"If I had not done it, I would not have been able to respect myself.”—Absp. Vigano"
#1
I surly hope that Clerics, especially these days, Bishops and Cardinals, are secretly and silently in the background and soon to be drawn out to act like Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò.

Links to the original article (this was received as an email by me) are located throughout the posting below.






Quote:[Image: mail?url=http%3A%2F%2Fstaticapp.icpsc.co...Z9YIvQ--~C]
 
 


Tuesday, August 28, 2018
"If I had not done it, I would not have been able to respect myself.”—Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano, on why he fought financial corruption inside the Vatican over many years, making many enemies
 
=============================
 
A Story about How Archbishop Viganò’s "Testimony" Came to Be
 
The text below was published yesterday, in Italian, by Italian Catholic journalist Aldo Maria Valli on his blog (link).
 
Valli tells us that Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò, former apostolic nuncio to the United States, came to visit him twice this summer before publishing his 11-page report on Church cover-ups of sexual abuse.
 
Valli reports near the end of his story that Viganò, meeting with him at his home in Rome, told him he had “already purchased an airplane ticket" to leave Italy, and cannot tell Valli where will be going.
 
"I am not to look for him," Valli writes. "His old cell phone number will no longer work. We say goodbye for the last time.”
 
And, as American Catholic writer Steve Skojec, who has published an English traslation of Vallis story on his onePeterfive website, writes (link), in a video interview on EWTN, Catholic journalist Edward Pentin of the National Catholic Register confirms that Viganò may fear for his safety, that his life may even be in danger. (link)
 
"A former apostolic nuncio, widely respected for his professionalism and decency, forced to go into hiding at age 78 for simply telling the truth about his fellow apostolic successors," Skojec observes.
 
Then he adds: "There is perhaps more wisdom in this than there appears to be at first glance. Viganò’s colleague, Monsignor Jean François Lantheaume, whose job it was to inform then-Cardinal McCarrick of the news that Pope Benedict XVI had levied sanctions against him because of his abuses, wrote on his Facebook page earlier this week, after confirming the veracity of the Viganò report (evidently citing a French comedian's monologe, so, not entirely seriously): "These may be the last lines I write… if I am found chopped up by a chainsaw and my body sunk in concrete, the police and the hacks will say that we have to consider the hypothesis of suicide!!!" (link)
 
Here is the text of this story.
 
=====================
 
This is how Archbishop Viganò gave me his memoir. And why I decided to publish it
 
By Aldo Maria Valli
 
“Doctor, I need to see you.”
 
The tone of the voice is calm, but indicates a note of apprehension. On the phone is Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò, the former nuncio to the United States.
 
I do not hide my surprise. We have met several times at various public convocations, but we can hardly say that we know each other.
 
He explains to me that he is one of my most assiduous readers, who appreciates my courage and my clarity, often united to irony. I thank him and I ask, “But why do you want to see me?”
 
He responds that he cannot tell me on the phone.
 
“All right, then, let’s meet up, but where?”
 
Naïvely I suggest at my office, or at the coffee shop down the street, which is my second office.
 
“No, no, please. As far as possible from the Vatican, far from all indiscreet eyes.”
 
By nature I am not a conspiracy theorist, but I can tell that the archbishop is seriously worried.
 
“All right, how about at my house? For dinner? I warn you that my wife will be there and also some of my children.”
 
“At your house will be perfect.”
 
“Shall I come to pick you up?”
 
“No, no, I will come in my car.”
 
And so he came.
 
When the archbishop arrives, on a warm summer evening, I see a man who is older than I remembered. He smiles, but immediately one can tell that something is burdening him. He has a weight on his heart.
 
After introducing my wife and children, and after he blessed the meal, in order to ease the tension a little bit we joke about our common roots in Lombardy (he is from Varese, while my family is from Rho). The archbishop arrived at the agreed upon hour, not a minute late: in Rome this a very rare occurrence.
 
Then Viganò immediately begins to talk.
 
He is worried for the Church, afraid that at its highest levels there are persons who do not work to carry the Gospel of Jesus to the men and women of our time, but rather intend to create confusion and yield to the logic of the world.
 
Then he begins to talk about his long experience in the Secretariate of State, as head of the Vatican City Governatorate, and as nuncio both in Nigeria and in the United States. He drops many names and speaks of many situations.
 
Even I, who have been a Vatican journalist for more than 20 years, find it hard to follow him at times.
 
But I do not interrupt him because I understand he needs to talk.
 
My impression is that he a man who is alone and sad because of what he sees happening all around him, but not bitter.
 
In his words there is never one ugly word directed toward any of the many people he speaks about.
 
The facts speak for themselves.
 
At times he smiles and looks at me, as if to say, “What should I do? Is there a way out?”
 
He says he called me because, although he does not know me personally, he esteems me, above all for the courage and freedom I demonstrate.
 
He adds that my blog is read and appreciated in the “sacred palaces,” even if not everyone can say so openly.
 
I ask him something about his experience at the Governatorate, and he talks about how he succeeded in saving the Vatican’s coffers a lot of expenses by enforcing the rules and putting order into the accounts.
 
I comment, “Well, Monsignor, after that clean-out, you certainly did not make any friends!”
 
He smiles again and responds, “I know! But if I had not done it, I would not have been able to respect myself.”
 
He is a man with a profound sense of duty. At least so it seems to me.
 
After just a few minutes, there is a harmony established between us.
 
My wife, who is a catechist at our parish, and my daughters remain literally speechless as they listen to certain stories. I always say, only half-joking, that good Catholics should not know how things function in the highest levels of the hierarchy, and this evening’s conversation confirms that.
 
However, I do not for a moment regret having invited the archbishop to my house.
 
I believe that the sorrowful testimony of this man, of this elderly servant of the Church, is telling us something of importance – something which, even in the midst of pain and confusion, can help our life of faith.
 
The archbishop says, “I am 78 years old, and I am at the end of my life. The judgment of men does not interest me. The one judgment that counts is that of the good God. He will ask me what I have done for the Church of Christ, and I want to be able to respond to him that I defended her and served her even to the end.”
 
The evening passed in this way. We have the distinct feeling that His Excellency never even noticed what he had on his plate. Between one mouthful and another, he never stopped talking.
 
When I accompany him to his car, I ask myself, “But, in the end, why did he want to see me?”
 
Out of respect for him, and because of a lack of confidence, I do not ask him, but, before he says goodbye, he says to me, “Thank you. We will meet again. Don’t call me. I will contact you.”
 
And he gets in his car.
 
I am a journalist, and so in these situations my first impulse is to go to my computer and write down everything he told me, but I refrain.
 
The archbishop did not forbid me from writing anything. Actually, he didn’t say anything about it. But it is out of the question that he made some revelations to me.
 
And so I understand that the encounter was a sort of test.
 
The archbishop wanted to see if he could trust me.
 
More than a month passes, and he calls me again.
 
The request is the same as last time: “Can we meet together?”
 
“Yes, of course. Would you like to come to my house again?”
 
I warn him that this time, one more daughter will be there, my eldest, as well as her two sons, our grandchildren.
 
“It doesn’t matter,” says Viganò. “The important thing is that at a certain point we have some space to speak together, just the two of us.”
 
And so His Excellency the former nuncio to the United States returned to see us.
 
And this time he seemed a bit less tense. You could tell he was happy to be with this big, somewhat rowdy family.
 
At a certain point, his cell phone rang. A video call from the United States. It’s his nephew: “Oh, sorry, Uncle, I didn’t mean to interrupt you!” Viganò smiles in amusement and shows with his cell phone the whole crowd at the table, including the grandchildren. “What beautiful company!” says his nephew. And then, speaking to me, “I would like to take this opportunity to tell you how much I respect you.”
 
The tension is dissolved. Our three-year-old grandson buzzes around the archbishop and calls him Carlo Maria. Viganò is amused, and it seems that for a few moments, he forgets his worries.
 
But once again, after saying the meal blessing, the archbishop is an overflowing river. So many stories, so many situations, so many names.
 
But this time he focuses more on his years in America. He speaks of the McCarrick case, the ex-cardinal known to be guilty of the most serious abuses, and he makes it clear that everybody knew, in the USA and in the Vatican, for a long time, for years. But they covered it up.
 
I ask, “Truly everybody?”
 
With a nod of the head the archbishop responds yes: truly everybody.
 
I want to ask other questions, but it is not easy to insert myself into the uninterrupted flow of dates, memos, meetings, names.
 
The heart of the matter is that Pope Francis also knew, according to Viganò.
 
And yet he allowed McCarrick to circulate undisturbed, making a joke of the bans imposed on him by Benedict XVI.
 
Francis knew at least since March 2013, when Viganò himself, responding to a question asked by the Pope during a face-to-face meeting, told him that in the Vatican t,here is a large dossier on McCarrick, and he needs to read it.
 
With respect to our previous encounter, there is the new development of the findings that have emerged from the grand jury investigation in Pennsylvania, and Viganò confirms that the image created by the findings is correct.
 
The sexual abuses constitute a phenomenon more extensive than anyone could imagine, and it is not correct to speak of pedophilia, because the overwhelming majority of cases deal with homosexual priests who go hunting for teenage young men.
 
It is more correct, says the archbishop, to speak about ephebophilia, if anything.
 
But the main point is that the web of complicity, silence, cover-up, and reciprocal favors extends so far that there are no words to describe it, and it involves everyone at the highest levels, both in America and in Rome.
 
We sit there, once again, stunned.
 
Because of my work, we had a sense that there was some of this, but for Catholics like us, born and raised in the womb of Mother Church, it is truly difficult to swallow such a mouthful.
 
My question is thus the most naïve of all: “Why?”
 
The response of the archbishop freezes my blood: “Because the cracks of which Paul VI spoke, from which he said the smoke of Satan would infiltrate the house of God, have become chasms. The devil is working overtime. And to not admit that, or to turn our face away from it, would be our greatest sin.”
 
I realize that we have not yet had a moment to speak alone, face to face, as the archbishop had requested. He has spoken in front of everyone.
 
I ask him if he would like go into another room with me, without my wife, daughters, and grandsons, but he says no, it’s okay just like this. It is understood that he is content as we are. For us it is a bit like listening to a grandfather tell us tales of far off worlds, and we so wish that at a certain point, he would say that it’s all fiction.
 
But instead, the world of which he is speaking is our world. He speaks of our Church. He speaks of our supreme pastors.
 
There remains basically only one question: why is the archbishop telling us all this? What does he want from me?
 
This time, I ask him, and the response is that he has written a memoir in which he recounts all of the circumstances of which he has spoken – including the meeting of June 23, 2013, with the pope, when he, Viganò, informed Francis about the dossier on McCarrick.
 
And so?
 
“And so,” he says to me, “if you will permit me, I would like to give you my memoir, which demonstrates that the pope knew and that he did not act. And then you, after evaluating it, may decide whether to publish it or not on your blog, which is widely read. I want this to be known. I do not do this with a light heart, but I think it is the only way left to attempt a change, an authentic conversion.”
 
“I understand. Will you give it only to me?”
 
“No. I will give it to another Italian blogger, to one in England, to an American, to a Canadian. Translations will be made into English and Spanish.”
 
Also, this time, the archbishop does not ask me for confidentiality. I understand that he trusts me. We therefore agree that, at his request, we will meet again, and he will give me his memoir.
 
After a few days he calls me back, and we make arrangements. I cannot say where we met each other, because I gave my word.
 
The archbishop shows up with sunglasses on and a baseball cap. He asks that my first reading of the document be done in his presence, right in front of him, so that, he says, “if something does not convince you, we can discuss it immediately.”
 
I read the whole thing. There are eleven pages. He is amazed at how quickly I read it, and he looks at me: “Well?”
 
I say: “It is strong. Detailed. Well-written. A dramatic picture.”
 
He asks: “Will you publish it?”
 
“Monsignor, do you realize this is a bomb? What should we do?”
 
“I entrust it to you. Think about it.”
 
“Monsignor, do you know what they will say? That you want revenge. That you are full of resentment for having been dismissed from the Governatorate and other things. That you are the crow who leaked the Vatileaks papers. They will say that you are unstable, as well as a conservative of the worst kind.”
 
“I know, I know. But that doesn’t matter to me. The one thing that matters to me is to bring the truth to the surface, so that a purification can begin. At the point that we have reached, there is no other way.”
 
I am not anguished. Deep down inside me, I have already made the decision to publish it, because I feel that I can trust this man.
 
But I ask myself, “What effect will this have on the simplest souls? On good Catholics? Is there not the risk of doing more good than evil?”
 
I realize that I have asked the question aloud, and the archbishop responds: “Think it over. Make a calm evaluation.”
 
We shake hands. He takes off his dark glasses, and we look each other straight in the eye.
 
The fact that he does not force me, that he does not appear anxious to see me publish everything, makes me trust him even more. Is this a maneuver? Is he manipulating me?
 
At home I speak with Serena and the girls. Their advice is always very important for me. What should I do?
 
These are days of questions. I re-read the memoir. It is detailed, but of course it is Viganò’s version of events. I think readers will understand it. I will propose the archbishop’s version, after which, if anyone has contrary arguments, he will propose other versions.
 
My wife reminds me: “But if you publish it, they will think that, by the very fact of publishing it, you are on his side. Are you okay with that?”
 
Yes, I am. Will they judge me to be biased? Patience. After all, I am biased.
 
When I am a reporter, I report the news, and that’s enough. I try to be as aseptic as possible. But in my blog, I am already clearly taking a position, and the readers know well what I think with regard to a certain turn that the Church has taken in recent years.
 
If afterwards somebody will presents me with documents that prove that Viganò is lying, or that his version of the facts is incomplete or incorrect, I will be more than happy to publish these as well.
 
I call the archbishop on the phone. I tell him my decision. We agree on the day and the hour of publication. He says that on the same day at the same hour the others will publish it as well. He has decided on Sunday, August 26 because the pope, returning from Dublin, will have a chance to reply to it by answering questions from journalists on the plane.
 
He alerts me that the daily newspaper La Verità has now been added to the list of those who will publish it.
 
He tells me he has already purchased an airplane ticket. He will leave the country. He cannot tell me where he is going. I am not to look for him. His old cell phone number will no longer work. We say goodbye for the last time.
 
And so it happened. Not that the doubts inside me are over.
 
Did I do good? Did I do evil? I continue to ask myself this.
 
But I am serene.
 
And I re-read the words that Archbishop Viganò wrote at the conclusion of his memoir:
 
“Let’s all pray for the Church and for the Pope, remembering how many times he has asked us to pray for him.
 
"Let’s all renew our faith in the Church our Mother: I believe in the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church!
 
"Christ will never abandon his Church!
 
"He has generated her in His Blood and he continuously reanimates her with His Spirit!
 
"Mary, Mother of the Church, pray for us! Mary Virgin Queen, Mother of the King of glory, pray for us!”
 
–Aldo Maria Valli
 
=============================
 
Tosatti's role
 
And then there is this news story about another Italian journalist, Marco Tossati, who has just revealed that he in recent days helped Vigano to mke the final edits on his 11-page "Testimony." Tosatti has covered the Vatican since the 1980s.
 
Here is that story, just out today from the Associated Press (link):
 
Italy journalist says he helped pen bombshell against pope

August 28, 2018
 
ROME (AP) — An Italian journalist who says he helped a former Vatican diplomat pen his bombshell allegation of sex abuse cover-up against Pope Francis says he persuaded the archbishop to go public after the U.S. church was thrown into turmoil by sex abuse revelations in the Pennsylvania grand jury report.
 
Marco Tosatti said he helped Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano write, rewrite and edit his 11-page testimony, saying the two sat side-by-side at a wooden table in Tosatti's living room for three hours on Aug. 22.
 
Tosatti, a leading conservative critic of Francis, told The Associated Press that Vigano had called him a few weeks ago out of the blue asking to meet, and then proceeded to tell him the information that became the basis of the testimony.
 
Vigano's document alleges that Francis knew of ex-Cardinal Theodore McCarrick's sexual misconduct starting in 2013 but rehabilitated him from sanctions that Pope Benedict XVI had imposed. The claims have shaken Francis' five-year papacy.
 
Vigano called for Francis to resign over what he said was complicity in covering-up McCarrick's crimes. There is ample evidence, however, that the Vatican under Benedict and St. John Paul II also covered up that information, and that any sanctions Benedict imposed were never enforced.
 
Vigano has kept largely quiet since the bombshell testimony Sunday, and his whereabouts are unknown. As a result, Tosatti's reconstruction provides the only insight into how the document came about.
 
Tosatti, a longtime correspondent for Italian daily La Stampa but who now writes largely for more conservative blogs, said after their initial meeting a few weeks ago, Vigano wasn't prepared to go public.
 
But Tosatti said he called him after the Pennsylvania grand jury report published Aug. 15 alleged some 300 priests in six Pennsylvania dioceses abused more than 1,000 children over the past 70 years, and that a sequence of bishops had covered it up.
 
Tosatti said he told Vigano: "I think that if you want to say something, now is the moment, because everything is going upside-down in the United States. He said 'OK.'"
 
The two then met at Tosatti's Rome apartment.
 
"He had prepared some kind of a draft of a document and he sat here by my side," Tosatti told the AP from behind his desk, pointing to the wooden chair to his right. "I told him that we had to work on it really because it was not in a journalistic style."
 
Tosatti said he persuaded Vigano to cut claims that couldn't be substantiated or documented "because it had to be absolutely water-proof." They worked for three hours.
 
Tosatti said he was well aware of the implications of the document and what it took for a Holy See diplomat to reveal secrets he had kept for years.
 
"They are brought up to die silent," Tosatti said of Holy See diplomats. "So what he was doing, what he was going to do, was something absolutely against his nature."
 
But he said Vigano felt compelled to publish out of a sense of duty to the Catholic Church and to clear his conscience.
 
"He enjoys a good health but 77 is an age where you start preparing yourself ... he couldn't have a clear conscience unless he spoke," Tosatti said.
 
Document in hand, Tosatti then set out to find publications willing to publish it in its entirety: the small Italian daily La Verita, the English-language National Catholic Register and LifeSiteNews, and the Spanish online site InfoVaticana.
 
All are ultra-conservative media that have been highly critical of Francis' mercy-over-morals papacy.
 
The English and Spanish publications translated the Italian document and all agreed on a Sunday morning embargo, coinciding with the second and final day of Francis' trip to Ireland, where the Catholic church's sex abuse and cover-up scandal dominated his trip.
 
Tosatti said Vigano didn't tell him where he was going after the article came out, knowing that the world's media would be clamoring to speak with him.
As Tosatti accompanied Vigano to his door, he bent down to kiss Vigano's ring — a sign of respect for Catholic bishops.
 
"He tried to say 'No.' I told him 'It's not for you, it's for the role that you (play) that I do it," Tosatti said. "He didn't say anything. He went away, but he was crying."
 
=======================
 
He that takes truth for his guide, and duty for his end, may safely trust to God's providence to lead him aright.” —Blaise Pascal (French mathematician, philosopher, physicist and writer, 1623-1662)

=========================================

 
 
Letter #40, Statements, from Monday, August 27, 2018
 
Note: Yesterday, due to a defct in my email program, I was able to send out Letter #40, but it only went to a few of the 20,000 names on my email list. So here below is that report from yesterday, for those who did not receive it. —Robert Moynihan
 
Day 3

Today was the second day after the release on Saturday, August 25, of the accusations by the long-time Vatican insider and now whistleblower, retired Italian Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò, 77.

Here for reference is the full text of Vigano's "J'accuse!" ("I accuse!")

A day of statements.

A day of positioning.

A day of assessing, strategizing, posturing.

A day of analyses by many different writers from many different perspectives, all reacting to Vigano's allegations.

And most missing the main point.

Which is this: that this is not about Vigano, and not even about Pope Francis, but about the Church.

For Vigano is not simply denouncing one or two men -- a cardinal here, an archbishop there, even a Pope -- for allowing, even enabling, the sexual abuse of young people over decades, he is denouncing an entire culture of cover-ups and deceit in the Catholic Church.

Vigano is denouncing the existance in the Church today an influential, mutually supportive, self-protective network or "lobby" of Church prelates who, in alliance with groups outside of the Church, would like to revise perennial Church teaching about human sexuality.

Vigano's statement is really a denunciation of massive eccesial corruption -- and in this sense, it is not unlike Pope Benedict's memorable denunciation of "filth" in the Church in 2005, just before he was elected Pope in April of that year (only to resign 8 years later), and little different, even, from Pope Francis' denunciation of sexual abuse on many occasions in recent years.

The difference is, Vigano has named names.

He has broken the code.

He has accused his own fellow-Vatican officials of having done too little, too late.

Vigano is not suggesting that this global, ancient institution, the Church, is his institution to lead or guide, or even that it is Pope Francis's institution (though Vigano clearly acknowledges that it is Pope Francis to whom the present leadership of the Church has been entrusted), and certainly he is not suggesting that it our institution -- bloggers, writers, parents, fathers and mothers and children, simple believers -- no, not ours, though we are part of it , we are in it, we draw our life from it... but that it is Christ's institution.

Christ "instituted" the Church, that is, founded it, gave it life, and being, and spirit. His Spirit. It is His Church.

What Vigano has been crying out with great passion is that children have been abused and that the men entrusted with the leadership in our time of Christ's Church have allowed it, enabled it, turned a blind eye to it -- including Francis.

What Vigano has been crying out is that this is unworthy of Christ, unworthy of the founder of the Church, who gave all for the Church, dying for the Church.

And this present situation, which harms children and which makes a mockery of all of the fine words of Church leaders about their desire to protect children from abuse, cannot continue.

Something must change.

There must be true reform.

That is what Vigano is saying, essentially.

On this fundamental point, he is entirely, courageously, heroically right.

But that does not mean that his cries will not be discounted, and mocked as excessive, exaggerated, unbalanced, impolite, and so ignored, set aside.

Already there are efforts to set aside Vigano's serious accusations through such means.

So the outcome of these recent events is still very much in the balance.

======================

In regard to the Vatican's handling of sexual abuse cases over the past quarter century (during the time of Vigano's own service in the Vatican and for the Vatican), Vigano's claims are principally two: that high-ranking Church leaders have protected molestors and abusers of children, knowingly, and, that they continue to do so.

So, despite all the meetings, all the commissions, all the guidelines, the crisis has not been adequately addressed.

Children are still in danger.

Still, there is tonight no clarity about what the various actors will do.

And many pundits and spin-doctors are madly spinning this story to shift the main thrust from the abuse and molestation of young people to ecclesial infighting between "reformers" and "hardliners."

Here are just a few of the "Statements" issued today. I include them here as a type of "Dossier" -- regrettably incomplete -- to allow you to glimpse what is taking place.

========================

Statements

(1) Vigano (link)

Vigano has been widely accused in the press of lacking credibility because he himself is allleged to have mishandled a case of alleged abuse in Minneapolis.
He is accused of blocking an investigation and of suggsting that correspondence be detroyed.
Today Vigano responded to that charge. He denied that he blocked the investigation, and he denied that he had asked for any evidence to be destroyed.
Here below is a piece from Catholic World Report on the matter. (link)

 
Archbishop Viganò responds to criticisms of handling of 2014 Nienstedt investigation
The former nuncio to the U.S. flatly denies assertions that he ordered a stop to an investigation of then-Archbishop John Nienstedt of St. Paul and Minneapolis
August 27, 2018
Carl E. Olson Features, Special Report
 
In an August 26th written statement seen by some media outlets, including Catholic World Report [Note: I also have seen the written statement, but have been asked not to publish it], Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò responded to reports that he ordered a stop to an investigation of then-Archbishop John Nienstedt of St. Paul and Minneapolis.
Viganò flatly denies these assertions, stating, “These accusations – that I would have ordered the two auxiliary bishops of Minneapolis to close the nvestigation on the life of archbishop Nienstedt – are false.”
The charges against Vigano have circulated for years but his recent criticism of an alleged Vatican and U.S. Catholic coverup of Archbishop McCarrick’s reported sexual misconduct have brought the charges back into general discussion.
According to veteran Vatican reporter John Allen, Jr., in an August 27th CRUX article, “Viganò arguably undercut his credibility by not dealing with his own record on the abuse issue.”
Allen then summarizes the central criticism:
According to a 2014 memo, first made public in 2016, Viganò as nuncio quashed an investigation – going as far as demanding that evidence be destroyed – into then-Archbishop John Nienstedt of St. Paul and Minneapolis, who was being investigated for misconduct with seminarians as well as cover-up of sexual abuse. In 2015, Nienstedt stepped down as head of the archdiocese.
Viganò, in his statement, says that in April 2014 he was given affidavits containing accusations that Nienstedt had an affair with a member of the Swiss guard while serving in the Vatican two decades ago.
Viganò says that an inquiry had been conducted by private investigators who were working for a Minneapolis law firm, Greene Espel, that was part of a pro-“homosexual marriage” coalition.
According to Vigano, the inquiry had been conducted in a manner he deemed “unbalanced” and with a “prosecutorial style”.
The investigators, Viganò says, wished to immediately investigate the pontifical Swiss guard without first interviewing Nienstedt.
Viganò says he suggested that Nienstedt be first heard out before further steps be taken: “To the bishops who came at the nunciature on April 12, 2014, I suggested to tell the Greene Espel lawyers that it appeared to me appropriate that archbishop Nienstedt be heard before taking this step – audiatur et altera pars – which they had not yet done. The bishops accepted my suggestion.”
Viganò denies that he said the inquiry should stop or that any documents be destroyed: “I never told anyone that Greene Espel should stop the inquiry, and I never ordered any document be destroyed: any statement to the contrary is false.”
On July 20, 2016, the New York Times published a story by Laurie Goodstein and Richard Pérez-Peña that reported Viganò had “quashed an independent investigation in 2014 into sexual and possible criminal misconduct by Archbishop John C. Nienstedt of St. Paul and Minneapolis and ordered Church officials to destroy a letter they wrote to him protesting the decision, according to a memo made public on Wednesday.”
The memo in question was written by Fr. Dan Griffith who, the Times reported, “wrote that the ambassador’s order to call off the investigation and destroy evidence amounted to ‘a good old fashioned cover-up to preserve power and avoid scandal.'”
Viganò, in his statement, says that Griffith was not present at the meeting at the nunciature, which included the archbishop and the two auxiliary bishops.
It was Griffith, writes Viganò, who had retained Greene Espel to investigate Nienstedt on behalf of the Archdiocese of St. Paul-Minneapolis.
The Times, in its 2014 report, stated, “The document offers a grave indictment of the conduct of the Vatican’s ambassador, and will probably put pressure on Pope Francis to discipline him and Archbishop Nienstedt.”
Viganò states that on July 21, 2016, the nuncio in Washington, DC, Archbishop Christophe Pierre—who had succeeded Viganò three months prior after Viganò had reached the traditional retirement age of 75—was ordered by Pope Francis, via Cardinal Parolin, to immediately open an investigation into Viganò’s alleged coverup.
Viganò says that an American lawyer, Mr. Jeffrey Lena, working for the Holy See, acquired documents from the Congregation for Bishops upholding Viganò’s account of events.
Mr. Lena delivered a report to Pope Francis, according to Viganò, but the Vatican did not make any statement refuting what was reported by the New York Times.
Viganò further says that a report was also given by the nunciature to Cardinal Parolin, and that report is on file at the Secretariat of State and at the nunciature in Washington, DC.
Viganò concludes by stating that he asked both Archbishop Pierre and Archbishop Hebda to correct Griffith’s memo: “On January 28, 2017 I wrote to both Archbishop Pierre and to Archbishop Hebda (who had succeeded Nienstedt) asking them to publicly correct the memorandum of father Griffith. In spite of repeated emails and phone calls, I never heard back from them.”
==================
 
(2) Mons. Jean-Francois Lantheaume (link)
 
Former nunciature official: ‘Vigano said the truth’
 
By Ed Condon, Aug 27, 2018, CATHOLIC NEWS AGENCY
 
WASHINGTON, D.C. - Monsignor Jean-François Lantheaume, the former first counsellor at the apostolic nunciature in Washington, D.C., has said that the former nuncio, Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò, told “the truth” in his explosive statement released to the press on Aug. 25.
One should have an open mind; open enough that things get in, but not so open that everything falls out
Art Bell
 
The individual is handicapped by coming face to face with a conspiracy so monstrous that he cannot believe it exists.
J Edgar Hoover

 
I don't need a good memory, because I always tell the truth.
Jessie Ventura

 
Its no wonder truth is stranger than fiction.
Fiction has to make sense
Mark Twain

If history doesn't repeat itself, it sure does rhyme.
Mark Twain
Reply
#2
My question for you, is this , since it appears this person feels the need to go into hiding. My question would be why ? Why does anyone in this day in age need to run and hide from the papacy / vatican / or the church ? Is there some kind of underground corps of assassins that we don't know about ? Is this person afraid of the Papacy security , that they are going to grab him off the street an toss him into a cell in Rome ? Or some religious or clergy are going to try and bump him off ?

If all this poor guy did was tell the truth, who does he have to fear and why.

Or is it he isn't afraid and just doesn't want to be involved any more ?

When I first learned of the original abuse scandal, before Pope Francis, I had my suspicions that this issue was not resolved in any sense of the word, I had my suspicions as to what was going on, and from what I can tell I was right, an so I am not at all surprised that this issue not only isn't resolved, but more than likely will not be resolved.


All anyone can do is to keep the light on the truth, and keep making the roaches run back into the dark, and pray, pray for justice and pray for the protection of all children. Catholic or not.

And as a side note since i am seeing this tweet that says " Cupich on Francis critics: “Quite frankly, they also don’t like him because he’s a Latino.”

I gotta disagree with this i mean ya gotta look at his full legal name, find the origins of it, and go oh okay he isn't " latino " I am third generation Italian/ I identify as a plain ole white American Male with rockn olive toned skin. If I go to Italy and start beep bopping around going heeeeeey ooooooooo that's a spicy meatball, I am going to get my teeth knocked in by the locals.

So really, Francis is about as Latino as I am Italian. Now I will take that back if he is 100% fluent in Latin and Italian and can cook both traditional Latin and Italian food.

but what ever that is me just being a lil bit of a jerk. so what ever. But to say they dont like him because of his nationality is a joke, considering the papacy is rarely if ever actually held by someone who is not physically white and European, and that isn't being racist that is just a fact. so unless there are photos of some Asian person or drawings paintings, and he looks full blown Asian, or and hold on to your politically correct pants cause we are testing boundaries now, on what one can say in here, or if there paintings , pictures, etc of a black * gasp * man as bishop of Rome, or heck Irish, Russian, etc. The papacy has predominately been held for what ever reason by white European men, Hence why I personally can not believe that God is personally hand picking through these cardinals who becomes pope.


So any of these cardinals want to cry racism at any point about the papacy, just point that out them first. and emphasis he is about as " Latino " as they are. Racism isn't a one way street.

And I find it all disappointing and aggravating.
Reply
#3
From the Code of Canon Law;

 Can.  1404 The First See is judged by no one.

http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P5A.HTM
Reply
#4
(08-29-2018, 03:20 AM)Poche Wrote: From the Code of Canon Law;

 Can.  1404 The First See is judged by no one.

http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P5A.HTM

Poche if you can't figure it out, trying to protect someone for covering up a crime doesn't bode well with society, and quoting canon law doesn't  mean that one just ignores wrong doings by someone in authority.  An popping up here n there in threads posting that quote just comes off as really odd. as if that partial quote is the final answer and gospel. 

anyhow I do hope someone can give me some kind of answer as to why he has to fear for his life.

we should start taking count of how many times we spot poche posting this quote too.
Reply
#5
(08-29-2018, 08:58 AM):originalscreenname Wrote: anyhow I do hope someone can give me some kind of answer as to why he has to fear for his life.

Since I don't have any first hand information to relate as a reason for his fear, I could, however, speculate:

This problem of Pedophilia and homosexuality in the Church is deeply ingrained and spread widely throughout the Administration and hierarchy. The depth of involvement, the utter ruin of one's persona and career, the threat of death or dishonor, even to loss of these things in others as well, are just a few of the common threats of this horrid sin which has had many years to become a deadly institution in the workings of the Clerics (and the lay as well) of our Dear Mother Church.

One of the known hallmarks and chief tools of these groups is blackmail, but they are very adept at murder and mayhem as well to get their desires met. This Archbishop is brave just opening up on what he has and only his conspicuousness may be his cover for now. Depending on how much his revelations effect these devils in cassocks (or Nun's habits, it appears, as well), would be indicators as to whether he'd get attacked, even physically, later on.

What he has done is a brave move, but more brave men (and woman) need to come out and put the spotlight on the perpetrators and flush them out of the Church. Much damage has already been done and time will only make things worse if we loose this opportunity to strike and remove this evil.
One should have an open mind; open enough that things get in, but not so open that everything falls out
Art Bell
 
The individual is handicapped by coming face to face with a conspiracy so monstrous that he cannot believe it exists.
J Edgar Hoover

 
I don't need a good memory, because I always tell the truth.
Jessie Ventura

 
Its no wonder truth is stranger than fiction.
Fiction has to make sense
Mark Twain

If history doesn't repeat itself, it sure does rhyme.
Mark Twain
[-] The following 1 user Likes Zedta's post:
  • originalscreenname
Reply
#6
(08-29-2018, 03:20 AM)Poche Wrote: From the Code of Canon Law;

 Can.  1404 The First See is judged by no one.

http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P5A.HTM

Does this mean a pope can be a criminal and rebel against moral law and remain untouchable?

And how binding is Canon Law?  It's not part of the Deposit of Faith is it?
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)