Pope: 'I will not say a single word' on Vigano's allegations of cover-up

  • Thread starter Thread starter Cathoholic
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Vigano’s story was released to ultra-right conservative sources like Lifesitenews and The Church Militant, which should’ve been a red flag in of itself.

Jesus responded by, “hear what those who heard me had to say.”

However, after his initial response, he refused to speak

As the Imitation of Christ says, " as often as I have left the company of men, I felt less of a man. This happens when we speak too much."

Pope Francis understands the traps that are laid for him if he choose to speak against Vigano’s letter.

Jim
 
It was released to the National Catholic Register.

I am a conservative Catholic who has always liked Pope Francis. I do not believe any investigation of the McCarrick affair would have ever been done without Archbishop Vigano’s letter. Now, I think there is a good chance an investigation will occur. So this conservative Catholic is thankful for Archbishoo Vigano’s letter, he did a great service for the church.

And I am most certainly NOT calling for the Pope’s resignation, that is the one place he went too far. Although his logic for doing so is understandable.
 
Last edited:
This “blame the ultra-right conservative” mindset is complete B.S. I could just as easily say; blame the ultra left wing that has infiltrated the Catholic Church hierarchy, who turned a blind eye towards active deviants in the clergy, which has allowed this cancer to metastasize in the first place.
 
Last edited:
I could not agree more. As many thoughtful people have stated, if this is investigated, there will be members of the hierarchy from both the left and the right who will have to answer for poor judgement. This should not be a conservative/ progressive issue. We should all want an honest accounting of who aided and abetted McCarrick’s behavior for so many years.

I think too many people are afraid of the answer, so they would prefer one more scandal swept under the rug.
 
Last edited:
The charges by Vigano are much too specific to be ignored. He took the extra step of calling for the resignation. Zero tolerance is zero tolerance.

The Pennsylvania AG has specifically also charged that the Vatican knew about all the abuse there.

Seems these holy guys have forgotten Rule #1 the end doesn’t justify the means. They shouldn’t be just lawyering up about all these scandals.

This is all so damaging to the reputation of the Church. WE AREN’T SUPPOSED TO BE THIS WAY.

I think that failure to respond is apostacy to the responsibility of the papacy, Francis is the one who has condemned the clericalism – abuse of power in the Church – and here he is clamming up,

All I can think now, having chattered about all this, is that there must be something WORSE that we don’t know about yet. I don’t think this is over by a long shot.
 
Last edited:
John 18:19-21 The high priest then asked Jesus of his disciples and his doctrines. Jesus answered, “I have spoken openly to the world. I have always taught in the synagogue, and in the temple, whither all the Jews resort, and in secret, I have said nothing. Why asketh thou me? Ask them who have heard what I have spoken to them. Behold, they know what things I have said.”

_ VERSUS_

CBS: Good evening, Holy Father. I’ll return to the subject of [sexual abuse]. Very early this morning a document by Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò was published. In it, he says that, in 2013, he had a personal conversaton with you at the Vatican, and that during that conversation he spoke with you explicitly about the behaviour of, and sexual abuse by, the former Cardinal McCarrick, and I wanted to ask you if this was true.

I would also like to ask something else. The Archbishop also said that Pope Benedict had sanctioned McCarrick, that he told him he couldn’t live in a seminary, he couldn’t celebrate the Mass publicly, that he couldn’t travel, he was sanctioned by the Church.

May I ask you whether these two things are true?

Pope Francis:

I will respond to your question. But I would prefer that we first speak about the trip, and then other topics. I got distracted with Stefania and now … but I will respond.

This morning I read that statement. I read it, and I will say sincerely that I must tell you all this — you [CBS] and all of you who are interested: Read the statement carefully yourselves and make your own judgment. I am not going to say a word about this. I believe that the statement speaks for itself, and you all have sufficient journalistic ability to draw conclusions. It is an act of trust. When a little time goes by, and you have drawn conclusions, perhaps I will speak about it, but I would like your professional maturity to do this work. It will do you all good, really.

Not getting the similarity you see.

Jesus: What about your disciples and doctrines?
Response: I have nothing to hide. I have spoken openly to all in the Synagogue and temple and they all know what I teach. I have not spoken secretly. Therefore, why don’t you question those who heard Me speak?
VERSUS
Pope Francis: Did a conversation about McCarrick’s sexual abuse behavior between you and Archbishop Vigano take place? Did Pope Benedict sanction McCarrick?
Response: Read the statement carefully….it speaks for itself. I will not say a word about it. I trust the press to draw your own conclusions. I might speak about it later, when a little time goes by, and I see what your professional maturity and journalistic ability is able to discern. It will do you all good. Really.
 
Last edited:
It was Monsignor Vignano who made these allegations.
I do not understand why he isn t the first one to be put against the cords to speak after all.
He has really involved and named a lot of people in his letter.

Either the threat why he is gone is real,perceived,staged,or he is around the corner and hopefully well,it is him that made these allegations.
It is surreal yes,to put a Pope against the cords with the " I said" " he said " .
 
Last edited:
When/if the investigation takes place, I am sure Vigano will testify.
 
Actually the Vigano letter has contradictions as to what took place and when. Also, his words to Pope Francis were in passing and not in a private conversation with him.

The AG in Pennsylvania doesn’t know what and who in the Vatican knew way.

As it was, Cardinal Sedano never informed Pope John Paul II about Father Maciel, but instead gave a glowing report on the priest to Pope John Paul II. Pope John Paul II ignorant of the allegations, gave Fr Maciel an award for his work. Of course Cardinal Sedona was given large sums of money raised by Fr Maciel and wasn’t going to stop that flow of gold.

Bishop Vigano is responsible for the continuing scandal and division which he’s caused by blindsiding Pope Francis, once again. He’s done this before when the Pope visited the USA.

The healing in the Church can not begin as long as we have people like Vigano poking their fingers into the wounds of Christ’s Church.

Jim
 
otrrl said:
The Pennsylvania AG has specifically also charged that the Vatican knew about all the abuse there.
Click to expand...
That would cover the Vatican under Pius XII, John XXIII, Paul VI, John Paul I (for 33 days), John Paul II, and Pope Benedict XVI too, with almost all the abuse happening before 2002.
 
The chief priests and the entire Sanhedrin kept trying to obtain false testimony against Jesus in order to put him to death who stated, “This man said, ‘I can destroy the temple of God and within three days rebuild it.The high priest rose and addressed him, “Have you no answer? What are these men testifying against you? But Jesus was silent Matthew 26:59-63
Click to expand...
Jesus did speak, when it was time to speak and say what was true for which the Sanhedrin could not deny.

Just like Pope Francis who has stated that he will remain silent on the issue and not say a word on it. He says, read it and judge for yourselves, and perhaps I’ll say something in the future.

He’s not going to react defensively, that’s what people who are trying to deny their guilt do.

Jim
 
40.png
Pope Francis Must Resign: Archbishop Vigano Catholic News
Sounds like super secret unenforced sanctions to me [Vigano, McCarrick and sanctions?]
Click to expand...
If this video in christofirst’s post is accurate, it may explain at least in part the Holy Father’s silence on the plane. Truly a stunning find.
 
THOUGHTS ON THIS THREAD FROM A GRATEFUL CONVERT:

I was baptized into the Roman Catholic Church 25 years ago at age 32. I had been brought up atheist (and leftist) and perhaps that’s why my RCIA program (filled with wonderful people) was unable to give me convincing answers. I had to reach out to other sources which were able to answer tough questions (Catholic Answers was one) and therefore, thanks be to God, I just may have been inoculated for this.

I will never leave the Roman Catholic Church and I will never attend Mass at a Church which is not in union with the pope. And I thank the divine and merciful hand of God our Father for reminding me that this is my bottom line. He did this by choosing before the creation of His world to give us the beautifully apropos words of Joshua and Paul and Peter and Our Blessed Lord Jesus at Mass on the very day the Vigano letter was published.

I read the Vigano letter. I then read or watched numerous commentaries from Vox to Church Militant. Then I came here to read posts.

I now dare to make a humble suggestion to my fellow sheep who are troubled: perhaps now is a time for us to strive to remember that there is nothing to fear from facing Truth because He comes with two blessings - the cross and the resurrection.

But at this point, the only person who can give us more of the truth (as opposed to speculation) is the Holy Father himself. My brain, as pathetically limited as it is, can still not be turned off. And I cannot conceive of any prudent or spiritual explanation why Pope Francis cannot or will not speak before the first of the faithful step into church for their Sunday obligation.

If His Holiness does not shed Blessed Light on this matter and no reasonable explanation why not is revealed, I will begin studying Vatican II’s teachings on the role of the laity because I will be unable to conclude anything other then the possibility that this is a moment which the Holy Spirit wisely and mercifully prepared us for with the last council.

May God bless and keep our pope, bishops, priests, deacons, religious, and all sheep loved by Our Good Shepherd, no matter where we’ve strayed in the field. May He give each of us the courage of John and Mary at the foot of the cross of Truth. May He give those He chooses the courage of our Lord on the cross.

May the Most Blessed Virgin Mary pray for us as Sunday draws near and we prepare to receive God, her Son, on the altar.
 
JimR-OCDS said:
He’s not going to react defensively, that’s what people who are trying to deny their guilt do.

Jim
Click to expand...
It is an extremely defensive reply in my book. That does not say that the pope has done anything wrong. But to refuse to answer and suggest the earnest questioner must work it out for themself without his help is defensive. To make a moral claim that it would be good for this person to do this without his help looks not just defensive and evasive but condescending.
 
I think you didn t grasp his paternal tone. He even knew the name of the lady journalist. ( Stephanie,I think…)He charters the plane with them.
“It will do you good”,as when you offer something kindly,and he trusted they would do their job.
We may have disagreements, Abucs, but condescending he wasn t . For sure.
 
Last edited:
Whether traditionalist or modernist, whether cardinal or archbishop, “celebrity priest,” theologian or lay leader, it’s past time to sweep out all those who actively or secretely subvert Church teachings, grounded in Divine and natural law, on human sexuality, marriage and the family.
 
graciew said:
I think you didn t grasp his paternal tone. He even knew the name of the lady journalist. ( Stephanie,I think…)He charters the plane with them.
“It will do you good”,as when you offer something kindly,and he trusted they would do their job.
We may have disagreements, Abucs, but condescending he wasn t . For sure.
Click to expand...
She is a representative of the community grace. It is the community asking this question. The way it was translated it looks very condescending not just to the journalists on the plane, but more importantly the wider community who want transparency in the church with regards to these types of allegations.

If i say to you grace that it was condescending and that i will not say any more on the matter and it will be good for you grace to work it out for yourself. That sounds condescending, not paternal. To me. For sure.
 
Last edited:
Leave that part about condescension in his dialogue with the journalist to rest ,he wasn t. I can hear him differently in my mind because like it or not, we belong to the same place.
I do not mean to second guess him,but just try and convey the tone.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top