Saturday, October 27, 2018

School of Mary - The Companions of the Cross

Run With Life: The Mad Hatter has nothing on Ontario's bubble zon...

Run With Life: The Mad Hatter has nothing on Ontario's bubble zon...: Okay class, let's review. This abortion bubble zone law has got to be one of the most moronic laws that the former Liberal Ontario--together with Ottawa mayor Jim Watson--ever dreamed up.

40 Days for Life Ottawa 2018 - Final Week

I received this from Wanda yesterday As you can see there is a need for volunteers this week. Please consider spending some time in prayer at the vigil site during the next several days. 

Thanks and God bless you!

"This is our last week of the 40 Days for Life campaign. Let’s give it a good ending. The cold has set in and volunteer fatigue is showing, but we’re almost there. Can you give one more hour to pray at the vigil site? Please come out whether or not there is a group or church scheduled for that day.

This Sunday, October 28 is the vigil day for NET Ministries and Notre Dame Cathedral. Both are having trouble filling up the vigil hours. Can you give one hour on Sunday?

Monday and Tuesday, there is no group or church who have taken on these days as vigil days, so signs can be obtained in St. Patrick’s Basilica in the Scavi, beside the Gift and Book Store. Please bring back your sign when your vigil time ends.

Wednesday is Halloween. We do have a vigil day scheduled, but this is a special day for prayer. If you can, please join them.

Thursday, there is no group or church holding a vigil day. The supply bag will be at St. Patrick’s Basilica, in the Scavi.

The week ends well, with committed vigil days on the weekend. Still, your presence would be very welcome. The more people praying – the more the power of prayer.

And don’t forget the closing rally on Sunday November 4 at the vigil site at 7 pm.

Leg’s give it one last try.

Check for vacant hours on the website VIGIL CALENDAR at,  

Yours for Life,


Wanda Hartlin


40 Days for Life, Ottawa

Friday, October 26, 2018

Father Tony Van Hee Is My Hero

Father Tony Van Hee is my hero for his unwavering courage in proclaiming the Gospel of Life.

Canadian Jesuit asks Order to make stopping abortion world-wide top priority 

OTTAWA, July 11, 2018 (LifeSiteNews) — A Canadian Jesuit who has fasted and prayed on Parliament Hill for nearly 30 years to end abortion has blasted his order for being silent on “the worldwide genocide of the preborn” for the same length of time.
Fr. Tony Van Hee, who will be 83 in September, also issued a heartfelt plea in a February letter to Jesuit superior general Fr. Arturo Sosa Abascal that the Jesuits make ending abortion a top priority.
It was his personal response to Abascal’s request for proposals by January 2019 for new “universal apostolic preferences” to direct Jesuit missionary efforts worldwide for the next decade.
“Is there a need of the universal Church more pressing than ending the greatest destroyer of peace in the world today, and in my and others’ opinion, the single greatest evil in all human history, apart from the death of Christ?” wrote Van Hee.
“Is there not something dreadfully, dreadfully, dreadfully wrong with a discernment process that has not said a word about abortion for at least the past 34 years…?” he questioned.
He also slammed past general superiors Peter-Hans Kolvenbach and Adolfo Nicolas.
“Not once — and I stand to be corrected on this — not once did either of them ever mention abortion by written or spoken word to the whole Society,” Van Hee wrote.

Quo vadis, Jesuits?

The Society of Jesus has been regarded as an elite force in the Church since Basque soldier St. Ignatius of Loyola founded it in France in 1534 in the shattering aftermath of the Protestant Reformation.
Jesuits undergo an intellectually rigorous formation that is the longest of any religious order, and take a special vow of obedience to the Holy Father for direction in their work, which is mainly in education.
They also seem to have a penchant for arousing enmity against them.
The Society’s explosive growth, and apparent power and influence in New World colonies — including rumours it had there amassed piles of gold — aroused such envy, fear and suspicion in the courts of Spain, France, Portugal and Austria that Jesuits were persecuted and expelled from those countries in the 18th century.
Pope Clement XIV bowed to the will of the monarchs by issuing a bull in 1773 declaring the “name of the company shall be forever extinguished and suppressed” — an edict ignored by Cathering the Great in Russia allowing the Jesuits to survive until Pope Pius VII restored the order in 1814.
Following Vatican II, the Society of Jesus -- with some significant exceptions -- became synonymous with liberal views within the Church.
Moreover, its membership declined sharply, falling from 36,038 in 1965 to about half that in 2011, according to data from the Center for Applied Research in the Apostolate at Georgetown University. The total membership in 2016 was 16,378.
Van Hee recalls that in Canada in 1965 there were 475 Jesuits in the English province, and over 800 in the French province. Now, there are 130 in the English and 50 in the French, which are amalgamating this month, he told LifeSiteNews.
Still and all, the Society of Jesus remains the single largest religious congregation of priests and brothers in the Catholic Church, working in 122 countries on six continents, and arguably retains much of its almost uncanny mystique and prestige, as well as an ability to provoke censure, justified or not.
Notably, Pope Francis is a Jesuit, and the order’s superior general is traditionally dubbed the “Black Pope” because of his sway in the Church.
Moreover, the influential Rome-based Jesuit magazine La Civiltà Cattolica, reviewed by the Vatican’s secretary of state before publication, is seen as reflecting the official views of the Holy See, and current editor is papal confidante and “mouthpiece,” Jesuit Antonio Spadaro.

Have Jesuits succumbed to “human respect”?

Van Hee has received no answer from Abascal, nor, at this point, does he expect one, he told LifeSiteNews.
A Venezuelan, Abascal stirred controversy since his 2017 election by opining Satan is a “symbolic figure” who doesn’t really exist, and Jesus’ words against divorce are “relative” and to be interpreted according to individual conscience.
As for Van Hee, he was arrested three times in the late 80s with Operation Rescue, a non-violent intervention to save mothers and children from the violence of abortion, the Catholic Register reported recently.
Since 1989, he has endured cold, wrath, vandalism, and more recently, pettifogging rules as he witnesses on Parliament Hill to Canada’s abortion victims when the House of Commons is sitting.
Van Hee fears the Jesuits have succumbed to the “sin of human respect.”
He pointed to a warning by Dr. Jeff Mirus in Catholic Culture against the temptation to be “respecters of persons” and influenced by “the prejudices of the dominant culture.”
Indeed, the “Modernist makes God Himself a victim of human culture,” Mirus writes, “denying even to Him the ability to transcend what those He has created have wrought.”
Despite this, Van Hee pleaded with Abascal in his letter to emulate the Society’s superiors who rallied Jesuits to enter Elizabethan England to minister to recusant Catholics, knowing their capture would mean a gruesome death.
He quoted former Anglican deacon St. Edmund Campion, who before he was captured, imprisoned in the Tower of London, racked at least twice before being hanged, drawn and quartered at Tyburn, penned his apologia — disparagingly referred to as “Campion’s Brag”: it known to you that we have made a league — all the Jesuits in the world, whose succession and multitude must overreach all the practice of England — cheerfully to carry the cross you shall lay upon us, and never to despair your recovery, while we have a man left to enjoy your Tyburn, or be racked with your torments, or consumed with your prisons.
At the voice of our General, which is to me a warrant from heaven and oracle of Christ, I took my voyage from Prague to Rome…and from Rome to England, as I might and would have done joyously into any part of Christendom or heathenness, had I been thereto assigned.
“It seems to me that’s the way we should have handled” abortion, Van Hee said. “We should have been that concerned about it,” and had “that confidence, that with God’s help,” the Jesuits could play a major role in stopping the “worldwide genocide of the preborn.”
“I think it’s when we were at our best,” he said.
Here is Fr. Van Hee’s letter in full:

Dear Father General, Arturo Sosa,                          Feb 20/18
May the Peace of Christ be with you always!
As my participation in the discernment of universal apostolic preferences (Letter, 2017/13), I am recommending ending abortion as a new universal apostolic preference.
Under the title, “Reconciliation, Justice, and Peace”, on page 2, the letter says, “In order to enter into this discernment of preferences with great spirit and generosity, we will lay out the framework within which we propose to work.”
It was not clear to me exactly what that framework was so I chose three short statements which seemed to be prominent, namely, “Reconciliation is today the most heartrending cry of humanity”, secondly, “Our Faith proclaims that Reconciliation and Justice lead to Peace” p 2), and thirdly, “Peace is the defining gift of God” (p 3).
Ending abortion would then be part of Justice and part of Peace. Justice for the Unborn would be to give them their fundamental right, the right to life.
And according to St Teresa of Calcutta: “I have said often, and I am sure of it, that the greatest destroyer of peace in the world today is abortion. If a mother can kill her own child, what is there to stop you and me from killing each other?” (Cairo International Conference on Population and Development, September 9, 1994).  
So I place the mission of ending abortion under the overall framework of “Reconciliation, Justice, and Peace”, taking to heart the following words of the letter, especially in the light of the harsh criticism I am about to make of the Society’s present discernment process:
“Justice is possible when human beings are made just by God’s action. Justice becomes reality when human beings, responding to the action of the Holy Spirit, follow the path of reconciliation by a conversion of heart that leads us to recognize our errors and ask for and receive forgiveness for them” (p 3).
In support of my recommendation to make ending abortion a new universal apostolic preference, I ask:
“Is there not something dreadfully, dreadfully, dreadfully wrong with a discernment process which has been unable, up to the present, to identify worldwide abortion as a universal apostolic preference for the Society of Jesus?
“Is there not something dreadfully, dreadfully, dreadfully wrong with a discernment process that has not said a word about abortion for at least the past 34 years, that is, since September 13, 1983, in the face of almost universal acceptance and promotion of abortion by those in power in the Western World; in the United Kingdom since October 27, 1967, in Canada since May 14, 1969, in the U.S. since January 22, 1973?”
Such is the case of our past two Generals, Peter-Hans Kolvenbach (September 13, 1983-January 14, 2008) and Adolfo Nicolas (January19, 2008—October 3, 2016). Not once -- and I stand to be corrected on this – not once did either of them ever mention abortion by written or spoken word TO THE WHOLE SOCIETY.
In Decree 21 n. 28, of General Congregation 34 (January 5-March 22, 1995) it is mandated in regard to Priorities:
“Father General … will discern the greater needs of the universal Church and will establish global and regional priorities”.
Is there a need of the universal Church more pressing than ending the greatest destroyer of peace in the world today, and in my and others’ opinion, the single greatest evil in all of human history, apart from the death of Christ?
Please, Father General, rally the members of the Society as did Fathers General Everard Mercurian and Claudius Aquaviva in regard to a much lesser evil, the Faith in Elizabethan England, which led to Campion’s Brag:
And touching our Society, be it known to you that we have made a league—all the Jesuits in the world, whose succession and multitude must overreach all the practice of England—cheerfully to carry the cross you shall lay upon us, and never to despair your recovery, while we have a man left to enjoy your Tyburn, or to be racked with your torments, or consumed with your prisons. The expense is reckoned, the enterprise is begun; it is of God; it cannot be withstood. So the faith was planted: So it must be restored.”
At the voice of our General”, Campion says, “which is to me a warrant from heaven and oracle of Christ, I took my voyage from Prague to Rome (where our General Father is always resident) and from Rome to England, as I might and would have done joyously into any part of Christendom or Heatheness, had I been thereto assigned.”
With all due respect, and with much gratitude for the Society of Jesus, and with prayers and God’s Blessing+,
Fr Tony Van Hee, S.J.,
Jesuits in English Canada
Copy to: Fr Provincial, Peter Bisson, S.J.

Police charge Father Tony Van Hee

Police charge 83-year-old pro-life priest who was praying too close to Canadian abortion mill

OTTAWA, Ontario, October 25, 2018 (LifeSiteNews) – Police slapped an 83-year-old Roman Catholic priest with a summons to appear in court Wednesday at about noon for allegedly intimidating or attempting to intimidate abortion clients at The Morgentaler Clinic in downtown Ottawa. 
Father Tony Van Hee is facing the charge under Ontario's new "bubble zone" law, the Safe Access to Abortion Services Act (Bill 163). 
Under that law, a first-time offense can carry a fine of up to $5,000 and six months in jail. 
"I will fight it on my own and if they fine me, I will not pay it and go to jail," Fr. Van Hee told LifeSiteNews. "If they jail me, I will fast."
He is asking all pro-lifers to pray for him. 
Fr. Tony Van Hee on the day of his arrest in Ottawa, Ontario, Oct. 24, 2018. Donald Andre Bruneau / Twitter
But the staunch pro-lifer, who has been protesting abortion for 28 years on Parliament Hill through prayer, fasting, and silent witness, is not surprised by the arrest. 
"I expected it," he said.
Last weekend, the priest took some signs and a seat and set himself up on what he believed was federal Crown land across from the abortion mill, thinking he could not be arrested under a provincial law while on federal Crown land. Security guards told him to leave. 
So, he instead took his signs and protested on the public sidewalk across the street from the abortion clinic at 65 Bank Street.
His signs, though, had nothing to do with abortion. They were about free speech. One of them, which the priest held in front of him, read: "The Primacy Of Free Speech: Cornerstone Of Western Civilization." The other, which was on his back, read: "Without Free Speech The State Is A Corpse."
Donald Andre Bruneau, a pro-life activist who has protested abortion with Fr. Van Hee for years, told LifeSiteNews he witnessed police officers arriving, talking to Fr. Van Hee, taking his signs, and issuing the summons to appear before the court on November 16. Bruneau captured the incident on video.
On his Twitter feed, Bruneau claims the priest was wrongly charged. He has photos of the cleric sitting on a bicycle seat on a poll, carrying his signs, and not even looking at the abortion clinic across the street. 
"He was within the bubble zone but he had nothing on him that was advocating against abortion," said Bruneau. 
Both the priest and Bruneau maintain the police also made a technical mistake on the summons to appear in court. 
"They have 11:13 a.m. (on the ticket) and it was about 12:20 p.m. when they first came to me," said Fr. Van Hee. "The time is wrong by about one hour and seven minutes."
Ontario's "bubble zone" law was passed almost exactly a year ago, making pro-life expression outside abortion facilities illegal even though there was virtually no evidence to back up any claims of violence by pro-lifers at these abortuaries.
Ottawa mayor Jim Watson asked for the law, also called Bill 163, at the behest of the abortion facility’s staff. They alleged pro-lifers were harassing and intimidating women as they approached the abortion clinic.
But a pro-life blogger, Patricia Maloney, filed a freedom of information request for a record of Ottawa police attendance at the Morgentaler abortion center from January 2014 to June 2017 and discovered the abortion clinic's claims of alleged pro-life violence were unfounded. 
“There were a total of 64 police reports for this period, most of which [...] were false alarms, cancelled calls, administrative issues, and other minor issues,” Maloney wrote on her blog last year.
“In this three-year, five-month period, there were exactly two level 1 assaults (minor injury or no injury). It is unknown if the assaults were perpetrated against pro-life or against pro-choice people.”
Fr. Van Hee considers the "bubble zone" law to be so unjust as to be worth jail time. 
"It's wrong and it has to be challenged and that's why I'm willing to go to court," he said. 
He is urging all Canadians to inform themselves as to just how badly freedom of speech has been damaged in their country.
"It's really being eroded and Bill 163 is an egregious example of it," he said. 

Wednesday, October 24, 2018

Youth Synod and Our Lady's third message in Akita - Fr. Mark Goring, CC

Youth Synod and Our Lady's third message in Akita - 
Fr. Mark Goring, CC

Thank you Father Mark!

Lord help us to want, what you are giving! - Homily Father Rob Arsenault

Father Rob`s Homily this past Sunday was really, really, really good! Father concluded with the prayer below 

In the name of Jesus, seek counsel for your life
Lord Jesus we believe you are who you say you are, believe that you are capable of  the things that you say you can do, we believe that you are aware of us and that you are active, that you are real, that you are true, that you are loving, and you are present. We pray that your Holy Spirit will come alive in the hearts, the minds, the imaginations, the memories of your people. Maybe where that is hurt, there would be healing, where there is doubt there would be faith, where there is confusion there would be clarity and wisdom. We do not put limits on what you can do or how you might want to communicate, we simply want to make you welcome in our lives. Pray that you want to move in a new and powerful and loving way. That we would come to know you personally and actively and reflect that truth to those people in our lives, in our work places and in our world. Mother Mary we pray that you would intercede for us and teach us the ways of your Son. Pray to the saints and angels to watch over us and protect us. Almighty God watch over, affirm, guide and protect in the name of Jesus Christ we pray. Father, Son and Holy Spirit.. Amen

Run With Life: Praying to end abortion standing in the corner

Run With Life: Praying to end abortion standing in the corner: Today Maureen and I joined other people who want to pray for an end to abortion during the 40 Days for Life. We prayed two rosaries and one Divine Mercy Chaplet. We were there from 7 am to 9:30 am. I also went to Mass at 8:00 at St. Pat's. Lots of prayers, which is what the scourge of abortion needs.

We have Jim Watson to thank for our being prevented from praying across from the abortion facility.

No freedom of expression rights for us, as we stood in the corner for our audacity at praying across from the facility in days gone by.

Maureen was so cold that she put a bag inside her coat to try and keep warm, like an insulation layer. I called it her bag motif. See bottom picture.

Jim Watson's attempt to move us out of the way only means we will now have to pray from a distance. Prayers work just as well no matter where you pray. He can't take away our freedom of conscience and religion rights as much as I'm sure he'd like to. Sorry Jimmy.

Sunday, October 21, 2018

Archbishop Terrence Prendergast - Ottawa Sun Column - October 21, 2018

The Catholic Church the world over is undergoing some turmoil and division. Pope Francis says this should not be surprising as it is the role of Satan to divide people and cause confusion. In fact, our word “devil” comes from the Greek word “diabolos”—the one who divides.
In addition to human weakness and sinfulness behind divisions in the Church, Pope Francis sees a cosmic battle between the forces of good and evil at work touching men and women in our time. To counteract these, he has proposed spiritual remedies.
Spiritual practices that aid people in unsettling times are prayer and fasting in repentance for personal sins. Another step is to make reparation for the sins committed against God’s commandments and the dignity of the human person by silent prayer, adoration and sacrificial giving to benefit others. 
Pope Francis has personally asked us to embrace a particular spiritual means in this month of October by reciting the rosary daily. The rosary is a series of prayers addressed to God the Father and the Virgin Mary, along with meditation on the mysteries of the life of Christ and His Blessed Mother.
At the conclusion to the rosary, the pope urged Catholics to add two invocations: a special prayer to Mary and another to the Archangel Saint Michael. The Bible repeatedly depicts Saint Michael winning by God’s power a titanic battle in heaven—described in the Book of Daniel (10.13–21; 12.1) and the Book of Revelation (12.7–9). God’s people on earth share in the struggle. The enemy is the Dragon.
The Holy Father asked the faithful of the entire world to pray that the Holy Mother of God place the Church beneath her protective mantle. We are to implore her to preserve the Church from attacks by the devil, “the great accuser.” We are also to ask her intercession to make members of the Church more aware of the faults, the errors, and the abuses committed recently and in the past, so that, being converted, evil may no longer prevail over us.
The rosary would then conclude with the prayer written by Pope Leo XIII: “Saint Michael the Archangel, defend us in battle, be our protection against the wickedness and snares of the devil; may God rebuke him, we humbly pray; and do thou, O Prince of the heavenly host, by the power of God, cast into hell Satan and all the evil spirits who prowl through the world seeking the ruin of souls. Amen.”
Several bishops in the United States, in response to the many molestations by priests and concealments by bishops, have encouraged the faithful of their dioceses to take up the Prayer to Saint Michael at the conclusion of each parish Mass. Churchgoers have been supportive of this practice.
The Bishops of Ontario discussed favourably the possibility of adopting this practice in their respective dioceses. Accordingly, I am inviting pastors in the Ottawa and Cornwall dioceses to introduce this practice in their churches beginning on December 2, the First Sunday of Advent.
Some liturgists are concerned that this prayer may blur the line between divine worship and devotions. However, the celebrant will separate the prayer from the Mass by reciting it after the dismissal of the assembly before or after the final hymn.
The struggle that the Church faces now has both a temporal and a spiritual component. Previously, I wrote about the work already underway to create safe environments in our parishes. But we must also seek spiritual assistance in this battle against malign forces. My hope is parishes joining together using this traditional prayer appealing to God for the intercession of Saint Michael will be encouraged and helped towards renewal, healing and safeguarding the most vulnerable among us.

Saturday, October 20, 2018

English text of Archbishop Viganò’s third testimony

ROME, October 19, 2018 (LifeSiteNews) – Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò today has issued a third explosive testimony, in response to an open letter from Cardinal Marc Ouellet, Prefect of the Congregation for Bishops. 

Here below we publish the official English text of Archbishop Viganò’s third testimony, dated October 19, the liturgical Feast of the North American Martyrs.

On the Feast of the North American Martyrs

To bear witness to corruption in the hierarchy of the Catholic Church was a painful decision for me, and remains so. But I am an old man, one who knows he must soon give an accounting to the Judge for his actions and omissions, one who fears Him who can cast body and soul into hell. A Judge who, even in his infinite mercy, will render to every person salvation or damnation according to what he has deserved.  Anticipating the dreadful question from that Judge – “How could you, who had knowledge of the truth, keep silent in the midst of falsehood and depravity?” -- what answer could I give?

I testified fully aware that my testimony would bring alarm and dismay to many eminent persons: churchmen, fellow bishops, colleagues with whom I had worked and prayed.  I knew many would feel wounded and betrayed. I expected that some would in their turn assail me and my motives. Most painful of all, I knew that many of the innocent faithful would be confused and disconcerted by the spectacle of a bishop’s charging colleagues and superiors with malfeasance, sexual sin, and grave neglect of duty.  Yet I believe that my continued silence would put many souls at risk, and would certainly damn my own.  Having reported multiple times to my superiors, and even to the Pope, the aberrant behavior of Theodore McCarrick, I could have publicly denounced the truths of which I was aware earlier. If I have some responsibility in this delay, I repent for that.  This delay was due to the gravity of the decision I was going to take, and to the long travail of my conscience.

I have been accused of creating confusion and division in the Church through my testimony. To those who believe such confusion and division were negligible prior to August 2018, perhaps such a claim is plausible. Most impartial observers, however, will have been aware of a longstanding excess of both, as is inevitable when the successor of Peter is negligent in exercising his principal mission, which is to confirm the brothers in the faith and in sound moral doctrine. When he then exacerbates the crisis by contradictory or perplexing statements about these doctrines, the confusion is worsened.

Therefore I spoke.  For it is the conspiracy of silence that has wrought and continues to wreak great harm in the Church -- harm to so many innocent souls, to young priestly vocations, to the faithful at large.  With regard to my decision, which I have taken in conscience before God, I willingly accept every fraternal correction, advice, recommendation, and invitation to progress in my life of faith and love for Christ, the Church and the Pope.

Let me restate the key points of my testimony.

  • In November 2000 the U.S. nuncio, Archbishop Montalvo, informed the Holy See of Cardinal McCarrick’s homosexual behavior with seminarians and priests.
  • In December 2006 the new U.S. nuncio, Archbishop Pietro Sambi, informed the Holy See of Cardinal McCarrick’s homosexual  behavior with yet another priest.
  • In December of 2006 I myself wrote a memo to the Secretary of State, Cardinal Bertone, and personally delivered it to the Substitute for General Affairs, Archbishop Leonardo Sandri, calling for the Pope to bring extraordinary disciplinary measures against McCarrick to forestall future crimes and scandal. This memo received no response.
  • In April 2008 an open letter to Pope Benedict by Richard Sipe was relayed by the Prefect of the CDF, Cardinal Levada, to the Secretary of State, Cardinal Bertone, containing further accusations of McCarrick’s sleeping with seminarians and priests. I received this a month later, and in May 2008 I myself delivered a second memo to the then Substitute for General Affairs, Archbishop Fernando Filoni, reporting the claims against McCarrick and calling for sanctions against him. This second memo also received no response.
  • In 2009 or 2010 I learned from Cardinal Re, prefect of the Congregation of Bishops, that Pope Benedict had ordered McCarrick to cease public ministry and begin a life of prayer and penance.  The nuncio Sambi communicated the Pope’s orders to McCarrick in a voice heard down the corridor of the nunciature.
  • In November 2011 Cardinal Ouellet, the new Prefect of Bishops, repeated to me, the new nuncio to the U.S., the Pope’s restrictions on McCarrick, and I myself communicated them to McCarrick face-to-face.
  • On June 21, 2013, toward the end of an official assembly of nuncios at the Vatican, Pope Francis spoke cryptic words to me criticizing the U.S. episcopacy.
  • On June 23, 2013, I met Pope Francis face-to-face in his apartment to ask for clarification, and the Pope asked me, “il cardinale McCarrick, com'è (Cardinal McCarrick -- what do you make of him)?”-- which I can only interpret as a feigning of curiosity in order to discover whether or not I was an ally of McCarrick. I told him that McCarrick had sexually corrupted generations of priests and seminarians, and had been ordered by Pope Benedict to confine himself to a life of prayer and penance.
  • Instead, McCarrick continued to enjoy the special regard of Pope Francis and was given new responsibilities and missions by him.
  • McCarrick was part of a network of bishops promoting homosexuality who, exploiting their favor with Pope Francis, manipulated episcopal appointments so as to protect themselves from justice and to strengthen the homosexual network in the hierarchy and in the Church at large.
  • Pope Francis himself has either colluded in this corruption, or, knowing what he does, is gravely negligent in failing to oppose it and uproot it. 

I invoked God as my witness to the truth of my claims, and none has been shown false.  Cardinal Ouellet has written to rebuke me for my temerity in breaking silence and leveling such grave accusations against my brothers and superiors, but in truth his remonstrance confirms me in my decision and, even more, serves to vindicate my claims, severally and as a whole.

  • Cardinal Ouellet concedes that he spoke with me about McCarrick’s situation prior to my leaving for Washington to begin my post as nuncio.
  • Cardinal Ouellet concedes that he communicated to me in writing the conditions and restrictions imposed on McCarrick by Pope Benedict.
  • Cardinal Ouellet concedes that these restrictions forbade McCarrick to travel or to make public appearances.
  • Cardinal Ouellet concedes that the Congregation of Bishops, in writing, first through the nuncio Sambi and then once again through me, required McCarrick to lead a life of prayer and penance.

What does Cardinal Ouellet dispute?

  • Cardinal Ouellet disputes the possibility that Pope Francis could have taken in important information about McCarrick on a day when he met scores of nuncios and gave each only a few moments of conversation.  But this was not my testimony.  My testimony is that at a second, private meeting, I informed the Pope, answering his own question about Theodore McCarrick, then Cardinal archbishop emeritus of Washington, prominent figure of the Church in the US, telling the Pope that McCarrick had sexually corrupted his own seminarians and priests. No Pope could forget that.
  • Cardinal Ouellet disputes the existence in his archives of letters signed by Pope Benedict or Pope Francis regarding sanctions on McCarrick. But this was not my testimony.  My testimony was that he has in his archives key documents –  irrespective of provenance – incriminating McCarrick and documenting the measures taken in his regard, and other proofs on the cover-up regarding his situation. And I confirm this again.
  • Cardinal Ouellet disputes the existence in the files of his predecessor, Cardinal Re, of “audience memos” imposing on McCarrick the restrictions already mentioned.  But this was not my testimony.  My testimony is that there are other documents: for instance, a note from Card Re not ex-Audientia SS.mi, signed by either the Secretary of State or by the Substitute.
  • Cardinal Ouellet disputes that it is false to present the measures taken against McCarrick as “sanctions” decreed by Pope Benedict and canceled by Pope Francis. True. They were not technically “sanctions” but provisions, “conditions and restrictions.” To quibble whether they were sanctions or provisions or something else is pure legalism. From a pastoral point of view they are exactly the same thing.

In brief, Cardinal Ouellet concedes the important claims that I did and do make, and disputes claims I don’t make and never made.

There is one point on which I must absolutely refute what Cardinal Ouellet wrote. The Cardinal states that the Holy See was only aware of “rumors,” which were not enough to justify disciplinary measures against McCarrick. I affirm to the contrary that the Holy See was aware of a variety of concrete facts, and is in possession of documentary proof, and that the responsible persons nevertheless chose not to intervene or were prevented from doing so. Compensation by the Archdiocese of Newark and the Diocese of Metuchen to the victims of McCarrick’s sexual abuse, the letters of Fr. Ramsey, of the nuncios Montalvo in 2000 and Sambi in 2006, of Dr. Sipe in 2008, my two notes to the superiors of the Secretariat of State who described in detail the concrete allegations against McCarrick; are all these just rumors? They are official correspondence, not gossip from the sacristy. The crimes reported were very serious, including those of attempting to give sacramental absolution to accomplices in perverse acts, with subsequent sacrilegious celebration of Mass. These documents specify the identity of the perpetrators and their protectors, and the chronological sequence of the facts. They are kept in the appropriate archives; no extraordinary investigation is needed to recover them.

In the public remonstrances directed at me I have noted two omissions, two dramatic silences. The first silence regards the plight of the victims. The second regards the underlying reason why there are so many victims, namely, the corrupting influence of homosexuality in the priesthood and in the hierarchy.  As to the first, it is dismaying that, amid all the scandals and indignation, so little thought should be given to those damaged by the sexual predations of those commissioned as ministers of the gospel.  This is not a matter of settling scores or sulking over the vicissitudes of ecclesiastical careers.  It is not a matter of politics.  It is not a matter of how church historians may evaluate this or that papacy.  This is about souls.  Many souls have been and are even now imperiled of their eternal salvation.

As to the second silence, this very grave crisis cannot be properly addressed and resolved unless and until we call things by their true names. This is a crisis due to the scourge of homosexuality, in its agents, in its motives, in its resistance to reform. It is no exaggeration to say that homosexuality has become a plague in the clergy, and it can only be eradicated with spiritual weapons.  It is an enormous hypocrisy to condemn the abuse, claim to weep for the victims, and yet refuse to denounce the root cause of so much sexual abuse: homosexuality.  It is hypocrisy to refuse to acknowledge that this scourge is due to a serious crisis in the spiritual life of the clergy and to fail to take the steps necessary to remedy it.

Unquestionably there exist philandering clergy, and unquestionably they too damage their own souls, the souls of those whom they corrupt, and the Church at large.  But these violations of priestly celibacy are usually confined to the individuals immediately involved.  Philandering clergy usually do not recruit other philanderers, nor work to promote them, nor cover-up their misdeeds -- whereas the evidence for homosexual collusion, with its deep roots that are so difficult to eradicate, is overwhelming. 

It is well established that homosexual predators exploit clerical privilege to their advantage.  But to claim the crisis itself to be clericalism is pure sophistry.  It is to pretend that a means, an instrument, is in fact the main motive.

Denouncing homosexual corruption and the moral cowardice that allows it to flourish does not meet with congratulation in our times, not even in the highest spheres of the Church.  I am not surprised that in calling attention to these plagues I am charged with disloyalty to the Holy Father and with fomenting an open and scandalous rebellion.  Yet rebellion would entail urging others to topple the papacy.  I am urging no such thing.  I pray every day for Pope Francis -- more than I have ever done for the other popes. I am asking, indeed earnestly begging, the Holy Father to face up to the commitments he himself made in assuming his office as successor of Peter. He took upon himself the mission of confirming his brothers and guiding all souls in following Christ, in the spiritual combat, along the way of the cross.  Let him admit his errors, repent, show his willingness to follow the mandate given to Peter and, once converted let him confirm his brothers (Lk 22:32).

In closing, I wish to repeat my appeal to my brother bishops and priests who know that my statements are true and who can so testify, or who have access to documents that can put the matter beyond doubt.  You too are faced with a choice.  You can choose to withdraw from the battle, to prop up the conspiracy of silence and avert your eyes from the spreading of corruption.  You can make excuses, compromises and justification that put off the day of reckoning.  You can console yourselves with the falsehood and the delusion that it will be easier to tell the truth tomorrow, and then the following day, and so on.

On the other hand, you can choose to speak.  You can trust Him who told us, “the truth will set you free.”  I do not say it will be easy to decide between silence and speaking.  I urge you to consider which choice-- on your deathbed, and then before the just Judge -- you will not regret having made.

+ Carlo Maria Viganò
Arcivescovo tit. di Ulpiana
Nunzio Apostolico

19 Ottobre 2018
Feast of the North American Martyrs