Criticising the Poles

Austen Ivereigh with Pope Francis (America Magazine)

Despite the clear statistics in my last post, I was really shocked to read this, frankly rather rude critique of Catholicism in Poland from Catholic Voices founder Austen Ivereigh, who seems to be looking for a plum job in Rome as far as I can make out, because he seems utterly blind to any concerns about the current pontificate despite shock waves rolling across the Catholic world. He even goes as far as to label concerned Catholics "dissenters" in this somewhat incoherent defence of Amoris Laetitia. I think this is a real shame for an organisation which has tried to be the voice of regular Catholics.

So what's this about? As a friend recently commented, Austen went to Poland, was warmly received by his hosts who helped him to plug his book. And then he wrote this piece of rudeness.

Ivereigh arrogantly claims in his article that the Poles consider "everything since (JP II) is evidence of backsliding" conveniently forgetting that the Poles loved John Paul II's successor (and friend) Pope Benedict XVI. Ivereigh continues:

"Polish Catholics suffer from a superiority complex, an assumption that their fervent faith (and their magnificent pope) saved the church, and that everything the church has done since, culminating in Francis, is evidence of dangerous backsliding."

Amusingly he goes on to criticise Poland for only accepting 10,000 asylum seekers: its as if they want to feel safe wandering about their Christmas markets or something. A Polish lorry had to find its way into Merkel's Germany before it could be forged into a weapon of murderous cruelty. Go figure Austen! I wonder how those who hosted him and helped him flog his book feel about this rant?

I used to consider Catholic Voices could be relied on for orthodoxy, but I am confused by Ivereigh's current direction which seems determined to fly in the face of facts. He maintains, for example, that Amoris Laetitia upholds Church teaching on Marriage in continuity with the Magisterium:

Yet Crux, among others, report that Cardinal Kasper states Amoris Laetitia is clear in that it permits communion for the divorced and remarried. Another friend of mine posed the question regarding this section from Ivereigh's Polish critique:

Why? Why is Amoris Laetitia *more* magisterial than everything that preceded it? Surely it can only be seen as Magisterial insofar as it affirms and expounds what the Church has already said? For me, it utterly fails in this regard, because it has only served to breed dreadful confusion.

And the Pope remains silent about the meaning of his document.