Former papal nuncio to the United States calls for Pope Francis's resignation

As reported by Andrea Tornielli of La Stampa, August 26, 2018 (updated August 27, 2018):

The authorities of the Holy See had been aware since 2000 of the existence of accusations against Archbishop Theodore McCarrik, who was promoted at the end of that year Archbishop of Washington and created cardinal by John Paul II the following year: it was known that the prelate invited his seminarians to sleep with him in the beach house. This is what can be read in an 11-page document signed by Carlo Maria Viganò, former secretary of the Governorate and former apostolic nuncio to the United States, who was removed from the Vatican and sent to the diplomatic seat in Washington in 2011.

Viganò’s text is full of dates and circumstances, and is clearly addressed to Pope Francis, whose resignation the former nuncio is asking because, according to him, he would have lifted the existing sanctions against McCarrick after the 2013 conclave. The document gives details of rumors and information which have been already circulating in the past two months in the anti-papal and traditional American and European media galaxy, trying to attribute all responsibility on the shoulders of the current Pontiff.

Viganò affirms that the accusations of 2000, with written testimonies against McCarrick – who had been accused of harassing seminarians and young adult priests - were regularly transmitted by the apostolic nuncios who followed one another in the See of Washington, first Monsignor Gabriel Montalvo and then Monsignor Pietro Sambi. These reports, however, remained unanswered.

Viganò blames the Secretary of State Angelo Sodano - but also the Substitute Leonardo Sandri, now Cardinal Prefect for the Eastern Churches – for having covered up McCarrick. And on John Paul II, who in 2000 approved the nomination to Washington, and the following year the inclusion of the controversial archbishop in the College of Cardinals, Viganò wrote: “Was it Sodano to appoint McCarrick to Washington and to Cardinal, as John Paul II was already very ill? We are not given to know. However, I do not think he was solely responsible for this. McCarrick frequently went to Rome and made friends everywhere, at all levels of the Curia.

A second round of allegations against McCarrick is dated 2006. Viganò himself writes that he had prepared two detailed notes against the cardinal, forwarding them to his superiors - at that moment the Cardinal Secretary of State Tarcisio Bertone (accused of sponsoring too many homosexuals to positions of responsibility in the Curia and in the Church). The outcome of these notes also took a long time to arrive, although Viganò states that in 2009 or 2010 Benedict XVI decided to impose sanctions on the now resigned McCarrick, imposing him not to live in a seminary, not to appear or celebrate in public, not to travel. McCarrick, however, did not take these sanctions, which remained secret, seriously. It is enough to browse the web for a few minutes to realize that even after Pope Ratzinger’s alleged sanctions, the American Cardinal continued to celebrate in public and give lectures.

Finally, the last chapter: in June 2013 Viganò, during a private audience of June 2013, when asked by Francis about McCarrick, replied to the Pope that there was a dossier full of accusations against the cardinal at the Congregation for the Bishops. Viganò does not claim to have transmitted, that day, or subsequently, documents or accusations against McCarrick to the new Pope. But those few words exchanged were sufficient for him to affirm that Francis would not have behaved correctly, but would in some way have helped the elderly cardinal, who would also have become - the former nuncio affirms, in this case without going into detail or reporting any precise facts – a close counselor to the new Pope for American episcopal nominations. It should not be forgotten that McCarrick was no longer in office since 2006, but was a cardinal archbishop emeritus, without posts.

Beyond the details of a text that evidently fits into the personal ecclesial battles of a prelate who has never digested his departure from the Vatican by decision of Benedict XVI, and the instrumental use that is made of it in the battle waged by the anti-Francis fringe and its penetrations into the Church, international politics and the media, there remain some facts to be clarified.

The first concerns the appointment of McCarrick to Washington and above all his subsequent inclusion in the College of Cardinals. In 2000 Pope John Paul II was certainly not at the end of his days (he died five years later), and to make him pass as tired, sick and unable to make decisions seems rather improper. It must be assumed that Cardinal Sodano concealed decisive information from the Pontiff. News that came from the apostolic nuncio to Washington, who also had direct access to the Pope. Cardinal Giovanni Battista Re - who according to Viganò, as a new Prefect of the Congregation of Bishops wrote down his opposition to McCarrick’s nomination - was a person close to the Pope and close to the powerful secretary of Pope Wojtyla, Monsignor Stanislaw Dziwisz. Why did no one tell the Pontiff of the accusations against the candidate for archbishopric of Washington and why no one blocked his subsequent nomination as cardinal?

The second fact concerns the period 2006-2013. Viganò assures us that there are secret sanctions against McCarrick by Pope Benedict XVI and attacks McCarrick’s successor in Washington, Donald Wuerl, for pretending he did not know. These sanctions obliged the cardinal harasser of seminarians and and young adult priests to retire from the public to a life of prayer and penance, without appearing or celebrating in public. Why did McCarrick not obey these sanctions and continue to do what he did before as a retired cardinal, celebrating masses and giving lectures? Why did no one ask for respect for the papal orders and why did no one warn the Pope of this grave disobedience? And again, why did Pope Ratzinger choose to keep these sanctions secret – if we assume that every statement made by Viganò is true - without ever making them public?

The third fact. When this year there was news of a concrete denunciation of abuse of a minor by McCarrick - a fact dating back to when he was a priest in New York - Pope Francis forced him to live withdrawn and took away his cardinal status. The very first real and radical sanction against the former archbishop, which has no precedent in the more recent history of the Church. Until 2018, the date of the formal opening of the canonical investigation against McCarrick, the allegations concerned homosexual relations with adults. Then the question remains as to why Monsignor Viganò has not published this information until today if he was so convinced that it was something of the utmost importance for the Church. And why as apostolic nuncio to the United States he did not put them down in writing, inviting the new Pope to take action against McCarrick, to ensure that Benedict’s secret sanctions were finally applied, something that had evidently not happened before.