GIÁO HỘI HIỆN THẾ

Following is the Vatican-provided transcript of the in-flight press conference Pope Francis held on his flight from Ireland to Rome, at the end of his Aug. 25-26, 2018, trip for the Ninth World Meeting of Families:

Yesterday, during the return flight from Dublin to Rome, at the end of his apostolic trip to Ireland for the Ninth World Meeting of Families, the Holy Father Francis met with journalists on board the aircraft in a press conference, the full text of which follows:

Greg Burke:
Good evening, Holy Father!

Pope Francis:
Good evening!

Greg Burke:
Holy Father, thank you for this time you are dedicating to us after two such intense days. Certainly, there were difficult moments in Ireland – there is always the matter of abuse – but also very beautiful moments: the Festival of Families, testimonies from families, the meeting with the young couples and the visit to the Capuchins, who greatly help the poor.

Let us hand over to the journalists, starting with the Irish… But maybe you want to say something first…

Pope Francis:
To say thank you, because while I am tired, I think of you who have work, work, work… I thank you so much for your effort and your work. Many thanks.

Greg Burke:
The first question, as usual, comes from a journalist from the country, who is Tony Connelly of RTÉ – Radio TV Ireland).

Tony Connelly, RTÉ (Radio Tv Irlanda)
Your Holiness, you spoke on Saturday about the meeting you had with the Minister for Childhood. You talked about how moved you were by what she said about the mother and baby homes. What exactly did she tell you? Were you shocked because it was the first time you had heard of these homes?

Pope Francis:
The minister first told me something that did not have too much to do with mothers and children. She told me, and she was brief: “Holy Father, we found mass graves of children, buried children, we are investigating… Does the Church have something to do with all this?” But she said it very politely and truly with a lot of respect. I thanked her, as this had touched my heart to the point that I wanted to repeat it in the speech. It is was not at the airport, I was mistaken, it was at the meeting with the President. At the airport, there was another lady, a minister I think, and I made the mistake. But, she told me, “I’ll send you a memo”. She sent me a memo and I haven’t been able to read it yet. I saw it was a memo, that she sent me a memo. She was very balanced in telling me, “There’s an issue, the investigation has not yet finished”. But, she made me understand that the Church has something to do with this. For me, this was an example of constructive collaboration, rather than, I don’t want to say the word “protest” … of complaint, of complaint for that which at one time maybe the Church had favoured. That lady had a dignity that touched my heart, and now I have that memo, which I will study when I get home. Thanks to her.

Greg Burke:
Now, another Irishman, Paddy Agnew, of the “Sunday Independent”, resident in Rome but an Irish journalist.

Pope Francis:
He is not the only Irishman in Rome!

Paddy Agnew, “Sunday Independent”:
Holy Father, thank you and good evening. Yesterday, Marie Collins, the abuse victim Marie Collins whom you know well, said that you are not favourable to a new tribunal for Vatican inquiries on the issue of abuses, new inquiries on the problem of sexual abuse, and in particular on a so-called tribunal of inquiry on the assumption of responsibility by bishops – bishop accountability. Why do you think this is not necessary?

Pope Francis:
No, no, it is not like this. Marie Collins is rather focused on the idea… I greatly respect Marie Collins. At times, we call her to the Vatican to give conferences. She is very interested in the idea of the text on “As a loving mother” (Apostolic Letter issued Motu proprio) in which it is said that it would be good to have a special tribunal to judge bishops. Then, we saw this was not practical, nor was it convenient for the different cultures of the bishops that had to be judged. You can take the recommendation of “As a loving mother” and make the “giuria” [commission of bishops] for each bishop, but it is not the same. This bishop is judged and the Pope makes a “giuria” that is more able to take on that case. It is something that works better, also because not all bishops are able to leave their dioceses. It is not possible. In this way, the tribunals, the “giuria” change. And that is what we have done so far. Quite a lot of bishops have been judged. The latest is that of Guam, the Archbishop of Guam, who appealed. And, I decided – because it is a very difficult case – to use a right I have of taking on the appeal myself and not sending it to the council of appeal that does its work with all the priests, but I took it upon myself. And made a commission of canonists who are helping me and who have told me that when I get back, after a maximum of a month, a recommendation will be made so I can make a judgment. It is a complicated case, on one hand, but not difficult because the evidence is clear. I cannot pre-judge, I await the report and then I will judge. I say that the evidence is clear because there is this evidence which led the first tribunal to the sentence. This is the most recent case. Now, there is another in process and we will see how it ends. But, of course, I told Marie that the spirit and also the recommendation of “As a loving mother” is being implemented… a bishop is judged by a tribunal, but it is not always the same tribunal, as it is not possible. She did not understand that well. But, when I see her, sometimes she comes to the Vatican, I will explain it more clearly. I wish her well.

Greg Burke:
Now the Italian group, Holy Father: there is Stefania Falasca, of “Avvenire”.

Stefania Falasca, “Avvenire”:
Good evening, Holy Father. You have said, even today, that it is always a challenge to welcome the migrant and the foreigner. Just yesterday a painful matter was resolved, that of the ship “Diciotti”. Is your “hoof” behind this solution? Is there your involvement, your interest?

Pope Francis:
It is the devil who has a hoof, not me! [Laughter] The hoof is the devil’s…

Stefania Falasca:
And then, many see extortion of Europe on the backs of these people. What do you think?

Pope Francis:
The welcoming of migrants is as old as the Bible. It is in Deuteronomy, in the Commandments. God commands welcoming the migrant, the foreigner. It is so old that it is in the spirit of revelation but also in the spirit of Christianity. It is a moral principle. I spoke about this. Then, I saw that I needed to bit a bit more explicit because it is not a reception with the “belle étoile,” no! It should be a reasonable welcome. And this applies to all of Europe. And when did I realize how this reasonable welcome must be? When there was the terrorist attack in Zaventem [Belgium]: that young men, the guerillas who carried out the attack on Zaventem were Belgians, but sons of migrants who had not been integrated, but rather had been “ghettoized”! That is, they were received by the country and just left there, and they formed a ghetto. They were not integrated. Then I remembered when I went to Sweden, and Franca [Giansoldati] in an article mentioned this, of how I expressed this thought, and when I went to Sweden, I spoke about integration, and I knew about this because during the dictatorship in Argentina, from 1976 to 1983, many, many Argentines and also many Uruguayans escaped to Sweden and there the government would integrate them immediately. It taught them the language, gave them a job and integrated them. To the point that, this is an interesting anecdote, a Minister who came to bid me farewell at the airport in Lund was the daughter of a Swedish and an African immigrant. This African migrant was so integrated to the extent that his daughter became a minister. Sweden was a model. But in that moment Sweden was starting to have difficulties, not because it did not have the good will for this, but because it did not have the possibility of integration. This was the reason why Sweden stopped a little, and took this step. Integration. And then, I spoke during the press conference among you about the virtue of prudence, the virtue proper to the governor, and I spoke about the prudence of peoples regarding the number [of migrants to receive] or the possibility. A people that can receive but which does not have the means for integrating [migrants], it is better not to receive them. There, there is the issue of prudence. And I believe that this is the real core of the dialogue today in the European Union. We must continue to speak. Solutions will be found.

What happened with the Diciotti? I didn’t put my “hoof” there. It was Fr. Aldo [Fr. Aldo Bonaiuto] who did the work with the Minister of the Interior, the good Fr. Aldo who continues the work of Fr. Benzi, whom the Italians know well, who works for the liberation of prostitutes, those who are exploited, and many things… The Italian Bishops’ Conference was also involved. Cardinal Bassetti was there, but on the telephone; he guided all the mediation, and one of his two under-secretaries, Msgr. Maffeis negotiated with the Minister. And I believe that Albania was involved.. Albania, Ireland, and Montenegro, I think, took a certain number of migrants, I’m not sure. The others were taken up by the Conference, I don’t know if under the “umbrella” of the Vatican or not, I do not know how it was negotiated there, and they will go to the “Mondo Migliore” Centre at Rocca di Papa, they will be welcomed there. The number I believe is more than a hundred, and there they will begin to learn the language and to do that work that is done with integrated migrants. I have had an experience that was very gratifying. When I went to Roma Tre (University), there were students who wanted to ask me questions and I saw a student and thought, “I know this face”, and she was one who had come with me among the thirteen I brought back from Lesbos. And that girl was at the university! Why? Because the Sant’Egidio Community, from the day after her arrival, took her to school, to study: go on, go on! and had integrated her at a university level. This is work with migrants. There is an openness of heart for everyone, suffering, then integration as a condition for welcoming and then the prudence of those who govern for doing this. I have seen a clandestinely made film of the things that happen to those who are sent back and fall into the hans of traffickers. It is horrible, the things that they do to the men – the women and the children, they sell them, but to the men, they do the most sophisticated torture. There was one there who was capable, a spy, of making that film that I sent to my two under-secretaries for immigration. For this reason, before sending them back you have to think carefully, very carefully.

Then, one last thing: there are these migrants who come, but there are also those who are tricked, at Fiumicino, they are conned. “No, we give you work”. They let them all have papers, but they end up on the street, enslaved, under threat from traffickers of women. This is what happens.

Greg Burke:
Thank you, Holy Father. The next question is from the English-speaking group: Anna Matranga, from the NBC American television.

Anna Matranga, CBS:
Good evening, Holy Father! I will return to the matter of abuse, of which you have already spoken. Every early this morning a document was issued by Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò, in which he says that in 2013 he had a personal conversation with you in the Vatican, and in this discussion he spoke with you explicitly about the behaviour and sexual abuse on the part of the ex-cardinal McCarrick. I wanted to ask you if this was true. And I also wanted to ask you another thing: the archbishop also said that Pope Benedict had sanctioned McCarrick, that he had said he could not live in the seminary, he could not celebrate Mass in public, he could not travel; he was sanctioned by the Church. Can I ask you if these two things are true?

Pope Francis:
One thing: I would prefer – although I will answer your question – I would prefer if first we spoke about the trip and then other matters… but I will answer. I read that letter this morning. I read it and sincerely I have to ask you this, you and all those among you who are interested: read it carefully, the letter, and then judge for yourselves. I will not say a word about this. I believe that the letter speaks for itself, and you have sufficient journalistic capacity to draw your conclusions. It is an act of trust: when a little time has passed and you have drawn your conclusions, perhaps I will speak. But I would like your professional maturity to do this work: it will do you good, truly. That’s good.

Anna Matranga:
Marie Collins has said, after having met with you during the meeting with victims, that she had spoken directly with you precisely about the ex-cardinal McCarrick; she said that you were very firm in your condemnation of McCarrick. I wanted to ask: when was the last time you heard talk of the abuses that the ex-cardinal had committed?

Pope Francis:
This is part of the letter on McCarrick: study it and then I will say. But since yesterday I had not read it, I allowed myself to speak clearly with Marie Collins and the group [of victims], in the meeting that lasted really an hour and a half; it was something that made me suffer greatly. But I think it was necessary to listen to those eight people; and from that meeting the proposal emerged – which I made myself and which they accepted and helped me to realize – of asking for forgiveness today in the Mass, but on concrete issues. For example, the last one, which I had heard: those mothers, they called it the “cleansing” of women, when an unmarried woman became pregnant, she went to a hospital or, I don’t know what it was called, an institute – but there were religious sisters who ran it, and they gave the child up for adoption by other people. And there were children, at that time, who looked for their mothers, to know if they were alive, they didn’t know… and they were told that it was a mortal sin to do so; and also the mothers who looked for their children, they told them it was a mortal sin. This is why I finished today by saying that this is not a mortal sin, but rather the fourth commandment. And the things I said today, some of them I did not know, and it was painful for me, but also with the consolation of being able to help clarify these things. And I await your comment on that document, I would like to read it! Thank you.

Greg Burke:
Thank you, Holy Father. Now Cecile Chambraud of “Le Monde”.

Cecile Chambraud, “Le Monde”:
Good evening, Holy Father. I hope you do not mind if I ask my question in Spanish, and I ask you though to answer in Italian for all the colleagues. In your address to the Irish authorities, you referred to your recent Letter to the People of God. In that letter, you called upon all Catholics to participate in the fight against abuses in the Church. Can you explain to us what in concrete terms Catholics can do, each one in his or her own position, to fight against abuse? And in this regard, in France, a priest has started a petition calling for the resignation of Cardinal Barbarin, accused by victims. Does this initiative seem suitable or not?

Pope Francis:
If there are suspicions or evidence or partial evidence, I see no harm in carrying out an investigation, always on the basis of the fundamental legal principle: Nemo malus nisi probetur, innocent until proven guilty. And many times there is the temptation not only to carry out an investigation, but to publish that the investigation has been carried out and so in some media – not yours, I don’t know – they begin to create a climate of guilt. And I wish to say what happened in those times, which may help in this, because for me it is important how one proceeds and how the media can help. Three years ago, more or less, the problem of so-called paedophile priests began in Granada, a group of six, eight, ten priests, who were accused of abuse of minors and also of holding parties, orgies and these things. I received the accusation, directly: a letter written by a young man aged twenty-three; he said he had been abused, giving names and everything. A young man who worked in a religious college in Granada, very prestigious: the letter was perfect. And he asked me what could be done to report this. I said, “Go to the archbishop, the archbishop knows what you have to do”. The archbishop did all that he had to do, and the matter even arrived in the civil court. There were two trials. The media in the place had started to talk, to talk… Three days after, it was written all over the parish about “paedophile priests”, and things of that type, and so the idea that these priests were criminals was created. Seven were questioned, and nothing was found; the investigation continued regarding three of them, and they were imprisoned for five days, two of them, and one – Father Roman, who was the parish priest – for seven days. For almost three years they suffered hatred from all the population: criminalized, they could not come out, and they suffered humiliation from the jury in countering the accusations of the young man, which I dare not repeat here. After more than three years, the jury declared the priests innocent, all of them, but especially those three: the others were already out – and the accuser to be guilty. Because they had seen that the accuser liked to invent, but he was a very intelligent person who also worked in a Catholic college and had this prestige, which gave the impression he was telling the truth. He was ordered to pay costs and all these things, and they were innocent. These men were sentenced by the media first, before obtaining justice. And therefore your work is very delicate: you must accompany, you must say things but always with this legal presumption of innocence, and not the legal presumption of guilt! And there is a difference between the informer who informs on a case but does not bet on the outcome, and the investigator who acts like Sherlock Holmes, who goes ahead with the presumption of guilt. When we read the technique of Hercule Poirot: for him, everyone was guilty. But this is the role of the investigator. They are two different positions. But those who inform must always start out from the presumption of innocence, saying their impressions, their doubts, but without passing judgement. This case in Granada was for me an example that is good for us all, in our [respective] role.

Greg Burke:
The first part of the [preceding] question was what the people of God can do in relation to this matter…

Pope Francis:
Ah yes, yes. When we see something, speak immediately. I will tell you something else, not very nice. At times, it is the parents who cover up the abuse carried out by a priest. Many times. It can be seen in the sentences. They say, “But, no…”. They do not believe, or they convince themselves that it is not true, and that the boy or girl remains in this way. I receive one or two people a week, but it is not mathematical; and I received a person, a woman, who for forty years had suffered from this wound of silence, because her parents did not believe her. She was abused for eight years. To speak, this is important. It is true that for a mother, to see this… It would be better if it were not true, and perhaps to think that the son maybe has fantasies… But we must speak. And speak with the right people, speak with those who can initiate a judgement, at least a preliminary investigation. Speak with the magistrate or the bishop, or if the parish priest is good, speak to him This is the first thing the people of God can do. These things must not be covered up, they are not to be covered up. A psychiatrist told me some time ago, but I do not want this to be an offence to women, that out of a sense of maternity, women are more inclined than men to cover up issues relating to their children. But I do not know if it is true or not. But this is: speak. Thank you.

Greg Burke:
From the Spanish group there is Javier Romero, of “Rome Reports TV”.

Javier Romero:
Your Holiness, excuse me, I would like to ask you two questions. The first is that the Prime Minister of Ireland, who was very direct in his address, is proud of a new model of family different to the one traditionally proposed by the Church so far: he spoke about gay marriage. And this is perhaps one of the models that causes the most disagreement, especially in the case of a Catholic family, when there is a person in this family who declares to be homosexual. Holiness, the first question I would like to ask you is: what do you think, what would you say to a father whose son says he is homosexual and would like to go and live with his companion? This is the first question. And the second, that you too in the address to the prime minister spoke about abortion; we have seen how Ireland has changed greatly in recent years and it seemed that the Minister was indeed satisfied with these changes: one of these changes is in fact abortion. We have seen that in recent months, in recent years the issue of abortion has come out in many countries, including in Argentina, your country. What do you feel when you see that this is an issue you speak about often and there are many countries in which it occurs…

Pope Francis:
Good. I will start with the second, but there are two points – thank you for this- because they are linked to the matters we are talking about. On abortion, you know what the Church thinks. The problem of abortion is not a religious problem, we are not against abortion because of religion. No. It is a human problem, and it must be studied by anthropology. Studying abortion starting from the religious fact means sidestepping the thought. The problem of abortion must be studied by anthropology. And there is always the anthropological question of the ethical aspect of eliminating a living being to resolve a problem. But this is already the discussion. I want only to underline this: I never permit that the problem of abortion is discussed starting from the religious fact. No. It is an anthropological problem, it is a human problem. This is my thought.

Second. There have always been homosexuals and people with homosexual tendencies. Always. The sociologists say, but I do not know if it is true, that in times of epoch change some social and ethical problems grow, and this would be one of those. This is the opinion of some sociologists. Your question is clear: what would I say to a father who sees that his son or his daughter has that tendency. I would tell him, first of all, to pray: pray. Not to condemn, but to engage in dialogue, to understand, to give space to the son or daughter. Make space for them to express themselves. Then, at what age does this disquiet manifest itself? This is important. It is one thing when it is manifested in a child, when there are many things that can be done, to see how things are; it is another thing when it is manifested after twenty years or something like that. But I will never say that silence is the remedy: ignoring the son or daughter with a homosexual tendency is a lack of paternity and maternity. You are my son, you are my daughter, just as you are; I am your father, your mother, let us talk. And if you, father or mother, are not able to cope, then ask for help, but always in dialogue, always in dialogue. Because that son and that daughter have the right to a family and the family is the one that there is: do not push them out of the family. This is a serious challenge to paternity and maternity. I thank you for your question, thank you.

Greg Burke:
Thank you, Holy Father.

Pope Francis:
And then, I would like to say something to the Irish who are here: I found great faith in Ireland. A lot of faith. It is true, the Irish population has suffered greatly as a result of scandals. But there is faith, in Ireland, and it is strong. And in addition the Irish people know how to distinguish, and I quote what I heard today from a prelate: “The Irish people know how to distinguish well between the truth and half-truths: it is something they have within”. It is true that it is in the phase of processing, and of healing from this scandal; it is true that some open up to positions that seem to drift away from faith. But the Irish people have a faith that is rooted and strong. I want to say this because it is what I saw, I heard, and what I have found out about in these two days.

Thank you for your work, many thanks! And pray for me, please.

Greg Burke:
Thank you. Have a good dinner and a good rest.

Full text of Pope Francis' in-flight press conference from Dublin

Vatican City, Aug 26, 2018 / 07:05 pm (CNA).- Please read below for CNA's full transcript of the Pope's Aug. 26 in-flight press conference from Dublin to Rome:

Greg Burke: Holy Father, thanks for this time you’re dedicating to us after two intense days. Certainly, there were difficult moments. In Ireland, there was the matter of abuses, but also very beautiful moments: the Festival of Families, testimonies from families, the meeting with the young couples and the visit to the Capuchins, but maybe you want to say something else first…

Pope Francis: To say thank you, because if I am tired I think of you who have work, work, work… I thank you so much for your effort and your work. Many thanks.

Greg Burke: The first question, as usual, comes from a journalist of the [host] nation which is Tony Connelly, RTE.

Tony Connelly, RTE: Your Holiness, you spoke on Saturday about the meeting you had with the minister for children. You talked about how moved you were by what she said about the mother and baby homes. What exactly did she tell you? Were you shocked because it was the first time you had heard of these homes?

Pope Francis: The minister first told me something that didn’t have too much to do with mother and children (Editor’s note: mother and baby homes). She told me, and she was brief: “Holy Father, we found mass graves of children, buried children, we’re investigating… and the Church has something to do with this.” But she said it very politely and truly with a lot of respect. I thanked her to the point that this had touched my heart. And, this is why I wanted to repeat it in the speech… and it was not at the airport, I was mistaken, it was at the president’s. At the airport, there was another lady minister and I made the mistake there.

But, she told me, “I’ll send you a memo.” She sent me a memo and I haven’t been able to read it yet. I saw it was a memo, that she sent me a memo. She was very balanced in telling me, “There’s an issue, the investigation has not yet finished.” But, she made me understand that the Church has something to do with this. For me, this was an example of constructive collaboration, but also of, I don’t want to say the word “protest” … of complaint, of complaint for that which at one time maybe the Church was of help to do. That lady had a dignity that touched my heart, and now I have the memo there that I will study when I get home.

Greg Burke: Now, another Irishman, exchanging places, which is Paddy Agnew, who is from the Sunday Independent, a resident in Rome but an Irish journalist.

Paddy Agnew, Sunday Independent: Holy Father, thanks and good evening. Yesterday, Marie Collins, an abuse victim that you know well, said that you are not favorable to a new tribunal for Vatican inquiries on the issue of abuses, new inquiries on the problem of sexual abuse, and in particular on a so-called tribunal of inquiry on bishops, bishop accountability. Why do you think this is not necessary?

Pope Francis: (speaking over the last part of the question) No, no, it is not like this. Marie Collins is a bit fixated on the idea that came up. I esteem Marie Collins so much. At times, we call her to give Vatican conferences. She is fixated on the idea, the idea of the “madre amorevole” (editor’s note: The motu proprio, “As a loving mother”), in which it is said that to judge bishops, that it would be good to have a special tribunal. Then, we saw this wasn’t practical and it also wasn’t convenient for the different cultures of the bishops that had to be judged.

You take the recommendations of “madre amorevole” and you make the “giuria” (Editor’s note: a special commission of bishops) for each bishop, but it’s not the same. This bishop is judged and the Pope makes a “giuria” that is more capable of taking that case. It is a thing that works better and also because not all bishops are able to leave their dioceses. It’s not possible.

In this way, the tribunals, the “giurias” change. And that’s what we’ve done up until now. Rather many bishops have been judged. The latest is that of Guam, the Archbishop of Guam, who appealed. And, I decided - because it’s a very difficult case - to take the privilege that I have of taking on the appeal myself and not sending it to the council of appeal that does its work with all the priests. I took it upon myself. And made a commission of canonists that are helping me and they told me that when I get back, after a maximum of a month, a recommendation will be made so I can make a judgment. It is a complicated case, on one hand, but not difficult because the evidence is clear. I cannot pre-judge, I await the report and then I will judge. I say that the evidence is clear because there is this evidence which led the first tribunal to the condemnation.

This is the latest step. Now, there’s another and we’ll see how it ends. But, of course, I told Marie that the spirit and also the recommendation of “as a loving mother” is being done… a bishop is judged by a tribunal, but it isn’t always the same tribunal, as it is not possible. She did not understand that well. But, when I see her, sometimes she comes to the Vatican, I will explain it more clearly. I love her.

Greg Burke: Now, the Italian group. Holy Father, Stefania Falasca from Avvenire is coming.

Falasca: You said also today that it is always a challenge to welcome migrants and the foreigner. Well, precisely yesterday a painful matter was resolved, that of the Diciotti ship. Is your hoof behind this solution? What was your involvement?

Falasca: Yes, then the second question: many in Europe see extortion on the backs of these people. What do you think?

Pope Francis: The welcoming of migrants is something as old as the bible. It’s in Deuteronomy, in the Commandments. God commands welcoming the migrant, the foreigner. It’s so old that it is in the spirit of revelation but also in the spirit of Christianity. It’s a moral principle. I spoke about this. Then, I saw that I needed to bit a bit more explicit because it’s not a welcoming with the “Belle etoile,” no! It should be a reasonable welcoming. That’s why Europe is all in this. And when did I realize how this reasonable welcome must be? When there was the terrorist attack in Zaventem (Editor’s note: the Brussels Airport), that that young men, the guerillas that made the attack on Zaventem were Belgians, but sons of migrants, not integrated, from ghettoes! That is, they were received by the country and left there, and they made a ghetto. They were not integrated. Then I remembered when I went to Sweden, and Franca (Editor’s note: Franca Giansoldati, Vatican correspondent for il Messaggero) in an article mentioned this, of how I explicitly made this though and when I went to Sweden, I knew it, I spoke about integration, as it was, because I knew because during the dictatorship in Argentina, from 1976 to 1983, many, many Argentinians and also many Uruguayans escaped to Sweden and there the government would integrate them immediately. It taught them the language, gave them a job and integrated them. To the point that, this is an interesting anecdote, a Minister who came to bid me farewell at the airport in Lund was the daughter of a Swedish and an African immigrant. This African migrant was so integrated to the extent that his daughter became a minister. Sweden was a model. But in that moment Sweden was beginning to have difficulties, not because it did not have the good will for this, but because it didn’t have the possibility of integration. This was the reason for which Sweden stopped for a bit. (After this step of integration) And then, I spoke during the press conference among you about the virtue of prudence, the virtue of the government. I spoke about the prudence of peoples, about the number or the possibility. A people that can receive but does not have the means to integrate [migrants], it’s better not to receive them. There, there is the issue of prudence. And I believe that this is the real core of the dialogue today in the European Union. We must continue to speak. Solutions will be found.

What happened with the Diciotti? I didn’t put my “paw” there. He who did the work with the minister of the interior was Fr. Aldo (Editor’s note: Fr. Aldo Bonaiuto, member of the Association “Giovanni XXIII”), the good Fr. Aldo that continues the work of Fr. Benzi, who the Italians know well, who work of liberating prostitutes, those that are exploited… The Italian Bishops’ Conference also was part. Cardinal Bassetti was there, but at the telephone, he guided everything by way of one of his two under-secretaries, Fr. Maffeis (Fr. Ivan Maffeis, director of communications) negotiated with the minister. And I believe that he went to Albania. Albania, Ireland took a number. Montenegro, I think not. I’m not sure. The others were picked up by the Conference, I don’t know if under the umbrella of the Vatican or not, I don’t know how it was negotiated there, and they’re going to a better world at Rocca di Papa (Editor’s note: an Italian town near Rome). They will be welcomed there. The number I believe that it is more than 100 and there they will begin to learn the language and to do that work that is done with integrated migrants. I’ve had an experience that was very gratifying for me. When I went to Roma Tre (University), there were students that wanted to ask me questions and I saw a student that “I know this face.” (Nour Essa, see story here, editor note), and it was one that had come with me among the 13 I brought back from Lesbos. And that girl was at the university because Sant’Egidio from the day after at school, to study, had integrated her at a university level. This is the work with migrants. There is an openness of heart for everyone, suffering, then integration as a condition for welcoming and then the prudence of those who govern for doing this. I have seen a clandestinely made film of the things that happen to those who are sent back. They are taken by the traffickers. Painful, the things that they do to the men... the women and the children, out! They sell them. But to the men, they do the most sophisticated torture. There was one there that was capable, a spy, of making that film that I sent to my two under-secretaries for immigration (Editor’s note: Fr. Michael Czerny and Fr. Fabio Baggio, undersecretaries of the Migrants and Refugees Section). For this, to send them back you have to think well. Then, one last thing: there are these migrants that come, but there are also those who are tricked at Fiumicino. They are tricked. “We give you work, they give you documents.” And they end up on the sidewalk enslaved, under threat from traffickers of women. That’s it.

Greg Burke: Thanks, Holiness. Let’s go to the question from the English-speaking group. Anna Matranga from the American television, CBS.

Anna Matranga, CBS: Good evening, Holy Father. I’ll return to the subject of sex abuse about which you’ve already spoken. This morning, very early, a document by Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano’ came out. In it, he says that in 2013 he had a personal talk with you at the Vatican, and that in that talk, he spoke to you explicitly of the behavior of and the sexual abuse by former-Cardinal McCarrick. I wanted to ask you if this was true. I also wanted to ask something else: the Archbishop also said that Pope Benedict sanctioned McCarrick, that he had forbidden him to live in a seminary, to celebrate Mass in public, he couldn’t travel, he was sanctioned by the Church. May I ask you whether these two things are true?

Pope Francis: I will respond to your question, but I would prefer last first we speak about the trip, and then other topics. I was distracted by Stefania, but I will respond.
I read the statement this morning, and I must tell you sincerely that, I must say this, to you and all those who are interested. Read the statement carefully and make your own judgment. I will not say a single word about this. I believe the statement speaks for itself. And you have the journalistic capacity to draw your own conclusions. It’s 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. That’s good. (inaudible)

Matranga: Marie Collins said that after she met you during the victims gathering, that she spoke with you precisely about ex-Cardinal McCarrick. She said you were very tough in your condemnation of McCarrick. I want to ask you, when was the first time that you heard talk about the abuses committed the former cardinal?

Pope Francis: This is part of the statement about McCarrick. Study it and then I will say. Yesterday, I had not read it but I permitted myself to speak clearly with Marie Collins and the group, it was really an hour-and-a-half, something which made me suffer a lot. But, I believe it was necessary to listen to these 8 people and from this meeting came the proposal. I made it, the others accepted and they helped me to do it, to ask forgiveness today in the Mass. But, in concrete things. The last thing. I had never heard about those mothers, they called it the women’s laundry, when an unmarried woman got pregnant she went to the hospital, I don’t know what the school was called, and the sisters said that and then they gave the child away in adoption to people. There were two sons from that time, they tried to find their mothers, if they were alive. And they would tell them that it was a mortal sin to do this, and to the mothers who called for their children also it was a mortal sin. For this reason, today I finished by saying that this is not a mortal sin but it’s the fourth commandment. And the things that I said today some I didn’t know (before). It was painful for me but I also had the consolation of being able to help clear these things up. I await your comment on the document, I would like that. Thanks.

Cecile Chambraud, Le Monde: Good evening, Holy Father. I hope you don’t mind if I pose my question in Spanish. I ask you to reply in Italian for all of the colleagues. In your speech in Ireland, you refer to your recent letter to the people of God. In that letter, you call all Catholics to take part in the fight against abuses in the Church. Can you provide details for us what concretely Catholics can do each in their place to fight against these abuses and on this theme, in France, a priest has started a petition for the removal of Cardinal Barbarin accused by victims. Does this initiative appear adequate to you or not?

Pope Francis: If there are suspicions, proofs or half-proofs, I do not see anything bad in making an investigation, but always that is done according to the fundamental juridical principal of “nemo malus nisi probetur” - No one is evil until it is proven. But many times there is the temptation not just to do the investigation but to publish that there is an investigation and why he’s culpable and so some media – not yours, I don’t know yours – to create a climate of culpability. I will tell you something that happened to me in these days that can help with this… because for me it is important how you proceed, how the media can help. Three years ago, more or less, the problem of the so-called “pedophile priests” started in Granada, involving 7, 8 or 10 priests accused of abuse of minors and of having festival or orgies and this kind of thing.

I received the accusation myself, directly, a letter made by a young 23-year old, according to him he was abused, he gave his name and everything, a young man who was working in a prestigious college of Granada, and the letter was perfect. And he asked me what to do to report this. I told him to go to the archbishop of Granada and tell him this, and the archbishop will know what to do. He did, and the archbishop did all that he should do. Then it also went to the civil tribunal and so there were two processes. But then the local media began to speak and speak (about this), and three days later, they wrote “in the parish, three pedophile priests” and so on, and in this way the consciousness was formed that the priests were criminals.

Seven were interrogated and nothing was found. On three, the investigation went ahead and they stayed in jail, for five days, two of them and one, Fr. Romani, the parish priest, was in for 7 days. For almost three years and more, they suffered hate, slaps from the whole town… “criminals!” They couldn’t go outside. They suffered humiliations made by the “giuria” declared to prove the accusations of the boy, that I don’t dare repeat here. After three years, meanwhile, the “giuria” declares the priests innocent, all innocent, but most of all these three, the others were already out of the case and the accuser was then denounced because it was seen that he had a vivid imagination. He was very intelligent and he worked in a Catholic college, he had this prestige and gave the impression of telling the truth.

He was condemned and had to pay the expenses. These men (the priests) were condemned by the local media before justice was done. For this reason, your work is very important, you must accompany the investigation but there must be the presumption of innocence, not with the legal presumption of culpability. There is a difference between the informer who provides information on a case, who isn’t playing for a foreseen condemnation, and the one who investigates, who acts like Sherlock Holmes and presumes that everyone is guilty, When we read the technique of Hercules Poirot, for him everyone was guilty, but this is the work of the investigator. They are two very different positions: but those who inform must start from the presumption of innocence, but saying their admirations, but this is a bit special, but why, to say doubts, but without making condemnations. This case that happened in Granada for me is an example that it will do us all good in our work.

Greg Burke: In the first part, you asked what could the people of God do about the issue…

Pope Francis: When you see something, speak immediately. I will say another thing that’s a little nasty: many times there are parents that cover up the abuse of a priest. Many times. You see it in the condemnation. “No, but…” they don’t believe… They are convinced that it’s not true and the boy or the girl remain like that. I by method receive every week one or two, but it’s not mathematical. And I’ve received a person, a woman, that for 40 years suffered this scourge of silence because her parents didn’t believe: she was abused at 8 years old. Speak! This is important. It’s true that for a mother to see it is better that it wasn’t, seeks that the child maybe is dreaming… speak! And speak with the right people, speak with those who can start a judgment, at least an preliminary investigation. Speak with a judge, with the bishop and if the parish priest is good speak with the parish priest, this is the first thing the people of God can do, this should not be covered up. A psychiatrist told me time ago, but I don’t want that this be an offense for the women, that for sense of maternity, women are more inclined to cover the things of the child than men. But I don’t know if it’s true, but… speak!

Greg Burke: Holy Father, we’re moving… the Spanish group. There’s Javier Romero, of Rome Reports.

Javier Romero, Rome Reports: Holiness, excuse me but I’d like to pose two questions. The first is the that the Prime Minister of Ireland, who was very direct in his speech, is proud of the new model of family different from that which traditionally the Church has proposed up until now: I mean homosexual marriage. And this is perhaps one of the models that generates more battles, and I thought in the case especially of a Catholic family , when there is a person of this family that declares themselves to be homosexual. Holiness, the first question that I’d like to pose you is: what do you think, what would you say to a father whose son says he is homosexual, that he would like to go live with his… this is the first question. And the second that you also in your speech to the Prime Minister spoke about abortion, and we saw how Ireland has changed so much in recent years and that it seems that the Minister was satisfied at these changes. One of these changes was abortion, and we saw that in recent months, in recent years abortion has come out in many countries, Argentina among others, your country. How do you feel when you see this is an issue of which you speak often and that in many countries it’s put in…

Pope Francis: Alright. I’ll begin from the second, but there are two points. Thanks for this. There are two points that are connected to the matter that we’re speaking about, on abortion you know what is thought. The problem of abortion is not religious. We are not against abortion for religion, no! It’s a human problem and it should be studied anthropologically. To study abortion, beginning with the religious fact is to skip over thought. The problem of abortion should be studied anthropologically. There is always the anthropological problem of the ethics of eliminating a human being to resolve a problem. But this is already to enter into the discussion. I just want to underscore this: I will never allow that the discussion on abortion begins on the religious fact. No, it’s an anthropological problem, it’s a human problem. This is my thinking.

Second. There have always been homosexuals, people with homosexual tendencies. Always. Sociologists say, I don’t know if it’s true, that in times of epochal changes, some social, ethical phenomena increase; one of them would be this. This is an opinion of some sociologists. Your question is clear: what would I say to a father who sees that his son or daughter has that tendency? I would say first to pray, pray! Don’t condemn. Dialogue, understand, make space for son and the daughter. Make space so they can express themselves.

Then, at what age does this restlessness of the child express itself? It’s important. One thing is when it shows itself in a child. There are many things to do with psychiatry, to see how things are. Another thing is when it manifests itself after 20 years of age… But I’ll never say that silence is a remedy. To ignore a son or daughter with homosexual tendencies is a lack of paternity and maternity. You are my son, you are my daughter as you are! I’m your father, mother. Let’s talk! And if you, father and mother aren’t up to it, ask for help, but always in dialogue because that son and that daughter have the right to a family and that family of not being chased out of the family. This is a serious challenge, but that makes paternity and maternity. Thank you for the question! Thanks!

Pope Francis: And then I would like to say something for the Irish that are here. I found so much faith in Ireland. So much faith. It’s true, the Irish people have suffered for the scandals. So much. But there is faith in Ireland. It’s strong. And also the Irish people know how to distinguish. And I cite what today I heard from a prelate: the Irish people know how to distinguish well between the truth and half-truths. It is something that they have within. It’s true that it’s in a process of elaboration, of healing from these scandals. It’s true that positions are being opened that seem to distance themselves from any faith. But the Irish people have a deep rooted faith. I want to say it because it’s what I’ve seen, what I’ve heard, of which in these two days I’ve been informed. Thanks for you work. Thanks a lot. And pray for me please.

Ex-nuncio accuses Pope Francis of failing to act on McCarrick's abuse reports

Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò. Credit: Edward Pentin / National Catholic Register.

Vatican City, Aug 25, 2018 / 07:00 pm (National Catholic Register).- In an 11-page written testament, a former apostolic nuncio to the United States has accused several senior prelates of complicity in covering up Archbishop Theodore McCarrick’s allegations of sexual abuse, and has claimed that Pope Francis knew about sanctions imposed on then-Cardinal McCarrick by Pope Benedict XVI but chose to repeal them.

Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò, 77, who served as apostolic nuncio in Washington D.C. from 2011 to 2016, wrote that in the late 2000s, Benedict had “imposed on Cardinal McCarrick sanctions similar to those now imposed on him by Pope Francis” and that Viganò personally told Pope Francis about those sanctions in 2013.

Archbishop Viganò said in his written statement that Pope Francis “continued to cover” for McCarrick and not only did he “not take into account the sanctions that Pope Benedict had imposed on him” but also made McCarrick “his trusted counselor,” claiming that the former archbishop of Washington advised the pope to appoint a number of bishops in the United States, including Cardinals Blase Cupich of Chicago and Joseph Tobin of Newark.

Archbishop Viganò, who said his “conscience dictates” that the truth be known as “the corruption has reached the very top of the Church’s hierarchy,” ended his testimony by calling on Pope Francis and all of those implicated in the cover up of Archbishop McCarrick’s abuse to resign.

On June 20, Vatican Secretary of State, Cardinal Pietro Parolin, on the order of Pope Francis, prohibited former Cardinal McCarrick from public ministry after an investigation by the New York archdiocese found an accusation of sexual abuse of a minor was “credible and substantiated.” That same day, the public learned that the Archdiocese of Newark and the Diocese of Metuchen in New Jersey had received three accusations of sexual misconduct involving adults against McCarrick. Since then media reports have written of victims of the abuse, spanning decades, include a teenage boy, three young priests or seminarians, and a man now in his 60s who alleges McCarrick abused him from the age of 11. The pope later accepted McCarrick’s resignation from the College of Cardinals.

But Viganò wrote that Benedict much earlier had imposed sanctions on McCarrick “similar” to those handed down by Cardinal Parolin. “The cardinal was to leave the seminary where he was living,” Viganò said, “he was also forbidden to celebrate [Mass] in public, to participate in public meetings, to give lectures, to travel, with the obligation of dedicating himself to a life of prayer and penance.” Viganò did not document the exact date but recollected the sanction to have been applied as far back 2009 or 2010.

Benedict’s measures came years after Archbishop Viganò’s predecessors at the nunciature — Archbishops Gabriel Montalvo and Pietro Sambi — had “immediately” informed the Holy See as soon as they had learned of Archbishop McCarrick’s “gravely immoral behaviour with seminarians and priests,” the retired Italian Vatican diplomat wrote.

He said Archbishop Montalvo first alerted the Vatican in 2000, requesting that Dominican Father Boniface Ramsey write to Rome confirming the allegations. In 2006, Viganò said, he personally, as delegate for pontifical representations in the Secretariat of State, wrote a memo to his superior, Cardinal Leonardo Sandri, proposing an “exemplary measure” be taken against McCarrick that could have a “medicinal function” to prevent future abuses and alleviate a “very serious scandal for the faithful.”

He drew on an indictment memorandum, communicated by Archbishop Sambi to Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, in which an abusive priest had made claims against McCarrick of “such gravity and vileness” including “depraved acts” and “sacrilegious celebration of the Eucharist.”

But, according to Viganò, his memo was ignored and no action was taken until the late 2000s — a delay which Archbishop Viganò claims is owed to complicity of John Paul II’s and Benedict XVI’s respective Secretary of States, Cardinals Angelo Sodano and Tarcisio Bertone.

In 2008, Archbishop Viganò claims he wrote a second memo, this time to Cardinal Sandri’s successor as sostituto at the Secretariat of State, Cardinal Fernando Filoni. He included a summary of research carried out by Richard Sipe, a psychotherapist and specialist in clerical sexual abuse, which Sipe had sent Benedict in the form of a statement. Viganò said he ended the memo by “repeating to my superiors that I thought it was necessary to intervene as soon as possible by removing the cardinal’s hat from Cardinal McCarrick.”

Again, according the Viganò, his request fell on deaf ears and he writes he was “greatly dismayed” that both memos were ignored until Sipe’s “courageous and meritorious” statement had “the desired result.”

“Benedict did what he had to do,” Archbishop Viganò told the National Catholic Register Aug. 25, “but his collaborators — the Secretary of State and all the others — didn’t enforce it as they should have done, which led to the delay.”

“What is certain,” Viganò writes in his testimony, “is that Pope Benedict imposed the above canonical sanctions on McCarrick and that they were communicated to him by the Apostolic Nuncio to the United States, Pietro Sambi.”

The National Catholic Register has independently confirmed that the allegations against McCarrick were certainly known to Benedict, and the Pope Emeritus remembers instructing Cardinal Bertone to impose measures but cannot recall their exact nature.

In 2011, on arrival in Washington D.C., Archbishop Viganò said he personally repeated the sanction to McCarrick. “The cardinal, muttering in a barely comprehensible way, admitted that he had perhaps made the mistake of sleeping in the same bed with some seminarians at his beach house, but he said this as if it had no importance,” Viganò recalled in his testimony.

In his written statement, Viganò then outlined his understanding of how, despite the allegations against him, McCarrick came to be appointed Archbishop of Washington D.C. in 2000 and how his misdeeds were covered up. His statement implicates Cardinals Sodano, Bertone and Parolin and he insists various other cardinals and bishops were well aware, including Cardinal Donald Wuerl, McCarrick’s successor as Archbishop of Washington D.C.

“I myself brought up the subject with Cardinal Wuerl on several occasions, and I certainly didn’t need to go into detail because it was immediately clear to me that he was fully aware of it,” he wrote.

Ed McFadden, a spokesman for the Archdiocese of Washington, told CNA that Wuerl categorically denies having been informed that McCarrick’s ministry had been restricted by the Vatican.

The second half of Viganò’s testimony primarily deals with what Pope Francis knew about McCarrick, and how he acted.

He recalled meeting Cardinal McCarrick in June 2013 at the Pope’s Domus Sanctae Marthae residence, during which McCarrick told him “in a tone somewhere between ambiguous and triumphant: ‘The Pope received me yesterday, tomorrow I am going to China’” — the implication being that Francis had lifted the travel ban placed on him by Benedict (further evidence of this can be seen in this interview McCarrick gave the National Catholic Reporter in 2014).

At a private meeting a few days later, Archbishop Viganò said the pope asked him, “What is Cardinal McCarrick like?” to which Viganò replied: “He corrupted generations of seminarians and priests and Pope Benedict ordered him to withdraw to a life of prayer and penance.” The former nuncio said he believes the pope’s purpose in asking him was to “find out if I was an ally of McCarrick or not.”
He said it was “clear” that “from the time of Pope Francis’s election, McCarrick, now free from all constraints, had felt free to travel continuously, to give lectures and interviews.”

Moreover, he added, McCarrick had “become the kingmaker for appointments in the Curia and the United States, and the most listened to advisor in the Vatican for relations with the Obama administration.”

Viganò claimed that the appointments of Cardinal Cupich to Chicago and Cardinal Joseph Tobin to Newark “were orchestrated by McCarrick” among others. He said neither of the names was presented by the nunciature, whose job is traditionally to present a list of names, or terna, to the Congregation for Bishops. He also added that Bishop Robert McElroy’s appointment to San Diego was orchestrated “from above” rather than through the nuncio.

The retired Italian diplomat also echoed the National Catholic Register’s reportsabout Cardinal Rodriguez Maradiaga and his record of cover-up in Honduras, saying the Pope “defends his man” to the “bitter end,” despite the allegations against him. The same applies to McCarrick, wrote Viganò.

“He [Pope Francis] knew from at least June 23, 2013 that McCarrick was a serial predator,” Archbishop Viganò stated, but although “he knew that he was a corrupt man, he covered for him to the bitter end.”

“It was only when he was forced by the report of the abuse of a minor, again on the basis of media attention, that he took action [regarding McCarrick] to save his image in the media,” wrote Viganò.

The former U.S. nuncio wrote that Pope Francis “is abdicating the mandate which Christ gave to Peter to confirm the brethren,” and urged him to “acknowledge his mistakes” and, to “set a good example to cardinals and bishops who covered up McCarrick’s abuses and resign along with all of them.”

In comments to the media Aug. 25 Viganò said his main motivation for writing his testimony now was to “stop the suffering of the victims, to prevent new victims and to protect the Church: only the truth can make her free.”

He also said he wanted to “discharge my conscience in front of God of my responsibilities as bishop for the universal Church,” adding that he is “old man” who wanted to present himself to God “with a clean conscience.”

“The people of God have the right to know the full truth also regarding their shepherds,” he said. “They have the right to be guided by good shepherds. In order to be able to trust them and love them, they have to know them openly, in transparency and truth, as they really are. A priest should always be a light on a candle, everywhere and for all.”

This article was originally published by our sister newspaper, the National Catholic Register. It has been updated by CNA.

Vigano testimony receives mixed response from US bishops

Washington D.C., Aug 27, 2018 / 05:02 pm (CNA/EWTN News).- Multiple bishops have responded to a testimony published over the weekend by a former apostolic nuncio to the United States, which called for the resignation of Pope Francis and several cardinals and bishops, who are alleged to have covered-up of sexual abuse allegations against former cardinal Theodore McCarrick.

In the testimony, Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò, 77, who served as apostolic nuncio in Washington D.C. from 2011 to 2016, wrote that Benedict had “imposed on Cardinal McCarrick sanctions similar to those now imposed on him by Pope Francis” and that Viganò personally told Pope Francis about those sanctions in 2013.

Vigano claimed that this was ignored by Francis, who pulled McCarrick back into public ministry and allowed him to become a “kingmaker for appointments in the Curia and the United States.”

He added that this is how “the Pope replaced Cardinal Burke with Wuerl and immediately appointed Cupich (to the Congregation of Bishops) right after he was made a cardinal.”

In a statement issued Sunday, Cardinal Blase Cupich of Chicago responded, saying that Vigano must be “confused about the sequence of these events,” as he was named to the Congregation of Bishops on July 7, 2016, before he was named a cardinal on October 9, 2016.

Vigano also claims in his testimony that Cupich’s appointment to Chicago and Bishop Joseph Tobin’s appointment to Newark “were orchestrated by McCarrick, Maradiaga and Wuerl, united by a wicked pact of abuses by the first, and at least of coverup of abuses by the other two. Their names were not among those presented by the Nunciature for Chicago and Newark.”

Cupich said he found these words “astonishing” because he had only ever received “supportive remarks and congratulations” from Vigano regarding his appointment to Chicago.

“As to the issue of my appointment to Chicago as well as the question of episcopal appointments in general, I do not know who recommended me for the Archdiocese of Chicago, but I do know that Pope Francis, like his predecessors, takes seriously the appointment of bishops as one of his major responsibilities,” Cupich said.

Furthermore, Vigano asserts that Cupich is “blinded by his pro-gay ideology” because he has stated that the main issue in the sex abuse crisis is clericalism, rather than homosexuality, which Vigano says ignores findings “that 80% of the abuses found were committed against young adults by homosexuals who were in a relationship of authority over their victims.”

Cupich said that “any reference I have ever made on this subject has always been based on the conclusions of the ‘Causes and Context’ study by the John Jay School of Criminal Justice, released in 2011, which states: ‘The clinical data do not support the hypothesis that priests with a homosexual identity or those who committed same-sex sexual behavior with adults are significantly more likely to sexually abuse children than those with a heterosexual orientation or behavior.’”

At the end of his statement, Cupich called for a “thorough vetting of the former nuncio’s many claims...before any assessment of their credibility can be made.”

Cardinal Joseph Tobin of Newark is mentioned twice by Vigano, first along with Cupich, in Vigano’s assertion that his appointment to his current position was “orchestrated” by McCarrick, Maradiaga and Wuerl.

Vigano also accuses Tobin of supporting Father James Martin, S.J., a “well-known activist who promotes the LGBT agenda.”

In a statement issued Monday, Tobin and the Archdiocese of Newark expressed “shock, sadness and consternation at the wide-ranging array of allegations...which cannot be understood as contributing to the healing of survivors of sexual abuse.”

“The factual errors, innuendo and fearful ideology of the ‘testimony’ serve to strengthen our conviction to move ahead resolutely in protecting the young and vulnerable from any sort of abuse” and guaranteeing a safe environment for all, the statement said.

“Together with Pope Francis, we are confident that scrutiny of the claims of the former nuncio will help to establish the truth.”

Pope Francis on Sunday responded to questions about Vigano’s testimony by saying that he will “not say a single word about it” and encouraged journalists and Catholics to study the testimony and its claims and draw their own conclusions.

Bishop Robert McElroy of San Diego is also mentioned by Vigano, who claims that his appointment to San Diego was also “orchestrated from above” by Cardinal Parolin. He also alleged that McElroy knew of “McCarrick’s abuses, as can be seen from a letter sent to him by Richard Sipe on July 28, 2016.”

In his response issued in a statement on Monday, McElroy slams Vigano’s testimony as a “distortion” that does not attempt to “comprehensively convey the truth.”

“In its ideologically-driven selection of bishops who are attacked, in its clear efforts to settle old personal scores, in its omission of any reference to Archbishop Vigano’s own massive personal participation in the covering up of sexual abuse by bishops, and most profoundly in its hatred for Pope Francis and all that he has taught, Archbishop Vigano consistently subordinates the pursuit of comprehensive truth to partisanship, division and distortion,” McElroy said.

“We as bishops cannot allow the pathway of partisanship to divide us or to divert us from the searing mission that Christ calls us to at this moment,” he added.

“We must make public our sinful past. We must engage and help heal the survivors of abuse. We must develop new, lay-governed instruments of oversight and investigation in every element of how we confront sexual abuse by clergy at all levels in the life of the Church. And we must reject all attempts to subordinate these goals to ideological or personal projects. For if we do not, we will have betrayed the victims of abuse once again.”

The Archdiocese of Washington, D.C., of which Cardinal Donald Wuerl is the head, issued a statement reiterating that Wuerl has “categorically denied that any of this information was communicated to him” regarding any sanctions against McCarrick and his ministry.

“Archbishop Viganò at no time provided Cardinal Wuerl any information about an alleged document from Pope Benedict XVI with directives of any sort from Rome regarding Archbishop McCarrick,” the archdiocese stated.

“Archbishop Viganò has not produced in his testimony any objectively verifiable proof that he in any way communicated to Cardinal Wuerl restrictions imposed on Cardinal McCarrick by Pope Benedict XVI. In fact, Archbishop Viganò’s testimony says that he did not.”

Vigano wrote it was “absolutely unthinkable” that Archbishop Pietro Sambi, nuncio at the time the restrictions were imposed, would not have informed Wuerl about the restrictions placed upon McCarrick.

Wuerl’s spokesperson Ed McFadden told CNA on Saturday that Vigano “presumed that Wuerl had specific information that Wuerl did not have” regarding any specific allegations or sanctions against McCarrick.

Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI and McCarrick, both mentioned in the testimony, have not issued responses as of press time.

While Archbishop Charles Chaput is not directly mentioned in the Vigano testimony, the Archdiocese of Philadelphia, which he heads, is mentioned several times, and its leader is mentioned as someone opposed by Francis and McCarrick.

Chaput’s spokesperson said that the archbishop “enjoyed working with Archbishop Vigano during his tenure as Apostolic Nuncio to the United States and found his service to be marked by integrity to the Church.”

However, Chaput declined to comment on Vigano’s testimony, “as it is beyond his personal experience."

Critics of Vigano have called the credibility of his testimony into question, in part because of Vigano’s own involvement of the case of Archbishop John C. Nienstedt, previously of St. Paul and Minneapolis. Nienstedt was accused of covering up multiple cases of clerical sexual abuse in his diocese at the time, and an investigation reportedly revealed further allegations of sexual misconduct towards seminarians on Nienstedt’s part.

In 2016, a document was made public accusing Vigano of suppressing a 2014 investigation into Nienstedt. The memo, written by Father Dan Griffith, an archdiocesan priest who was a liaison to the lawyers conducting an independent investigation into Archbishop Nienstedt, reported that Vigano ordered the halt of the investigation into Nienstedt and the destruction of evidence once sexual and criminal allegations against Nienstedt were uncovered.

The move was “a good old fashioned cover-up to preserve power and avoid scandal and accountability,” Griffith said in the memo.

Some bishops not mentioned in the testimony have also issued responses to it, mostly calling for prayer and transparency.

Bishop Joseph Strickland of Tyler, Texas, issued a statement to his diocese saying that while Vigano’s claims have not been investigated and are “still allegations...as your shepherd I find them to be credible.”

He called for a “thorough investigation” of the testimony and said while he does not have the authority to launch such an investigation, “I will lend my voice in whatever way necessary to call for this investigation and urge that it’s findings demand accountability of all found to be culpable even at the highest levels of the Church.”

When asked by CNA why Strickland believed Vigano’s claims were credible, diocesan spokesman Luke Heinstschel responded, saying that Strickland had said “all that he wished to say for the time” in his original statement, and that “he asks that we all pray for bishops and priests at this time.”

Bishop David Konderla of the Diocese of Tulsa said on his personal Facebook page that he counts himself “blessed that it was Archbishop Viganò who called me to tell me that I was appointed fourth bishop of Tulsa.”

“The allegations he details mark a good place to begin the investigations that must happen in order for us to restore holiness and accountability to the leadership of the Church,” he added. “Now is the time for us to re-double our prayers for the church and for the victims of these crimes. St. Michael the Archangel, defend us in battle.”

Bishop Thomas Olmsted of Phoenix said in a statement that he has known Vigano since 1979 and, “I have always known and respected him as a man of truthfulness, faith and integrity.”

While he said he had no personal knowledge of the allegations contained in his testimony, he asked that it be “taken seriously by all, and that every claim that he makes be investigated thoroughly. Many innocent people have been seriously harmed by clerics like Archbishop McCarrick; whoever has covered up these shameful acts must be brought to the light of day.”

Archbishop Allen Vigneron of Detroit issued a statement in which he said Catholics have “nothing to fear” in the face of Vigano’s claims because the “truth will set us free.”

“Whether the Archbishop’s claims are confirmed or proved to be unfounded, the truth which comes to light will show us the sure path to the purification and reform of the Church.”

He called on Catholics to pray for truth and transparency in the coming days, and urged Catholics to not lose hope.

“Christ has not abandoned us in this time of crisis. By his rising, he is Lord of all history. And in these trials, he seeks to restore the vitality of his Church,” he said.

“We must respond with abandonment to his designs, to identify the grace he offers us in this moment and to accept it willingly regardless of the cost. If we respond with hope, the Lord will take us to a new place from which we can go forth to unleash the Gospel with new power and new strength.”