Thomas Gallatin asks: Is the Pope Catholic?

The following essay by Thomas Gallatin* appeared in The Patriot Post today, 12/11/23. Walt hopes the author won't mind our passing it along. 

Trust demands consistency, yet what has come out of the Vatican recently is anything but consistent. Indeed, much of the confusion is due to the pontiff himself, as Pope Francis has repeatedly made statements that appear to challenge long-held church doctrine.

The issues most concerning to many Catholics are those surrounding the ongoing sexual revolution that has effectively taken over the whole of western culture and is now proliferating throughout the Christian church, both Protestant and Catholic. 

Recently, five conservative cardinals from five continents sent five questions to Francis seeking clarification. These formal questions, known as “dubai,” [sic - should be "dubia". Walt] Latin for “doubts,” included a question on liberal priests, predominately in Germany, giving blessings to same-sex couples. 

According to church doctrine, marriage is only between one man and one woman, in accordance with God’s intended design for marriage. Anything that deviates from this God-given design is viewed as sinful, and in the case of homosexuality, disordered. Therefore, since the church does not bless sin, and since homosexual relationships are recognized by the church as sinful, how can priests issue blessings to inherently sinful unions?

Francis responded to the question by reiterating church doctrine. Marriage is an “exclusive, stable, and indissoluble union between a man and a woman, naturally open to conceiving children,” he said. “For this reason, the Church avoids all kinds of rites or sacramentals that could contradict this conviction and imply that it is recognizing as a marriage something that is not.”

However, rather than leave it there, Francis proceeded to muddy the waters. Concern for pastoral charity requires a “defense of the objective truth,” but that “is not the only expression of that charity, which is also made up of kindness, patience, understanding, tenderness, encouragement,” he said. 

"For that reason, pastoral prudence must adequately discern if there are forms of blessing, solicited by one or various persons, that don’t transmit a mistaken concept of marriage."

In other words, Francis will not rebuke priests who have been blessing same-sex unions, while at the same time claiming to uphold the church’s doctrine. The problem is that just two years ago, Francis was explicit on the issue, denying that same-sex unions were permissible. Now he’s says that “pastoral charity should permeate all our decisions and attitudes” and that “we cannot be judges who only deny, reject, and exclude.”

If anything, it appears that Francis is trying to have it both ways. He’s clearly gotten soft on the issue, and appears frustrated by the conservative faction of the church, that keeps pressing for clarity and consistency with long-established doctrine. In short, the conservatives want the church’s practice to match its orthodoxy.

And this is where the rub is. According to recent reporting, Francis criticized the U.S. church for developing “a very strong, organized, reactionary attitude,” which he called “backward.” “Doing this,” he warned, “you lose the true tradition and you turn to ideologies to have support. In other words, ideologies replace faith. The vision of the doctrine of the church as a monolith is wrong. When you go backward, you make something closed off, disconnected from the roots of the church."

So, in an apparent effort to reinforce his views, the Vatican is holding a “Synod on Synodality” this week. National Review’s Michael Brendan Dougherty contends, “The aim of the Synod, rather plainly, is for a large group of bishops [led by the Vatican's "lavender Mafia" - Walt] to debate each other about survey material they guided some small number of lay Catholics through in their home diocese, and whether this pile of papers gives sufficient cover for the pope to begin chucking certain moral and dogmatic teachings of the church overboard in favor of newer understandings.”

He adds that Francis is “basically … going to ask a bunch of bishops to write up a document showing that the church in general has come to a new understanding of itself.” There is a clear divide developing in the Catholic Church, with the current pontiff siding with the liberal faction. One wonders how the church will bridge this growing theological gap. And this is no shallow ditch, but a deep crevasse.

*Thomas Gallatin is a history teacher and a staff analyst at The Patriot Post.

Benedict XVI blames 60s culture, sexual revolution, for scandals, moral decline of Catholic Church

I have often written, here and in other publications, and told anyone who will listen, that the decline of the Roman Catholic Church and Christian (Western) society in general started in the hippy-dippy sixties. Our religion and our culture was killed by secularism and the counter-culture. So I enjoyed something of a "told ya so" moment yesterday when "Pope Emeritus" Benedict XVI released an essay on sexual abuse in the Church, which he blames on the "absence of God".

In the introduction to his "notes", the ex-Holy Father [Can there be such a thing? Ed.] writes: In the first part, I aim to present briefly the wider social context of the question, without which the problem cannot be understood. I try to show that in the 1960s an egregious event occurred, on a scale unprecedented in history.... In the second part, I aim to point out the effects of this situation on the formation of priests and on the lives of priests. Finally, in the third part, I would like to develop some perspectives for a proper response on the part of the Church."

In the 6000-world essay, which originally appeared in Klerusblatt, a German-language magazine for the clergy, Pope Ratzinger blames the Church's sexual abuse scandal on the 1960s sexual revolution, growing secularization and weak church laws that made prosecution of guilty priests difficult. "Among the freedoms that the Revolution of 1968 sought to fight for was this all-out sexual freedom.... Part of the physiognomy of the Revolution of `68 was that pedophilia was then also diagnosed as allowed and appropriate." What an amazing admission! How dismaying for faithful Catholics, to hear this from no less a personage than the former Vicar of Christ. But there's more...

"Why did pedophilia reach such proportions?", Pope Ratzinger asks. "Ultimately, the reason is the absence of God," he answers, noting failed attempts to include a reference to God in European Union treaties as a negative example of Western secularization. He also cited the appearance of sex in films in the 60s in his native Bavaria and the formation in seminaries of "homosexual cliques" in seminaries "which acted more or less openly and significantly changed the climate." He also attributes the moral corruption of the Catholic clergy and the Church as a whole to "failures in moral theology".

Benedict also faulted Church laws that protected accused priests. He wrote that during the 80s and 90s "the right to a defence (for priests) was so broad as to make a conviction nearly impossible." In 1981 Pope John Paul II named Cardinal Ratzinger (as he then was) Cardinal-Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, formerly known as the Holy Office and, especially around the 16th century, as the Roman Inquisition.

But did he do anything to excise the rotten and diseased members of Christ's Church? He tried in 2001 to reforms of those laws to make it easier to remove priests who abused children, and later, as Pope, defrocked 100s of priests accused of raping and molesting children. But he was opposed by powerful forces -- "the lavender Mafia" -- within the Vatican itself. Some say his unprecedented "resignation" was engineered by those same evil men, who succeeded in replacing him with the more tolerant and merciful Jorge Bergoglio.

Compared with Pope Francis, Benedict XVI emerges in this essay as a voice calling Catholics to turn away from the excesses of Vatican II, and back to the values of traditional Catholicism. Of course he does not suggest that Vatican II was in error or anything like the "anti-council" which many traditionalists now claim it was.

He writes: "The Second Vatican Council was rightly focused on returning this sacrament of the Presence of the Body and Blood of Christ...to the centre of Christian life and the very existence of the Church. In part, this really has come about, and we should be most grateful to the Lord for it. [But] what predominates [now] is not a new reverence for the presence of Christ's death and resurrection, but a way of dealing with Him that destroys the greatness of the Mystery." The reference is to declining participation in Sunday Mass and treatment of the Eucharist as "a mere ceremonial gesture."

"We do not need another Church of our own design," Benedict concludes. "Rather, what is required first and foremost is the renewal of the Faith in the Reality of Jesus Christ given to us in the Blessed Sacrament." A pity he didn't tell us sooner, but let us hope and pray for a Catholic Counter-Revolution, before Christ's Church disintegrates completely. Amen.

Further reading: "Benedict XVI addresses sex abuse scandal", Catholic Herald, 11/4/19.

UPDATED: VIDEO: Why Al Franken has to quit and POTUS doesn't

I saw clips from soon-to-be-ex-Senator Al Franken's churlish and mean-spirited announcement that he would be leaving the Senate at some unspecified time in the future. The New York Times described the Democratic Senator from Minnesota as "emotional...defiant and mournful but hardly contrite" as he denied allegations of having groped and made improper advances towards "at least" six women.

Mr Franken again denied the allegations but said he'd resign anyway -- a strange position for a lawmaker of the US of A, where everyone is innocent until proven guilty. Why didn't he insist on having his day in court, so he could confront his accusers mano-a-womano and show them up for the Trumpian conspirators that they undoubtedly are?

Instead, as his Democratic colleagues -- the ones who threw him under the bus -- looked on, the SNL alumnus took a parting shot at President Trump and Judge Roy Moore, the Republican candidate in today's special election in Alabama. (Walt predicts Judge Moore will win by a comfortable margin. Lifetime pct .989.)

Groping for words (this time), Mr Franken told the meeja "I, of all people, am aware that there is some irony in the fact that I am leaving while a man who has bragged on tape about his history of sexual assault sits in the Oval Office, and a man who has repeatedly preyed on young girls campaigns for the Senate with the full support of his party."

What Mr Franken really meant is: "How come I have to quit and the other two don't?" Walt will explain four words: It's that picture, stupid! Unlike President Trump or Judge Moore, Mr Franken has been caught red-handed, so to speak.

The allegations of misbehaviour against Judge Moore are decades old, and the only "evidence" that has been produced is an inscription alleged to be in the high school yearbook belong to one of the accusers, of which only a photo has been made public. The lawyer for the offended woman refuses to produce the actual yearbook so the authenticity of the not-very-damning writing can be verified.

The case against President Trump is even weaker, weak to the point of being non-existent. There is only the little Billy Bush video clip in which (if you believe it hasn't been tampered with) you can hear Mr Trump saying that, because of his celebrity status, he could, if he wanted to, grab a woman by the pussy and get away with it. If he wanted to! He didn't say he did that, and no-one -- no-one! -- has come forward to say he did that, or anything like it.

Compare that with the numerous allegation of sexual harassment and misconduct made against Mr Franken's political crony, Bill Clinton, for crimes and misdemeanours which he committed while he was in office as Governor of Arkansas or President of the Excited States of America. In spite of the shitload of evidence against him, Hellery's husband was never impeached and never resigned, so if and when Mr Franken actually leaves the Senate, we'll give him that one. Resigning would show that, at last, he gets it!

BREAKING NEWS: UPDATED AT 1000 today: Beverly Young Nelson has finally admitted that she forged a portion of the infamous high school yearbook that she and attorney Gloria Allred used as proof of her accusations against US Senate candidate Judge Roy Moore. Click here to read the story on Breitbart News. Great timing, eh, since the special election is less than a week away.

With his usual impeccable timing, our good friend Michael Matt, editor of The Remnant, has just posted a video in which he  discusses sexual harassment in politics and entertainment, and asks the question: Where is the media's newfound moral indignation coming from? What did they expect after 50 years of sexual revolution, classroom sex education, free love, and women demanding to be treated just like men? Plus, is there a connection between all of this and the total breakdown of modesty in dress in our culture?

Walt remembers well the hippy-dippy 60s, in which all this started. The middle of that decade coincided with the Second Vatican Council, the beginning of the suicide of the Roman Catholic Church. The steady decline of Western society started in those years. I expect that decline to end -- in the total collapse of western civilization -- any day now.