Let Us Pray for an End to this Pontificate.
Rumors are swirling to the effect that Pope Bergoglio’s recent colon surgery was not due to mere obstructive diverticulitis but rather colon cancer, that his condition is progressive and degenerative, and that, according to Antonio Socci, Francis has suggested that by next spring there may be a new Pope due to his resignation on account of health. That would create an unheard-of triad of Popes: one in office after the next conclave and two still-living Popes emeritus. At that rate, the Vatican would need to establish a 401K account for “retired” Roman Pontiffs.
On that score, another rumor is circulating: according to Bussola Quotidiana, Francis will launch another motu proprio essentially doing away with the novelty of the “emeritus” Pope (certainly not a bad thing) and perhaps even establishing a mandatory papal retirement age of 85 (definitely a bad thing).
At any rate, Bergoglio’s departure is a consummation devoutly to be wished! For with Bergoglio, we have a man in a great hurry to inflict as much damage on traditional Catholicism as he can while he is still in office. Consider this take on Traditionis custodes in an article by Jason Horowitz, a religion correspondent for The New York Times. It begins with the following inadvertent bit of exquisite irony: “Pope Francis took a significant step toward putting the Roman Catholic Church’s liturgy solidly on the side of modernization on Friday by cracking down on the use of the old Latin Mass, essentially reversing a decision by his conservative predecessor.”
Yes, Horowitz is serious. The last fifty years of ruinous “modernization” of the Church in general and the liturgy in particular appear to have escaped his notice. Is it too much to ask that the Times’ correspondent on Church affairs actually know something about the Church and her recent history?
Another embarrassing example of Horowitz’s profound ignorance of his subject: “In 2016, when Cardinal Sarah called for priests to celebrate Mass with their backs to the congregation, Francis issued an unusual public rebuke.” Of course, what Cardinal Sarah actually called for was Mass with both the people and the priest facing God. The fifty-year-old novelty of facing the congregation, not the object of worship, is about as absurd as a bus driver facing his passengers.
Continuing to blunder about in matters of which he knows nothing, Horowitz quotes some horrified reactions of tradition-minded Catholics to Francis’ declaration of war on the Latin Mass (e.g., the headline “FRANCIS WILL DIE, THE LATIN MASS WILL LIVE FOREVER.”), and then writes that “Supporters of Francis said such overblown statements by opponents demonstrated the necessity of a correction to Benedict’s policies.” Massimo Faggioli, that reliable apologist for every destructive novelty of this catastrophic pontificate, is quoted for that proposition that “What they [traditionalists] are saying about Pope Francis’ decision makes a very good argument for Pope Francis’ decision.”
In other words, tradition-minded Catholics should not be outraged by Bergoglio’s attempt to exterminate the Mass of the Ages, the bedrock of Christian civilization, which even atheists defend as an essential element of culture. Their very outrage over Bergoglio’s outrageous act justifies the outrageous act! The closed loop of that reasoning is reflective of the closed mind of the same Pope who constantly denounces the rigidity of others.
Will Francis resign? Let’s be real: His papacy will end only when his life ends. Like the Democrat governors who continue to tyrannize millions with their nonsensical, socially destructive COVID-19 restrictions on human existence, Bergoglio will never relinquish his power until it is wrested from his hands by death or some other divine intervention. For which we the faithful have every right, indeed a duty, to pray, failing the miracle of this Pope’s conversion.