The newly released Epstein files show that Jeffrey Epstein and Steve Bannon discussed opposition to Pope Francis, including a move that Bannon claimed would ‘take down Francis.’,The newly released Epstein files show that Jeffrey Epstein and Steve Bannon discussed opposition to Pope Francis, including a move that Bannon claimed would ‘take down Francis.’
22 days ago
Newly released U.S. Department of Justice documents from Jeffrey Epstein's files reveal discussions involving the Vatican and Pope Francis.1 2
These include text messages and emails linking Epstein, Steve Bannon, and a proposed film adaptation of Frédéric Martel's book In the Closet of the Vatican.2
The book claims widespread homosexuality among Vatican clergy, fueling conservative backlash.2
Steve Bannon proposed Epstein as executive producer for a documentary based on Martel's 2019 book during Paris meetings.2
Bannon equated Pope Francis with geopolitical foes like the Clintons, Xi Jinping, and the EU in messages to Epstein.2
Martel confirmed Bannon's enthusiasm but denied any deal or Epstein contact.2
The discussions occurred amid conservative resistance to Francis' papacy since 2013.2
Critics opposed Francis' emphasis on mercy for divorced, remarried, and LGBTQ Catholics, highlighted in the 2014-2015 Synod on the Family.2
Key events included dubia from cardinals like Raymond Burke and Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò's accusations over Theodore McCarrick.2
Cardinal Burke distanced himself from Bannon-linked groups opposing the film project.2
Epstein made crude jokes about inviting Pope Francis for a massage during the pope's 2015 U.S. visit near his New York home.2
Epstein showed interest in Vatican finances, referencing scandals like Banco Ambrosiano and Roberto Calvi's death.2
Francis had reformed Vatican finances via the Secretariat for the Economy under Cardinal George Pell.2
An email discussed blockchain experiments in Vatican City as a potential "big hack" with cybersecurity researcher Vincenzo Iozzo.2
An FBI report mentions an "Epstein’s hacker" possibly holding a Vatican passport, but no evidence links Pope Francis to hacking.2
Media claims of Vatican cyber operations against Epstein are unfounded.2
The files portray the Vatican as a geopolitical pressure point in finance, media, and politics for Epstein's circle.2
No coordinated anti-Francis campaign materialized; the film was never made, and Church dissent proceeded independently.2
The disclosures highlight how even religious institutions attract strategic interest in global power dynamics.1 2
Investigate how Catholic conservatives influence Pope Francis’s public image
Catholic conservatives have played a multifaceted role in shaping Pope Francis's public image, often serving as both defenders against media distortions and critics highlighting theological tensions. Drawing from Catholic intellectual discourse, their influence manifests in nuanced interpretations of his statements, historical debates over Church engagement with modernity, and cautious endorsements that emphasize continuity with tradition amid pastoral innovations. This analysis reveals conservatives not as monolithic opponents but as contributors to a balanced perception, countering secular simplifications while voicing concerns over perceived shifts in moral theology and liturgy.
A key strand of conservative influence traces back to longstanding tensions in American Catholicism, where figures associated with traditionalism have critiqued optimistic alliances between faith and liberal democracy—alliances that some saw Pope Francis as continuing or complicating. In the 1980s, conservatives like Richard John Neuhaus of First Things championed John Courtney Murray's vision of Catholic compatibility with the American polity, advocating natural law reasoning to support traditional morality, democratic capitalism, and anti-Communism in coalition with non-Catholics. Opponents, linked to David L. Schindler of Communio, argued for irreconcilable "logics" between American "freedom" and Catholic truth, urging the Church to transform culture by fidelity to its own fullness rather than seeking a "seat at the table." This debate has evolved into "Catholic postliberalism," a radicalized stance among traditional Catholics amid declining optimism about U.S. prospects post-1980s. Conservatives critical of Francis often frame his emphasis on mercy and periphery as echoing Murray-esque pragmatism, potentially diluting doctrinal rigor, thus influencing his image as a "pastoral" pope at odds with rigid traditionalism.
Conservative voices have significantly shaped Francis's image by rebutting sensationalized media portrayals, particularly his 2013 press conference remark, "Who am I to judge?"—widely misconstrued as doctrinal laxity. Dominican Father Dominic Legge, O.P., clarifies that the full context addressed a homosexual priest striving to follow Church teaching, aligning with the Catechism's distinction: "Love the sinner, and condemn the sin." Legge notes the statement's mythic status in media like The New Yorker, which ignored Vatican clarifications and Francis's own reaffirmations. This conservative intervention portrays Francis not as a relativist but as upholding tradition, much like St. Thomas Aquinas on judging acts versus persons. Similarly, media histories highlight how negative images of Benedict XVI—fueled by critics like Hans Küng—contrasted with Francis's favorable press, with journalists like Andreas Englisch admitting to dramatic manipulations that pitted popes against each other. Conservatives like Legge thus influence public perception by insisting on contextual fidelity, mitigating portrayals of Francis as a revolutionary.
Prominent conservatives have bolstered Francis's image as a humble, evangelistic shepherd, evoking St. Francis of Assisi. Archbishop Charles J. Chaput, O.F.M. Cap., describes him as a "Jesuit with a Franciscan heart," blending Ignatian sophistication with mendicant serenity, appealing in an anti-intellectual age. Chaput praises gestures like foot-washing for prisoners and critiques of "Lent without Easter," while noting his popularity stems from embracing the poor without overt condemnations—yet warns of challenges on marriage and sexuality. R.R. Reno interprets "Who am I to judge?" through a Franciscan lens of demanding solidarity and consolation, not affirmation, distinguishing it from secular readings. Reno highlights Francis's renunciation of isolation and unpredictability as charismatic, though worrisome for institutional continuity. These endorsements from figures like Chaput humanize Francis, influencing conservative audiences to see him as orthodox amid mercy.
Conservative critiques have also cast shadows, amplifying perceptions of rupture. Thomas Berg identifies a "crisis of conscience" in post-Vatican II moral theology, exacerbated by Amoris Laetitia (2016), hailed by some like Cardinal Parolin as a "new paradigm" prioritizing accompaniment. Revisionists' conscience-centered approach, Berg argues, risks autonomy over objective truth, with Francis's emphasis intensifying the tipping point. On liturgy, the Congregation for Divine Worship's Responsa ad Dubia (2021) on Traditionis Custodes defends Francis's restrictions on pre-conciliar rites as safeguarding unity under Paul VI and John Paul II's books, decrying divisions exploiting the Eucharist. Figures like Cardinal Raymond Leo Burke—former Prefect of the Apostolic Signatura and critic of synodality—exemplify conservative pushback, their prominence shaping narratives of Francis as centralizing against tradition.
In sum, Catholic conservatives influence Francis's public image dialectically: defending against media caricatures, offering sympathetic readings rooted in tradition, yet critiquing innovations in conscience, synodality, and liturgy as risks to unity and truth. This dynamic fosters a perception of Francis as merciful yet magisterial, preventing both adulation and demonization.