Pope Francis Must Resign: Archbishop Vigano

  • Thread starter Thread starter TigerLily-1
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Be that as it may, why was Pope Benedict handing out some sort of award to the interdicted cardinal, in the video?

Seems odd to me, especially since he was the one issuing the order.
 
I agree. We really need the Vatican to weigh in here…something, anything. Until then the rumors, insults, blind opinions, and outright conspiracy theories will keep flying. Both in Catholic circles and secular media.

Silence from the Pope does absolutely no good here.
 
KJW5551 said:
Silence from the Pope does absolutely no good here.
Click to expand...
… as far as we know, or more to the point, as far as we can imagine.

But maybe there is some good intended by this. Maybe Jesus knows.
 
Last edited:
Ghosty1981 said:
What award was Pope Benedict giving anyone, let alone McCarrick?
Click to expand...
Did you not see the video? At the 2012 ad limina visit Pope Benedict handed McCarrick some sort of certificate and a box. This is supposedly after he sanctioned McCarrick.
 
OraLabora said:
Did you not see the video? At the 2012 ad limina visit Pope Benedict handed McCarrick some sort of certificate and a box. This is supposedly after he sanctioned McCarrick.
Click to expand...
How is that an award and not a thank-you letter? It appears that they were being handed to everyone.
 
Last edited:
You ask valid questions.

Another possibility is the sanctions didn’t include receiving an award. Pope Benedict was told by Sipe (the former priest and psychologist whose letter prompted the sanctions) that predatory and deviant behavior was toward priests and seminarians under McCarrick, not those at a ceremony.
Perhaps word was that McCarrick had repented?
Perhaps Pope Benedict had yet to see the dossier?

Agree, it does seem odd…something doesn’t add up An investigation is required.
 
May 2, 2012, gala dinner of the Pontifical Mission Societies in the United States, which honored Cardinal McCarrick as a “Pontifical Ambassador for Mission.”

Oblate Father Andrew Small, director of the Pontifical Mission Societies, told Catholic News Service Aug. 29 that neither Archbishop Vigano nor anyone from the nunciature tried to dissuade the societies from giving the honor to Cardinal McCarrick.
 
Yes, the report is probably central to understanding the mess in the Church today.
From the USA Today story:

www.usatoday.com

Report: Pope resigned in wake of gay priest scandal

Pope transfers top official amid speculation about report on Vatican leaks scandal.
www.usatoday.com

The Italian media is reporting that Pope Benedict XVI resigned after receiving the results of an internal investigation, delivered in a 300-page, two-volume dossier, that laid bare a sordid tale of blackmail, corruption and gay sex at the Vatican.

The respected Italian newspaper La Repubblica reported Friday that the report stamped "Pontifical Secret," contained "an exact map of the mischief and the bad fish" inside the Holy See.

The newspaper said the findings of the nine-month investigation, headed by Spanish cardinal, Julian Herranz , with the assistance of Cardinal Salvatore De Giorgi, former archbishop of Palermo, and Slovak cardinal Jozef Tomko, was delivered to the pope on Dec. 17, 2012.

"It was on that day, with those papers on his desk, that Benedict XVI took the decision he had mulled over for so long,’’ the newspaper said.

La Repubblica said the panel drew upon “dozens and dozens” of interviews with bishops, cardinals and lay people. It said the pope was kept apprised of the investigation in weekly meetings from April until December. The final, bound in red leather, is being kept in a safe in the pope’s Vatican quarters, the newspaper said.

"What’s coming out is a very detailed X-ray of the Roman Curia that does not spare even the closest collaborators of the pope," respected Vatican expert Ignazio Ingrao writes in Panorama. “The pope was no stranger to the intrigues, but he probably did not know that under his pontificate there was such a complex network and such intricate chains of personal interests and unmentionable relationships.”

A Vatican spokesman, the Rev. Federico Lombardi, has refused to comment on the reports.

"Neither the cardinals’ commission nor I will make comments to confirm or deny the things that are said about this matter. Let each one assume his or her own responsibilities. We shall not be following up on the observations that are made about this,’’ Lombardi said, according to the German news agency Deutsche Presse-Agentur.

If they had followed up on the observations made, perhaps this scandal could have been addressed in 2013.

Notice that Pope Benedict is said to have RESIGNED because of the dossier’s contents (I’ve bolded some relevant possibilities). Perhaps he felt he had no power to address properly? Perhaps he felt that the next Pope would be able to do clean up the mess. He DID give Pope Francis the dossier. What has Pope Francis done? The cover-up continues?
 
Last edited:
graciew said:
May 2, 2012, gala dinner of the Pontifical Mission Societies in the United States, which honored Cardinal McCarrick as a “Pontifical Ambassador for Mission.”

Oblate Father Andrew Small, director of the Pontifical Mission Societies, told Catholic News Service Aug. 29 that neither Archbishop Vigano nor anyone from the nunciature tried to dissuade the societies from giving the honor to Cardinal McCarrick.
Click to expand...
Why would they dissuade them from giving the award?

McCarrick wasn’t under house arrest, and he wasn’t a known and public criminal at the time.
 
Interesting choice because Alger Hiss was guilty as sin but no one wanted to believe it. 😛
 
Last edited:
Canvas said:
Vigano, McCarrick and sanctions?
Click to expand...
Another video to add to this murky puzzle:


This one seems to be more faithful to Vigano’s assertions. The sanctions issue definitely needs looking into though. Cardinal Bertone should provide some of this information (whether he will or not is another question).
 
kyrie03 said:
Perhaps word was that McCarrick had repented?
Click to expand...
Which would also explain why Pope Francis didn’t enforce the sanctions at first.

It occurred to me today though that there might be a simple human dimension to all this. McCarrick was apparently a good friend of Pope Francis. It could simply be that Pope Francis was not covering up for McCarrick, but was just not wanting to accept the reality that his friend turns out to be a sexual predator. The Pope is human. He is allowed to have friends, and when close friends misbehave, it must hurt and lead to a sense of betrayal. Perhaps the news about McCarrick becoming public jolted him into finally realizing he had to do something, which he did.

Imagine for a minute you heard rumours that your best friend was into child porn or something. You refuse to believe it and classify it as malicious gossip. Then one day you catch your friend in the act of viewing child porn, and it realize it is up to you to turn him in to the police.

Remember the Marcial Maciel case; saint John Paul II, a pope and saint I deeply admired, simply refused to believe all that he was hearing about him. This was a very human and understandable failure; it did not prevent him from being canonized!

Those calling for Pope Francis’s head… are you not imposing a standard of impeccability on the pope? Christ promised infallibility, not impeccability.
 
Last edited:
The secular media is all over this now. But the Catholic hierarchy is not accountable to secular society, right? Perhaps it will just blow over.
shrug
Starting to feel apathetic. Glad football season is at hand.
 
Last edited:
Sure, but Pope Francis’ reaction to this report in that case would have been less than exemplary.
 
Actually I can’t tell the media is making any noise at all now. The only mentions of this (aside from the first day) are casting it as a liberal/conservative feud. Don’t forget that most of the secular media is pretty liberal. IMO the secular media storm is over already. Doesn’t mean anything about the actual allegations, though.
 
Well, if you just Google “Pope Francis,” there are a number of very recent articles.
But again, I’m starting to realize, what’s it got to do with me, personally? Why spend the energy worrying about corruption in big business, government, or the Church? Nothing I can really do about it anyway. I might as well hunker down, keep my faith to myself. If no one knows I’m Catholic, then I won’t get hassled.
 
OraLabora said:
It occurred to me today though that there might be a simple human dimension to all this. McCarrick was apparently a good friend of Pope Francis. It could simply be that Pope Francis was not covering up for McCarrick, but was just not wanting to accept the reality that his friend turns out to be a sexual predator. The Pope is human. He is allowed to have friends, and when close friends misbehave, it must hurt and lead to a sense of betrayal. Perhaps the news about McCarrick becoming public jolted him into finally realizing he had to do something, which he did.
Click to expand...
I can’t speak for those that want Pope Francis to resign. I don’t believe the Pope should resign even if the worst of the allegations are proven. I will say, however, that an inability to separate friendship from the needs of the Church could be a real problem regardless of whether or not such behavior is understandable.

If the Pope is willing to reverse the sanctions of previous Popes and overlook problematic behavior because of friendship, or ideological alignment, then we need to know.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top