One of the good things about the current pontificate is that it is forcing us to pick up where the serious theological (and especially ecclesiological) discussion left off, in 1870 when the Papal States fell to the Italian unifiers and Vatican I was interrupted – and never really finished.

Since then, we have had the flowering and fruition of the industrial revolution and the beginning and mid-game of the sexual revolution. We have had the invention of the telephone, the car, the airplane, the radio, the television, the internet, the smartphone, and social media. We have had two world wars, a major communist regime within Europe rise and fall, the establishment of the Lateran Pacts (creating “the Vatican”), and the fall of the Kingdom of Italy and the establishment of the Republic. We had another ecumenical council and a major liturgical reform.

We had pretty much uncontroversial papacies during that time… men who didn’t put the office through a stress test. Men who didn’t touch the boundaries of Pius IX’s wild assertion, “I am the tradition.”

I love Blessed Pope Pius IX. He was a wonderful man and a good pope. But he was not a perfect one. And the theological and ecclesiastical moment of Pius IX’s papacy is what is relevant right now for the most pressing ecclesiological questions.

We need to examine his actions and motivations critically. We need to look at the real history of how Pastor Aeternus came to be. (This includes the strange and sad story of the genius theologian Fr. Joseph Kleutgen, SJ, one of the main drafters – who was seduced several times, including by a bisexual murderous “woman priest” who claimed to be a visionary… If Netflix made up a story like this, you’d think it was over the top. But it’s real history. Pius IX resuscitated Kleutgen after he was sent into exile, the positive motivation for which was clear – he was the most brilliant mind available to defend and articulate Pius’ vision for the office of the papacy. He essentially owed the man his life.)

Let’s talk about Pastor Aeternus and what it really means. Let’s talk about its context. Let’s talk about Lamennais and his legacy. Let’s talk about Anton Günther, Father Bautain, Bl. Antonio Rosmini, the positive theologians of the Roman College, Luigi Taparelli, Matteo Liberatore, the start of Civiltà Cattolica, Leo XIII’s social and theological project, the rise of Achille Ratti (Pius XI) in the Ambrosiana and his diplomatic mission between the Pope and the “modernists” of Milan, the “ius exclusivae” (the involvement of certain LAY Catholic monarchs in conclaves, with the right to veto candidates, which was used in the conclave that elected Pius X), let’s talk about the German bishops and their Febronianism and their attitude towards Tübingen…

ALL OF THIS STUFF IS RELEVANT, and ALMOST NOBODY is talking about it, as they are either unaware of its relevance entirely, or they are just plain distracted by 1965 and the “current thing.”

Let’s change that, at least a bit, here on these pages, shall we?

I’m off to Ireland this evening… No real posts from me until next week. Just some fun stuff.

Have a penitential Friday and a happy weekend.

-Eamonn