There is a phrase: Rumor volat… Rumor, hearsay, noise flies”. In this case, this may be just so much noise, but today during the Angelus in Rome “noise flew” in St. Peter’s Square.
I want to be careful with this. It is worth at least mentioning.
As you know, at the end the video of last week’s Wednesday General Audience, it sounded as if a small group might have been chanting “VI-GA-NÒ!” Some of you thought it was that, others thought it might have been “Italo!” for a bishop who was there. It is not unusual at all for people to chant oddities at audiences. In fact, it is odd if they don’t.
However, in the wake of that Audience, I was wondering if chanting “VI-GA-NÒ!” might become a thing. Hence, I watched the video of today’s Sunday Angelus address. There were a few instances of a lone voice shouting in the piazza. Please note that St. Peter’s Square is pretty big and the acoustics are not great. Also, the one shouting was not near a microphone, directional or other, which would pick up ambient sound for the broadcast.
There was one point, however, when it seemed to me that the voice, fairly high and probably female, could have been shouting “VIGANÒ!”, not like a crowd might, “VI-GA-NÒ!” but more like a call.
Just after the Angelus itself and as Francis starts the pray for the dead, Pro fidelibus defunctis, you hear this lone call raised and it gets his attention. He seems pensive as he continues. He looks out in the direction of the sound. Just as he starts the Apostolic Benediction, you hear the shout again. Francis imparts the blessing, but with a measure of hesitation in his body language. Keep in mind that he has done this only a zillion times.
If you go to other videos of the Angelus or Regina Caeli, as I did, you see that he zips right along. This time, he is seemingly distracted.
I do not want to read too much into this. We will soon enough have verification from someone who was in the piazza of what happened, yay or nay. Perhaps this post will shake some information loose. Meanwhile, the video is posted. You can decide.
Meanwhile, in Chicago, Card. Cupich ordered that a statement from him should be read at all the parishes of the Archdiocese. He did an interview with the local NBC affiliate and he said some strange things that brought sky down on his head. He said that his true intent was distorted by their editing. NBC posted the whole thing and, frankly, it didn’t change a thing: he said some strange things. NBC is standing by what they did and Cupich now requires the priests of the Archdiocese to read his self-defense. The Sun-Times has a story, HERE.
Elsewhere, Card. Tobin, according to CNA, declined to investigate reports about disgraced non-Card. McCarrick.
Cardinal Joseph Tobin told a journalist Friday that he heard rumors shortly after his 2017 arrival in the Archdiocese of Newark about the sexual misconduct of Archbishop Theodore McCarrick. He said he did not investigate those rumors because he found them unbelievable.
In a column published Aug. 31 in the North Jersey Record, journalist Mike Kelly reported that “Tobin told me that soon after arriving in Newark, he heard ‘rumors’ about McCarrick’s beach house. But he never bothered to check them out. He says he thought the story was too ‘incredulous’ to believe.”
“Shame on me that I didn’t ask sooner,” Tobin reportedly told Kelly.
First, someone has to explain that rumors can’t be incredulous. Rumors can be incredible. People are incredulous. That aside…
To be fair, Tobin was religious, a Redemptorist, and he spent some time in Rome. While it might have been quite common for diocesan men to have known what was going on, it is just possible that a religious might not have heard. It is possible that Tobin did not know about McCarrick before he arrived in Newark… although I remain incredulous.
On a another note, we know that one of Francis’ closest advisors, Fr. Antonio “2+2=5” Spadaro, SJ, maintains a website dedicated to the homoerotic writer Pier Vittorio Tondelli. What I didn’t know is that another very close confidant, Francis’ personal secretary was thought to be involved with child porn to the point where authorities seized his computer. However, this same priest was promoted to be Sub-Secretary of the Congregation for Bishops: Fabián Pedacchio Leániz. He has been around for quite a while.
Lavender all around. Sick. Are there any men of God left in the Vatican?
Perhaps it was the stones crying out.
Yes… Lots of good, holy men of God there…lots…
Remember… 300 in penna over 70 yrs singled out (rightly so), but 15,000 men of God served the Lord who cry out: we have, Lord, done only what was asked of us:serve you.
That may be frjim, but the 300 negate the good work of the others, because where evil is done and condoned, allowed, and flourishes unmolested, what good is the good! Isn’t there a moral law that says evil must not be done even if good results? It makes no sense on any level that when looking at any organization, to say we can ignore evil here because there is good there. If sex traffickers take money paid by johns and give it to the poor, is that something we can call good? Of course not.
This church cannot flourish or even survive if this rot does not get addressed and these predators and enablers cleaned out. Even now we are only covering it a bit, we are pretending all is well, but all is not well, in truth the patient is dying. The thing is this will not go away. In that video with the lone woman’s voice crying out Vigano, I am inspired, and would like to thank her and say God bless her. I wish that were me! Her voice carries over and above the din of the crowd, it is like the voice of John the Baptist crying out in the wilderness “Repent ye, for the Kingdom of heaven is at hand.” Her voice is clear, and if it hit it’s target up in that window, thanks be to God.
Time is running out.
We can’t let him forget. At every public Papal appearance he should either hear or see the name Viganò
Claims by the likes of Cardinal Tobin that they did not know of Cardinal McCarrick’s activities, in my eyes, makes them instantly incredible. It reminds me of Anita Hill’s claims that she didn’t know what her pay grade was. Based on my experience in working for the federal government, the one thing you can be sure that every person knows is his pay grade and step level, and probably that of everyone else he works with, too. So when Ms. Hill claimed not to know, I was sure she was a liar.
Angry about the scandals listen to this:
If you’re angry about all that went on with the scandals and everything listen to Father Larry’s 10 1/2 minute homily from today. See if you need a heart transplant. Remember HE WAS ABUSED at 17 when he went into the Seminary. If he can forgive why can’t we. Also will mercy be shown to us at the end of our life if we don’t show mercy to others now.
Like Father Larry said we have a right to be angry but also we need to reign in the venomous speech for we will held accountable for what we say. I include myself in that DEFINITELY. God knows all and God will work all of this out. I trust in God alone and in God alone is my rest.
Joy, people can forgive an individual, but not an institution that seems to have virtually made abuse a policy (well, for certain people). And they shouldn’t.
The information about Fr Fabian Pedacchio, which has been published as it was written, in Spanish, is stunning. If anybody wants a translation I’ll send one.
But the other thing that is stunning is that he has been protected and promoted (and whisked out of his country) by Bergoglio for decades.
Well I am talking about a certain individual in the Church that is being truly “beat up” . I am not thrilled, happy or accepting of all that was done by everybody in authority in the Church but we must wait until it is ALL clear and out in the open. I just would rather take the road of wait until “ALL of the laundry is hung out before we start seeing it it’s dry or wet still. ”
I am far from being in any position to say definitively who is responsible for what. I will pray, do penance, ask for forgiveness for my sins and continue to love my Catholic Church and TRUST God to do the best for the Church.
When it is all boiled down, between Pope Francis and Archbishop Viganò, at least one person is committing a grave sin.
So we are left with asking very troubling questions between these two. The resulting deductions from those questions is also troubling.
2 September 2018 at 6:07 PM
When it is all boiled down, between Pope Francis and Archbishop Viganò, at least one person is committing a grave sin.
So we are left with asking very troubling questions between these two. The resulting deductions from those questions is also troubling.”
Well I guess we will find out one day. But God knows ALL. They’ll have to answer to Him.
The inquiries into McCarrick could have started with the obvious question, what is a cardinal archbishop doing with a beach house, anyway?
[You seem to be under the impression that secular, diocesan priests cannot or should not own property. Religious make vows of poverty, but diocesan priests do not. They can legitimately own all manner of property and have various sources of income. They can also inherit property that has been in the family. Some men come to the priesthood after having another career whereby they earned certain things. It is good that priests not be conspicuous in opulence. However, they can own property like everyone else. Furthermore, if a diocesan priest has produced well-managed wealth – honestly – to gain some property, that’s a good sign: he knows what to do with money. That bodes well for a parish. Some priests don’t have a clue. Moreover, the way things are going, and this is a serious concern, it could be that priests will be more or less on their own in their twilight years, without support of a diocese or pension, as I certainly will be. Property, for such a priest, alone and unsupported would be good. As it turns out, Augustine of Hippo resolved these issues back in the 5th c. in some of the last sermons he ever delivered that are in our possession.]
There are Canadian diocesan bishops (and priests) who have cottages on bodies of water. Good investing, careful spending, inheritance, pre-seminary careers… one priest pays little attention to investing and goes on a personal pilgrimmage to Europe every year; another pays more attention or perhaps has friends or family members who know these things and chooses to invest in real estate.
That’s a great point, Anita. I had not thought of that, but you are absolutely right.
[I’d rethink that.]
@Anita – For the same reason that any man has when setting up an off-the-books residence: setting up a place for adulterous, sexual trysts without the inconvenience of running into people that would recognize him. Well, I take that back, as this has been done for drug dealing too, but I digress.
[Who says his residence was “off-the-books”…and “whose” books?]
Let’s find out who this town crier is and send her a mega phone
cJoy65, we have Pope Francis’s public statements and public acts. This is enough, setting aside Vigano’s testimony, to clarify what kind of man sits on the papal throne. I have decided a long time ago that the man Bergoglio has nothing of spiritual value to teach me. When he sits in the chair and rings the bell – which he hasn’t yet done – I will listen to what he has to say, referring constantly to Pastor Aeternus, and measuring what he says against the defined truths of the apostolic faith.
Thanks to Vigano, we are finally starting to get down to the heart of the matter. The lavendar/gay culture, which I presume was a subculture in the church at one point in the distant past, at this moment seems like the most “politically” powerful secular movement in the clergy.
The moral crisis of sexual libertines running amok in the clergy can only be resolved by enforcing the ban on those with homosexual tendencies from entering the seminary in the first place.
The power of the gay mafia in the church is strong and it is especially ascendant in society in the last 10 years. I wonder how things might have been different if JPII and BXVI had taken on the gay movement head-on as a root cause of the crisis in the clergy, instead of promoting self-policing among the bishops, who they knew to be badly compromised.
A prophetic witness to the truth and bold leadership from the top (JPII especially) might have (a) spared the Church from another 15 years of “winked-at” sexual abuse of minors and (b) helped to blunt the moral authority of the gay movement in society, especially in many segments of the Church, where rank-and-file Catholics defend the gay movement tooth-and-nail, and often times with the support of pastoral leadership.
The time is over for detente. The time is over for secrecy. The time is over for trimming sails. The time is NOW for prophetic witness against the roots of the moral rot in society (sexual license) and in the clergy (society’s general sexual rot + the lavender culture).
Regarding ++Tobin: As I recall, he did not come directly from Rome to Newark but was first designated the Archbishop of Indianapolis for about four years duration before transferring to Newark. So he could have learned some things about McCarrick during those years.
I am so saddened by these revelations. At my age I am not into travelling abroad to different counties but I have always had a special place in my heart for Rome.
Not any more! I am quite sure that I will never see Rome again.
This is a good report: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fwfaRKU1QXc
Here is another video of part of the Angelus, taken in the square. https://youtu.be/D9z_-8NEn64
Military chaplains (the US Army, Navy, and Air Force) are paid by rank. Their commissions are Reserve (at least Catholic chaplains) even those who are serving active duty. Some Catholic chaplains who served until being eligible to retire from military service(I have heard) had an agreement with their home diocese (many go back to their home diocese as a priest and serve as a parish priest until death or retirement at 75) that they would not be put into the diocesan retirement plan. Military reservists (US military) do not begin receiving retirement until 62 years of age, where active duty retirees receive retirement immediately (even the E-7 or O-4 who was eligible to retire at 42).
There are a few Pastoral Provision priests serving in the Armed Forces, and being paid by rank probably helps provide for their families.
In addition, some of the “late vocation ” priests who had a career had an agreement with their diocese (I have heard) that they could keep their civilian retirement, but they would not be invested in the diocesan retirement plan.
For what it’s worth, you will find a priest who may own a small home, particularly if he has been able to invest a little, or inherit a home from a family member. My mother remembers a priest who drove a Cadillac – he had several brothers and sisters who chipped in and brought him a decent car that would last a long time.
Rumor does indeed volat, but not in classical literature, and Ovid says it evem “pervolat” (flies very fast indeed). As a pedant, however, I still prefer Vergil’s “Fama (virtually equal to “rumor” in the context) volat,” which occurs thrice in the _Aeneid_.
From what I gathered on Twitter, Cardinal Cupich didn’t quite get the obedience he was hoping for with that letter of his. Even my parents’ parish, they only stuffed it in the bulletin and mentioned that it existed–it was not read. The parish I went to didn’t even mention the letter existed, much less provide a copy, and much, much less read it. I can’t imagine why the priests of the Archdiocese didn’t like being hijacked to be PR reps in the middle of the Mass….hmm….
Re: Cadillacs, my old parish begged the pastor for years to get a new car, but he refused to spend the money because he could always find a good cause (or a needy person, or a thing around the parish) to spend his extra cash upon.
So when he retired, and got the bishop to assign him to a bunch of farflung parishes and a school close to the old parish as his retirement job, the parish got together and bought him a Cadillac, so that he wouldn’t get stuck somewhere in his little shove-it, while he was driving around half the day. He was not allowed to refuse, or to sell off the car!
@Anita It seems like you hit a tender spot, however I think I know what you were getting at.
I know that priests can either be very good or very bad with money, some have retirement plans, and own stock and property. They invest like we all do and no they don’t take a vow of poverty.
However, I think sometimes there is an impression among lay people that some priests, even good priests, can gain a certain affinity for a lavish lifestyle. They very much enjoy weekends at a parishioners multi million dollar summer houses where they get full use of boats and jet skis. The multiple over seas vacations per year (sorry I meant pilgrimages) taken at the expense of parishioners who will maybe take one trip like that a lifetime. As well as the luxury of drinking good wines and whiskeys. Now, I am not disparaging priests for taking part in those things, I can’t say I wouldn’t myself provide them when I am able or take part when I am able.
BUT, many times those luxuries it seems are provided by people of a certain boomer generation, who provide financial support for the parish, but do so with conditions. They are not shy about saying how “they never really got Mass in a language they couldn’t understand”, “they really like when the priest faces you”, I don’t see why priests can’t get married”, “We really need to have a spirit choir, that dusty chant stinks” There can be an impression at times that even a good priest can be influenced not to rock the financial boat and it blocks tradition and opens them to influences they might not otherwise be inclined to follow. Of course that is true of all of us.
So I get the fear that Anita was suggesting with regards to McCarrick’s beach house causeing some red flags. I don’t think that property ownership (or stock, or baseball card collections) can be used to judge the worthiness of a priest, but I also bet McCarrick’s use of that beach house was just for getting a sun tan.
When lay people who many times put forth many financial sacrifices to support the church witness priests who live so lavishly and seem to enjoy being king of their world so much, it begs the question who they are living for? What are they willing to sacrifice?
Anyway I don’t mean for this response to be judgmental just an observation of how things can be viewed and how people might be a little uneasy reading about a priest’s beach house. Obviously we all make life decisions about how to live and how to invest our money and priests are no exception. I am grateful for all of the good priests like Father Z and ones I know personally who seem to know very clearly the balance between enjoying life’s pleasures and service to their flock.
Yes, I do understand that diocesan priests can own property. Property ownership is not my issue. My issue is princes of the Church leading opulent, luxurious lifestyles, and whether that is entirely in line with their calling, and whether a devotion to ostentatious wealth in someone of that calling is not a red flag. And I am not talking about official residences, or the pomp and ceremony that comes with the office, or the necessities of diplomatic service. I am certainly not talking about having a nest egg or provision for old age. It is the apparent inordinate attachment to worldly wealth that grates, not the mere possession of it, and not a well-ordered enjoyment of the good things in life.
St. Dominic counseled the clergy of his day to do away with their personal finery and ostentation, and not to be seen to have an attachment to worldly wealth, among other reasons because their flocks contrasted them unfavorably on that account with the Albigensians, who lived in ostentatious poverty. This is still not bad advice.