Pope Francis response to ex nuncio

[RandomAlias]

@Ghosty1981, @leroy.garrett, et al., have you not noticed that Pope Francis avoids calling people liars? When it comes to “he said, she said,” (i.e., his word against the word of another), his approach is diplomatic and subtle to a degree that is apparently confusing to those who have been fed a steady diet of controversy by a frenzied mass-media.

Look, for instance, at the controversy surrounding the journalist who quoted Pope Francis as saying there is no Hell. Pope Francis could have said “No, I never said that,” but to do so would amount to calling his friend an incompetent reporter or a liar. Instead, the Holy Father said, more or less, “He wrote what he wrote.” You might say he punted, rather ungracefully. I would say he chose humility and charity.

I believe Pope Francis’ handling of the present controversy is similar.

 

[Ghosty1981]

“Us” who?
Who do you mean by us?

All of us. Everyone. He may speak publically eventually.

 

[leroy.garrett]

I actually posted three answers that Pope Francis could have used, two of which did not accuse Vigano of lying. He chose not to use them and just tell the press to read the testimony and draw their own conclusions. It was a terrible response. As a Catholic, I don’t accept that as a charitable or effective response. If he doesn’t want to say that Vigano is a liar, that’s fine! Say that he is correct or say that there is some truth to what he said, but not everything is accurate. “He wrote what he wrote” isn’t humble or charitable.

 

[graciew]

I do not need it.
But I can understand you may do.

 

[Ghosty1981]

It isn’t necessarily saintly to avoid revealing the truth, especially when talking about institutional corruption. If someone is lying about the Church, revealing their lies is virtuous.

If Vigano is lying, then his sins are already out in the open. If he is telling the truth, then the Church must face up to the corruption of the highest office. If he is mistaken, then the truth must be uncovered.

The Pope, whether he likes it or not, is now in the middle of this ordeal. His personal integrity is the integrity of the Papacy itself. Reporters are doing their jobs by asking him these questions, and an answer will have to come if the Church is to regain its position as a beacon in the fallen world.

 

[RandomAlias]

just tell the press to read the testimony and draw their own conclusions.

No, he told them to read it better and come back to him with better questions.

 

[Ghosty1981]

I do not need it.
But I can understand you may do.

I won’t presume to speak for you, either.

 

[Ghosty1981]

No, he told them to read it better and come back to him with better questions.

That isn’t what he said. He said come to your own conclusions, and then I may respond.

 

[graciew]

Thank you!
We kind of speak for all sometimes. It happens.
No.problem.

 

[Ghosty1981]

Thank you!
We all kind of speak for all sometimes. It happens.
No.problem.

For some no answer is needed, and for some no answer is sufficient. Most of us lie somewhere in between, no doubt.

God bless!

 

[graciew]

God bless you too!

 

[Ghosty1981]

Did I say I was, exactly who did I say I could speak for? All victims? Or
Hmm what groups, and why in my Parish and Diocese

You can only speak for yourself when it comes to what the preferred course of action for the Pope would be, and about what actions would cause more or less pain to the victims and the Faithful.

I won’t presume to speak for the victims, nor any other person affected by all of this, and I don’t think any one else can either. What I will say is that the Pope is not being a “straight shooter”, and I think it would better serve the Truth, and the Church, if he was.