Pope Francis Mau-Mauing his own Flak Catchers

The most important function of a royal court is to deflect the resentment government always brings away from the monarch.  So it has been with the Roman Curia, long a byword for corruption, obstruction, and overall evil for Catholics both orthodox and heretical.  We all know the standard story about “the Curia” being a bunch of grumpy reactionaries who tried to stop Vatican II’s “renewal” of the Church (which, if true, would make them heroes).  However, even conservative Catholics often talk about “reforming” or “cleaning up” the Curia as a major priority for renewing the Church, as if any of that matters when the pope, most bishops, most priests, and nearly all the laity are surrendering to the world.  It is said that the Curia is corrupt, but that isn’t quite right.  The sodomite lobby is not corrupt, but principled, like foreign spies rather than like bribed officials.  And what should we expect, when the fags run the Church at every other level?  Probably the proportion of holy men serving God is higher in the Curia than outside of it.  If the Church at large didn’t approve their sin, the presence of a clique of sodomites in the Vatican would be bad for their souls but irrelevant to the functioning of the Church.

This doesn’t mean we should launch a propaganda campaign to rehabilitate the Curia’s reputation.  If we had the power to launch propaganda campaigns, there would be much more important messages to send, and as I said, the unpopularity of the Curia serves a useful social function.  But this is the reason it is so unseemly for the pope to court popularity by publicly berating his own flak catchers.

4 Responses

  1. Sixtus V created in the Curia the first modern bureaucracy. Its great merit was that it demanded no more of its members than assiduous mediocrity to operate tolerably efficiently.
    Alas! As the estimable Walter Bagehot observes, “We have all heard the saying that “Frederic the Great lost the battle of Jena.” It was the system which he had established—a good system for his wants and his times—which, blindly adhered to, and continued into a different age, put to strive with new competitors, brought his country to ruin.”
    The older method, whereby every monarch had a Sejanus, to carry out unpopular policies and who could then be thrown to the mob, had advantages over the a bureaucracy, where responsibility is inevitably collective and anonymous.

  2. Your point is that the Curia is actually a less usable scapegoat than a prominent minister. That sounds right, although the Curia certainly seems to serve the purpose reasonably well.

  3. […] our present set of less than perfectly stalwart Bishops. His makes a quick poke at Pope Francis Mau-Mauing his own Flak-catchers. Democracies tend to elect politicians, and even limiting the franchise to Cardinal Electors is not […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: