3. What Follows After Benedict XVI’s Death?
In La Nuova Bussola Quotidiana of January 7, Stefano Fontana raises the question of Benedict XVI’s legacy. According to him, this heritage “represents an era, that of the Council and the Post-Conciliar one” which consists in “picking up the whole question from where he [the pope emeritus] left off, not carrying out a change of era, continuing to hold back dissolute tendencies and continuing with the reconstruction.” For Francis, on the other hand, “the debate between the Council and the post-Council is finished.” He “intends to leave behind this era which, according to him, would see the Church still in a position of conservation and not of exit.”
Stefano Fontana affirms: Francis “wants to be post-post-conciliar. It is true that he often refers to the Council, but precisely to say that it is no longer the case of dwelling on it and on the era it inaugurated. The debate between the Council and the post-Council is over for him.”
“The clearest proof of this position of his, among the innumerable that we could recall, is the motu proprio Traditionis custodes which established that the “liturgical question” is over and, with it, the question of an entire era. But this was precisely the main question that Benedict XVI felt should be left open.”
Does this mean that the role of “timer” or “speed bump” played by Benedict XVI died with him? The Italian journalist thinks that “Benedict and his legacy will influence the Church more than before, more now, after his physical death, than before, when he was still alive. We all remember his last two public interventions: one on abuses by the clergy and the other on the priestly celibacy together with Cardinal Sarah. These two interventions ‘stopped’ some negative processes and prevented decisions that had perhaps already been made but were frozen. With his death this will no longer be possible, but this work, from now on, will be continued by those who have taken charge of his legacy in these days.”
Stefano Fontana’s hypothesis raises a question. Should we see “the hermeneutics of reform in continuity” promoted by Benedict XVI in 2005, as capable of concretely producing only a “slowdown” of an inexorable fall?
Like a parachute that slows down the descent, but does not prevent the fall to the ground, only making it less brutal? This legacy of Benedict XVI does not conform to the program of the pontificate of St. Pius X: “Restore all things in Christ” (Ep. 1:10).
The January 8 edition of The Caminante Wanderer, referring to the German newspaper Die Tagespost, considers that, “with the death of Benedict XVI, a new stage began in the pontificate of Francis, indeed of the Church herself. And the reason is that Ratzinger acted as a sort of buffer that dampened the conservatives’ fury against Bergoglio’s excesses.”
“Or, as Cardinal Müller put it, conservatives could go to the Mater Ecclesiæ monastery for healing. Now there is no buffer, and there is no longer a nursing home. Confrontation is inevitable…”
However, according to the Argentinian commentator, the current context modifies the balance of power: “The death of Benedict XVI has come late; the story would have been very different if it had happened five or six years ago. Now, Bergoglio is a worn-out and weakened pontiff, and all those around him in more or less close circles are waiting for him to die.… As specialists have been saying for a few months, the Vatican smells like a conclave.”
“On the other hand, Francis’ extremely authoritarian style of government created enemies everywhere, even among those who share his progressivism. Let us think, for example, how the the apostolic constitution he promulgated last Friday [Ecclesiarum communione, January 6, 2023], by which the diocese of Rome intervenes de facto and demands that his vicar, for example, consult him about the appointment of all the parish priests or the ordination of each one of the seminarians.”
Moreover, Francis “does not have the support of the most powerful progressive forces either: the German episcopate and, with it, that of other countries in its orbit. And he does not have popular support either. The people, the ‘faithful people,’ are not close to Pope Francis. It is enough to see the meager public turnout that any of his public appearances manages to gather.”
“Bergoglio, then, is weak because he is old and sick; because his pontificate has worn itself out with much ado about nothing, because his style of government has earned him countless enemies, and because he lacks popular support and devotion.”
The Wanderer, however, does not see a reaction emerging from the side of the conservative prelates whom it quotes pell-mell: “Cardinals Burke, Sarah; bishops like Viganò or Schneider, may be the best known. But I would also include in that group Cardinals Müller, Pell [who has just rendered his soul to God on January 10], Erdö, and Eijk, and a good number of American bishops.”
This is no conservative reaction, because among these prelates there is not a leader capable of uniting them. The progressive press is currently designating a man to be brought down, however: Msgr. Georg Gänswein, the former private secretary of Benedict XVI. The launch of his book Nient’altro che la Verità [Nothing But the Truth, My Life Alongside Benedict XVI], placed him in the spotlight.
The Argentinian site considers that the raising up of a leader would require “the occurrence of an explosive event.” He sees it in the possible appointment of a chemically pure progressive to head the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith: “According to comments in Vatican circles, the real and rabid intention of Francis is to appoint the German bishop Heiner Wilmer as prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.”
He is a person described by all as ultra-progressive and aligned with the most extreme decisions of the German Synodal Path. “For him, for example, the Holy Mass is not an important element of Christian life, and he proposes a complete revision of the Church’s teaching on sexuality. It is said that he has not yet been named due to the strong opposition Francis has encountered from numerous bishops and cardinals, such as Cardinal Müller.”
“But if he insists on the appointment, which is quite likely given the circumstances, there is no doubt that the Church will enter into a very deep struggle and division, and no one knows how it will end.”
Credit: Source link
