A horror story
The extrajudicial process opened by the Vatican against Archbishop Vigano stems from a sexual abuse scandal that should never have happened.
Dear reader,
This is a story with a bad ending. And a worse beginning. You may have heard, or will hear in the next few weeks, the name of Carlo Maria Viganò. An archbishop to whom the Vatican has opened an extrajudicial process that may end in his expulsion from the Church. This newsletter simply aims to put into context things that happen in the Vatican. The conclusions are up to you.
Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò is a controversial figure primarily due to his vocal criticism of Pope Francis and his claims about corruption and misconduct within the Vatican.
A brilliant career
Viganò served in various roles within the Vatican, including as Secretary-General of the Governorate of Vatican City State from 2009 to 2011. During this period, he was credited with improving financial transparency and reducing corruption within Vatican operations. He also played an important role in the Vatican Dicasterie of Communications. In 2011, Pope Benedict XVI appointed Viganò as the Apostolic Nuncio to the United States. In this position, he acted as the Vatican's ambassador to the U.S. and was involved in various high-profile church matters.
In short, a brilliant career in Vatican positions of the highest relevance. Vatican ambassadors not only represent the Holy See in a specific country, they also play a crucial role in the Pope's appointment of bishops. And it cannot be overlooked that the U.S. church is one of the most influential in the Catholic world.
And here the story takes a dramatic turn.
After retiring in 2016, Viganò gained global attention in August 2018 when he released a detailed testimony accusing Pope Francis and other high-ranking Church officials of covering up sexual abuse allegations against Cardinal Theodore McCarrick. Viganò claimed that Pope Francis had known about McCarrick’s misconduct since 2013 but had failed to act.
It is necessary to dwell on the McCarrick scandal. A lurid affair of sexual abuse that, although canonically closed (McCarrick was stripped of his titles and priesthood) still drags serious criminal consequences.
A gruesome story and more.
Theodore McCarrick was a high-ranking and very influential figure within the Catholic Church, serving as Archbishop of Washington, D.C., from 2001 to 2006. He was elevated to Cardinal by Pope John Paul II in 2001. He had a wide network of relationships both in the Vatican and with governments all over the world, including China. His image perfectly matched that of a prince of the Church, albeit with American flair.
However allegations of McCarrick's sexual misconduct emerged in the early 2000s. These included claims that he had sexually abused seminarians and young priests over… several decades. Despite these allegations, McCarrick continued to rise within the Church hierarchy. No need to keep a low profile. Trips, receptions, business... always a full agenda. Several dioceses reportedly reached financial settlements with his accusers, but these settlements did not lead to his removal from ministry.
It is not only about the importance of McCarrick's figure, but also about the extent of the accusations and their repercussions. Let's try to summarize it.
The first public accusation against McCarrick involved a claim that he sexually abused a 16-year-old altar boy in the early 1970s when he was a priest in the Archdiocese of New York. This case was investigated by the Archdiocese and found to be credible and substantiated in 2018. In July 2018, another man came forward, alleging that McCarrick had abused him when he was 11 years old, also in the 1970s. This incident reportedly took place at a “beach house” . This last testimony triggered a cascade of other identical accusations about several seminarians and young priests reported that McCarrick would invite them to his beach house in New Jersey, where he allegedly shared beds with them and initiated sexual contact. The prelate took four seminarians to spend a weekend in a house, but there were only three beds available for them. The fourth bed was McCarrick's own. These accounts date back to the 1980s and 1990s.
But the matter did not stop there. To keep the secret (and create a network of complicity) McCarrick groomed his victims by offering career advancements, mentorship, and gifts. Victims described feeling coerced into compliance due to McCarrick’s high rank and influence within the Church. They feared retribution or damage to their clerical careers if they resisted or reported the abuse. It was later revealed that multiple Church officials were aware of McCarrick’s misconduct over the years but failed to take appropriate action to stop him or remove him from positions of power. And it was not known only as a rumor. Reports indicate that dioceses in New Jersey reached financial settlements with several of McCarrick’s accusers in the mid-2000s. These settlements were largely kept confidential, and McCarrick faced no public disciplinary action at the time.
A striking timing
And here we return to Viganò. Note that the dates are important:
After five years in Washington, in 2016 Viganò turned 75, the age at which bishops must submit their resignation to the Pope and retire, but the Pope need not accept it. Moreover, the custom is (or was) for him not to accept it immediately. Francis accepted it almost immediately. It was written in January and accepted in April 2016. Viganò returned to Rome and McCarrick continued his abuses. And two years passed.
In June 2018, the Archdiocese of New York found allegations that McCarrick had sexually abused a minor in the 1970s to be "credible and substantiated." This was the first public accusation involving a minor. Following the New York Archdiocese's findings, McCarrick was immediately removed from public ministry. Subsequent reports revealed additional allegations of sexual misconduct with seminarians and young priests.
Two months later, in August 2018, Archbishop Viganò released an 11-page letter accusing high-ranking Church officials, including Pope Francis, of covering up McCarrick's misconduct. Viganò claimed that sanctions had been imposed on McCarrick by Pope Benedict XVI but were lifted by Pope Francis. Viganò's testimony called for Pope Francis to resign. Nothing more and nothing less.
The archbishop assured that Francis knew what was going on, that he had even lifted some sanctions imposed by Benedict XVI on McCarrick and that he (Viganò) had tried to report everything that the powerful American cardinal was doing. Viganò also blamed three consecutive Vatican secretaries of state, Cardinal Angelo Sodano, Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, and Cardinal Pietro Parolin, of knowing about McCarrick's behavior but doing nothing about it.
The letter was a bombshell and divided many people between those who gave it credence and those who did not. There were two options:
If it was true. The Vatican leadership knew what McCarrick was doing. Benedict XVI had only "discreetly" sanctioned him by forbidding him to live in a seminary, Francis had pardoned him and the cardinal's cover-up was a systematic policy of the Vatican Secretariat of State. Viganò knew it and was the only one who had tried, unsuccessfully, to put an end to the situation. The Vatican was complicit.
If the letter was not true, at least two popes and several high ranked cardinals in the Vatican (7,300 km from Washington DC) did not know about the situation, but on the other hand, the American clergy did know about it and did not act with the necessary diligence... and Viganò also knew about it and did not inform Rome as he was obliged to do.
Media outlets not suspected of being friendly to the Catholic Church such as The New York Times, The Washington Post or The Guardian carefully picked apart the letter with the same conclusion: The bishop's accusations were inconsistent although the personal attacks were devastating.
After releasing the letter, the archbishop did not stop there. Following his 2018 testimony, Viganò continued to release statements and letters including further criticisms of Pope Francis, allegations of corruption within the Vatican, and comments on broader societal issues. Widening the range of action, he has been a vocal critic of Pope Francis' approach to various Church doctrines and policies, accusing him of promoting a liberal agenda and undermining traditional Catholic values. He has opposed the Pope’s stances on issues such as interfaith dialogue, climate change, and social justice. Then he has suggested that the COVID-19 pandemic is being used by global elites to control populations. At a certain moment he left Rome with unknown destination saying that he feared for his life and finally he declared the Pope illegitimate, so to speak, there is no Pope.This is what is called sedevacantism.
Now the Vatican has opened a process of excommunication to the still archbishop.
The worst thing is that the trigger for all this is a tragedy that should never have happened: the sexual abuse of an archbishop for decades, the network of silence (if not complicity) woven in the face of shameful behavior, the irreparable damage caused to the victims and the discredit caused to the institution. That and not the who-said-what is what is important.