Throughout the movie was the implicit lie that the Church (not just Rome) must be reformed and that this reform would of necessity move it further away from confidence in its dogma, further away from its own past, history, and tradition, and further away the primary concern with the salvation of man. It began with the sermon suggesting that doubts are good, doubts are healthy, and doubting leaders are good leaders. It moved to an absolute from one of the prime liberal papabile that people must know where he stands about morality and the role of women (more for the latter than the former). It moves through a scandalous characterization of church leaders as guilty of bribery, simony, hate, crass power grabbing, and lies -- oh, so many lies. It ends with the greatest lie of all -- a dead pope who manipulates the conclave, a doubting dean who is his dupe, and a new pope who is what, a woman, trans, whatever. Honestly, if the Church follows this path of reform it will renew the Church into the progress of death!
It unfolds that the worst of all are those who believe the words of Scripture about homosexual behavior and who wish to connect the present to the past. The movie is quick to label the former hypocrites and the conservatives lunatics. There is that great and telling line from the cardinal who wonders what he is supposed to go back and tell his people when they have elected a pope who decries homosexual behavior. In other words, the church in this movie is so far from God and His Word that they cannot even imagine having to defend what God has said (and not a particular cardinal). The end is particularly troubling. The burning of the papal ballots seals the lie and then the bad actors who were the princes are redeemed by being deceived.
And today it all begins in earnest in Rome. Of course, there will be different opinions about the man and the direction that should be taken but it would not hurt if the papal electors watched the move and came up with another end than the deathward drift from futile birth that has characterized liberal progress. How can we be at home with our grandchildren if we are not at home with our fathers? Rome cannot abide more doubt and uncertainty from the top and we would all benefit from someone who speaks with clarity rather than confusion. No, we don't need some dark horse from Kabul or a political insider but the world hopes and prays that the one elected can restore some integrity to what is believed and taught.
1 comment:
I do not know how a new Pope will “restore integrity” as you said, to the Catholic Church. The Reformation, lest we forget, was Luther’s effort to reform the Church of Rome, and it failed. Little has changed dogmatically over the centuries, and even if the conclave were to elect a conservative and reject the liberal and progressive movements of the day, what kind of teachings would remain? Would the church still worship Mary as co-redemptress with Jesus in the salvation of sinners? Would prayers of intervention still be uttered to the canonized saints who are revered to this day? Would works remain more important than grace? Would purgatory still be taught as the halfway house on the sinner’s way to Heaven? Would the the Mass remain the necessary daily “sacrifice” for the faithful, denying the one needful sacrifice of the Lamb of God who took away the sins of the world?” I cannot see a big change in the Catholic Church that would address these concerns. I submit that the reformers, the ones who fought for the purity of the Gospel, who were sometimes burned as heretics, suffered, died grisly deaths, were raised to glory by Our Savior, believed that the Church of Rome, steeped in heresy as a tradition, could ever change. They were right. Soli Deo Gloria
Post a Comment