Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò gives his first extended interview since calling on the pope to resign

  • Thread starter Thread starter Cathoholic
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

Cathoholic

Guest

Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò gives his first extended interview since calling on the pope to resign​

10 Jun 2019 Washington Post

Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò corresponded by email with The Washington Post over two months, writing 8,000 words in response to nearly 40 questions. Here we present that exchange. Selected passages containing unverified allegations have been removed. . .

What are your thoughts on the outcome of February’s four-day Protection of Minors in the Church summit?

. . . Unfortunately, that initiative turned out to be pure ostentation, for we saw no sign of a genuine willingness to attend to the real causes of the present crisis. Indeed, Pope Francis’s choice of Cardinal [Blase] Cupich, [archbishop of Chicago,] as a leader of the event was itself disturbing. . . .

. . . . The press conferences during the summit were also discouraging. Journalists, especially some courageous women of great experience and professionalism, including some from the secular media, tried in vain to get answers that might have offered a minimum of credibility to the summit. To cite just one example, Archbishop [Charles] Scicluna, was caught by surprise with a question about the pope covering up in the scandalous case of Argentine Bishop Gustavo Zanchetta . . . .

. . . The signs I see are truly ominous. Not only is Pope Francis doing close to nothing to punish those who have committed abuse, he is doing absolutely nothing to expose and bring to justice those who have, for decades, facilitated and covered up the abusers. Just to cite one example: Cardinal [Donald] Wuerl, who covered up the abuses of [then-Cardinal Theodore] McCarrick and others for decades, and whose repeated and blatant lies have been made manifest to everyone who has been paying attention, had to resign in disgrace due to popular outrage. Yet, in accepting his resignation, Pope Francis praised him for his “nobility.” . . .

. . . According to a statement issued by the Press Office of the Holy See on Feb. 16, 2019, McCarrick was found guilty by the CDF of “solicitation in the Sacrament of Confession, and sins against the Sixth Commandment” with both minors and adults, with “the aggravating factor of the abuse of power.” The penalty imposed was laicization, which Pope Francis confirmed as “definitive.” In this way McCarrick, who has always declared himself innocent, was deprived of any opportunity to appeal the sentence. Where is the due process? Is this how justice is done in the Vatican?

Moreover, having made the sentence definitive, the pope has made it impossible to conduct any further investigation, which could have revealed who in the Curia and elsewhere knew of McCarrick’s abuses, when they knew it, and who helped him to be named archbishop of Washington and eventually a cardinal. Note, by the way, that the documents of this case, whose publication had been promised, have never been produced. . . .
Click to expand...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...fd89bd36d4e_story.html?utm_term=.f3c9a2a9d5e5
 
. . . The bottom line is this: Pope Francis is deliberately concealing the McCarrick evidence.

I repeat it firmly before God: Pope Francis learned about McCarrick from me on Sunday 23 June 2013, 40 minutes before the Angelus. I told him of McCarrick’s abuses after the pope himself, on his own initiative, asked me about McCarrick.

But let us consider the far more important spiritual dimension, which was completely absent from any declaration about McCarrick or any press conference at the summit. The most important purpose of penalties in the canonical order is repentance and conversion: “Suprema ratio est salus animarum” (the supreme law is the salvation of souls). I believe, therefore, that the mere “reduction to the lay state” is completely inadequate, because it does not provide a remedy and does not express the concern for the most important purpose of punishment, namely, the salvation of McCarrick’s soul.

Indeed, unless it is accompanied by other measures, a simple laicization could be considered an expression of contempt for the lay state. The idea that a prelate who misbehaves is punished by being “reduced” to the lay state smacks of clericalism. As Professor Scott Hahn argues, it undermines the meaning of the universal call to holiness. . . .

. . . The Vatican in October promised its own archival investigation into the McCarrick case. The findings of such an investigation still have not been made public. But if and once they are, what do you think will be revealed?

To this date, there are no indications such an investigation has even begun. I know for a fact that the results of an honest investigation would be disastrous for the current papacy, and those responsible for initiating the work know this as well. I can only conclude that the assurance of an appropriate archival investigation was an empty promise. . . .

. . . I myself regret not having spoken publicly earlier. As I already said, I had truly hoped against hope that the Church could reform itself from within. But when it became clear that the successor of Peter himself was one of those covering up the crimes, I had no doubt that the Lord was calling me to speak up, as I have done and will continue to do. . . .
Click to expand...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...fd89bd36d4e_story.html?utm_term=.f3c9a2a9d5e5
 
Last edited:
. . . If you could redo events, would you still ask for the Pope Francis’s resignation? Do you think asking for the pope’s resignation took attention away from your message?

I did the best I could with my testimony, and the Lord asks no more than that. I stand by that testimony. . . .

. . . “I am asking, indeed earnestly begging, the Holy Father to face up to the commitments he himself made in assuming his office as successor of Peter. He took upon himself the mission of confirming his brothers and guiding all souls in following Christ, in the spiritual combat, along the way of the cross. Let him admit his errors, repent, show his willingness to follow the mandate given to Peter and, once converted, let him confirm his brothers (Lk 22:32).”

I would have pointed out that Saint Peter himself denied Christ three times, but then wept bitterly and repented. Then I would have said what I say now: May Pope Francis imitate St. Peter! But if Pope Francis refuses to admit his mistakes and ask for forgiveness, so he can carry out the mandate he received from Christ, he should resign. . . .

. . . The crisis is about the fact that a corrupt “mafia” has taken control of many institutions of the Church, from the top down, and is exploiting the Church and the faithful for its own immoral purposes. As I noted above, this coalition is bound together not by shared sexual intimacy but by a shared interest in protecting and advancing one another professionally and in sabotaging every effort to reform the sexual corruption. Yet the members of this alliance, and those who fear its wrath, are the only ones with the authority to correct the problem through proper judicial procedures, the imposition of discipline and the reaffirmation of sound teaching.

This is causing an institutional paralysis that is immensely demoralizing for the faithful. That said, we should be neither entirely surprised nor overly disturbed by this desperate state of affairs, given the abiding presence of the Holy Spirit and Christ’s promise to come again and establish his definitive kingdom. I conclude by quoting a sobering passage from the Catechism of the Catholic Church, which seems to be verified in our own age:

Before Christ’s second coming the Church must pass through a final trial that will shake the faith of many believers. The persecution that accompanies her pilgrimage on earth will unveil the “mystery of iniquity” in the form of a religious deception offering men an apparent solution to their problems at the price of apostasy from the truth. (CCC, 675)
  • Carlo Maria Viganò, Archbishop of Ulpiana Apostolic Nuncio
May 2, 2019 Feast of St. Athanasius Bishop and Doctor of the Church
Click to expand...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...fd89bd36d4e_story.html?utm_term=.f3c9a2a9d5e5

The above is a brief summary of a very long article which itself was the product of 40 questions and presumably many emails between Archbishop Vigano and The Washington Post!
 
Last edited:
What can one say? This is serious. However, it is only one side of the investigation. We need to hear the Pope’s account.
 
I suspect the Pope will just continue to ignore this. Eventually Pope Francis, Vigano, and McCarrick will all die and then history will sort it out.
 
Just a quick FYI for non-Catholics who may read this thread.

None of these alleged actions or alleged inactions regarding the Pope affect the sphere of Infallibility, even if all are true.

The Church proclaims a narrow sphere regarding the charism of infallibility.

If interested, you can see them outlined in the Vatican I documents and even some more detail in the Vatican II teachings.
 
Last edited:
I kind of rolled my eyes when I read “corresponded by mail.” I have a hard time granting credibility to who thinks his life is in danger of criticizing Pope Francis.
 
Tis_Bearself . . .
I’d love to know what the “unverified allegations” were that the Post had to “remove”.
Click to expand...
Yes, I was thinking the same thing.
 
I don’t think he fears for his life because of the Pope, but rather the homosexual “mafia” that included Mccarrick and others…

Hard to believe until you realize the unbelievable allegations against Mccarrick were also true.
 
I don’t think anyone is suggesting Pope Francis orders assassination hits. That’s not the issue.
What if I told you a cardinal, admired and beloved around the world, was a serial abuser and predator for decades? Shocking right. Yet it’s true. Is it so impossible that some of these serial abusers might be capable of murder?
I don’t know the full story. I’m not taking sides. But Viganò is calling for a full investigation… and even if he’s only partially right, there are other corrupt individuals who could be exposed and don’t want that to happen.
 
There are many people in the world besides Catholic clergy who could be making him fearful. They may not even be connected to the Catholic Church.

I do wish Pope Francis would let us know his side. Or at least n honest about his silence.
 
The topic just below this discussed a Mexican Priest murdering due to what on the surface apoears to be his taking of homosexual lover (no corraboration yet, in fairness).

While terrible, is an act nowhere neat the magnitude of the whole McCarrick ordeal. So tell me again why this would surprise you or anyone?
 
I shouldn’t judge him for being afraid. Being fearful for one’s life is natural, if one senses danger. Personally, I don’t see it. But if he does, then I get that. However, such seclusion comes with a consequences. I will listen to him when he is less anonymous.

BTW, I personally have found that most sexual predators are the least dangerous criminals except to those they can victimize sexual, quite the opposite of those who commit other forms of violent crimes.
 
Have you ever studied serial killers and rapists ? Some of the most horrific people, some of the most violent, And the crimes almost always have a sexual component. From Ted bundy to BTK to Manson, you name it and there is a usually a sexual component. And underage and homosexual things can be common as well. Not to mention that regardless of proclivity to violence of a sexual abuser in the Church, there is the human instinct for survival and the seductivity of power in itself. Ok… A run of the mill child molester might not kill at will, but a person who has achieved incredible amounts of power will indeed do almost anything to hang onto it.
A sexual predator priest in my hometown has attempted to travel to another country, and kill an infant after abusing them… So, lets cut this guy some slack for not sticking his head in some cross hairs just so some people might think he is manly enough to be telling the truth.
 
Last edited:
Hoosier-Daddy said:
Have you ever studied serial killers and rapists ?
Click to expand...
No. Serial killers are comparatively rare, and the tend to kill more randomly, not for revenge. I have dealt with a whole lot of sexual offenders though.

I am all for cutting him slack. However, such behavior comes with consequences. For example, what kind of ministry can one have in hiding?
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top