Rome – Today there is much talk about the need for bishops to be “close to the people,” “poor,” “simple,” “Franciscan.” Empty words. Stock phrases fit for the press and for those who need to project an image of themselves. And some bishops have understood this very well. But this is hardly the real issue.
The true drama of today’s episcopate is apathy. A blindness to concrete reality, an embarrassing inability to understand the needs of the clergy, and above all, a disheartening lack of will to make use of their talents. The issue is not whether a bishop wears a gold, silver, or hidden pectoral cross; nor whether he dons four meters of lace or a polyester alb. These are ecclesiastical gossip matters, interesting only to a few repressed laypeople or bored priests.
We used to have bishops who wore mitres sixty centimeters high, but who knew their clergy, loved them, and understood their struggles. They were able to govern with firmness, but without abusing their authority. Today, such figures have virtually disappeared. The crisis of new episcopal appointments is now obvious. Pope Francis has chosen young figures, often with personal and professional paths that are at best questionable, entrusting them with dioceses now led with either a manipulative and autocratic style or an inept and detached approach.
Some bishops, during meetings with the clergy, speak of “great reforms,” announce imminent appointments and changes, only to deny it all the next day. This is not confusion: it is calculation. They observe reactions, measure responses, study who speaks up. It’s a manipulative game, designed to catch you off guard. Because ultimately, you are not meant to have a living relationship with the faithful, nor to be respected or loved by your community: if you are, they feel threatened. It is manipulation, plain and simple. In a Church that never stops invoking the word “abuse” — almost always and exclusively referring to minors — one is careful never to speak of abuses of power and authority. Yet these happen daily.
The vast majority of episcopal appointments since 2013 have placed young men in office who relate to their presbyterate using the same distorted dynamics they lived in seminary: “who is my enemy, who is my friend,” “who speaks well of me and who speaks badly,” “who can I dominate and who not,” “who misses my predecessor and who doesn’t.” Such an approach is already serious in a priest — a clear sign of poor and toxic formation — but it is entirely unacceptable in a Bishop, who should be the first to build communion, not destroy it.
Even more embarrassing is how many of these young bishops treat their predecessors: as obstacles, annoyances to ignore or — worse — humiliate, openly showing them disrespect. A disgraceful attitude that says much about the human and ecclesial level of certain profiles now promoted to the episcopate.
Divide et impera
There are bishops who act like “buddies” with their priests, but then spend their time speaking ill of one to the other, revealing personal facts, making poisonous remarks, and sowing judgments that fuel division within the presbyterate. They pit priests against each other, cultivating suspicion and mistrust. Then there are those who collect gossip, slander, and lies — and use them as weapons against their own clergy, fully aware that these accusations have never been verified. A method that is not at all new and faithfully replicates the style of the one who appointed them: he too governed the Church using suspicion and confrontation, dividing in order to rule with apparent calm. As the Latins said: divide et impera.
Before the public, they present themselves as “bishops in short-sleeved clerical shirts with crosses in their pockets”: marketing operations, nothing more. A contrived closeness, while in reality they govern like despots, promoting trusted friends and compliant laity who, in some cases, even bring entire dioceses to financial ruin. Everything is focused on an appearance of peace, a superficial balance. And when a collaborator dares to point out critical issues — corruption, worn-out dynamics, favoritism, clergy dissatisfaction — their only concern is that it doesn’t leak out, that no one gets too agitated. The priority is to preserve the image. But wasn’t it precisely this kind of hypocrisy that most outraged Jesus of Nazareth in the Pharisees?
The Palmieri Case
The case of the former Vicegerent of the Diocese of Rome, Gianpiero Palmieri — now Archbishop-Bishop of San Benedetto del Tronto-Ripatransone-Montalto and Ascoli Piceno — is emblematic. An “important” title (sic!), because — although removed from the Vicariate of Rome due to clashes with the Secretary General — Pope Francis still left him the title of Archbishop.
Palmieri likes to appear smiling, calm, serene. But that forced smile, teeth on display, conceals an emotional instability that has already surfaced multiple times with both laypeople and clergy. Even his soothing voice, supposedly reassuring, ends up putting people to sleep. Yet when something doesn’t go his way, he wastes no time in reflection and immediately lashes out in anger. And while preaching peace, he never spares jabs at those he labels “enemies,” even when no one has ever treated him as such.
It is paradoxical: he was ousted by the very system that has eroded the Church over the past twelve years, yet continues to lash out at those who told the truth about it. But Palmieri is a man of lights and shadows. And, as often happens, his episcopal appointment was not the result of merit but of relationships needing reciprocation. He does not like free voices that dare to point out even his contradictions: like many others, he demands blind loyalty. He cannot accept the complexity of reality. You’re either with him or against him. It’s either black or white. The problem, however, is not his personality in itself, but his way of governing: unable to build healthy relationships with clergy and lay communities. Palmieri thinks ideologically and lacks a solid cultural foundation. He is one of many bishops who prefer to surround themselves with loyalists rather than thoughtful men. Ending up, inevitably, alone.
Rupnik’s Disciples at De Donatis House
Silere non possum had already denounced the case of Father Ivan Bresciani, welcomed into the diocese by Palmieri. Bresciani had left the Jesuit Order in the midst of the Rupnik scandal. We are not speaking here of the abuse cases — for which no trial has yet taken place, by explicit will of Bergoglio — but of serious acts of disobedience. Father Marco Ivan Rupnik had received ministerial restrictions from the Jesuits. Father Ivan Bresciani, who led him at the Aletti Center community, not only never enforced these restrictions but continued to cover for him.
A priest who always did as he pleased, outside any authority. When he left the Order in protest alongside Rupnik, he was welcomed by Palmieri under pressure from Angelo De Donatis. And if that fact alone is disturbing, even more so is the Archbishop-Bishop of Ascoli Piceno’s decision to force the clergy to be “catechized” by Ivan Bresciani. As is known, when a priest requests incardination in a diocese, the bishop may grant it ad experimentum. But to propose this man as a model, to let him preach at retreats, to present him as a spiritual guide is an insult to common sense and — we dare say — cries out to heaven for justice.
This is how things now work in the Church: figures who should not even hold a public role are offered as models, while priests who have lived in obedience and formed themselves seriously — precisely to acquire the tools to accompany their confrères — are marginalized. Because behind it all are power, money, favors to be repaid, appointments to be returned. And so, the ecclesial body has become hypocritical and profoundly untrustworthy.
Jubilee of Priests, Retreat for the Laity
For the Jubilee of Priests (June 26–27, Rome), Palmieri has arranged for the meditation for his clergy to be led by none other than Father Ivan Bresciani. The priests will be able to stay at the “Maria Consolatrice” spirituality house in Santa Severa (RM), a facility connected — surprise! — to the Aletti Center. Naturally, the accommodation fees will benefit this entity, which “so badly needs” the money of the Marche-region priests.
It doesn’t end there. In August, in Ripatransone, Palmieri has planned a retreat for the laity, once again led by Bresciani.
The Unanswered Questions
And so the same question remains on the table: what model of priesthood is being proposed? And what model of Christian? The model of blind obedience, imposed arrogantly on those who are weaker and still believe in the bishop’s authority as father and pastor?
Because this is how it works today: if you are weak, bishops crush you, abuse their authority, manipulate your conscience, and rely on your silence. If you are strong, they become meek little lambs, treating you with reverence. Is this what Our Lord taught us? Must we pound our fists to earn respect?
In San Benedetto del Tronto and Ascoli Piceno, many priests are tired. Tired of seeing unacceptable models being pushed. Does the clergy of the dioceses of Ascoli Piceno and San Benedetto del Tronto-Ripatransone-Montalto really lack valid “elements” to be promoted on such occasions? The priests are tired of a Church that demands one-way obedience. Tired of having to bow their heads before those who, perhaps, should be the first to undertake a serious path of discernment and ask forgiveness for what they have permitted, concealed, and covered up.
d.L.B.
Silere non possum