Posted on 09/05/2018 10:58:39 AM PDT by ebb tide
At several points in his bombshell testimony, Archbishop Vigano explained where the corroborating evidence could be found: in files at the Vatican or the offices of the apostolic nuncio. If those files are made publicor even vetted by a reliable, objective investigatorwe would all soon know whether the archbishops remarkable account is accurate.
But while we wait for the Vatican to open those files (and since we realize we might wait forever), all we can do is compare the claims of Archbishop Vigano with what we do know. The more closely they match, the more plausible the archbishops witness appears.
Even someone who is inclined to believe the testimony of Archbishop Vigano (as I am) must acknowledge that on several points, his account of the McCarrick scandal seemsat first glance, at leastinconsistent with known facts. In each case, there is a possible explanation for that inconsistency. Lets take a look at those problem areas, and see if the explanations match what we know about the people involved.
Inconsistency #1: the secret sanctions
Earlier in his pontificate, Pope Benedict had restricted Father Marcial Maciel to a life of prayer and penance, but made no announcement of that action. The disciplinary action became public knowledge only after the fact. McCarrick was already retired, so there was no need to remove him from office; he could simply have been ordered to keep a low profile.
Inconsistency #2: McCarricks public appearances
In 2004, when the US bishops were engaged in a heated debate about whether politicians who promote abortion should be allowed to receive Communion, Cardinal McCarrickwho had been appointed to chair a special committee on the subjectreported that then-Cardinal Ratzinger had said, in a private letter, that individual bishops should decide the question for their own dioceses. In fact, the letter from Cardinal Ratzinger had stated quite clearly that pro-abortion politicians should be denied the Eucharist. In 2009, at a burial service for Senator Ted Kennedy, McCarrick read a laudatory letter from the Vatican Secretary of State, deliberately creating the impression that it was a message from Pope Benedict, who in fact had studiously avoided any public comment. Clearly the American prelate was willing to flout the wishes of Pope Benedict.
Inconsistency #3: The lack of enforcement
Particularly under Cardinal Angelo Sodano, the Secretariat of State was notorious for protecting Father Maciel. Like Maciel, McCarrick was an extremely successful fundraiser, who used his prowess to curry favor with the most powerful Vatican officials. Although Cardinal Sodano had retired by the time McCarrick was reportedly disciplined, he remained influential, and according to Archbishop Vigano his successor, Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, took a similar line.
Inconsistency #4: The Popes reliance on McCarrick
In 2013, the Pope appointed Msgr. Battista Ricca to a very sensitive post, making him prelate to the Vatican bank, the Institute for Religious Works (IOR), at a time when the IOR was under heavy criticism. When he was questioned about Msgr. Riccas background, which included notorious homosexual escapades, the Pope issued his famous rhetorical question: Who am I to judge? The Pope drew a sharp distinction between consensual sexual activitiesThey are not crimes, right?and sex with minorsCrimes are something different; the abuse of minors is a crime.
Is it conceivable that the Vicar of Christ thought that a man who had seduced his seminarians should be freed from restrictionsand not only forgiven, but trusted as an adviser? That is the essence of Archbishop Viganos testimony. Unfortunately, the available facts give us no reason to dismiss the charge.
Ping
This is a very intelligent, logical breakdown of the mess.
I've been admiring his ability to do that, for years.
BTTT for later.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.