Conservative dissent is brewing inside the Vatican

[StMichael]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/a-conservative-revolt-is-brewing-inside-the-vatican/2015/09/07/1d8e02ba-4b3d-11e5-80c2-106ea7fb80d4_story.html

[Not A Real Name]

Could you provide a little synopsis for those of us who have crappy computers?

Edited September 8, 2015 by Not A Real Name

[bardegaulois]

It's like most mainstream press reports about the conservative/orthodox/traditional backlash against the Bergoglio pontificate, only with more reference to recent events. You've probably read the same thing six months ago, or last year, or even two years ago.

[beatitude]

It's like most mainstream press reports about the conservative/orthodox/traditional backlash against the Bergoglio pontificate, only with more reference to recent events. You've probably read the same thing six months ago, or last year, or even two years ago.

This is one of the reasons why I distrust secular reporting on issues in the Vatican. It's not that I think journalists are necessarily being disingenuous on purpose, more that they lack the basic knowledge of Catholicism needed to write an informed article. (Come to think of it, this is not a problem restricted to coverage of the Faith.) For example, Cardinal Burke says that the Pope does not have the authority to change Church teaching...and the reporter presents this as a rebuke to Francis. However, I would read this as more an attempt on the part of Cardinal Burke to educate the press on the nature and scope of the papal office, because it is the press that has been suggesting Pope Francis is going to change Catholic teachings, not Francis himself. But the reporter treats this as hard evidence of some kind of liberal-conservative tussle for power in the Vatican.

I don't think we can reasonably expect journalists to become experts on every topic they're expected to write about, but as Catholics I think we need to avoid contributing to these misconceptions through our own attitudes and behaviour. Some Catholics who were made uncomfortable by Pope Benedict's emphasis on respect for the liturgy were very quick to try and smear him as some out-of-touch antique who was trying to drag the Church back to the musty Dark Ages, instead of seeing his papacy as an invitation for them to grow in their own love for the liturgy and a challenge to give more honour to the Blessed Sacrament. Now we have other Catholics who are upset by Pope Francis's emphasis on compassion for the poorest and most marginalised, and who want to dismiss his approach as political rather than religious so that they don't have to confront their own failings and weaknesses in this regard. No Pope is perfect, but as a general rule I think that if the Holy Father is making me feel uncomfortable about something, it's probably not the Holy Father who has the problem.

[KnightofChrist]

Could you provide a little synopsis for those of us who have crappy computers?

It's a link.

[Not A Real Name]

I know it's a link.  I would like a synopsis of the article linked. My computer won't go to the site.  

 

[StMichael]

Conservative dissent is brewing inside the Vatican

VATICAN CITY — On a sunny morning earlier this year, a camera crew entered a well-appointed apartment just outside the 9th-century gates of Vatican City. Pristinely dressed in the black robes and scarlet sash of the princes of the Roman Catholic Church, Wisconsin-born Cardinal Raymond Burke sat in his elaborately upholstered armchair and appeared to issue a warning to Pope Francis.

A staunch conservative and Vatican bureaucrat, Burke had been demoted by the pope a few months earlier, but it did not take the fight out of him. Francis had been backing a more inclusive era, giving space to progressive voices on divorced Catholics as well as gays and lesbians. In front of the camera, Burke said he would “resist” liberal changes — and seemed to caution Francis about the limits of his authority. “One must be very attentive regarding the power of the pope,” Burke told the French news crew.

[What has Pope Francis actually accomplished? Here’s a look at 8 of his most notable statements.]

Papal power, Burke warned, “is not absolute.” He added, “The pope does not have the power to change teaching [or] doctrine.”

Burke’s words belied a growing sense of alarm among strict conservatives, exposing what is fast emerging as a culture war over Francis’s papacy and the powerful hierarchy that governs the Roman Catholic Church.

This month, Francis makes his first trip to the United States at a time when his progressive allies are hailing him as a revolutionary, a man who only last week broadened the power of priests to forgive women who commit what Catholic teachings call the “mortal sin” of abortion during his newly declared “year of mercy” starting in December. On Sunday, he called for “every” Catholic parish in Europe to offer shelter to one refugee family from the thousands of asylum seekers risking all to escape war-torn Syria and other pockets of conflict and poverty.

[VIDEO: Pope emphasizes forgiveness for abortions during ‘year of mercy’]

Yet as he upends church convention, Francis also is grappling with a conservative backlash to the liberal momentum building inside the church. In more than a dozen interviews, including with seven senior church officials, insiders say the change has left the hierarchy more polarized over the direction of the church than at any point since the great papal reformers of the 1960s.

The conservative rebellion is taking on many guises — in public comments, yes, but also in the rising popularity of conservative Catholic Web sites promoting Francis dissenters; books and promotional materials backed by conservative clerics seeking to counter the liberal trend; and leaks to the news media, aimed at Vatican reformers.

In his recent comments, Burke was also merely stating fact. Despite the vast powers of the pope, church doctrine serves as a kind of constitution. And for liberal reformers, the bruising theological pushback by conservatives is complicating efforts to translate the pope’s transformative style into tangible changes.

“At least we aren’t poisoning each other’s chalices anymore,” said the Rev. Timothy Radcliffe, a liberal British priest and Francis ally appointed to an influential Vatican post in May. Radcliffe said he welcomed open debate, even critical dissent within the church. But he professed himself as being “afraid” of “some of what we’re seeing”

Testing newfound freedom

Rather than stake out clear stances, the pope is more subtly, often implicitly, backing liberal church leaders who are pressing for radical change, while dramatically opening the parameters of the debate over how far reforms can go. For instance, during the opening of a meeting of senior bishops last year, Francis told those gathered, “Let no one say, ‘This you cannot say.’ ”

View Graphic 

See details on each of the events in the Pope’s visit

Since then, liberals have tested the boundaries of their new freedom, with one Belgian bishop going as far as calling for the Catholic Church to formally recognize same-sex couples. 

[How Pope Francis is also reforming the marriage annulment process]

Conservatives counter that in the climate of rising liberal thought, they have been thrust unfairly into a position in which “defending the real teachings of the church makes you look like an enemy of the pope,” a senior Vatican official said on the condition of anonymity in order to speak freely.

“We have a serious issue right now, a very alarming situation where Catholic priests and bishops are saying and doing things that are against what the church teaches, talking about same-sex unions, about Communion for those who are living in adultery,” the official said. “And yet the pope does nothing to silence them. So the inference is that this is what the pope wants.”

The contention within

A measure of the church’s long history of intrigue has spilled into the Francis papacy, particularly as the pope has ordered radical overhauls of murky Vatican finances. Under Francis, the top leadership of the Vatican Bank was ousted, as was the all-Italian board of its financial watchdog agency.

One method of pushback has been to give damaging leaks to the Italian news media. Vatican officials are now convinced that the biggest leak to date — of the papal encyclical on the environment in June — was driven by greed (it was sold to the media) rather than vengeance. But other disclosures have targeted key figures in the papal cleanup — including the conservative chosen to lead the pope’s financial reforms, the Australian Cardinal George Pell, who in March was the subject of a leak about his allegedly lavish personal tastes.

More often, dissent unfolds on ideological grounds. Criticism of a sitting pope is hardly unusual — liberal bishops on occasion challenged Francis’s predecessor, Benedict XVI. But in an institution cloaked in traditional fealty to the pope, what shocks many is just how public the criticism of Francis has become.

In an open letter to his diocese, Bishop Thomas Tobin of Providence, R.I., wrote: “In trying to accommodate the needs of the age, as Pope Francis suggests, the Church risks the danger of losing its courageous, countercultural, prophetic voice, one that the world needs to hear.” For his part, Burke, the cardinal from Wisconsin, has called the church under Francis “a ship without a rudder.”

Even Pell appeared to undermine him on theological grounds. Commenting on the pope’s call for dramatic action on climate change, Pell told the Financial Times in July, “The church has got no mandate from the Lord to pronounce on scientific matters.”

In conservative circles, the word “confusion” also has become a euphemism for censuring the papacy without mentioning the pope. In one instance, 500 Catholic priests in Britain drafted an open letter this year that cited “much confusion” in “Catholic moral teaching” following the bishops’ conference on the family last year in which Francis threw open the floodgates of debate, resulting in proposed language offering a new stance for divorced or gay Catholics.

That language ultimately was watered down in a vote that showed the still-ample power of conservatives. It set up another showdown for next month, when senior church leaders will meet in a follow-up conference that observers predict will turn into another theological slugfest. The pope himself will have the final word on any changes next year.

Conservatives have launched a campaign against a possible policy change that would grant divorced and remarried Catholics the right to take Communion at Mass. Last year, five senior leaders, including Burke and the conservative Cardinal Carlo Caffarra of Bologna, Italy, drafted what has become known as “the manifesto” against such a change. In July, a DVD distributed to hundreds of dioceses in Europe and Australia, and backed by conservative Catholic clergy members, made the same point. In it, Burke, who has made similar arguments at Catholic conferences, issued dire warnings of a world in which traditional teachings are ignored.

But this is still the Catholic Church, where hierarchical respect is as much tradition as anything else. Rather than targeting the pope, conservative bishops and cardinals more often take aim at their liberal peers. They include the German Cardinal Walter Kasper, who has suggested that he has become a substitute target for clergy members who are not brave enough to criticize the pope directly.

Yet conservatives counter that liberals are overstepping their bounds, putting their own spin on the pronouncements of a pope who has been more ambiguous than Kasper and his allies are willing to admit.

“I was born a papist, I have lived as a papist, and I will die a papist,” Caffarra said. “The pope has never said that divorced and remarried Catholics should be able to take Holy Communion, and yet, his words are being twisted to give them false meaning.”

Some of the pope’s allies insist that debate is precisely what Francis wants.

“I think that people are speaking their mind because they feel very strongly and passionately in their position, and I don’t think the Holy Father sees it as a personal attack on him,” said Chicago Archbishop Blase J. Cupich, considered a close ally of the pope. “The Holy Father has opened the possibility for these matters to be discussed openly; he has not predetermined where this is going.”

It's like most mainstream press reports about the conservative/orthodox/traditional backlash against the Bergoglio pontificate, only with more reference to recent events. You've probably read the same thing six months ago, or last year, or even two years ago.

Certainly I would be distrustful of secular press, but much of what is in this particular article contains the same sentiment I am hearing from obedient clergy. 

[bardegaulois]

 

Certainly I would be distrustful of secular press, but much of what is in this particular article contains the same sentiment I am hearing from obedient clergy. 

And it's not new. This from Burke about a year ago, right after the conclusion of the first phase of the synod: http://www.religionnews.com/2014/10/31/cardinal-catholic-church-pope-francis-ship-without-rudder/. This from Crux, at about the same time: http://www.cruxnow.com/church/2014/10/16/will-conservatives-turn-on-pope-francis/. This from Chaput: http://www.religionnews.com/2014/10/21/archbishop-chaput-blasts-vatican-debate-family-says-confusion-devil/. It's almost a media trope right now. Yes, lots of Catholics of more traditional or conservative attitudes have been very frustrated with Francis since almost the beginning of his pontificate. I'm actually one of them. Moreover, this number includes a good share of clergy and prelates in good standing, not merely Lefebvrists or the like. This is not news, because it's not new.

[Lilllabettt]

This is one of the reasons why I distrust secular reporting on issues in the Vatican. It's not that I think journalists are necessarily being disingenuous on purpose, more that they lack the basic knowledge of Catholicism needed to write an informed article. (Come to think of it, this is not a problem restricted to coverage of the Faith.) For example, Cardinal Burke says that the Pope does not have the authority to change Church teaching...and the reporter presents this as a rebuke to Francis. However, I would read this as more an attempt on the part of Cardinal Burke to educate the press on the nature and scope of the papal office, because it is the press that has been suggesting Pope Francis is going to change Catholic teachings, not Francis himself. But the reporter treats this as hard evidence of some kind of liberal-conservative tussle for power in the Vatican.

Secular coverage of religious topics in general is suspect. The media loves a "story" naturally, so their bias is always going to lean towards making a mountain out of a molehill.

That said, if they are playing up reality, I think you are downplaying it. Cardinal Burke was demoted, and he did give a number of unusually frank statements to the media expressing unhappiness about it and the "direction" of things, or rather the lack of direction. US Catholic bishops have been critical of the pope's approach, usually in private, but occasionally in public. Globally there is an unprecedentedly out-loud debate raging between conservative and liberal factions of the Church, complete with publicity dumps and shadow councils.

If you think there isn't a high-stakes tussle going on at the highest level --- you're fooling yourself. You are fooling yourself if you do not think there are two opposing factions, and that they are organized, and that their lines are hardening. 

I believe the Holy Father wants this -he has spoken many times, approvingly, of "making a mess." He believes that chaos can help good things rise to the top .

Of course, when you stir dark water, there is no knowing what lies below. What surfaces may be good or it may be evil.  The Holy Father thinks that risk is worth it. Maybe he is right - depending on the condition the Church is in - something radical might be necessary. Something so radical Pope Benedict did not think he had the strength to do it ... who knows.

But if you think there is peace and unity reigning right now at the top ... you are fooling yourself. 

[beatitude]

Secular coverage of religious topics in general is suspect. The media loves a "story" naturally, so their bias is always going to lean towards making a mountain out of a molehill.

That said, if they are playing up reality, I think you are downplaying it. Cardinal Burke was demoted, and he did give a number of unusually frank statements to the media expressing unhappiness about it and the "direction" of things, or rather the lack of direction. US Catholic bishops have been critical of the pope's approach, usually in private, but occasionally in public. Globally there is an unprecedentedly out-loud debate raging between conservative and liberal factions of the Church, complete with publicity dumps and shadow councils...

But if you think there is peace and unity reigning right now at the top ... you are fooling yourself. 

I don't think the Vatican is a pool of tranquillity and unity right now and I also don't deny that there is factionalism in the Church, but I'm very interested in how secular press and to a certain extent lay Catholics are playing into that. Unless the Pope is telling us to do something objectively sinful, my approach is to see how I can learn from his approach. While Christ knew we needed a shepherd, he never said that we would always like the direction in which the shepherd took us - it's only reasonable that sometimes we are going to be challenged. However, sometimes we seem to gauge how right the Pope is by the degree to which we agree with him and like him, and I don't think this is helpful.

I am also uncomfortable with the idea of promotion and demotion within the Church, as though we're a business corporation and a person's influence is contingent on the position they hold. Yes, I know that there are power struggles within the hierarchy and the Church is never going to be free of internal politics so long as senior clergy are human too, but If you accept that one of the greatest missionaries of modern times was a young nun who never left her Carmel it does start to seem a bit futile to think in those terms.

[dUSt]

Yes, lots of Catholics of more traditional or conservative attitudes have been very frustrated with Francis since almost the beginning of his pontificate. I'm actually one of them. Moreover, this number includes a good share of clergy and prelates in good standing, not merely Lefebvrists or the like. This is not news, because it's not new.

Please, explain why you are frustrated with pope Francis.

The most "obedient" priest I know, who is actually accused of being too conservative, loves Pope Francis. So, I'm curious what you have against him.

[bardegaulois]

Please, explain why you are frustrated with pope Francis.

The most "obedient" priest I know, who is actually accused of being too conservative, loves Pope Francis. So, I'm curious what you have against him.

The source of my frustration is what could only be construed as either an obliviousness or a lackadaisicality as to how his words and actions are going to be construed by the press or by the non-Catholic public. Just to give perhaps the most famous instance, "who am I to judge?" has been taken very much out of its proper context by many in an attempt to undermine Catholic teaching on sexual ethics. Did the Pope intend it that way? Of course not, but it makes my work of defending and promoting Catholic doctrine all the more difficult. Likewise with the conflict at the synod last year.

Moreover, his use of such epithets as "self-absorbed Promethean neo-Pelagians" or "sourpusses" also sets me off. Is he referring to traditional Catholics? If so, what does he think he might accomplish by calling those who would be most loyal to him insulting names? I know there's a stereo type he's trying to argue against, but in my experience, this stereotype doesn't exist.

So, in short, dUSt, my trying to live an authentically Catholic life when it seems like the Holy Father is appearing to demean or belittle what I am doing is incredibly frustrating, so much so that I rarely take note of the news from Rome any longer. I pray consistently for the Holy Father's soul and give his office incredible respect, and indeed I think he's a very likable person. However, I know I won't be getting much public moral support from him, and it's led me to focus more on my own communities, rather than the trends of the global church.

[dUSt]

Just to give perhaps the most famous instance, "who am I to judge?" has been taken very much out of its proper context by many in an attempt to undermine Catholic teaching on sexual ethics.

So, would you prefer he quote from the Catechism instead, so the media can have the headline, "Pope calls gay people disordered". Which is also not what the Church teaches? Seems like your problem is with the media.

Moreover, his use of such epithets as "self-absorbed Promethean neo-Pelagians" or "sourpusses" also sets me off. Is he referring to traditional Catholics? If so, what does he think he might accomplish by calling those who would be most loyal to him insulting names? I know there's a stereo type he's trying to argue against, but in my experience, this stereotype doesn't exist.

When the pope used that term, it seems to me that he is talking about two extremes. If you fall into the latter, maybe you should look at it as an opportunity to evaluate your outlook on life.

Evangelii Gaudium: 94. This worldliness can be fueled in two deeply interrelated ways. One is the attraction of Gnosticism, a purely subjective faith whose only interest is a certain experience or a set of ideas and bits of information which are meant to console and enlighten, but which ultimately keep one imprisoned in his or her own thoughts and feelings. The other is the self-absorbed Promethean neopelagianism of those who ultimately trust only in their own powers and feel superior to others because they observe certain rules or remain intransigently faithful to a particular Catholic style from the past. A supposed soundness of doctrine or discipline leads instead to a narcissistic and authoritarian elitism, whereby instead of evangelizing, one analyzes and classifies others, and instead of opening the door to grace, one exhausts his or her energies in inspecting and verifying. In neither case is one really concerned about Jesus Christ or others. These are manifestations of an anthropocentric immanentism. It is impossible to think that a genuine evangelizing thrust could emerge from these adulterated forms of Christianity.

So, in short, dUSt, my trying to live an authentically Catholic life when it seems like the Holy Father is appearing to demean or belittle what I am doing...

Seriously? You honestly think Pope Francis is demeaning / belittling what you are doing? What exactly are you doing?

...it's led me to focus more on my own communities, rather than the trends of the global church.

Wow, sounds like self-absorbed Promethean neopelagianism to me.

[Not A Real Name]

Conservative dissent is brewing inside the Vatican

VATICAN CITY — On a sunny morning earlier this year, a camera crew entered a well-appointed apartment just outside the 9th-century gates of Vatican City. ..

Thank you for providing this. 

[Maggyie]

Anthroprocentric immanentism 

Promethean neo pelagian.

I consider myself mildly well educated and it's Greek to me (Promethean... Greek... Get it? Get it?)

what is annoying is having to pretend there is not an agenda. The pope TOTALLY has an agenda, the others have an agenda. It's entirely appropriate to refer to demotions and promotions, imho. It's a human organization. with all the pretending it's enough to give you whiplash.