The Arlington Catholic Herald's front page article on Pope Francis in the current issue (April 24 - May7) made me shake my head. Ridiculously one-sided and it totally ignored anything that might upset the instant canonization applecart. From headline to last sentence it turned the Francis papacy into the equivalent of a snake oil salesman's pitch for his magic elixir. It is typical since Vatican II to turn every funeral into an instant canonization process, so why shouldn't we expect that for the death of a pope? After all, every pope since Vatican II except Benedict was rushed through to instant sainthood. One is tempted to say it is all about canonizing the council.
Now to be fair, I wouldn't expect everyone to pile on the deceased with acrimony, but to totally ignore reality lacks integrity. What would you say if a dad who sexually abused his children was described as a model father at his funeral? Cognitive dissonance? How would the abused children feel? Wouldn't it be better to just be silent? Or to at least acknowledge that the deceased, like all of us, was a sinner with a mixed legacy?
The Herald could have done that, admitted that the reign of Pope Francis was a mixed bag. They could still include legitimate praise. But no, Pope Francis, in the pages of the Herald was a holy pope. We can expect him to be on fast track to canonization next. As I read the article, it struck me as totally lacking in balance and integrity. But I'll present my case by looking more closely at what was essentially a puff piece - beginning with the headline, A Man of Compassion and the first paragraph which sets up the eulogy:
He advocated for the poor, the elderly, migrants and refugees. He championed care for creation and an end to global wars. Over the course of his 12-year-pontificate, Pope Francis sought to uplift the marginalized and unify a global church in faith and service to the poor.
Well now, that's part of the story but it leaves out a huge chunk of facts that illustrate the exact opposite of the picture being painted by the Herald of a "man of compassion." My questions:
- Did Francis advocate for the poor underground Church of China where the situation is so much worse following his policy of giving the Communist party the right to name bishops with a rubber stamp from the Vatican? Cardinal Zen has been very critical of the Vatican's actions, but don't look for any concern for the poor Catholics of China in the Herald's sugar-coated propaganda piece. (source)
- Did Francis care about the Church in Africa when he promoted blessing same-sex relationships? Fiducia supplicans was resisted by all the bishops of Africa who ended up preparing a just-say-no-document with the Vatican which was not made public, but resides in the Vatican archives. (source)
- Did the pope show concern and compassion toward the faithful across the globe when, during the Amazon Synod, he allowed the Pachamama idol to be bowed to in the Vatican garden ceremony and then allowed a plant representing Pachamama to decorate St. Peter's altar during the synod's closing Mass? (source)
- And what about the pope's treatment of Catholics who desire nothing more than to worship as Catholics have for millennia. This pope not only robbed them of the TLM but all the other traditional sacraments. Not only that, but in his "compassion," he threw them out of the churches they helped pay for sending them to gyms and auditoriums. Even those handful of locations are being reduced and eliminated across the world. Is that how Pope Francis sought to "uplift the marginalized and unify a global church?" Sounds more like marginalizing Catholics, the very ones proved in polls to be the most orthodox and faithful. And don't forget the nasty names Francis used to describe traditional Catholics: mentally imbalanced, diseased, gagging church "reforms," rigid, etc. ad nauseum.
- Francis also covered up clergy sex abuse and put one of the worst bishops, Victor Fernandez in charge of examining cases. (source) And who will be closing his coffin? Cover-up cardinal Roger Mahoney, an appropriate choice in view of the pope's history of coddling homosexuals.
- Perhaps worst of all and the actions most lacking in compassion were the treatment of his spiritual sons. How much compassion is evident in the sacking and canceling of good priests including Bishop Joseph Strickland? Some of the bishops Francis awarded red hats were notorious for covering up sex abuse scandals - Robert McElroy, Blase Cupich, and Wilton Gregory to name a few.
I could go on. The legacy of Pope Francis is hardly compassion and unity. It is selective compassion as he coddled pro-abortion and LGBTQ champions even putting them on Vatican councils and having them speak at Vatican events. (See here, and here and here and here) The scandals of this pope go on and on, but there was nary a discordant word in the Herald to balance the effusive and gushing praise.
It's hard to believe that Fr. Paul deLadurantaye could be aware of the pope's long list of disrespect for those with whom he disagreed and praise Francis for his:
strong promotion of the dignity of every person and his concern that those on the peripheries -- the unborn, children, the elderly, the sick, the poor, migrants and refugees -- not be forgotten and discarded by what he termed a 'throwaway society.'
Didn't the pope "throw away" a number of his spiritual sons not to mention the smelly members of the flock whom he considered rigid and mentally unbalanced? Didn't he throw away the pro-life members of the Pontifical Academy for Life and replace them with champions of abortion and euthanasia? I can only shake my head over Father's statement.
Bishop Burbidge described the pope as one who "called us to live the joy of the Gospel and be a church of missionary disciples." Again, that flies in the face of reality. Francis scolded anyone who acted like a "missionary disciple" by encouraging conversion to the one true Church. Francis told Catholics not to proselytize, but his definition seemed to encompass any explicit invitation to consider becoming Catholic.
He gave us the Abu Dhabi agreement that promoted syncretism and the Amazon Synod that glorified pagan religions. During that disastrous event, we heard how much Catholics have to learn from the pagan residents of the Amazon and their spiritual practices which include the worship of the demon goddess Pachamama. The Amazonian natives apparently have nothing to learn from Catholics and from the "missionary" group that never converted anyone in 53 years. (source) Was there any criticism of Bishop Kräutler who said he never baptized an Indian and never would? Absolutely not. In fact, he was chosen to help prepare the synod documents. Obviously acting like true missionaries, working tirelessly for conversion of souls, was not on the agenda of the Amazon synod.
All of this is the legacy of Pope Francis. To summarize him as a "man of compassion" is like calling a habitual liar a "man of truth." I'm sorry for the biased article about the pope from Catholic newspapers. It's not surprising that the majority of Catholics have a positive view of a man who, in my opinion, was the worst pope since the beginning of the 20th century. Many people left the Church during his reign. Even more embraced sacrilege while pretending to be Catholic without any fear of pushback. He provided great photo ops for pro-abortion Catholic politicians like Nancy Pelosi and Joe Biden.
Between the mainstream media, the Jesuit press, and diocesan papers presenting one-sided views of the Francis papacy, we are likely to see a call for Francis' canonization as soon as the last shovelful of dirt covers the coffin. A more balanced and factual article presenting the unvarnished truth would have been welcome. It didn't need to be an attack piece, just a balanced one. However, I didn't expect it from the Herald. After all, being nice these days is valued more than being truthful, and that is certainly the case with the Arlington Catholic Herald. Sad!
Let us all pray for Pope Francis, but not sugarcoat his legacy.
When the pope speaks in regards to faith and MORALS, he speaks with the voice and authority of Christ. Hard to believe Catholics believe he was a valid pope. Unfathomable.
ReplyDeleteOur Lady of Good Success told the Conceptionist nun Mother Mariana de Jesus Torres that there is a limit to the patience of God: “Know that Divine Justice releases terrible chastisements on entire nations not only for the sins of the people, but especially for those of priests and religious persons. For the latter are called by the perfection of their state to be the salt of the earth, the masters of truth, and the shields to hold back Divine Ire.”
ReplyDeletePope Francis, January '2025 by allowing Italian candidates for priesthood to profess themselves to be homosexuals – was the final stroke of iniquity that set off the Divine Ire.
Thank you Mary Ann. The media’s coverage this week of Bergoglio has been sickening. Pope Benedict’s death didn’t receive a fraction of a percent of the coverage Bergoglio had this week and what little coverage he had was 90 plus percent negative. Of course the same secular and catholic media fawning all over the “people’s (anti)pope” are the same media who terrorized us for two years with the covidism propaganda and then, one day in 2022, switched the 24/7 covidism show into non-stop reasons why we all had to start hating Russia and hero-worshipping the cocaine dwarf of Kiev (Zelensky). If the media tells you to do something, for the sake of your soul, you should run in the opposite direction.
ReplyDeleteThe Pope has no real job. This is why he becomes a busybody. He has not actual responsibility.
ReplyDeleteDid Peter have "no real job?" Was he just a "busybody" with no "actual responsibility." I doubt if you are Catholic to say that. The pope is first and foremost the Supreme Pastor of the Church, with the responsibility to safeguard the faith and preserve it according to the teaching of Christ and the apostles. He has NO authority to alter the doctrine, but a duty to teach and clarify which he does through encyclicals and other documents. He is the only one who can teach ex cathedra dogma that all Catholics are required to believe, a rare event in the Church, but important. He is the visible sign of Christ's presence on earth as the head of the Mystical Body. Some popes have been saints; some have been scandalous sinners. The Holy Spirit does not "choose the pope" as some people believe, the cardinals do. We need to pray they listen to the voice of the Holy Spirit, but some do not. The existence of the St. Galen Mafia in the last conclave proves that.
Deletehttps://nypost.com/2025/04/26/opinion/how-pope-francis-fought-the-church-and-lost/
ReplyDeleteGreat article! Thanks for posting the link.
DeleteA very thoughtful post.
ReplyDeleteI believe Pope Francis caused serious damage to the Church and the Faith.
To those who say he did laudable things my answer to that is he could have done those worthy things and not had a demon on the alter, destroyed the pro-life Pontifical Academy, encouraged continuing sin for adulterers etc etc etc as you detail. Liberals seem to believe that following the teachings of the Church and helping the poor etc are mutually exclusive. We know they are not. And certainly many faithful Catholics have proven that. I think it's a false dichotomy to confuse many uneducated Catholics. Also we need to believe a person's actions/"unclear" statements/ failure to act regarding his faith is what he believes such allowing adulterers to receive communion.
https://crisismagazine.com/opinion/may-pope-francis-rest-in-peace-and-may-peace-return-to-mother-church
ReplyDeleteThere have been bad popes in the past (name the sins!), but none has laid the axe to the roots of our Church and Faith as had Jorge the Jesuit...the idolatry, the indifferentism, the betrayal of the Chinese Catholics, ad nauseam.
ReplyDelete