Friday, July 4, 2014


Having just read a fascinating article by Sandro Magister I confess that I have never seriously considered the fact that at certain times in the Church's history agreements were decided upon in or just before Conclave to the effect that if a certain candidate was to be elected to the papacy he would be bound by these early agreements.  I marvel at my naivete.

To be sure some of these agreements, at least the ones that are known that Magister has written about are more or less innocent enough: if you elect my man then he will make sure your friend becomes Secretary of State, that sort of thing.  But when I write "innocent enough" I am not forgetting that this is something a bit sinister and, at least with regard to the matter of who becomes the Secretary of State - the acting Pope in many matters - it could turn out to be anything but innocent.

It is well to keep these things in mind especially if we are tempted to imagine that it is the Holy Ghost Himself who personally chooses the Pope without any human agency whatsoever.

What is extremely interesting, at least to this writer, is that the current Pontiff is, according to Magister, acting in certain matters as if he were bound to one of these pre-Conclave "agreements".  If nothing else the low calibre of many of the Cardinals voting should deeply concern anyone observing the actions of Francis.  When the likes of a Roger Mahony or a Donald Wuerl are working behind the scenes creating such agreements I think we can rightly say that there is more than a little cause for concern.  One particular remark by Francis when being asked about these matters is particularly interesting, and very much unsettling:

"My decisions are the fruit of the pre-conclave meetings. I have done nothing alone."

If a St Pius X were on the throne, or an Innocent III or a Gregory the Great my fears would be considerably alleviated for I would be confident that such strong personalities would not flinch from pursuing their own paths as God willed.  But with a weakling, or an equivocator or a mere company man at the helm we have no cause for such confidence.

Pope St Pius X was one Pope whose disdain for this practice was well known and who took some steps to put a stop to it.  Alas! like his ill-fated "Oath Against Modernism" these steps were soon ignored and almost totally forgotten.  Good man that he was he often failed to put real teeth into his pronouncements.  A cautionary tale to remind us that even great Saints sometimes fail in matters of supreme importance.

Be that as it may if some of the more dire remarks of the current Pope have been inspired even a little by any pre-election agreement then we may be at a new crossroads in the history of holy Church.  Commenter Joe Potillor, writing on Father Ray Blake's blog today made a devastating remark that, when I read it, was like a bolt out of the blue.

But I will say "who am I to judge" were 5 of the most damaging words ever said by Pope Francis.

No matter how many times I have read or heard references to those damaging words, no matter how many internet articles read about it, the words of Mr Potillor were like a slap across the face, awakening me to a harsh reality.  I don't say that the Pope uttered this disastrous statement due to any terms of an agreement. But I do say that views such as those were unquestionably known by the aforementioned Cardinals and others of their ilk, so that whatever agreement they may have created would hardly have contradicted the mindset of a person who would utter such a phrase while occupying such an Office as Pope Francis did.  I would like very much to think or hope that it was Cardinals like Rai, Burke and certain other fine men who were working on such agreements but considering the power of the Americans and the Germans and the French episcopates I very seriously doubt their input was sought.

The post-Conclave jubilation by creeps like Wuerl and Mahony, well known to watchful readers, does speak volumes.  Mahony is merely stupid so his joyful remarks were to be expected.  But Wuerl is cunning, and if he is as pleased about things as he seems to be we would do well to watch our backs.

"I follow what the Cardinals asked" may turn out to be words every bit as disastrous as those five other words uttered by the current Keeper of the Keys.


Anonymous said...

I would go even further and suggest that the Catholic Church is no longer controlled by the Vatican 'managers' and administrative machinery. Not directly anyway. Events of the past 50 years, and possibly farther back, seem to indicate an external control link, perhaps of a financial nature. This is highly speculative of course, but what other conclusion can be reached when an organization repeatedly shoots itself in the foot and then claims it can run a marathon.

Joe Potillor said...

Thanks for referencing my comment...Keep up the good work.

The 5 words of infamy (Who am I to judge) will take decades to recover from....The constant framing of objective arguments in terms of the subjective application by our Holy Father gives me much reasons for concern. The context to his statement doesn't really help him. (As he effectively avoided answering the question that was asked)...If Pope Francis can't stand up for himself, what is he doing on the Throne (oops, I mean comfortable chair...can't be a restorationalist)...If everything he's doing (modus operandi) is being dictated by what was discussed pre-Conclave, God help us all. I'm sure this is all the minds of the left leaning Cardinals....Mahony's rejoicing (via twitter) was enough...Somethings up...I believe he (Francis) is Pope until proven otherwise....but something sinister is up with this Pontificate....Pray, pray, pray

Tereze Avila said...

Pope Francis is expected to be a Biblical False Prophet... Check also this: and, also

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...