Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Fake News from the Vatican: The Benedict Letter
There has been quite some hubbub this past week over a letter written by Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI. It is a sad case of what happens when the truth is withheld. And yet, apparently, even our good friends at the Vatican Secretariat for Communications spread fake news. Sad. Particularly sad when Pope Francis, in his message for the World Day of Social Communications, condemned fake news.
The story is like a turducken, composed of various parts hidden inside one another, that came to see the light of day only through the work of a press seeking the truth. As they say, the cover-up is usually worse than the scandal.
The Turkey
The shine on Pope Francis is wearing thin. Priestly sex abuse scandals and financial scandals are causing his friends in the secular media to take a second look at their humble friend. And so to put Francis back in a good light, a press conference was held “on the occasion of the presentation to the press of the series “The theology of Pope Francis,” published by Libreria Editrice Vaticana and made up of eleven booklets, by different authors, on various aspects of the written and oral magisterium of the current pontiff.” At the presser, the prefect of the Secretariat for Communications, Monsignor Dario Edoardo Viganò, read aloud a letter from Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI, wherein one was made to think that Benedict was very pleased with this book project, for it rejected the “foolish prejudice” against both Francis and Benedict, showed the solid theological and philosophical formation of Pope Francis, and that the pontificates of Benedict and Pope Francis were in interior continuity.
The Duck
Yet it turns out that the entire letter was not read at the press conference, and that the press photo of the letter and the booklets that was released was doctored so that one could not read the entire letter. Having been caught red-handed, the Vatican admitted to their nonsense. In addition, it turned out that Benedict had not read any of the books and will not read them anytime soon so that he could not “write a brief and dense theological page about them” as had apparently been sought.
The Chicken
Yet not only was the photo with the covered-up letter doctored and the fact that Benedict had not read any of the volumes admitted to, but there was also another entire paragraph of the letter that was hidden because it didn’t fit the narrative of this whole sham:
[…] all the more so in that I am under other obligations to which I have already agreed.
Just as a side note, I would like to mention my surprise at the fact that the authors also include Professor Hünermann, who during my pontificate put himself in the spotlight by heading anti-papal initiatives. He participated to a significant extent in the promulgation of the “Kölner Erklärung,” which, in relation to the encyclical “Veritatis Splendor,” attacked in a virulent manner the magisterial authority of the pope especially on questions of moral theology. The Europäische Theologengesellschaft, which he founded, also was initially designed by him as an organization in opposition to the papal magisterium. Afterward, the ecclesial sentiment of many theologians blocked this tendency, making that organization a normal instrument of encounter among theologians.
I am certain that you will have understanding for my declination, and I cordially greet you.
It is quite telling to me that this paragraph and it’s mention of Veritatis Splendor was one that the Vatican didn’t want to see the light of day. To have Benedict XVI mention that one of the volumes was written by a man who attacked Veritatis Splendor and the magisterial authority of the pope on questions of moral theology is a mention that gets to the heart of a grave crisis in the Church today, and probably one which they wish would go away.
It would have been better for this pontificate if the letter, which had been marked “personal, reserved,” been kept private as requested and not seen the light of day. It is awfully hard to put lipstick on a pig.
Published in Religion & Philosophy
Wow.
And clearly there is nothing at all wrong or fuzzy in Pope Benedict’s thinking.
I have been wondering if he was somehow unable to be the pope. Hah. Not so. He would be just fine with it.
I read the AP coverage (sorry, I don’t know how to link to anything). Was amusing to see AP report a deception they know harms the cause of the merciful and forward looking “new” Catholic Church of Pope Francis. Well, it would be amusing if it wasn’t so awful.
That’s OK, I’ve got a link in the post. This was all a very sordid affair.
I wish the Catholic Church with all of its issues would get its act together and realize the need for cohesion in these difficult days.
That phrase alone prompted me to read a post I would otherwise have skipped over, given my general disinterest in the inner workings of the Church of Rome.
But I read it, and I feel edified. Good post.
I agree that it’s a sad story, if not an entirely new one, that spin should emanate from within the Vatican.
Well, good, now you are hooked. Let me know when you need a sponsor to come into full communion with the Church ;).
I appreciate your respect for us that you would say this. Thank you.
Well this post is a contradiction.
The theme, content and direction indicate more trouble and heartache for my Church.
But the “turducken” structure is a hoot and compels you to the very heart of the story.
Though, again, the heart of the story is a chicken ass.
I think that Benedict was overthrown in a palace coup by the Jesuits.
I highly recommend the novels of Malachi Martin on Vatican intrigues. He was there for years and I have read other books, nonfiction, that correlate his versions of the Vatican history.
As in a Bishop’s nose? How apropos.
I wonder about something similar, though I suspect a broader group of progressives. I was originally going to suggest that it was progressives, rather than Jesuits, then realized that there may not be any senior non-progressive Jesuits.
I have no info either way as to any “coup” to oust Benedict, but, for the record, there are two Jesuits in the College of Cardinals. Neither, due to age, were among the 115 who voted in 2013 when Francis was chosen.
Who needs the Jesuits when you have the Sankt Gallen Mafia. Further reading here and here.
One phrase in one of Martin’s novels was “The smoke of Satan surrounds the throne of Paul VI” The Mafia Pope.
In his childhood, the Perons were far more important than Christ.
He’s more of a Peronist than he is a Catholic.
Lucky Guy!
Though the order as a whole has gone south, there are some great Jesuits out there: Father Mitch Pacwa, Father Meconi, Father Schall…..all fantastic and faithful intellectuals.
Yesterday I went to confession and told the priest that I was becoming a crabby Catholic, with all of the disappointments from the Vatican and thinking of possible schism brought on as result. “Schism has been with us for 50 years!” was his reply. “It’s just not acknowledged”. I think he’s right.
That was profound and, I imagine, unexpected.
Indeed, schism has been with us for 2000 years, give or take. To read the history of the Church is to read the history of heresies, councils called to settle disputes, and the schisms that often followed. It’s tragic no doubt, but there’s no reason to have expected our generation to be immune from carrying that particular cross.
Mentally he’s still sharp as a tack by all accounts, but physically I gather he’s very frail these days.
I highly doubt it. Benedict never much liked the limelight to begin with (as a fellow introvert, I sympathize with his plight!) and he reached a point where his health wouldn’t permit him to travel much. I believe he resigned because he thought the Church needed an energetic, globetrotting pope in the model of Francis or St. John Paul the Great in his younger days, and he no longer felt up to the role.
As an evangelical Christian these posts make me feel good that I don’t have the cult layer sitting on top of Christianity.
So I take it the leaders of your church are all perfect angels who have never committed a sin to embarrass and scandalize you?
What do you mean?
The man at the center of this controversy, the prefect of the Secretariat for Communications, Monsignor Dario Edoardo Viganò, has resigned.
This is quite an interesting follow-up article on this mess.
Sandro Magister continues to follow this mess and writes more on the connection to Veritatis Splendor. He also provides a snippet from the homily of Pope Francis on Palm Sunday: