[ad_1]
The Vatican has decided to fight fire and sulfur, fire and sulfur.
Six weeks after Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò, former Vatican ambassador to the United States, shook the church accusing Pope Francis of covering sexual abuse, the Vatican broke its public silence on Sunday with a Scathing public replica of a powerful prefect of the Congregation for Bishops.
The prefect, Cardinal Marc Ouellet, described the accusations of "dear Viganò" as "false", "far-fetched", "blasphemous", "incomprehensible" "abhorred" and politically motivated to wound Francis. He suggested that the archbishop would be wise to "quickly fix" his break with the pope.
"I can not begin to understand how you are convinced of this monstrous accusation, which does not stand up," said Cardinal Ouellet in his letter in French.
Archbishop Viganò did not immediately return a request for comment on Sunday.
On August 26, Catholic media conservative critics of the pope issued a long letter from the Archbishop accusing Francis of lifting the punishment for sexual misconduct of a former American cardinal, Theodore McCarrick, who would have been imposed by the pope Benedict XVI.
Sunday, just one day after the Vatican announced that Francis had ordered a "thorough study" of its archives to investigate the accusations, Cardinal Ouellet wrote to Bishop Viganò that accusing the Pope of covering himself for this "alleged sexual predator" and to judge Francis unfit to lead the church was " incredible and far-fetched. "
"I find it absolutely absurd that you exploited the scandalous scandal of sexual abuse in the United States to inflict a scandalous and unjustified blow on the moral authority of your superior," wrote Cardinal Ouellet.
He said that he was responding with the permission of a pope to whom, unlike Archbishop Viganò, he had remained faithful. He seemed to suggest that the archbishop, who disappeared from sight, was running a serious risk of being severely punished by the Church and called for him to "get out of hiding," and he repent of his revolt and return to better feelings towards the Holy Father aggravates the hostility against him. "
Cardinal Ouellet urges him to "quickly repair" the injustice of a "political organization" and, adroitly supporting the ambitious cleric, to overcome "bitterness and disappointment" who had marked his career in the clergy.
"You should not end your priestly life in an open and outrageous rebellion that inflicts a very painful wound" on the church, he wrote.
Bishop Viganò's initial letter was a remarkable opposition to the Vatican hierarchy. Francis basically said that he would not give an answer to the accusations. But Cardinal Ouellet did it and he responded in the same way.
Cardinal Ouellet offered a personal testimony based on his own interactions and the archives of the congregation. He stated that there was no written record of the sentence imposed on Archbishop McCarrick, although he acknowledged that the American had been "strongly urged" to lead a quiet prayer life, without a trip or public appearance, because of rumors of sexual misconduct.
"We come to the facts," wrote Cardinal Ouellet to Archbishop Viganò, sent by Benedict XVI to Washington as the papal envoy in 2011, after his participation in a scandal in Rome that revealed his frustration at not being named cardinal.
"How is it possible," wrote Cardinal Ouellet, that Archbishop McCarrick was promoted to "the high office of Archbishop of Washington and Cardinal?"
A professor at a New Jersey seminary issued warnings to the Vatican on allegations of sexual misconduct in 2000 when Archbishop McCarrick was named Archbishop of Washington.
Pope John Paul II, accused of allowing sexual abuse to be infested in the church, made him cardinal in 2001. Other charges have recently been made, including men who reported being abused in their teens.
In his letter, Cardinal Ouellet insists that the American rise took place under John Paul, while stating that Francis has nothing to do with the promotions of Archbishop McCarrick from New York to New Jersey and Washington.
"Without going into detail," he wrote, "decisions are made by the popes based on information available at the time, and judgments are not infallible."
Speaking to the defense of John Paul II, beloved by Archbishop Viganò and his conservative allies, the Canadian Cardinal said that it seemed unfair to call corrupt policy makers, even if "certain indications provided by witnesses should have been examined further".
He stated that Archbishop McCarrick had shown a great ability to defend himself and, in response to ad hominem attacks by Archbishop Viganò against Vatican officials for homosexuality or support for homosexuals within the city. 39, he wrote that "the fact" that practice or support sexual behavior "contrary to the values of the Gospel" was not a reason to generalize and declare "unworthy and complicit" a broad band of people, "even the Holy Father".
To do, he says, was only "slander and defamation".
He acknowledges that Archbishop McCarrick, who retired in May 2006, was urged to "not travel and not to appear in public, so as not to cause more rumors about him" but he said that it was wrong to present the measures taken against him. as a punishment decreed by Pope Benedict XVI and then lifted by Francis.
"After a review of the archives, I find that there is no document signed by one or the other pope in this regard," wrote Cardinal Oullet.
This seems to undermine the central statement of Archbishop Viganò's story. He wrote in his August letter that he had first learned of Cardinal Oullet's predecessor, Cardinal Giovanni Battista Re, about Benedict's punishment of Archbishop McCarrick. He said his predecessor in Washington, the late archbishop Pietro Sambi, had received instructions to enforce these measures.
Cardinal Ouellet suggests that these movements were purely preventive.
"So the decision of the congregation was inspired by prudence, and the letters of my predecessor and my own letters urged him, first through the Apostolic Nuncio Pietro Sambi, then through you to lead a life of prayer and penance, for his good and for the good of the Church. "
On June 23, 2013, Archbishop Viganò was directly charged with personally informing Francis of the sexual misconduct of Cardinal McCarrick during an audience with numerous papal emissaries.
"I can only imagine the amount of verbal and written information provided to the Holy Father on this occasion on so many people and situations," wrote Cardinal Ouellet. "I strongly doubt that the pope had such an interest in McCarrick, as you would like to believe, given that he was then an eminent 82-year-old archbishop who had been without a role for seven years."
To counter the archbishop Archbishop McCarrick's portrayal of the pope's confidant and political ally, he writes that he had never heard Pope Francis mention it.
Cardinal Ouellet ends his letter by accusing Bishop Viganò of harboring political motives.
"Dear Viganò, in response to your unjust and unjustified attack, I can only conclude that the prosecution is a political conspiracy lacking any real basis that could incriminate the Pope and that deeply interferes with the communion of l & # 39;. Church "
