COMMENT: There are numerous indications that “fascist-friendly” institutional continuity will be maintained at the Vatican.
The Pope will have the title of “Emeritus Pope,” wearing white and interfacing with Georg Ganswein, the German Opus Dei operative who has served as the Pope’s right-hand man and who will serve the new Pope as well.
As a result of this gambit, Ratzinger/Benedict may well be able to function as an eminence grise, wielding clandestine power behind the scenes.
The Pope’s proposal to move up the conclave of cardinals who will select the new Pope has also been seen as favoring a continuation of the reactionary bent of the Vatican, reminiscent in some ways of the Mohamed Morsi’s decision to speed up approval of the pro-Muslim Brotherhood constitution in Egypt.
In addition, Ratzinger/Benedict’s residence in the Vatican will shield him from any possible legal action, because of the Vatican’s status of diplomatic immunity.
EXCERPT: Pope Benedict XVI will be known as “emeritus pope” in his retirement and will continue to wear a white cassock, the Vatican announced Tuesday, again fueling concerns about potential conflicts arising from having both a reigning and a retired pope.
The pope’s title and what he would wear have been a major source of speculation ever since Benedict stunned the world and announced he would resign on Thursday, the first pontiff to do so in 600 years.
The Vatican spokesman, the Rev. Federico Lombardi, said Benedict himself had made the decision in consultation with others, settling on “Your Holiness Benedict XVI” and either emeritus pope or emeritus Roman pontiff.
Lombardi said he didn’t know why Benedict had decided to drop his other main title: bishop of Rome.
In the two weeks since Benedict’s resignation announcement, Vatican officials had suggested that Benedict would likely resume wearing the traditional black garb of a cleric and would use the title “emeritus bishop of Rome” so as to not create confusion with the future pope.
Benedict’s decision to call himself emeritus pope and to keep wearing white is sure to fan concern voiced privately by some cardinals about the awkward reality of having two popes, both living within the Vatican walls.
Adding to the concern is that Benedict’s trusted secretary, Monsignor Georg Gaenswein, will be serving both pontiffs — living with Benedict at the monastery inside the Vatican and keeping his day job as prefect of the new pope’s household. . . .
EXCERPT: Pope Benedict’s decision to live in the Vatican after he resigns will provide him with security and privacy. It will also offer legal protection from any attempt to prosecute him in connection with sexual abuse cases around the world, Church sources and legal experts say.
“His continued presence in the Vatican is necessary, otherwise he might be defenseless. He wouldn’t have his immunity, his prerogatives, his security, if he is anywhere else,” said one Vatican official, speaking on condition of anonymity.
This could be complicated for the Church, particularly in the unlikely event that the next pope makes decisions that may displease conservatives, who could then go to Benedict’s place of residence to pay tribute to him.
“That would be very problematic,” another Vatican official said.
The final key consideration is the pope’s potential exposure to legal claims over the Catholic Church’s sexual abuse scandals.
In 2010, for example, Benedict was named as a defendant in a law suit alleging that he failed to take action as a cardinal in 1995 when he was allegedly told about a priest who had abused boys at a U.S. school for the deaf decades earlier. The lawyers withdrew the case last year and the Vatican said it was a major victory that proved the pope could not be held liable for the actions of abusive priests. . . .
. . . That would continue to provide him immunity under the provisions of the Lateran Pacts while he is in the Vatican and even if he makes jaunts into Italy as a Vatican citizen.
The 1929 Lateran Pacts between [Mussolini’s] Italy and the Holy See, which established Vatican City as a sovereign state, said Vatican City would be “invariably and in every event considered as neutral and inviolable territory”. . . .
EXCERPT: Pope Benedict may change rules governing the conclave that will secretly elect his successor, a move that could move up the global meeting of cardinals who are already in touch about who could best lead Catholics through a period of crisis. . . .
The Vatican appears to be aiming to have a new pope elected and then formally installed before Palm Sunday on March 24 . . . .
CONCERNS ABOUT EARLY CONCLAVE
But some in the Church believe that an early conclave would give an unfair advantage to cardinals already in Rome and working in the Curia, the Vatican’s central administration.
“A short period before a conclave helps the curial cardinals in Rome operating on their home turf,” said Father Tom Reese, senior fellow at the Woodstock Theological Center at Georgetown University and author of several books on the Vatican.
“The curial cardinals are the ones that cardinals from outside Rome turn to for opinions about the other cardinals. The longer the pre-conclave period, the more time non-curial cardinals have to talk to each other and to get to know each other. The longer the period prior to the conclave, the less dependent outside cardinals are on the curial cardinals.”
There is speculation in the Vatican that, if the rules are amended, the conclave could start on March 10, lasting a few days, and the new pope could be installed on March 17, both Sundays. But much would depend on the length of the conclave.
During the conclave, cardinals live in a residence inside the Vatican and vote twice in the Sistine Chapel. They are not allowed to communicate in any way with the outside world, nor are they allowed to listen to radio, watch television, make phone calls or use the internet.
Benedict has hand-picked more than half the men who will elect his successor. The rest were chosen by the late Pope John Paul, a Pole with whom the German pope shared a determination to reassert a more orthodox Catholicism in the new millennium. . . .
Underground Reich connections?
As his last substantive act as pope, Ratzinger appointed a fellow German, Ernst von Freyberg, an aristocrat and conservative Catholic, to head the Vatican bank. The appointment appeared to be a pre-emptive move, aimed at preventing his successor from picking his own bank chief.
Von Freyberg’s appointment provoked new controversy, however, after it was revealed that the German shipbuilding company he chairs had manufactured battleships and U‑boats for Hitler’s navy and is currently producing warships for the German government.
A Vatican spokesman responded to questions about the propriety of naming an arms manufacturer to head the Church’s bank by insisting that the von Freyberg’s main line of work was building luxury yachts and that “he also organizes pilgrimages to Lourdes, he is a member of the Order of Malta, he takes care of the sick, so certainly he is a person with a notable human and Christian sensibility.”
Part of the common wisdom regarding the challenges surrounding a new Pope is the need to “rebrand” the Catholic Church. And to the now-Emeritus Pope’s credit, one of the final decisions he made — the decision to order UK’s most senior cleric, Cardinal Keith O’Brien, to resign and not attend the Vatican conclave where the new Pope will be selected — was probably a good ‘rebranding’ move:
@Stu–
We covered this and other Vatican-related matters in previous posts.
It’d be good to keep current.
Best,
Dave Emory
The news this week in the US has been dominated by stories related to the impeachment of President Trump, including the formal delivery of articles of impeachment against President Trump being delivered by the US House to the US Senate this week, kicking off a trial in the Senate. So here’s a series of articles about a very different kind of impeachment process that’s slowly playing out right now. And unlike the impeachment process, this one isn’t legitimate and is more of a coup: It’s the quiet impeachment of Pope Francis that appears to be underway by a faction of far right ideologues inside Vatican and allied with with global far right. And Steve Bannon is involved. Surprise!
As we’re going to see, while there have been signs of tensions between the backers of the liberal Pope Francis and the backers of his far right predecessor Joseph Ratzinger (Pope Benedict), that conflict appears to be heating up of late and spilling over into an apparent recent public rebuke of Francis by Ratzinger that’s raising the question of whether or not there’s an outright Pope power struggle underway. The apparent rebuke came in the form of Ratzinger authoring parts of a new book about the topic of allowing priests to be married that strongly criticized Pope Francis’s recent move to allow married priests in some circumstances. The book was primarily written by Cardinal Robert Sarah, an extremely conservative Cardinal Robert Sarah from Guinea who is vehemently opposed to any moves to relax the church’s views on human sexuality. But as we’ll see, it was Ratzinger who was both photographed on the cover of the book and listed as its leak author as “Pope Benedict”. It’s that book that appears to be an open move by the ex-Pope to overrule the current Pope. Even many Benedict’s backers acknowledge that he should have been listed as “Joseph Ratzinger”, not Pope Benedict, under the rules that seemed to be in place after Ratzinger stepped down and agreed not to speak or write publicly.
But it gets more mysterious. Because Ratzinger’s health is so frail that many are questioning whether or not he even wrote the parts of the book he apparently authored. That’s leading to speculation that his personal secretary Georg Gaenswein (“Gorgeous Georg”), who continues to serve as the gatekeeper to Ratzinger, has actually been putting words in the ex-Pope’s mouth/pen and is allowing him to be used to lead this far right revolt. And yet, as we’ll see in the second article below, Gaenswein is now publicly asserting that Ratinger had not agreed to be a co-author of the book or signed off on the jointly written introduction and conclusion and he is demanding that the book publisher remove Ratzinger from the book cover. Gaenswein is portraying the situation as an innocent misunderstanding between Ratzinger and Cardinal Sarah over what Ratzinger agreed to in terms of authorship. The publisher, Ignatius Press, is claiming that Ratzinger was indeed a co-author under the rules of co-authorship and Cardinal Sarah claims to have letters where Ratzinger agreed on the front cover. Two hours after Sarah made those claims, he tweeted out that Pope Benedict’s name would be removed as a co-author and would instead be listed as a contributor but the essay Ratzinger write will remain in the book.
So are Gaenswein’s demands just necessary public ass-covering to buy time and sow confusion as this power struggle gets underway or was something else going on that led to Ratzinger’s “Pope Benedict” title being used to lead the charge against the new Pope’s new policies? That remains unclear. But as we’re going to see, Gaenswein is indeed seen as one of the key playing in the Vatican faction opposed to Pope Francis’s moves to liberalize the Catholic Church’s policies. And that’s a faction that includes figures outside the church. Figures like Italian far right politician Matteo Salvini, Steve Bannon, and a German former punk rocker-turned-princess Princess Gloria of Thurn and Taxis.
Ok, here’s the first article about the scandal over the book cover of a book primarily written by Cardinal Sarah but listed “Pope Benedict” as the lead author on the cover along with his picture. As the article notes, part of what made this so controversial was that Ratzinger’s health is so weak it’s speculated he didn’t even write the parts he supposedly write and instead “Gorgeous Georg” Gaenswein is allowing the ex-Pope to get used in a drive to undermine Pope Francis’s authority:
“While he initially stuck to his promise to carry out a life of quiet contemplation and academic research, he has since weighed in on the explosive issues of clerical sex abuse and whether the priesthood could be opened to married men.”
He was a compliant ex-Pope for a while, but not anymore. It’s something that isn’t entirely surprising either given that Ratzinger refused to give up wearing papal garb and still lives in the Vatican. The way he stepped down while note entirely stepping down from the papal role made clear this scenario was going to remain a possibility from the beginning and now it’s happening:
But the fact that this is happening at a time when Ratzinger has difficulty speaking or writing is leading to speculation that Ratzinger may not entirely be directly involved in this power struggle but is instead having words put in his mouth. And the person in the best position to do that is “Gorgeous Georg”:
And those speculations are part of what make the following article so interesting. Because it’s Gaenswein who is now demanding that Benedict’s name and photo be removed from the cover of the book while insisting that Ratzinger never gave his permissions and describes the situation as a misunderstanding. But the publisher is refusing, saying it’s clear Ratzinger was a co-author who had been working with Cardinal Sarah for months on the book. And Cardinal Sarah claims to have evidence that Ratzinger did indeed agree to that front cover but then tweeted out that Pope Benedict’s name will be removed as a co-author and instead listed as a contributor. So it’s going to be interesting to see if Gaenswein continues with his demands or if shifting Pope Benedict from a co-author to contributor satisfies his demands, which will give us a better idea of the nature of these theatrics:
““The Pope emeritus in fact knew the Cardinal was preparing a book,” Archbishop Gänswein added, “and had sent a short text of his on the priesthood”, authorising the Cardinal to use it as he wished. But the Pope emeritus “had not approved any project for a co-signed book, nor had he seen and authorised the cover. It was a misunderstanding, without questioning the good faith of Cardinal Sarah.” ”
So according to Gaenswein’s clarification, Ratzinger was indeed aware of this book and sent a short text that agreed Cardinal Sarah could use, but he didn’t agree to be a c0-signer and hadn’t authorized the cover. But Cardinal Sarah issued a statement saying he did indeed agree to a front cover and claimed to have the letters to prove it. But in the end, Sarah agreed to have Benedict’s name removed as co-author and instead listed him as a contributor. But the ex-Pope’s essays still stand. Which is a big deal, just not as big a deal as that cover:
And the book publishers claims the text they received back up Cardinal Sarah’s version of events and indicated that Ratzinger really did co-author the introductions and conclusions of the book along with his own chapter. And that technically makes him a co-author under publishing rules:
So that’s the current open challenge to the authority of Pope Francis that is now underway by a faction of the church that appears to actively include “Georgeous Georg” Gaenswein. It’s unclear to what extent Ratzinger is active in this plot or is just being used.
Next, here’s an article from back in July of 2019 about how Italy’s far right, and the far right across the West, is increasingly opposed to Pope Francis, largely over Francis’s calls for treating migrants and refugees with compassion. But there is one particular cardinal that is increasingly popular with the West’s far right: Cardinal Sarah. The article describes how Matteo Salvini, leader of the Northern League, used posters of Cardinal Sarah during an anti-immigration rally in Milan. But he’s not the only cardinal popular with the far right. US Cardinal Raymond Burke is seen as the de facto leader of the conservative opposition to Pope Francis and, himself, is an open fan of Salvini and his anti-migrant/refugee policies. And that’s all part of the context of this intra-Vatican fight: It’s just one part of the global rise of the far right and anti-immigration sentiments are going to be major factor in that rise both inside and outside the Vatican:
“While the pope has emerged as a leading champion for refugees and migrants around the world, anti-immigration politicians with a populist appeal have found increasing support among once-powerful conservative Catholic figures who have been sidelined within the church by Francis.”
The rise of the far right is a pretty grim scenario for the world in general, but it’s especially grim for an institution like the Catholic Church, where the rise of the far right represents a direct rejection of the core teachings of figure the whole church is supposed to be based on. Compassion for refugees and strangers in general is viscerally antithetical to the far right id and yet it’s also as the core of Jesus’s message in the Bible so when we see an alliance of anti-immigrant politicians for a powerful faction in the Vatican it becomes a particularly morally grotesque situation. That part of the context of this Vatican power struggle between the two Popes. It’s part of a move to literally make the Vatican church theologically anti-compassion-for-strangers:
And as the following article describes, it’s not just Italian far right politicians with disturbingly close ties to the far right faction within the Catholic Church. There’s a whole global far right network. A network that includes figures like Steven Bannon and Princess Gloria of Thurn and Taxis, who hosts meetings attended by a number of senior conservatives Cardinals, including Georg Gaenswein:
“The opulent Roman salon of a wealthy German princess is the location for regular gatherings of a group of ultra-conservative Catholics — including Steve Bannon, former White House strategist once favoured by President Donald Trump — where they plot their campaign to undermine the Papacy of Francis.”
A far right German princess is regularly holding gatherings of ultra-conservative Catholics at her opulent Roman salon where they plot the undermining of the current Pope who has earned their ire for his calls to bring the church back to things like helping the poor. And Steve Bannon is part of this cabal. It’s like the backstory for a supervillain organization. And the senior Cardinals who regular attend these meetings include Cardinal Burke but also Archbishop Georg Gaenswein:
And while it’s unclear to what extent Steve Bannon is a driving force in this plot to undermine Pope Francis, it’s clear he’s involved. Bannon has apparently become the darling of right-wing Catholic groups in the US and Europe who wish to see a restoration of pre-Vatican II Catholicism, which is basically an attempt to role back the various reforms in the church over the last 50+ years:
And according to Austen Ivereigh, Gaenswein and German Cardinal Gerhard Muller are central players in the Vatican opposition to Francis, noting that it was Gaenswein who urged Ratzinger to continue dressing in papal garbs after stepping down in 2013 and continue living in the Vatican and being referred to as ‘His Holiness’, despite the protests:
So this ‘two Popes’ legitimacy power-struggle scenario that’s playing out now is a scenario that Gaenswein appeared to be ensuring could play out in the future back in 2013. But note one of the other key dynamics in all of this that could end up being a major factor in how this power struggle plays out: the challenge to Pope Francis’s authority is predicated on the on-going “legitimacy” of Pope Benedict’s authority. And it’s very unclear how much longer Benedict is going to be alive. So the clock is ticking:
Yes, the anti-Pope cabal knows it doesn’t have much time left, but it doesn’t know the actual amount of time left. It just knows it has to move fast, before Ratzinger kicks it. And it’s that ‘tick...tick...tick...’ dynamic that could make this a particularly explosive power struggle. This can’ be a slow undermining that plays out over years. They may not have years left.
So we’ll see if this far right cabal wins out. It’s not like there isn’t a long history of the Catholic Church colluding with fascists. The Nazi Ratlines couldn’t have happened without the Catholic Church’s cooperation. In some respects we’re seeing the consequences of those post-WWII moves to keep the international fascist networks alive and intact in the post-War environment.
But as the articles have pointed out, we’re also seeing the direct consequences of the decision made by Pope Benedict to down in 2013 but not step down entirely. He remained a quasi-Pope and that was a choice. A choice that many warned at the time could lead precisely to a situation like we’re seeing right now. And a choice that Ratzinger was apparently pushed into by Gorgeous Georg Gaenswein. So while Gaenswein may be proclaiming that the scandal over the current “Pope Benedict” book cover was something neither Ratzinger nor Gaenswein agreed to, it’s going to be important to keep in mind that the current scandal is something Gaenswein and the ultra-conservative forces he’s aligned with appear to have planned on years ago. And time for that plan to be completed is running out. In other words, the final years, or months, of Joseph Ratzinger’s life could be unexpectedly active for a guy who stepped down as Pope over health concerns.