[ad_1]
Pope Francis has or has not revolutionized the Catholic Church? It is one of the questions of the moment. A question that the effects of the pandemic state have also helped to raise. And this has happened perhaps because even ecclesiastical circles, like all other spheres, are called to face a generalized disorder, which can even affect an ancient and apparently monolithic institution like‘Church. In short, this phase is very special. Insiders are insisting on how Covid-19 has reduced the size or, in any case, has revised the very role of a pontiff in the presence of the world. These are times of balance, although the reign of Francis is still ongoing.
From IOR to doctrine, passing through curial organization and pastoral priorities: the imprint of Jorge Mario Bergoglio it cannot go unnoticed. Another discourse refers to the scope of this imprint, which may or may not be poorly digested. It is a constant in the history of the Catholic Church: every bishop of Rome has had to face a critical front. In the case of the former archbishop of Buenos Aires, most of the opponents belong to the conservative or traditionalist hemisphere. More than seven years have passed since Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s election to Pietro’s throne. At what stage is the reform? How did the Argentine pontiff intervene in curial logic? Can it be said today that the Church is more transparent? Has the doctrine been changed? Is there a “plug” that prevents Bergoglio’s “driving force” from realizing its demands? These are all useful questions to summarize impulse. However, answering comprehensively is not an easy exercise.
We know, then, some ambitions of progressives: for exampleabolition of priestly celibacy, which Bergoglio did not endorse. If it depended on the “ecclesiastical left”, the Catholic Church today would have approved the viri probati, the blessing for homosexual couples, the ecumenical Mass, that is, a rite valid for both Protestants and conservatives, the changes related to the relationship between the Catechism and homosexuality, the diaconate woman and perhaps even the “priestesses.” These are experimental paradigms that some theological-doctrinal currents have been promoting since unsuspecting times. And this, according to the intentions of those currents, should have been the pontiff of the definitive turning point. That is to say, the Pope of the full realization of the Second Vatican Council and, in fact, of the passage capable of going beyond these novelties.
Of course, also for the opposition to the Council, a criticism pronounced part of the “right” of the chessboard. That is the area of the field where the complaints are most tangible. Jorge Mario Bergoglio, for conservatives, should have followed in the footsteps of Joseph Ratzinger, thus restoring rather than revolutionizing Catholicism. However, as stated, the revolutionary nature of this kingdom is anything but peaceful.
Economic and financial problems
One of the many emphases that can be placed on economic and financial matters: the Bishop of Rome began by wondering if the Church really needed a “bank.” Not only that For it is still there, but these years have been surrounded by a series of scandals – those that culminated narratively in the “Becciu case” – that affected precisely the places of “Vatican finances”. What happened to the box that Ratzinger gave to Bergoglio after his “resignation”? All open questions about “scandals” must reside in that container. However, no more is said about that. The “conservative front” would seem to want the anti-money laundering rules proposed by Cardinal Attilio Nicora, who died, to be reinstated, again an example. Those norms were modified with a decree, expanding – the traditionalists always say – the role of the Secretary of State and limiting the freedom of action of the AIF, the body that Benedict XVI had wanted independent. In short, the table is full of arguments for the discussion between the “sides”. And judging the state of Bergoglio’s reform also requires understanding from which “side” of “Vatican politics” the grievances come.
The state of the reform
José Antonio Ureta wrote a book a few years ago entitled “The” paradigm shift “of Pope Francis: continuity or rupture in the mission of the Church ?: Five-year review of his pontificate”. Now seven years have passed. And Pope Francis’ general reform has certainly advanced. Or the other way around: it varies depending on who is photographing the situation. This also applies to Ureta, whom we interviewed to investigate these aspects. And for the scholar, who appears to be a critic of the pontiff, the question not only cannot be summarized, but must also be circumscribed according to interpretation: “It depends on what is understood by” reform. “In a broad sense, that is, putting the Church on a par with modernity – as Cardinal Martini wished, who said that the Church is 200 years behind – reform is very advanced: with Amoris laetitia, Francis relativized Catholic morality and adopted the hypothesis of situational morality, which led the German episcopate to draw the consequences of these premises and to ask for the recognition of premarital unions, homosexual unions… ”. The German episcopate is holding a “biennial synod”, which has even been referred to as a “schism”, in connection with the fact that the Teutonics seem willing to decide autocephalously on doctrinal questions of universal competence, and therefore of the Pope.
A few days ago the new encyclical of the Holy Father came out. A text with which Pope Bergoglio seems to reiterate some fixed concepts of his pastoral: welcome to the migrants, “no” to sovereign populism, the need for global governance, criticism of capitalism, etc. Is the last encyclical also part of the reform project? We asked Ureta: “With “Fratelli Tutti”, Francis built a bridge between the Enlightenment and Catholicism, as Massimo Cacciari said for La Repubblica. In the strict sense of an internal reform of the Church, Francis’ program is paralyzed … “. What do you mean? “…because Querida Amazonia did not accept the request of the Synod to open a regional exception to ecclesiastical celibacy and create ministries similar to the diaconate of women. An Italian theologian who teaches in Germany, Fr. Marcello Neri – continues Ureta – He regretted that for many, Francis will not go down in history as the Pope of the reforms of the Church, but as the one who has not kept his promises. He attributes this failure to the failure to find “adequate support in the Catholic episcopal staff …”. And from the curial point of view? “With regard to the reform of the Curia, we must hope that the motu proprio will focus on the reorganization of the dicasteries. There is a sector, however, in which nothing seems to have changed: the management of financial funds … ”.
The first Jesuit pope in history should soon promulgate, after the work of the restricted council of cardinals, the so-called C9, a new apostolic constitution, which in turn should rebalance the Curia. This is probably what Ureta is referring to when he mentions the reorganization of the dicasteries. The fact that the academic has cited the finances of the Holy See cannot go unnoticed. During the last meeting of the restricted council of cardinals, as related by Lapresse, the Pope exposed a fact: Bergoglio believes that the “reform” “is already under way.” That is to say, that, leaving aside the promulgation of the new Apostolic Constitution, its action is already tangible. Perhaps a way to respond to grievances that come up on a daily basis.
What is happening in the sacred palaces
The “Becciu case” also touches on the management of the San Pedro Pennies, the offerings that the faithful donate to the pontiff for charitable works. The Cardinal of Sardinia continues to reject all the accusations. Leaving aside the news itself, it is worth noting how the “scandal” has reopened the debate around “transparency.” Ureta said he was amazed that the Pope “react at the last minute with drastic decisions (Becciu, for example, lost the powers derived from purple) and without granting the accused the right to defense, because, instead of opening a criminal proceeding, he makes final administrative decisions. This does not allow a defense and, above all, prevents possible accomplices from coming to light ”. Then Ureta refers to another “case”, very different from Becciu’s and that has nothing to do with financial matters: that of Theodore McCarrick, an influential high-ranking American cardinal, which Bergoglio unhinged after the appearance. of accusations of abuse of seminarians. The former Stars and Stripes cardinal is the same one who was at the center of Mgr. Carlo Maria Viganò’s file.
Bergoglio’s attitude towards the “Becciu case” would therefore be reception “in the financial sphere of the procedure followed in the case of the ex-Cardinal McCarrick sexual abuse scandal, reduced to secular status without trial and whose file has not yet been disclosed despite his formal promise, which is two years ago … ” . Just these days, the Vatican is about to release the McCarrick memorandum. Which could reveal the existence of hedges.
The Curia that does not change
As it has circulated in recent months, the new Apostolic Constitution should foresee a reduction of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and a new leap forward for the Secretary of State, which is currently directed by Cardinal Pietro Parolin, which would become increasingly central among the different departments and bodies that manage the power processes within the lion’s walls.
The feeling is that much of Francis’s pontificate should be analyzed, if at all, the day after the approval of this document, which should really redesign the‘Church and its institutions as we know them. Ureta, for his part, does not have too many doubts about the state of the curial art: “There have already been important changes, but we have to wait for the final reform. If what has happened so far is confirmed, it would be a fatal blow for the Roman Curia in the service of the Supreme Pontiff to bring him closer to a kind of permanent representation of the world’s episcopates alongside the Pope, to govern alongside him, as a democratic parliament. ”
