|
Post by cato on Sept 13, 2018 14:39:55 GMT
]But will he come back to face justice? I will be somewhat surprised if he returns to the United States. [/quote]
I don't think the Vatican are that stupid. I hope not. O heck they are probably planning it and will say it's the Holy Spirit speaking in silence rebuking the rigid pharisees!
They got away with with Cardinal Law (ironic name)but it will utterly discredit what shreds of moral authority Pope Francis possesses. Maybe they need to do some incredibly stupid in public for people to start demanding real reform.
|
|
|
Post by Stephen on Sept 28, 2018 8:50:11 GMT
Viganò Viganò Viganò Viganò... New letter of response.
Tit. Archbishop of Ulpiana Apostolic Nuncio
Scio Cui credidi (2 Tim 1:12)
Before starting my writing, I would first of all like to give thanks and glory to God the Father for every situation and trial that He has prepared and will prepare for me during my life. As a priest and bishop of the holy Church, spouse of Christ, I am called like every baptized person to bear witness to the truth. By the gift of the Spirit who sustains me with joy on the path that I am called to travel, I intend to do so until the end of my days. Our only Lord has addressed also to me the invitation, “Follow me!”, and I intend to follow him with the help of his grace until the end of my days.
"As long as I have life, I will sing to the Lord, I will sing praise to my God while I have being. May my song be pleasing to him; For I rejoice in the Lord." (Psalm 103:33-34)
*****
It has been a month since I offered my testimony, solely for the good of the Church, regarding what occurred at the audience with Pope Francis on June 23, 2013 and regarding certain matters I was given to know in the assignments entrusted to me at the Secretariat of State and in Washington, in relation to those who bear responsibility for covering up the crimes committed by the former archbishop of that capital.
My decision to reveal those grave facts was for me the most painful and serious decision that I have ever made in my life. I made it after long reflection and prayer, during months of profound suffering and anguish, during a crescendo of continual news of terrible events, with thousands of innocent victims destroyed and the vocations and lives of young priests and religious disturbed. The silence of the pastors who could have provided a remedy and prevented new victims became increasingly indefensible, a devastating crime for the Church. Well aware of the enormous consequences that my testimony could have, because what I was about to reveal involved the successor of Peter himself, I nonetheless chose to speak in order to protect the Church, and I declare with a clear conscience before God that my testimony is true. Christ died for the Church, and Peter, Servus servorum Dei, is the first one called to serve the spouse of Christ.
I declare with a clear conscience before God that my testimony is true. Tweet Certainly, some of the facts that I was to reveal were covered by the pontifical secret that I had promised to observe and that I had faithfully observed from the beginning of my service to the Holy See. But the purpose of any secret, including the pontifical secret, is to protect the Church from her enemies, not to cover up and become complicit in crimes committed by some of her members. I was a witness, not by my choice, of shocking facts and, as the Catechism of the Catholic Church states (par. 2491), the seal of secrecy is not binding when very grave harm can be avoided only by divulging the truth. Only the seal of confession could have justified my silence.
Neither the pope, nor any of the cardinals in Rome have denied the facts I asserted in my testimony. "Qui tacet consentit" surely applies here, for if they deny my testimony, they have only to say so, and provide documentation to support that denial. How can one avoid concluding that the reason they do not provide the documentation is that they know it confirms my testimony?
The center of my testimony was that since at least June 23, 2013, the pope knew from me how perverse and evil McCarrick was in his intentions and actions, and instead of taking the measures that every good pastor would have taken, the pope made McCarrick one of his principal agents in governing the Church, in regard to the United States, the Curia, and even China, as we are seeing these days with great concern and anxiety for that martyr Church.
Now, the pope’s reply to my testimony was: "I will not say a word!" But then, contradicting himself, he has compared his silence to that of Jesus in Nazareth and before Pilate, and compared me to the great accuser, Satan, who sows scandal and division in the Church — though without ever uttering my name. If he had said: "Viganò lied," he would have challenged my credibility while trying to affirm his own. In so doing he would have intensified the demand of the people of God and the world for the documentation needed to determine who has told the truth. Instead, he put in place a subtle slander against me — slander being an offense he has often compared to the gravity of murder. Indeed, he did it repeatedly, in the context of the celebration of the most Holy Sacrament, the Eucharist, where he runs no risk of being challenged by journalists. When he did speak to journalists, he asked them to exercise their professional maturity and draw their own conclusions. But how can journalists discover and know the truth if those directly involved with a matter refuse to answer any questions or to release any documents? The pope's unwillingness to respond to my charges and his deafness to the appeals by the faithful for accountability are hardly consistent with his calls for transparency and bridge building.
Moreover, the pope’s cover-up of McCarrick was clearly not an isolated mistake. Many more instances have recently been documented in the press, showing that Pope Francis has defended homosexual clergy who committed serious sexual abuses against minors or adults. These include his role in the case of Fr. Julio Grassi in Buenos Aires, his reinstatement of Fr. Mauro Inzoli after Pope Benedict had removed him from ministry (until he went to prison, at which point Pope Francis laicized him), and his halting of the investigation of sex abuse allegations against Cardinal Cormac Murphy O’Connor.
In the meantime, a delegation of the USCCB, headed by its president Cardinal DiNardo, went to Rome asking for a Vatican investigation into McCarrick. Cardinal DiNardo and the other prelates should tell the Church in America and in the world: did the pope refuse to carry out a Vatican investigation into McCarrick's crimes and of those responsible for covering them up? The faithful deserve to know.
Did the pope refuse to carry out a Vatican investigation into McCarrick's crimes and of those responsible for covering them up? Tweet I would like to make a special appeal to Cardinal Ouellet, because as nuncio I always worked in great harmony with him, and I have always had great esteem and affection towards him. He will remember when, at the end of my mission in Washington, he received me at his apartment in Rome in the evening for a long conversation. At the beginning of Pope Francis' pontificate, he had maintained his dignity, as he had shown with courage when he was Archbishop of Québec. Later, however, when his work as prefect of the Congregation for Bishops was being undermined because recommendations for episcopal appointments were being passed directly to Pope Francis by two homosexual "friends" of his dicastery, bypassing the Cardinal, he gave up. His long article in L’Osservatore Romano, in which he came out in favor of the more controversial aspects of Amoris Laetitia, represents his surrender. Your Eminence, before I left for Washington, you were the one who told me of Pope Benedict's sanctions on McCarrick. You have at your complete disposal key documents incriminating McCarrick and many in the curia for their cover-ups. Your Eminence, I urge you to bear witness to the truth.
*****
Finally, I wish to encourage you, dear faithful, my brothers and sisters in Christ: never be despondent! Make your own the act of faith and complete confidence in Christ Jesus, our Savior, of Saint Paul in his second Letter to Timothy, Scio cui credidi, which I choose as my episcopal motto. This is a time of repentance, of conversion, of prayers, of grace, to prepare the Church, the bride of the Lamb, ready to fight and win with Mary the battle against the old dragon.
“Scio Cui credidi” (2 Tim 1:12) In you, Jesus, my only Lord, I place all my trust. “Diligentibus Deum omnia cooperantur in bonum” (Rom 8:28)
To commemorate my episcopal ordination on April 26, 1992, conferred on me by St. John Paul II, I chose this image taken from a mosaic of the Basilica of St. Mark in Venice. It represents the miracle of the calming of the storm. I was struck by the fact that in the boat of Peter, tossed by the water, the figure of Jesus is portrayed twice. Jesus is sound asleep in the bow, while Peter tries to wake him up: "Master, do you not care that we are about to die?” Meanwhile the apostles, terrified, look each in a different direction and do not realize that Jesus is standing behind them, blessing them and assuredly in command of the boat: "He awoke and rebuked the wind and said to the sea, 'Quiet! Be still,' … then he said to them, 'Why are you afraid? Do you still have no faith?'" (Mk 4:38–40).
The scene is very timely in portraying the tremendous storm the Church is passing through in this moment, but with a substantial difference: the successor of Peter not only fails to see the Lord in full control of the boat, it seems he does not even intend to awaken Jesus asleep in the bow.
Has Christ perhaps become invisible to his vicar? Perhaps is he being tempted to try to act as a substitute of our only Master and Lord?
The Lord is in full control of the boat!
May Christ, the Truth, always be the light on our way!
+ Carlo Maria Viganò Titular Archbishop of Ulpiana Apostolic Nuncio
|
|
|
Post by Stephen on Sept 28, 2018 10:17:09 GMT
Archbishop Viganò is courageously digging in with a letter that restates his initial accusations against Pope Francis and powerful members of the hierarchy.
This man is standing alone against the legion of satanic forces! These forces which will do all in their power to silence this voice crying in the wilderness. It is clear that the enemy is not only at the gates, but is in the highest positions of influence.
God bless you, Your Excellency.
|
|
|
Post by cato on Sept 28, 2018 10:41:37 GMT
No doubt we will be treated to more "private" sermons from the Pope's daily masses when he compares himself to the silent Jesus and his critics to satan.
Words fail me when it comes to the current pontiff. He is also claiming full responsibility for the recent agreement with communist China which guarantees that Chinese Christians will flock to protestant churches if and when communism collapses.
|
|
|
Post by Maolsheachlann on Sept 28, 2018 10:57:44 GMT
No doubt we will be treated to more "private" sermons from the Pope's daily masses when he compares himself to the silent Jesus and his critics to satan. Words fail me when it comes to the current pontiff. He is also claiming full responsibility for the recent agreement with communist China which guarantees that Chinese Christians will flock to protestant churches if and when communism collapses. I have long reached the point of considering silence the most charitable and docile attitude to Pope Francis. I will assume the best of him as far as I can. If he resigned, I would be greatly relieved, even though many people have pointed out that two Popes resigning in a row is not a good thing. But it's better than what's happening now.
|
|
|
Post by rogerbuck on Oct 4, 2018 12:16:37 GMT
I am very glad Stephen started this and has kept us up to date. Cato's early comment rings ever more true to me. I bold some of it: I was puzzled the pope didn't just say this was all nonsense and categorically deny it. There are a few conspiracy type allegations in the document but the main points are devastating if true. Vigano has taken a major risk here as breaching papal confidentiality merits excommunication as far as I know. If he is lying the pope should say so and discipline him. This will not go away by relying on journalists to ferret out the truth. If the allegations are true Pope Francis will go down in infamy. Right now, I'm not sure I have too much intelligent to add to that. But I want to note it deeply disturbs me how little attention this seems to get. Whatever position you take on this, the issue should be prominent for reasons you indicate, Cato. Alas, though, I'm not even managing to keep up properly with it myself. (Feel a deep need to be focussed elsewhere on "irrelevant" things such as the De Gaulle/De Valera parallels of the past, both men claiming mysterious, even sacred identity with their nation and vocation to speak for their nation; both men trying to keep their cultures independent, neutral, free from NATO etc. etc. - cryptic aside that may interest some here.) Anyway, last I saw, something like 35 of the world's 4000 or so bishops had backed Vigano to some extent or another. What does that say, I wonder? (Although maybe the number's swelled since?) For reasons, I find hard to explain, it is not easy for me to keep up minute to minute with current developments. Even ones as incredibly important as this. Or, alas, to keep up with this forum. Which also seems so very important to me. But I utter a few words here, intelligent or not, about this topic. If anyone has an easy way of keeping abreast with the KEY developments here, without wading through all the dross, please advise!
|
|
|
Post by cato on Oct 5, 2018 10:39:01 GMT
If anyone has an easy way of keeping abreast with the KEY developments here, without wading through all the dross, please advise!
[/quote]
I doubt Solomon in all his wisdom could give a simple answer to that very reasonable request! At the risk of being overly simplistic if I had to read one person on the current Vatican crisis I would choose the American Robert Royal. He is learned and lucid. He has a broad learning which includes theology history and he has a good grasp of the wider culture and the nitty gritty of church politics. He is critical of Francis but is also charitable. He can be found at the Catholic thing website and is on EWTN's The World Over with Raymond Arroya regularly. At the American Thing he is giving daily accounts of the Youth Synod were so much is at stake.
He also has a survey of Catholic thought in the 20th century called a Deeper Vision which is well worth reading too and which you may find useful.
I have a distinct feeling be it Brexit, the USA , or the Church so much is happening so rapidly it can be hard to discern what is actually really happening amidst the chaos noise and clamour. I wonder is this manic sense of constant activity and torrents of scare mongering a deliberate ploy to overwhelm resistence to change or to create a sense of helplessness and craziness. Drift , breakdown and uncertainty are among the unsettled spirits of our time.
|
|
|
Post by Maolsheachlann on Oct 5, 2018 10:51:40 GMT
If anyone has an easy way of keeping abreast with the KEY developments here, without wading through all the dross, please advise! I doubt Solomon in all his wisdom could give a simple answer to that very reasonable request! At the risk of being overly simplistic if I had to read one person on the current Vatican crisis I would choose the American Robert Royal. He is learned and lucid. He has a broad learning which includes theology history and he has a good grasp of the wider culture and the nitty gritty of church politics. He is critical of Francis but is also charitable. He can be found at the Catholic thing website and is on EWTN's The World Over with Raymond Arroya regularly. At the American Thing he is giving daily accounts of the Youth Synod were so much is at stake. He also has a survey of Catholic thought in the 20th century called a Deeper Vision which is well worth reading too and which you may find useful. I have a distinct feeling be it Brexit, the USA , or the Church so much is happening so rapidly it can be hard to discern what is actually really happening amidst the chaos noise and clamour. I wonder is this manic sense of constant activity and torrents of scare mongering a deliberate ploy to overwhelm resistence to change or to create a sense of helplessness and craziness. Drift , breakdown and uncertainty are among the unsettled spirits of our time.[/quote] This is one of the reasons I am reluctant to comment unless and until I am VERY sure of my ground.
|
|
|
Post by cato on Oct 5, 2018 14:49:34 GMT
]This is one of the reasons I am reluctant to comment unless and until I am VERY sure of my ground. [/quote]
A tutor of mine many moons ago said if you want to come across as intelligent never comment on subjects you know nothing about! It's a rule I try to keep. I would add that asking the right question is also a sign of intelligence.It is funny how fearful people can be of asking a really obvious question.
On the wider issue of the comments of our Holy Father it is striking how often he puts his foot in it. I have expressed the opinion before this may in fact be a deliberate strategy of deconstructing the papal office especially among conservatives, traditionally the most ardent papists of all.
On a wider level perhaps the current crisis is an opportunity to come to a more complete view of the papal ministry ie its limits and what the pope can't say/do . Similarly bishops have been found wanting and there needs to some method of accountability for their poor decision making. The traditional monarchical model of church leadership doesn't work if those monarchs embrace the values of the World. Perhaps that's the weakness in our devotion to the papal office holder.
|
|
|
Post by cato on Oct 25, 2018 22:13:13 GMT
Mc Carrick incredible as this may seem was used by the Vatican as a negiotator with the Chinese communist dictatorship. His fingerprints are all over that shoddy sell out agreement. I don't know what his talents or expertise in Chinese affairs consists of.
Future generations will be shocked to learn this and the other appalling fact that the Chinese church was deliberately ignored in the talks by the catholic side who were all white middle aged European/American males. At least they weren't all heterosexuals!
Some people in the Vatican still behave like those European Imperialist statesmen who drew lineson maps of Africa and the Middle East in the heyday of colonialism.
|
|
|
Post by Tomas on Oct 26, 2018 9:30:37 GMT
Is that true? The new church politics of the Chinese State scandal with a suspect like McCarrick in its midst... mostly secret dim darkness in terms of what is going on, along with loads of speculations from outside the inner ring (not by necessity anything to do with mistaken search for conspiracy in contrast to traditional objective investigation). That looks even worse than the old colonialism.
|
|
|
Post by cato on Nov 16, 2018 13:32:45 GMT
The news from the US bishops on Monday last was most depressing. Their meeting to address the Episcopal abuse scandal in their own ranks was scuttled by the Pope who asked them not to vote on much awaited reform measures.
Yes it is confusing. The pope who wants to decentralise power orders the American bishops not to implement urgent reforms but to wait until a February meeting in Rome. I suspect an anti gringo agenda here. Team Francis is very critical of most things American unless it is from the Spirit of the Council cohort. Also many people in Rome are fearful of a full and frank investigation into previous cover ups.
It has been speculated liberal leaning Cardinals Cupich and the recently "sacked" Wuerl who sit on the Roman congregation of bishops were behind this very public and humilating slap on the wrist to the other American bishops.
The laity and their concerns are needless to say ignored in all of this.
|
|
|
Post by cato on Nov 11, 2020 13:23:51 GMT
Almost two years to the day the Mc Carrick report was published yesterday. It is over 400 pages and contains strong material. Much of the blame has fallen on Pope John Paul II. For all his many gifts John Paul was deceived by deceitful predators on several occasions to disastrous effect. Cardinal Groer of Austria and Fr Marciel of the Legionaries of Christ are two other lying abusers who come to mind who were trusted by John Paul. John Paul had experienced false smear tactics by the Polish secret service and seemingly mistakingly dismissed genuine complaints.
Benedict did put restraints on Mc Carrick but he ignored them and did his own thing regardless. McCarrick treated Benedict with scorn and exploited his weakness in disciplining him with half hearted measures.
Archbishop Vigano is actually blamed for much of Mc Carricks rise. Institutions normally turn on whistle blowers and sadly the Vatican is no different from secular centres of power.
The report ignores two huge areas. As a roving ambassador Mc Carrick was a key player in negotiating the vile China deal with the Church.
Mc Carrick like Marcial regularly visited Rome with large cheques for various clerical pals. This issue of potential corruption is ignored too.
Pope Francis is absolved of any responsibility. Nothing to see. Move on.
|
|