Left, Mons. Carlo Vigano; right, Mons Jean-Francois Lantheaume
Ex-Vatican ambassador affirms
affirms Vigano testimony
by Rodney Pelletier
August 27, 2018
DETROIT (ChurchMilitant.com) - Monsignor Jean-François Lantheaume, the temporary Vatican ambassador to the United States in July 2011, is confirming Abp. Carlo Viganò's explosive testimony regarding Pope Francis's complicity in covering up for homosexual predator bishops.
Speaking to Catholic News Agency (CNA), Lantheaume is declaring, "Viganò said the truth. That's all."
On Facebook, however, he went into greater detail, asserting, "[The testimony] says the whole truth. I am a witness. The nuncio Viganò is the most honest Prelate that I know in the Vatican."
He cautions, "These may be the last lines I write… if I am found chopped up by a chainsaw and my body sunk in concrete, the police and the hacks will say that we have to consider the hypothesis of suicide!!!"
Earlier in the exchange, which is in French, Lantheaume responds to comments, adding "[The storm is] worse than you think, ready yourself."
When another person adds, "You're not reassuring us dear father!" he responds,
"My goal is not to reassure you, but to tell the truth! Bishops are neither unscathed nor untouchable: they are all just as much sinners as are others!!! let it be said once and for all… they do not enjoy papal infallibility!"
He goes on further,
"But of course as soon as one tries to tell the truth, you have your head cut off, or you 'have a bad spirit'…. it's been over twenty years since I said what I had to say…. now believe what you want, but I can tell you as being the direct witness that Viganò is telling the truth: I was a direct witness!"
As a member of the Vatican's diplomatic corps, Lantheaume was a direct witness to the "stormy conversation" referenced in Viganò's testimony between the previous papal ambassador, Abp. Pietro Sambi, and then-archbishop of Washington, D.C. Theodore McCarrick.
Lantheaume took over as the Vatican's temporary diplomat after the death of Sambi, who was the Vatican ambassador to the United States from 2005 until his death in July 2011. Viganò was subsequently appointed to succeed him. In his 11-page testimony published Sunday, Vigano wrote:
Monsignor Jean-François Lantheaume, then first Counsellor of the Nunciature in Washington and Chargé d'Affaires ad interim after the unexpected death of Nuncio Sambi in Baltimore, told me when I arrived in Washington — and he is ready to testify to it — about a stormy conversation, lasting over an hour, that Nuncio Sambi had with Cardinal McCarrick whom he had summoned to the Nunciature. Monsignor Lantheaume told me that "the Nuncio's voice could be heard all the way out in the corridor."
Curiously, Viganò refers to Sambi's death and that of his predecessor, Abp. Gabriel Montalvo, as "premature."
Since Viganò's testimony was released on Saturday night, others have stepped forward to confirm its contents.
Father Carlos Martin commented that a source from within the Vatican says Viganò's testimony "has hit the Curia like an atomic bomb."
Martin adds that, in the Vatican, Viganò was a "highly respected individual who had been regularly promoted for doing his job well."
He further added that his source in the Vatican noted, "The feeling in the Curia right now is that the response of Viganò's enemies will to try to discredit him personally, both because of the impeccability of Viganò's character and the impossibility of his having interpreted the facts incorrectly."
He continues, "Their only hope will be to try to take energy away from the perversion and corruption that he uncovered. They will likely state that he is a bitter man who is seeking personal aggrandizement after having been exiled from Rome. When this occurs, don't buy into it. Viganò is retired. He has nothing personally to gain from this."
Since Viganò's testimony went public, two cardinals have personally and confidentially confirmed to Church Militant the testimony is correct in its assessment.
Cardinal Raymond Burke commented to LifeSiteNews, "The corruption and filth which have entered into the life of the Church must be purified at their roots," adding, "The declarations made by a prelate of the authority of Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò must be totally taken to heart by those responsible in the Church."
He also called for an investigation into "each declaration … according to the Church's time-tried procedural law."
Bishop Joseph Strickland of the diocese of Tyler, Texas, responded to Viganò's testimony on Sunday morning, calling it "credible" and requiring all his priests "to include this notice in the masses on August 26, and post it on their websites and other social media immediately."
On his blogsite, Aldo Maria Valli has a riveting account of how Mons. Vigano - though their prior contacts had been few and only at public events - sought him out on at least three occasions prior to the publication of his testimony on August 26, the first two occasions being like reconnaissance missions until Vigano told him that he was one of five writers whom he had chosen to entrust with his testimony about what he knew about the Vatican cover-up, starting with the pope, regarding now ex-Cardinal Theodore McCarrick's 'open secret' double life as sex predator and papal confidante. A GoogleTranslation has been posted but I will try to provide my own translation later.
https://www.aldomariavalli.it/2018/08/27/cosi-monsignor-vigano-mi-ha-dato-il-suo-memoriale-ed-ecco-perche-ho-deciso-di-pubblicarlo/
Meanwhile, Church Militant has taken the lead among Catholic websites for openly calling on the reigning pope to resign. To think that not too long ago, Catholics who believe in Canon 212's provision that concerned laity have a duty to speak out against erring and faithless pastors were outraged that Michael Voris of The Vortex proclaimed it was all right for us to denounce everybody else but not the pope! And now, after all has been said and done, he has come to this. The statement below had been preceded earlier by banners like this accompanying each CM story on the Vigano expose:
August 27, 2018
Given the horror that has increasingly seized hold of the Church these past 50 years — and which has climbed to unimaginable heights under the pontificate of Pope Francis — now is the appropriate moment for the laity to offer comment, which we are rightly allowed to do according to canon law.
As many people know, Church Militant has taken great pains in the past to avoid public criticism of Pope Francis with regard to various confusing theological writings, interviews and off-the-cuff remarks.
Out of respect for the office of Pope, and so as not to induce scandal, we have dutifully left the work of publicly analyzing his theological content to those above us, more qualified to address those things specifically and those responses we have covered in great detail.
Likewise, we have made a point of steering far clear of any disrespectful or uncharitable comments denigrating the Holy Father owing to his theological pronouncements — but that was in the arena of theology.
The homosexual clerical sex abuse scandal and resulting cover-up is not theological at its foundation, but moral.
And in this arena, the laity are absolutely duty-bound to speak up, for while we may not all be theologians, each one of us is a moral being and will be judged by Our Blessed Lord on how faithfully we have lived in accord with that objective morality.
With that said,
Pope Francis, Holy Father, for the salvation of your own soul, you must step down from the Chair of Peter and do so immediately.
You have treated too many of the faithful with coldness and callousness, abusing the power of your office in regard to their sufferings over this horrendous unconscionable evil which you have facilitated.
On multiple occasions, you have violated your own standard of zero tolerance when it comes to cover-up bishops. You are doing it with Donald Wuerl who covered up for predator priests.
You should have, more than a week ago, stripped him of his red hat, yet he still holds the office of cardinal with your blessing — a man who covered up a homosexual priest gay pornography ring while he was bishop of Pittsburgh, and who Viganò says is lying.
You have protected abusers of power, of office, and worst of all, young adults and even children. You have covered up for them. In some cases, you have drawn them close to yourself and taken them on as trusted advisors.
And now, given the revelations over the weekend from Abp. Viganò's testimony — a testimony you do not even deny — it is now clear that you yourself are one of the cover-up bishops because you directly covered up for an actual predator, Theodore McCarrick, until the media heat got too great to withstand.
You have violated your own zero tolerance policy as it pertains specifically to your own actions and omissions.
You have drawn into the temple of God, the most holy of sanctuaries, wicked men who have both raped and covered up the rape of innocents.
Your hypocritical and shameless parade of empty words of sorrow and pleading for forgiveness are an egregious affront to those who believe in God, because you lack all sincerity.
How many trips are you going to take, paid for by the faithful, where you continue to meet with victims, supposedly mourn with them and then return to Rome and conspire with those who abused them or created the environment for the abuse — or both?
The men you have surrounded yourself with have no supernatural faith, for one with supernatural faith would tremble and drop dead of fright at the thought of being judged for what they — and now you — have done. A man who aids, abets, protects and promotes such wicked, sexually perverted and predatory men is not fit for the Chair of St. Peter — he is fit for far worse.
These wolves in shepherds' clothing brutalize and sodomize the sheep, and you promote them. They have no fear of God, and with each passing day, it appears that neither do you.
Any other bishop acting as you have would have been removed immediately for abuse of power and the gravest negligence of office under canon law.
Catholics hold, as you know well, that the Pope is judged on Earth by no man except God, but in conscience, have you so quickly forgotten that in the case of yourself, you are judged?
With all sincerity and concern for your immortal soul, Holy Father, recalling how you are an old man who may not wake to see the next day, your eternal life hangs in the balance. Confess the truth before you stand before Jesus Christ.
You can duck and weave questions from the press on Viganò's testimony, and offer clever retorts to the media that sidestep the testimony of your own ambassador, but oh how you cannot do that with Almighty God.
Church Militant has independently confirmed with at least two different cardinals that the charges in the Viganò statement are absolutely true — and this is in addition to Cdl. Burke's support of Viganò.
You, Holy Father, as every Catholic must do when in a state of sin, should accuse and judge yourself guilty, now, while you still have air in your lungs, and dispose of the wicked heretics and sodomites you have shamelessly collected around yourself so that they may never have a role in electing your successor.
Then as your last act in office, you should resign the papacy and spare Holy Mother Church and the People of God any further harm and evil that you could inflict upon them!
You are tearing the Body of Christ apart by elevating the very men whose crimes cry out to Heaven for vengeance, who never will stop because they have no supernatural faith.
Your actions and omissions have left you unable to reign over the Church in any meaningful way. You have no credibility, no moral authority, not a shred of decency left after having covered up one scandal after another, until the day you go to your own grave.
You had better hope that this is not the state you die in, or you will be delivered over to the demons for an everlasting death of agony and torment in the unquenchable fire, for popes are not immune from risk of damnation, whether you believe in Hell or not.
And when you would next encounter the henchmen you have promoted in this life, each of you will rip and tear one another apart for all eternity, having contributed to the damnation of each other as well as innocents while on Earth.
Whatever pact of evil you may have created with one another, or rationalized, it will be your everlasting shame and agony when you are plunged into the pit where the fire is never quenched and the worm dieth not.
You still have time, Holiness. Admit your tremendous failings, sweep the wicked hirelings from the College of Cardinals, resign your office and give us back the Holy Church that we love and your sycophantic minions loathe.
Holy Father, your friends, your advisors, have raped men and boys. They destroy truth and innocence and lives and souls. You are covering for them.
After you have resigned and they have been forced from office by you, the first thing your successor should do is prosecute the entire lot to demonstrate to the world that change has indeed come to the Church. It will go much better for you that you face justice now, rather than after you die.
For the good of your soul, Holy Father, so as not to be subject to the tortures of demons for eternity, step down.
Pray, my fellow Catholics, pray your Rosary that the Queen of Heaven convert the heart of the Holy Father and bring an end to this scourge of sexual predation and cover-up.
May God have mercy on us all.
If Pope Francis covered up McCarrick abuse,
then he’s neither ‘holy’ nor a ‘father’
by Peter Kwasniewski
August 27, 2018 (LifeSiteNews) – Should we be surprised at Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò’s detailed testimony about Pope Francis covering up ex-Cardinal McCarrick’s abuse? We have seen this level of mendacity and depravity coming for years.
From the first moment of his papacy, Pope Francis showed disdain for papal traditions, a sign of disrespect for the duties and limits of his office.
- His minimalist and lackluster celebrations of Mass suggested that for him, the liturgy was not “the source and summit of the Christian life.”
- His torturous and often doctrinally suspect homilies exposed an uncatholic mind.
- His sloppy interviews with newspapers and on airplanes sowed confusion about basic Christian teachings.
- “Who am I to judge?” appeared in every newspaper and eventually on thousands of pieces of online merchandise as a message of liberation from God’s commandments.
- The sweet name of “mercy” was co-opted for an agenda of secularization.
- The word “Pharisee” became the favorite taunt for anyone who still believed in the Bible or any identifiable version of Christianity.
- The papally rigged synods on the family and their spawn, Amoris Laetitia — authoritatively clarified by the Buenos Aires guidelines — bestowed papal honors on the normalization of adulterous liaisons.
- Changes to the annulment process fast-tracked the granting of “Catholic divorce.”
- Internal reorganizations and initiatives at the Vatican weakened the anti-abortion message and muddied the waters of Humanae Vitae even in its anniversary year.
- Notorious anti-Catholics were invited to the Vatican, given a platform, and applauded.
The moment anyone got too near to the wretched truth about Vatican financial corruption, the supposedly “reform-minded” pope ensured that the threat was removed — be it the C-9 cardinal who was conveniently framed or the professional external auditors who were summarily fired.
- The pope’s condemnation of homosexuality was never better than ambivalent; the traditional teaching seemed to be heading for the same dustbin as capital punishment. (If you don’t like what Church tradition has to say, why not just change the Catechism, while speaking the magic words “Abracadabra, development of doctrine”?) - The handling of the global sexual abuse crisis, as seen in the situation in Chile, demonstrated a flaccid commitment to justice at best, and a trend towards complicity at worst.
And now this news, which has rightly created shockwaves around the globe, a collective astonishment at the depths of alleged wickedness in high places.
- It is not only that we lack justice in Casa Santa Marta.
We have dwelling there what appears to be a calculated, premeditated resolve to support, honor, and promote injustice.
- It is not only that we have a “trend towards complicity”; the upper echelons of the Vatican are the factory where the evils are being manufactured, with an efficiency Henry Ford would marvel at.
The ineluctable progress of events is unmasking Pope Francis more and more as a facilitator of that lavender mafia in whose limp-wristed bureaucratic grip the Church on earth is suffering strangulation. Bergoglio’s Vatican is a kind of sinkhole in which the worldly accommodationism of the Second Vatican Council and the worst ideas and behaviors of the postconciliar rebellion have gathered in concentrated form.
An article I published at OnePeterFive on August 15 contained the following statement:
“To hear well-meaning people say Bergoglio must impanel some investigative body to set things right [in the USA] is Alice in Wonderland lunacy. It’s like putting Himmler in charge of Nuremberg.” For some, this was too strong a statement. How dare I say such a thing about “the Holy Father”?
Today, in light of Viganò’s revelations and so many other pieces of evidence, I stand by that statement, and a thousand others like it. For he shows no probable signs of being holy, nor is he acting like a father.
- A holy father would not treat Catholics the way Francis has treated them.
- A holy father would not mislead his children into sin about the mysteries of sexuality, marriage, and the Blessed Sacrament. -
- A holy father would not oppress those of his children who found spiritual strength in the recovery of family traditions, while sponsoring and promoting children who rebel against the family, or even strangers who care nothing for it.
- A holy father would not tolerate for a moment the eldest children in his family when they are caught grossly abusing the littlest; he would strip them of all dignities and put them out.
Who knows what is going on within the convolutions of his own mind? God alone knows. What we know is that
God has permitted this period of tribulation for the testing and strengthening of the faith of His servants, to see if we will be loyal to His revelation, His commandments, His gift of tradition, His righteousness, come what may.
Divine Providence has tested Christian fidelity many times in the Church’s long history, be it with the gruesome tortures and bitter exiles of Roman or pagan persecution, rampant clerical immorality and corruption, doctrinal chaos and compromise, or simply the terrible hardships of war, famine, plague, and disasters that our fallen world will never be without.
“Blessed is the man who remains steadfast under trial, for when he has stood the test he will receive the crown of life, which God has promised to those who love him”
(Jas 1:12).
A cleansing fire
by Robert Royal
August 27, 2018
As virtually the whole world now knows, Carlo Maria Viganò, the former papal nuncio to the United States, has published a blockbuster 11-page letter, naming names of people involved in sexual abuse and cover-ups in America, and their enablers in Rome, up to the very highest levels, including Pope Francis.
He provides dates and details and information on where the relevant documents may be found; speaks of persons who can corroborate his story; and has called on everyone implicated, including the Holy Father (who already knew about McCarrick in 2013 and did nothing, he says), to respect the Church’s Zero Tolerance policy, become an example to others, and resign.
I knew Viganò somewhat in Washington and always liked him; he was the best Vatican ambassador we’ve had in recent years. My esteem had grown, even prior to this letter. At Rome’s Marcia per la Vita (March for Life), bishops do not participate (the Italian bishops’ conference, displaying deeply misplaced faith, thinks it should work through elected politicians, not public demonstrations). At the last one, I saw Cardinal Burke and Bishop Athanasius Schneider; as for other bishops – only Viganò.
Many call him a man of honesty and integrity. This comes through clearly in passages from his letter such as this:
My conscience requires me also to reveal facts that I have experienced personally, concerning Pope Francis, that have a dramatic significance, which as Bishop, sharing the collegial responsibility of all the bishops for the universal Church, do not allow me to remain silent, and that I state here, ready to reaffirm them under oath by calling on God as my witness.
Defenders of the pope have already raised questions about specific details of the letter. Those will all be settled in good time. But no one has disputed the overall picture, which can be easily confirmed – and probably will be, if there’s any real accountability. The Vatican has so far been silent; Francis declared that he would not say a word for now on the flight back from Dublin to Rome.
Today, I’d intended to give a wrap-up of the papal trip to Ireland (I left as he was arriving because it’s actually easier to follow the pope’s movements via electronic media than in the mob). One Irish journalist was already lamenting before the pope even arrived that “this visit feels too much like a ceremonial procession.”
Given the destruction that sexual abuse has caused not only to numerous individuals and families in Ireland, but Chile, America, Honduras, Australia, and many other nations, I suggested weeks ago that the World Meeting on Families should be canceled and a penitential procession, to be repeated annually, should take its place.
That all seems like ages ago now on a planet far away. Just Friday, at the alternative conference on the family sponsored by the Lumen Fidei Institute in Dublin, somewhat to my own surprise, I played the prophet and predicted that more major revelations, in addition to the McCarrick case, were going to erupt within weeks.
And it’s just at the beginning.
We are in for a long string of painful days now, but I believe it will become a “cleansing fire.” Many in the Church hierarchy, especially in Rome, are still under the delusion that they can manage this monstrosity. They can’t.
The American bishops took a while, but finally realized that they had to take at least some action after the McCarrick revelations.
In his letter to American victims of abuse – and in remarks during his visit to Ireland – Pope Francis basically expressed his confidence that existing safeguards can deal with the various situations. No need to create special tribunals, etc. This is fantasy and will soon be widely seen as such, to the further detriment of the pope’s credibility if he doesn’t take serious, large steps. As one commentator put it: “Pope to U.S. Church: You’re on your own.”
Pope Francis already found in Ireland that expressing the Church’s sorrow and shame over failures placates no one. People want action – and answers.
To begin with, Viganò says McCarrick was 14th on the list to become archbishop of Washington
[This was way back in 2000, when already, a US delegation went to Rome specifically to ask John Paul II not to name McCarrick a cardinal because of his 'open secret' sexual predatorship.] Who in Rome moved him up to the top? Cupich and Tobin were not on the lists of bishops submitted to the Vatican for Chicago and Newark. Who promoted them? And why?
We also have to start asking the right questions about the mess as a whole. It wasn’t “the Church” that committed crimes and abused power. Neither was the problem a general “clericalism,” but the acts of specific individuals and others who protected them. Unless, as the anti-Catholics say, the Church is really a criminal syndicate, we want to separate the sheep from the goats now.
According to Viganò, McCarrick and Honduran Cardinal Oscar Maradiaga (himself under suspicion for financial misdealings and widespread scandal at his seminary), were instrumental in the appointments of Cardinals Cupich and Tobin (Newark), as well as Cardinal Farrell to the Dicastery for Laity, Family, and Life. And in the election of Jorge Bergoglio as pope.
At the very least, every one of those named now – and the list goes on – is under a cloud, given that the Catholic bishops themselves have, sadly, put in question their own right to be considered innocent until proven guilty.
How for instance, was Cardinal Tobin just appointed by Pope Francis as one of his personal choices to participate in the upcoming Synod on Youth? Tobin, it should be recalled, said he knew nothing about payouts and settlements over McCarrick in the very diocese he currently heads. Same with Farrell. Same with Cardinal Wuerl, though Viganò provides convincing evidence and says Wuerl is lying shamelessly.
His whole letter is worth studying carefully. One episode I find quite revealing: when Viganò first met the Holy Father as Nuncio, Francis asked him in conversations about McCarrick and Wuerl, what they were like or whether they were good. (Francis also said American bishops must not be “ideologized” [sic] – neither right nor left, but he specifically mentioned “Philadelphia,” i.e., Archbishop Chaput.) Viganò only realized later that Francis was really asking whether he, Viganò, would support McCarrick and Wuerl, despite the damning information he’d just provided.
The pope had never been to America before his trip in 2015, knows little about us, and relies on figures like McCarrick and Maradiaga, and others like Antonio Spadaro and Marcelo Figueroa, who have expressed a quite laughable view that traditional Catholics and evangelicals have forged an “ecumenism of hate” in America. Even liberal Catholic outlets were embarrassed by that spectacle. In fact,
if you put together the various names in Viganò’s letter, almost all of Francis’s closest advisors lie close to the heart of the problem, not its solution.
If there is a solution now, it’s going to come primarily from lay people and the few bishops – so far – willing to speak candidly and do something. All Catholics everywhere now must firmly keep pressing the Church to come clean. Completely. No one gets a partial or plenary indulgence. No one. Nothing else will do.
As for those who are compromised: it would be wise to be careful what you say and do next. The old days of deception and delay, even in Rome, have ended. People are watching who steps forwards and who doesn’t; who tries to spin obvious facts and hide behind pious platitudes; whether heads roll or it’s all talk.
Much of what was hidden – including any further lies or actions – will become known now. Stonewalling will only make the ultimate day of reckoning even worse.
Thomas Peters anticipates the arguments used by the Bergogliacs (I think more appropriate than plain 'Bergoglians' to drown Mons. Vigano's charges by pumping out all the bilge and muck they can against him...
Seven reasons why I believe
Mons. Vigano's accusations are credible
by Thomas Peters
CATHOLIC VOTE
aUGUST 27, 2018
Make no mistake, we are living through a historic moment in the Church’s life.
I was deeply disturbed when I read the 11-page letter of the former Nuncio to the US, Archbishop Carlo Vigano, in which he accuses Pope Francis and dozens of cardinals and bishops of having knowledge of the credible accusations and settlements resulting from the sexual abuses perpetrated by Theodore McCarrick.
Please read the entire letter if you have not.
If Abp. Vigano’s accusations against the pope and the cardinals he names are true, the proper response from the universal Church is outrage, and the only responsible thing for the pope and guilty cardinals to do is resign.
I think the next steps here are simple: the claims made in the letter must be thoroughly investigated
both by the secular and Catholic press and by competent ecclesiastical authorities (if, ahem, any have the fortitude to do so).
Already Bishop Joseph Strickland has instructed his priests this Sunday to read a letter from him saying he believes Abp. Vigano’s allegations are “credible” and calls for a “thorough investigation” into them. More bishops need to come forward and demand a full investigation into the facts and say what they know out loud, in public.
There is now a coordinated counter-effort underfoot to discredit Abp. Vigano and his accusations, both by progressive Catholics and the mainstream media (led, of course, by the New York Times). They are attempting to discredit the letter primarily by attacking Abp. Vigano.
Other, more objective people are asking legitimate questions that leave room for doubt when it comes to some of the specific timelines and facts that Abp. Vigano asserts.
Before I go any further, one important point: I don’t care who turns out to be guilty. Now, of course, I will be devastated to find out that bishops, cardinals, popes etc. that I thought were good men turn out to be fallen men, terrible men, evil men.
But no one is above the law of God.
Even if it turns out Pope Benedict is guilty, I will and must accept that truth.
Journalists, in particular Catholic journalists, have a responsibility to pursue this story wherever it leads, in an unbiased manner. Again, history will judge them by their deeds. And not reporting what you know to be true can be a sin of omission as well.
So, as a commentator, here are my reasons for believing Abp. Vigano’s accusations are credible:
1. Abp. Vigano would have to be a mad man to fabricate all of this — maybe he is. But he is either crazy or telling the truth. Either the bulk of what he said is true, and he has to know that investigations will corroborate what he says, or he has to know investigations will contradict what he alleges, and if that turns out to be the case then … what’s the point? This will be the end of his career and he will rightfully be punished.
2. Critics have asked, “Why did Abp. Vigano wait now to come forward?” Well, obviously, the crisis is now.
Pope Francis’S statement in reaction to the twin stories of McCarrick’s abuse and the Pennsylvania Grand Jury Report has been to say nothing about the particular guilt of bishops. The pope has kept Cdl. Wuerl in his position, and has reportedly said he plans no further particular actions in response to the current crisis. It’s business as usual at the Vatican.
If Abp. Vigano was waiting to see if Rome would act, he must have concluded it wouldn’t without someone speaking out as he has chosen to do.
3. Critics point out that Abp. Vigano may be guilty or complicit in the cover up of abuse. That may be true too! Unfortunately the people with the most knowledge of the cover up and system of corruption are most likely part of it, to some degree. This doesn’t mean they should stay silent. Quite the opposite!
Still, Abp. Vigano’s statement would carry more weight if he would have also pointed the finger at himself – but who knows, he could be innocent. Again, him releasing this letter puts more attention on himself and his past actions.
If he has something to hide, it counts in favor of the letter’s authenticity that he would nevertheless publish it despite the fact that he may be implicated and face punishment himself as a direct consequence.
4. His explanation provides the simplest explanation for how McCarrick, despite his widespread deviant, predatory behavior and multiple settlements, continued to have a public life in the Church — up to and including frequent encounters with seminarians (he was allowed to retire to a seminary, for heaven’s sake!). Simply put, it’s extremely unlikely that no one knew this whole time, and that ultimately the cover up was not only extended to the Vatican but emanated from it.
5. Pope Francis’S non-denial denial statement on the flight back from Ireland almost confirms the veracity of some of Abp. Vigano’s accusations for the simple fact that
if it was all or mostly untrue, why not just say that?
6. The most valid criticism of Abp. Vigano’s letter is that it is well-known and well-documented that McCarrick continued to enjoy a public life in the church after the claimed sanctions of Pope Benedict were issued – up to and including Abp. Vigano concelebrating Mass with (among others) McCarrick, and McCarrick greeting Pope Benedict at his last audience after he had announced his attention to resign.
However, Abp. Vigano’s letter clearly states that Pope Benedict’s top lieutenants, including Cdls. Levada, Sodano and Bertone were part of the cover-up, and were not only filtering the information they passed on to him, but actively undermining him in other ways.
Second, it’s no surprise that McCarrick would flout the sanctions imposed on him by Pope Benedict if he felt he had adequate protection from the cabal.
Third, it would be no surprise if Abp. Vigano, aware of what was going on but outranked and with no place to go, would smile and go along with the lie everyone else at the time was living.
Finally, the appearance of McCarrick in Rome might have been for Pope Benedict yet another reminder that his sentences were being flouted and he was no longer capable of holding his office. We just won’t know for sure until every avenue is pursued.
7. Today Monsignor Jean-Francois Lantheaume, the former first counsellor at the apostolic nunciature in Washington D.C., told CNA that the former nuncio, Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano, told “the truth” in his letter, but “that’s all” he’ll say. The pressure these men must be under is incredible.
In the days, weeks and months ahead, we must continue praying and fasting for our Church.
And if you are a bishop, what you say or don’t say, do or don’t do, is something you will have to account for before the face of God.
Because only the truth will set us free.
May Jesus have mercy on us all.
Archbishop Vigano:
Are his narratives fictive?
August 27, 2018
I first published the following piece on 30 July this year. I am reprinting it now because it seems to me that
one of the strongest arguments favouring acceptance of Archbishop Vigano's disclosures is that the picture he gives us of PF's character fits so closely the conclusions which some of us have come to about PF's evasive attitude to Truth. [Fr H's circumlocution for 'PF's habitual lying'.]
One of my motives for writing this piece in July had been the following. PF had recently accused the Four Cardinals of lying: they claimed that the Dubia had been delivered to PF's desk; he claimed that he first heard about the Dubia after they were made public: "I heard about it from the Press".
Given this conflict of testimony, it was not easy to understand why four cardinals should put themselves so very much in the wrong by behaving like that and by lying in such a way. So I wrote:
It is a now familiar picture: the Pope who shifts the blame on to others ("I was poorly informed"); the Pope who contradicts himself; who says different things to different people.
The recent account of PF's dealings with the Argentine military dictatorship is unsubstantiated but terrifyingly circumstantial and unnervingly fits in with many compelling reconstructions of his character.
We have a Pope who, in any sort of Mess, rapidly takes easy and facile refuge in Fictive Narratives.
Many of us have felt driven to differ from PF's views on basically important matters of Faith and Morals. Nevertheless, he and we are fellow-Christians with all that this implies about our common life together in Christ's Body the Church.
But how easy is it to do any sort of meaningful business with a Roman Pontiff the integrity of whose word looks increasingly implausible? (Or, indeed, with his public apologists?)
Any sort of meaningful business, that is, other than waiting for these terrible days to pass.
NEW PERSONAL FOOTNOTES:
(1) The words of Pope Benedict XIV which I reported as recently as Saturday morning ("the Mug"), have been spectacularly fulfilled by Mgr Vigano:
the Scum certainly now is right on the Surface of the Cooking Pot, for everyone to see! I think I had better visit Ashmole more often!
(2) PF's neat way of dodging questions in the airliner does immense credit to whichever of his aides dreamed it up. Talent there!
(3) A bishop Strickland finds the Vigano Testimony 'credible'. Now his website is down, just as Bishop Egan's was so recently.
(4) Both the Testimony of Archbishop Vigano, and the admirable letter of Bishop Philip Egan calling for a Lay Congress and an Extraordinary Synod to consider the crisis, are dated to the Octave Day of the Assumption, the Queenship of Mary aka Her Immaculate Heart.
Perhaps 22 August will go down in History as the Marian intervention which precipitated the ending of this calamitous and divisive pontificate.
[Modificato da TERESA BENEDETTA 28/08/2018 11:07]