The Next Pope

[Glaurung]

The scandals haunting Pope Francis

unherd.com

I make no secret of my disdain for the current regime in Rome. But I have become cautiously optimistic as this pontificate enters its final years. The scandal of the current pontificate makes the prospect of a Francis II unlikely. I anticipate that the next conclave will seek to elect a moderate conservative whose policies will be more in line with those of St. John Paul II and Benedict XVI.

A business that intentionally alienates its most loyal customers is an irrationally run business. A church that intentionally alienates its most devout adherents is an irrationally run church. A Catholic Church that continues to deprecate its own liturgical heritage: a Catholic Church that will not affirm its own moral doctrines without ambiguity - perpetually seeking to 'compromise' on its own teachings - undermines its claims to being the custodian of divine revelation.

The next pope has a big mess to clean up. But his opening move is actually quite obvious. End the crusade against the TLM and rescind most of Francis' restrictions on it. Allowing more access to traditional services (be those services the TLM or the NO with smells and bells) will upset the hardline liberals but they will be an irrelevant screeching minority the day Francis dies.

The fundamental issue with the Francis vision is that it attempts to address a world that no longer exists. Liberal Catholicism may have made a degree of sense in the 1970s but it makes no sense in the 2020's. A Christianity that stands for little but unthreatening platitudes is not compelling in a secular culture hostile to religion. The only churches that will survive these coming decades are those with an uncompromising message. Until the Catholic Church sees that it will continue to flounder: being a parody of itself, a once great church.

 

[LuisDantas]

As hopes and goals go, I fear that those you pursue are more than a bit self-defeating.

There are good likely reasons why Benedict XVI stepped down. There is no reason to expect that a similar would-be Pope would be any better, nor to want him to.

 

[Glaurung]

As hopes and goals go, I fear that those you pursue are more than a bit self-defeating.

On the contrary. I think it's possible we will see a religious resurgence as this century rolls on. Secular people don't breed. Secular humanism has no future generations to pass its values on to. Unless of course, something like alien disclosure happens and changes humanity existentially.

There are good likely reasons why Benedict XVI stepped down. There is no reason to expect that a similar would-be Pope would be any better, nor to want him to.

Benedict stepped down because he felt too old and demoralized to deal with the corruption that had become so entrenched within the higher clergy. I don't think he anticipated living as long as he ended up doing. Francis has done nothing to fix the rot. He has enabled it. So no, I don't think the next conclave will be under the illusion that a Francis II will do anything to solve the Church's problems. Francis 2.0 would make things worse.

 

[LuisDantas]

On the contrary. I think it's possible we will see a religious resurgence as this century rolls on. Secular people don't breed. Secular humanism has no future generations to pass its values on to. Unless of course, something like alien disclosure happens and changes humanity existentially.

Uh... what?

I mean... do you actually believe in that?

Wow!

 

[Left Coast]

The scandals haunting Pope Francis

unherd.com

I make no secret of my disdain for the current regime in Rome. But I have become cautiously optimistic as this pontificate enters its final years. The scandal of the current pontificate makes the prospect of a Francis II unlikely. I anticipate that the next conclave will seek to elect a moderate conservative whose policies will be more in line with those of St. John Paul II and Benedict XVI.

A business that intentionally alienates its most loyal customers is an irrationally run business. A church that intentionally alienates its most devout adherents is an irrationally run church. A Catholic Church that continues to deprecate its own liturgical heritage: a Catholic Church that will not affirm its own moral doctrines without ambiguity - perpetually seeking to 'compromise' on its own teachings - undermines its claims to being the custodian of divine revelation.

The next pope has a big mess to clean up. But his opening move is actually quite obvious. End the crusade against the TLM and rescind most of Francis' restrictions on it. Allowing more access to traditional services (be those services the TLM or the NO with smells and bells) will upset the hardline liberals but they will be an irrelevant screeching minority the day Francis dies.

The fundamental issue with the Francis vision is that it attempts to address a world that no longer exists. Liberal Catholicism may have made a degree of sense in the 1970s but it makes no sense in the 2020's. A Christianity that stands for little but unthreatening platitudes is not compelling in a secular culture hostile to religion. The only churches that will survive these coming decades are those with an uncompromising message. Until the Catholic Church sees that it will continue to flounder: being a parody of itself, a once great church.

My read is different. The obsession of some uber-traddies with TLM and believing they're more Catholic than the Pope (literally) is a mostly American thing. They are loud, obnoxious minority clinging to a bygone era of Church history. I suspect they will increasingly fade into irrelevance and the Church will move on as she has for centuries.

 

[Estro Felino]

A politicized papacy after we had John Paul II, the golden age of Catholicism.

 

[Left Coast]

Uh... what?

I mean... do you actually believe in that?

Wow!

He's not wrong in the sense that non-religious people do have fewer kids than religious folks (as a population average, obviously).

 

[Estro Felino]

My read is different. The obsession of some uber-traddies with TLM and believing they're more Catholic than the Pope (literally) is a mostly American thing. They are loud, obnoxious minority clinging to a bygone era of Church history. I suspect they will increasingly fade into irrelevance and the Church will move on as she has for centuries.

Forbidding something means waging a war against something.
I don't understand that.

Personally I prefer the Mass in vernacular languages...but I would never impose that on anyone.

 

[Left Coast]

Forbidding something means waging a war against something.
I don't understand that.

Personally I prefer the Mass in vernacular languages...but I would never impose that on anyone.

You understand that the TLM was also an imposition in the 16th century, yes? The Church banned other Western liturgies. This isn't new.

 

[Estro Felino]

You understand that the TLM was also an imposition in the 16th century, yes? The Church banned other Western liturgies. This isn't new.

From one extreme to the other.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

Faith is in rapid decile in the western world. Only in Africa and the Moslem nations is it growing or holding it's own.
The Catholic churches problem od declining,congregations and lack of new clergy, is common among the protestant churches as well.

No amount of looking backwards is going to change thing one iota.

Without state help many churches will fade away.

 

[Left Coast]

From one extreme to the other.

Not really. The Church values a certain degree of liturgical uniformity and norms. This isn't new. It's the same principle, applied in different generations.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Well, the Church is not a democracy -- it will get what a bunch of old cardinals decide to give it. A return to the homophobia (along with systemic cover-up of pedophiles in the clergy) will not do the world a great deal of good.

And by the way, as many denominations are finding out, alienating your congregations will have the effect of emptying your churches.

Secular people don't breed. Secular humanism has no future generations to pass its values on to.

What a remarkable thing to say! The most secular nations on earth are China, Sweden, Czech Republic, United Kingdom, Belgium, Azerbaijan, Vietnam, Australia, Norway and Denmark. They all seem to be repopulating themselves nicely, thank you very much, with little chance of finding themselves empty of any citizens at all..

 

[Left Coast]

What a remarkable thing to say! The most secular nations on earth are China, Sweden, Czech Republic, United Kingdom, Belgium, Azerbaijan, Vietnam, Australia, Norway and Denmark. They all seem to be repopulating themselves nicely, thank you very much, with little chance of finding themselves empty of any citizens at all..

That is a remarkable thing to say! China is on the verge of major problems right now because of their past policies restricting how many kids their citizens are allowed to have. Their population is shrinking.

 

[The Hammer]

That is a remarkable thing to say! China is on the verge of major problems right now because of their past policies restricting how many kids their citizens are allowed to have. Their population is shrinking.

And Japan is having a similar problem thanks to an obsession with corporate work culture imported from the west.

 

[Left Coast]

And Japan is having a similar problem thanks to an obsession with corporate work culture imported from the west.

Norway, another country on the list, has also been having increasingly low birth rates. I believe the UK is in a similar boat.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Forbidding something means waging a war against something.
I don't understand that.

Personally I prefer the Mass in vernacular languages...but I would never impose that on anyone.

Yes, there's no reason why both cannot continue to be offered. It's totally ridiculous, especially when they have "charismatic masses". It's obviously in demand and it's actually a part of reviving the Church and her heritage, so they're only hurting themselves by suppressing it. They are going to drive people away who want to be devout Catholics.

 

[LuisDantas]

He's not wrong in the sense that non-religious people do have fewer kids than religious folks (as a population average, obviously).

True... but it is not like secularists consistently have only - or even mostly - secularist offspring.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

That is a remarkable thing to say! China is on the verge of major problems right now because of their past policies restricting how many kids their citizens are allowed to have. Their population is shrinking.

And Japan is having a similar problem thanks to an obsession with corporate work culture imported from the west.

Norway, another country on the list, has also been having increasingly low birth rates. I believe the UK is in a similar boat.

The world's population is increasing -- any of you doubt that? It's increasing primarily in places that can't support the increase, which is (one might think) something of a problem. And that, by the way

Having babies isn't the only way that any nation increases its population -- we have this thing call "immigration." Does that mean that some of the demographics will change, that culture will shift? Of course. But why is that something to be fearful of? And I think it can be said that demographics and culture won't change all that much. My own experience in Toronto, Ontario, Canada, one of the most diverse places on the planet, our immigrants retain much of their previous culture and belief, but also absorb much of the culture (if not religious beliefs) of their new home. And the natives -- to be clear -- still outnumber the immigrants.

As I said, Toronto is one of the most multicultural places on earth. We are loaded with people from every religion, language, culture and nation. Many of the people who live here come from places where a gay man like myself would, just as a matter of daily practice, be villified or even killed. And yet, the Muslims, Hindus and Sikhs show up at Pride, and gay folks show up at "Taste of South Asia," the "Polish Festival" on Roncesvalles or the Ukrainian Festival at Bloor-West Village. And we all get along. We work together.

I hated Benedict XVI for his disgusting letter (while he was Cardinal Ratzinger and head of Doctrine of Faith) called "On the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons." He didn't have either the smarts or the humanity to even consider how bloody demeaning it was. Any of you want to tell me why I should want to stand by and be treated like some lower life-form that needs your pity -- but not your acceptance? If you think that, I say "[insert naughty word here] you!"

 

[Left Coast]

True... but it is not like secularists consistently have only - or even mostly - secularist offspring.

I would bet the trend is generally similar to the kids of religious parents. Most people inherit the worldview of their parents. America is kind of an outlier there - we have an abnormally large rate of conversion and deconversion.