, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Francis !Introduction

Yesterday we left off our narrative on the 8th of December 2014. In this post titled The Hermeneutic of the “Paradigm of Discontinuity”, (see here) it was established that three “apparently” unrelated events were intertwined, namely:

A) the stoppage of the Curia reforms,

B) the stoppage was caused by the “agenda of the Manipulators” at the Synod of Bishops,

C) the timing of the stoppage was caused by “vote canvassing” allegations detailed in a book authored by Dr. Austen Ivereigh titled: The Great Reformer: Francis and the Making of a Radical Pope.

Furthermore, we established a causal relationship between the above identified events, whereby the Curia reform was “de facto halted” by the Curia members, the “de facto halting” caused by the actions of the Manipulators at the Secret Synod of 2014, and the timing of the “de facto halting” was due to the appearance of the Ivereigh allegation. This I where we pick up today.

Crisis? What Crisis?

Crisis? What crisis? Don’t know of any crisis? Aside from the general crisis affecting the Catholic Church caused by the advent of the “New Springtime of the spirit of VII”. But I digress…

But apparently, another crisis arose during the week of 8 December to 15 December 2014. But not to worry, “Francis is beyond this crisis” already. He did it quickly. No doubt the “god of surprises” had a hand in the resolution of this crisis. I digress again… Below are the details.

On the 15th of December 2014, another post appeared on the MondayVatican blog with another strange title. The title read thus: Pope Francis beyond the crisis. Waiting to appoint new cardinals. (see here)

Reading the above, I was naturally curious as to which crisis it was that I had missed, this crisis that “Francis was beyond”. Here is how the MondayVatican describes this “crisis” that “Francis was beyond”.

This crisis lies on two issues: the debate about the Synod of Bishops, and the discussion on Curia reform. In both cases, the discussion has become very lively. In both cases, the Pope is called to take a strong stance.


This brings us back to the two events that we identified in the previous The Hermeneutic of the “Paradigm of Discontinuity” post and summarized in the Introduction section. However I don’t recall the word “crisis” being used earlier. The word “crisis” does not appear anywhere in the MondayVatican post of the 8th of December 2014 where these two “issues” were earlier mentioned. On further examination, the word “crisis” does not appear in any of the preceding MondayVatican posts going back to 13 October 2014. Now if you will recall, the 13 of October was during the Synod. When reviewing that post, titled The synods’ risk: mismanaged expectations, (see here) the word crisis appears, but in reference to the “crisis in the family”. But between that post and the 15 of December 2014, the word crisis has not appeared ANYWHERE on the MondayVatican blog.

So what are we to make of this?

We must therefore conclude that this “crisis that Francis is beyond”, must have arisen between the 8th of December and the publication of this MondayVatican post of the 15th of December 2014. Therefore, the next question is: what happened in this 7 day period that would have created this “crisis”?

Reading further down in this post, we are informed that:

In the middle, the guidelines (Lineamenta) of the 2015 synod have been released. The guidelines include the synod’s final report as it is (with all of its controversies) and a series of 46 final considerations. […] Id est, not to go back from the “pastoral turn” and to avoid “a mere application of doctrine to pastoral work,” taking into account that the synod’s path has been now traced. ( Ed. Note: Leaving aside for the moment commenting as to the truthfulness of this last sentence, “In the middle” here means the time frame between the La Nacion article that was published on the 7th of December 2014 and the General Audience on the 10th of December 2014, which is also in the middle of the week of 8 December to 15 December 2014.)

So the event that elevated the two earlier mentioned “issues” into a “crisis”, was the release of the Lineamenta (guidelines) to the Synod of Bishops’ of 2015 that occurred on the 9th of December 2014.  The below must be the background that took these above mentioned issues to crisis level.

Certainly, not all the participants of the synod will appreciate these indications. Some days ago, concluding the plenary assembly of the International Theological Commission, Cardinal Gehrard Ludwig Mueller, prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, underscored that “separating doctrine from pastoral work is almost a heresy.” However, the synod’s guidelines are yet to be published. This is prove that the discussion will be tough.

So what we now know is that the release of the Lineamenta (guidelines) created a crisis. A crisis that Francis not only was already beyond, but one that he knowingly caused. Here are the two relevant passages:

Pope Francis has started to manage the crisis. He did it his way, personalizing communication. He personally took the floor. With “La Nación,”… (Ed Note: interview published on 7 December 2014, or two days before the Lineamenta release)


Given all this circumstances, it is not surprising that Pope Francis may have used an interview to address the current problems and critics, in order to manage the crisis.

Concluding here, several key data points need to be mentioned.

1) We have confirmation of our earlier assumptions from the previous post that “issues” related to the Secret Synod of Bishops are the main cause of the “crisis” identified in this post.

2) We have observed that these “issues” promoted by the Manipulators of the Secret Synod were the cause that blocked the “apparently” independent Curia reform, a process that has been ongoing practically since the beginning of the Francis pontificate.

3) The “reform of the Curia” was the major reason that the College of Cardinals voted for Francis.

4) Nowhere are the Ivereigh allegations mentioned in the 15 December 2014 MondayVatican post, and yet we have established that they were the main cause behind why the Curia reforms were stopped on or before the 8th of December 2014.

The conclusion that can be inferred from this information thus far is : Francis actions demonstrate that the Synod of Bishops’ agenda of the Manipulators is more important than any Curia reform process that has been undertaken thus far. Furthermore, Francis is willing to create a “crisis” in order to get the Synod of Bishops’ Manipulators agenda passed. This Synod of Bishops’ Manipulators agenda has very strong precedence over the Curia reform process, a process that was the primary reason for his election to the papacy and that he has instituted almost at the beginning of his pontificate.

Therefore, what we have in the above paragraph is a proof of the TRUE AGENDA of Francis, and that TRUE AGENDA of Francis is the same as the agenda of the Manipulators of the Synod of Bishops of 2014. Furthermore, we can also assume with a very high degree of certainty that this TRUE AGENDA will takes precedence over any other agenda that may be promoted concurrently. And finally, all other agendas are expendable when they come into conflict with the TRUE AGENDA.

We will finish on these points today.

This is still crazy, you say?

Once again, hold that thought…