PURITAN NEWS WEEKLY

www.puritans.net/news/

1/03/03

VATICAN POLITICS : THE ELECTION OF THE NEXT POPE

By Al Hembd

Correspondent
 
 
 
 

The article below is written by a former editor and publisher of two Roman
Catholic magazines.  His website is at http://www.catholicreform.org.  He
is predicting the election of an Italian Pope in the next Papal conclave,
but his reasons are most enlightening as to the corrupt realities of
Vatican international politics.

A little background: up to the time of the revelation of the child
molestation scandals, liberals in the Church--including the Jesuits, and
esp. the North American bishops--were pressing for a Third World country
Pope.  Someone like Cardinal Arinze of Nigeria.  Since the majority of
cardinals in the Vatican are from the third world, the election of such a
pope seemed for quite some time to be a certainty.

However, such an election of a third world pope was a matter of great
concern to this present "conservative" Pope and his Opus Dei allies in the
Roman Curia.  The reason being: the third world cardinals from which a
third world pope would be elected, are all far-left Marxist fanatics, who
would carry the dictates of the socialistic Vatican II council to its
logical extremes.

However...opportunely enough, the revelation of the latest child
molestation scandals is dramatically changing everyone's mind.  Why?  Well,
here's where the article below is most enlightening.  It appears that the
Italian popes and cardinals are the only ones politically crafty enough, to
know how to shield the cardinals from international prosecution.  The
Italian Curia cardinals alone have the political craftiness to see, for
example, that Cardinal Bernard Law does not end up in prison.  Along with a
number of other cardinals worldwide.  This is because the Italian
Cardinals, with their FreeMason/Opus Dei connections, have powerful
contacts in high places in most of the governments of the earth.

I am rather of the opinion of the Vatican watcher, a Baptist by the name of
Eric Jon Phelps, that the recent publicization of the child molestation
scandals may be a deliberate trick of the Vatican...to insure the election
of an Italian Pope.  Because these scandals have been going on for a long
time--but only in this last year has the Vatican, for the first time in
history, decreed that the American bishops should cooperate with the civil
authorities in turning over their files to them.  This in turn exposes the
American bishops and cardinals to criminal prosecution.  So, in other
words, the Vatican is now deliberately cooperating with the authorities,
where it never has before.  Where, to the contrary, it has always protected
and shielded its bishops and cardinals.

To give you an idea of how the Vatican has dealt with the same exact
problem--child molestation--in America's past, I recommend you to a book by
Father Jeremiah Crowley, written in 1911, called "Romanism: Threat to the
Nation."  In that book, Father Crowley, who left the Church of Rome to
become a Presbyterian minister, places actual photographs of depositions of
local magistrates against Popish priests for child molestation.  He then
documents with facts how that these same priests subsequently escaped
prosecution, and were merely then placed in new parishes, time and time and
time again (repeat offenses).  In other words, this wickedness and this
covering of it has been going on for at least a century in the U.S.

Father Crowley wrote one more book in his life--"The Pope: Chief of White
Slavers and Intrigues," documenting the immorality of nunneries, and the
political meddlings of the Vatican.  Father Crowley was murdered the very
year that book was published (1913).

Point being: child molestation and Papist hierarchical coverups of it are
documented in America, going back to the turn of the 20th century and
before.  Always in the past, the Church of Rome has resorted to its
powerful allies in political machines of the major cities of the US, and to
its Catholic politicians in Washington, D. C., to avoid prosecution.

Though it is possible that the open publication of the lawsuits in Boston
over the internet has rallied Roman Catholics themselves to insist upon the
Vatican's cooperation with authorities--it is also altogether possible
that, quite to the contrary, the Vatican...which has always been covering
up molestation scandals...suddenly decided to cooperate with the
authorities, so as to guarantee that cardinals wordwide, fearful of
prosecution, will now vote for an "old-guard" (Opus Dei) Italian Pope.
(Bernard Law being one of them, as the article below points out.)

Read carefully.  Father Jeremiah Crowley was right.  Romanism is a threat
to the being and well-being of our nations.
 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 

http://www.vdare.com/misc/mccaffrey_earthquake.htm
 

A Third World Pope Is Suddenly Less Likely
By  Roger A. McCaffrey

Even in its exhausted conditionthe result of its effort to be politically
liberal and morally conservative at the same timethe modern papacy
nevertheless remains a pivotal Western institution. But close observers of
the Roman scene have long conceded that the next Pope could be African, or
Latin American, or even Asian. Much enthusiasm in Catholics of all
persuasions is engendered by the very idea...which is by itself a barometer
worth heeding. (Cardinal-electors come from our own ranks.) There are a
handful of Third World eligibles. If their like-minded colleagues decided
to form a bloc, they could have their Pope, with the help of what the New
York Times would be calling Visionary Europeans and Americans.

But a Third World Pope is now dramatically less likely. The resignation in
Rome on December 13 of Bernard, Cardinal Law, Archbishop of Boston, has
been cataclysmic for the Church. Shock waves extend into the deepest
recesses of the Vatican - and for sure into the Sistine Chapel a year or
two or three from now, where John Paul II's cardinals will gather to elect
his successor.

The long arm of Cardinal Law reached much, much farther than most casual
observers can imagine. Those of us who keep an eye on Church politics take
as a given that he was responsible for placing at least 20% of all American
ordinaries (bishops with dioceses) in their positions - and checkmating the
appointments of others.

He claimed a far greater number of priestly protégés than, say, his
friendly rival, the late John Cardinal O'Connor. No one else in the U.S.,
the Roman Catholic Church's richest preserve, came close.

One of Law's invisible levers of power was overseeing the commission in
charge of "Anglican-use" parishes, of which there are several, with more
soon to come. These are entire groups, formerly "high-church" Episcopalian,
which convert en masse to Roman Catholicism, and are permitted by Rome to
use their beautiful liturgy with a few key changes, rather than having to
adopt the banal contemporary "Roman" liturgy. In an interesting twist,
especially for the allegedly-conservative Law, many of their priests are
married; they are nevertheless re-ordained to serve in their parishes under
Rome's auspices.

His Eminence was scheduled to visit one such parish in Texas a few years
ago, and a friend of mine was in charge of his travel arrangements.
Speaking with Law's secretary, my friend was informed crisply, "The
Cardinal travels first class." Appropriate arrangements were made for His
Eminence thenand rest assured, are being made now, across the Atlantic.

Law being Law, it's fair to speculate that his first thought as he made the
rounds at the Vatican was of himself. Meeting with the Pontiff for the
cameras was necessary, of course. But the handful of no-name cardinals who
run the Church were just as important to consult, to nail down certain
matters for Law: How would he live after resigning? What position could
they assure him?

And the most important question: If indicted in Boston, how much protection
could the Pope guarantee? Would Law, for example, be provided one of the
apartments within the ultra-safe confines of the Vatican city-state itself?

Apparently satisfied with the answers, His Eminence precipitated the
earthquake felt in every jittery chancery office on either side of the
Atlantic, resigning not only as Cardinal Archbishop of Bostonwhich he made
a center of influence at least as significant as Cardinal Richard Cushing's
in his Camelot-era heydaybut in the event, Samson-like, surrendering all
his power for something resembling immediate gratification.

All that remains in his arsenal is Law's vote in the next conclave.

And it is precisely the next conclave that the Boston archbishop has
re-shaped - in ways he did not intend.

What was once an open seat, so to speak, with any number of contenders, has
become an Italian's to lose once again. But with so many Euro-American
hides on the line, this time, unlike 1978, they probably won't lose it.

Eight to ten percent of the votes for the next pope will likely be
American. Law himself, once a paragon of Catholic civil rights advocacy,
might well have cast his for a black. Ditto the center-left Cardinal
Mahonyand any number of conservatives to whom Nigeria's genially definite
Cardinal Arinze appeals, almost viscerally.

But no American cardinal whose job is (suddenly) in jeopardy could risk
voting for an African or Latin American candidate. A safe Italian with a
soothing track record is now the only way to go. Italians are practiced at
waiting out storms, regally confident in their use of supreme authority,
and loyal to those who give it to them (unless threatened by same).

Above all, Italians, from millennia of experience, know how to handle
hostile civil powers. Journalists? CNN? Not a problem, not a problem. So
Law and his colleagues will be safe in any storm, seen or unforeseen,
living out their lives in the tranquility and comfort to which they are
entitled after their hard laboring in the vineyard, as we Catholics know.

It isn't that Latins or Africans are unreliable, American and European
cardinals will hasten to assure themselves. Why, look at all the worthy men
among them, most of them raised in unspeakable poverty, each more
mediagenic than the next! It's just that they lack experience, and this
terribly delicate period in Church history calls for a steady hand. John
Paul was new and different, the results are decidedly mixed, and now
BernieBernie!has been forced out. Good Lord, what next?

The Church's leaders are badly shaken in the aftermath of Law's
resignation. Quite probably others, like Law, for a wide range of personal
and political reasons, have protected and/or promoted priests who molest
children. None ever expected having to consider resignation. That's what
treasury secretaries and senators do. Maybe a bishop or two, caught
red-handed. But cardinals, powerful ones, never.

In this atmosphere, three Italians at present seem ever more likely to be
elected Pope if, as seems possible, John Paul II is called to his reward in
the next couple of years. Cardinal Reinze, the dependable insider who heads
the Vatican office for appointing new bishops, comes first to mind. Or
Cardinal Tettamanzi of Milan, who even before the sex scandals was on
everyone's short list. Or indeed Cardinal Martini, the recently retired
Jesuit, highly esteemed (though often denigrated by conservative cardinals)
Scripture-scholar. He plays the press perfectly, yet is a consummate
insider.

Seventy-six and with early Parkinson's, Martini might have been stricken
from papabili lists except that now, all Italian candidates are getting a
second look, after the Great Boston Earthquake of '02.

Roger A. McCaffrey (email him), the editor of http://www.catholicreform.org
is a publisher and writer from Connecticut and the former publisher and
editor of two Catholic magazines.