Fake news did not originate as a “thing” with the advent of the Trump campaign and presidency in the United States. Butler, it seems unwittingly, took someone named Du Pin’s critique of today’s saint, Pope Gregory VII, as a paean to the Pope’s greatness–either missing the upshot of the critique or else thinking that the readers would be fooled by the praise into believing that “Gosh, if even Du Pin thinks Gregory was ‘all that and a bag of chips’ then he must really have been great!!”

Here is the ostensible praise of Gregory that Du Pin wrote (as translated and quoted by Butler):

It must be acknowledged that pope Gregory VII. was an extraordinary genius, capable of great things; constant and undaunted in the execution; well versed in the constitution of his predecessors; zealous for the interests of the Holy See; an enemy to simony and libertinism; full of Christian thoughts and of zeal for the reformation of the clergy; and that there is not the least colour to think that he was not unblemished in his own morals.–This is the judgment which we suppose everyone will pass upon him who shall read over his letters with a disinterested and unprejudiced mind. They are penned with a great deal of eloquence, full of good matter, and embellished with noble and pious thoughts; and we boldly say that no pope since Gregory I. wrote such fine and strong letters as this Gregory did. (emphasis added)

So no one in over 400 years wrote such eloquent letters displaying such sterling character in reference to himself. Anyone reading what Gregory VII had to say about himself would certainly agree that Gregory had nothing but righteous things to say about his own morals, intentions, and actions, as well as his education. One might be tempted to think that he had the highest IQ, graduated at the top of his class, had the best memory of anyone ever, stood for the best values, was indeed a Christian among Christians, and worked harder than any other office holder ever.

Ummmm… sound familiar, anyone? Anyone?

One thing that Gregory VII did accomplish was to restrict the use of the title “Papa” or “Pope” to the Bishop of Rome (interestingly this had not been the case until the late 11th century). He was living in a time of great disputes and was elected amongst a host of popes and anti-popes (those who some called pope but who the eventual winners declared weren’t real popes), and he was eager to make sure that no one could claim the title of “Pope” except for him! (See Fahlbusch, Erwin (et al.); Bromiley (English translation), Geoffrey William, eds. (2005). “Pope, Papacy”. Evangelisches Kirchenlexikon [The encyclopedia of Christianity]. Vol 4, Grand Rapids, Mich.: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing. pp. 272–282.)

It’s understandable that Gregory’s singular accomplishment should net him sainthood, because it helped consolidate power and authority in the “right” place–which is institutionally significant.

Note though that even in Du Pin’s lush praise of Gregory’s self-depiction, there is not so much as a passing reference to the poor, the defenseless, the lonely, the outcast, the orphan, the victims or war or persecution…

Ummmm… sound familiar, anyone? Anyone?