(LifeSiteNews) — Anyone who wants to understand what is currently happening in the Church in German-speaking countries – and, in a similar way, in other countries too – should read Heinrich Heine.

This gifted satirist is not a Catholic reference author, but fools have always spoken the truth. In his 1833 work Die romantische Schule (The Romantic School), the writer recalls the “old Jesuits.” By this he means those theological sophists from the mid-17th century whom Blaise Pascal criticized in his Lettres provinciales. This French mathematician and philosopher accused them of undermining the Church’s moral teachings with demagogic sophistry in order to make the Church palatable to the powerful.

Heine remarks:

Never has the human spirit devised greater combinations than those by which the old Jesuits sought to preserve Catholicism. But they did not succeed, because they were enthusiastic only about preserving Catholicism and not about Catholicism itself. They did not really care much about the latter in and of itself; therefore, they sometimes profaned the Catholic principle itself in order to bring it to power; they came to terms with paganism, with the rulers of the earth, and promoted their lusts (Book 2, III, last section).

It is not difficult to see that most bishops in German-speaking countries today are the reincarnations of the “old Jesuits.” They also exist in some other countries. They are not so much interested in the integrity of the faith as they are in preserving the structures that it once produced. That is why they strive to fraternize with the neo-pagans and the powerful, including those of the fourth estate, the media, at the expense of what they should actually represent as witnesses of Jesus Christ.

Countering this policy with theological arguments, as exemplified by the initiative called “Neuer Anfang” (New Beginning) in Germany, is not only commendable but also necessary. But in these (moral) theological debates, one must not forget the big picture. Otherwise, one gets lost in the details.

And the situation is more complex than one might think. For in the public perception, the Apostolic See currently stands against the majority of German bishops when it comes to the “Synodal Path.” But the question arises: who appointed the bishops who are rowing against the Apostolic See? Correct: the Apostolic See. Only the appointment of the seats of Basel and St. Gallen (Switzerland) cannot be blamed on the Pope. For there, he can only approve the election of the person presented to him by the cathedral chapters.

In reality, the Apostolic See is not a monolith. It is itself divided, which is concealed from the outside world as far as possible. However, the rift became visible once in recent Church history, during the conflict over German pregnancy counseling in the 1990s. The trap that the state set for the Church was this: abortion remains exempt from punishment if the woman can prove with a certificate that she has sought counseling beforehand. This “counseling certificate” is not equivalent to abortion, but it is an essential prerequisite for it to take place without punishment.

The Church was now invited and implored by influential political forces to issue this “certificate” in its counseling centers. The Church would thus have remained in agreement with the state. But from a moral-theological point of view, it was clear that by cooperating, the Church would have indirectly approved of abortion and collaborated with evil.

The media portrayed the conflict that the counseling certificate brought into the Church not only as a conflict among the bishops (Archbishop Johannes Dyba of Fulda against the rest of the German Bishops’ Conference), but also as a conflict within the Apostolic See: Ratzinger versus Sodano. And indeed, the diplomatic department of the Apostolic See – the “Sodanos” – feared that a rejection of the “certificate” would jeopardize the concordats and church taxes. And for this, many “Sodanos” were prepared to seriously compromise the Church in terms of moral theology. In the end, Pope John Paul II listened to then-Cardinal Ratzinger. The German dioceses were not allowed to issue “certificates” in their counseling centers. (And the feared break with the state did not happen after all).

READ: What the Epstein Files get wrong about Pope Benedict XVI’s resignation

Today, the “Sodanos” and the “Ratzingers” are once again at odds with each other. The former are as numerous and influential in the Vatican as they were in the past. The latter are weakened, not least because the heart of the prefect of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith does not beat so much for the purity of doctrine, because it is filled with an obsession for other things. Pope Leo XIV has therefore been meeting repeatedly in recent months with representatives of the “Ratzingers” who come from outside the Roman Curia: Bishops Stefan Oster and Rudolf Voderholzer, Prof. Katharina Westerhorstmann, representatives of “Neuer Anfang” (New Beginning) and the newspaper Die Tagespost, which is not only nominally Catholic.

But the dilemma of a divided Vatican remains. Even though the Dicastery for Bishops proposes bishops for appointment to the Pope, the process of appointing bishops is handled by the respective nuncio, the representative of the “Sodanos.” Among the nuncios, there are undoubtedly some who belong to the “Ratzinger” team. They are courageous exceptions, such as Monsignor Nikola Eterović (the actual nuncio in Germany). One may wonder whether he has really been heard by the Apostolic See in recent years or whether he has merely been used. But regardless of that, the entire apparatus to which the nuncios belong is geared toward contacts and deals with governments. As a result, for a long time now, bishops have been selected primarily on the basis of whether they can guarantee to maintain the – often merely superficial – peace with “paganism, with the powers that be on earth.”

Pope Benedict tried to change the priorities of the questionnaire that is sent out in advance of each bishop appointment. Previously, after general questions about the person, the first question asked was about their acceptance in the ecclesiastical and social mainstream. Now, the first question asked was about the candidate’s orthodoxy. This is cosmetic, but it indicates the weightings. In the meantime, streamlined populism is once again the highest maxim.

This leads to an episcopate as we know it in German-speaking countries. It is appointed by the Apostolic See and then works against it in matters of doctrine and morality. It is absurd, but that is how it is. However, the consequences are dramatic. They are increasingly resulting in a de facto horizontal schism. For the bishops who, out of fear and opportunism, act in a left-wing, green, rainbow-colored manner in German-speaking countries are increasingly losing the respect of the priests and faithful of their dioceses. One may wonder who still listens to them. For with their opportunism and cowardice, often disguised as “prudence,” they repel those who still want to remain faithful in post-Christian societies.

The result is the bleeding dry of dioceses and their seminaries, as well as parishes. Those who can save themselves flee as lay people to parishes or priests who are trying to stay the course at the local level. Others, including prospective candidates for the priesthood, go to religious communities that are better able to evade the episcopal course. Or they turn to the world of the Traditional Latin Mass, where the liturgy helps to preserve the faith better.

Lay people are also increasingly beginning to get involved in initiatives that are protected against the bishops under civil law, for example in the area of the right to life or in private church media initiatives. This is valuable. But it shows that the bishops in German-speaking countries are in danger of losing the remaining faithful. At the same time, the bishops’ strategy of ingratiation is failing, as was the case with the “old Jesuits.” This is because it does not win back post-Christians. They even secretly despise the bishops for their opportunism, and in some cases, this is now also happening publicly.

READ: Archbishop Viganò offers ‘full support’ for SSPX to consecrate bishops without Vatican approval

As “pragmatists,” to put it cautiously, the “Sodanos” should actually realize that they themselves will become irrelevant if the Church bleeds to death under their policies. Even if only out of self-interest, they should correct their ruinous course. However, as the recent appointments of bishops far beyond the German-speaking world show, there is no sign of enlightenment.

What will happen under Leo XIV remains to be seen. As an American, he comes from a background that is unfamiliar with state churches and the struggle to preserve them. This could be significant, because he too stands between the “Ratzingers” and the “Sodanos.”

It should also be clear to him that the Church in the U.S. continues to flourish compared to the Church in German-speaking countries, even though both live in societies that are corroded by woke left-liberalism. The reason for this is that, due to the separation of church and state in the U.S., it makes no sense to rely on “old Jesuits.” For reality proves even today that it is the fearless witness of faith that attracts people, not the Church’s loyalty to governments, its state-like position, or its cozy relationship with the left-wing, green, woke movement. Heinrich Heine put it this way in his usual pointedly satirical manner: “No life can blossom from a lie, and God cannot be saved by the devil.”