Quite unexpectedly, this global policy proved to be 1 of the most crucial themes of Pope Francis' pontificate. This happened mostly due to the fact that the pope of Argentina became active in these matters in a way different from the predecessors. At the same time, however, it is hard present to measure this reorientation as successful, at least on the basis of the results achieved. That is why it is inactive of interest.
The text was created as part of the "Ordo Iuris Civilization" cycle.
Publication in PDF format is available HERE
First place on the fresh map of papal geopolitics occupies the problem of war. The Pope undertook it in his teaching, but he besides had to face it realistically, as a politician and spiritual leader, due to the outbreak of a full-scale conflict on the entrance of Europe. In the encyclical Fratelli tutti The bishop of Rome has conducted fundamental criticisms of the preventive war, mostly in consequence to the actions of Western states, which have intervened in various places of the planet in the last decades to defend their interests. However, it seems that the improvement amazed the Holy See, which did not anticipate that a preventive attack could come out of Russia, with which Francis maintained good and even very good relations.
The deficiency of unequivocal condemnation of Russian aggression by the Bishop of Rome revealed the fundamental differences between the political doctrine preached and the intentions of the Holy See. This led to a crucial decline in the authority of Francis not only in the Catholic world, but besides in the circles of influence outside the Church, which so far favored Francis for various reasons.
So what are these fresh intentions in the politics of the Holy See? The Pope appears to form them in the spirit of the doctrine of the erstwhile head of Vatican diplomacy, Cardinal Agostino Casaroli. This diplomat put above good relations of the Church with individual nations dialog with large capitals, or powers. As a result, in the 1960s and 1970s there was an impression that the Holy See was more willing to side with the political powers than it supported the oppressed. This was peculiarly evident in relations with the russian bloc.
Today it seems that likewise instrumentally Ukraine is treated respective times, more or little explicitly, in the name of peace, to be called upon to surrender by the Pope and his people. Poland besides met in 2021 with criticism of the Holy See erstwhile she defended her borders against the hybrid attack of immigrant groups inspired from Minsk and Moscow. The Holy See then revealed itself as a friend of our opponents utilizing the rhetoric of caring about the destiny of people storming the crossing in Kuźnica.
The reorientation of the politics of the Holy See seems to be a large turning point towards global processes, while at the same time turning distant from circumstantial people awaiting from the Church primarily spiritual services, but besides the clarity of the principles preached. This is besides pointed out by the secret agreement of the Vatican – Beijing, which has been in force for respective years, and the effect so far is only a deeper limitation of the anticipation of Chinese Catholics. It is hard not to ask what interests this agreement protects.
The thought of incorporating the Holy See into the alliance of the alleged global south against the West seems to float over these and another activities of the Holy See. But does the Catholic Church truly want to march through the planet under the banners of Moscow and Beijing, 2 capitals with totalitarian ambitions. That's what it looks like for today.
It is impossible to ignore – erstwhile you look at many examples of Catholic surrender against modern tendencies[1] – the policy which Pope Francis has conducted in fresh years on behalf of the Catholic Church. It is worth to leave for a moment, as far as possible, the confusion which the current successor of St Peter causes straight in matters of spiritual doctrine[2]to focus on issues concerning the global relations of the Holy See. Inevitably, the doctrine and politics of the Church are intertwined, but this is the starting point.
The subject of global relations became rather unexpectedly 1 of the characteristic features of the ongoing pontificate. In particular, it would be worth pointing out 4 crucial themes, namely the attitude of Pope Francis to Russian aggression against Ukraine, the relations of the Holy See with communist China and the return of Vatican diplomacy to the doctrine of cardinals. Agostino Casaroli. These 3 things are definitely connected. It is besides impossible to ignore – as a point 4 – the paradoxical outline of relations between the Holy See and the alleged global south, the function of which the Pope wishes to appreciate, but does so ineffectively due to the interior contradictions which origin his own actions.
First defeat: the ethics of war and peace
Surely for the most striking example of public disasters The Pope must be recognized for his policy towards the war which is taking place in the east areas of Ukraine. To realize this better, let's go back for a while to the first months, weeks, and even days after the Russian invasion, which began on February 24, 2022. At that time, almost the full western but besides wider Catholic world, he wiped his eyes with amazement as he observed the pro-Russian drift of the Bishop of Rome. Words specified as “war”, “invasion”, “Russia”, or “Putin” have evaporated from the dictionary both the Bishop of Rome and his closest associate liable for global politics, or the Secretary of State of the Holy See, Cardinal Pietro Parolin. Day after the invasion, the Pope visited the Russian embassy at the Vatican[3], which undoubtedly caused a scandal to the public and at the same time seemed to avoid contact with representatives of the Ukrainian State. By April 2024, the announced visit of Francis to Kiev, from which the Pope withdrew multiplying many excuses, did not come to pass.[4]. In the summertime of 2023, the Bishop of Rome decided to send his peaceful emissary to Ukraine and Moscow designated the cardinals for this task. Matteo Zuppie[5]. Zuppi is 1 of the leaders of the community of St. Jedago (Sant’egidio), whose founder prof. Andrea Riccardi, from 2011 to 2013, Minister of National and global Cooperation in the Mario Monti Government, immediately after the outbreak of the war on February 26, 2022 appealed to the parties of the conflict “to declare Kiev an open city and start negotiations”[6]. At that point, it meant nothing more than calling the Ukrainians to consider themselves defeated. At the end of the 3rd decade of March 2022, in 1 of Francis' statements, he leaned over the suffering of “Russian boys sent to fight”[7] – which he again stunned besides the church's public – although at that phase of the war the aggressor's troops mostly consisted of professionals and mercenaries. At the same time, during the same speech addressed to the participants of the Papal legislature of the Gravissimum Educationis Foundation, Francis condemned “a nation that wants to defend itself by force”. These words were then clearly perceived as a call to the Ukrainians to surrender. This explanation has never been corrected by Vatican factors, or even reinforced[8].
“It should be remembered that good is connected with love. We can't defend her with military force. A community or nation that wants to defend itself by force does so to the detriment of another communities and nations and becomes a origin of injustice, inequality and violence"[9] – said the Pope in the Vatican passage of speech quoted by the media.
In early May of the same year, Francis in an interview with the Italian paper “Corriere della Serra” declared his willingness to visit Moscow and talk to Putin, while at the same time explicitly rejecting the anticipation of coming to Kiev.[10]. The task returned as a anticipation only a fewer months later, but it was not implemented as mentioned. In an interview with “Corriere della Serra”, the pope besides said that 1 of the possible reasons for the Russian attack on Ukraine and Putin's attitude could have been “the barking at Russia's door by NATO.” “It’s anger; I don’t know if it was provoked, but possibly so facilitated,” added Francis[11].
In mid-June 2022, the magazine “La Civiltà Cattolica” published a evidence of talks that were taking place during an audience given by Francis to Jesuit media editors. After reading the words that fell from the Pope's mouth at the time, it may have seemed that there was a change in Francis' message concerning the war in Ukraine. On the 1 hand, the Pope reiterated his opinion of “ barking NATO at the gates of Russia”, but this time quoting it as a communicative he heard from the unnamed head of a country. On the another hand, he besides yet got a distant opinion on Putin's policy. "I'm not for Putin. It would be a simplification and a mistake to say specified a thing."[12] said the Pope.
This voice, so expected a fewer weeks earlier, erstwhile it actually appeared, did not, however, have the effect which could be expected to happen to the Pope. Why did this happen? most likely due to the fact that the disappointment of the bishop of Rome’s erstwhile attitude was already complete, and this single, late message could not change the dominant moods. Politics, what the Pope should know, is besides the art of timing, and appropriate action includes not only public acts, but besides their minute and space. After many – perceived as corrosive – reactions to the war of representatives of the Holy See, but besides the Pope himself[13]Francis simply lost authority on this matter[14]. All the more so, as the above-mentioned distance from the president of Russia liable for the war did not sound entirely convincing.
The second conviction quoted inactive pointed to any kind of disturbing nuance in the Pope's perception of Russia's aggression towards Ukraine. What could it mean to preach the opinion that Francis gave his support to Putin? possibly that the Argentine Bishop of Rome takes into account and accepts with knowing the Russian argument that led to a violent preventive war in Ukrainian territory, despite not enjoying it? This war, let us remind, consumed – the state of affairs from the beginning of 2024 – already respective 100 1000 victims[15].
In the following passages of the papal message published in “La Civilta Cattolca” the papal position is clearly ambiguous.
“The danger is that we see only what is terrible, and we do not see all the drama that is taking place in the background of this war, which may have been provoked in any way, or which has not been prevented. I mean the interest in investigating and selling weapons. It is very sad, but in the end that is besides an crucial aspect of this conflict. Looking at the savagery and cruelty of Russian troops, we must not forget another problems”[16] – Francis said.
However, before anything is said about “other problems”, we must pay attention to this basic one. In his words, the Pope frequently diverted the audience's attention from the central political and moral issue, namely the apparent and direct work of the Russian state for the war on the land of our east neighbour. These are Russian troops after decisions of political factors in Moscow first in 2014, and then 2022 began preventive military action in Ukraine. Only for propaganda reasons, and in order to avoid the responsibilities of any country that is officially conducting the war, Moscow does not call its actions that way, and uses the slogan of a peculiar military operation.
But why, from the point of view of Francis' policy, should specified work be judged as a “basic problem” and why should peculiar attention be paid to it? After all, 1 could – with any difficulty – presume that the Holy See assumes the superiority of the Russian argument over the North Atlantic. But the answer is simple, Francis himself in his encyclical Fratelli tutti in 2020, he expressed his strong criticism of the application of global military prevention in politics. It is hard not to admit that the Pope omitted his own teaching, erstwhile he constantly keyed not wanting to grant justice to Ukraine's own moral reason[17].
Let us mention in a longer quote the related words 258 encyclical point. “So easy to choose a war, utilizing all kinds of excuses, seemingly humanitarian, defensive or preventive, besides resorting to information manipulation. Indeed, in fresh decades all wars have been supposedly "justified". Catechism of the Catholic Church speaks of the rightful anticipation Defence utilizing armed forces, which means showing that there are certain “accurate conditions of moral authority (KKK, n. 2309). However, it is easy to get besides broad an explanation of this possible law. This is besides an effort to justify “preventive” attacks or warfare, which easy entail “seriouser evil and confusion than the evil to be removed” (KKK, n. 2309). The point is that since the improvement of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons, as well as the tremendous and expanding opportunities offered by fresh technologies, war has been given an impossible to control destructive power that strikes many innocent civilians. Indeed, “humanity has never had so much power over itself and there is no warrant that it will be utilized well”[18]. So we can no longer think of war as a solution, due to the fact that the hazard is likely to always outweigh the hypothetical utility attributed to it. Against this background, it is very hard present to keep the rational criteria that have been developed in erstwhile centuries to talk about the anticipation of a "fair war". No more war!”[19]
The Pope, with this passage of his encyclical, before the Russian full-scale invasion of Ukraine, tried to open a discussion on the legitimacy of the defensive war, which is hard – without falling into the utopia – to refuse compliance with the premise of a just war[20]. At the same time, the issue of the preventive war, even if it may be controversial at certain points, is convincing in the encyclical. 1 would anticipate Francis to keep at least individual consistency and to follow the rules he himself decided to lay out. What interpretations of political events in Ukraine we would not accept, came at the borders of this country, twice in a fewer years, to clearly aggressive actions justified by the necessity of prevention. After all, it is from the Russian alternatively than Western position that the alleged peculiar military operation is simply a military preventive action. However, if you consider her an unjust demonstration of Russian imperialism attitude[21]Francis is even harder to defend.
One can have suspicions – knowing the Pope's reluctant attitude, e.g. to the politics pursued by the American Republican Party, or the ease with which he repeated his opinion of “abusing NATO” – that the above passus of encyclicals was primarily meant to fulfil a critical function regarding United States and another Western states' armed interventions, specified as those in Afghanistan or Iraq. The creators of the encyclical, the Pope and his supporting theologians, did not seem to take into account the fact that Catholic science, to which the improvement in paragraph 258 has contributed, could in certain circumstances become the word of the accusation besides towards the current global policy of the Holy See. This 1 is rather apparent – it belongs to it, in addition to its opposition to the United States' aspirations to stay a guarantor of global safety – a clear approximation with dictatorships in Moscow[22] and Pekie[23].
The Pope met Vladimir Putin – demonstrating friendly relations – respective times[24]. In the face of Beijing, he and his co-workers did not spare so flattering words as embarrassing in the context of today's political situation[25]. It is no longer possible to mention at least the Vatican-China agreement signed in 2018, which, despite many concessions from the Church, did not bring any benefits to the Holy See.[26]. Moreover, the Vatican has silenced all critical voices about the mediate State[27]. The fresh hot phase of the war in Ukraine seems to have undermined any of the framework assumptions of the abroad policy of the Holy See of the Apostolic Age of Francis, according to which the West is an aggressive organization in a large global game of force. The Pope's inability to act in accordance with the rules concerning the war, which were formulated in an encyclical signed by his own name, only confirms the above outlined diagnosis of the fresh political direction of the Holy See. It besides means the surrender of the Church from a brave game which John Paul II tried to lead in global politics. The Pope from Poland rightly assumed – as was seen in practice – that the main force of the Holy See is moral capital, which has its origin in Catholic doctrine and bonds which the Church builds with individual peoples[28], not deals with contenders for planet hegemony.
It is time to look at the question of “other problems”, which the Pope mentioned in the passage quoted. Francis almost straight criticises the Western states in him for providing Ukraine with weapons that enable it to wage a defensive war. As we know, the arms are not only donated to Ukraine, but besides sold on loan, which is undoubtedly linked to the gross already obtained by the NATO arms industry. This is not the end of profits, the current support for Ukraine will most likely be repaid by, among others, concessions which companies from western countries will get in the reconstruction of Ukraine. How can 1 realize the Pope's opposition to military aid, which Ukraine besides grants Poland to a large extent? The answer comes to me. If we consider the starting point to be abstract, without assessing the means essential to accomplish it, peace, arms supplied to the Kiev-led troops prolongs the war. The quoted passage of the speech rather clearly shows that in the papal optics it has actually changed small compared to erstwhile statements. According to Francis, specified a conclusion seems legitimate – the guarantor of peace is simply “recognition of rights” of the stronger of the states to dominate. It is 1 of them who has the ability to determine, besides by military advantage, political conditions, that has the right to impose a framework of peace. The framework of specified a peace is determined only by its own means – speaking the language of Marseille of Padua – “the defender of peace”[29]. In the east of Europe this is – Pope Francis – Russia seems to think. NATO's presence in this area so distorts any kind of “natural law”, a natural – possibly geopolitical – distribution of power and work that ensures global order. Therefore, if NATO “ barked at the gates of Russia”, Russia seemingly “must” reconstruct peace at “its” limitrof. And it's hard to blame her. The problem is, however, that the adoption of a geostrategic position of balancing forces in a multipolar planet does not have much to do with ethical warfare, which in modern Catholic terms involves the right of all nation to political independency within the limits recognised by the global community.
The Pope’s actual rejection of the rule of a just war[30] – the framework component of which is besides the sovereignty of the real political and national communities – as a tool for assessing the situation of the armed conflict, he leads Francis consecutive to the incorrect path. erstwhile accepting the pacifist interpretative key, the words of the Pope, which have been spoken since the first days of the war, should be interpreted not only as a call to the Ukrainians to surrender immediately for the sake of peace and the welfare of the world. Rejecting the ethics of fair war is besides abandoning ius in bello, i.e. the requirements of possible fair methods of carrying out warfare[31]. It's to leave the Russians free to defy resistance. Unfortunately, Francis is openly speaking out against the anticipation of linking war and justice, as if this first reality were even removed from the area of moral and political reflection.[32]. And yet the origin of war is devoted to the Catholic Church's Catechism, which is rather comprehensive, formulated in precise language, passages entitled in fact eloquently – “The Defence of Peace”[33]. The Pope did not say straight that Kiev should lay down its arms. However, specified sense of papal statements was inevitably imposed along with the increase in awareness that Francis thought of peace in an abstract way, and that Ukraine itself treated only as a subject of the politics of powers, alternatively than a sovereign nation. In March 2024 earlier suspicions about political logic The Pope materialized in the words he spoke for 1 of the Swiss media. He called on Ukraine to “the courage of the white flag”: “When you see that you are defeated, that things are not going well, you must have the courage to negotiate,” said the Argentine Bishop of Rome.
Abstractness of the Pope's reasoning about peace is evident especially erstwhile the Bishop of Rome in his calls for the end of the fight takes in brackets rather real and concrete goods which Ukrainians want to defend against Russian aggression. In putting this paragraph, 1 must say the essential thing – the preservation of the goods that the Ukrainian people are fighting for is an inexhaustible component of peace. If, of course, we are talking about actual peace, which is more than just the established force of 1 nation over another.
* Oh, my God *
However, the issue of abstract, based only on the account of the forces of Francis' knowing of the problem of the ongoing war and the world's hope for peace requires further analysis. It is the Pope himself who accuses abstract opinions of his indeterminate critics.
“There are no metaphysical good and bad described abstractly. Here something is born global, with elements that are very intertwined"[34] “The Pope spoke to representatives of Jesuit media. In an additional comment, which we will find in the Vatican news portal Vatican News, we read that the Pope “explained [...] and emphasized that he does not agree to limit the complicated reality of war to pointing good and bad, without reasoning about the roots and interests that are very complex”[35].
The generalization of work for the war to which the Pope is resorting is nothing more than an effort to descend – nomen omen – from the line of fire, which is determined by the circumstantial work of the ongoing conflict. erstwhile we want to say that the Ukrainians defend themselves fairly, we do not at the same time claim that global policy is not complex, nor do we claim that the United States is the Good Empire. Nor do we argue that no Ukrainian soldier has committed a war crime. War is simply a time-space of cruelty, suffering, force and death – it was never the same, and theorists of the just war were full aware of it. If prevention wars are mostly wrong, as the encyclical teaches Fratelli tutti, it is about Putin's decision to start the conflict in the east of Ukraine that we can talk only in 1 way – clearly critical. This is simply a concrete alternatively than abstract assessment of war from the position of the doctrine of politics and the ethics of just conduct of war.[36]. If the Pope does not do so, it gives public opinion that he defends his expected allies – Moscow and Beijing – more than Catholic principles.
The question must be asked, does the Pope truly think that the planet order organized by the power performance of Moscow and Beijing would be better than the 1 going on today? Even if we take into account the many allegations which, especially the countries of South America, may formulate towards the United States, the Russian dictatorship, and worse, striving towards totalitarianism China, do not seem to be in any way an alternate to the institutions of the emerging era of Western domination. It is inactive the West that is simply a civilization willing not to follow the logic of force in all matters, but besides law or even ethics. That is why in the case of war, 3 areas of the rule of appropriate conduct have been identified. ius ad bellum, ius in bello and ius post bellum[37]. Without noticing this Pope as a herald of peace[38] He actually announces the surrender of his mission.
In the above context, the warm words of the Pope spoken occasionally about the Ukrainians must rise more doubts than comfort.
“Brave people. A nation that's not afraid to fight. People industrious and arrogant of their land. Let us remember Ukrainian identity at this time. That's what moves us: seeing specified a hero. I would very much like to emphasise the heroism of the Ukrainian people. We are looking at the situation of planet war, global interests, arms sales and geopolitical propriety, which leads to the martyrdom of a heroic nation.”[39] – said the Pope.
We do not learn from these words or Ukrainian heroism, it is acting in the right origin or possibly a manifestation of false political consciousness. In fact, it can be considered that, according to Francis, the Ukrainians were entangled in the imperial politics of the West, which Russia simply opposes. The question remains whether specified papal statements should be perceived, as should Francis' distance towards Putin, as a step towards prudence, or alternatively as camouflage for the actual support of multipolar peace, which is actually the multipolar force of respective powers. Again – in what Francis said – work for the situation of Ukrainians seems to be borne by planet mafias of arms dealers, not Russian politics.
* Oh, my God *
However, let us effort a more understandable – which does not mean justifying – analysis of the Pope's conduct. As a mention point, we can usage the attitude of the Orthodox Patriarch of Moscow Cyril, a faithful politician of Vladimir Putin, as well as the words of Dominican Father Paul Gużyński, who in early May 2022 said that “Franciszek does not want to be a NATO pope”[40]. A summary of these 2 elements can give us rather interesting insights in the way the Pope thinks. On the 1 hand, we will be able to see the intellectual mechanics behind the diagnosis, according to which the inevitable advent of the multipolar planet – or actually the anti-Western planet – in global politics, and on the another hand how the Pope imagines his universal function as a spiritual and spiritual leader.
The word “Putin’s Pope” has frequently appeared in the press.[41]. Without deciding whether it is correct, 1 can effort to reconstruct the way in which the Argentine Bishop of Rome would not agree with this term. However, let us leave another point. What precisely does it mean that “French does not want to be a NATO Pope”? possibly it is just that he does not want to be like Cyril, who is no uncertainty “putin's patriarch”[42]. So possibly according to Francis, his opposition to Russia would mean enrolling in 1 – Natovian – multipolar organization of the planet in which it is not known who is right. If anyone has it at all – above the dominant political settlement by force. It can so be suspected that the Pope in his own conviction wants to stand above the peculiar interests of the politics of powers and remind about matters as fundamental as peace. At the same time, as a priest, he tries to keep pastoral neutrality[43] and does not want to justice the work of circumstantial states for the conflict. In the margins, it would should be added that in order to effectively keep “neutrality” The Pope should simply be more restrained in his statements[44]. It's not. We know that Francis tends alternatively towards the opinion that the West bears political work for the bad state of the world[45]. It can so be considered that in relation to the war in Ukraine it is besides guided by established political superstitions alternatively than priestly, apolitical superstitions modus operandi. possibly in Francis alone these 2 tendencies are fighting each other, and the effect is visible to the full world's public.
The above outlined way of reasoning – even if we read it empathically – is very problematic. It leaves the moral isolation of both the weak under the force of the strong and those who feel very specifically the consequences of unfair treatment. This is, of course, the situation of the Ukrainians. However, there is simply a danger of moving this kind of intellectual action, favouring the stronger, even if it is wicked, into another areas of activity not only of the Pope, but of the Holy See.
This besides applies to the interior life of the Church, which present struggles to account for the harm suffered in fresh decades by tiny and defenseless adults and strong, armed with spiritual authority. Would the Pope say here that we live in a planet of multipolar morality and, according to this diversity, should we approach injustice, which occurred, certainly, in complex circumstances? This is simply a provocative question, but it does not make sense to the increasingly widespread relativism and theological utilitarianism, the origin of which is the center of ecclesiastical power itself.[46]. Sense, or even more moral thinking, is simply a kind of strategy of connected vessels that do not stay without influence. The filling liquid 1 of them penetrates – even if very slow – to others by purifying or polluting them. Therefore, the current global policy of the Holy See must be viewed with concern besides in a universal context. Since the Pope capitulated before the temptation of dismantling Catholic integrity in specified an crucial substance as the indissolubleness of marriage, the sanctity of the Eucharist and the sacrament of penance, agreeing to join the communion of the holy people who, while remaining in an crucial Catholic marriage, live in another unsakramental union[47]If by consent to the blessing of homosexual couples[48] made – it is hard to find another word – institutionalization of specified unions in the Catholic Church, why should he think that the Church has something to say in matters of political ethics, something separate from the opinion of the powers.
Second failure: east policy
The politics of the Holy See towards Ukraine, though for many amazingly it had its prologue a fewer months earlier. It took place in the autumn of 2021, erstwhile border tensions were escalated and a strong effort was made to penetrate a large group of migrants, controlled by the Belarusian services, through the border crossing in Kuźnica. Although the conflict on the border of Poland and Belarus has late been silenced, it remains an option in the political game of the east neighbours of the Republic. That same autumn, the Catholic Church in Poland was besides in unexpected difficulties, for which – for the first time in decades – the Holy See put force on matters straight political. Although the media interest in the situation at the border has decreased, it does not mean that the effects of the tensions it generated have disappeared.
The tensions between Rome and the Church in Poland resulted, on the 1 hand, from the course in global politics adopted by the Holy See, and on the another hand from the information policy of the Pope himself, who frequently raised the subject of migration as a precedence for his pontificate. Since frequently the words about “pink wire” and “walls” returned in the papal statements, clear to almost everyone in our country, it was not possible to ignore these statements in the Polish context.
In a speech to the diplomatic corps of January 10, 2022, after the November events that took place in Kuźnica, The Pope one more time presented the current explanation of the Vatican doctrine on migration and migrants. This is not an accident, this doctrine has been an crucial tool for the global policy of the Church in fresh years. For Donald Trump's presidency, she gave political ammunition to criticize an unpopular Republican president declaring to fight the illegal influx of people into his country. In our region, this doctrine offers another possibilities – it allows for warming relations with Moscow at the expense of states and Catholic local Churches in east Europe. Although the war in Ukraine has somewhat frozen these opportunities, they should inactive be considered part of the political arsenal of the Holy See.
“We cannot stay indifferent, we cannot dig behind walls and barbed wires under the pretext of defending safety or lifestyle.” said the Pope. "I am aware of the difficulties any countries face in the face of a large influx of people. No 1 can be asked to do what he is incapable to do, but there is simply a clear difference between accepting, though to a limited degree and rejecting,” Francis continued. "We must overcome indifference and reject the thought that migrants are the problem of others. The effect of this approach is seen in the dehumanization of migrants [...]" – argued the Pope. Let us add another passage: “Unfortunately, migrants themselves frequently become a tool for political blackmail, a kind of bargaining power that deprives people of dignity”[49].
The papal instructions, which may seem morally right in their generalities, at political level contain any contradictions that have led the Vatican to play its political game for a long time. Already in the autumn of 2021, it was rather clear that according to the Holy See the planet entered a fresh phase of the performance of the powers, and that the Church needs to re-establish its future by positioning itself against global players. Especially in relations with the most important, undemocratic, powers like China and Russia. We observed this game at the gathering of Archbishop Paul Gallagher, Vatican Secretary for Relations with the States with Russian abroad Minister Sergei Lavrow on 9 November 2021 in Moscow. This gathering took place only a week before the attack on the crossing in Kuźnica. On the video available in the media, we heard the Vatican diplomat call on European countries to halt the “humanitarian crisis” and at the same time inform the audience that the Church in Poland criticised the strong behaviour of the Polish government towards refugees. Lavrow did not stay indebted in courtesy and wrote “the careful and respectful attitude of Francis to the position of Russian authorities in global matters”. He besides rapidly discounted Gallagher's message by casting the question why the European Union will not aid Belarus. Since we are simply dealing with a “humanitarian crisis” which equally concerns Poland, Lithuania and Belarus, it should not be solved by a joint effort[50].
The moralist position of the Holy See, avoiding references to the political specificity of the border conflict between countries provoked by Belarus, was and is Russia on hand. In 2021 it allowed Putin and his people to rhetorically transfer work from Lukashenko, consciously seeking escalation at the border with Poland, the Republic of Poland and the European Union. It allowed crucial issues to be avoided, specified as the fundamental discrimination between migrants and refugees in the assessment of the activities of the services of all countries active in the conflict. Besides, what is crucial for Russia, the Pope's position plays a function in shaping the opinion of societies, even in the secularized West.
On 10 November 2021, the Polish Church responded to Archbishop Stanisław Gądecki, president of the Polish Church of Gallagher: “I powerfully condemn the usage of human dramas by the Belarusian side to carry out actions against the sovereignty of Poland [...] I would like to repeat one more time that people affected by this evil request our solidarity”[51] – wrote the Poznań metropolitan. He expressed his gratitude “to all state services, including, above all, the Border Guard, the military and the police for their full devotion to the defence of Polish borders”[52]. He besides added his request for a “pray for Poland, for the victims of this crisis and for its peaceful absolution”[53].
The consequence to Gallagher's words was more than just a consequence to Moscow's diplomatic dissonance. It was an effort to balance the increasing misunderstanding in Poland for the position of the universal Church in the face of the border crisis, the main thought Sufler of which was constantly Francis. Earlier, the hierarchs actually kept quiet about the case or paid attention mainly to the difficulties experienced by migrants. Moreover, on 5 November 2021 they amazed Polish Catholics with the announcement of a collection for their support. The gathering was scheduled for 21 November 2021[54]. Meanwhile, on 16 November there was already a direct assault on the crossing in Kuźnica, and November weeks proved to be a period of apogee of aggressive force on the Polish border.
The Polish bishop reacted to the situation at the border one more time in a broader way in a communication from 390. The Plenary Assembly of the Polish Episcopal Conference, which was published on 19 November 2021. It reiterates the well - known position of the Holy See, focusing on the request to supply well - being for migrants. “There is besides no interior conflict between well understood patriotism and the request to defend our borders, and the aid of a neighbour in need, in the spirit of a good Samaritan”[55] – bishops wrote. It is appropriate to express the supposition that force was exerted on Polish bishops in 2021 – or they themselves felt under force – in order to support an adverse message from the Vatican for Poland.
It is worth recalling another event from that time. On 30 November 2021, 2 days after Francis mentioned before the prayer the situation on the Polish-Belarusian border, our country visited, as part of synod consultations, the president of the German episcopal Bishop Georg Bätzing. After the meeting, both sides issued appropriate messages, which nevertheless differed significantly. This was highlighted by Cezary Kościelniak in the text What dialog do we request with the German Church today?[56], which appeared on the portal “Christianitas”.
"In an interview with Polish bishops, the German Episcopal Conference besides expressed the opinion that pushbacks ordered by the Polish government are not compatible with European values and standards. In order to address the crisis, European countries must yet besides be ready to receive refugees without retreating from the blackmail from Belarus," the German bishops wrote in their summary. Polish bishops did not mention this subject clearly by making a conscious evasive evasive. Given the importance of the German episcopal in today's arrangement creating a church policy of the emergence of the migration thread in the episcopal talks, and at that time, it could not have been an accident.
“It was impossible to accept migrants and thus not to play in the plan to destabilise Europe. Without the readmission agreement, it would not be possible to send these people back to Belarus. Unfortunately, there is not a word in the German paper about this dilemma. Equally worrying is the communicative strategy of this Communication in geopolitical terms"[57] – concluded Kościelniak.
The intent of the policy of the east Vatican was clear at that time – to act to weaken the sovereignty of the region, which Moscow considers to be its political buffer in return for e.g. the protection of the Catholic church structure in the Orthodox area. Looking from the outside, it could be considered that the Holy See operates a completely pragmatic, amoral policy only camouflaged with humanitarian slogans. This would mean that the current mention point for papal diplomacy is not the Catholic principles of supporting the legitimate laws of nations, but a completely pragmatic recognition, according to which the foreseeable future of the planet belongs not to Atlantic civilization, but to continental powers. specified targeted reasoning would match the political doctrines of the Papal State, which in the 19th century – in the name of the defence of political governance in Europe and the organization safety of the Church, guaranteed by the powers – allowed popes to criticize e.g. national liberation uprisings[58]. The problem is that even then the attitude of the Holy See, resulting from the fear of continuing the anti-Catholic revolution begun in France in the late 18th century, raised doubts.
Some kind of return to specified diplomatic practices in the 20th century was the card policy. Agostino Casaroli, who believed that an agreement should be sought with communist states for the benefit of local Churches[59]. However, the consequence of these agreements was that the communists played the Holy See in an effort to make favorable agreements straight with the Vatican above the heads of the hierarchs in individual countries and to the detriment of the faithful. Today, too, it seems that the large policy of the Pope's message to admit reality – the Church's resources are apparent – is primarily based on moral credibility in relations with individual peoples, as well as organization unity based on ecclesiastical bonds, based on doctrinal unity. In front of us, both elements of this capital are wasted.
Card Policy. Casaroli was only abandoned by John Paul II and cardinals. Joseph Ratzinger at the turn of the 1970s and 1980s. These 2 hierarchs brought correction to the Church on many issues, including those concerning global politics and its connection to the Church's moral doctrine. 1 of the crucial elements of this correction was to support the just intentions of the different peoples of east Europe – and their Churches – to cultural and political sovereignty.[60]. This fresh kind of political doctrine penetrated the practice of Vatican diplomacy for over 3 decades. Undoubtedly – in addition to the fact that it referred to Polish Romanticism, 1 of the foundations of Karol Wojtyła's individual formation – it was besides rooted in the anti-totaliztic reflection of the Church from the 1930s. Then 3 crucial encyclicals appeared: anti-fascist Non abbiamo bissagno[61] of 1931, Divini Redemptoris from 1937, besides known in Polish translation from its somewhat old-fashioned subtitle, About Godless Communism. fresh translation of this, published in 2018 in the quarterly “Christianitas”[62], speaking of “atheistic communism”, rightly modernized papal firmness. yet – a fewer days before Divini Redemptoris – an encyclical has been published, which is considered a genus non possumus The Holy See to Nazism. It's about Mit Brennender sorge[63]whose German title is not an accident. Let us add that the initiator of this text was Cardinal Eugene Pacelli, the future Pope Pius XII. The current policy of the Holy See so appears to be a double step backwards, both in the light of the designation of legitimate claims by national communities and in view of the designation of the wicked – unjust – nature of political order of the character of totalitarian dictatorship. erstwhile Francis praises modern China, erstwhile it seems to fall for Putin's spiritual rhetoric, it takes back church politics to the time of the Holy Covenant.
In the past, the Church has in fact succumbed to the logic that it is violence, not law and reason that stabilize global order. At the same time, it seemed that the Holy See had learned something over the past 100 years. For now, these hopes most likely request to be put off at different times. Today, we gotta admit that there has been a capitulation of the Church towards the planet and a return to past missteps – then the unsuccessful, present embarrassingly anachronistic. New, possibly even worse, is the doctrinal rejection of the rule of justice.
Third defeat: “powers concert”
Although the 2 previously sketched themes besides form part of the spectrum of the wider problem of changing the paradigm of the activities of the Holy See in global politics, they served to present another related issues. However, the fiasco of attempts to affect the Vatican in the fresh “Concert of Powers” is peculiarly striking in the case of the relations of the Holy See with the People's Republic of China. The departure of the rule of the sovereign sovereignty of the pope over local churches brought only bad results – for both the universal Church and Catholics in China.
The relations of the Catholic Church with communist China during the pontificate of Pope Francis are among the most important, but besides the most astonishing themes in the contemporary abroad policy of the Holy See. This subject returns in analyses and publications. At the same time, it is hard not to get the impression that the ideas to date to capture this issue look like attempts to solve the action with besides many unknowns. Card. George Pell in a long conversation with Piotr Bednarski and Zbigniew Przybydowski, published on YouTube tv channels EWTN Polska and associations Arrival Faithful indicated the basic paradox contained in relations Catholic Church and Asian totalitarian power – since the Holy See decided to bring the situation of Catholics in China closer to Beijing has deteriorated[64]. Yet, despite this, the policy of approximation is maintained.
We can point to 3 unknowns about these relationships. The first unknown is the content of the agreement concluded in 2018 between the Vatican and China, the second unknown is the far-reaching concessions of the Holy See towards Beijing, and the phenomenon to be described as diplomatic skills of the Church's representatives towards the Asian power. The 3rd unknown is the reason why ecclesiastical diplomacy tries to make the impression that there has been no break-up between the political method utilized by specified Popes as Pius XII, John Paul II or Benedict XVI and the modern neo-cassarolism of the Vatican.
The most serious uncertainty is without uncertainty the content of the agreement, which has been concluded despite the fact that Beijing and the Vatican do not keep diplomatic relations. The agreement has already been renewed twice in 2020 and 2022, despite the Chinese side, as reported by church media, not respecting its findings[65]. Fr Antonio Spadaro, Jesuit and editor-in-chief of the magazine “La Civilta Cattolica”, in many cases appearing as a papal interpreter, in the autumn of 2018 he wrote that in the agreement “it is not [...] about a summary of any process, but about its real beginning, which will besides should be realized by verifying and improving the text”[66]. Although it has been respective years since the agreement was concluded, there is inactive no authoritative evidence of its content. The only messages to the outside planet are that it is being extended. In the summertime of 2023, sparing information appeared in the media about certain misunderstandings between the Holy See and Beijing, said to have been resolved[67]. At that time, however, China was able to revamp its law on spiritual communities in specified a way that they would be subject to even greater control than before. This law besides applies to Catholics.
At the end of December 2021, Chinese leader Xi Jinping in a speech on a government conference on the implementation of the thought of socialism in the field of spiritual practices, clearly outlined the plan of “sinization of religion”. According to Xi Jinping, all spiritual unions are to participate in the creation of “great socialist China” and the realization of “Chinese dream for national renewal”[68]. Following these directives, the Government of the People's Republic of China announced, for example, that from March 2022 any spiritual activity on the net would be prohibited unless a peculiar government licence was issued. As Asia News reported, the authorities passed so-called. "Administrative measures concerning online spiritual information services" aimed at preventing spiritual activities contrary to the interests of the Communist organization and "Western influences". Online activities of abroad entities have been completely prohibited, and in the case of those operating in the country, the provincial Department of spiritual Affairs will be required to consent.[69].
Meanwhile, the actions of the Holy See match those which were carried out in Vatican diplomacy in the time of the cardinals mentioned. Agostino Casaroli. Casaroli felt that a policy of relaxation in the bilateral relations of the Holy See and communist countries would lead to an improvement in the situation of local churches in these countries. The reality was completely different, persecuted episcopals were completely objectified by policies conducted above their heads at the level of relations of abroad ministers. Communist states promised concessions that were not implemented and Rome was satisfied with the rhetoric “building trust and peace”. The reading of Pope Francis or Archbishop Parolin on China leaves a strong impression that past unfortunately repeats itself. Casaroli's policy had to be likewise embarrassing to the Holy See at different times, as modern agreements with Beijing for many Catholics, since the content of the agreement that was concluded in 1964 with Hungarian communists is inactive classified. Moreover, in 1998 they were classified until 2073[70]. This happened despite the fact that historical circumstances had completely changed. To this day, it is unclear what the Vatican gained from Casaroli’s actions.
In the case of Poland, the thought of pacifying the strong position of cards. Stefan Wyszyński, was to establish a nunciature that would let the communists to talk to the Holy See without the primacy[71]. The way to intrigue against Wyszynski – what was tried to do anyway – would have become an opening. In retrospect, the alleged realpolitics of Casaroli must in fact be assessed simply as a policy of naivety. Cardinal Parolin erstwhile commented on the agreement with China: “When choosing candidates for the episcopal, we choose shepherds, not people who regularly argue the regime, people who act like gladiators, people who love the grandstand on the political stage”[72]. The most celebrated Chinese spiritual cardinal Joseph Zen of Hong Kong commented: “I wonder who he meant by creating this description? I'm afraid he was reasoning of Cardinal Wyszynski, Cardinal Mindszent, Cardinal Beran. But they are heroes who bravely defended the religion of their people!”[73].
Card. Zen is simply a consistent critic of the current diplomatic line of the Holy See. According to the Chinese hierarch, the Pope with his actions legitimizes the existence of schismatite, completely under the control of the Beijing Patriotic Association of Chinese Catholics (CPCA), which usurp the right to represent the Church in the mediate State. Zen became even for a time persona non grata surrounded by the Pope. In the fall of 2020 – as the media all over the planet wrote about – Francis refused the cardinal a gathering although he only received a 100-hour visa from the Chinese authorities to visit Rome[74].
Today it is known that the concessions which the Holy See has made towards Beijing are the designation of government bishops from the existing since 1957 State Church or “patriotic” (the CPCA). Until the time of Francis, the spiritual creation led by the Chinese state included excommunication[75]. The Vatican did not recognise – apart from exceptions to the individual requests of any hierarchs – bishops who acted out of giving the communist party. At the same time, the communists persecuted the underground Church, existing in unity with Rome. The 2018 agreement did not make the destiny of Catholics any lighter, yet the state authorities gained greater control over the full Catholic community thanks to the Vatican's friendly attitude. It is thanks to the agreement of the Vatican and Beijing that Catholics no longer have the opportunity, in their opposition to the dictatorship, to appeal, even morally, to the authority of the Holy Capital. From the position of a simple Chinese Catholic the difference between Rome and Beijing has faded.
For years, any criticism of Beijing's politics by the Vatican has been completely excluded. Pope or cardinal. Parolin speaks of the authorities of this country only in superlatives while maintaining the illusion that it is possible to build trust in relations with totalitarianism. In the article mentioned earlier, Fr Spadaro wrote: “Chinese cultural and conventional values and evangelical values and teaching of the Church have much in common”[76]. Even further, Bishop Marcelo Sorondo, who in February 2018, before signing agreements, but in time close to the act of excommunication from 7 government hierarchs, in an interview with the portal “Vatican Insider” said Beijing “defends dignity” and “China evolves in a very good direction”. Sorondo besides called China a country that best realises the social discipline of the Church[77]. He said all this about a country tightening a totalitarian noose around its citizens' neck.
It may be believed that Francis and his diplomats hoped that flattery would convince the Chinese. This kind of action must be considered ridiculous by anyone who, although in outline, has an thought of China's political art traditions as well as communist methods. According to the cardinals. Zen Italian and South American sympathy for communism, as an ideology resisting injustice, are a trap for the Church. "If I were a cartoonist of comic books, I would introduce the Holy Father, as on his knees gives the keys of the Kingdom to Blue president Xi Jinping with the words: "Please, consider me Pope"[78] – ironic in October 2018 a aged hierarch in Hong Kong. Zen repeatedly tried to intervene with the Pope on the Chinese situation both before and after the agreement was signed.
After 2 unknowns, we are left with a third, which concerns the question of why the Holy See and papal interpreters are trying so hard to build the impression that Francis and cardinals. Parolin only continues what was already to be developed during erstwhile pontificates. Let us add that the very usage of the rhetoric of “peace and trust” which the Vatican has been utilizing since the early 20th century does not mean continuity of rules. It must be assumed that it is primarily about calming public opinion in Western countries, as well as the opinion of this part of Catholics who are not curious in getting into the details of the situation. In 2007, Benedict XVI wrote in a letter to Chinese Catholics that there was no mention of recognizing “the patriotic church” due to the fact that it is under the complete control of communist authorities. According to canon law, he recalled that the sacraments given by excommunicated clergymen are important, but wickedly exercised[79]. A calming communicative about the continuity of Vatican's global policy has yet another goal: to stifle the simple fact that Catholics of persecuted underground Church, like Catholics from countries of real socialism in Europe, believe that they have been betrayed.
The issue is not symbolic; the authorities have already begun to limit the anticipation of preaching any Catholic teachings, specified as opposition to abortion, which is simply a hard part of Asian collos' demographic policy. No uncertainty there are reasons for concern. At the beginning of 2022, the esteemed Catholic writer Edward Pentin pointed to the crucial similarity of the ideas of the speeches of Xi Jinping and Pope Francis in matters concerning global policy[80]. This can be interpreted in different ways, including that the Chinese want to strengthen the naive belief in Western people that their social strategy and political presence in the planet are non-conflict and non-invasive. It is simply a apparent lie.
What if things look even worse and the journalists “The Pillar” Ed Condon and JD Flynn, who in the summertime 2021 article stated that the agreement between the Vatican and Beijing was the consequence of political blackmail?[81] Condon and Flynn reached the information according to which the Vatican's non-public spaces utilized a homosexual dating application Grindr. This happened at a time erstwhile this portal belonged to the Chinese corp Beijing Kunlun Tech. If journalists have reached specified data, they are surely besides in the hands of the Beijing authorities who usage their media for intelligence purposes. According to both journalists, the Catholic opinion in China rather widely accepted the agreement of the Holy See with Beijing as a capitular and even as a slap against believers. possibly it was that Beijing showed the epigons the cards. Casaroli as a real-life politician. However, this would mean that the content of the agreement would stay secret until China considers its disclosure as a useful tool of influence, a levar on the weak Pope – 1 or another.
In May 2022 the substance of the agreement was summed up by the cardinals. George Pell in the already cited conversation: “I think that erstwhile you make a deal and nothing comes out of it, and in fact things seem to be getting worse, that must be a good reason to stick to its provisions”[82]. Nothing to add, nothing to say.
Defeat Four: Global South
One of the global perspectives of Pope Francis from the beginning of the pontificate was, at least verbally adopted a position that could be described as a preferential option for the poor. This was clearly seen in the Pope's programional apostolic adhortation Evangelii Gaudium[83], in which the subject of concern for the – differently understood – periphery of the human planet was developed. In the encyclical Laudato si The 2015 issue besides gained a more political dimension.
“Inequality affects not only individuals, but besides countries and forces people to think about the ethics of global relations. There is simply a genuine "green debt", in peculiar between the North and the South, linked to the environmental consequences of a trade imbalance and the disproportionate usage of natural resources that any countries have committed in history. The export of certain natural materials to satisfy the markets of the industrialised North has caused local damage’[84] – we read in a paper signed by the Pope.
In another place, Francis added: “The abroad debt of mediocre countries has become a control tool, but this does not apply to ecological debt. In various ways, developing countries with the most crucial biosphere reserves proceed to drive the improvement of the wealthiest countries at the expense of their present and future. The land of the mediocre South is rich and lowly contaminated, but access to possession of goods and resources to meet their basic needs is closed to them by a structurally wicked strategy of commercial relations and property."[85].
Pope Francis is frequently attacked by conservative opinion centres for his social teaching. The problem, however, is not just the Pope's attention to the global inequalities calling for vengeance to heaven. These themes have been appearing in Catholic teaching for decades, and more and more clearly. These are found in Paul VI’s documents[86]John Paul II[87] and possibly most straight at Benedict XVI[88]“Laudato si”. Theological scaffolding of the second paper was based on Romano Guardini's essay “The End of Modern Times”[89], an author crucial to both Francis and – possibly even more – Benedict XVI. Guardini points out the request for man to quit modern authority over the planet of God, as well as to the nature “as always a valid norm, or even as a life refuge. He looks at her without any prepared assumptions, in fact, as the place and material of his work, which he devotes everything to, not caring what will come of it.”[90] The real problem is that the Pope ignores the hierarchy of social principles which constitute a carrier strategy of Catholic social teaching. Consequently, we are all witnessing a process of confusion of what could be described as the doctrinal identity of the Church. This translates specifically into the effects of ecclesiastical politics on an global level. Francis seems implicite carry out his mission, as if he were leading a global NGO, not the Church of Christ. In practice, this means that it seems almost completely free and unconnected to treat elements of Catholic social doctrine, depending on its subjective purpose. As a result, Francis's policy is given a makiavellic taste. This is not just a symbolic substance or an abstract issue. specified an attitude of the Pope makes his policy of supporting the global south – or wider – of the mediocre suffering from the existing global strategy ineffective.
It is simply a paradox that this Pope, who has been practicing politics in a very secular style, has repeatedly reminded in the past that the Church is not a non-governmental organization or corporation[91]. Meanwhile, Francis himself “brings the Church into a pragmatic necessity to preach various doctrines in an unordered way, without giving them 1 and unambiguous ratio traversing traditions like a thread woven from gold thread.”[92] A characteristic example of this kind of policy was, in fact, the public support of Pope Joe Biden's candidacy for president of the United States. Although the gestures of support were sufficiently subtle, most Americans before the elections shared the belief that Francis favoured the Democratic organization candidate[93]. Given the political dynamics, it was not hard to make specified an impression, but individual had to put their hand on it. What was the dynamics itself? These Republicans are more perceived in the planet as promoters of American expansionism, it is Republicans who are more likely to blame themselves for “global oppression”, at the same time it was Democrats who proposed a liberal approach to the phenomenon of mass migration from the mediocre south to the United States, that democracy, at least since Barack's time Obama is trying to rise the level of state care in areas as basic as wellness care. All of this fits in with Francis's closest model of policy subordinate to the preferential option for the poor. That means, among another things, weakening the West by undermining its influence, and supporting this circumstantial kind of redistribution, which is supporting migrationism.[94] – ideologies according to which the mediocre can, in effect, seize themselves on the wealth of rich nations. This expropriation, e.g. in the welfare systems of the western states, can be treated as compensation for the unspeakable usage of the well-being of the confederate peoples. This does not mean, of course, that the problems of post and neocolonialism, which mostly implicite undertakes, Francis does not occur.
The problem lies somewhere else – Francis, following any abstract visions of global justice, seems to ignore the most circumstantial justice. In fresh decades, the American Democratic organization has become 1 of the most extremist and aggressive organizations against the life of the unborn in the world.[95]. Due to these changes from the Democratic Party, after a loud article published in February 2020 in the fresh York Post, the well-known American Catholic theologian Charles Camosy left. Camosy remained in the Democratic organization for a long time, reasoning that the prosocial Democratic program was more Catholic than the Republican 1 and that this is what the United States needs. In his farewell text to his own political environment, he wrote: “To individual who is progressive on most issues, this decision [about leaving the Democratic organization – TR] does not come easily. Like most Democrats, I believe that the government has a vigorous function to play in supporting women, families and children. I support paid household leave, aid with besides costly childcare, union rights, affordable bill, taxation breaks for children and adoptions and many more. I'm worried about climate change. I'm a declared vegetarian. I believe in accepting refugees and immigrants. I'm against unnecessary wars. But the organization gave me no choice. [...] Democrats are usually a organization of a vigorous government protecting the defenceless from violence. But as far as abortion is concerned, elite Democrats become staunch libertarians, believing that the state has no interest in interfering in private individual choices. Abortion is only "health care", and an unborn child, unimaginably vulnerable, even erstwhile needed, becomes invisible and brutally rejected"[96]. Camosy’s article, with which many Catholics would not agree, is simply a evidence to how much the American Left has become a extremist doctrinal phenomenon.
Democrats are besides behind the promotion of an identity policy that is increasingly dividing the American people. The revolution of “woke”, an eruption of egoism – more or little imagined – of minorities, even Democratic-supporting intellectuals were critical in the early months of Donald Trump's presidency. This policy of social demolition saw the origin of Hillary Clinton's defeat[97]. The American Catholic episcopate attempted to cushion the corrosive Christian community's consequences of political rapprochement between Francis and Bid throughout the summertime and part of the fall of 2021. At the time, work on a paper containing “guides for giving holy communion to the faithful” was publically investigated. Eventually, erstwhile the post was published, it was not mentioned by the name of either president Biden or another pro-abortionary politicians, but focused on emphasizing the importance of the Eucharist and on the criteria according to which believing it could accept it[98]. Meanwhile, the expectations of the Church, besides functioning within the global south, were going in the other direction than the politics of the Holy See. While Francis was preparing to visit 3 African countries in autumn 2019: Mozambique, Madagascar and Mauritius Catholic communities in these countries expected the Pope to talk out during his visit precisely against abortion[99]One of the darkest plagues brought to the South by Northern colonialism. “In the 1960s British scientists diagnosed that besides many children were born, which threatens overcrowding and stated that it would not be best to introduce the sterilization of women. Thus, the authorities undertook appropriate “family policy” inviting, among others, organisations promoting abortion,” said Agnieszka Kieniewicz-Duverge of the L’action Familiale Foundation in Africa. Thus, the Church, more and more powerful in the South, should, besides for the sake of principle, argue wickedness and injustice, including the 1 that occurs between states. However, it should not succumb to the temptation of alliance with the technologists of globalism, who, with phrases of integrated development, cover real actions promoting mass killing of unborn children and demolition of local cultures[100]. Meanwhile, Pope Francis strengthens ties with the ideology and practices of globalisation[101]One of the objectives of which is Africa's depopulation[102], and in the composition of the Pontifical Academy of Life people appeared during his pontificate giving moral consent to prenatal killing[103].
The false tones of the Holy See's policy on the protection of life were overshadowed in time by Francis' individual statements. In November 2022 the Pope in an interview with the magazine “America”, published by Jesuits in the United States, said “abortion is simply a crime”[104]. In an autobiography published in March 2024, Francis repeated this opinion: “We must always defend human life, from conception to death. I will never halt saying that abortion is murder, a crime”[105]. However, these words stay nothing more than an opinion, due to the fact that the Papal policy has in no way changed due to them. In the statements of 2022 there was an crucial but somewhat forgotten adverb in which the Pope actually separated moral responsibilities from political principles: “The problem arises erstwhile the reality of killing a human being is transformed into a political issue or erstwhile the pastor of the Church applies political categories”[106]. Why did the Pope urge that crucial political issues be removed? After all, he does not do it himself, and even he seems to treat killing the unborn as an inevitable component of the higher political plan to repair the world.
Africa's unrest has besides to any degree been alleviated by statements refocusing the attention of African elites from the moral law issue to the injustice experienced by the countries of this continent. "Enough choking of Africa. This is not a mine that needs to be exploited or land to plunder" - said the Pope on Wednesday 20 September 2023 during the general audience[107]. In the case of the right to life of unborn Francis seems to usage the method of multiplying conflicting messages addressed to different audiences already known from another circumstances[108]. Undoubtedly, however, separating political activity from the golden currency of the Church, which is enlightened by the grace of an orderly hierarchy of principles of moral action, means corrupting the best of the currencies. Not only due to the fact that its pattern “is not of this world”[109]but besides due to the fact that it has repeatedly shown its effectiveness.
In 2023, the tensions that had been outlined increased and even went into conflict. As Tomasz Terlikowski noted in January 2024 – “The global South of the Church mostly shares the pope’s geopolitical views”[110]But the problem has reappeared elsewhere. For the global South, the distance of the Holy See towards the West is simply a valuable issue, but only in a package with the integral moral teaching of the Church. The declaration “Fiduccia supplicans”, published by the Dicastery of the Doctrine of Faith, shortly before Christmas of the Lord's Year 2023, institutionalized in the Catholic Church the blessings of homosexual couples renewed the smoky, especially in Africa suspicions of the actual position of Pope Francis towards moral principles. In Africa of our time, Christian and Muslim perspectives form moral consensus, and Western permissiveism is perceived as neocolonial perversion destroying symbiosis with large religions of national communities. The issue of homosexuality has been spelled out. Judging from the effectiveness of the overt rebellion of parts of African episcopals towards “Fiduccia supplicant” – The Holy See ruled that the provisions of this paper did not apply to Africa[111] – it can be believed that in many places of this continent Francis from a somewhat suspicious yet ally of justice for the politically marginalized South, Francis became something “in the form of a UN chaplain, a globalist agenda, naturalistic, anti-Christian, completely materialistic mentality and ideology”, as Bishop Atanazy Schneider erstwhile said[112].
* Oh, my God *
The above-mentioned cases show how the action which the Pope himself may respect as a kind of political emancipation of the Holy See, as a release of the Church from a close connection with the West or the North, is simply a surrender and a waiver from the sovereign Catholic voice in global politics. possibly Francis does not announcement that his makiawelism, peronism, or casarolism, this overwhelming desire not to be the Pope of the West puts him in a camp of 2 old-new totalitarianisms whose goal is not to implement a “sustainable development” in the planet – if we could specify global justice. The intent of Beijing and Moscow is fresh dominance, and the South is only a tool for this purpose. Like the Holy See in the regulation of Pope Francis. Meanwhile, the political goal of the papal capital should be to preach the justice of sui generis – in time and not in time, like Christ. Pragmatism, political balance, the tendency to ideology, the instrumentalization of the Church's gold currency, are part of the elements that make up the noticeable fall of the authority of the Holy See in both the secular and spiritual communities.
Tomasz Rowinski
The text was created as part of the "Ordo Iuris Civilization" cycle.
PDF publication available HERE
[1] J. Potocka, Pope on NATO barking outside Russia and gathering Putin, https://www.rmf24.pl/reports/report-war-with-Russia/news-Pope-about- barking-nato-under-door-rosion-and-meeting-with-pu,nId,6000320#crp_state=1, accessed: January 23, 2024.
[2] The president The Pope explained: he heard words about “talking NATO” from 1 of the heads of state, https://www.pap.pl/updates/news%2C1247717%2Pope-explaining-word-about- barking-nato-hearing-from-one-of-chiefs, accessed: January 23, 2024.
[3] On 4 March he appeared in Polish media The appeal to Pope Francis for clear and clear support of Ukraine in the war against Russia for freedomsigned by a number of Catholic intellectuals, https://christianitas.org/news/apel-to-Pope-French-o-unique-and-read-support-Ukraine-in-war-with-Russia-Freedom/, accessed: January 23, 2024.
[4] "The fresh York Times": Half a million victims of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, https://www.rp.pl/armistic conflicts/art38972171-the-new-york-times-pol-million-offering-Russian-invasion-on-Ukraine, accessed: January 23, 2024.
[5] L. Sosniak SJ, Pope admires Ukrainian heroism, https://www.vaticannews.va/en/papiez/news/2022-06/papiez-to-jezuitow-no-I'm-for-putin.html. Access: January 23, 2024.
[6] Francis, Fratelli tutti, 258.
[7] More about the first reaction of the Holy See: T. Rowinski, The shadow of Moscow over the Vatican, “To the Thing”, No. 15, 2022, pp. 60-61.
[8] T. Rowinski, Left for Vatican“To the Thing”, No 8, 2022, pp. 62-63;
[9] W. Rodkiewicz, K. Chawryło, Putin at the Pope: ideology and politics, https://www.osw.waw.pl/publications/analysis/2013-11-27/putin-u-paper-ideology-and-politics, accessed: 27 March 2024.
[10]Pope of China: large culture, with large inexhaustible wisdom, https://deon.pl/kosciol/swis-Popie/Popiez-o-chinach-great-culture-with-great-inexhaustible-madroscia,377861, accessed: 23 January 2024, T. Rowinski, Left for Vatican.
[11] T. Rowinski, An embarrassing inaction against injustice, html, accessed: January 23, 2024.
[12] John Paul II.Human rights and the rights of nations. Anthology of Texts, ed. Fr B. Pieron, Kraków 2017.
[13] Marseille of Padua, Peacekeeper, crowd. W. Senko, Angles 2006.
[14] The doctrine of “fair peace” to replace the “just war” was written by B. Bartosik, Only peace is fair, https://wiez.pl/2017/10/26/only-peace-is-fair/, accessed: January 23, 2024.
[15] I have devoted this substance to the full extended book entitled Turbo Papacy. About the dynamics of a crisisDębo Góra 2022.
[16]Pope Francis: there is no situation in which war could be considered fair, https://deon.pl/kosciol/Popiez-French-not-has-a-situation-in-which-war-could-be-considered-for-fair,2299124, accessed: January 23, 2024.
[17] Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2307-2317.
[18] L. Sosniak SJ, Pope admires Ukrainian heroism.
[19] Ibid.
[20] P. Milcarek, T. Rowinski, Justice, sovereignty, nation, “Christianitas”, No 89, 2022, pp. 9-17.
[21] P. Milcarek, T. Rowinski, Justice, sovereignty, nation, pp. 10-11.
[22] T. Figure, Oh. Paweł Gużyński: Francis does not want to be the pope of NATO, https://news.onet.pl/religion/o-pawel-gusinski-French-no-want-to-be-Pope-nato/bcr7ngh, accessed: January 24, 2024.
[23] Wprost wrote about it by A. Szostkiewicz, Pope Putin, https://szostkiewicz.blog.polityka.pl/2023/09/19/papiez-putina/, accessed: January 24, 2024.
[24] Examples of the constant support of the leader of the Russian Church for war are: Patriarch Cyril: Our boys defend Russia on the battlefield, https://www.rp.pl/armistic conflicts/art36533571-patriarcha-cyryl-usi-boys-arms-rosion-on-field-fight, accessed: January 24, 2024.
[25] P. Milcarek, T. Rowinski, Justice, sovereignty, nation, there.
[26] Ibid.
[27] Many authors wrote about it, now I will mention only 2 works: P. Grad, Disposal of the Magisterium. Discussion survey on Amoris Laetitia, 305, “Christianitas”, No 65, 2016 and R. Douthat, Change the church. Pope Francis and the Future of Catholicism, Krakow 2019.
[28]Vatican: The anticipation of allowing divorced people to communion is "authentic teaching", https://m.Sunday.pl/article/95493/Watykan-Proposed-post-ws, accessed: 24 January 2024; P. Grad, Disposal of the magisterium. Discussion survey on “Amoris laetitia”, 305, “Christianitas”, No 65, 2016, 41-84.
[29] Declaration Fiducia supplicans of the pastoral importance of blessings, https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/collections/cfair/documents/rc_ddf_doc_20231218_fiducia-supplicans.html, accessed January 24, 2024.
[30] K. Ołdakowski, there.
[31] The president Pope: Only love can save the human family, https://www.vaticannews.va/en/Popiez/news/2022-03/Popiez-only-love-moze-saving-family-human.html, accessed: January 24, 2024.
[32]Pope Francis visited the Russian embassy at the Vatican, https://www.vaticannews.va/en/Popiez/news/2022-02/Popiez-French-visited-Russian-ambasade-at-vacation.html, accessed: January 24, 2024.
[33] L. Sośniak SJ, Pope will not go to Kiev, he besides cancelled the gathering with Cyril, https://www.vaticannews.va/en/Popiez/news/2022-04/Popiez-not-go-to-kijowa-revocation-tez-meeting-with-cyril.html, accessed: January 24, 2024.
[34] T. Terlikowski, The Vatican and the war in Ukraine. "When the bottom was reached, we abruptly heard a knock from the bottom", https://tvn24.pl/premium/Popiez-franciszek-o-warie-w-ukrainie-tomasz-terlikowski- comments 5697172, accessed: January 24, 2024.
[35] A. Onions, The pacifism of Pope Francis. Needed Polish Answer, “Christianitas”, No 87-88, 2022, p. 118.
[36] A. Onions, The pacifism of Pope Francis. Needed Polish Answer, p. 118.
[37] T. Rowinski, Back to old mistakes. Notes on Pope Francis and the Holy See's attitude to the war in Ukraine, “Christianitas”, No 87-88, 2022, p. 129.
[38] A. Onions, The pacifism of Pope Francis. Needed Polish Answer, p. 118.
[39] A. Onions, The pacifism of Pope Francis. Needed Polish Answer, p. 117.
[40] L. Sosniak SJ, Pope admires Ukrainian heroism.
[41] The prosecution of NATO itself of causing war in Ukraine sufficed to support these beliefs, but critical opinions were more: Pope: Europe is tired and helpless, like a “fertile grandmother”, https://www.gosc.pl/doc/3770969.Popiez-Europe-is-weary-and-responsible-like-splendent-grandmother, accessed: 25 January 2024; Pope in Reuters' interview criticizes US immigration policy, https://news.onet.pl/world/Pope-in-interview-for-reuters-critique-immigrant policy-us/wqjpg1f, accessed: January 24, 2024.
[42] B. Zajączkowska, Pope to Ambassadors on the Lights and Shadows of Our Time, https://www.vaticannews.va/en/Popiez/news/2022-01/Popiez-to-corpus-diplomatastic-light-and-shadow-our.html, accessed: January 25, 2024.
[43] S. Gadecki, Communication from the president of the Polish Parliament to the escalation of tensions at the Polish-Belarusian border, https://www.ekai.pl/documents/president-communication-kep-against-escalation-scalation-on-border-Polish-Belarusian/, accessed: January 25, 2024.
[44] Ibid.
[45] Ibid.
[46] The president of the Episcopate asks for funds to be raised for migrants from the Polish-Belarusian border, https://episkopat.pl/presidents-episkopatu-request-o-collection-fund-on-thing-immigrant-from-border-Polish-Belarusian/, accessed: January 25, 2024.
[47]Announcement from 390th Plenary gathering of the Polish Episcopal Conference, https://episkopat.pl/communication-from-390-collection-plennar-conference-episkopat-Polish/, accessed: January 25, 2024.
[48] C. Koselniak, What dialog do we request with the German Church today?, https://christianitas.org/news/what-dialogue-with-German-Church-today-we need/. Access: January 25, 2024.
[49] Ibid.
[50] C. Koselniak, Is Tiber coming to Moscow? The Vatican's turn in east politics at the threshold of the fresh “powers concert”, “Christianitas”, No 86, 2021.
[51] Pius XI, Encyclical Divini Redemptoris, “Christianitas”, No 74, 2018, pp. 45-78.
[52] Pius XI, Encyclical Non abbiamo bissagno, https://okoka.org.pl/library/W/WP/pius_xi/encyclicals/non_abbiamo_29061931, accessed: January 25, 2024.
[53] Pius XI, Encyclical Mit Brennender sorge, https://okoka.org.pl/library/W/WP/pius_xi/encyclicals/mit_brenender_sorge_14031937.html
[54] This conversation is besides available in text form: Keeping and transferring a deposit of religion in times of turmoil, crisis and persecution. Interview with Cardinal George Pelle, retired Archbishop of Sydney, associate of the Council of Cardinals, prefect of the Secretariat for economical Capitals, University Centre for the survey of spiritual Freedom of the University of Warsaw, “Sources”, Notebook 2, p. 17
[55] The dispute with China over the nomination of the bishop of Shanghai was resolved, the Pope approved it, https://www.gosc.pl/doc/8385711.Zagnano-spor-z-Chinami-w-w-nomination-bishop-Shanghaju-Popiez, accessed: January 30, 2024.
[56]A. Spadara, Agreement between China and the Holy See, https://all the more important.pl/antonio-spadaro-sj-understanding-between-chinami-a-capital-Apostol/, accessed: January 30, 2024.
[57]The dispute with China over the nomination of the bishop of Shanghai was resolved, the Pope approved it, https://www.gosc.pl/doc/8385711.Zagnano-spor-z-Chinami-w-w-nomination-bishop-Shanghaju-Popiez, accessed: January 30, 2024.
[58]Xi Jinping: More nationalism, collectivism, socialism and “sinization of religion”, html, accessed 31 January 2024.
[59]China fights "Western influences". Prohibition of online spiritual activity without government approval, html, accessed: 31 January 2024.
[60] G. Upper, New Vatican Ostpolitik in China. Or a card. Parolin will follow in the footsteps of Cardinal Casarol?, https://wpolityka.pl/kosciol/378391-new-ostpolitik-watykan-in-chinach-do-kard-parolin-go-in-slady-kard-casarole, accessed: 31 January 2024.
[61] C. Koselniak, Is Tiber coming to Moscow? The Vatican's turn in east politics at the threshold of the fresh “powers concert”p. 53
[62] Quote behind text by Grzegorz Górny, New Vatican Ostpolitik in China. Or a card. Parolin will follow in the footsteps of Cardinal Casarol?
[63] Ibid.
[64]Cardinal Zen arrived in Rome, but... he did not receive an audience with Pope Francis., https://pch24.pl/kardinal-zen-emerged-to-Roman-but-not-received-audience-u-Popies-French/, accessed: 31 January 2024. The gathering of the Pope and Cardinal took place in early 2023 after the ceremony of Benedict XVI in Rome.
[65] The rules in this case were laid down in the encyclical Pius XII Ad Apostolorum Principis 1958.
[66] A. Spadara, Agreement between China and the Holy See.
[67] Vatican authoritative praises China for witness to Catholic social teaching, https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/37694/vatican-official-praises-china-for-witness-to-catholic-social-teaching, accessed: December 31, 2024.
[68] Chinese Cardinal: Pope does not realize China, https://missiony.pl/Chinese-Cardinal-Popies-non-understanding-chin/, accessed: 31 January 2024.
[69] Benedict XVI, Letter to Catholics in China, http://www.vatican.va/content/benedict-xvi/en/letters/2007/documents/hf_ben-xvi_let_20070527_china.html, accessed: 31 January 2024.
[70] The president The Simular Global Visions of China’s president Xi Jinping and Pope Francis, https://edwardpentin.co.uk/the-shared-vision-of-chinas-president-xi-jinping-and-pope-francis/, accessed: 31 January 2024.
[71] The Pillar, Location-based apps pose safety hazard for Holy See, https://www.pillarcatholic.com/p/location-based-apps-pose-security, accessed 31 January 2024.
[72]Keeping and transferring a deposit of religion in times of turmoil, crisis and persecution. Interview with Cardinal George Pelle, retired Archbishop of Sydney, associate of the Council of Cardinals, prefect of the Secretariat for economical Capitals, p. 17.
[73] Francis, Evangelii Gaudium, https://www.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/apost_exhortations/documents/papa-francesco_esortazione-ap_20131124_evangelii-gaudium.html, accessed: 1 February 2024.
[74] Francis, Laudato si, https://www.vatican.va/content/francesco/encyclals/documents/papa-francesco_20150524_enciclica-laudato-si.html, 51, accessed: 1 February 2024.
[75] Francis, Laudato si, 52.
[76]The Pope spoke of a white flag being displayed by Ukraine. Vatican translates Francis' words, https://www.rp.pl/kosciol/art39967691-Popiez-movil-o-hanging-white-flagi-via-Ukraine-Vatican-tltranslation-word-French, accessed 27 March 2024.
[77] Francis, Laudato si, 888.
[78] W. Vassilenko, Cause, nature and intent of Russia's armed aggression against Ukraine, “Polish-Ukrainian Studies of Science”, vol. 3, 2017, pp. 21-26; P. Rojek, The curse of the empire. Sources of Russian behavior, Kraków 2014.
[79] Pope Francis will welcome president Vladimir Putin in Vatican, https://www.rp.pl/events/Article1292281-Pope-French-adopted-in-Vatican-President-wladimir-putina, accessed: 27 March 2024.
[80]Amazing. The Vatican typical alongside Lavrow... criticizes Poland?! Polish clergy are responding. VIDEO, https://wpolityka.pl/kosciol/573436-Vatican representative-u-boku-lawrowa-critic-polske, accessed: 27 March 2024.
[81] W. Kowalski, 182 years ago Pope Gregory XVI condemned the November Uprising, dzieja.pl, accessed: 27 March 2024.
[82] The president Culture the basis of the nation's sovereignty in the light of John Paul II, “Lodz Theological Studies”, No. 15, 2006, pp. 25-29.
[83] Paul VI, Populorum progressiveio, https://okoka.org.pl/library/W/WP/pawel_vi/encyclicals/popularum_progressio_26031967, accessed: March 28, 2024.
[84] John Paul II, Sollicitudo rei socialis, https://www.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/encycles/documents/hf_jp-ii_enc_30121987_sollicitudo-rei-socialis.html, accessed: March 28, 2024.
[85] Benedict XVI, Caritas in veritate, https://okoka.org.pl/library/W/WP/beneddict_xvi/encyclicals/caritas_in_vertite_29062009, accessed: March 28, 2024.
[86] R. Guardini, The End of Modern Times, crowd. Z. Włodkowa, in: the same, The end of modern times. The planet and the person. Freedom, grace, fate, collective crowd, Kraków 1969, pp. 19-86.
[87]Pope on the Catholic Church: it is not NGO or an global concern, https://polskieradio24.pl/article/2397359,epiez-o-kosciele-Catholic-to-ngo-ani-international-concern, accessed: March 28, 2024.
[88] T. Rowinski, Post-paternity, Peter, where are you going?, in: Turbo Papacy, Dębo Góra 2022, p. 633.
[89] J. Bielecki, Francis supports Biden? That's what America thinks, https://www.rp.pl/events/art463291-French-supports-bidena-tak-sadzi-america, accessed: March 28, 2024.
[90] This problem is devoted to a book by 1 of the crucial intellectuals of the Mark Lilli Democratic Camp, The end of liberalism as we know it. Requiem for identity policy, Warsaw 2018.
[91]Party Platform. The Democratic Platform: Healing The Soul of America,
https://democrats.org/where-we-stand/party-platform/healthing-the-soul-of-america/, accessed: 4 April 2024.
[92]The U.S. Bishops adopted a thrilling paper about the Eucharist. He addresses the issue of giving communion to abortion supporters, https://station7.pl/from-world/biskupi-usa-accepted-budget-great-emotion-document-o-eucharysti-moves-on-issue-giving-communion-supporters-abortion/, accessed: 4 April 2024.
[93] Pope's pilgrimage to Africa. The church in Mauritius awaits Francis' anti-abortion position, https://polskieradio24.pl/article/2363593, peligree-papieza-do-Africa-kosciol-na-mauritius-choice-on-antiabortion-position-French, accessed: March 29, 2024.
[94] The president Vatican and Globalists, https://drzeczy.pl/religion/409303/chmielewski-watkan-i-globalisci.html, accessed: March 28, 2024.
[95] A. Stelmach, Sustainable development. The spell of globalists – an instrument of full enslavement, Kraków 2023, pp. 53-56.
[96]It supports abortion and euthanasia. Francis called him to the Pontifical Academy of Life, html, accessed: March 29, 2024; “An abortion supporter” nominated for the Pontifical Academy of Life?, https://www.ekai.pl/supporter-abortion-nominated-to-Pope-accademia-life/, accessed: March 29, 2024.
[97]Pope Francis on abortion, sexual abuse and communism, https://all important.pl/pepites/Popez-French-o-abortion/, accessed: March 29, 2024.
[98] Pope Francis: I will never halt saying abortion is murder, https://www.ekai.pl/Popiez-French-abortion-is-murder/, accessed: March 29, 2024.
[99]Pope Francis on abortion, sexual abuse and communism.
[100] Pope: adequate choking Africa, https://www.gosc.pl/doc/8497387.Popez-Enough-soulning-Africa, accessed: March 29, 2024.
[101]Pope Francis warmly supports migration to Europe, https://wgólce.pl/information/125054-Popiez-French-goraco-supports-migration-to-europa, accessed: 4 April 2024.
[102] There is no request to scope out to critics of the globalistic agenda, just look at the books of UN experts, specified as Bill Gates: H. Rosling, Ola Rosling, Anna Rosling, Rönnlund, Factfulness. Why the planet is better than we think, which is how stereotypes replace real knowledge, crowd. M. Popławska, Poznań 2018.
[103] For example, in March 2019 Pope Francis to Bishop Atanaze Schneider “corrected” a fragment of the declaration of peace signed by him and the large imam Al-Azhar. According to the declaration, the diversity of religion is wanted by God. In his oral correction, the Pope acknowledged that it would be appropriate to say that the multiplicity of religion is permitted by God. Of course, this oral “correction” did not change the content of the authoritative declaration paper on which the signature of Pope Francis appears; The Pope states: God permits a multitude of religions, https://www.vaticannews.va/en/Popiez/news/2019-03/Popiez-diversity-religion-god-accepts-schneider.html, accessed: 4 April 2024.
[104] J 18, 36.
[105] T. Terlikowski, Papal Dance on Diplomatic Line, https://news.wp.pl/Popie-dance-on-diploma-line-opinion-6984296589093376a, accessed April 4, 2024.
[106] Bishop Schneider: The Pope became a UN chaplain and anti-Christian ideology, html, April 4, 2024.
[107]Pope on the blessings of LGBT couples. He calls Africa a “special case”, https://www.rp.pl/kosciol/art39754901-Popiez-o-blogoslovenstwoch-par-lgbt-names-afrique-special-case, April 4, 2024
[108] Ibid. p. 58.
[109] C. Camosy, The Democratic organization is telling millions of pro-lifters to get out, https://nypost.com/2020/02/06/the-Democratic-party-is-telling-millions-of-pro-lifters-to-get-out/, accessed April 5, 2024.
[110] The president Cardinal Zuppie: We are trying to bring Ukrainian children home, https://www.vaticannews.va/en/church/news/2023-07/cardinal-zuppi-we-are-trying-to-bring-Ukrainian-children-home.html, accessed: 5 April 2024.
[111] The president Sant’Egidio calls for negotiations to accomplish peace in Ukraine, https://www.vaticannews.va/en/church/news/2022-02/ukraine-sant-egidio-appeal-peace-russia-urgent.html, accessed: 5 April 2024.
[112] It is worth noting here: Ch. Delsol, The end of the Christian world. The normative inversion and the fresh era, crowd. P. Napivodzki, Krakow 2023, to which I replied in a text Capitalation prof. Delsol, “Christianitas”, No 94, 2023, pp. 13-30; R. Dreher, Benedict's option. How to last the Time of Neo - Paganism, M. Samborska, Kraków 2018, T. Terlikowski, Extinction. The Twilight of My Church, Krakow 2023, or an article by M. Kędzierski, "For the figure of this planet passes by." LGBT, Ordo Iuris and the breakdown of Catholic imaginarium, https://klubjagiellonski.pl/2020/08/08/passion-bowiem-postac-that-world-lgbt-ordo-iuris-and-catholic-imaginarium/, accessed: 5 April 2024. I have devoted my essay to the apolitical part of the Polish Catholic hierarchy Not apolitical, but preaching the common gospel, “Christianitas”, No 93, 2023, pp. 17-35. Both of my texts mentioned here can besides be found on the website christianitas.org.
