Well (as one meme announced this morning), I guess that’s one way for the Vatican to avoid Trump’s tariffs!
On Thursday the cardinals selected a pope who was “made in the USA.”
All else equal, I wish he weren’t. This is a personal preference, but I’d rather the pope seem more mysterious, ethereal, and distant.
I don’t want him to be my drinking buddy. Thinking of the pope as a Bears fan eating deep-dish at Ditka’s makes him easier to relate to, yet harder to respect.
Many might argue that, like Jesus, the Vicar of Christ should be accessible. I can understand that, and agree intellectually. But I resist viscerally.
I admit this is my problem, not the new pope’s fault. Italians might’ve felt for centuries the way I do today, even if most of them wanted to.
The Pope’s Purpose
But regardless the ancestral origins of any pontiff, patriotism has no place in the universal Church, an institution that should strive to be above this world… not of it.
She should be a heavenly beacon toward which the temporal should aspire. That’s one reason (among many since the Second Vatican Council) the vernacular Mass was such a mistake. But it wasn’t necessarily the biggest.
Except in his ability to clearly convey Catholic doctrine, the Bishop of Rome needn’t be “relatable” to select constituencies. He should be somewhat other-worldly, unconcerned with fickle fashion or passing fads.
I admit to not knowing much about the former Cardinal Robert Prevost. But the initial endorsements are disconcerting. Most unsettling is that they occur at all.
A true successor of St. Peter is chosen under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. That should be sufficient acclamation. Labeling him as “liberal” or “conservative”, “traditional” or “progressive”, is a category mistake… another example of how politics ruins everything.
The pope isn’t a president, congressman, or Supreme Court justice. To speak of his “position” on “issues” is absurd. To the true Vicar of Christ, doctrine is divinely prescribed. St. Peter’s successor has no choice in the matter.
The pope’s purpose is the salvation of souls. As custodian of the Church, his job is to clearly and consistently defend and promote Catholic dogma, discipline, and Tradition.
In this regard, initial indications about Pope Leo XIV aren’t encouraging.
The New York Times reports that “The Rev. Michele Falcone, 46, a priest in the Order of St. Augustine previously led by Cardinal Prevost, described his mentor and friend as the ‘dignified middle of the road.’”
Almost sounds like a compliment, doesn’t it? Praise from Nancy Pelosi and Father James Martin (the “Rainbow Jesuit”) are more disconcerting.
Obviously, none of this is conclusive proof we’re entering an apostatic “papacy”. We’ll need to see whether the Vatican will keep wandering the expanding wilderness it seems determined to plant. But even if Leo begins clearing some brush, I doubt he’ll be another Pius V or Innocent III.
Two Great Popes
On the throne at the turn of the thirteenth century, Innocent’s pontificate was the peak of Catholic power. At 37, he was the youngest pope in 150 years. He’d studied at Paris and Bologna, was a cardinal and canon at St. Peters, and won the papacy on the first ballot.
His consecration address emphasized the relation between spiritual and temporal power. While the temporal was autonomous within its realm, the spiritual was superior, and the pope could intervene when the situation demanded.
Innocent made liberal use of interdicts, presided over the Fourth Lateran Council, and made royal rulers succumb to his ecclesial decrees. No pope has done more to congeal the authority of the Church. A few centuries later, another pontiff made an attempt.
Best known for excommunicating Queen Elizabeth, creating the Holy League that won Lepanto, convening the Council of Trent, and formalizing the Tridentine Rite, St. Pius V saved the Church.
He started tossing lifelines prior to his papacy, when he prosecuted bishops for heresy and rebuked his predecessor for nepotism. As pope, he made St Thomas Aquinas a Doctor of the Church.
More than anyone, St. Pius V restored some semblance of morality to decadent Rome by eliminating many extravagant luxuries that adorned his court. He earned the enmity of Italy by forbidding horse racing in St Peters Square, and imposing sanctions on sodomy, blasphemy, and adultery (that this was necessary is telling). During a famine in Latium, he used his own funds to import food from Sicily and France.
The Spirit of Francis
Will Leo XIV have similar impact?
Pope Francis made Prevost a cardinal less than two years ago. A few months earlier, he’d appointed him to the lead the office that vets potential bishops.
He wouldn’t have done so if his pick were unwilling to perpetuate the Bergoglian agenda. Prevost’s extensive service in Peru and affinity with the Latin American “social gospel” is another red flag that we should expect more bull.
Yet yesterday the new pope sprinkled this spiritual desert with a few drops of hope. Unlike his predecessor, he dressed appropriately, took a pre-conciliar name, and introduced himself with the words of Christ when he appeared to the Apostles.
Superficialities and aesthetics are nice, and symbolically important. But they aren’t essential, or sufficient. As we’ve seen before, they can be distractions from doctrinal abuse.
As with most pronouncements from modern popes, Leo’s Urbi et Orbi was a collection of insipid banalities that seemed designed not to offend. He commended “inclusivity” and “unity”, as if indiscriminate acceptance and unanimous agreement were inherently beneficial.
In the spirit of Francis, the new pope praised “synodality”. Like many “innovations” of the Vatican II church, this consultative approach is incompatible with Catholic tradition. It’s more protestant than papal.
As if this were an inaugural address, he talked of “building bridges”, expanding “dialogue”, and extending “open arms.” But Catholics don’t seek “open dialogue” with the pope. They want clear pronouncements on divine doctrine. They only want to “build bridges” that are one-way, with adherents of other religions coming to the Faith. This was affirmed by every pope thru Pius XII.
