Pope Francis Must Resign: Archbishop Vigano

  • Thread starter Thread starter TigerLily-1
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
The most disappointing thing about all this? even worse that the abuse itself?

The response to the “crisis” has shown how little belief people have in satan. And he loves that disbelief.
 
Its been longer than 24 days. The USCCB called for an investigation on August 17th into the McCarrick affair. That was 8 days before Vigano’s letter. At this point I am getting to be pessimistic. Since Cardinal DiNardo has met with the pope and the initial statement, not a peep. I think only an full and transparent investigation into the whole McCarrick situation will tell us the extent of the corruption in the hierarchy. I believe the problem of priests abusing minors has been largely addressed (in this country at least). But the problem with the Bishops and Cardinals has been ignored/covered up. Too many instances, in too many seminaries around the world for us to believe a real problem does not exist.

ETA: On the other hand, there is cause for hope. 8 days ago, the Council of Cardinals did say that Holy See is preparing to address the recent issues.
 
Last edited:
Between the fact that the USCCB has repeatedly answered “no comment” to questions from reporters on whether or not there will be an investigation and the statement that Cdl. DiNardo put out was very vague and said they would “discern the next steps” leads me to strongly believe that there will not be an investigation. My guess is that Pope Francis does not particularly want one due to the clergy that would likely be the focus. Let’s take a look at the list of high ranking clergy who would probably be focused on in an investigation:

Cdl. Wuerl - Current Archbishop of Washington who was a close friend of McCarrick and his successor in Washington. Claims to have known nothing of McCarrick’s crimes despite kicking him out of a seminary at one point and canceling events with him talking to seminarians. Known to be very close to Pope Francis and has stayed on past retirement age for several years.

Cdl. Farrell - Current Prefect of the Dicastery for the Laity, Family, and Life. Claims to have known nothing about McCarrick’s trysts with seminarians despite having lived with him in the same apartment for about 6 years when he was serving as an auxiliary bishop of Washington. Made a Cardinal by Pope Francis in 2016 along with Cdls. Tobin and Cupich and appointed to the Dicastery by Pope Francis as well.

Cdl. Tobin - Current Archbishop of Newark. Despite his archdiocese having made settlements with former seminarians abused by McCarrick, claimed to be unaware of his actions. Later admitted in an interview that he had heard rumors of McCarrick’ outings to his infamous beach house in New Jersey, but declined to investigate them, saying he found them unbelievable. Named in Archbishop Vigano’s testimony as having his appointment to Newark heavily influenced by McCarrick. Also currently dealing with an abuse controversy in a seminary under his jurisdiction. Named Cardinal by Pope Francis in 2016 along with Cdls. Farrell and Cupich.

Cdl. O’Malley - Current Archbishop of Boston. Admitted in a statement that he did not act on a letter sent to him by a priest about McCarrick’s abuses. Claims the letter never reached him personally. Named by Pope Francis to his “C9” council of Cardinals that advise him on Church issues.

Bishop McElroy - Current Bishop of San Diego. Admitted that he received a letter from sex abuse expert Richard Sipe in 2016 about McCarrick’s abuses but did not act on it, saying that there was no way to determine the credibility of the accusations. Made bishop of San Diego by Pope Francis in 2015, and is widely believed to be one of the leading candidates to replace Cdl. Wuerl in Washington upon his retirement or resignation.

Cdl. Cupich - Current Archbishop of Chicago. Not directly or indirectly implicated in any action or inaction regarding McCarrick’s abuses, but named in Archbishop Vigano’s testimony in having his appointment heavily influenced by McCarrick. Made Cardinal in 2016 along with Cdls. Farrell and Tobin.

Notice a pattern here? It’s not difficult to see that an investigation could be very inconvenient for Pope Francis and the Vatican if there is any dirt to be found.
 
Last edited:
ucfengr said:
As the head of the Catholic Church, I don’t see how the Pope can be absolved from responsibility for what is going on under his watch, whether he took active part or not. I think at this point, the way Pope Francis has handled the situation is hurting the Church, and if nothing else, this is reason for him to step down. Personally, I think he should open all the books and make a full accounting before he goes. The corruption within the Church needs to be cleaned out top to bottom. Anything less leaves us where we are in which every couple of years a new sex abuse scandal erupts further damaging the Church.
Click to expand...
Keep in mind that the Catholic Church is not a democracy, ucfengr.
 
Maxirad said:
Keep in mind that the Catholic Church is not a democracy, ucfengr.
Click to expand...
All the more reason for the leader of the Catholic Church to step up and fix this mess. It’s not a democracy so he doesn’t need to wait for popular vote from the magisterium. It also means he has no excuse for not knowing what goes on under his watch.
 
It appears the consensus now is that an investigation into McCarrick will not be happening.

Loading…

www.catholicculture.org
The US Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) has announced a series of new responses to the sex-abuse scandal. But the USCCB request to Pope Francis for an apostolic visitation of the American Church has apparently been rejected.
Click to expand...

Loading…

www.catholicculture.org
 
Last edited:
Maybe if the Bishops called out the Vatican they might do something lol. Not sure that would be helpful in the end though. A Visitation was an weak solution at best
 
Maxirad said:
40.png
ucfengr:
As the head of the Catholic Church, I don’t see how the Pope can be absolved from responsibility for what is going on under his watch, whether he took active part or not. I think at this point, the way Pope Francis has handled the situation is hurting the Church, and if nothing else, this is reason for him to step down. Personally, I think he should open all the books and make a full accounting before he goes. The corruption within the Church needs to be cleaned out top to bottom. Anything less leaves us where we are in which every couple of years a new sex abuse scandal erupts further damaging the Church.
Click to expand...
Keep in mind that the Catholic Church is not a democracy, ucfengr.
Click to expand...
Ding, ding, ding. Precisely.
 
I’ve no problem accepting that the pope has greater responsibility. But because the Church is not a democracy, I have a big problem with calling for the pope’s resignation.
 
gracepoole said:
I’ve no problem accepting that the pope has greater responsibility. But because the Church is not a democracy, I have a big problem with calling for the pope’s resignation.
Click to expand...
Non-democracy does not equal non-accountability. The Church has not always operated as an absolute monarchy, and it needn’t be that way now. There is a huge difference between calling for a resignation and forcing one, and so far no one is suggesting that.

Speaking out and saying that the Pope is failing in his job, and should either step up or step down, is not a new thing in the Church. It is one of the few ways we as a Church have of holding the Pope accountable, as we have no canonical recourse.

Popes are not impeccable, they are not protected by Divine Power from making horrible, Church damaging choices. They are not prevented from scandalizing the people of God, nor from doing grave harm to the Church. They are protected from leading the Church into heresy, that is all, and that is because of the indefectable nature of the Church Herself, not because of a unique property of the Papacy per se.

So calling out the Pope, even calling for resignation, is not a rejection of the Papacy, it is a recognition of its power and importance. A particular call might be wrongheaded or imprudent, but correction and/or calling for resignation in itself is not an offense against the nature of the Papacy, and has profound precedent.
 
Last edited:
I didn’t advocate for a loss of accountability. Nor did I claim popes are impeccable. But if you mean to create in the Church a democracy, count me out. I smell relativism on the horizon.
 
gracepoole said:
I didn’t advocate for a loss of accountability. Nor did I claim popes are impeccable. But if you mean to create in the Church a democracy, count me out. I smell relativism on the horizon.
Click to expand...
I don’t want a democratic Church at all; the ability of the Papacy to protect the Faith rests entirely on its monarchical authority. There is nothing inherently democratic in calling out a Pope’s failings and pressing him to step up or step down, however. Democracy would come into play if the majority had the authority to force such a resignation, and that is sonething utterly foreign to the Church.
 
It does not sound promising. I am curious as to what their forth action entails:

“Supported a full investigation into the situation surrounding Archbishop McCarrick, including his alleged assaults on minors, priests, and seminarians, as well any responses made to those allegations. Such an investigation should rely upon lay experts in relevant fields, such as law enforcement and social services.”

(from http://www.usccb.org/news/2018/18-152.cfm )

It says the are “supported”: 1) past tense? 2) why just “support”, why not initiate an investigation on their own. Yes, this investigation may not be able to get access to Vatican or Nuncio documents and it may not have any forced authority from above for various prelates to cooperate, but get the ball rolling anyway. And let everyone know when various people or dioceses do not cooperate.
 
gracepoole said:
40.png
Maxirad:
40.png
ucfengr:
As the head of the Catholic Church, I don’t see how the Pope can be absolved from responsibility for what is going on under his watch, whether he took active part or not. I think at this point, the way Pope Francis has handled the situation is hurting the Church, and if nothing else, this is reason for him to step down. Personally, I think he should open all the books and make a full accounting before he goes. The corruption within the Church needs to be cleaned out top to bottom. Anything less leaves us where we are in which every couple of years a new sex abuse scandal erupts further damaging the Church.
Click to expand...
Keep in mind that the Catholic Church is not a democracy, ucfengr.
Click to expand...
Ding, ding, ding. Precisely.
Click to expand...
That is not to imply the Church is therefore an autocracy, with the Pope as the chief autocrat, nor is it an aristocracy.

The role of the Pope and Magisterium is more like that of the keepers of the Holy Constitution (the Word) or as the Chief Stewart and managerial staff, acting at the discretion, and in the absence of the ruling Monarch, Christ. It is, after all, the Kingdom of God on earth.

Using Scripture and Tradition as the benchmarks for what the current hierarchy ought to be teaching and doing is not out of line with the role of the people of God.
 
Calling for the pope’s resignation ala Trump is not a valid move for the laity, regardless of all that you’ve said (with which I agree).
 
If what Vigano says is true, Francis’ behaviour (especially after the letter) has been rather reprehensible in my opinion. I would be wishing for him to take responsibility somehow. However, a pope resigning in disgrace is a troubling concept. It would set a precedent of opponents of a pope digging for dirt to take the pope down. The fact that this hasn’t happened before would give more credibility to Vigano, however future calls for papal resignations (regardless of how good or bad the pope is) would now seem less credible, and for that reason Vigano is setting a bad precedent. But it does raise the hypothetical problem on what to do with a bad pope especially in the time of mass media.

If Vigano’s claims are false, all of this of course is a moot point, and Pope Francis’ actions become a non-concern, and there would be no reason for him to even consider resigning.
 
gracepoole said:
Calling for the pope’s resignation ala Trump is not a valid move for the laity, regardless of all that you’ve said (with which I agree).
Click to expand...
St. Catherine of Sienna was laity when she told to Pope to either resign or act appropriately. I see no reason why it is inappropriate for the laity where it would be appropriate for a Bishop; there is no canonical authority in either case.
 
MapleLeaf1 said:
However, a pope resigning in disgrace is a troubling concept. It would set a precedent of opponents of a pope digging for dirt to take the pope down. The fact that this hasn’t happened before would give more credibility to Vigano, however future calls for papal resignations (regardless of how good or bad the pope is) would now seem less credible, and for that reason Vigano is setting a bad precedent. But it does raise the hypothetical problem on what to do with a bad pope especially in the time of mass media.
Click to expand...
I agree completely. If Pope’s resign because of this sort of accusation then we might as well be back in the Middle Ages where poison was used to remove unwanted authorities.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top