The Dictator Pope: the Inside Story of the Francis Papacy, by Marcantonio Colonna. Washington, D.C., Regnery Publishing 2018. 232 pp. $26.99

One is appalled at the behavior of the “dictator pope,” Jorge Bergoglio (to Roman Catholics, Pope Francis), that Marcantonio Colonna (pen name for H.J.A. Sure, who spent 2012-17 living in Rome) in his book sets forth. Bergoglio’s Jesuit Superior General (we are told early on in the book), objected to him being made a Bishop by JP II (32). This raises the question of discernment that clergy superiors have or do not have—especially when a man such as Bergoglio is elected Pope (after reaching the Cardinalate). Missing documents to which Colonna alludes proving this objection make his episcopal appointment even more puzzling.
This issue of clerical discernment, grave enough, is not as serious, however, as the charge in the book that Bergoglio gave part of Peter’s Pence to Hillary Clinton’s Presidential campaign (92). How is it that Benedict XVI’s successor sees fit to move out of the “lavish” papal apartments (for the guise of “poverty”) and yet give money to a woman suspected of financial dealings that to many the word “charitable” cannot possibly describe?
Of deeper concern is the book’s claim of this Pope to seek “mercy” in judgments on human conduct that his Church has settled on for centuries and which “mercy” would surely overturn—“mercy” as understood by Jorge Bergoglio. Such doctrinal aberrations emerge in the instance of Amoris Laetitia. This gives the pronouncement (suggestion?) by Bergoglio that Catholics, living in the objective state of sin (pursuing conjugal relations without an annulment after divorce) may be allowed the Eucharist because possibly they are not subjectively culpable for such actions. Circumstances in life inveigh against a harsh exclusion to Sacramental participation Bergoglio preaches—in the teeth of moral rulings that for centuries have forbidden civilly remarried divorced Catholics to receive the Eucharist.
Colonna cites the objections of various ecclesiastical hierarchs to Bergoglio’s Amoris (he has lowered the bar for moral conduct by arguing some are just inherently weaker morally), and Bergoglio’s attempt to silence them for the sake of his vision of a “merciful Church.” Walter Kaspar, German Cardinal long known for hostility to Church positions, is the ally Bergoglio smugly places as his buttress against Cardinals in personal reprisals unmatched in memory (172).
One is puzzled at Bergoglio’s entrée into climate science (for which he has neither training nor remit), and his peculiar interpretation of immigration politics. The Marxist belief that “what’s yours is also mine” gives Bergoglio’s view of the protocommunity Church’s “share and share alike” practice the impetus to push his migratory views, though his own Vatican has walls surrounding it to protect against occupation by others.
The reader is given a glance at Bergoglio’s statement on same-sex behavior, with the background of ephebophiliac clergy (one a highly placed Vatican Monsignor) allowed to stay as priests. For sure they can seek a prayerful retreat from the world instead of being laicized and defrocked. Meanwhile for decades bastard sons were not given access to the sacrament of Holy Orders.
On the other hand, Bergoglio’s view on same-sex behavior “Who am I to judge?” fails to give the basis for his views, though scholars have written the pastoral approach by Rome and its priests has ignored much that is biblical. Aquinas’ doctrine that the natural end of coitus is a child meets difficulty when what is by nature he states occurs always or for the most part, while a child does not occur from coitus except during a monthly narrow window that Nature has ordained. Speaking of same-sex behavior as “unnatural” has further difficulty when if for moral theology the primary end of coitus is a child, how is it that the end is achieved only rarely during a month? How can something rare be primary? Biblical scholars have argued whether the “man” referred to in Leviticus as lying with another “man” is not in fact a boy given that the Hebrew word there can refer to a boy (that question of ephebophilia/pedophila again). Homosexuality universally practiced would mean the end of the human race and in this lies probable reason for is prohibition.
Be these issues (brought up here only because of Bergoglio’s controversial pronouncements on the matter) as they may, Bergoglio appears in confusion regarding his “mercy” panoply that moves to his acceptance (or de-emphasis) of ephebophilia amongst his clergy. Surely sexual pleasure sought in a young man by a priest does not comport with the design of the human being as worthy of so much more than being an object to satisfy clerical lust.
This makes Bergoglio’s appointment of Archbishop Vincenzo Paglia, with his fancy for homoerotic murals (132, 133) as head of Academia Pro Vita and John Paul II Institute for Studies on Marriage and the Family modestly bizarre. Paglia’s selection of euthanasia lite Anglican Nigel Beggar to that commission seems to have enjoyed Bergoglio’s stance of “studied ambiguity” “to find new paths to follow” in Rome’s new world of “merciful indulgence.”
One returns to the issue of discernment of a clerical superior, and how repeatedly bad men are ordained. No one has answered for this yet, and Bergoglio does not seem to think it an issue. His whole episcopal hierarchy in Chile recently offered their resignation to him over child abuse. How ironic since he has tolerated young man sex for those he still keeps in authority.
One wonders if there is any link in Bergoglio’s behavior to his rabid dismemberment of the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate that Colonna recounts with this failure of clergy discernment by superiors entrusted with priestly formation. This canonically approbated order’s use of the Latin Liturgy (loathed by Bergoglio) brought lies and charges of thievery against them which charges the Italian courts dismissed with orders of financial restitution to the Franciscans.
Bergoglio’s peculiar interactions against the Order of Malta raise eyebrows once more as to what exactly this Bergoglio is. Especially given that a Curial prelate warned the Order “You need to realize that Pope Francis is a ruthless and vindictive dictator, and if you make the slightest attempt at resistance he will destroy the Order” (167). Where is the panoply of mercy Bergoglio uses as a front for his desire to change Church teachings to his own liking? Where is it? It isn’t anywhere except in what apparently Bergoglio declares, no matter the opposition of his Cardinals and laity.
Comments by Colonna such as “access to the papal presence is left to the whim of Pope Francis” (174), “the prelates who enjoy favor are psychophants” (175), and “it is not in Francis’s style to leave anyone secure” (175) leave one with disgust at the behavior of this man in the Vatican. Even if the account by Colonna is only one quarter true, one does not get the read that Jorge is a holy man.
One even wonders how it is that he reached the papacy if the Paraclete is guiding Christ’s church on earth. The reader looks at Bergoglio in this book and comes away with the impression that Jorge should never have been made Pope, that his papacy is a regrettable span of rule. While the Eastern Church has not recognized the Roman pontiff for centuries, one wonders if there is not some insight given it by the same Paraclete in its non-recognition, that Paraclete Whom Christ promised would be present to the faithful to the end of the world.

*