Pope Francis Will Fail Using Pope John’s Flawed Synod Strategy

By Jerry Slevin
Christian Catholicism
October 9, 2014

http://christiancatholicism.com/pope-francis-will-fail-using-pope-johns-flawed-synod-strategy/

Pope Francis, and the Family Synod sideshow, appear to be following Pope John XXIII’s earlier flawed synod strategy. John’s strategy, and now Francis’ approach, was simply to follow the classic politicians’ ploy and carve out topics that were especially embarrassing to or sensitive for the pope, like contraception or clerical rape of children, from the assembled bishops’ highly public agenda. These topics are then parked in secretive and “slow walked” Vatican controlled “advisory committees”, that are supposedly trustworthy because they have some carefully selected “showpiece” members. Currently, this may include the well respected and very brave Irish activist and priest rape survivor, Marie Collins.

Marie Collins has for many years been a leading Irish advocate for priest abuse survivors. She also had a role in setting up in Dublin the very effective One-In-Four organization. This group, now under the intrepid Maeve Lewis, advocates relentlessly for, and provides needed counseling to, Irish survivors of child sexual abuse. Marie Collins has since March been a member of Pope Francis’ Pontifical Commission on the Protection of Minors (or so-called “Child Abuse Commission”), that is still “under construction” after more than a year and a half of Francis’ papacy.

Pursuant to this synod strategy, a papal committee would then likely take years “quietly investigating” already well known priest child abuse issues and solutions. The pope, of course, would then be free to reject the committee’s secretive findings and advice, after the media frenzy subsides, as happened with Paul VI in 1968 with artificial contraception. But Paul VI failed dismally with this strategy and so likely will Francis.

Yes, the latest papal saint-to- be (the third in six months), Paul VI used this ploy in 1968, just before Francis’ ordination, when faced with John XXIII’s birth control commission’s strong endorsement of artificial contraception. Paul then suddenly and unexpectedly rejected his own commission’s strong endorsement after six years of “study”. Then, this earlier commission’s very influential married member, Patty Crowley, a leader of the Catholic Family Movement which had earlier initially advocated “natural family planning”, was shamefully shunned by the Church hierarchy, even by her own Cardinal in Chicago.

Let’s hope that Marie Collins will be very careful and wary to avoid being “used” by a pope, like Patty Crowley was used by Paul VI a half century ago in similar circumstances!

From 1962-1965, John, and his successor, Paul VI, a “Captive of the Curia”, oversaw the Second Vatican Council, the largest synod of bishops ever. That Council, evidently under papal directive, carefully avoided seriously publicly considering the major scandals (that existed even then) of priest child abuse and the artificial contraception ban. Francis now also seems clearly to be trying to avoid seriously addressing these scandals as well, following John XXIII/Paul VI’s strategy.

The Family Synod has been mostly a carefully “stage managed” farce so far, with the few surprises coming from some “natural family planning” auditor/couples who seem to be straying from their “Ban the Pill” scripts.

At the Synod, 150+ celibate bishops in full medieval dress sit in an auditorium like puppets listening to arcane planned discussions of ‘parrhesia” and of “gradualism”. This last term is the latest papal ruse, along with “mercy”, that might enable the Vatican to appear in the media to be “changing the harsh doctrinal message”, when it is really only “changing the harsh doctrinal packaging”.

And Pope Francis, as discussed below, in addition to a disappointing Synod so far, may also be facing some “Irish resistance” from priest abuse survivor, Marie Collins, viewed apparently by some as an essential Vatican supporter.

“Good Pope John” and “Pensive Paul VI”, together buried, for six years until 1968, any papal review of the contraception ban, in a secretive advisory committee, whose well considered advice Paul VI then disregarded completely.

Pope Francis now appears to be trying similarly to bury for many years the already well known priest child abuse scandal “solutions”, like (1) making bishops fully and transparently accountable to independent lay oversight for protecting priest predators, and (2) expanding the potential priest pool, by including married and women priests, to reduce the pressure on bishops to accept questionable seminarians and to retain predatory priests.

Francis recently criticized worldwide bishops for ordaining too many “bad priests”, but Francis in 18 months has done almost nothing to expand worldwide bishops’ potential priest pools in a declining priestly vocation environment. Even shortening the currently unnecessarily long priest educational indoctrination process would help increase priests’ overall lifetime productivity.

Does anyone at the Vatican think “out of the box” or is it just all about evading prosecutors’ clutches?

What could be more of a Catholic “family issue” that bishops should be discussing than protecting children from rape by priests and bishops? Why has the Family Synod avoided so far the biggest Church crises in centuries? If celibate bishops can evaluate the morality of sex between a husband and wife, then why do they fail to even discuss the immorality of sex between a bishop and a boy? Presumably, some bishops, at least, would have more insight into this latter relationship of bishops with boys, no?

Pope Francis appears to be trying to bury these long overdue solutions in another secretive advisory committee, the Child Abuse Commission, now to be actively overseen by infamous Cardinal Law’s former canon lawyer, Fr. Oliver, after his questionable performance as chief “Vatican prosecutor” and canon lawyer in Boston.

Francis, or his successor, could, of course, then also disregard all the Child Abuse Commission’s advice, again without any papal accountability, after the massive media coverage moves on. This flawed diversionary strategy failed quickly in 1968, and will surely fail even more quickly in this age of the 24/7 news cycle and the Internet.

Unfortunately for Francis, unlike with John’s Vatican II Council in the early 1960’s, many Catholics now gathering with cell phones and computers in Rome for Francis’ Synod, are not buying this latest replay of papal stall tactics. This reportedly appears to have included Marie Collins, who this week publicly indicated to AP’s Nicole Winfield, Collins’ frustration with the absence of progress under Boston’s Cardinal Sean O’Malley of the Child Abuse Commission. Francis seems evidently to be using the Commission to sidetrack prompter, more transparent and more serious curtailment of the priest child abuse scandal, including the related bishop accountability solution.

If, however, Marie Collins and other lay Catholics were now to begin to strongly resist publicly Francis’ diversionary strategy, then the pursuit of real reform efforts, including independent lay oversight, may then be Francis only option. We can hope, no?

Francis appears to be trying to get some prominent priest abuse survivors, however well intentioned and brave they may otherwise be, to help “sell” this obviously evasive strategy. This survivor cooperation could eventually harm more suffering abuse survivors and defenseless children than it helps.

As noted elsewhere, this Child Abuse Commission, after ten months (and 19 months of Francis’ papacy”), has not yet even finalized with Francis its membership roster or operating rules or even set up a permanent office. Indeed, its lone abuse survivor member, Marie Collins has indicated to AP that she had been frustrated earlier in the year with the slow progress on the Child Abuse Commission.

Now Pope Francis is struggling with a “Family Synod” of celibate men to save the Catholic Church that faces two unprecedented crises over child abuse and contraception. Marie Collins, a survivor of priest rape at 13 and now a married mother, may be able to help, as discussed below, Pope Francis save the Family Synod and perhaps even save the Catholic Church.

Marie Collins has apparently languished for over six months as the sole abuse survivor member of the Francis’ inactive Child Abuse Commission. She indicated earlier this week, according to AP’s Vatican reporter, Nicole Winfield, as follows:

“Collins said she had been frustrated earlier in the year with the slow pace of work on the commission, but was now more hopeful after the weekend’s progress.

“I want to see change as fast as possible. But on the other hand if we’re going to bring in change, it has to be the right change and it has to be well thought out and it has to be something that will last,” she said. “There’s no point in rushing something into place and then finding it has flaws.”

Is Marie Collins just trying to be constructively positive here? Who is rushing anything? After 10 months since the Child Abuse Commission’s well publicized initial announcement (and 19 months into Francis’ papacy), the still “under construction” Commission has not yet even finalized its membership roster or operating rules or even set up a permanent office.

Will reliable and knowledgeable canon law experts like Fr. Thomas Doyle or Jennifer Haselberger be added to the Child Abuse Commission, as they surely should be?

Reports are that the master of doublespeak on abuse issues, Dublin’s Archbishop Diarmuid Martin may be added. Nor surprise here. He has a long history serving under Cardinal Sodano, including a key role for the Vatican in Geneva where the Vatican has, in effect, stonewalled the UN committees for years. Martin apparently has had a less than perfect relationship wiht the Dublin One-In-Four abuse survivor group.

AP’s informed reporter, Nicole Winfield, also this week added her own observations about the Child Abuse Commission’s delays. She said: “While Francis’ other expert commissions looking into Vatican finance and administration worked at a frenzied pace through 2014 and finished their projects in recent months, the sex abuse commission never seemed to get off the ground. It lacked organization, a clear mission statement, office space, funding and a full membership roster.”

If Marie Collins really wants to help abuse survivors and protect children promptly and fully , she might consider demanding that Francis add the child abuse scandal as a top priority to the remaining current Family Synod discussions, and certainly to the final Synod agenda to be held next October.

If Marie Collins does not push now, she may just be facilitating the Vatican’s latest cover-up, however well intentioned and brave she may be. It appears to me that presently she is running a real risk of “being used” once more by ruthless Vatican clerics, as Patty Crowley was used a half century ago.

John XXIII and Paul VI, and their successors, sought to maximize papal “mystical power” without any real power sharing with the Catholic laity or even with the worldwide Catholic hierarchy.Recent popes also avoided like the plague any appearance of “changing” doctrine, since a fundamental element of the papal power myth is that popes have “declared” unchangeable papal power doctrines that cannot be revised by changing experience. To admit to changing any of them risks bringing down the mythical papal house of cards.

Francis is now, in effect, following his predecessors’ flawed strategy as Popes John Paul II and Benedict did as well. Francis’ Family Synod has omitted the child abuse scandal, is preserving the contraception ban and has avoided any real power sharing with lay Catholics and even with bishops. John XXIII, Paul VI, John Paul II and Benedict XVI failed with this strategy, as will Francis. Making the first three saints and the last “pope emeritus” cannot mask this dismal reality.

John XXIII ruled just after thirty six years of two absolute Vatican monarchs, Pius XI and Pius XII. The two Pius Popes had failed spectacularly to restore papal power, by their alliances with defeated fascists, Mussolini, Franco and Hitler.

Pius XI in 1922 mandated secrecy about child abuse and in 1930 banned birth control. Pius XII in 1950 declared the “dogma” on Assumption, the only formal claim of papal infallibility since Pope Pius IX, in effect, invented infallibility in 1869 as Italian nationalists were advancing to capture the Papal states and Rome from the Pope.

John XXIII tried to recover by having a worldwide Vatican II Council that buried the clerical child sex scandal and diverted reconsideration of Pius XI’s 1930 birth control ban to a confidential commission.

Italy has a male and female patron saint: Francis of Assisi and Catherine of Sienna. Francis helped reform the medieval clergy; Catherine helped return the papacy to Rome from Avignon. Now Pope Francis is struggling with a “family synod” of celibate men to save the Catholic Church that faces two unprecedented crises over child abuse and contraception. Marie Collins, a survivor of priest rape at 13 and now a married mother, can help as described above Francis save the Family Synod and perhaps the Catholic Church.

The Family Synod has been a major disappointment, to me at least, with arcane theological discussions about “parrhesia” and “graduality”, among other non-events. Parrhesia, meaning “boldness or freedom of speech” seems a strange term to use at a discussion forum about Catholic sexual morality that excludes 99.9% of Catholics from participating, even through chosen representatives, in the discussions.

Earier this week, English Cardinal Vincent Nichols spoke to the media, noting one recurring theme so far for the Synod was the theological notion of “graduality,” meaning that Catholics may sometimes grow toward adherence or understanding of church teaching throughout their lives. Hello?

“It’s a law of pastoral moral theology which permits and encourages people, all of us, to take one step at a time in our search for holiness in our lives,” Nichols said. One wonders whether Nichols’ mind was distracted by the concurrent scandalous UK reporting about his longtime former colleague, UK’s discgraced former Bishop Kieran Conroy.

Conroy has admitted to a sexual liason with at least one UK women and had been accused of at least another, a married mother of two. Conry said his relationship with the second woman whose husband threatened to sue was no more than a close friendship. The woman allegedly stayed at his house at least three times. He admitted that a relationship with another woman six years ago had been sexual but would not say how long it had lasted.

Conry told the UK Guardian this week that celibacy was not about sex but marriage. “When a priest makes a promise of celibacy, he promises to remain unmarried, that’s all. Then the ordinary rules of morality apply,” he said. One wonders if Conroy’s approach to celibacy is an example of “gradualism”. Nichols is unlikely to address this any time soon, no?

Further to the contradicting reports that the Synod may result in changes of certain church doctrines, the Synod’s assertive and seemingly ambitious spokeman, Canada’s Thomas Rosica said: “There was no language whatsoever of a need to change doctrine but to repurpose what we know in a way that’s accessible to all.”

“Repurpose”, not “repackage”, really? A difference without a distinction, I submit!

Matters got even more interesting the next day with remarks by Nigerian Archbishop Ignatius Kaigama, as reported by the National Catholic Reporter (NCR), as follows:

“We should be allowed to think for ourselves… We are wooed by economic things,” said Kaigama, who heads Nigeria’s Jos archdiocese. “We are told if you limit your population, we’re going to give you so much. And we tell them, ‘Who tells you that our population is overgrown?’ “

Kaigama, one of 36 African prelates attending the Synod as the heads of the continent’s bishops’ conferences, spoke Wednesday at a Vatican briefing.

Following are the archbishop’s pertinent remarks about contraception, as reported by NCR:

” … We get international organizations, countries, and groups which like to entice us to deviate from our cultural practices, traditions, and even our religious beliefs. And this is because of their belief that their views should be our views. Their opinions and their concept of life should be ours… “

“… We are wooed by economic things. We are told, “If you limit your population, we’re going to give you so much.” And we tell them, “Who tells you that our population is overgrown?” In the first place, children die — infant mortality — we die in inter-tribal wars, and diseases of all kinds. And yet, you come with money to say, “Decrease your population; we will give you economic help… “

“Now you come to tell us about reproductive rights, and you give us condoms and artificial contraceptives. Those are not the things we want. We want food, we want education, we want good roads, regular light, and so on. Good health care.”

“We have been offered the wrong things, and we are expected to accept simply because they think we are poor. And we are saying poverty is not about money. One can be poor in spirituality, poor in ideas, poor in education, and in many other ways.”

“So we are not poor in that sense. We may be poor materially but we are not poor in every sense. So we say no to what we think is wrong. And time has gone when we would just follow without question. Now, we question. We evaluate. We decide. We ask questions. This is what we do in Africa now.”

So the celibate African Archbishop appears to be claiming that poor Nigerian couples should not have affordable access and free choice as to contraception because tribal wars and disease are already ‘thinning the population”. Was he really serious? The Archbishop may not want artificial contraception, he cannot get pregnant! How about “his flock”? Might unwanted and unaffordable children be a factor that contributes to disease and tribal wars?

Some of the current comments from well regarded NCR bloggers indicate the Synod is not inspiring some. One blogger writes, in pertinent part:

“This is the wrong synod to hold. We should have a synod of all the People of God with priests and bishops only proportionately represented as in their numbers in the People of God as a whole. This synod of the Laity should then be discussing all the difficulties with clericalism, and the authoritarianism in the RCC leadership. Families are not nearly so much in trouble as are the clerics and their system of leadership that is not leading anyone toward spirituality but is a defensive system trying to protect itself through cannon law…. Laws are human inventions and must be reconsidered when they are no longer working. As the clerics themselves have failed to do this, the people loose faith and trust in the leadership as a whole and also in individual leaders particularly the ones that attempt to regulate women’s health issues and family life.”

Another respected NCR blogger wrote, in pertinent part:

It’s not just the bishops’ seminary education that stands in the way of meaningful reform. Even more significant is their unmitigated desire for power, perks, prominence and promotions, all linked with the unflickering loyalty demanded of episcopal candidates by JP II and B XVI. The result has been a syncophant choir which expects to produce great and saving music by singing one single note! Tibetan monks perform way better in the musical realm. Our bishops need to re-learn the meaning of DIVERSITY and the strengths that flow from it, strengths which have largely disappeared from the Catholic clergy.”

A third well regarded NCR blogger wrote, in pertinent part:

“You know, all of this assurance regarding whether or not God did this or that seems to me to be ridiculous. W may believe that God did this or that. We may be mistake in our belief, or we may be correct. None of us can know what God is doing; we can only discern, and, as I said, our discernment may be mistaken. I wish that the hierarchy would stop with this pretend certainty. It’s beginning to remind me of the games that little children play when they pretend.”

And yet another perceptive NCR blogger wrote, in pertinent part:

“It is meant to be a synod, but it is organized like a conclave : the people of God are asked to wait quietly and watch until the smoke comes out, white or black … “

What is the meaning of parrhesia ? What did that word mean when the ancient Greek philosophers used it ? What did it mean when Luke used it in the Acts of the Apostles ?

Did it mean speaking in secret under closed door ? Or did it mean being unafraid to speak boldly to the crowds, on the main square of the city, without secrets ? without doors ? … “

For the insightful views on the Family Synod of a UK theologian, Tina Beattie, who has indirectly felt the pressure of Vatican censors recently, please see her remarks at:

[theguardian.com]

In the end, one’s view of the Family Synod may come down to where you sit as a Catholic. Some optimists say any movement at a Family Synod is progress among a dysfunctional Vatican hierarchy, even if the voting participants are all clerical celibate males who are ducking discussion at the Synod of the key family issue — the clerical child abuse scandal. Some pessimists say that Pope Francis has just bought a diversionary delay from the clerical child abuse scandal, and also a delay perhaps of three years (until 2016, his 80th year) from any need for him to state a clear position on controversial “pope-made moral dogmas”, like the Pope Paul VI’s 1968 Ban of the Pill.

This, of course, seems to then enable Pope Francis to continue to focus, as he has mainly for a over a year and a half now, on maximizing the protection of Catholic cardinals and bishops from criminal investigations related to the numerous clerical child abuse and financial corruption scandals.

For example, a lay Catholic reform group like Future Church that is interested in real reforms that benefit women and others, may see it one way. This reform group has, however, not been invited to be present during Synod deliberations.

On the other hand, a German Catholic bishop concerned about protecting significant “future church” governmental tax subsidies that may no longer be paid with respect to some divorced and remarried “ex-German Catholics”, may see it differently. Prominent Cardinal Walter Kasper, who many years earlier had been Hans Kung’s assistant, is present for the Synod deliberations and is expected, along with other bishops from Germany and elsewhere, to press for welcoming back divorced Catholics to full participation in the Eucharist celebration at Mass. This apparently may then secure German bishops’ access to their pro rata shares of German tax subsidies related to many of these divorced Catholics. Money still matters.

Please note the description from the reform group, Future Church, about what they faced recently (10/5) from Vatican security when they tried to express in St. Peter’s Square their views supporting lay voting participation at the Family Synod that presently excludes almost all independent lay Catholics from meaningful participation and excludes all all lay Catholics from voting on family moral matters.

This happened in Rome, not in Hong Kong, Moscow or Beijing! Here is an excerpt from Future Church’s recent e-mail:

Heading — “As Catholics stream to the opening mass for the Synod, reformers ask for a vote and run into the police.”

“As the crowds streamed into the Vatican Basilica for the opening mass for the Synod on the Family, members of Catholic Church Reform International were joined by International Movement of We Are Church, Women’s Ordination Worldwide and other international reform groups to protest the lack of real decision making power for families at the Synod. They unfurled a sign that read, “Families must have vote in family synods.”

“The group was quickly surrounded by the police who challenged their right to be in the square. Leader Rene Reid, showed the officers the permit she had obtained for the event, but that was not sufficient. With more than a dozen officers surrounding the group, the police snapped photos of the group’s signs, song sheets, and confiscated Reid’s passport. Given the circumstances, the group rolled up the signs and waited. The police later returned with Reid’s passport and agreed they could conduct their peaceful protest.” ***

It may one thing at a nightclub to get hassled by a “bouncer”, but in front of the world’s most famous church, St. Peter’s, an ex-bouncer’s security team has gotten out of hand with some well behaved and non-threatening Catholic reform activists, it appears, no? Let’s hope these security teams exercise better judgement over the next two weeks. Not being permitted to attend the Synod is bad enough, but having one’s passport pulled is over the top.

And what if you are one of the millions of poor couples from the Philippines or some countries in Africa and Latin America, where Vatican lobbying against accessible and affordable family planning programs has prevented you even from effectively using contraception to plan your family at an affordable size. Of course, these poor couples will not be assembling in St. Peter’s Square to watch the hierarchical parades, and few, if any, celibate and obedient bishops or “natural family planning” advocacy couples will be making their case in favor of contraception at the Synod, no?

Indeed, before the Family Synod had even started, Francis had preemptively and autocratically indicated that the Synod will end on Sunday, Oct. 19 with the beatification of Pope Paul VI, the “Anti-Pill Pope”, the third 20th century pope that Francis will push towards sainthood this year.

Many Argentinian Jesuits reportedly found Pope Francis earlier to be autocratic as well. Can the Synod Fathers now really be expected to evaluate contraception fairly and honestly in the presence of their “boss”, Francis, and his “cherry picked natural family planning couple cheer leaders”? Will the Synod Fathers now challenge Paul VI’s best known mistake, among several major mistakes, including also Paul VI’s undercutting of real episcopal collegiality and optional celibacy implementation?

Of course, the Synod “Fathers Without Kids” will likely not now seriously pursue the Synod’s heavily hyped reconsideration of Paul VI’s Ban of the Pill — this appears to be just more “papal bull” from the Vatican’s media machine. So much for the infallibility of the “Sense of the Faithful”!

Moreover, approving of contraception now would undercut the US bishops’ “anti-Obamacare contraception mandate crusade”, just a few weeks before the critical US Senate elections. The papal prohibition on contraception will survive this Synod, to be sure.

A central issue is not whether Pope Francis is sincere or a “good guy”. He is not God! He is an elderly celibate man made by the Vatican after a lifetime in the “old boys’ club”. His exclusion of really independent and diverse lay Catholics, including all women, as full voting Synod participants is an arrogant and ominous decision, no matter how much resistance he may now face. He is the pope and now has strong and widespread public and political support for reforms, but he mistakenly is taking a seemingly easier path that cannot succeed in saving the Catholic Church, in my considered judgment.

The unprecedented ongoing crisis, of bishops and priests who sexually assault children often with impunity, presents Pope Francis with a fundamental choice — Francis can either try to save the coercive top-down Vatican dominated Church, and thereby risk losing the hierarchical Church to legal onslaughts by prosecutors from the USA, Australia, Ireland, Italy, the Dominican Republic and elsewhere, or he can try to begin to restore a consensual bottom-up lay Catholic dominated Church, like the one that Jesus’ original disciples, including some women, left behind.

Only a Church with independent and effective lay oversight will ever convince enough prosecutors at this point that children are safe from clerical predators’ lust. The Vatican has permanently lost its moral authority, as well as the trust of Catholics (and political leaders) worldwide.This loss of moral authority is rapidly eroding the Vatican’s ability to sway voters to back the Vatican’s right wing allies and donors, the last remaining source of significant Vatican political power.

So far, Pope Francis has mainly followed the top down script that ex-Pope Benedict and Cardinal Sodano apparently offered him last year as a pre-condition to his becoming Pope. This is evident from the ten strategic goals that Francis now appears to be pursuing vigorously, as described in detail below.

Some of the important stakes at the Synod have been set forth well here by an experienced and informed Irish observer at:

[irishexaminer.com]

Popes have, of necessity, had political strategies for almost two millennia. For the initial three centuries, as the small Christian movement spread widely, popularly selected popes usually tried quietly to peacefully coexist with political leaders. Constantine and his successors changed that beginning in the 4th Century, increasingly pushing top-down imperial papal selections. Since then, popes’ main priority has often defensively been to maintain a close working relationship with the most powerful political leaders they had to deal with.

Pius XI and XII sought this relationship mistakenly with powerful fascists, Mussolini, Franco and Hitler, while Paul VI unsuccessfully sought peaceful co-existence with the Soviets and the West. In the American Century, the last three popes, including Francis, have sought to exchange (a) papal “pull” with key fundamentalist anti-abortion and anti-gay US voters for (b) potential subsidies and legal protection, as part of an ongoing favored Vatican relationship with powerful US right wing leaders, including Presidents Reagan and both Bushes and with Mitt Romney.

Francis has in many ways already shown his hand on supporting the election in four weeks of a right wing US Senate (likely to preserve a US Supreme Court majority friendly to Francis’ “low tax” billionaire donors and legally vulnerable bishops).

And, of course, predictably, Francis is trying to control Synod information flow through his fellow Jesuit, Fr. Lombardi, who has been spinning us for years about the Vatican’s “zero tolerance” of clerical child abuse.

As veteran and forthright AP Vatican reporter, Nicole Winfield, has recently put it so well:

“Technically, the synod is a closed-door affair, with only the opening session broadcast and a final written message published. Press conferences are scheduled throughout.”

“In past synods, the Vatican published written summaries of bishops’ remarks to the meetings and provided daily briefings about the general themes discussed.”

This time around, however, the VATICAN APPEARS TO BE CLAMPING DOWN on the dissemination of such detailed information to encourage frank and spontaneous discussion. No written summaries are being provided.” (My emphasis)

So much for the trusting Papa Francesco! God forbid, Catholic “sheep” would know which “shepherd” said what. The only person that can hold any bishop accountable is Pope Francis, and he will be live at the Synod. What “bulloney”! The ex-bouncer still lives, forcefully, it appears.

There is no sufficient reason the Synod discussions could not be broadcast live on television, as the Vatican’s endless parades of hierarchs in colorful dresses are regularly done. There already are lay auditors present at all the Synod discussions — how much more “chilling” would the presence of TV cameramen be for the timid bishops? Francis clearly wants to control the media “Synod spin”, as he has controlled the spin since he was elected. Docile Catholics inexcusably just grin and bear this, yes, often like “sheep”!

Paul VI wrote Humanae Vitae, the 1968 encyclical which enshrined the Vatican’s opposition to artificial contraception. This was in spite of the overwhelming approval of artificial contraception in 1966, after years of careful consideration by cardinals, bishops, theologians, doctors and married couples on Paul VI’s own pontifical “birth control” commission and the clear “sense of the Catholic faithful”.

Paul VI, of course, wanted in 1968 to avoid jeopardizing his weak papal “mystical power” claim to “infallibility” by reversing Pius XI’s 1930 ban on birth control, evidently made in 1930 to pump up the depleted post-World War I European population, in light of the growing atheistic Soviet threat that Pius XI had been obsessed about since he saw Soviet brutality first hand over a decade earlier in Poland.

Francis apparently will also be overlooking the reports of Paul VI’s alleged illicit gay relationship with an Italian actor, as Francis last April overlooked the unanswered questions about John XXIII’s and John Paul II’s evident failures to act effectively to curtail clerical sex abuse of children and, as well in the case of John Paul II, failures to to act on the numerous and substantial allegations of sexual improprieties of Vienna’s Cardinal Groer and Mexico’s one man sex abuse scandal, Fr. Maciel .

Of course, this beatification ceremony will dovetail neatly with the US bishops’ current US election driven crusade against Obamacare’s contraception insurance mandate to help elect a right wing US Senate in four weeks. The US right wing’s main issue in the US Senate campaign is opposition to Obamacare. Hello? Are you listening fundamentalist US voters? Francis seems to want you to vote Republican.

Of course, the secretive Vatican does not publicly disclose its legal and geo-political goals and strategies that it formulates with considerable input from its high priced legal. financial and political advisers, but it clearly has some. These current goals and strategies can be reasonably inferred from the Vatican’s actions taken since Ratzinger indicated a year and a half ago that he would strategically retreat to an unprecedented “pope emeritus” or “shadow pope” position. Ratzinger, appears to be functioning as the Shadow Pope, as his oldest acquaintance, Hans Kung, had warned 18 months ago he would.

The overall papal goals and strategies over the last two years appear from many indications to include the following ten:

(1) Replacing the stern and rigid public image and doctrinaire decisional style of Benedict with the softer and gentler image and intentionally ambiguous platitudes of Francis, amplified by a Vatican media operation greatly enhanced both internally and externally by powerful and wealthy Vatican allies that have considerable influence over various media outlets;

(2) Boosting papal “mystical power and infallible doctrines” by commandeering the Vatican’s saint making process for the benefit of modern popes, including the failed anti-contraception advocate, Paul VI, now to be beatified seemingly mainly by a Francis “fiat” in a couple of weeks at the new Synod;

(3) Protecting, as the highest priority, Catholic cardinals and bishops from prosecution, especially related to allegations of child abuse and/or related cover-ups and of financial corruption, (A) by easing out, quietly and with minimal recriminations, controversial hierarchs by comfortable retirements, demotions or transfers, and (B) by trying to co-opt completely all independent government investigations of hierarchs with Vatican controlled and secretive proceedings, that conveniently also protect against disclosures about other hierarchs that may be implicated (Archbishop Wesolowski, for example, served in numerous countries over more than three decades and could well have in his computer files child porn related links to other pedophiles in the worldwide hierarchy — who knows, but why did Francis have him smuggled, in effect, back to the Vatican?);

(4) Tightening papal control over Church finances under a facade of minority “lay oversight” from carefully selected and potentially pliable papal allies mainly from “big finance”, “big oil” and major media sectors, with the oil and finance advisers possibly now being behind Francis’ almost warlike calls for “crusader-like” actions against Islamicist extremists in Syria/Iraq who are seizing major oil assets, while some of these papal allies, and dependable papal cheer leaders like Crux’s John Allen, amazingly may now also be behind the current touting of Pope Francis for the Nobel Peace Prize, even though Ratzinger and Sodano barely squeezed past “crimes against humanity” charges for a clerical child abuse cover-up policy that Francis has in effect mainly continued, along with continuing the Vatican’s “un-peace-like” policies on contraception, and the equal rights of women and gay persons ;

(5) Strengthening alliances with powerful political and financial interests worldwide, including with right wing “low tax” billionaire elites in the USA who appear to need Vatican political help in four weeks to elect a right wing US Senate and thereby preserve a “business friendly” US Supreme Court majority indefinitely; hence, the Vatican directed, pre-November US bishops’ election “crusades” against gay marriage and Obama’s policies on contraception insurance, immigration law enforcement and non- deployment of more US troops in the Middle East;

(6) Continuing to handle priest and bishop child abuse allegations secretly within the Vatican under Ratzinger’s hand picked protege, Cardinal Mueller;

(7) Pursuing effective child protection reform measures very slowly and almost secretly in a new advisory committee (A) headed by Cardinal Law’s successor, Cardinal O’Malley, who is experienced with “handling” abuse investigations confidentially, and (B) assisted by Law’s, O’Malley’s and Mueller’s predictable and pliable longtime canon lawyer, Fr. Oliver;

(8) Diverting attention from priest child abuse matters with tightly controlled media directed “synod spectacles” of numerous “cherrypicked” celibate men discussing privately and anonymously arcane and insufficient theological justifications for “doctrines/disciplines”, that many adult Catholics have already in practice completely rejected, following their conscience and “sense of the faithful”, relating to divorce, contraception, cohabitation, gay marriage and similar sexual morality matters generally “foreign” to celibate hierarchs. Since Francis has shrewdly tried to string out until 2016, a US Presidential election year, the schedule for him to respond directly on any issues addressed at the Synod, he in effect may have bought Ratzinger and the Vatican an extra three years to try to deal with its major child abuse and financial corruption scandals, except that the Wesolowski type crimes demand much earlier resolutions and prosecutors are pressing forward;

(9) Deflecting attention from the Vatican’s worldwide financial and sex scandals to a “New Devil”, a small number of Islamicist terrorists who threaten and attack some local Middle East Christians, and perhaps more importantly, are threatening to control much of the oil resources so important to some of Francis’ key political and financial allies, while (incredibly) Crux’s John Allen is now suggesting that Ratzinger, the “Bavarian crusader” that needlessly gave the lethal and reckless Regensburg speech against Muslims, be the Vatican’s leader on Muslim dialogue efforts; and

(10) Endeavoring to silence, marginalize or “manage” alternative prophetic and theological voices, especially women like Tina Beattie, Mary McAleese, Elizabeth Johnson, and the sisters of the Leadership Conference of Women Religious and of Network.

As Pope Francis approaches his 78th birthday in two months and appears increasingly to struggle handling the escalating and relentless stress, he is running out of time. If he does not soon change directions, he likely will be the last pope who could have possibly saved the Church from perpetually splintering into competing cults or even from sinking completely.

Francis’ recent complaints about the poor selection process for new priests from the diminishing seminarian pool, while he avoids facilitating married and women priest eligibility, and also while he oversees the shift of foreign priests from Africa and Asia to the West and the excessive reliance on many thousands of married male deacons and subservient nuns , all make one wonder if Francis is in over his head as the unaccountable monarch of a worldwide Church. Moreover, his frequent public references to myths, like devils and guardian angels, raise questions about whether the stress is affecting his reasoning processes.

Confirming my observation that Francis is exhibiting the effects of the stresses he is facing is the comment made recently (10/4) by a reliabe American “church reformer” who is in Rome to follow the Synod as best she can. She blogged yesterday as follows in pertinent part:

“We got to St. Peter’s Square about 4:30 … Well, it actually started at 6pm … Promptly at 6, the service began … “

“Then Francis appeared looking tired, sick and/or concerned and definitely not the Francis captured by the media. He spoke slowly and definitively in Italian with neither a smile nor his contagious personality; this caused me grave personal concern. Is Francis prepared to take on the war that awaits him? Many voiced the same statement as they left St. Peter’s with an identical statement, i.e., “If I were facing what he will be facing, I would be so scared!”

As mentioned above, Francis’ predecessor, Ratzinger, then 85 years old at “retirement”, decided in February 2013 to make a strategic retreat to a nearby convent, to oversee from “retirement” a new strategy to defend against other escalating major investigations of Vatican wrongdoing, especially involving failures to protect children and to obey banking laws.

Ratzinger’s (and Francis’) top goal by most indications was and remains to keep the hierarchy out of the clutches of independent prosecutors. Civil fines and damages appear to be acceptable, since the Vatican appears to have access to substantial financial resources and, incredibly, docile Catholics keep donating no matter how many hierarchical crimes are uncovered. This is discussed further below in the articles linked here at the bottom.

As mentioned above, Hans Kung, who has known Ratzinger well for over a half century, warned, even before Francis was elected, about Ratzinger remaining at the Vatican. Kung stated, as follows in pertinent part:

“It is very dangerous to have a former pope living in the actual Vatican. … He will have the same secretary, Father George. He wants to remain in contact with cardinals and with the new pope. I was afraid of a “shadow pope” in the Vatican. Now it seems confirmed. He is certainly interested in prolonging his line, otherwise he would not have done it like this.”

“… It is a dangerous situation. I see many conflicts … {I foresee a} secret interference, an uncontrollable one.”

“Ratzinger says, “I’m out, but I am in the center of the Vatican.” So, that’s not good. Of course, he will not have official communications, but infinite private meetings… “

“This has been prepared for a long time. It is part of a clear strategy. Just think of the appointment of his secretary as archbishop (last December). The curia have defined this as “the new nepotism.” Or there is the Holy Office Prefect, a friend and disciple of Ratzinger, Bishop of Regensburg. Less accepted in Germany among the bishops… “

Pope Francis seems, with his diversionary Family Synod strategy, to be pressing very hard to change the subject and distance himself from the escalating fallout from the priest child rape scandal. Francis has for over 18 months mainly avoided addressing this scandal directly, effectively and transparently, even though the scandal is the most serious Vatican crisis since 1789. The French Revolution then began the challenges to absolute monarchies like the Vatican, the world’s oldest continuous unaccountable monarchy. The revolutionary fever has now crossed the Tiber to Vatican Hill. Increasingly, Catholics are demanding accountability of its leaders, as had existed for centuries in the Church that the disciples of Jesus, including some women, left behind.

The latest major abuse scandal fallout may soon be emitted from Puerto Rico (PR), a territory of the USA, where the papal apostolic delegate to PR, Archibishop Wesolowski, had been the senior Vatican official for five years. He fled secretly last year to the Vatican’s purported legal immunity protection, as potential investigation targets Cardinals Law and Pell seemingly also have done. Indeed, Pell appears still to be in the cross hairs of the important commission that is investigating institutional child sexual abuse in Australia and that is also relentlessly moving in on the Vatican’s complicit role there, it appears.

Significantly, President Obama’s Federal prosecutors in PR recently have stepped up considerably priest child abuse and related criminal investigations. Given Wesolowski’s reported computer stash of 100,000+ child porn images, and his reported sexual obsession with young boys, US investigators may soon identify some Puerto Rican boys, all US citizens, as being among his many child victims. Obama’s Federal prosecutors are also involved in Minneapolis priest child porn investigations relating to allegations previously reviewed insufficiently by the Vatican and by local vicar general, Fr. Kevin McDonough, close brother of Denis McDonough, Obama’s Chief of Staff.

When is Obama going to step up publicly to protect better all American children, whether they live in Minneapolis, Philadelphia, Boston, Los Angeles or San Juan? When will Obama follow Australia’s effective example and set up a Presidential commission to investigate institutional child sexual abuse, including within religious institutions, and to identify solutions, legislative and well as prosecutorial, to curtail this epidemic? When are Catholics going to stop talking and begin doing something that might make a difference, like demanding that their Federal government protect their defenseless children still at serious risk of clerical sex abuse?

US Federal prosecutors treat child porn as a very serious criminal matter. Also, the US has an extradition treaty with Italy, but not with the Vatican. This may help explain Weslowski’s reportedly being moved to a Vatican apartment, since he had earlier been spotted walking freely in Rome in Italian territory.

Pope Francis’ drawn out two step Family Synod distraction appears to stem from an overall strategy seemingly crafted by ex-Pope Benedict XVI, Joseph Ratzinger, and Cardinal Sodano after they both dodged a “potentially fatal” legal bullet in mid-2012 . The International Criminal Court (ICC) prosecutor then deferred ” … at this time …” pursuit of “crimes against humanity charges” relating to their alleged role in a worldwide cover-up of the rape of children by Catholic priests.

For over six months thereafter, the ex-Pope evidently fashioned his future strategy as the continuing “Shadow Pope” before publicly announcing his resignation early last year. It appears increasingly that Cardinal Bergoglio accepted, possibly with some personal input, this strategy as a pre-condition to his papal election as Pope Francis. The Family Synods appear to be a key element of the Benedict/Francis/Sodano strategy to save the papal monarchy by distracting for two and a half years from the unprecedented priest child rape scandal.

Ratzinger, then 85 years old at “retirement”, decided in February 2013 to make a strategic retreat to a nearby convent, to oversee from “retirement” a new strategy to defend against other escalating major investigations of Vatican wrongdoing, especially involving failures to protect children and to obey banking laws, while still pressing through his protege, Cardinal Mueller, for a purer and smaller Church.

Ratzinger’s (and Francis’) top goal by most indications was and remains to keep the hierarchy out of the clutches of independent prosecutors. Civil fines and damages appear to be acceptable, since the Vatican appears to have access to substantial financial resources. This is discussed further below in the articles linked here at the bottom.

To get a sense of why the Vatican is trying so hard to keep out of the grasp of Obama’s Federal prosecutors, please note the remarks last year that Tammy Dickinson, United States Attorney in Missouri, announced when a Roman Catholic priest, Fr. Shawn Ratigan, who abused under Bishop Finn’s facilitating watch, was sentenced in Federal court for producing child pornography.

“This sexual predator victimized five young children over a period of almost six years,” Dickinson said. “He violated his religious vows, betrayed the trust of his parishioners, and shocked the entire community. He deserves to spend the rest of his life in prison for his deliberate, planned, and chronic child sexual abuse. Today’s sentence of 50 years without parole, a virtual life sentence, is a just outcome to protect our children and our community from this predator priest… “

One wonders what this prosecutor would say about a conviction of Wesolowski, whom reportedly was permitted by the Vatican to roam freely in Rome after the Vatican smuggled him back to the Vatican’s “oversight”.

Please also see my, “Pope Francis’ Course and Crew For the “Synod Family Sail” Can Sink the Vatican Titanic” at:

[christiancatholicism.com]

For more information on today’s Future Church clash with Vatican security, please see:

[synodwatch.wordpress.com]

For Hans Kung’s full warning to the effect that letting Ratzinger stick around would be a real mistake, please see:

[www.huffingtonpost.com]

With respect to Pope Francis’ announced beatification of Pope Paul VI, hopefully, either in connection with the needed Family Synod discussion of gay Catholics and families, and possibly also in connection with the beatification of Paul VI, Pope Francis will generate an honest discussion at the Synod about the pertinence and relevance of rumors of the sexual orientation of recent popes, including Paul VI and Benedict XVI.

Perhaps, the ex-Pope might even share with the Synod Fathers some honest observations of his own on the pressing subject of treating gay Catholics with dignity, notwithstanding his earlier brutal position reflected in the Catechism?. At this point, what does the ex-Pope stand to lose?

Since it is unlikely Pope Francis and the ex-Pope will ever publicly release, without a court order, the ex-Pope’s secret “Gay Lobby Report”, at least the ex-Pope should consider discussing this important subject, no?

For the unprecedented way Pope Francis is making modern popes saints, please see:

[blog.yupnet.org]

For some related background o Pope Paul VI and Benedict XVI relating to homosexuality, please see:

[traditioninaction.org]

[awrsipe.com]

For additional information on Wesolowski and the priest child abuse situation in Puerto Rico and the Dominican Republic, please see:

[eldia.com.do]

[foxnews.com]

[caribbeanbusinesspr.com]

[actualidad.com.do]

[zeit.de]

[pinellas.legalexaminer.com]

[dominicantoday.com]