On Popes and Cardinal Pecksniffs

Seeing the world through the lens of Charles Dickens is quite conducive to sanity. In almost every circumstance of life, there is an event or character from his books that can serve as a clarifying parallel. The character he created seem to be caricatures rather than real people, but it is the very exaggeration of faults and virtues which provides a touchstone by which to judge the world in which we live. One such Dickensian character is that of Pecksniff from Martin Chuzzlewitt.

Pecksniff is an architect of no skill or talent whatsoever, whose one success in the book comes from stealing someone else’s design. Pecksniff carries himself with an air that only appears to radiate goodness to himself and his sycophant daughters. He thinks his self-serving is charity, his grasping subservience to be humility, and his greed to be nothing but love for his fellow men. In the end, the only one fooled by Pecksniff is Pecksniff.

Throughout the novel, the self-righteous subservience of Pecksniff offends everyone who encounters it, including the reader, and there seems to be no limit to what he will accomplish to satisfy his greed and lusts. The novel ends with Pecksniff being exposed as a fraud and ruined, not being able to see that he is the cause of his own demise, and while the reader rejoices to see justice take place, Pecksniff is pitied because he cannot see reality, because he is insane, because he will suffer without knowing the real reason behind it.

Unfortunately, individuals who are blind to reality do not only appear in the pages of literature; rather we encounter them quite frequently. We see them in the news, at work, and sometimes even our families. They all have the same thing in common with Pecksniff; they cannot see reality, and suffering seems unable to open their eyes.

For the last fifty years, the Catholic Church has been suffering from a similar situation: many of her leaders and theologians cannot see reality, and what they cannot see is truth illuminated by the light of the faith.

Frank Sheed explains this very problem in his book, Theology and Sanity.

“Seeing God everywhere and all things upheld by Him is not a matter of sanctity, but of plain sanity, because God is everywhere and all things are upheld by Him … To overlook God’s presence is not simply to be irreligious; it is a kind of insanity, like overlooking anything else that is actually there.”

The many controversial comments of our present Holy Father seem to give evidence of this lack of theological sanity: speculating that atheists can go the heaven, indicating that contraception can be permitted under certain circumstances, allowing for the divorced and remarried to receive Communion, and even claiming that Jesus, the Son of God, would have had to ask forgiveness from Mary and Joseph after He left them for three days to teach in the Temple.

These theological pronouncements are not in alignment with reality, and if the Holy Father does think these things to be true, then he does not see reality as it is.

The reality is that which Sheed indicated above, that “God is everywhere and all things are upheld by Him.” God is objectively real; His will is objectively real; and even the separation that man can place between himself and God is also objectively real. Mankind is absolutely dependent on God, so much so, that if anybody rejects God, he cannot participate in God. This is objective reality, and this is why atheists cannot go to heaven, why divorced and remarried couples cannot receive Communion, why contraception is not permitted for any reason whatsoever.

This is also why Jesus did not have to apologize to Mary and Joseph. He is God, and Mary and Joseph were subject to His will, His intellect, His power.

God never has to apologize to them; nor does He have to accommodate Himself to us and treat adultery as if it was of no consequence. He is God, and all that He does is good because He is goodness itself. Consequently, all His actions and laws are for our own good.

Many prelates, the Holy Father included, participate in this blindness to reality, and the remonstrations of good bishops and faithful do not lift that veil of blindness. These prelates exude an air of oily goodwill toward their fellow man, deceiving only themselves and their sycophants. This implacable blindness can be cured, but only if we know the source. What, then, has brought about the theological blindness of our Church leaders?

A loss of faith. Not that one can say that the members of the hierarchy have necessarily lost the infused virtue of faith, but that the virtue was not properly cultivated and informed. Frank Sheed, in the same work listed above, says that there are two parts to faith. One part is that gift from God by which we believe whatever it is that He has revealed because He is the one revealing it. This acceptance, though, is not knowledge which is the second part of the virtue of faith. God gives the soul the power to believe, but it is up to the soul to learn what must be believed, and if one is not taught the truth, one could very well be deceived in what he believes. The Holy Father and the theologians who are destroying the fabric of the Church are missing this second aspect of the faith.

Their knowledge of the faith is corrupt. They are blind because they do not know, and because they think they know, their blindness is implacable.

This is what has been evidenced by the theologians for the last fifty years – a willingness to believe, but an almost incurable blindness as to the reality that must be believed. In many ways, the Second Vatican Council has given us a Church guided by Pecksniffs, not one of whom can see the truth about God, about themselves, and about the effect they are having on countless souls.

The crisis of today (the fact that a man of such dubious theology was elected pope indicates the depth of this crisis) is not merely one of discipline or philosophy. It, at its core, is a crisis of faith because the faith is not known, and those who should know it, do not recognize it when they encounter it. The Church suffers as a result, and will continue to suffer until theology is restored.

There is a way out of this blindness, though, but it is not easy. To illustrate this point, Dickens shows us two characters in Martin Chuzzlewitt who were deceived by Pecksniff but came to realize the truth regarding his character: his daughter Merry and Tom Pinch. Merry learned by suffering through an abusive marriage, and Tom Pinch learned through the suffering of someone he loved. Charles Dickens seems to make the claim that suffering is the only possible means of curing this insanity.

Pecksniff, however, does not learn. Suffering does not pierce the veil his pride has constructed, and it may be that it is impossible for him to suffer enough to bring about his intellectual cure.

The fragment of the Third Secret of Fatima revealed in 2000 shows that suffering is coming to the Church, and even to the pope. Sister Lucy describes seeing a war torn city, the bodies of clergy, and a suffering pope eventually being executed himself. But will this suffering be enough? Or will Pope Francis, if he is the “bishop in white” described by Sister Lucy, along with his bishops be like so many Pecksniffs, blind to reality and never coming to see the cosmos as the Church sees it? If the later situation is what develops, then they are to be pitied, for their suffering will be without result, and in a certain sense, they will be suffering needlessly.

Thus the more we hear about the dubious statements of the pope and bishops, the more faithful Catholics need to pray and do penance. The power of prayer and grace cannot be forgotten, and the prayer of faithful Catholics will accomplish more than anger, bitterness, and polemics. But much prayer will be required. A single person suffering from intellectual and spiritual blindness might not be able to handle the amount of suffering required to restore sanity, but all of us, through the wonderful association of the Communion of the Saints, can suffer together the required degree.

Our Lady of Fatima said that many go to hell because there was no one to pray for them. She not only exhorted the three children to do penance for sinners, but requested that we do so as well. How well has her request of the Five First Saturdays been heeded? What about the daily rosary? The faithful fulfillment of our duties of state? These things are given to us as means of fulfilling the plea of the Mother of God to pray for sinners. Our prayers, then, can be used by Our Lady for saving souls, and since she asked us to pray for the pope, can we not think that she is waiting for us to pray so she can apply their fruits to the Holy Father?

One of the most noble characters in Martin Chuzzlewitt is a very simple man called Mark Tapley. He goes through life seeking difficult circumstances to see if he can still be jolly. Thus he is one of the most selfless individuals to appear in the pages of English literature.

He rejoices in other’s joys, and comforts those who suffer. Through his selfless care of young Martin Chuzzlewitt, he was able to lead Martin out of his selfcentered indignation toward his uncle. Martin is cured of his blindness through the sacrifices of Mark.

This is our calling. We are called by Our Lady of Fatima to be as so many Mark Tapleys, working for the cure of the Pecksniffs that are in the Church. Even though a study of the crisis in the Church and instructing others in the nature of the crisis are good and wholesome things, self-centered indignation is of no benefit for the Church and our souls; it is even a form of blindness. Rather than indignation, which will do nothing to help bring about the conversion of the pope, let us pray and do penance. The more we do that, the more we hasten the victory of the Immaculate Heart of Mary.

Let us pray for our Holy Father Francis.

May the Lord preserve him and give him life and make him blessed upon the earth and deliver him not up to the will of his enemies.

(Peviously published in The Remnant Newspaper on June 14, 2016. Used with permission)