Wednesday, October 3, 2018

Pope Francis’s silence on McCarrick cover-up and Viganò 'testimony’





Tit. Archbishop of Ulpiana
Apostolic Nuncio
Scio Cui credidi
(2 Tim 1:12)

Before starting my writing, I would first of all like to give thanks and glory to God the
Father for every situation and trial that He has prepared and will prepare for me during my life.
As a priest and bishop of the holy Church, spouse of Christ, I am called like every baptized
person to bear witness to the truth. By the gift of the Spirit who sustains me with joy on the path
that I am called to travel, I intend to do so until the end of my days. Our only Lord has addressed
also to me the invitation, “Follow me!”, and I intend to follow him with the help of his grace
until the end of my days.
“As long as I have life, I will sing to the Lord,
I will sing praise to my God while I have being.
May my song be pleasing to him;
For I rejoice in the Lord.”
(Psalm 103:33-34)
*****
It has been a month since I offered my testimony, solely for the good of the Church,
regarding what occurred at the audience with Pope Francis on June 23, 2013 and regarding
certain matters I was given to know in the assignments entrusted to me at the Secretariat of State
and in Washington, in relation to those who bear responsibility for covering up the crimes
committed by the former archbishop of that capital.

My decision to reveal those grave facts was for me the most painful and serious decision
that I have ever made in my life. I made it after long reflection and prayer, during months of
profound suffering and anguish, during a crescendo of continual news of terrible events, with
thousands of innocent victims destroyed and the vocations and lives of young priests and
religious disturbed. The silence of the pastors who could have provided a remedy and prevented
new victims became increasingly indefensible, a devastating crime for the Church. Well aware of
the enormous consequences that my testimony could have, because what I was about to reveal
involved the successor of Peter himself, I nonetheless chose to speak in order to protect the
Church, and I declare with a clear conscience before God that my testimony is true. Christ died
for the Church, and Peter, Servus servorum Dei, is the first one called to serve the spouse of
Christ.

Certainly, some of the facts that I was to reveal were covered by the pontifical secret that
I had promised to observe and that I had faithfully observed from the beginning of my service to
the Holy See. But the purpose of any secret, including the pontifical secret, is to protect the
Church from her enemies, not to cover up and become complicit in crimes committed by some of
her members. I was a witness, not by my choice, of shocking facts and, as the Catechism of the
Catholic Church states (par. 2491), the seal of secrecy is not binding when very grave harm can
be avoided only by divulging the truth. Only the seal of confession could have justified my
silence.

Neither the pope, nor any of the cardinals in Rome have denied the facts I asserted in my
testimony. “Qui tacet consentit” surely applies here, for if they deny my testimony, they have
only to say so, and provide documentation to support that denial. How can one avoid concluding
that the reason they do not provide the documentation is that they know it confirms my
testimony?

The center of my testimony was that since at least June 23, 2013, the pope knew from me
how perverse and evil McCarrick was in his intentions and actions, and instead of taking the
measures that every good pastor would have taken, the pope made McCarrick one of his
principal agents in governing the Church, in regard to the United States, the Curia, and even
China, as we are seeing these days with great concern and anxiety for that martyr Church.
Now, the pope’s reply to my testimony was: “I will not say a word!” But then,
contradicting himself, he has compared his silence to that of Jesus in Nazareth and before Pilate,
and compared me to the great accuser, Satan, who sows scandal and division in the Church —
though without ever uttering my name. If he had said: “Viganò lied,” he would have challenged
my credibility while trying to affirm his own. In so doing he would have intensified the demand
of the people of God and the world for the documentation needed to determine who has told the
truth. Instead, he put in place a subtle slander against me — slander being an offense he has often
compared to the gravity of murder. Indeed, he did it repeatedly, in the context of the celebration
of the most Holy Sacrament, the Eucharist, where he runs no risk of being challenged by
journalists. When he did speak to journalists, he asked them to exercise their professional
maturity and draw their own conclusions. But how can journalists discover and know the truth if
those directly involved with a matter refuse to answer any questions or to release any
documents? The pope’s unwillingness to respond to my charges and his deafness to the appeals
by the faithful for accountability are hardly consistent with his calls for transparency and bridge
building.

Moreover, the pope’s cover-up of McCarrick was clearly not an isolated mistake. Many
more instances have recently been documented in the press, showing that Pope Francis has
defended homosexual clergy who committed serious sexual abuses against minors or adults.
These include his role in the case of Fr. Julio Grassi in Buenos Aires, his reinstatement of Fr.
Mauro Inzoli after Pope Benedict had removed him from ministry (until he went to prison, at
which point Pope Francis laicized him), and his halting of the investigation of sex abuse
allegations against Cardinal Cormac Murphy O’Connor.
In the meantime, a delegation of the USCCB, headed by its president Cardinal DiNardo,
went to Rome asking for a Vatican investigation into McCarrick. Cardinal DiNardo and the other
prelates should tell the Church i
n America and in the world: did the pope refuse to carry out a
Vatican investigation into McCarrick’s crimes and of those responsible for covering them up?
The faithful deserve to know.

I would like to make a special appeal to Cardinal Ouellet, because as nuncio I always
worked in great harmony with him, and I have always had great esteem and affection towards
him. He will remember when, at the end of my mission in Washington, he received me at his
apartment in Rome in the evening for a long conversation. At the beginning of Pope Francis’
pontificate, he had maintained his dignity, as he had shown with courage when he was
Archbishop of Québec. Later, however, when his work as prefect of the Congregation for
Bishops was being undermined because recommendations for episcopal appointments were
being passed directly to Pope Francis by two homosexual “friends” of his dicastery, bypassing
the Cardinal, he gave up. His long article in L’Osservatore Romano, in which he came out in
favor of the more controversial aspects of Amoris Laetitia, represents his surrender. Your
Eminence, before I left for Washington, you were the one who told me of Pope Benedict’s
sanctions on McCarrick. You have at your complete disposal key documents incriminating
McCarrick and many in the curia for their cover-ups. Your Eminence, I urge you to bear witness
to the truth.
*****
Finally, I wish to encourage you, dear faithful, my brothers and sisters in Christ: never be
despondent! Make your own the act of faith and complete confidence in Christ Jesus, our Savior,
of Saint Paul in his second Letter to Timothy, Scio cui credidi, which I choose as my episcopal
motto. This is a time of repentance, of conversion, of prayers, of grace, to prepare the Church,
the bride of the Lamb, ready to fight and win with Mary the battle against the old dragon.
“Scio Cui credidi” (2 Tim 1:12)
In you, Jesus, my only Lord, I place all my trust.

“Diligentibus Deum omnia cooperantur in bonum” (Rom 8:28).
To commemorate my episcopal ordination on April 26, 1992, conferred on me by St.
John Paul II, I chose this image taken from a mosaic of the Basilica of St. Mark in Venice. It
represents the miracle of the calming of the storm. I was struck by the fact that in the boat of
Peter, tossed by the water, the figure of Jesus is portrayed twice. Jesus is sound asleep in the
bow, while Peter tries to wake him up: “Master, do you not care that we are about to die?”
Meanwhile the apostles, terrified, look each in a different direction and do not realize that Jesus
is standing behind them, blessing them and assuredly in command of the boat: “He awoke and
rebuked the wind and said to the sea, ‘Quiet! Be still,’ … then he said to them, ‘Why are you
afraid? Do you still have no faith?’” (Mk 4:38-40).
The scene is very timely in portraying the tremendous storm the Church is passing
through in this moment, but with a substantial difference: the successor of Peter not only fails to
see the Lord in full control of the boat, it seems he does not even intend to awaken Jesus asleep
in the bow.

Has Christ perhaps become invisible to his vicar? Perhaps is he being tempted to try to
act as a substitute of our only Master and Lord?
The Lord is in full control of the boat!
May Christ, the Truth, always be the light on our way!

+ Carlo Maria Viganò
Titular Archbishop of Ulpiana
Apostolic Nuncio

September 29th, 2018

Feast of St. Michael, Archangel
Post a Comment