
Aboard the papal plane, Mar 8, 2021 / 03:00 pm (CNA).- Please read below for CNA’s full transcript of Pope Francis’ in-flight press conference from Baghdad, Iraq, to Rome, Italy on March 8, 2021.
Pope Francis: First of all, thank you for your work, your company, your fatigue. Then, today is Women’s Day. Congratulations to the women. Women’s Day. But they were saying why is there no Men’s Day? Even when [I was] in the meeting with the wife of the president. I said it was because us men are always celebrated and we want to celebrate women. And the wife of the president spoke well about women, she told me lovely things today, about that strength that women have to carry forward life, history, the family, many things. Congratulations to everyone. And third, today is the birthday of the COPE journalist. Or the other day. Where are you?
Matteo Bruni, Holy See press office director: It was yesterday.
Pope Francis: Best wishes and we should celebrate it, right? We will see how we can [do it] here. Very well. Now, the word is yours.
Bruni: The first question comes from the Arabic world: Imad Atrach of Sky News Arabia.
Imad Abdul Karim Atrach (Sky News Arabia): Holiness, two years ago in Abu Dhabi there was the meeting with the Imam al-Tayyeb of al-Azhar and the signing of the document on human fraternity. Three days ago you met with al-Sistani. Are you thinking to something similar with the Shiite side of Islam? And then a second thing about Lebanon, which St. John Paul II said is more than a country, it is a message. This message, unfortunately, as a Lebanese, I tell you that this message is now disappearing. Can we think a future visit by you to Lebanon is imminent?
Pope Francis: The Abu Dhabi document of February 4 was prepared with the grand imam in secret during six months, praying, reflecting, correcting the text. It was, I will say, a little assuming but take it as a presumption, a first step of what you ask me about.
Let’s say that this [Ed. meeting with al-Sistani] would be the second [step] and there will be others. It is important, the journey of fraternity. Then, the two documents. The Abu Dhabi one created a concern for fraternity in me, Fratelli tutti came out, which has given a lot. We must… both documents must be studied because they go in the same direction, they are seeking fraternity.
Ayatollah al-Sistani has a phrase which I expect to remember well. Every man… men are either brothers for religion or equals for creation. And fraternity is equality, but beneath equality we cannot go. I believe it is also a cultural path.
We Christians think about the Thirty Years’ War. The night of St. Bartholomew [Ed. St. Bartholomew’s Day massacre], to give an example. Think about this. How the mentality has changed among us, because our faith makes us discover that this is it: the revelation of Jesus is love, charity, and it leads us to this. But how many centuries [will it take] to implement it? This is an important thing, human fraternity. That as men we are all brothers and we must move forward with other religions.
The [Second] Vatican Council took a big step forward in [interreligious dialogue], also the later constitution, the council for Christian unity, and the council for religious dialogue — Cardinal Ayuso accompanies us today — and you are human, you are a child of God and you are my brother, period. This would be the biggest indication. And many times you have to take risks to take this step. You know that there are some critics who [say] “the pope is not courageous, he is an idiot who is taking steps against Catholic doctrine, which is a heretical step.” There are risks. But these decisions are always made in prayer, in dialogue, asking for advice, in reflection. They are not a whim and they are also the line that the [Second Vatican] Council has taught us. This is his first question.
The second: Lebanon is a message. Lebanon is suffering. Lebanon is more than a balance. It has the weakness of the diversity which some are still not reconciled to, but it has the strength of the great people reconciled like the fortress of the cedars. Patriarch Rai asked me to please make a stop in Beirut on this trip, but it seemed somewhat too little to me: A crumb in front of a problem in a country that suffers like Lebanon. I wrote a letter and promised to make a trip to Lebanon. But Lebanon at the moment is in crisis, but in crisis — I do not want to offend — but in a crisis of life. Lebanon is so generous in welcoming refugees. This is a second trip.
Bruni: Thank you, Your Holiness. The second question comes from Johannes Neudecker of the German news agency Dpa.
Johannes Neudecker (Deutsche Presse-Agentur): Thank you, Holy Father. My question is also about the meeting with al-Sistani. In what measure was the meeting with al-Sistani also a message to the religious leaders of Iran?
Pope Francis: I believe it was a universal message. I felt the duty of this pilgrimage of faith and penance to go and find a great man, a wise man, a man of God. And just listening to him you perceived this. And speaking of messages, I will say: It is a message for everyone, it is a message for everyone. And he is a person who has that wisdom and also prudence… he told me that for 10 years, “I do not receive people who come to visit me with also other political or cultural aims, no… only for religious [purposes].” And he was very respectful, very respectful in the meeting. I felt very honored; he never gets up even to greet people. He got up to greet me twice. A humble and wise man. This meeting did my soul good. He is a light. These wisemen are everywhere because God’s wisdom has been spread all over the world.
It also happens the same with the saints, who are not only those who are on the altars, they are the everyday saints, the ones I call “next-door saints.” Men and women who live their faith, whatever it may be, with coherence. Who live human values with coherence, fraternity with coherence. I believe that we should discover these people, highlight them, because there are so many examples. When there are scandals in the Church, many, this does not help, but we show the people seeking the path of fraternity. The saints next door. And we will find the people of our family, for sure. For sure a few grandpas, a few grandmas.
Eva Fernandez (Radio COPE): Holy Father, it is great to resume the press conferences again. It is very good. My apologies, but my colleagues have asked me to ask this question in Spanish.
[In Spanish] During these days your trip to Iraq has had a great impact throughout the world. Do you think that this could be the trip of your pontificate? And also, it has been said that it was the most dangerous. Have you been afraid at some point during this trip? And soon we will return to travel and you, who are about to complete the eighth year of your pontificate, do you still think it will be a short [pontificate]? And the big question always for the Holy Father, will you ever return to Argentina? Will Spain still have hope that one day the pope will visit?
Pope Francis: Thank you, Eva, and I made you celebrate your birthday twice — once in advance and another belated.
I start with the last question, which is a question that I understand. It is because of that book by my friend, the journalist and doctor, Nelson Castro. He wrote a book on [the history of] presidents’ illnesses, and I once told him, already in Rome, “But you have to do one on the diseases of the popes because it will be interesting to know the health issues of the popes — at least of some who are more recent.”
He started [writing] again, and he interviewed me. The book came out. They tell me it is good, but I have not seen it. But he asked me a question: “If you resign” — well, if I will die or if I will resign — “If you resign, will you return to Argentina or will you stay here?”
I said: “I will not go back to Argentina.” This is what I have said, but I will stay here in my diocese. But in that case, this goes together with the question: When will I visit Argentina? And why have I not gone there? I always answer a little ironically: “I spent 76 years in Argentina, that’s enough, isn’t it?”
But there is one thing. I do not know why, but it has not been said. A trip to Argentina was planned for November 2017 and work began. It was Chile, Argentina, and Uruguay. This was at the end of November. But then at that time there was an election campaign happening in Chile because on that day in December the successor of Michelle Bachelet was elected. I had to go before the government changed, I could not go [further].
So let us do this: Go to Chile in January. And then in January it was not possible to go to Argentina and Uruguay because January is like our August here, it is July and August in both countries. Thinking about it, the suggestion was made: Why not include Peru, because Peru was bypassed during the trip to Ecuador, Bolivia, Paraguay, and remained apart. And from this was born the January trip between Chile and Peru.
But this is what I want to say so that you do not create fantasies of “patriaphobia.” When there are opportunities, it must be done, right? Because there is Argentina and Uruguay and the south of Brazil, which are a very great cultural composition.
About my travels: I make a decision about my trips by listening. The invitations are many. I listen to the advice of the counselors and also to the people. Sometimes someone comes and says: What do you think? Should I go or not? And it is good for me to listen. And this helps me to make the decision later.
I listen to the counselors and in the end I pray. I pray and I think a lot. I have reflected a lot about some trips, and then the decision comes from within. It is almost spontaneous, but like a ripe fruit. It is a long way, isn’t it? Some are more difficult, some are easier, and the decision about this trip comes early.
The first invitation of the ambassador, first, that pediatrician doctor who was the ambassador of Iraq, very good. She persisted. And then came the ambassador to Italy who is a woman of battle. Then the new ambassador to the Vatican came and fought. Soon the president came. All these things stayed with me.
But there is one thing behind my decision that I would like to mention. One of you gave me a Spanish edition [of the book] “The Last Girl.” I have read it in Italian, then I gave it to Elisabetta Piqué to read. Did you read it? More or less it is the story of the Yazidis. And Nadia Murad tells about terrifying things. I recommend that you read it. In some places it may seem heavy, but for me this was the trasfondo of God, the underlying reason for my decision. That book worked inside me. And also when I listened to Nadia who came to tell me terrible things. Then, with the book… All these things together made the decision; thinking about all the many issues. But finally the decision came and I took it.
And, about the eighth year of my pontificate. Should I do this? [He crosses his fingers.] I do not know if my travel will slow down or not. I only confess that on this trip I felt much more tired than on the others. The 84 [years] do not come alone, it is a consequence. But we will see.
Now I will have to go to Hungary for the final Mass of the Eucharistic Congress, not a visit to the country, but just for the Mass. But Budapest is a two-hour drive from Bratislava, why not make a visit to Slovakia? I do not know. That is how they are thinking. Excuse me. Thank you.
Bruni: Thank you, Eva. Now the next question is from Chico Harlan of the Washington Post.
Chico Harlan (Washington Post): Thank you, Holy Father. I will ask my question in English with the help of Matteo. [In English] This trip obviously had extraordinary meaning for the people who got to see you, but it did also lead to events that caused conditions conducive to spreading the virus. In particular, unvaccinated people packed together singing. So as you weigh the trip, the thought that went into it and what it will mean, do you worry that the people who came to see you could also get sick or even die. Can you explain that reflection and calculation. Thank you.
Pope Francis: As I said recently, the trips are cooked over time in my conscience. And this is one of the [thoughts] that came to me most, “maybe, maybe.” I thought a lot, I prayed a lot about this. And in the end I freely made the decision. But that came from within. I said: “The one who allows me to decide this way will look after the people.” And so I made the decision like this but after prayer and after awareness of the risks, after all.
Bruni: The next question comes from Philippine de Saint-Pierre of the French press.
Philippine de Saint-Pierre (KTO): Your Holiness, we have seen the courage and dynamism of Iraqi Christians. We have also seen the challenges they face: the threat of Islamist violence, the exodus of Christians, and the witnesss of the faith in their environment. These are the challenges facing Christians through the region. We spoke about Lebanon, but also Syria, the Holy Land, etc. The synod for the Middle East took place 10 years ago but its development was interrupted with the attack on the Baghdad cathedral. Are you thinking about organizing something for the entire Middle East, be it a regional synod or any other initiative?
Pope Francis: I’m not thinking about a synod. Initiatives, yes — I am open to many. But a synod never came to mind. You planted the first seed, let’s see what will happen. The life of Christians in Iraq is an afflicted life, but not only for Christians. I came to talk about Yazidis and other religions that did not submit to the power of Daesh. And this, I don’t know why, gave them a very great strength. But there is a problem, like you said, with emigration. Yesterday, as we drove from Qaraqosh to Erbil, there were lots of young people and the age level was low, low, low. Lots of young people. And the question someone asked me: But these young people, what is their future? Where will they go? Many will have to leave the country, many. Before leaving for the trip the other day, on Friday, 12 Iraqi refugees came to say goodbye to me. One had a prosthetic leg because he had escaped under a truck and had an accident… so many escaped. Migration is a double right. The right to not emigrate and the right to emigrate. But these people do not have either of the two. Because they cannot not emigrate, they do not know how to do it. And they cannot emigrate because the world squashes the consciousness that migration is a human right.
The other day — I’ll go back to the migration question — an Italian sociologist told me, speaking about the demographic winter in Italy: “But within 40 years we will have to import foreigners to work and pay pension taxes.” You French are smarter, you have advanced 10 years with the family support law and your level of growth is very large.
But immigration is experienced as an invasion. Because he asked, yesterday I wanted to receive Alan Kurdi’s father after Mass. This child is a symbol for them. Alan Kurdi is a symbol, for which I gave a sculpture to FAO [the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations]. It is a symbol that goes beyond a child who died in migration. He is a symbol of dying civilizations, which cannot survive. A symbol of humanity. Urgent measures are needed so that people have work in their place and do not have to emigrate. And also measures to safeguard the right to emigrate. It is true that every country must study well the ability to receive [immigrants], because it is not only about receiving them and leaving them on the beach. Receive them, accompany them, help them progress, and integrate them. The integration of immigrants is key.
Two anecdotes: Zaventem, in Belgium: the terrorists were Belgians, born in Belgium, but from ghettoized, non-integrated Islamic immigrants. Another example: when I went to Sweden, during the farewell ceremony, there was the minister, of what I don’t know, [Ed. Alice Bah-Kuhnke, Swedish Minister of Culture and Democracy from 2014 to 2019], she was very young, and she had a distinctive appearance, not typical of Swedes. She was the daughter of a migrant and a Swede, and so well integrated that she became minister [of culture]. Looking at these two things, they make you think a lot, a lot, a lot.
I would like to thank the generous countries. The countries that receive migrants, Lebanon. Lebanon was generous with emigrants. There are two million Syrians there, I think. And Jordan — unfortunately, we will not pass over Jordan because the king is very nice, King Abdullah wanted to pay us a tribute with the planes in passage. I will thank him now — Jordan has been very generous [with] more than one and a half million migrants, also many other countries… to name just two. Thank you to these generous countries. Thank you very much.
Matteo Bruni: The next question is in Italian from the journalist Stefania Falasca.
Stefania Falasca (Avvenire): Good morning, Holy Father. Thank you. In three days in this country, which is a key country of the Middle East, you have done what the powerful of the earth have been discussing for 30 years. You have already explained what was the interesting genesis of your travels, how the choices for your travels originate, but now in this juncture, can you also consider a trip to Syria? What could be the objectives from now to a year from now of other places where your presence is required?
Pope Francis: Thank you. In the Middle East only the hypothesis, and also the promise is for Lebanon. I have not thought about a trip to Syria. I have not thought about it because the inspiration did not come to me. But I am so close to the tormented and beloved Syria, as I call it. I remember from the beginning of my pontificate that afternoon of prayer in St. Peter’s Square. There was the rosary, adoration of the Blessed Sacrament. And how many Muslims with carpets on the ground were praying with us for peace in Syria, to stop the bombing, at that moment when it was said that there would be a fierce bombing. I carry Syria in my heart, but thinking about a trip, it has not occurred to me at this moment. Thank you.
Matteo Bruni: Thank you. The next question comes from Sylwia Wysocka of the Polish press.
Sylwia Wysocka (Polish Press Agency): Holy Father, in these very difficult 12 months your activity has been very limited. Yesterday you had the first direct and very close contact with the people in Qaraqosh: What did you feel? And then, in your opinion, now, with the current health system, can the general audiences with people, with faithful, recommence as before?
Pope Francis: I feel different when I am away from the people in the audiences. I would like to restart the general audiences again as soon as possible. Hopefully the conditions will be right. I will follow the norms of the authorities in this. They are in charge and they have the grace of God to help us in this. They are responsible for setting the rules, whether we like them or not. They are responsible and they have to be so.
Now I have started again with the Angelus in the square, with the distances it can be done. There is the proposal of small general audiences, but I have not decided until the development of the situation becomes clear. After these months of imprisonment, I really felt a bit imprisoned, this is, for me, living again.
Living again because it is touching the Church, touching the holy people of God, touching all peoples. A priest becomes a priest to serve, to serve the people of God, not for careerism, right? Not for the money.
This morning in the Mass there was [the Scripture reading about] the healing of Naaman the Syrian and it said that Naaman wanted to give gifts after he had been healed. But he refused… but the prophet Elisha refused them. And the Bible continues: the prophet Elisha’s assistant, when they had left, settled the prophet well and running he followed Naaman and asked for gifts for him. And God said, “the leprosy that Naaman had will cling to you.” I am afraid that we, men and women of the Church, especially we priests, do not have this gratuitous closeness to the people of God which is what saves us.
And to be like Naaman’s servant, to help, but then going back [for the gifts.] I am afraid of that leprosy. And the only one who saves us from the leprosy of greed, of pride, is the holy people of God, like what God spoke about with David, “I have taken you out of the flock, do not forget the flock.” That of which Paul spoke to Timothy: “Remember your mother and grandmother who nursed you in the faith.” Do not lose your belonging to the people of God to become a privileged caste of consecrated, clerics, anything.
This is why contact with the people saves us, helps us. We give the Eucharist, preaching, our function to the people of God, but they give us belonging. Let us not forget this belonging to the people of God. Then begin again like this.
I met in Iraq, in Qaraqosh… I did not imagine the ruins of Mosul, I did not imagine. Really. Yes, I may have seen things, I may have read the book, but this touches, it is touching.
What touched me the most was the testimony of a mother in Qaraqosh. A priest who truly knows poverty, service, penance; and a woman who lost her son in the first bombings by ISIS gave her testimony. She said one word: forgiveness. I was moved. A mother who says: I forgive, I ask forgiveness for them.
I was reminded of my trip to Colombia, of that meeting in Villavicencio where so many people, women above all, mothers and brides, spoke about their experience of the murder of their children and husbands. They said, “I forgive, I forgive.” But this word we have lost. We know how to insult big time. We know how to condemn in a big way. Me first, we know it well. But to forgive, to forgive one’s enemies. This is the pure Gospel. This is what touched me the most in Qaraqosh.
Matteo Bruni: There are other questions if you want. Otherwise we can…
Pope Francis: How long has it been?
Bruni: Almost an hour.
Pope Francis: We have been talking for almost an hour. I don’t know, I would continue, [joking] but the car… [is waiting for me.] Let’s do, how do you say, the last one before celebrating the birthday.
Matteo Bruni: The last is by Catherine Marciano from the French press, from the Agence France-Presse.
Catherine Marciano (AFP): Your Holiness, I wanted to know what you felt in the helicopter seeing the destroyed city of Mosul and praying on the ruins of a church. Since it is Women’s Day, I would like to ask a little question about women… You have supported the women in Qaraqosh with very nice words, but what do you think about the fact that a Muslim woman in love cannot marry a Christian without being discarded by her family or even worse. But the first question was about Mosul. Thank you, Your Holiness.
Pope Francis: I said what I felt in Mosul a little bit en passant. When I stopped in front of the destroyed church, I had no words, I had no words… beyond belief, beyond belief. Not just the church, even the other destroyed churches. Even a destroyed mosque, you can see that [the perpetrators] did not agree with the people. Not to believe our human cruelty, no. At this moment I do not want to say the word, “it begins again,” but let’s look at Africa. With our experience of Mosul, and these people who destroy everything, enmity is created and the so-called Islamic State begins to act. This is a bad thing, very bad, and before moving on to the other question — A question that came to my mind in the church was this: “But who sells weapons to these destroyers? Because they do not make weapons at home. Yes, they will make some bombs, but who sells the weapons, who is responsible? I would at least ask that those who sell the weapons have the sincerity to say: we sell weapons. They don’t say it. It’s ugly.
Women… women are braver than men. But even today women are humiliated. Let’s go to the extreme: one of you showed me the list of prices for women. [Ed. prepared by ISIS for selling Christian and Yazidi women.] I couldn’t believe it: if the woman is like this, she costs this much… to sell her… Women are sold, women are enslaved. Even in the center of Rome, the work against trafficking is an everyday job.
During the Jubilee, I went to visit one of the many houses of the Opera Don Benzi: Ransomed girls, one with her ear cut off because she had not brought the right money that day, and the other brought from Bratislava in the trunk of a car, a slave, kidnapped. This happens among us, the educated. Human trafficking. In these countries, some, especially in parts of Africa, there is mutilation as a ritual that must be done. Women are still slaves, and we have to fight, struggle, for the dignity of women. They are the ones who carry history forward. This is not an exaggeration: Women carry history forward and it’s not a compliment because today is Women’s Day. Even slavery is like this, the rejection of women… Just think, there are places where there is the debate regarding whether repudiation of a wife should be given in writing or only orally. Not even the right to have the act of repudiation! This is happening today, but to keep us from straying, think of what happens in the center of Rome, of the girls who are kidnapped and are exploited. I think I have said everything about this. I wish you a good end to your trip and I ask you to pray for me, I need it. Thank you.

[…]
I made up my mind “Your Holiness.”
Resign…and stop the “Catholic” theater.
McCarrick establishment…all the way to the grave.
I can confidently tell you Francis is implicitly calling on the left wing press and media not to investigate because, look, Vigano is an anti-homosexual conservative.
Check out: https://www.npr.org/2018/08/26/642061113/archbishop-alleges-pope-francis-long-knew-about-abuse-calls-on-him-to-resign
The press is covering for him. The irony of it — and does it not say it all? He is a pawn of the left. When they circle the wagons for you the verdict is in. The papacy defended against complicity in sexual abuse and misconduct and John McCain canonized all in one weekend.
We live in perfectly transparent times.
You know an individual by their friends.
He contradicted nothing of Vigano’s statement. He called on the press to do their job. OK. Hagan lio!
Translation of Francis’ possible thinking: not responding worked with the dubia challenge…it will work here too.
Games rather than truthful transparency works in our system for some reason…if I am silent, a certain percentage of Catholics will presume me innocent…that’s all I need in order to continue…time, silence and presumption of innocence by a certain percent…no one kicked out Alexander VI nor Julius III…time and silence.
PYes Bill B.the lines are drawn for battle for the soul of the Church with the odds seemingly stacked in favor of the ‘little hiss from hell.” But surely if this Pope manages to ride this crises out it will only be because the rest of failed to put up a fight to oust him by public condemnation and so taking away any little credibility he has left with the vast majority of practicing Catholics. Thankfully Bishop Olmsted of Arizona jumped quickly and bravely into the frey issuing his supportive thoughts on this highly respected Vigano. So far,only half a dozen others did the same. Where are the Chaput’s , my own K VAHN and Gomez? Why delay ?
Surely there are enough bishops with clout to lead the flock out of this mess and rid of this immoral man as St. Agustine put it:
“ If a person is without anger where there is just cause is an immoral person.” Well said to you Saint Agustine..
How could you have known it would one day describe our Pope Francis.
How is it that our bishops ( too many and for too many years now ) have seen their roles as champians of mediocrity when defence of the Faith was called for – on so so many moral issues. As a word of encouoragement to so many of our frightened leaders listen and take to heart Our Lady’s alleged advice to one chosen soul. “ My children need to know that there is too much talk of the evil one. Know that the heavens are more powerful than this pitiful band of evil ( I think she said Mc Carrick Tobin Cupich -:) ) ones who want only your misery.”
Time to hear also from Muller / Sara /the African bishops the whole shebang in fact . Run these satanist out of our beloved Church.
Do we see a pattern here? Deflect. Go mum. Rather like the response to the “dubia.” The moral high horse — no self-defense. Honestly…?
It is irresponsible and contemptable.
The “code of silence” has finally been broken by an insider. Viganò hit a bullseye and Bergoglio doesn’t know the response required when you are outed and in the crosshairs. Hide under behind your office and a wall of silence will have to do.
But it won’t.
On top of good bishops leading the charge what we need is an unparalled
media coverage resulting from a sustained outcry from catholic laity in parishes , social media, catholic radio and tv stations. Don’t we at least owe this now to the author of love himself, seeet Jesus ?
Is the Latin belief that no one is above the pope true? Who can compel the bishop of Rome to a canonical inquiry into his conduct?
No one can compel him; no one can judge him. There is and cannot be any canonical procedure against him. On this side of the eschaton, he is free to do as he pleases.
That is the oddest response I can imagine. This man who speaks his mind all the time, is challenging the press to figure it out for themselves. And he does so in a way that seems manipulative, almost holding their integrity and faith over their heads. “…he believes in the “journalistic capacity to draw your own conclusions,” calling it an “act of faith.” “When some time passes and you have drawn your conclusions, I may speak. But I would like your professional maturity to do the work for you. It will be good for you.”
What a politician. He’s not saying he won’t ever answer, but holds out the carrot that after they’ve done their duty as a professional and used their faith, then maybe he’ll have something too say. I
And his adversaries of note are all older men…Cardinals. By using silence in the dubia situation, he saw two out of four adversaries depart this earth and seemingly the other two fall into less energy. 98% of Catholics are not going to read the allegations. It needs a host of Cardinals or Bishops in revolt or the NY Times etc. which likes him on the death penalty and appointing Tobin to nearby Newark where an lgbtq Mass was held at the cathedral which the nytimes reported on…noting that known couples were allowed to receive Communion. So it has to be Cardinals…their red hats stand for blood and courage…we’ll see. They make about 70-80 k a year til death for a single old man…not easy to let go of if they have no known alternative after a fracas with a Pope. Hopefully some are from wealthy families like Sodano.
What smugness. What arrogance.
You’re right. He does not speak with the voice of a pastor or a shepherd, but rather a politician.
He cares about nothing and no one but himself.
His not too subtle appeal was for the media to cover for him. He let them know what he expects of them. He expects them to discredit the Vigano letter. He knows they love him. He knows they want to keep him in power. He is just like Obama “All of you voted for me” etc. HE DID NOT DENY ANYTHING. We can assume that it is true.
Pope refuses to say anything on Viganó’s evidence.He angrily told the media that won’t even discuss the facts presented in the former Nuncio’s letter until MAYBE …
Yet he writes in his tergiversating letter to you and me that “I am conscious of the effort and work being carried out in various parts of the world to come up with the necessary means … [implementing] ways of making all those who perpetrate or cover up these crimes accountable. We have delayed in applying these actions and sanctions that are so necessary, yet I am confident that they will help to guarantee a greater culture of care in the present and future.”
But when the cover-up lands on his door-step he refuses to give any account of his deeds. He refuses to be accountable.
If we need any more evidence of the moral turpitude of this man, I simply can’t say what that might be.
Fiant dies eius pauci, et ministerium eius accipiat alter. (Psalm 109:8)
Stonewalling long term is not a viable option for either the dubia or this situation. In this situation, however, stonewalling will increase the pressure on Pope Francis to resign. As some had recognized before the Vigano’ bombshell, only the Pope is in the position to root out the corruption that permitted ex-Cardinal McCarrick to rise in the American Church’s hierarchy notwithstanding the widespread knowledge within the American hierarchy of the ex-Cardinal’s wrongdoing. Now that Pope Francis is implicated the papacy is now disabled from rooting the corruption out. Thus, so long as Pope Francis is Pope, the McCarrick scandal cannot be effectively addressed. Support for Pope Francis at this point is support for not addressing the problem of bishops who look the other way when it comes to sexual abuse. Given this, it seems to me that Pope Francis is in an untenable position and will have to resign.
Unless it has to do with climate change, expect no answers from Pope Francis.
And what of immigration? C’mon now!
Oh boy. Can’t wait to see how the political cartoons will lampoon all of this…
So much for transparency. How condescending: ‘it will be good for you!’
We may hope and pray that the reaction to this papacy will be that the Cardinals feel cornered into electing a holy, orthodox Pope who will restore the Church who has both the energy and will to root out the rot, and that any candidate promoted by or acceptable to Cupich, Farrell and Tobin will be unpalatable and unelectable. May Benedict XVI live to see this fulfilled.
Thomas More at his trial, partly for remaining silent about Henry VIII’s agenda—from A Man for All Seasons:
“…the maxim is “qui taced consentire…the maxim of the law is ‘Silence gives consent.’ If, therefore, you wish to construe what my silence ‘betokened’, you must construe that I consented, not that I denied.”
New slogans for Pope Francis:
Lies are greater than truth.
Corruption is greater than purity.
Vindictiveness is greater than forgiveness.
Francis is playing a game of buying time coupled with cat and mouse. Instead of presenting a vigorous defense, he’s trying to buy time in the hopes that the media – someone – will punch holes in Vigano’s letter.
If these allegations by Vigano are true (and while they are still allegations at this point, they come from reliable Catholic news sources like the National Catholic Register and Catholic News Agency, who are loyal to the Magisterium of the Church) then Pope Francis must step down.
When confronted with the evidence by reporter Anna Matranga the Pontiff reverses the question placing moral responsibility on the enquirer regarding the quality of the evidence. A kind of reverse discernment in which the enquirer is indebted to give the benefit of the doubt. Ingenious? Yes. It would be a rare find to identify evidence of the Pontiff having made a definitive committal to any of the allegations. It’s simply not his m.o. He’s managed to reverse interpretation of the Gospels exactly by sound bites, suggestive wording, acts, appointments. Nonetheless in criminal proceedings circumstantial evidence can convict when direct evidence is unavailable. Here we have a preponderance of circumstantial evidence. If he doesn’t resign which I’m confidant he won’t he must now be openly resisted.
The Pontiff is simply calling on his enablers in the DLEMM – Dominant Liberal Establishment Mass Media – to attack Archbishop Vigano and do everything they can to discredit his testimony.
He is setting the example for his bishops to follow: I say nothing, therefore you will say nothing. You will gain nothing and your lives will become miserable if you cross me.
Church, flock, vows, Holy Orders….be damned.
Pope Bergoglio has nothing to said because there is nothing that needs to be said. As even he himself has cryptically noted, the Vigano letter speaks for itself. For him to deny its accusations would compound his many lies and his hypocrisy, especially when they will all be proven true since, as facts, they can only be true or false.
If he does not do the just and moral thing and resign while an investigation proceeds, then he needs to be a heretic by whatever the council of cardinals or bishops is required so that his office as pope can be declared vacant.
What is clear from Vigano’s letter is that the Secretariat of State as well as the entire Curia is a cesspool of corruption. It is also clear that every cardinal and bishop installed by Bergoglio needs to be removed. All of them, Franciscardinals and Francisbishops alike, should also be degraded liturgically from their offices and canonically laicized to the extent they conspired with Bergoglio in covering up McCarrick’s sex crimes or are themselves perverts like McCarrick.
The Pope’s remarks to the journalist are merely code words for: “You know your job. Now DO it.” Their job is to protect the homosexual and liberal culture in the Church, and by so doing, to protect him. And they will indeed “figure it out” and go on the offensive against anyone who attacks their environmentalist, population control, anti-death penalty, pro-Muslim, anti-doctrinal Pope.
I have no doubt Archbishop Vigano is telling the truth. He gives many details that can be confirmed, plus he seems to be speaking for himself, no hidden agenda. His record of a faithful prelate and Bergoglio’s own MO seems to validate Vigano’s letter. But I doubt pope Bergoglio will resign, he is, by his own words a political animal.Where all this leaves us?
Bergoglio’s plane comments are so revealing
They are the parsings of a politician, not the concerns of a pastor.
Shame on our Church if we give in to inertia and go back to business as usual with this pit of vipers still in place.
They must be rooted out.
Bergoglio is using the tactics of the progressive politicos in the U.S., trusting a sympathetic and compliant press to spike the story of his complicity.
I’m hoping his cynical stratagy won’t succeed because the base of Catholic believers is more engaged than the typical American voter.
God help us if that’s a miscalculation.
Viganò’s statement — so detailed and so comprehensive — rings true.
We have monsters in our midst.
Bergoglio and his crew of McCarrick-inspired bishops and cardinals must ALL step down.
The next few weeks and months will tell us whether they have gained total ascendency.
As horrific as this episode is in Church history, it may yet prove to be a great blessing, as the moneylenders are driven from the temple.
It would do “all” well to read the article on http://www.catholicnews.com concerning this … one of the interesting statements about the accuser ..”Archbishop Vigano himself has been accused of suppressing an investigation into alleged homosexual activity committed by retired Archbishop John Nienstedt of St. Paul and Minneapolis.” Read the “whole” article before formulating an opinion.
http://www.catholicnews.com/services/englishnews/2018/former-us-nuncio-alleges-broad-cover-up-of-mccarricks-misdeeds.cfm Perhaps Pope Francis is letting the free press do their job and check into Vigano’s background and the possible reasons he might have for making less than honest allegations against not only two popes and many others . There is a vast difference between allegations, rumors, and opinions and proven facts. Where is Vigano’s “documented” proof ?
Barbara,
That and others are a skimpy report. You cannot tell what this evidence was and whether or not Vignano saw it as evidence at all or non evidence; and it was about not the offending priest but about how well his Bishop went after him. Then the fact that Vigano criticized AL is irrelevant…tens of thousands of Catholics did.
The present issue is simple and unaffected by such things. Did Francis hear Vigano when he said to Francis that there was a thick volume of complaints about McCarrick when Vigano said that conversation occurred datewise. Francis could simply answer…”no…that conversation never took place that year”….or “no I didn’t hear him say that”. It’s an untapped conversation…he said/he said. There is no documentation possible unless one man had a personal secretary taking shorthand. You don’t ordinarily tape private conversations in the Church. Francis could simply deny the conversation ever took place that year…or did but he didn’t hear the thick volume part of it. But he did not deny it. He started an unusual game of elusiveness probably to avoid technically lying…which means to me that Vigano is telling the truth. Francis had just finished extolling dialogue at the World Meeting of Families and on the plane, he did the opposite of dialogue when asked a simple question. He could have just said that the thick volume on McCarrick was never mentioned but instead he started this elaborate example of non dialogue. It tells me personally that Francis was trying to avoid a real lie…and that he did hear Vigano say there was a thick volume against McCarrick. I don’t think Francis wanted McCarrick to pick pro gay Bishops….he wanted him to pick very liberal Bishops generally and avoid conservative Bishops…but he ended up with Tobin in Newark by farming out decision making to McCarrick. Francis is missing a chance to be a real saint rather than a cliché saint…by stepping down…something he has no trouble asking others to do. Vigano comes from a wealthy family according to today’s ny times so he is doing something a more dependent Cardinal might not risk. He can take the job or lose it and still be comfortable in old age…so he is not facing the temptation of losing everything by speaking out.
First, he needs to admit or deny the very specific allegations. If the Holy Father denies an allegation, then the veracity of the accuser becomes relevant.
He says that all, or most of what he refers to is documented & on file at the nunciature and in Rome! Additional elements could also be found in various places, e.g., the file on mccarrick at the congr. for bishops would be able to confirm. Two other sources have now confirmed most of part of the contents. You are basically engaging in character assassination and a double standard- you want us to immediately believe the assertions re: nienstad- but question Vigano’s statements; it also does nothing to refute the substance of Vigano’s claims.
“documented & on file at the nunciature and in Rome! ”
Unless of course somebody has destroyed them.
It would do you well to read the following:
Archbishop Viganò responds to criticisms of handling of 2014 Nienstedt investigation
It has reached the point that I can no longer comment regarding this situation for fear of committing a sin. I can only say that I am praying for a good and holy Pope who will consecrate Russia to Our Lady’s Immaculate Heart as she requested so long ago. Only she can crush this serpent’s head. Virgo Potens, ora pro nobis!
THROW THE BUM OUT!
That anyone would question the veracity of Archbishop Viganò stretches the boundaries of reason. If he were a covert atheist hell-bent on destroying the papacy would he jeopardize his temporal security? Most assuredly no. Why would he when the Bergoglians have advanced that cause further than Hegel, Marx, Lenin and Nietzsche would believe?
On the other hand if the Archbishop is indeed a believer in Jesus Christ and faithful to His Church would he deliberately squander eternal salvation for a gripe over Church polity? To even a score? What would motivate such testimony as he has provided but to bring the raking light of truth upon a cancer being enabled by complicity or gross incompetence?
Archbishop Viganò has undoubtedly spoken the truth and done so conscientiously and with fortitude. Pope Francis has employed a perfectly transparent mendacious comportment and has been reduced to silence. One need only provide a list of his cast of characters to provide a clear lens on to his cognitive take on clerical immorality.
Going mum isn’t going to get this monkey off this pope’s back. We know who he is. When it dawns on him perhaps we will be free of him and some of his ilk will follow him away.
That’s a wise teacher for you! “Research your subject!” Good. Now let’s do it. What are the verifiable facts in Archbishop Vigano’s statement?
sure it’s true the church cannot indite him, but knowing him now we can ignore him.
A heretic unrepentant is no pope
He is one of them and now we all know it.
Resign.?This guy has no intention of resigning and his cabal of sodomites won’t stop until the Vatican is painted like the rainbow and adultery no longer a sin.
The guessing game for slow learners is well and truly over.
Pope Francis responds, “Read the statement yourself and make your own judgement… I would like your professional maturity to do the work for you,” sounds like, “You’re the expert here — I can’t add anything to what you already know.”
The latter response is a classic technique used to shut down the conversation.
“But I would like your professional maturity to do the work for you. It will be good for you.”
Even as a professor, if I spoke this way to students they would think I was being a condescending ass. And they would be right.
Also, very few have noted how Francis seems to play the victim card here, albeit in rather subtle fashion. It was a strange exchange, and not befitting an adult, never mind the Vicar of Christ.
He can’t help it. His favored modes of engagement — if you can call them that — is patronize and pandering. It is always quite “off-putting,” to be kind. Its his act. It is fraudulent and many in the clergy class try to get away with it. Doubtlessly the future will not allow of it. But by then he will be gone.
Your observations regarding Pope F – in this instance particularly – are spot on Carl Olsen! Very well said! Thank you.
*If* Vigano’s allegations about the Pope prove true, are there any provisions in the law of the Vatican City State, or in Italian law, to handle cover-ups of abuse — by a Pope or high-ranking Vatician officials? On first one might think: of course not. So why even ask? On the other hand, the Wikipedia article about the law of Vatican City suggests that the issue might be much more complex than it might seem at first.
The question is merely academic at this point, pending a good deal more journalistic investigation.
It appears that no one has addressed this issue about the scope of civil law (in Vatican City or Italy). At least I have not seen any attempt to do so. Maybe everyone assumes that a Pope is immune. Maybe that’s correct.
If so, strengthening the relevant city and state law in these entities with respect to meting out punishments for such things can play some role in deterring future cover-ups, in any papacy or the highest levels of the hierarchy. Plus it could motivate a guilty Pope to resign in such cases. Not to mention applying preemptive pressures on high ranking persons in the Vatican not to engage in cover-ups.
This may be the only way to challenge the assumption of immunity that probably pervades the highest levels of the hierarchy.
*The highest levels of the hierarchy have to be held to the same civil procedures as the rank and file priest.*
Again, though, the journalists must continue to do their work to establish the truth of Vigano’s allegations. Regardless the outcomes of investigations, a revision of law (if necessary) as suggested above could be salutary.
The Pope writes his own fitness report. There is no higher reviewing officer this side of Heaven.
Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.
Now I think we are looking at this the wrong way. We have one impression about the report of the bishop but lets do as the holy pope suggests- read! Read! Read! Read!!!- each and every word for hidden meaning. Let it all nuance while sipping cognac or an exquisitely made espresso. Dig! Dig! Dig! Merely reading it is-well…inadmisable. Let it all effervesse. Look for a deeper continuity; the fellas at CU theology dept. are good at this. And for heaven’s sake don’t neglect the Thomistic integration of it all. Dig Dig Dig. And after enough saltatory imbueing by the Holy Spirit you may reach the upper level of understanding like we did. And it will then turn out that the poor bishop was saying something completely different but truly developed from what you first thought was being reported. I mean it works for theology why not accusations??? More cognac anyone?
As of May 23, 2019 has ANYTHING like you describe been done? No! No! No! And will not be done until pressure is applied to Francis. Pressure from the Bishops, Cardinals and the good Catholic in the world at large! We must get some answers. What is Francis waiting for? Christ’s peace to you all.
A Pope resigning in disgrace would excite lefty journalists more then “protecting” a secret homosexual network. It would hurt the Church more in their eyes because they don’t really want to subvert the Church. They want to wipe out religious belief in general.
“I will not say a single word” –PF
“And i will not give you a single penny”.–teo
No one is talking about the possible motivations behind the Pope’s decisions, if they are proven, if he is surrounded by wolves in sheep’s skin, how does it looks like, if he is trying to uncover something even worst and this was the only way, if there is an insidious plan behind, that has been in the making for more than we know, if we can believe beyond our eyes, and if we can let the Holy Spirit enlighten our minds and souls, through fasting and prayer, as a family, as the children of God, as a faithful Church. Then we can know the true and what God is asking of us in this situation. The Peace of Christ to you all.
Archbishop Vigano called on God as his witness. Perhaps someone should ask the same of the pope.
So calling your critics Satan is not saying a single word? Has there ever been a bigger hyporcrite in human history?