A rival Pope?

Last year I discussed (OK, gloated over) the possibility of a schism in the Catholic Church as traditionalist believers foamed at the mouth over the possibility that the Amazon synod could lead to the Church accepting homosexuality and married priests (which, along with abortion, apparently form the evil trinity which constitutes Satan).  Already they are emerging as a rebellious faction within the Church, and some of them are starting to sound violently unhinged.  God's Church, they insist, just can't stop treating homos like shit, or allow Father Moe and Father Lester to get laid consensually so that they (one hopes) quit fiddling with the altar boys.  The traditionalists have faced a dilemma, though -- most of the hierarchy, including Pope Francis, is firmly in the reformist camp.  How can one uphold Catholic tradition by challenging the Pope and the rest of the clerical grandees to whom that same Catholic tradition requires deference?

This week a possible solution began to take shape.  Joseph Ratzinger, the former Pope Benedict XVI, broke the silence he has mostly imposed on himself since retiring from the Papacy in 2013.  He has, it emerged, co-authored a book defending the no-shagging-for-priests rule -- a frontal attack on one of the top items on the reformists' agenda.  It's also an implicit challenge to the authority of the current Pope Francis, in whose hands the decision about married priests rests.  Reformist leaders flew into an infuriated snit, while traditionalists rejoiced.

This roiling potpourri of Popery is unprecedented in the Church's modern history -- the last time a Pope resigned rather than dying in office, and thus hung around to shadow his successor's reign, was more than six hundred years ago.  Ratzinger commands enormous respect throughout the Church, and many traditionalists argue that he remains the true Pope, either because his resignation was invalid in some way or because Francis is a heretic and therefore illegitimate.

Ratzinger is not going to openly call for an uprising against Francis in the name of the Old Ways.  That's not how Popes do things.  As monarchs of a massively conservative institution, they are not revolutionaries.  But he's made himself a potential figurehead and rallying-point for the traditionalists, and that's all they need.  In fact, he'd probably be more effective as a reserved elder statesman issuing occasional encouraging hints (like his new book) than by wading into the fray.  It's more in line with how a Pope is supposed to behave.

I suspect the traditionalists will seize upon Ratzinger's book as a signal to launch their crusade against the reformists and against the very legitimacy of Francis.  Time, after all, is not on their side.  Ratzinger is 92, and more than half of the cardinals now entitled to vote for the next Pope were appointed by Francis, so that next Pope is likely to be another reformist.  If they don't act soon, they won't get a more promising opportunity in the foreseeable future.

And it's likely that Ratzinger really does support the traditionalist cause.  Why else would he write such a book -- with Robert Sarah, one of the few cardinals to have spoken out repeatedly and vociferously against the reformist agenda?  Again, he's not going to openly lead a revolution.  Popes don't do that.  But he's likely to encourage the traditionalists in whatever ways he considers appropriate to his position.  It's what he probably believes is the right thing to do -- and at 92, what does he have to lose?

The Methodists are already splitting into two denominations over the issue of homosexuality.  The Catholic Church can't do that since its members believe it to be the only "real" church, outside which there is no salvation.  Neither side can simply leave.  If there is a schism, the reformists and traditionalists will be two scorpions in a bottle.  And the whole institution's gravitas and power will suffer accordingly.