That's how Monsignor Anthony Figueiredo, a former Vatican official and a longtime consultant for CBS News, described Viganò's "testimony," an 11-page dossier of accusations and innuendos that targeted the pope and nearly a dozen high-ranking Vatican prelates.

Msgr. Figueiredo, a priest from the Archdiocese of Newark (New Jersey) who has been living in Rome since 2006, immediately defended Viganò's credibility.

"I know him personally," he told CBS. "I know him as a man of great integrity, honest to the core. He's worked for three different popes, and [was] sent to a Vatican position, a diplomatic position as big as the United States, which means he's a trusted man."

The very bright and articulate Newark priest vouched for Viganò on Aug. 27, 2018, just one day after the former papal nuncio carefully coordinated with LifeSite News and the National Catholic Register to publish his 11 pages of accusations.

Taking Viganò's lead

Now nine months later Msgr. Figueiredo is back in the news. And how!

Following in the footsteps of his friend or acquaintance, Archbishop Viganò, the 55-year-old priest has become the latest clergyman with a public profile to blow the whistle on Church cover-up in the hierarchy.

He did so this past May 28 when he released - simultaneously through CBS and the Catholic publication, Crux - excerpts of personal correspondence with McCarrick, a man whom (you will see in a moment) he once considered a father figure and patron.

These carefully chosen excerpts reinforce claims made by Viganò and others that a number of high-ranking Church officials were aware that Benedict XVI had quietly placed restrictions on the former cardinal but they did nothing to enforce them.

Most notable among the accused is Cardinal Donald Wuerl, the recently retired archbishop of Washington. Wuerl has already denied any knowledge of sanctions.

But what's new in Figueiredo's cache of documents is that McCarrick himself claims in letters, which the monsignor relayed to officials in Rome, that he discussed his restrictions with Wuerl. But, as the now defrocked McCarrick has been proven to be less than truthful on a number of other matters, it's only his word against Wuerl's.

Why release the documents now?

Msgr. Figueiredo has posted the documents - and warns that he may post others - on a special website, called… the "Figueiredo Report." Despite the self-referential name of the site, he offers noble reasons why he's become a whistle-blower.

"My actions in releasing this report at this time are encouraged by the Holy Father's motu proprio Vos Estis Lux Mundi… based on the overriding principle that it is imperative to place in the public domain, at the right time and prudently, information that has yet to come to light and impacts directly on allegations of criminal activity, the restrictions imposed on my now laicized former archbishop, and who knew what and when," he says.

Figueiredo expresses his "unswerving affection, loyalty and support for Pope Francis" and claims he wishes "only to present facts that will help the Church to know the truth."

He says he's going public now after making "attempts since September 2018 to share and discuss these [documents] with the Holy See and other Church leaders."

The implication, of course, is that such attempts have been fruitless.

"The hierarchy's abuse of authority and cover up, in their various and serious manifestations, have inflicted consequences upon me, too," the priest reveals, expressing regret that he's harmed others by "seeking consolation in alcohol." He says therapy is now helping him "to embrace a life of sobriety."

In fact, on Oct. 1, 2018 - just five weeks after defending Archbishop Viganò for publishing his screed - Msgr. Figueiredo was arrested for causing an accident while operating a motor vehicle in the state of inebriation. He ended up pleading guilty for drunk driving and hitting a car driven by a pregnant woman.

Greg Burke, who was the head of the Holy See Press Office at the time, said Figueiredo had been recalled to his home diocese. It certainly must have been a low point for a man who had been living permanently in Rome since 2006.

Washing his hands of McCarrick

It is only natural that, having lived in Rome and followed ecclesiastical affairs and politics for more than 30 years, I get just a little skeptical when a cleric has a sudden conversion and starts airing the Church's dirty laundry. There is often more than what meets the eye.

Without calling into question Msgr. Figueiredo's integrity or motives, there are a number of aspects of his personal history and vocation that should push any journalist to scrutinize more carefully the full reasons for his latest actions.

This priest knows an awful lot more than what he's shared so far in this parsimonious and careful selection of correspondence with Theodore McCarrick.

He's known the former cardinal since at least the early 1990s and the two men became very close in the ensuing years.

Long before falling into disgrace, McCarrick was perhaps Figueiredo's most influential and well-connected Church patron.

Now, any connection to McCarrick is Figueiredo's greatest liability. It is understandable why the priest would want to distance himself from the man he once held in such high esteem.

McCarrick is the first person Figueiredo mentions in the list of acknowledgments found in his doctoral dissertation, which was published by the Gregorian University Press in 2001.

"I am indebted to God for Theodore Cardinal McCormick, who, as Archbishop of Newark, conferred upon me the gift of the priesthood and assigned me to graduate studies in Rome," Figueiredo wrote in 2000 in the "acknowledgments" page of his doctrinal dissertation.

"His Eminence has been a true 'father-in-Christ,' supporting me with his Christ-like care, confidence and correction," the priest wrote.

The Neocat connection

Figueiredo's path to ordination was through the Neocatechumenate Way, a dynamic but controversial post-Vatican II movement in the Church commonly called the Neocats. Born in Kenya, and originally from Goa, his family moved to England when he was three.

Upon completion of university studies in the UK, he "embarked upon a career in international banking in the City of London."

But according to a biographical sketch from a 2011 Church conference in the United States, Figueiredo "gave up his prestigious position" three years later and did missionary work "in places as diverse as New York, Los Angeles and Ethiopia."

The experience awakened his desire to become a priest.

It is not clear how he ended up in Newark, but it is certain that he attended the fledgling Redemptoris Mater Seminary that the then-Archbishop McCarrick had just allowed the Neocats to open in the archdiocese. Figueiredo was in the seminary's very first ordination class of 1994.

He says on his new website that he served as McCarrick's personal secretary from September 1994 - June 1995. That's only nine months. But he adds that he resumed assisting the former cardinal "in a secretarial capacity" when he moved to Rome.

Post-graduate studies, a Vatican job and time at the North American College

A little more than a year after ordination, Father Figueiredo did missionary work in Estonia with the Neocats. Afterwards, McCarrick sent him to Rome for post-graduate studies (1996-2000).

The young priest eventually earned a doctorate in dogmatic theology at the Gregorian University where he worked under the direction of the late Karl Becker SJ (d. 2015), a German theologian whom Benedict XVI made a cardinal in 2012.

Freshly minted with a prestigious degree in hand, Father Figueiredo then worked for six years (2000-2006) in Newark's diocesan seminary and the adjoining Seton Hall University, before returning to Rome to be a staffer at the now defunct Pontifical Council "Cor Unum" (2006-2011).

When he finished his job at the Vatican, where he was given the title "monsignor," Figueiredo was hired to direct the Institute of Continuing Theological Education for priests on sabbatical at the North American College (NAC) in Rome.

He left that position in 2014, but stayed on at NAC as an adjunct spiritual director for the seminarians.

It appears that his association with NAC came to a sudden halt at some point in the summer of 2016.

Despite being listed in the official 2016-2017 college catalogue as continuing in the post, Msgr. Figueiredo was no longer at the NAC at the start of that academic year.

Angling for another job at the Vatican

It is at this point where the monsignor's resume becomes murky.

Several people, all colleagues or associates with whom he's been engaged in various work and ministerial activities during his time here in Rome, have noted Figueiredo's determination to find a permanent job in the Eternal City.

But nothing materialized.

"He seemed like he was on the career track and then, all of a sudden, he was without a job," one said.

Figueiredo has gone to China each year for the past decade to give retreats to bishops. He says the annual appointments began in 2008 when he was still working at "Cor Unum" and went to Southern China on an earthquake relief mission on behalf of the Holy See.

"Cor Unum" was officially suppressed in January 2017, but it had already been merged some months earlier into what is now the Dicastery for Integral Human Development.

In regular speaking engagements from the past, especially in the United States, Msgr. Figueiredo has sometimes been described as a permanent consultor to the dicastery's section for migrants and refugees.

But, in fact, his relationship to that office lasted for only three months some two years ago.

"Msgr. Anthony Figueiredo worked with the new Migrants and Refugees section from approximately mid-February until mid-May 2017, and since then has had no relationship with the section. He was not a permanent consultor but a temporary staff-member," confirmed Father Michael Czerny SJ, that office's under-secretary.

Figueiredo also was a "special contributor" to the Eternal Word Television Network (EWTN), following his stint back at the Vatican. He also served as a sort of chaplain to EWTN, celebrating Mass with the staff every Friday morning in St. Peter's Basilica.

But the conservative network appears to have severed its working ties with him following his drunk driving arrest.

More recently the Newark priest has been writing for the British paper, Catholic Universe, which describes him as its senior Vatican correspondent.

La Croix International sent an email to Msgr. Figueiredo on May 29 requesting clarification about his canonical status, current ministerial assignment and whether he is still incardinated in the Archdiocese of Newark. As of now, he has not responded.

And the archdiocese has issued no public statements about him or his current status, either. It has merely published the Catholic News Service reporting his new whistle-blowing effort.

So for now there are as many - and perhaps even more - questions pertaining to Anthony Figueiredo as there are to the now-disgraced Christ-like father figure who ordained him 25 years ago.

• Robert Mickens is editor of La Croix International. He writes from Rome, Vatican City.

He also discussed the personal letter Pope Francis sent him upon accepting his resignation Oct. 12, as well as his 18 years as a bishop in Pittsburgh, the Pennsylvania grand jury report, his 12 years as archbishop of Washington D.C., the McCarrick case, the accusations leveled against him and the pope by Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò, and Cardinal Marc Ouellet's response.

"I was very moved that [the pope's letter] it highlights what is so important to me, namely that the shepherd's first responsibility is to his flock, is to the people entrusted to his pastoral care and that the unity of the flock is so important," Cardinal Wuerl told America when asked for his reaction to the letter from Pope Francis.

"I felt that my ability to be able to serve that unity would have required concentrating on a defense of myself and of my actions and that would, I believe, have taken us in the wrong direction rather than trying to do the healing and unity as quickly as possible. That's why I asked the Holy Father to accept my resignation so that a new and fresh leadership did not have to deal with these other issues."

In his letter, Pope Francis appeared to believe that while the cardinal committed "some mistakes," he did not engage in "cover up" or fail "to deal with problems."

When asked if that was how he saw it, too, the cardinal responded: "Yes, and I said that. I made errors of judgment when we were dealing with all those cases before the Dallas Charter.

"Some of those errors in judgment were based on professional psychological evaluations, some of the errors were based on moving too slowly as we tried to find some verification of the allegations. Those were all judgmental errors, and I certainly regret them."

And, he added, "I think it is also worth noting that all those priests who were faced with allegations in my time there, if there was any substantiation for them they were removed from any ministry that would put them in contact with young people."

He said, "I think what we can say is that a careful reading of the [Pennsylvania grand jury] report and the Diocese of Pittsburgh's response, which the Pennsylvania Supreme Court allowed to be attached to the grand jury report, shows that I acted in a very responsible way to remove predator priests."

When asked if he wished he had done anything differently during his 18 years as a bishop in Pittsburgh, the cardinal said: "It's a hard question to answer because in those early years of my ministry, that was before the change in canon law, before the Essential Norms, there were a lot of things that I did that went in the direction of trying to get some proof of allegations.

"I think where we are today is a different place. When an allegation is made today without any corroborating testimony or proof, the person is still put on leave.

"I think had that practice and that approach to canon law been operative when I began ministry in Pittsburgh, things would have been very different. Then we were required to have some modicum of proof before moving out the person."

In his letter of August 25, Archbishop Viganò attacked Pope Francis for allegedly covering up Archbishop McCarrick's abuse and accused him of lifting the sanctions that Benedict XVI had imposed on McCarrick.

He also accused Cardinal Wuerl of not enforcing the secret sanctions.

Last Sunday, Cardinal Marc Ouellet, the prefect of the Congregation for Bishops, of which Cardinal Wuerl is also a member, responded in an open letter to Archbishop Viganò's attack against the pope, addressed the question of sanctions and stated, "I conclude that the accusation is a political plot devoid of real foundation that could incriminate the pope and has profoundly wounded the communion of the church."

Asked if he agrees with the Canadian cardinal when he calls Archbishop Viganò's attack "a political plot [set up]," Cardinal Wuerl responded: "In my read of that testimony, particularly the part that touches me, it is not faithful to the facts.

"There can be reasons for that, and I think Cardinal Ouellet is touching on what may be the primary one. In his testimony, Archbishop Viganò clearly says that there were secret sanctions in some form.

"But he also says himself that he never communicated them to me.

"Yet this should have been his duty.

"I find it difficult to accept his version that he holds me responsible for implementing something he never passed on or his gratuitous insult that I must be a liar when I say that I never received these secret sanctions.

"Certainly I would never have guessed that there were sanctions against Cardinal McCarrick from all the times I encountered him at receptions and events hosted by Archbishop Viganò at the Apostolic Nunciature.

"The gap between what he says and what he did and his easy calumny call into question for me the real intent and purpose of his letter." Continue reading

• Image: America Magazine

The survey results released this week show:

• 30% of American Catholic adults say Francis is doing an "excellent" or a "good" job addressing the issue
• 60% say he is doing an "only fair" or "poor" job handling the sex abuse scandal
• 36% say his efforts on this front have been poor. This is nearly double the share who said he was doing a poor job at the beginning of this year, and triple the share who said this in 2015.

Although US Catholics' confidence has dropped since January's poll, the sex abuse scandal has made the headlines several times in recent months:

• In June, there were widespread allegations against Theodore McCarrick, the former archbishop of Washington, DC, who resigned from the College of Cardinals.
• In August, a Pennsylvania grand jury report said over 300 priests have been accused of sexually abusing minors over the past 70 years
• In late August Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò released a letter alleging Francis and other senior church officials knew about some of the abuses and did nothing. Viganò has suggested Francis should resign because of the scandals.
• Last week, Viganò again wrote to Pope Francis demanding answers in relation to his initial letter.

Although Francis is still rated more positively than negatively for his leadership in spreading the Catholic faith and standing up for traditional moral values, according to the Pew Research results the share of Catholics who say he is doing an excellent or a good job in this work has declined this year.

Source

• Pew Research Centre
• LifeSight News
• Image: The Tablet

The eleven-page document, crafted and published by Viganò with the help of sympathetic Catholic journalists while the pope was in Ireland, is motivated by a personal vendetta and enabled by a serious crisis within U.S. Catholicism.

Those familiar with Viganò's career at the Vatican and in Washington, D.C., were not surprised to see his accusations fall apart upon inspection.

His earlier smear campaign against other members of the Curia, which came to light because of "Vatileaks," had similarly collapsed.

It is worth noting that the first real pushback from the Vatican came on September 2, when officials challenged Viganò's account of how he had arranged the private meeting between the pope and Kim Davis in 2015.

Viganò misled Pope Francis about that stunt, and ignored the advice of Cardinal Donald Wuerl and Archbishop Joseph Edward Kurtz, who had both warned him against it.

There is still much we don't know about how Rome handled information about Cardinal Theodore McCarrick, but at least three things are already clear enough.

Bringing down the pope

First, this was not just an ordinary case of some disgruntled cleric complaining about his former boss; this was a retired papal diplomat trying to bring down the pope.

Operation Viganò has failed in its purpose, and one hopes that its failure will give Francis the strength he needs to deal with the American abuse crisis the way he finally dealt with the crisis in Chile.

Vigano backfires

Second, the attempt to turn the anger of American Catholics, anger at the revelations involving former cardinal Theodore McCarrick, toward Pope Francis personally has not only failed but backfired.

It has led, not very surprisingly, to a reconsideration of the role the two previous popes played in keeping McCarrick's misconduct a secret.

Francis is the first pope who not only took public action against McCarrick, but has also "accepted" the resignation of a number of bishops guilty of covering up for sexually abusive priests.

It took less than a week—between August 26 and September 1—for journalists to begin filling in the real picture behind Viganò's "testimony": if a sexual abuser was allowed to become cardinal archbishop of Washington, D.C., it was because of what the whole ecclesiastical system under the papacies of John Paul II and Benedict XVI did and failed to do.

Full picture

Third, it's been clear from the start of this episode that it will take a long time to get to the bottom of what really happened.

It is naïve to imagine that there is just oneMcCarrick dossier locked up in some filing cabinet in the Vatican, or even that everything is on a piece of paper somewhere.

The "bishops' factory" has always been, at least in the second millennium, a mix of bureaucracy, social mobility, and informal networks.

The Vatican has never been a totally bureaucratic system, and not everything is written down. Continue reading

• Massimo Faggioli is a Church historian, Professor of Theology and Religious Studies at Villanova University and contributing writer to Commonweal magazine.
• Image: Ferrara Italy

They did not want to "ruin the brand," in the parlance of marketing.

They did not want people turning against the concept of soda altogether.

So, instead, each company adopted clever ways of situating their project in the consumer's mind, and they even occasionally took an implied swipe at their competitor — e.g. Coke was "the real thing," in one ad campaign, implying Pepsi was not real, or at least nothing better than a copycat.

The Catholic Church is not a soda company.

It is not a company at all.

But it is hard not to recognize that this summer, conservative critics of Pope Francis became so overwrought that they decided to ruin the brand.

As Massimo Faggioli explained in a brilliant essay at Commonweal, in seeking to de-legitimize Francis, they have de-legitimized all popes and more.

"[W]hat is really in danger is the bond between the church as a people and ecclesiastical authority — not just particular church officials, but the very idea of ecclesiastical authority."

The fact that this result is ironic — the same crowd attacking Francis has been repeating, albeit often in a misunderstood way, Pope Benedict XVI's warning against the "dictatorship of relativism" for years — is little comfort.

And, irony is not the problem here. Hypocrisy is.

The face of hypocrisy

Back in 2002, the first public allegation of sexual misconduct was made against Cardinal George Pell, but there had been rumors swirling around him before that.

Later, despite his reputation for being tough on the issue due to the relative forcefulness of the "Melbourne Response" to clergy sex abuse that Pell had crafted when serving as archbishop of that city, he was alleged to have covered up clergy sex abuse.

He is now back in Australia, and his trial is set to start soon.

The facts in the Pell case are not hugely different from the facts in the case of now ex-cardinal Theodore McCarrick, but I do not recall our conservative friends calling for the entire episcopacy to be overthrown back when Pell was the target.

And they certainly did not try and direct their fire at Benedict XVI, still less Pope John Paul II.

The idea that people who showed no particular concern for the victims or allegations when they were Fr. Marcial Maciel's victims or allegations against Pell are suddenly horrified by the grand jury report in Pennsylvania does not pass the smell test.

It is bizarre to watch EWTN interview two of the women who signed a letter calling on Francis to respond to the allegations hurled at him by Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò.

They huffed and puffed about Francis, and the host, Raymond Arroyo, did not stop and say: Of course, it was John Paul II who appointed McCarrick to be bishop of Metuchen, then archbishop of Newark, then archbishop of Washington, and then cardinal-priest of the Church of Rome — not Francis.

Like the dubia cardinals, these women are not acting in good faith.

How can I tell?

Because they make demands of the pope but ask nothing of Viganò.

Why should he not be asked to produce evidence?

Why should he not be asked to explain his behavior to McCarrick?

They repeat the obvious falsehood that Francis might have promoted McCarrick when it was John Paul II who promoted this predator.

The pope is well advised not to engage people who act in bad faith. Continue reading

• Michael Sean Withers is a Visiting Fellow at Catholic University's Institute for Policy Research and Catholic Studies.

It is said that Alexander VI, the most debauched of the Borgia pontiffs, elected in 1492, even had an affair with one of his daughters.

Another pope contracted syphilis during his reign — a "disease very fond of priests, especially rich priests," as the saying went in Renaissance times.

That was Julius II, known as "Il terrible."

A third pope, Pius IX, added Flaubert's "Madame Bovary" and John Stuart Mill's book on the free market economy to the Vatican's List of Prohibited Books during his long reign in the 19th century.

He also formalized the doctrine of papal infallibility.

Get a grip on sex

What these Holy Fathers had in common was not just that they were badly flawed men putting forth badly flawed ideas: At the root of their moral failings is Catholicism's centuries-old inability to come to grips with sex.

I say this as a somewhat lapsed, but certainly listening, Catholic educated by fine Jesuit minds and encouraged by the open-mindedness of Pope Francis.

Where's Jesus?

The big issue behind the budding civil war in a faith of 1.3 billion people — a rift that could plunge the church back into a medieval mind-set on sexuality — is the same old thing.

And most of the church's backward teachings, dictated by nominally celibate and hypocritical men, have no connection to the words of Jesus.

If you're going to strike at a pope, to paraphrase the line about taking down a king, you must kill him.

Right-wing Catholics, those who think allowing gay members of the faith to worship with dignity is an affront to God, have just taken their best shot at Francis.

The attempted coup was disguised as an exposé by a conscience-stricken cleric, Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò.

He claims that the pope must resign because he knew about the sexual abuse of young seminarians by a disgraced cardinal and did not defrock the predator.

It's a fair point, and one that demands a full response from Francis.

But if you read Viganò's full 11-page letter, you see what's really driving him and his ultraconservative cabal — an abhorrence of gay Catholics and a desire to return to the Dark Ages.

"The homosexual networks present in the church must be eradicated," Viganò wrote.

Homosexuality is disordered

Those close to Francis, Vigano claimed, "belong to the homosexual current in favor of subverting Catholic doctrine on homosexuality."

For theological authority, he cited the infamous 1986 letter to bishops condemning homosexuality as "a moral disorder."

That instructive was issued by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, designed to do to heretics what the Inquisition once did, without the stake-burning.

The bishop's letter cites Old Testament sanctions against "sodomites" and a New Testament interpretation from St. Paul, who admitted he was not speaking with direct authority from the divine.

St. Augustine, who loved sex and had plenty of it before he hated it, set the church template in the fifth century, saying, "Marriage is only one degree less sinful than fornication." Continue reading

• Image: Seattle PI

The Pope Emeritus Benedict, his collaborators explain, has absolutely no intention of saying anything about the whole thing.

Pope Francis invited journalists to read what was written by the former nuncio Carlo Maria Viganò in his j'accuse that tries to involve three Popes in the case of the cardinal - serial harasser of seminarians (later discovered also abuser of minors) - Theodore McCarrick.

Here is a comprehensive and reasoned chronology of the news that has emerged so far, along with the first denials of Viganò's manifesto through witness statements and documentary evidence.

1994

A priest (presumably Gregory Littleton) writes to the Bishop of Metuchen, Edward Thomas Hughes, speaking of the sexual and psychological abuse that Bishop Theodore Edgar McCarrick (born in 1930, ordained priest in New York in 1958, ordained auxiliary bishop of New York in 1977, moved to Metuchen in 1981, then promoted to Newark in 1986), inflicted on him.

He claims that McCarrick left him so traumatized that he himself had harassed by two 15-year-old boys.

The priest was removed and reduced to the lay state ten years later, following the entry into force of the new anti-pedophilia rules, based on the admissions contained in that letter.

21 November 2000

John Paul II appoints Theodore McCarrick Archbishop of Washington.

The nuncio to the United States is Gabriel Montalvo, the Prefect of the Congregation of Bishops (who has been in office for a few weeks) is Giovanni Battista Re. According to Viganò's hypothesis, the Cardinal Secretary of State, Angelo Sodano played an important role in the nomination.

Viganò states that Re would have opposed it because McCarrick's name was only the 14th on the list of candidates.

In his statement Viganò does not mention in any way the name of John Paul II's personal secretary, Bishop Stanislaw Dziwisz, who is very close to Re.

Dziwisz is in fact one of the most influential people in Pope Wojtyla's entourage.

From Viganò's story emerges a deplorable and offensive portrait of the Pontiff now proclaimed saint.

The former nuncio in fact recalls that John Paul II was "already very ill" suggesting he was so sick that he was no longer able to take care of the appointments, not even the most important ones, not even those that led - at that time - the sure attribution of the cardinal's hat and therefore inclusion in a future conclave.

In 2000 Pope Wojtyla had still 5 more years to go.

• That same year, in addition to presiding over dozens of Jubilee celebrations, he visited Egypt, the Holy Land (Jordan, Israel, Palestinian Territories) and Fatima.
• A few months before McCarrick's nomination, in February 2000, Pope Wojtyla nominated the new Archbishop of Westminster, Cormac Murphy-O'Connor; then in June 2000, he nominated Edward Michael Egan as Archbishop of New York.
• At the beginning of the following year, as we shall see, John Paul II created 44 new cardinals in a single consistory.
• After McCarrick in Washington he nominated - to give some examples limited to some metropolitan seats only- Angelo Scola to the Patriarchate of Venice (January 2002); Philippe Barbarin to archbishop of Lyon (July 2002); Péter Erdo to archbishop of Esztergom-Budapest (December 2002); Tarcisio Bertone in Genoa (December 2002); Diarmuid Martin as coadjutor archbishop of Dublin (May 2003); Gaudencio Rosales as archbishop of Manila (December 2003); Lluís Martinez Sistach as archbishop of Barcelona (June 2004).

Karol Wojtyla, despite the slow progress of the disease that was inhibiting his motor skills, is a Pontiff who continues to travel and govern the Church.

Anyone who has followed Vatican events knows that attempting to present the Pope - in the year 2000 - as a man incapable of understanding and deciding for himself, is a falsehood.

22 November 2000

Dominican friar Boniface Ramsey wrote a letter to nuncio Montalvo in which he reported rumors of McCarrick's improper behavior towards seminarians and said he knew some of these seminarians and priests. Ramsey announces the arrival of the same letter to Montalvo by phone, then changes his mind after a conversation with a friend, and calls the nuncio to tell him he had second thoughts.

But during this second conversation - as Ramsey himself tells the National Catholic Register - the nuncio persuaded him to send it anyway.

The document probably does not pass through the office of the Delegate for the Pontifical Representations, Carlo Maria Viganò.

According to the memorandum, Viganò will have news of this first letter containing accusations only in 2006, by the new nuncio Pietro Sambi.

Yet he insists on blaming only Cardinal Sodano who received it in November 2000, without however indicating any evidence: "the office that I held at the time was not informed of any measure taken by the Holy See after those charges were brought by Nuncio Montalvo at the end of 2000, when Cardinal Angelo Sodano was Secretary of State".

January-February 2001

Theodore McCarrick takes office as Archbishop of Washington. On 21 February of the same year he received the red hat from John Paul II, in the most crowded Consistory in the history of the Church: 44 new cardinals. Among these there are many Latin Americans and Jorge Mario Bergoglio himself.

2004 -2005

According to the spokesman for the diocese of Metuchen, Erin Friedlander, in 2004 the first complaint against McCarrick arrived at the diocese.

Two more will follow, all relating to events of previous decades.

The Archdiocese of Newark and the Dioceses of Metuchen and Trenton are paying settlements to Robert Ciolek, who was harassed by McCarrick, but which also includes another settlement for the abuses that Ciolek had suffered from a teacher while he was a student in a Catholic high school.

According to the spokesman for the diocese of Metuchen, the settlement was reported to the nunciature.

April 2005

McCarrick participated in the pre-Conclave congregations and then in the Conclave that elected Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger Pope on 19 April of that year.

July 7, 2005

McCarrick turns 75 and sends - as required at this age - his renunciation to the Holy See.

16 May 2006

McCarrick's renunciation was accepted by Benedict XVI, eight months after the canonical age: it was not a long period (metropolitan archbishops with the red hat, if in good health, can remain at least a year - often even two - after turning 75); yet it was not even that short of a period to suggest that Rome wanted to give a punitive signal to the Archbishop of Washington.

Instead of McCarrick, Pope Ratzinger appoints Donald Wuerl.

McCarrick's retirement occurs after the first claim for compensation to the Diocese of Newark.

June 2006

Former priest Gregory Littleton (his name in full had never been made public, it is Viganò who disclosed it for the first time) denounces to the diocese of Metuchen the abuses suffered by McCarrick during his time as bishop there: he will be paid 100,000 dollars in compensation.

Also in this case, being a bishop (and later a cardinal), the diocese is obliged to inform the apostolic nunciature in the United States.

The spokesperson for the Diocese of Metuchen says today that the report had been duly filed. Continue reading

• Image: ZeroHedge

Vigano alleges Pope Francis knew former Cardinal Theodore McCarrick had "corrupted generations of seminarians and priests" but nonetheless decided to lift sanctions.

Sanctions that included "a life of prayer and penance" which had been imposed on the retired D.C. archbishop by Pope Benedict XVI in either 2009 or 2010.

Archbishop Viganò, the papal representative to the United States from 2011 until he was recalled to Rome by Pope Francis in 2016, did not provide documents proving that sanctions were imposed by Benedict.

Nor did he provide evidence that Francis knew about the sanctions or that he lifted them.

During the years that then-Cardinal McCarrick was allegedly sanctioned by Rome, he kept up a public profile that included preaching at high-profile Masses, giving talks and accepting awards.

He testified in front of a Senate subcommittee and appeared in the media.

The cardinal also kept up a famously robust travel schedule, in part because he served on the board of Catholic Relief Services and chaired the board of the charitable arm of the international development nonprofit.

A spokeswoman for C.R.S. told America that then-Cardinal McCarrick traveled on "a couple of dozen trips during that time, including in Asia, Africa, the Middle East and Latin America" between 2009 and the end of Pope Benedict's papacy in 2013, adding that C.R.S. was "unaware" of any sanctions.

Archbishop Viganò alleges that after several specific attempts to convince the Vatican that then-Cardinal McCarrick should be sanctioned because of allegations of sexual misconduct with priests and seminarians, prohibitions were handed down in 2009 or 2010.

Those sanctions, he said, required the cardinal to move out of a seminary where he was living and forbade him to celebrate Mass in public, participating in public meetings, giving lectures or traveling.

He was to dedicate "himself to a life of prayer in penance."

Pope Francis removed then-Cardinal McCarrick from ministry in June following substantiated allegations that he had sexually abused a minor decades ago.

Sharon Euart, R.S.M., a canon lawyer and the executive director of the Resource Center for Religious Institutes, said that while she could not comment on the specifics regarding the onetime archbishop of Washington, D.C., a priest or bishop who is punished with sanctions removing him from ministry would be notified in writing.

Sister Euart said that whoever has jurisdiction over the offender would normally be notified of the penalty so that the offender could be monitored.

In the case of then-Cardinal McCarrick, it is not clear who may have been asked to monitor him.

Cardinal Donald Wuerl, who succeeded Archbishop McCarrick in Washington, has said he was not made aware of any sanctions, a statement challenged by Archbishop Viganò.

"There is certainly expectation that they would abide by the regulations of their particular situation," Sister Euart said, adding that she would find it "unusual" for such penalties to remain secret. Continue reading

• Image: America Magazine

Archbishop Viganò, the former chief Vatican diplomat in the United States, spent the morning working shoulder to shoulder with the reporter at his dining room table on a 7,000-word letter that called for the resignation of Pope Francis, accusing him of covering up sexual abuse and giving comfort to a "homosexual current" in the Vatican.

The journalist, Marco Tosatti, said he had smoothed out the narrative.

The enraged archbishop brought no evidence, he said, but he did supply the flair, condemning the homosexual networks inside the church that act "with the power of octopus tentacles" to "strangle innocent victims and priestly vocations."

"The poetry is all his," Mr. Tosatti said.

When the letter was finished, Archbishop Viganò took his leave, turning off his cellphone.

Keeping his destination a secret because he was "worried for his own security," Mr. Tosatti said, the archbishop then simply "disappeared."

The letter, published on Sunday, has challenged Pope Francis' papacy and shaken the Roman Catholic Church to its core.

The pope has said he won't dignify it with a response, yet the allegations have touched off an ideological civil war, with the usually shadowy Vatican backstabbing giving way to open combat.

Settling old scores

The letter exposed deep ideological clashes, with conservatives taking up arms against Francis' inclusive vision of a church that is less focused on divisive issues like abortion and homosexuality.

But Archbishop Viganò — who himself has been accused of hindering a sexual misconduct investigation in Minnesota — also seems to be settling old scores.

As the papal ambassador, or nuncio, in the United States, Archbishop Viganò sided with conservative culture warriors and used his role in naming new bishops to put staunch conservatives in San Francisco, Denver and Baltimore. But he found himself iced out after the election of Pope Francis.

Then in 2015, he personally ran afoul of Francis.

Pope fires Viganò

His decision to invite a staunch critic of gay rights to greet the pope in Washington during a visit to the United States directly challenged Francis' inclusive message and prompted a controversy that nearly overshadowed the trip.

Juan Carlos Cruz, an abuse survivor with whom Francis has spoken at length, said the pope recently told him Archbishop Viganò nearly sabotaged the visit by inviting the critic, Kim Davis, a Kentucky county clerk who became a conservative cause célèbre when she refused to grant marriage licenses to same-sex couples.

"I didn't know who that woman was, and he snuck her in to say hello to me — and of course they made a whole publicity out of it," Pope Francis said, according to Mr. Cruz.

"And I was horrified and I fired that nuncio," Mr. Cruz recalled the pope saying.

Now, three years later, Archbishop Viganò appears to be trying to return the favor.

Archbishop Viganò complex character

Known for his short temper and ambition, Archbishop Viganò has clashed with superiors who stunted his ascent in the church and has played a key role in some of the most stunning Vatican scandals of recent times.

While Archbishop Viganò, who was once criticized by church traditionalists as overly pragmatic, has aligned himself with a small but influential group of church traditionalists who have spent years seeking to stop Francis, many of his critics think his personal grudges are central to his motivations.

Supporters of Archbishop Viganò, who did not return a request for comment, bristle at the notion that his letter calling on the pope to resign represents the fury of a disgruntled excellency.

They portray him as principled and shocked by what he sees as the destruction of the church he loves. Continue reading

• Image: Vox Cantoris

Viganò, the former Vatican ambassador to the United States, claims in the letter that Pope Francis knew that recently resigned Cardinal Theodore McCarrick abused seminarians when he was a bishop in New Jersey but nonetheless didn't punish the cardinal.

The 7,000-word document also accuses about a dozen Vatican cardinals who served in the papacies of John Paul, Benedict and Francis of being part of the coverup.

It might be easy to write Viganò off as a disgruntled employee.

He was denied the job he sought under Pope Benedict XVI — president of the governorate of the Vatican City State — and was sent to the United States as papal nuncio, or representative to the U.S. government and the American church.

In a 2012 memo to Pope Benedict, which was leaked to the media, Viganò complained that he was being exiled because he had made enemies trying to reform Vatican finances.

Nuncio to the United States is no minor job, but the head of the Vatican government normally becomes a cardinal.

Viganò became even more unhappy with his job as nuncio after the election of Pope Francis, who ignored his recommendations in the appointment of bishops.

And although most nuncios to the U.S. later become cardinals, it became clear that he was never going to get a red hat.

It is worth noting that many of the people Viganò accuses are the same people with whom he had conflicts in the Vatican.

Nor is this the first time Viganò has criticized the pope.

He joined Cardinal Raymond Burke and others in criticizing the pope's document on the family, "Amoris Laetitia," because they thought it diverged from orthodoxy.

Disgruntled employee? Yes. But many whistleblowers are disgruntled employees.

What is more damning are questions about Viganò's own record regarding the American sex abuse scandal.

During legal proceedings against the Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis, a 2014 letter from Viganò was uncovered in which he told an auxiliary bishop to limit an investigation against the local archbishop and to destroy evidence.

Viganò was certainly not known for transparency and accountability while he was nuncio from 2011 to 2016, but now he presents himself as a born-again defender of the abused.

In the letter, Viganò goes after many former and current officials in the Vatican, including the three most recent secretaries of state: cardinals Angelo Sodano, Tarcisio Bertone and Pietro Parolin.

Other Vatican cardinals he alleges knew about McCarrick's abuse include William Levada, Giovanni Battista Re, Marc Ouellet, Leonardo Sandri, Fernando Filoni, Angelo Becciu, Giovanni Lajolo and Dominique Mamberti.

Given how the crimes of Rev. Marcial Maciel Degollado, founder of the Legionairies of Christ, were ignored during the papacy of Pope John Paul II, some of what Viganò says sounds possible. But no evidence is presented.

Interestingly, John Paul escapes Viganò's criticism. Viganò implies that McCarrick's appointment to Washington and as a cardinal was the work of Sodano "when John Paul II was already very ill."

Yet McCarrick was appointed archbishop of Washington in 2000, five years before John Paul died.

Was John Paul a puppet during his last five years in office?

And if McCarrick's abuse of seminarians was so widely known in John Paul's curia, it is hard to believe that Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger did not know.

Did he tell John Paul?

Viganò claims that Re told him that, sometime between 2009 and 2010, Pope Benedict told McCarrick to stop living at a seminary, saying Mass in public, traveling and lecturing.

But there is no evidence to support the claim that McCarrick was sanctioned by Pope Benedict.

McCarrick continued to celebrate Mass, travel and lecture throughout the papacy of Benedict. And on his many visits to Rome, he stayed at the North American College, the residence for U.S. seminarians. Anyone who thinks Benedict would tolerate such disobedience doesn't know Benedict.

Viganò claims that he told Pope Francis on June 23, 2013: "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."

Since Pope Francis allegedly did not listen to him then, Viganò thinks he should resign.

Viganò released his letter as Pope Francis was wrapping up his visit to Ireland. Journalists asked the pope about it during the press conference on the plane headed back to Rome.

"I will not say one word on this," the pope said, according to a New York Times video.

"I think this statement speaks for itself, and you have sufficient journalistic capacity to reach your own conclusions."

"When time will pass and you'll draw the conclusions, maybe I will speak," said Francis.

"But I'd like that you do this job in a professional way."

Of course, many headlines read: "Pope refuses to respond to accusations of coverup."

The pope was correct to encourage journalists to examine the Viganò document to see what is true and what is not.

The press conference was not the place to do a line-by-line critique of the document. Many reporters have in fact examined the document and found its claims wanting.

But what about Viganò's claim that he told the pope about McCarrick?

Since the pope is the only other witness to this encounter, only he can verify or deny what Viganò said, and refusing to answer that question does not enhance his credibility.

The pope's media advisers should have told him so immediately after the press conference and responded to the reporters with a clarification before they filed their stories.

The answer could have been, "No, he did not say that to the pope."

Or, it could have been: "Yes, he did say that to the pope, but there is no record of the alleged sanctions by Benedict.

The pope disregarded the accusations because Viganò had a history of unsubstantiated accusations.

And remember, it was Francis who told McCarrick to spend the rest of his life in prayer and penance and took away his red hat."

Reporters, like most people, like the pope, but they also have a job to do.

The Vatican should not make it difficult.

Just as every diocese in the United States needs to do a full and transparent account of clerical sex abuse and each diocese's response, so too the Vatican must disclose what it knew, when it knew and what it did or did not do.

Nothing less will begin the restoration of credibility to the Catholic Church.

• Thomas J. Reese SJ, is a Senior Analyst at RNS. Previously he was a columnist at the National Catholic Reporter (2015-17) and an associate editor (1978-85) and editor in chief (1998-2005) at America magazine. First Publlished in RNS. Republished with permission.
• Image: RNS

That is, a trafficker in conspiracy theories who mixes fact, fiction and venom to produce something explosive but also suspicious.

When you finish reading this testimony, as at the end of Stone's 1991 movie "JFK," you can only conclude that the product tells us more about the author than it does about the subject.

Vigano is certainly correct that Cardinal Angelo Sodano, longtime Secretary of State to Pope John Paul II, was a patron of disgraced former-cardinal Theodore McCarrick.

Stone recognized the assassination happened in Dallas.

But why does Vigno fail to mention the key role played by Cardinal Stanislaus Dsiwisz in protecting McCarrick?

Vigano alleges that Pope Francis lifted sanctions against McCarrick that had been imposed by Pope Benedict.

Indeed, the headline on the Edward Pentin story that broke the news of this testimony reads "Ex-nuncio Accuses Pope Francis of Failing to Act on McCarrick's Abuse."

But, Francis did act.

He is the one who removed McCarrick from ministry in June.

The central focus of this testimony is the claim that Benedict issued sanctions against McCarrick: "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," Vigano writes.

During the Benedict papacy, with my own eyes I witnessed McCarrick celebrate Mass in public, participate in meetings, travel, etc.

More importantly, so did Pope Benedict!

If Benedict imposed these penalties, he certainly did not apply them.

He continued to receive McCarrick with the rest of the Papal Foundation, continued to allow him to celebrate Mass publicly at the Vatican, even concelebrating with Benedict at events like consistories.

But, as Vigano tell is, it is all Pope Francis' fault.

Vigano is more than a little obsessed with homosexuality and names prelates whom he accuses of supporting efforts at "subverting Catholic doctrine on homosexuality."

Filmmaker Stone was obsessed with the grassy knoll.

Back in my seminary days, when one of the seminarians would give evidence of this kind of obsession, making wild claims about homosexuality, its sources and its effects, ignoring the emerging scientific and psychological data, the rest of us would look at each other and someone would say, "I would like to take a look at her dance card."

Something similar is playing out all this summer.

Bishops and archbishops speak about gay people with such hatred, you ask yourself how a minister of the Gospel could speak so nastily about other human beings and then it hits you: They are not speaking about other human beings. and you've got to wonder if what you are watching is self-hatred unfolding.

Unfortunately, Vigano's tissue of misinformation will leave its mark.

In the midst of a feeding frenzy, no one stops to ask basic questions and even journalists can forget to undertake basic tasks like asking for corroboration or looking at the questions a text such as Vigano's poses.

Here are a few of my questions. Continue reading

• Image: LifeSite News