Two Key Papal Allies Give Contrasting Responses to Viganò’s Testimony

The Catholic Herald (UK) ^ | 9/10/18 | Michael Davis

[marshmallow]

Cardinals Wuerl and Cupich have offered notably different reactions

Since Pope Francis’s election, the US Conference of Catholic Bishops has increasingly reflected the Pontiff’s own priorities. But this may change after the “testimony” of Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò. The former US nuncio claimed that Benedict XVI attempted to quietly remove Theodore McCarrick from public ministry after hearing reports that he preyed on seminarians and young priests. Viganò accused Francis of rehabilitating McCarrick upon succeeding Benedict and, despite being aware of accusations against him, making McCarrick a “kingmaker” for appointing American bishops.

Among those McCarrick supported, Viganò claims, was Cardinal Blase Cupich of Chicago. Cupich was plucked from relative obscurity and appointed to a major diocese. A small but influential “Francis party” emerged in the US bishops’ conference: a group of liberal prelates who owed their advancement to the Holy Father.

But the “Francis party” also includes several senior bishops promoted during previous papacies. McCarrick, appointed Archbishop of Washington by John Paul II, is one. So is Cardinal Donald Wuerl, whom Benedict chose to succeed McCarrick in 2010.

Viganò accuses Wuerl and Cupich of knowing about McCarrick’s predatory behaviour but refusing to intervene – and, in Wuerl’s case, even protecting him from scrutiny. They deny the allegations. But their contrasting responses to the former nuncio’s letter suggest the “Francis party” may no longer be as united as it once was.

For his part, Wuerl denied any knowledge of his predecessor’s misdeeds. On August 26, his spokesman told the Catholic Herald that “Cardinal Wuerl did not receive any documentation or information during his time in Washington regarding any actions taken against Archbishop McCarrick.”

Wuerl struck a more conciliatory note on August 30, when he published a letter asking Washington’s priests “for forgiveness for my errors in judgment, for my inadequacies, and also for your.......

[heterosupremacist]

"It’s worth remembering the grand jury’s strong criticisms of Wuerl. Cupich could have said more in defence of the Archbishop of Washington, if he had wished – just as he could have made a more forceful defense of the Pope. As the situation develops, will he speak out more for his US and Vatican allies? Come what may, it sounds like the “Francis party” is beginning to wind down." Cupich changes like the weather - I don't believe a word he says. He will turn on the Pope if he sees it as being in his best interests! He cares about nothing but covering his crimes. (like most politicians in Chicago, ordained or elected))

[LadyDoc]

I don't know if Wuerl "knew" about his predecessor, but when we layfolks in Altoona knew about abuse cases being ignored, and the gay priests cruising in bars in State College and Pittsburgh, Wuerl didn't bother to go to his fellow bishops and say: Hey we have a problem.

And what no one is discussing: The gay friendly catholic church in State College, which might be why when Sandusky was found raping a young teenager in the shower, no one thought it was wrong.

and this story is horrific: but since it is Huffpost, I don't know if anyone posted it.

Young teenager abused by stranger, and become addicted to gay sex.

and my granddaughter, after watching the so called "gay romance" film "call me by my name" pointed out how the kid was groomed and then raped even though he told the guy to stop. Ironically, the MSM didn't notice that part.

[circlecity]

I think this could become a real internal “every man for himself” bloodbath. If so, expect Francis to start tossing friends and foes alike under the bus. It’s how socialists roll.