Henry Sire Interview

Over at Gloria.tv there's a really informative and interesting interview with Henry Sire, former Knight of the Sovereign Military Order of Malta and author of the book The Dictator Pope, which contains a summary of the work that many journalists had already done analysing the abuses and blunders of Francis's rule. In it Sire uses the insights of Argentinians who knew exactly what Bergoglio was like, insights which, owing to the language barrier, had not been made known in the English-speaking world. Spanish-born, Sire's familiarity with Spanish culture provides him with a particular insight into the Argentinian Pope's strategy and motives.

Sire asserts that Bergoglio is a classic product of Argentinian society, which is a caricature of Spanish society with special elements such as Peronism added. Essentially, those who try to understand Bergoglio from the standards of Anglo-Saxon or Germanic decency and correct conduct find themselves struggling to grasp the culture of unprincipled selfishness which for an Argentinian is just part of the climate.

The Order of Malta.

The interview starts with a lot of very interesting details about the Order of Malta in the light of Fra' Festing's recent death. There's an interesting discussion of the politics that sought to control the order. Sire says that Pope Francis's dismissal of Fra’ Matthew was primarily intended to strike at Cardinal Burke and deprive him of his power base, and Fra’ Matthew was essentially caught in the middle.

The interview explains that the office of Patronus is usually a retirement post given to an old cardinal, and Cardinal Burke's appointment in 2014 was therefore a sign of Pope Francis's intention to side-line him (as had been widely speculated). However, Cardinal Burke soon began to use the position to acquire widespread influence, as the Order's world-wide membership facilitated. In December 2016 Cardinal Burke had just presented the dubia, which Sire says infuriated Pope Francis and his partisans. The Pope's  first response was to order the CDF not to answer them. But in fact, the ousting of Cardinal Burke as Patronus was Francis's answer to the dubia, and Sire states that it is a typically political and devious gesture.

The Election of Bergoglio

Sire makes the important point that neither John Paul II nor Benedict did much to keep Modernists out of the College of Cardinals. Given the low standard of the modern hierarchy, the chances of a bad pope being elected were real.

He says that in 2013 the trajectory of the Church was towards a recovery of orthodoxy and tradition and he suggests the election of a candidate like Jorge Bergoglio would not have been possible without the machinations of the Saint Gallen Mafia. Sire reveals that when Benedict abdicated, he expected his Secretary of State, Cardinal Bertone, to arrange the election of Cardinal Scola as pope; but Bertone was personally opposed to Scola and let Benedict down completely. The Conclave was thus thrown into disarray and the door was opened for the St Gallen intrigues.

Pope Benedict followed what he would have called an even-handed policy in his appointments, and the result is that many of the worst representatives of the modern Church got to the top. But in particular, his choice of Cardinal Scola as a successor showed his bad judgment of men. Scola appeared to be a sound conservative, but in fact he was a careerist, as his subsequent behaviour has shown, and Bertone and the Italian cardinals rejected him precisely for that reason.

Pope Benedict is certainly very intelligent, but he is primarily a scholar, and he has shown himself deficient in political calculation and in judgment of men. But the main point is that Benedict in fact had a plan for the 2013 Conclave: it was the election of Cardinal Scola, and he obviously assumed that it would succeed. The fact that it never even got off the ground threw out all calculations; but even a much cleverer observer could well have failed to predict that the St Gallen Mafia, which had ceased to meet since 2005, would be suddenly resurrected, and with exactly the same candidate.

Where Benedict fell down was in the timing of his abdication. If he had delayed it even six or twelve months, several of the key players, including Bergoglio himself, would have been retired. Just as with the Bertone-Scola fiasco, Benedict showed his bad political calculation, and the result has been a Greek tragedy: the election of the worst possible pope, just at the moment when the Church seemed headed for recovery. This was the worst fulfilment of the damage done by the Second Vatican Council.

Bergoglio: The Product of A Hispanic Culture

Sire explains that he has witnessed the collapse and corruption of the Society of Jesus since the Second Vatican Council, and that he thinks Bergoglio offers a classic case of it. He says his understanding of Hispanic culture like Argentina's has given him a particular insight into what is going on. And this is where the interview starts to get really interesting!!

The great mystery of Bergoglio's career, according to Sire, is his transition from the right-hand man of the “reactionary” Cardinal Quarracino in Buenos Aires to the favourite of the St Gallen Group. The only explanation Sire offers is that, in the declining years of Pope John Paul II, it was expected that a more liberal pope would succeed him, and Bergoglio wanted to be on the winning side. I don't think he seriously expected to be the papal candidate himself before 2005. But essentially the problem is that Bergoglio has no real principles, like the typical Peronist that he is.

It has certainly been a catastrophe for the Church to have as pope the representative of a very bad political culture such as Argentina's. The first step towards reform will be to escape from that legacy.

Asked what this political culture consists of, Sire explains: Dictatorial methods, obviously. Other elements in the culture include a loud-mouthed populism which enables a politician to claim that he is supporting the people when in fact he does nothing for them, and a hereditary anti-Yankeeism which has been the motivation for Francis's disastrous sell-out to the Chinese Communist government. Asked about the Pope's tendency to give contradictory signals, Sire says this is typical Peronism, throwing out contradictory signals to opposite parties. An Argentinian would understand it perfectly well, but to the rest of the world it appears incomprehensible.

This is the bit that I really struggle with. The Pope is obviously, openly doing this and yet so many seem prepared to continue to support him and pretend this isn't happening. The worst example recently was his words condemning abortion then meeting Pelosi and Biden.

All through his life, Bergoglio's yes has been no, and his no has been yes.

Asked Where Francis is doing the biggest damage, Sire says the worst damage is in the continuing flow of bad bishops and cardinals he has been appointing. Sire thinks it will probably lead to another bad papacy to follow. Even if by a miracle we escape that, it will be an appalling legacy that will weigh upon the Church for years. I totally agree.

The War on Tradition

Sire thinks that Bergoglio is following the St Gallen programme in trying to stamp out tradition. He also thinks his bias is against the good people in the Church. All through his career, he has surrounded himself with the compromised and the morally weak precisely because that enables him to control them.

On “Traditiones Custodes”, Sire says this has been aptly translated as “The Jailers of Tradition”. He believes it is the last bid of the Vatican II generation to block the recovery of tradition visible among younger Catholics. This is a theory I have heard from a number of clergy. Sire thinks a significant thing has been the reluctance of most bishops to carry through its repressive policy. The fact is that Pope Francis is so unpopular that many bishops will prefer to ignore his lead even when they have no particular sympathy with the old liturgy.

Pope Francis & The World

Sire considers that Francis has no policy but to win the applause of the modern-day elites by following every fad of theirs: climate alarmism, uncontrolled immigration, an imitation Marxism which is in fact in the service of modern “woke” capitalism. If you look at Bergolio's record before he became pope, he showed certain “popular” sympathies, in the sense that he allied himself with the trade unions etc., but he did nothing for the really poor in Argentina, and he has been the same as pope. His policy is simply to push certain linguistic buttons, and the media react slavishly, depicting him as the champion of the poor for whom in practice he does nothing. Various commentators have said that Rome is in the typical state of the declining years of a papacy, with everyone's eyes on the next Conclave. The result of that Conclave is especially unpredictable on this occasion because Bergoglio has appointed so many cardinals from obscure parts of the world, and more, has deliberately prevented them from meeting so as to get to know each other.

The Next Pope

Sire thinks the next Conclave will be chaotic, and it may well produce a schism within the Conclave itself. Even if that is avoided, I think the most likely outcome is that the cardinals will try to elect a middle-of-the-road pope, to avoid the bad feelings that have been so plentifully created in this pontificate. The next pope will then not know what to do, will not give a clear lead, and the confusion that has been created by Francis's ambiguities will grow even more. However, the future might be far more surprising than that. By the grace of God, the Conclave might even elect a good pope.

Read the full interview here.