Pope Francis covered up McCarrick abuse, former US nuncio testifies

A faithful Catholic owes fidelity first and foremost to the truth. It is no different in marriage. If a wife is to be subordinate to her husband, which last Sunday's readings attest to, it is only in so far as the husband is acting within the truths of Christ and his church. So too, a faithful Cardinal, Bishop or Priest must only remain obedient and faithful to the pope when he is speaking within his authority within the truths of God. When the pope speaks and acts outside the truths of God and is corrected and continues to ignore a dubia requested in good faith and now is asked to speak to his his support and accountability of covering up the ring leader of homosexual clergy in the USA, he all of a sudden has nothing to say. He doesn't have to. His silence speaks to his coverup crime. His rainbow colors at the Vatican have come home to roost.

 

I repost here the full translation of the article of Aldo Maria Valli - this is the translation by Father Z. Aldo is a well respected vaticanist, he has indeed been widely respected before and after Pope Francis, unlike many other vaticanist that have been pushed aside in this pontificate like Marco Tossati, Aldo still continues to be esteemed by the Holy See communications team - that is why this article is sooooo relevant. You see, many journalists write about facts but in reality they are subreptitiously trying to damage the reputation of Vigano and the previous popes, they represent what pope Francis calls terrorists of the information age (we are after all in the post truth era - so be wary of articles that say 'facts about...'). The only serious journalist that has met with Vigano is this one below, Aldo Maria Valli, and he recounts his experience with great detail, giving us the most accurate external perception of Vigano and the motivations behind publishing the letter.

http://wdtprs.com/blog/2018/08/ital...e-his-memo-heres-why-i-decided-to-publish-it/

Così monsignor Viganò mi ha dato il suo memoriale. Ed ecco perché ho deciso di pubblicarlo
How Archbishop Viganò gave me his memo. And here’s why I decided to publish it.

“”Dottore”(in Italian, a not rare title), I need to see you”.
The tone of voice was calm, but I could hear a note of apprehension. On the phone was Msgr. Carl Maria Viganò the former Nuncio in the United States.
I didn’t hide my surprise, we had seen each other. Sometimes, on the occasion of public conferences, but I can say that we knew each other.
He explained that he is an avid reader, that he appreciates my courage and my clarity, sometimes joined with irony. I thanked him and I asked: why do you want to get together?
The response was that I can’t say it on the phone.
Okay, so let’s get together, but where?
I naïvely suggest my office then as a little bar that’s nearby, which is my second office.
“No, no, for heaven sake. As far away from the Vatican as possible, far from prying eyes”.
I am not by nature a conspiracy guy, but I can see that the Archbishop was seriously worried.
“So at my house? For supper? But my wife then some of my daughters will be there.”
“At your house is just fine”.
“Should I come to get you?”
“No no I will come with my car.”
And that’s how it happened.
When the Archbishop came, on a warm evening of early summer, I saw an older man than how I remembered him. He smiled, but right away you knew that something was oppressing him. He had a weight on his heart.
After introducing my wife and daughters, and after he blessed the table, to break the tension a little we joked about our common Lombard roots (he Varese, we from Rho). The Archbishop had arrived at the appointed hour, on the minute: in Rome that happens pretty rarely.
Then Viganò got down to business. He was worried for the Church, feared that at its summit there are people who are not working to bring the Gospel of Jesus to men and women of our time, but to bring confusion and to give in to the logic of the world. Then he began to recount his long experience in the Secretariat of State, as head of the Governorate of Vatican City and as Nuncio in Nigeria and in the United States. He gave a lot of names and cited many circumstances. For my wife and for my daughters it wasn’t easy to follow him. Even I, having been a Vaticanista for more than 20 years, sometimes struggled to get my bearings. But we did not interrupt him because we understood that he needed to talk. The impression was that he was a man alone, and sad for what he had seen around him, but not embittered. In his speech there was never a bad word about the many other people he mentioned. The facts were eloquent. Sometimes he smiled and looked at me, as if to say: “What do we have to do? Is there a way out of this?”
He said that he called me because, even not knowing me personally, he respected me especially for the courage and the freedom that I show. He added that my blog is read and appreciated also in the “sacri palazzi” (Vatican offices), even if not everyone can say it openly. [Tell me about it!]
I asked him something about his experience at the Governorate and he told about how he managed to save the Vatican a great deal of money, by making them follow the rules and by putting the accounts in order.
I commented: “So, Monsignore, after that clean up you certainly won’t have made friends!” He smiled again and said: “Don’t I know it! But if I would not have done it. I could not have respected myself.”
He is a man of a profound sense of duty. At least that’s what it seems. In just a few minutes we were on the same frequency.
My wife, a catechist at the parish, and my daughters were literally speechless in the face of certain stories. I always say, joking but not really, that good Catholics shouldn’t know how things work in the upper hierarchy, and this evening confirmed that. Nevertheless, I am not sorry to have invited the Archbishop to my home. I believe that the sorrowful testimony of this man, of this old servant of the Church, is telling us something important. Something which, even in its pain and its discomfort, can help our life of faith.
The Archbishop said: “I’m 77 years old, and I’m at the end of my life. The judgment of men doesn’t interest me. The only judgment that counts is that of our good God. He will ask me what I did for the Church of Christ and I want to be able to tell him that I defended her and served her to the last.”
That’s how the evening went. We had the strong sense that His Excellency hadn’t even noticed what he had on his plate. Between one bite and another he didn’t stop talking.
When I walked him to his car. I asked myself: So, in conclusion, why did he want to see me? Out of respect, and from a lack of confidence, I didn’t ask him that question, but, before taking his leave, he said to me: “Thank you, we will meet again. Don’t call me. I’ll get in touch with you.” And he got into his car.
I am a journalist and therefore in these cases my first impulse is to sit down at the computer and write everything that he told me, but I held back. The Archbishop did not forbid me to write. Indeed, he didn’t say anything to me about that. But it was beyond doubt that he had revealed certain things to me. I now understand that the meeting was a kind of test. The Archbishop wanted to see if he could trust me.
A little more than a month went by and he called me again. The request was the same as the last time, “can we get together?”
“Of course we can. Shall we meet at my house again? I ask this because there will be yet another daughter, the oldest, and there will be per two children, our grandchildren.”
“No problem”, Viganò said. “The important thing is that we too have a secure place where we can speak.”
And so His Excellency, the former Nuncio of the United States, returned to visit us. And this time he seemed a little less tense. You could see that being with this big and a little chaotic family was a pleasure. At a certain point his mobile phone rang. It was a video call from the United States. It was his nephew: “Oh, sorry, uncle, I don’t want to disturb!” Viganò smiled, amused, and showed with his phone the whole gang at the table, including the grandchildren. “What great company!”, His nephew said. And then, turning to me: “take advantage of the situation to tell him of my great esteem.” The tension relaxed. Our grandchild of three years swarmed on the monsignor and called him Carlo Maria. Viganò was amused and it seemed for a few minutes to have forgotten his crosses. But again, after the blessing of the table, the Archbishop was a river in full flood. So many stories, so many situations, so many names. But this time he focused more on his years in America. He mentioned the case of McCarrick, the ex-Cardinal known to be guilty of very grave abuses, and he gave us to understand that everyone knew, in the United States and in the Vatican, for a long time, for years. And they covered it up even so.
I asked: Everyone? Really everyone?
With a nod of his head. The Archbishop responded yes: everyone, really.
I wanted to ask other things, but it wasn’t easy to inject myself into the uninterrupted flood of dates, stories, meetings, names. The core of it was that even Pope Francis, according to Viganò, knew. Even so, he let McCarrick go about undisturbed, making a joke out of the bans that had been imposed by Benedict XVI. Francis new already by March 2013, when Viganò himself responded to a question from the Pope during a face-to-face meeting, he said that there was a thick dossier on McCarrick in the Vatican and there was nothing else to do but read it.
In respect to our previous meeting there was the news of the results emerging from the investigation by the grand jury in Pennsylvania, and Viganò confirmed that the general line was correct. Sexual abuses constituted a phenomenon more extensive than one could imagine, and it was not correct to speak of pedophilia, because in the vast majority of cases they were dealing with homosexual clerics who were on the hunt for adolescent males. More accurate, the Archbishop said, is to speak if anything of ephebophilia. But the point was that the network of complicity, omertà, cover-up, and reciprocal favors extended beyond all imagination, and reached the very heights, both in America and in Rome.

Continues here: http://wdtprs.com/blog/2018/08/ital...e-his-memo-heres-why-i-decided-to-publish-it/

 

I might add, through supernatural means, but with the faithful remnants correspondence and rightful action.

 

Catholics Deserve Answers, Not Church Politics
By ALEXANDRA DESANCTIS

Pope Francis gestures as he leads the Wednesday general audience in Saint Peter’s square at the Vatican on April 4, 2018. (Remo Casilli/Reuters)

Pope Francis loves to talk to the press on airplanes. At least, until he doesn’t.

Yesterday, on the return from his weekend trip to Ireland, the pope declined to comment on the news rocking the Catholic Church: the bombshell testimony published by Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò.

Viganò alleges that he told the pope during a June 2013 meeting about former Cardinal Theodore McCarrick’s sexual abuse and indiscretions — and that the pope nevertheless went on to lift the sanctions that Pope Benedict XVI had placed on McCarrick several years earlier. Not only that, but he alleges that the pope then brought McCarrick into his inner circle and permitted him to heavily influence the elevation of bishops and cardinals in the U.S.

New York Times report yesterday evening, for instance, portrayed Viganò as a disgruntled, anti-gay conservative attacking the pope out of political animus:

Its unsubstantiated allegations and personal attacks amounted to an extraordinary public declaration of war against Francis’ papacy at perhaps its most vulnerable moment, intended to unseat a pope whose predecessor, Benedict XVI, was the first pontiff to resign in nearly 600 years. . . .

Archbishop Viganò, who blames gays for the child abuse crisis that has destroyed the church’s standing in many countries, dedicated entire sections of the letter to outing cardinals who he claims belong to what he characterizes as a pernicious “homosexual current” within the Vatican.

Another Times faith reporter characterized the Viganò testimony similarly: “impt to keep in mind that Vigano and Francis have been political enemies,” Elizabeth Dias wrote in one tweet. “The anti-Francis wing of the church is speaking with new boldness,” she added in another.

Massimo Faggioli, a prominent left-wing Catholic commentator and professor at Villanova University, referred to Viganò as a “terrorist” and gave an interview to Slate in which he attempted to smear Viganò’s character and impugn his motives:

I think Viganò represents the part of the right wing of the church that sees the LGBT issue as the defining issue of this millennium, or this century, and this pontificate. They think that anything can and should be done to stop Pope Francis from ushering in a more welcoming church for LGBT people.

These are utterly transparent efforts to direct focus toward anything other than the substance of Viganò’s allegations. By casting doubt on the moral authority of Church leaders, Viganò’s testimony threatens to undercut the doctrinal changes that many reform-minded Catholics hoped to see under the Francis pontificate. For such would-be reformers, the best recourse is to ignore the claims themselves and instead discredit Viganò personally.

COMMENTS
The pope’s total non-reply very obviously, and likely intentionally, gives cover to reporters and sympathetic commentators who wish to do just that: distract from the allegations and focus instead on internecine Church warfare. On a cynical read, the pope’s evasive statement was calculated to encourage onlookers to dismiss his critics as nothing more than politically motivated, anti-gay conservatives.




But only one thing matters right now: Are the allegations true? That is what faithful Catholics want, and deserve, to know. No other question should occupy the minds of anyone covering or commenting on the testimony and its ramifications. Until that question is answered, Church politics can — and must — wait.

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/pope-francis-catholic-church-deserves-answers/

 

May I say negative reactions from the “usual suspects” do not surprise me at all.

 

Question for the Pope. Will you soon learn that when you deal with the devil and when the devil's use of yourself for his supreme goal of bringing down the Papacy....not really caring through whom that comes to pass.....you will then become useless to him and his minions of this world and "heaven" will NOT come down to earth through such people but rather be blocked from memory if things go their way!

What will be his next step having now been so weakened? Will this tip him over to even greater support for the globalists or will he retire into hoped for quiet, to be replaced by another planned co-opted operative?

Meanwhile it seems our only instructions coming from our Mother are to nevertheless pray for the Pope, bishops, and priests. Trust in the plan!!!

 

Ch

Check Padraig’s thread”will the pope resign?”
I am hoping the globalists will be so distracted with the incoming tsunami from Pres Trump and the white hats that they won’t try to salvage anything. But who knows? Btw what do you think of the rumors about McCain’s death?

 

Did you listen to the latest post from Praying Medic re: McCain and Q's various drops about him and his history, death time and date et al? I just linked it at the "New to Q?" thread.

 

I think even the New York Times is beginning to dump this pope, he´s become such a liability:

What Did Pope Francis Know?
The Catholic Church needs leaders who can purge corruption even among their own theological allies. The pope is failing that test.

During the Catholic Church’s synod on the family in Rome in 2015, a rough-and-tumble affair in which Pope Francis pushed the assembled bishops to liberalize Catholic teaching on remarriage and divorce, one of the attendees, by the pope’s own invitation, was the retired Belgian Cardinal Godfried Danneels.

Danneels was a natural pick in one sense: One of the church’s prominent liberals, he had been part of a circle that supported Jorge Bergoglio in the run-up to his election as Francis, and in a synodal fight with conservative bishops, the pope needed all the allies he could get.

In another sense, though, Danneels was a wildly inappropriate choice, because at the conclusion of his career he was caught on tape trying to persuade a young victim of sex abuse not to go public with allegations against the victim’s uncle, Bishop Roger Vangheluwe of Bruges, Belgium. For Pope Francis, who talked a good game about disciplining bishops for covering up sex abuse, hauling a cover-up artist out of retirement for a synod on the family was a statement that ideological loyalties mattered more to him than personal misconduct: Sex abuse might be bad, but what really mattered was being on the correct side of the Catholic civil war.

The Danneels case is useful context for thinking about the bomb that went off on an already cratered Catholic landscape over the weekend, when the former papal nuncio in the United States, Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò, published a “testimony” accusing a raft of high Vatican officials of longstanding knowledge of the sexual crimes of Cardinal Theodore McCarrick.

Continue here:

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/28/...l?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage

 

This same statement has been written by many catholic commentators and media before - the NYT is quite a bit late. The fact that the pope, unfortunately, would go to the bitter end to protect his own, even when they are tainted by well supported accusations of sex abuse (Chile is a recent example). And this si exactly what Vigano exposes in the McCarrick case.

 

Ha! The NYTimes suddenly becoming the arbiter of moral behavior of the Catholic Church when in reality they look at this as the goal getting completed for a hoped for complete take down of the papacy.

Cardinal Danneels admits being part of clerical ‘Mafia’ that plotted Francis’ election

September 25, 2015 (LifeSiteNews) - The authorized biography of Cardinal Godfried Danneels, out next week, is even more of a bombshell than expected. Not only do the two authors, Jürgen Mettepenningen and Karim Schelkens, reveal that the Cardinal was a regular member of a secret pressure group of Churchmen that met in the Swiss town of Sankt-Gallen, but the Cardinal himself has publicly and good-humoredly admitted the fact.

Danneels even said that what was officially but discreetly labeled “the Sankt-Gallen group” was referred to by its members as “the Mafia”. Its self-imposed aim was to counter the growing influence of Cardinal Ratzinger under the pontificate of Saint John Paul II, serving as a sort of outlet where handpicked cardinals and bishops could express their impatience at the traditional mindset of the Pope and his closest counsellor.

The Belgian press doesn't hesitate to say that one of the group's primary goals was the promotion of Cardinal Bergoglio (now Pope Francis) in view of John Paul II’s nearing death – something the book itself, which is not yet available in bookstores, perhaps clarifies. The Sankt-Gallen group certainly aimed to promote the ideas and preferences for which they had found a champion in Pope Francis.

Said Schelkens in an interview this week: “The election of Bergoglio was prepared in Sankt-Gallen, without doubt. And the main lines of the program the Pope is carrying out are those that Danneels and Co were starting to discuss more than ten years ago.”

“They wanted Church reform, they wanted to bring the Church closer to the hearts of people; they moved forward by stages,” commented Mettepenningen. “At the beginning of the year 2000, when John Paul II’s end was becoming more foreseeable, they thought more strategically about what was going to happen to the Church after John Paul II. When Cardinal Silvestrini joined the group it took on a more tactical and strategic character.”

The new climate in the Church after Pope Benedict’s resignation made these things easier to discuss, according to Mettepenningen.

“It is only now that the existence of a society of same-minded Church leaders can be made known to the public,” he told the Dutch media KerkNet. “In the international press they were talking about the so-called ‘team Bergoglio’ that promoted his choice as Pope, but the name was badly chosen.

In 2013, it was about the content first, the person came afterwards. Danneels took part in both conclaves. He openly showed his disappointment after the first one. He described the second one, in which Pope Francis was elected, as his “personal resurrection.”

More:
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/c...g-part-of-clerical-mafia-that-plotted-francis

 

They are sharks and smell blood in the water. We should never forget this no matter what they publish.

 

They are not our friends. This a tragedy all the way around. I suppose they feel they have to weigh in but I am not going to be reading their articles.

 

Pastor Boniface Ramsay - priest says he warned church about Cardinal McCarrick's alleged abuse

 

Well I guess the big payoffs to the victims is not working anymore to keep everything under the rug. It's when public prosecutors came forth that it is being brought out into the open. Now they can't run and hide anymore, I hear other cities are starting to investigate. It's about time! and it much more horrific than we thought, ugh. And my trust level is about zero right now. But I have faith, Jesus will get it all straightened out, it's his church.

 

True

 

Good to hear from you, Katfalls
I agree with your post

 

As hard as it is to comprehend for us this is much much bigger than sexual abuse and abuse of power. Read about the things said to the victims and rituals used during these abuses using the sacred objects of the Church. They are in the PA report (if you have the stomach for it) and I suggest all good men of God read some of them and truly grasp what exactly we are facing. These men are not merely deviants preying on Church faithful and innocent young men pledged to the clergy they are possessed and given over to demons.
They carry out exactly what is described in Pope Leo XIII prayer to Saint Michael the Archangel.

Their testimony and stories are heart breaking. These are Martyr's crying out for vengeance.

After the death of one of the victims of these men his mother recounts;
"He stayed with the church. And he asked me if anything ever happened to him to
have a Catholic mass and I didn't want to do it and he made me promise and I did.
I did what he wanted, but it was the hardest thing to go into that church and being
counseled with by a priest. I listened to him and tried to help him out a little bit but
I was against it. But he -- the religion was very important to him and he was so
afraid of going to hell that I think that is why he stuck with it."

Fr. Malachi Martin's "fictional" books are seemingly warning us of what was happening in the Church.

These most crafty enemies have filled and inebriated with gall and bitterness the Church, the spouse of the immaculate Lamb, and have laid impious hands on her most sacred possessions. In the Holy Place itself, where the See of Holy Peter and the Chair of Truth has been set up as the light of the world, they have raised the throne of their abominable impiety, with the iniquitous design that when the Pastor has been struck, the sheep may be scattered.