Bergoglio is finished!
Vatican “Archbishop” blabs, accuses Francis of knowing about and covering up McCarrick’s Sex Abuse
Ladies and gentlemen, a bombshell of epic proportions has just hit: The Vatican’s former nuncio to the United States, “Archbishop” Carlo Maria Viganò, has decided to take Francis’ talk about transparency seriously and has released an 11-page tell-all letter in which he says what he knows about sex abuse and cover-up. What makes the missive particularly explosive is the fact that Viganò mentions precise details and is not afraid to name names. The individual of the highest rank accused by Viganò is: “Pope” Francis himself!
The letter is dated Aug. 22, 2018, and was written in Italian. The original can be read here, and an English translation is available here. The following portions are some of the highlights taken from the English translation (all formatting in original):
…now that the corruption has reached the very top of the Church’s hierarchy, my conscience dictates that I reveal those truths regarding the heart-breaking case of the Archbishop Emeritus of Washington, D.C., Theodore McCarrick, which I came to know in the course of the duties entrusted to me by St. John Paul II, as Delegate for Pontifical Representations, from 1998 to 2009, and by Pope Benedict XVI, as Apostolic Nuncio to the United States of America, from October 19, 2011 until end of May 2016.
…
In writing up a memo1 on these documents that were entrusted to me, as Delegate for Pontifical Representations, on December 6, 2006, I wrote to my superiors, Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone and the Substitute Leonardo Sandri, that the facts attributed to McCarrick by Littleton were of such gravity and vileness as to provoke bewilderment, a sense of disgust, deep sorrow and bitterness in the reader, and that they constituted the crimes of seducing, requesting depraved acts of seminarians and priests, repeatedly and simultaneously with several people, derision of a young seminarian who tried to resist the Archbishop’s seductions in the presence of two other priests, absolution of the accomplices in these depraved acts, sacrilegious celebration of the Eucharist with the same priests after committing such acts.
…
Pope Benedict had imposed on Cardinal McCarrick sanctions similar to those now imposed on him by Pope Francis: the Cardinal was to leave the seminary where he was living, he was forbidden to celebrate [Mass] in public, to participate in public meetings, to give lectures, to travel, with the obligation of dedicating himself to a life of prayer and penance.
…
My conscience requires me also to reveal facts that I have experienced personally, concerning Pope Francis, that have a dramatic significance, which as Bishop, sharing the collegial responsibility of all the bishops for the universal Church, do not allow me to remain silent, and that I state here, ready to reaffirm them under oath by calling on God as my witness.
…
I began the conversation, asking the Pope what he intended to say to me with the words he had addressed to me when I greeted him the previous Friday. And the Pope, in a very different, friendly, almost affectionate tone, said to me: “Yes, the Bishops in the United States must not be ideologized, they must not be right-wing like the Archbishop of Philadelphia, (the Pope did not give me the name of the Archbishop) they must be shepherds; and they must not be left-wing — and he added, raising both arms — and when I say left-wing I mean homosexual.” Of course, the logic of the correlation between being left-wing and being homosexual escaped me, but I added nothing else.
Immediately after, the Pope asked me in a deceitful way: “What is Cardinal McCarrick like?” I answered him with complete frankness and, if you want, with great naiveté: “Holy Father, I don’t know if you know Cardinal McCarrick, but if you ask the Congregation for Bishops there is a dossier this thick about him. He corrupted generations of seminarians and priests and Pope Benedict ordered him to withdraw to a life of prayer and penance.” The Pope did not make the slightest comment about those very grave words of mine and did not show any expression of surprise on his face, as if he had already known the matter for some time, and he immediately changed the subject. But then, what was the Pope’s purpose in asking me that question: “What is Cardinal McCarrick like?” He clearly wanted to find out if I was an ally of McCarrick or not.
Back in Washington everything became very clear to me, thanks also to a new event that occurred only a few days after my meeting with Pope Francis. When the new Bishop Mark Seitz took possession of the Diocese of El Paso on July 9, 2013, I sent the first Counsellor, Monsignor Jean-François Lantheaume, while I went to Dallas that same day for an international meeting on Bioethics. When he got back, Monsignor Lantheaume told me that in El Paso he had met Cardinal McCarrick who, taking him aside, told him almost the same words that the Pope had said to me in Rome: “the Bishops in the United States must not be ideologized, they must not be right-wing, they must be shepherds….” I was astounded! It was therefore clear that the words of reproach that Pope Francis had addressed to me on June 21, 2013 had been put into his mouth the day before by Cardinal McCarrick. Also the Pope’s mention “not like the Archbishop of Philadelphia” could be traced to McCarrick, because there had been a strong disagreement between the two of them about the admission to Communion of pro-abortion politicians. In his communication to the bishops, McCarrick had manipulated a letter of then-Cardinal Ratzinger who prohibited giving them Communion. Indeed, I also knew how certain Cardinals such as Mahony, Levada and Wuerl, were closely linked to McCarrick; they had opposed the most recent appointments made by Pope Benedict, for important posts such as Philadelphia, Baltimore, Denver and San Francisco.
…
The appointments of Blase Cupich to Chicago and Joseph W. Tobin to Newark were orchestrated by McCarrick, Maradiaga and Wuerl, united by a wicked pact of abuses by the first, and at least of coverup of abuses by the other two. Their names were not among those presented by the Nunciature for Chicago and Newark.
Regarding Cupich, one cannot fail to note his ostentatious arrogance, and the insolence with which he denies the evidence that is now obvious to all: that 80% of the abuses found were committed against young adults by homosexuals who were in a relationship of authority over their victims.
…
Pope Francis has repeatedly asked for total transparency in the Church and for bishops and faithful to act with parrhesia. The faithful throughout the world also demand this of him in an exemplary manner. He must honestly state when he first learned about the crimes committed by McCarrick, who abused his authority with seminarians and priests.
In any case, the Pope learned about it from me on June 23, 2013 and continued to cover for him. He did not take into account the sanctions that Pope Benedict had imposed on him and made him his trusted counselor along with Maradiaga.
The latter [Maradiaga] is so confident of the Pope’s protection that he can dismiss as “gossip” the heartfelt appeals of dozens of his seminarians, who found the courage to write to him after one of them tried to commit suicide over homosexual abuse in the seminary.
By now the faithful have well understood Maradiaga’s strategy: insult the victims to save himself, lie to the bitter end to cover up a chasm of abuses of power, of mismanagement in the administration of Church property, and of financial disasters even against close friends, as in the case of the Ambassador of Honduras Alejandro Valladares, former Dean of the Diplomatic Corps to the Holy See.
…
Even in the tragic affair of McCarrick, Pope Francis’s behavior was no different. He knew from at least June 23, 2013 that McCarrick was a serial predator. Although he knew that he was a corrupt man, he covered for him to the bitter end; indeed, he made McCarrick’s advice his own, which was certainly not inspired by sound intentions and for love of the Church. It was only when he was forced by the report of the abuse of a minor, again on the basis of media attention, that he took action [regarding McCarrick] to save his image in the media.
…
I implore everyone, especially Bishops, to speak up in order to defeat this conspiracy of silence that is so widespread, and to report the cases of abuse they know about to the media and civil authorities.
…At the Angelus on Sunday, August 12, 2018 Pope Francis said these words: “Everyone is guilty for the good he could have done and did not do … If we do not oppose evil, we tacitly feed it. We need to intervene where evil is spreading; for evil spreads where daring Christians who oppose evil with good are lacking.” If this is rightly to be considered a serious moral responsibility for every believer, how much graver is it for the Church’s supreme pastor, who in the case of McCarrick not only did not oppose evil but associated himself in doing evil with someone he knew to be deeply corrupt. He followed the advice of someone he knew well to be a pervert, thus multiplying exponentially with his supreme authority the evil done by McCarrick. And how many other evil pastors is Francis still continuing to prop up in their active destruction of the Church!
Francis is abdicating the mandate which Christ gave to Peter to confirm the brethren. Indeed, by his action he has divided them, led them into error, and encouraged the wolves to continue to tear apart the sheep of Christ’s flock.
In this extremely dramatic moment for the universal Church, he must acknowledge his mistakes and, in keeping with the proclaimed principle of zero tolerance, Pope Francis must be the first to set a good example for cardinals and bishops who covered up McCarrick’s abuses and resign along with all of them.
…
Other high-profile individuals named unfavorably in Viganò’s letter include: “Cardinals” Angelo Sodano, Pietro Parolin, William Levada, Marc Ouellet, Kevin Farrell, Sean O’Malley, Angelo Becciu, and Lorenzo Baldisseri; “Archbishops” John Myers and Edgar Peña Parra; “Bishops” Paul Bootkoski and Robert McElroy; and “Fr.” James Martin.
This move on Viganò’s part is absolutely stunning and perhaps without precedence. The news broke at a most inconvenient hour in the middle of a weekend, but journalists are beginning to cover it everywhere. Here are links to some of the first available coverage by mostly Novus Ordo sources [LIST UPDATED 27-AUG-2018]:
- Whispers in the Loggia – Rocco Palmo
- LifeSite – Diane Montagna
- National Catholic Register – Edward Pentin
- Church Militant – Christine Niles
- Stilum Curiae – Marco Tosatti
- Vatican Insider – Andrea Tornielli
- The Spectator – Damian Thompson
- Crux
- Catholic World Report – Christopher R. Altieri
- Rorate Caeli
- Crux – John Allen
- American Conservative – Rod Dreher
- Catholic Herald – Raymond De Souza
- The Stream – John Zmirak with Henry Sire
- The Catholic Thing – Robert Royal
- America – Michael J. O’Loughlin
- First Things – Phil Lawler
- Inside the Vatican – Robert Moynihan (1)
- Inside the Vatican – Robert Moynihan (2)
And now a photo of the man who has single-handedly brought down Jorge Bergoglio:
“Abp.” Carlo Maria Viganò is not to be confused with “Mgr.” Dario Viganò, who had to resign from leading the Vatican’s Secretariat of Communications after he was caught producing fake news for Francis at the expense of Benedict XVI
This incredibly candid news comes at a most inconvenient time for Francis, who is currently receiving the adulation of the crowds in Dublin, Ireland, as part of his “pastoral visit” on the occasion of the World Meeting of Families of all things. On Saturday the “Pope” visited a church in which was burning a “candle of innocence”, which is “a memorial to the victims of abuse at the hands of church personnel” (source). The same day, the papal pretender also met with eight victims of sex abuse and called what happened to them and the subsequent cover-up “caca” (Spanish for “excrement”). Truly, Viganò’s letter could not have come at a more perfect time!
Francis has been checkmated. What could he possibly do now other than resign? The press is going to eat him alive, and in Italy this has already begun. He cannot salvage this. His credibility is completely shattered; his many words about zero tolerance have been exposed as insincere and sanctimonious; his meetings with abuse survivors are now revealed as hypocritical public relations stunts.
Sunday evening, Francis will be flying back from Ireland to Vatican City. We suspect that the typical in-flight press conference will be called off this time.
Image sources: shutterstock.com (modified)
Licenses: Paid
;
No Comments
Be the first to start a conversation