A Catholic outlet based in Italy called The Daily Compass published an open letter written by someone claiming to be a cardinal of the Church in collaboration with other cardinals and bishops. The article, titled “A Profile of the Next Pope,” criticizes the pontificate of Pope Francis as a “catastrophe.” The authors accuse Francis of creating confusion among the faithful; they intend to influence the next conclave.[1]
They decry the pope as an autocratic ruler who accepts no dissent and blasted him for using papal authority at his discretion. They encourage other cardinals to get to know one another, supposedly to understand one another’s perspectives better before the next conclave. But these cardinals seek to influence their colleagues to join their faction.
Even speculating on the next pope is in poor taste, but attempting to influence a conclave would appear to violate the spirit, if not the letter, of Universi Dominici Gregoris—the apostolic constitution governing the election of the pope promulgated by John Paul II.
This isn’t the first time a cardinal has anonymously published a contemptuous rebuke of Pope Francis. In 2023, it came to light that the late Cardinal George Pell penned a letter under the name Demos.[2] The new author followed Pell’s lead by naming himself Demos II.
High-ranking clerics and their allies have opposed Francis throughout his papacy. They operate out of the same playbook, use similar language, repeating false accusations. They claim that Francis is autocratic, and their favorite complaint is that Francis is confusing.
However, Pope Francis is not difficult to understand. He treats the faithful like they’re adults and trusts their ability to think prayerfully with the Church. If there was popular confusion, the learned cardinals should help the faithful understand. The bulk of any widespread confusion comes from people like Demos II and his co-conspirators, who might be confused as to why the pope doesn’t behave the way they think he should.
To describe this pope as autocratic is risible. Francis has included more people in the decision-making process and has assigned traditionally unrepresented people—especially women—to influential Vatican offices.
The Synod on Synodality has created opportunities for all Catholics globally to express their views and listen to each other, but many antagonists chose to complain instead of participating. The pope even appointed one of his harshest critics, Cardinal Gerhard Müller, to participate in the final sessions. The critics aren’t confused or upset about popes exercising their Petrine ministry as they see fit. They might, instead, understand that their own power is being diluted.
Francis’s traditionalist adversaries typically admire papacies in the mode of Pius IX, who consolidated papal authority[3] and defined papal infallibility as a tenet of the faith. Subsequent popes, like Pius X, wielded that authority to institute liturgical reforms, set qualifications for the reception of communion, and create an antimodernist oath required for priests.
The Second Vatican Council decentered the position of the pope as absolute monarch and promoted collegiality among the bishops. Nevertheless, critics have suggested Pope John Paul II exercised his Petrine ministry more in line with the Vatican I model, and one described his papacy as “the restoration of unbridled monarchical authority.” He and his Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Cardinal Ratzinger (the future Pope Benedict XVI), frequently stifled dissent, including from university professors and Latin American liberation theologians.
Benedict’s papacy was known for its monarchical tendencies, symbolized stylistically through his wardrobe choices of red shoes and ermine trim. He used absolute papal authority to lift the restrictions Pope Paul VI had placed on celebrating the pre-conciliar Mass with his motu proprio Summorum Pontificum. Benedict created the name “extraordinary form” while dubbing the post-conciliar Mass the “ordinary form.” This liturgical innovation arguably represented a step away from the council, and the two liturgical forms became a divisive issue over the next decade.[4]
Hostility to papal power is not a matter of principle for the letter’s anonymous authors. They didn’t criticize John Paul or Benedict for their rejection of collegiality or for addressing controversial issues through motu proprios—presumably because they agree with them. Rather, they disapprove of the content of Francis’ decisions and likely don’t appreciate Francis not following their advice.
The cardinals who elected Francis expected him to clean up Vatican corruption, and his organizational reforms have caused significant reaction against him.[5] His implementation of the Synod on Synodality and opposition to clericalism have decentered the priesthood and expanded authority in both the Vatican and the Church more broadly. Cardinals who have publicly resisted Francis might be more upset about their loss of influence. Three prominent ones are Burke, Müller, and Sarah.
Beginning in 2013, Pope Francis removed Cardinal Raymond Leo Burke from his powerful Vatican positions and appointed him to a largely ceremonial role. Burke was later sidelined from that job as well. He became one of the leading voices opposing Francis and submitted several dubia, official questions regarding papal decisions. Francis ignored one set and provided a stinging response to another. After a decade of Burke sowing disunity, Pope Francis revoked the subsidies that were being paid to him. Perhaps not coincidentally, Burke’s writings have appeared on the website that published Demos II.
So have pieces by Cardinal Gerhard Müller. After his removal from his position as head of the Vatican’s department on doctrine, Müller joined the chorus of dissenting voices. He has blasted Francis’s decisions as “blasphemous” and “a step towards Protestantization.” Müller ignored the pope’s request to keep the synod’s proceedings confidential, and he appeared on EWTN to decry the synod as “a hostile takeover of the Church.”
Cardinal Robert Sarah, the former Prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, has a history of opposing Francis. One incident occurred when he contravened the pope and encouraged priests to celebrate the Mass ad orientem. A second happened in 2017 after Francis issued Magnum Principium, a motu proprio that set out principles for reconsidering Benedict’s controversial liturgy translation guidelines. When Sarah wrote an article claiming his Vatican office had authority to veto translations done by bishops’ conferences, Francis publicly corrected him.
The group represented by Demos II might not include these three cardinals, but the attacks follow their example. Moreover, Demos II strategically struck during a week when the pope had visited a hospital for a respiratory infection. As with Archbishop Viganò’s attempted overthrow of Francis in 2018, Demos II and his collaborators lashed out against the pope during a time of perceived papal weakness. Like the earlier incident, this one only demonstrates their fear and ineffectiveness.
If the authors felt confident, they would have signed their names and not cravenly hidden behind a pseudonym used by another frustrated cardinal. Their desperation partly comes from knowing that the synod reconvenes in October, when it may suggest changes in Church leadership structure, development in teaching, and modifications of liturgical practice.[6] They also know Francis may nominate even more cardinals this year, further eroding their voting bloc’s power in a conclave.
These opponents have demonstrated a blatant willingness to ignore Church norms and lobby outside a conclave that could theoretically elect one of them pope. Their misguided attempt to influence a future conclave sabotages the legitimacy of that papal election.
All cardinals swear an oath to be “constantly obedient to the Holy Apostolic Roman Church, to Blessed Peter in the person of the Supreme Pontiff, become members of the Roman clergy and cooperate more directly in N. and his canonically elected successors.” The cardinals in the Demos group have violated their oath and set a dangerous precedent for future cardinals to find friendly outlets and conspire against future popes. If Demos were to become pope, the cardinals he named might plot his downfall. That’s not good for anyone.
By colluding with others, including the website’s ownership, Demos II has put himself in a compromised position, particularly if he were to become pope. Threats to leak the identity of the group’s members could make them susceptible to corruption and even extortion.
Well-meaning Catholics can disagree with the pope, sincerely try to understand, and do their best to accept his choices. The dissidents are different. They seem to think the pope—the guarantor of the Catholic faith they claim to love—is always wrong. They appear to believe they hold the keys to the kingdom and are more Catholic than the pope. Their claim of confusion is a euphemism for, “I completely disagree with Francis and will muddy the waters for others.”
The seedy affair further tarnishes the reputation of the Church at a time when trust in all institutions is crumbling. If Francis were a dictator, he would call in all the cardinals and require a confession. But he won’t because he’s not. If the Demos II partners had honor, they would come clean. The Church is in no need of dishonorable cardinals who play power games to elect a potential future pope who has neither courage nor integrity. The anonymous authors have sullied their vocations, tainted the next papal election, and contributed to the culture of corruption. Such a person has no business voting for pope or becoming one.
Notes
[1] That conclave might not happen for years.
[2] Cardinal Pell was accused and found guilty of child sexual abuse in Australia. His conviction was overturned. Before his death, he published an account of his time in prison.
[3] Cardinal Ratzinger described it as “excessive Roman centralization.”
[4] Francis “identified the pre-conciliar form of the liturgy as an unfortunate rallying point for dissension and the growth of ideological factions that display tendencies of undermining the Magisterium (teaching authority) of the Church.” He abrogated Summorum Pontificum in 2021.
[5] Vatileaks and the abuse case of Marcial Maciel are two of the most notorious instances that occurred before Francis’s papacy.
[6] Including the possible introduction or reintroduction of women deacons.
Kevin Beck is a former educator who lives in Colorado Springs with his family. After being diagnosed with a rare neurological disorder, he began writing on disability, grief and the intersection of disability and faith.
Popular Posts