamama mentioned a few times; he also did foot-washing for non-Catholics, half demanded that nations encourage illegal alien immigration, … he came near enough to directly insulting the American citizenry on more than one occasion. He typically didn’t bother explaining why rules existed. Mostly he “went around” them for symbolic gesture’s sake. He often struck me as Pope John Paul II on steroids.
Like any leader with a potentially unpopular agenda in mind, he gave appearance of seeking to gain “on the ground” insights. Tough to say if he knew what he’d hear.
I AM surprised by Spuntoni’s view that Bruni should know not to evaluate a reporter’s question. I would expect Spuntoni to know that …shaping a narrative…IS what a press office does. We may not like the message. We may not like the messenger. Both reporters and press officers still have their respective jobs.
On the whole, …I still don’t know what to make of all this. Is Leo carefully crafting a message to give himself cover, the better to ultimately alter Traditionis? Maybe.
I still think it strange that a bishop ought wait to implement Traditionis. I wish to see it undone too. ..It remains the law until Leo changes it.
Leo has not yet chosen to act.
I do wish he’d make a decision. I wish he would make several decisions.
Pope Francis had the authority to ban/restrict the Latin Rite Mass without consulting anyone just like Pope Benedict had authority to expand it without consulting anyone. Why spin a lie and say it was frowned upon by bishops, it caused problems within diocese, it was dividing the Church etc..why play this game? It’s important to know “why” instead of simply dismissing Pope Francis as an evil man acting in an evil way. Because if it indeed was pressure from certain sections of the Church, then those manipulative people are still there and active, even though Francis is gone. The “faceless men” are still there and will continue to be a problem…I honestly am of the belief Pope Francis did not personally care either way (which was concerning in itself) and the current Pope has to get to the root of the problem…
I guess best to wait for Pope Leo to reverse the course first then go after the political factions who instigated this. I personally think he is worried how he is going to do it, without them coming after him.
When Pope Paul VI was considering the Church’s stance on artificial birth control and other life issues, he too consulted with the world’s bishops and leading theologians. It turned out that a majority of the feedback the Pope received was favoring a more ‘nuanced’, permissive stance.
Fortunately for the Church and the world, Pope Paul VI decided that the Church’s stance on those issues was better expressed by what was the minority opinion of those bishops consulted. Paul VI then wrote Humanae Vitae and faced the ensuing howls of his critics. (And as we see 55 years after, he was absolutely 100% correct, even prophetic in that encyclical).
But unlike Francis, Pope Paul VI didn’t lie about the input he had received from the bishops he consulted. He forthrightly acknowledged that their majority did not agree with his own decision. He paid those bishops the compliment of being honest with them, and being honest with the Church at large. It was his decision to make and he made it, and he paid a price for it.
Francis, on the other hand, merely used the bishops’ input as a cover for making a decision he would have made no matter what they’d said. Instead of standing by his own choice, he used them to take the heat. What he did was cynical, dishonest, manipulative and in the end, cowardly. Unworthy behavior from a Vicar of Christ.
Ezabelle:
Pope Benedict XVI said that The Latin Mass was not prohibited by Vatican II, therefore the Latin Mass was free to be used.
Yes – thank you Mary.
There’s nothing wrong in itself about running a survey as part of decisionmaking. For example, before the dogmatic declaration of the Immaculate Conception, the Pope asked bishops to survey their priests and parishes, to make sure that the Immaculate Conception really was something believed universally, and thought absolutely necessary as part of doctrine.
That was just making sure, with “vox populi vox Dei.” And the populace was generally well-formed, and the doctrine already existed; so it wasn’t dangerous.
Making a survey when you don’t want to find out what’s true — that’s the misuse.
It has been documented that Bergoglio hated the United States of America, the Tridentine Mass and it’s adherents.
It is clear he hid behind the cover of the bishops to choke off the Tridentine Mass, while Benedict was still alive. The fact that the bishops of Charlotte and Detroit are set on enforcing something that is the product of a dead Pope and known to be a lie shows the rot is derp and widespread.
A shepherd concerned with his flock would support that which leads souls to Christ.
Wow! suburbanbanshee Making a rare appearance! I’m so happy to see you posting, I hate to disagree with you, but here goes:
That was just making sure, with “vox populi vox Dei.” And the populace was generally well-formed, and the doctrine already existed; so it wasn’t dangerous
It certainly was dangerous, as the progressives’ obsession with invoking the sensus fidei as justification for overturning centuries of settled doctrine clearly demonstrates.
Making a survey when you don’t want to find out what’s true — that’s the misuse.
I’m not sure surveys ever reveal truths … The decks are stacked with people who answer in the desired fashion before the questions are even asked.
… But I’m a cynic
“It has been documented that Bergoglio hated the United States of America, the Tridentine Mass and its adherents.”
You are probably right. I think he hated the US and its prosperity because he couldn’t stand to admit that socialists government ie. Argentina, the one he grew up under, were economic and social failures. Time and time again.
But in terms of prejudices I don’t think his actions against the Latin Mass had anything to do with his dislike *cough* jealousy of the US. The Latin Mass is attended by people all over the world and is not specific to the US. Pope Leo has to get to the root of the problem because it’s hanging around like a bad smell.