The Thinking 

On the Fragmentation of the Papacy

February 12, 2013


AT Tradition in Action, Atila Sinke Guimarães writes:

[I] think that there is no one in the College of Cardinals who is not committed to Progressivism. And if by some odd chance one would pop up, he would not have any possibility to be elected Pope.

Therefore, to know what agenda the next Pontiff will have for the Church, it is my opinion that one should ask: What are the main interests of Progressivism today? Answering this question, he has a good chance of realizing what will happen.

[NOTE: This article at TIA was written upon the death of John Paul II. It was posted again this week with the comment that its main arguments are relevant now. My apologies for failing to note this when I initially posted it.]

— Comments —

John E. writes:

I found Mr. Guimarães’ article unnecessarily dour, and off the mark at best.  It looks like he wrote it before the conclave which elected Pope Benedict XVI, and in light of the latter’s pontificate, Guimarães seems to be somewhat of a Chicken Little.  This is not to suggest that Pope Benedict turned the clock back decisively against leftism in the Church, to say nothing of the World, but some of Guimarães’ greatest warnings voiced in the article are now shown to be overreactions.  For instance, he says, “For a simple priest to receive a celebrat – permission for him to say the Tridentine Mass – the Vatican demands a written compromise in which he agrees to not criticize either Vatican II or the New Mass.”  At the close of Pope Benedict’s pontificate, however, any priest is free to say the Tridentine Mass without any special permission.  This is certainly not nearly the direction one would have guessed to be taken if relying on Guimarães’ predictions.  It’s one thing for him to have had these thoughts upon the death of Pope John Paul II, but there is much evidence here to question the wisdom of his decision to share them with the world through the web.  His opinion was that the Holy Spirit would not have a part within the conclave which turned out to select our present Pontiff?  Am I off the mark to question the strength of his faith?

Laura writes:

Actually, this piece was written upon the death of JP II. Tradition in Action posted it with the comment that its main points are still relevant. I have added a comment to that effect at the top of the page.

John says:

His opinion was that the Holy Spirit would not have a part within the conclave which turned out to select our present Pontiff?

I think it goes without saying that any prediction is fallible and that all events are open to the intervention of God. Nevertheless, it is reasonable to make forecasts based on the available evidence.

Share:Email this to someoneShare on Facebook0Tweet about this on TwitterPin on Pinterest0Share on Google+0