Socci Hears from the Vatican Vice-Secretary of State. Has He Struck a Nerve?

Socci Hears from the Vatican Vice-Secretary of State.
Has He Struck a Nerve?

by Christopher A. Ferrara
August 10, 2017

We are not pleased with your article, Antonio!

When Antonio Socci speaks, the Vatican listens. And responds. The response to his piece on the apparent efforts by elements of the Roman Curia, led by Secretary of State Cardinal Parolin, to control the damage caused by Pope Francis’ “work of demolition” was immediate.

As Socci reports (translation mine), he has received a note from the Substitute (Vice) Secretary of State, Archbishop Angelo Becciu, within two days of the publication of his column, wherein Becciu asserts that the column is “offensive with regard to the Pope and the same Cardinal Parolin.”

Parolin himself, however, has nothing to say, evidently. Socci notes the telling fact that it is Becciu, not Parolin, who has responded to his exposé, for it is Becciu who acts “as the operative arm of the Pope and the Secretary of State. Thus, there falls to him the task of telling us that Bergoglio and Parolin have a perfect identity of views, contrary to what has been written by the perfidious Socci.”

But while Becciu purports to deny that there is anything but perfect harmony between Francis and Parolin, “the facts say otherwise,” as the headline of Socci’s follow-up article declares. First of all, Socci’s sources within the Vatican have since informed him that “you nailed it” and that, accordingly, there “will be a row” within the Vatican corridors of power.

Furthermore, Socci notes an analogous situation involving Becciu’s role as a Vatican attack dog: his note to Socci in 2012 protesting Socci’s negative depiction of the Mafioso-like behavior of the now disgraced Cardinal Bertone in comparison with the gentle pastoral style of Pope Benedict.  Showing just how expedient Becciu’s Vatican whitewashing operation is, those who “had praised and even supported Bertone overnight became paladins of Bergoglian revolution (while deprecating the days of Bertone).”

Turning to the merits of Becciu’s letter, Socci notes the damning omission of any reference to Socci’s demonstration of clear opposition between the Pope and Parolin on the matter of immigration, with Parolin trying to temper Francis’ “obsessive ideological hammering on welcoming everyone” without regard to the disastrous impact on Italy.

Also omitted is any attempt to dispute Socci’s depiction of opposition between Parolin and the Pope on the latter’s view of a supposedly “dangerous” alliance between the U.S. and Russia or Russia and Assad (who is protecting Syria’s Christian population from Muslim fanatics), regarding which Parolin “has clearly overturned that judgment…”

Becciu, writes Socci, is particularly embarrassed by his claim that the Pope shares Parolin’s condemnation of the Maduro regime’s tyranny in Venezuela. As Socci notes, Maduro himself has exposed this falsehood by declaring that “the Pope’s course as defender of the Christian people with his humility” — meaning his defense of Maduro’s claim to represent “the Christian people” by imposing socialist tyranny on them — has been undermined by “Monsignor Parolin [who has] fallen into the hands of the most extreme sectors of the Venezuelan Catholic Church” — meaning the bishops who, in a document co-signed by Parolin, have stood up in opposition to Maduro’s tyranny and his ongoing destruction of a once prosperous nation.

Indeed, while Parolin has spoken out clearly against the Maduro regime, Francis — who administered his personal blessing to the bloody dictator at the Vatican — has never uttered a word against him (or, for that matter, the Castros or the tyrants of Beijing). And now, having coddled various “red dictators” while condemning Trump and other Western politicians for being insufficiently cooperative in his pet causes of open borders and ecological scare-mongering, Francis can only remain silent while his subalterns speak the truth, lest he have to eat all of his own words and gestures favorable to socialist and communist tyrants.

Thus, as Socci concludes: “This is why it is unacceptable — to me — that the Substitute judges ‘offensive with regard the Pope’ an article wherein I expound political facts and actions which are before the eyes of everyone. Is the Pope offended by the truth?”

It is the truth that makes us free. And, like Socci, we at The Fatima Center will continue to publish the truth about our situation, no matter whom it offends.

Get AQ Email Updates

Leave a Reply