Posted on 05/28/2015 7:40:25 PM PDT by annalex
May 27, 2015 (LifeSiteNews.com) -- The prominent German monthly journal, Cicero, a secular-intellectual publication, has entitled its May issue “The Struggle for Rome” (“Der Kampf um Rom”) and has dedicated it to the papacy of Pope Francis. In it, Guiseppe Rusconi, the well-respected Swiss Rome-Correspondent and journalist for Inside the Vatican, reports on the internal criticisms of Pope Francis as they were privately and candidly disclosed to him from within the Roman Curia itself.
Rusconi's revelations caused an immediate stir in Rome, since he simultaneously posted the Italian version of his article on his own website, rossoporpora.org, where he summed up and specifically quoted forthright comments made by high-ranking clergymen from the Roman Curia who also openly revealed to him the atmosphere within the Vatican. They spoke with the explicit request that they should remain anonymous.
Rusconi starts his article with the stunning quote from one of his sources: “Francis has remained with his heart and mind the Archbishop of Buenos Aires. That would also be fine, if he were not, for two years now, the Bishop of Rome and therewith Pope of the Universal Church.”
As Rusconi says, many Curial members are still indignant about Pope Francis' last Christmas address in 2014 to the Roman Curia:
The large stomach of the Vatican still has not yet digested the last address of Pope Francis to the Curia on December 22 of last year. […] The address still burns under the skin of many Curials. 'If someone would have had the courage to get off his chair and to leave the Sala Clementina while the Pope was presenting his list [of reproaches and accusations], then, I think, all – or nearly all – would have left: right-wing or left-wing, young or old,' comments which came from my first interlocutor with the bitterness of a man who feels wounded. And he earnestly requested once more: 'That my name will not be made public! Can I rely on that?'
Rusconi describes the atmosphere within the Curia, as follows: “The Curia finds itself in an uncomfortable, even insecure situation.” He describes the intensification of conflicts in Rome:
Today, with the distance of two years, some of those wearers of the purple color who were then joining in jubilation might regret to have given their own vote to the then-76-year-old Archbishop. A struggle for Rome has started, and it is not at all clear who stands where – also because Francis himself speaks in a contradictory way. But there is already taking place a wrestling [a grappling]. And from October 4 on when between 200 and 300 bishops will meet in Rome for the [2015] Synod in order to speak about family questions, it could come to even harder fights.
Pope Francis' expression of “Who am I to judge?” also finds much criticism:
With this renunciation to judge, this 'sentence which has been abused by many media, Pope Francis did damage to the Church,' stressed another interlocutor from the Vatican with whom I met for lunch in Trastevere. 'He has, without intending it, favored the advance of the homosexual lobby which he claims to fight.'
Concerning the question of the family, many members of the Curia do not understand Pope Francis' intentions. As one source says to Rusconi: “One simply does not understand what Pope Francis' aims are. After a very firm principled declaration, he follows up with words and gestures that cause insecurity and confusion among orthodox Catholics.” In the eyes of this man, Pope Francis is tempted “to want to win the hearts of those who are, according to the current teaching, living in an irregular situation [i.e., remarried couples].”
Rusconi discusses some of those Cardinals who push for a liberalizing agenda with respect to the Church's moral teaching, namely, Reinhard Cardinal Marx and Walter Cardinal Kasper, both of whom are now meeting with resistance and adverse criticism. For example, he says about Cardinal Marx himself:
The President of the German Bishops' Conference [Cardinal Marx] does not have an easy status and standing in Rome these days, since he has claimed for the German Church the right to go its own pastoral ways with respect to the problem of the remarried divorcees, and independently of any majority of the Synod. 'We are not a subsidiary of Rome,' Marx has declared. The Swiss Curial Cardinal, Kurt Koch, promptly felt reminded of the 'German Christians' who bowed down to the Nazis during the Third Reich. In the same way, the German Curial Cardinal, Paul Josef Cordes, also disapproved of the ideas of Marx. He declared in the newspaper Die Tagespost: 'As a social ethicist, Cardinal Marx might have some knowledge about the [commercial-financial] dependencies of subsidiaries toward their mother company. But, in the context of the Church, such comments should rather be left to the village pub.'
One of Rusconi's interlocutors criticizes Pope Francis for trying to fight material poverty while omitting to speak about the danger of spiritual poverty, and even the loss of Faith. He says:
But the Church is universal, and the greatest poverty is the spiritual poverty, as one sees it especially in the Occident, where the number of Catholics is continually dwindling. Unfortunately, the Pope has very little interest in Europe.
The same source, as presented by Rusconi, comments on the Synod of the Family:
I think, he [Pope Francis] wants to lead the forthcoming Synod on the Family in October onto a certain path so that the Synod Fathers feel urged to choose [putatively] merciful solutions – which would be, in my eyes, not be a true mercy – especially with regard to the question whether remarried people shall be admitted to Holy Communion.
The journalist Rusconi concludes his very important synopsis of some of the internal criticisms from within the Curia with these words: “The dispute in the fall, however, could turn out just the same: sour and sharp.”
Not a pretty picture; and not an edifying example or ethos, is it?
For your ping lists; remember, on Catholic matters I rely on your ping membership.
Isn't THAT the truth!
For your comments
Thank you for posting this story, annalex. I appreciate it.
IMO the church is doomed until the members accept that a communist liberation theologist leads them and a Christian does not. And do something to save their church, their faith and their history.
With this renunciation to judge, this 'sentence which has been abused by many media, Pope Francis did damage to the Church,' stressed another interlocutor from the Vatican with whom I met for lunch in Trastevere. 'He has, without intending it, favored the advance of the homosexual lobby which he claims to fight.'
"Who am I to judge?" was pulled out of a longer statement in which Francis said first: "After I give absolution - who am I to judge?"
Of course, he is right because after absolution it is no longer in his hands but it is in God's hands.
The media conveniently twists everything that comes out of his mouth, so how can I judge what he says when I only get part of the story?
The Pope is no threat to the stability of the church at all....the church is 2,015 years old, has gone through MANY trying periods and has come out just fine. Pope Francis is being harshly judged, even by me, for his views of things political and some environmental issues....That being said, he is just a man and is certainly entitled to speak based on his own experiences....he came from a somewhat socialist area and is thus skeptical of capitalism.
He'll do just fine...watch and see.(and pray for him!!!!)
That is true, but there was no clarification later.
I do think that His Holiness does not get credit for his bubbly Latino personality, when people criticize his occasional rashness or ability to provide leftwing-pleasing soundbites inside a solid larger context. But when some light-hearted remark gets distorted so systematically, and there is no correction from Rome, the distortion effectively becomes the genuine statement.
This somewhat softens my bewilderment of Pope Francis, who imho, has been appearing to be either innocently and stupidly being used by the gay mafia, or appearing as a coward of the first order, or a genius who is insidiously culpable himself in advancing their agenda and simply looks innocent, as well as his other political issues such as climate change, and licensing illicit second “marriages”, all signaling harassment of capitalism, the promotion of liberation theology (disguised nicely as ecumenicalism and “unity”) and to generally promote socialism.
It is one of these. After reading this version, possibly he is a coward, a useful idiot, seeking the love and hearts of men and unwilling to supply admonishment in hope of their salvation. Perhaps he is being “worked over”, by the nefarious forces. And then, maybe not. He is truly an enigma.
I do also believe we probably have the pope we deserve, given that the faith is barely recognizable as Catholic any longer, after having been steeped in Modernism for at least five decades. What is left is what we learn on our own volition from antiquity, the pre-Nicene era, the Early Church writings, early popes, the saints, the ancient homilies, the Didache, etc.
One can’t learn that at the Church anymore. It might compete with the social justice agenda.
Considering you have Catholics questioning, rightly, his actions, I’d say stability is already a problem.
None of those questionable things involve matters of Catholic dogma. So stability of the Church as a social group may indeed be elusive, but it is not at all a new phenomenon. We’ve seen worse: the Western Schism, iconoclasm, entire monastic orders suppressed, Catholic splinter groups forming left and right. The stability of the Church as a supernatural body of the faithful on earth and in heaven, however, cannot be threatened by this, and is not. The pope’s still Catholic.
Wow.
Oh? Having global warming and homosexuality injected into Catholicism isn’t something new? It doesn’t directly conflict with the Bible or established dogma? Thats just two. What about catering to Islam while Christians and specifically Catholics are slaughtered by the thousands??
The popes of old could be hooked to turbines and generate electricity as they must be spinning in their graves at sufficient RPM by now.
It is entirely possible for a good Catholic to believe in global warming theories, recognize that homosexuals have rights and are children of God, or seek mutual understanding with other religions. None of that is a dogmatic contradiction, however unfortunate some such positions may be.
Every Christian I ever learned from, Including RC priests in my youth taught us that a lie was a lie. I was taught to resist evil and to call out liars. Global warming is a lie as are it’s proponents liars and homosexuals are to be opposed, not given privileges and acceptance. We don’t have to hate them, just not help them continue down evil’s road. And this pope is.
I am at the point where I don’t feel like paying attention to anything the media says about him.
I try to save this kind of discussion to here. Which brings me to a question I have: with the upcoming synod and the confusion and scandal it will surely bring, not to mention the many European Bishops' conferences darn near in schism how does one talk about these issues to those who we would consider nominal Catholics?
Yes, I remember his comment that we need dialog when christians area being slaughtered by the thousands.
Dialog with someone who wants to kill you?
I’m waiting for his global warming statement. I plan on sending a note to my bishop to let him know that I’m on board, I’ll stop using my evil car and my evil money on Sundays to help heal the earth.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.