he title above is the name of a book
that appeared Monday in English (after earlier publication in Italian)
by a writer who has assumed a grand Renaissance pseudonym: Marcantonio
Colonna (an admiral at Lepanto). He evidently could not publish under
his real name, for fear of reprisals. But the case he lays out is
largely convincing: that Pope Francis has carefully cultivated an image
in public as the apostle of mercy, kindness, and openness; in private,
he’s authoritarian, given to profanity-laced outbursts of anger, and
manipulative in pursuing his agenda.
This is hardly news, least of all in Rome. This volume, however, is
far more probing and detailed than anything that has previously
appeared. It sometimes stretches evidence, but the sheer amount of
evidence it provides is stunning. About 90 percent of it is simply
incontrovertible, and cannot help but clarify who Francis is and what
he’s about.
The parts of this story I know best – the Synods on the family that I
reported on daily from Rome for TCT – are absolutely reliable. We know,
for example, that Pope Francis was quite willing to openly manipulate
the Synods by personally appointing supporters of the Kasper Proposal
and that he even intervened personally at key points, changing
procedures and instructing the bishops about where their deliberations
should start – and end.
When Francis cares about something – as Colonna shows – he makes it
happen, whatever the opposition (at the Synods, it was considerable).
There’s a clear pattern of behavior, whatever uncertainties remain. On
the divorced and remarried, the environment, immigrants, “Islamophobia,”
the poor, the pope is relentless. But he was not elected to
revolutionize marital doctrine or “discipline.” Nor was he chosen to be a
player in international politics. He was elected to be a “reformer” who
would mainly clean up Vatican finances and deal with the gay lobby, two
things that played a role in Benedict’s resignation.
On the financial front, there was a strong start: The council of
cardinals, Cardinal Pell’s effort to inject Anglo-Saxon transparency, a
new special secretariat on the economy, hiring PriceWaterhouseCoopers to
do an external audit. The momentum stalled as the old guard slowly
regained control over Vatican finances – and oversight. A series of
Vatican Bank presidents, officials, accountants, etc. – probably getting
too close to the truth – have been fired without good explanations.
(Something similar played out in the Knights of Malta controversy.) Pell
had to return to Australia to deal with sexual abuse charges from forty
years ago that, suspiciously, resurfaced after being earlier examined
and dismissed.
And where was the pope during all of this? He didn’t seem very
interested. If he had been, he’d be at least as dogged in dealing with
financial reform as he is, say, about global warming. Austen Ivereigh, a
British writer and papal fan, entitled his biography The Great Reformer,
in part because of Jorge Bergoglio’s alleged role in curbing abuses in
Buenos Aires. Colonna doubts the truth of that account, and not only
because of Francis’s lack of action in Rome. He thinks the Argentinian
stories should be re-examined.
Then there’s the gay mafia. People forget that the occasion for
Francis’ famous remark “Who am I to judge?” was not a general comment
about homosexuality. It was in response to a question about Msgr.
Battista Ricca, who was involved in several notorious homosexual
scandals, some right across the river from Buenos Aires in Uruguay.
Nonetheless, right after the 2013 papal election, he became the pope’s
“eyes and ears” at the Vatican Bank and director of the Casa Santa
Marta, where Francis resides.
And then there’s the troubling, casual resurrection of figures like
Cardinal Gottfried Daneels, once thoroughly discredited for his support
for contraception, divorce, gay marriage, even euthanasia and abortion –
and outrageous mishandling of priestly abuse. But he stood with Francis
on the balcony of St. Peter’s right after the conclave and read the
prayer for the new pope at his inauguration. He was also one of the
ringers Francis personally invited to bolster his case at the Synods.
Then there’s the appointment of another radical, Archbishop Paglia,
to head the “reformed” John Paul II Institute on Marriage and the
Family. In a remarkably naked authoritarian move, the pope substituted
himself for Cardinal Sarah for the institute’s opening academic address
in 2016, and spoke of “a far too abstract and almost artificial
theological ideal of marriage.” You have to believe that Cardinal Marx
was expressing the truth when he said, at the end of the synods, that it
was just the beginning.
The least satisfactory part of this book for me is the account of how
the “St. Gallen Group” – one of its own members called it a “mafia” –
which met to plan opposition to St. JPII and Joseph Ratzinger,
identified Jorge Bergoglio as a future papal candidate. He had no global
visibility until he gave the concluding address at the 2001 Synod on
the role of bishops. NYC’s Cardinal Edward Egan was supposed to do
that but stayed home because 9/11 had just happened. The address
impressed the synod fathers for its fairness to both sides. Colonna
reveals, however, that it was entirely the work of a Synod
secretary/speechwriter, Msgr. Daniel Emilio Estivill. We need to know
more about how things went, from then to now.
Colonna also weakens his credibility somewhat by repeating rumors
that Vatican Secretary of State Cardinal Parolin convinced Francis to
use money from Peter’s Pence to support Hillary Clinton’s presidential
campaign. No footnotes appear to support this claim, nor does Colonna
offer a plausible account of how and why Rome would think Mrs. Clinton –
Hilary Clinton? – worth such a risky bet and potential scandal.
Despite a few lapses, the most disturbing element remains: the
abundant evidence – confirmed by many particular instances now over
years of this papacy – that the pope has little use for established
procedures, precedents, even legal structures within the Church. These
are not mere trivial rules, Pharisaic legalism, resistance to the Holy
Spirit, etc. They are the means by which the Church seeks to be clear,
fair, and orderly – and to address unjust actions or abuses by those in
power.
When the head of the Church himself does not much feel bound by the
tradition or impartial laws he has inherited, what then? That the
question even has to be asked is disturbing. Any answer will have to
reckon with the eye-opening material in this compelling book.
