RED ALERT: Sunday Newspaper Headlines in Italy: “The Pope knew about the sexual abuses of the gay Cardinal and covered them up”

RED ALERT: Sunday Newspaper Headlines in Italy: “The Pope knew about the sexual abuses of the gay Cardinal and covered them up”

posted on  by 



Diane Montagna at LifeSite has the full text of Viganò’s letter HERE.

Italian newspaper “La Veritá” leading tomorrow’s Sunday edition with former nuncio to the U.S. Carlo Maria Viganó saying that Antipope Bergoglio knew about McCarrick’s sexual abuse and covered it up because Viganó told him of it while he was nunzio to the U.S. and Bergoglio ignored him.  Viganó apparently calls for Bergoglio to “resign”.

Viganó was Apostolic Nuncio to the U.S. from October ARSH 2011 until April ARSH 2016.

Looks like Pietro Parolin is making his move against Bergoglio.

The Italian Trads have screengrabs HERE.

That headline translates as:


The text beneath translates as:

Shocking indictment by the former apostolic nuncio to the US who names first names and lastnames of the powerful homosexual lobby of the Church. “My denunciations were ignored for years, now Francesco has to resign.”

It’s being teased on Italian television….

Get AQ Email Updates

23 comments on “RED ALERT: Sunday Newspaper Headlines in Italy: “The Pope knew about the sexual abuses of the gay Cardinal and covered them up”

  1. Quick! Anybody have the Stones’ “19th Nervous Breakdown” recording in Italian?
    Don Begolione and his mob will DEFINITELY be “going to the mattresses” now!

  2. Abp. Vigano has performed superbly, saving countless investigative manhours on the part of ecclesiastical and law enforcement authorities charged with the responsibility of bringing before church and civil courts evidence of criminality. His summary of events identifies the ringleaders and their key co-conspirators, short-circuiting Bergolgio & Co’s escape and evasion schemes. Let us keep this heroic prelate in our prayers.

  3. The editor of Inside the Vatican has a report on Pope Francis’s knowledge of the McCarrick allegations in his current e-newsletter. That Pope Francis did NOTHING after being informed of the cardinal’s unsavory sexual practices while serving as a bishop. This leads to a few possible conclusions: Pope Francis was too timid to act; he didn’t care, he didn’t understand the gravity of such perverted crimes, he was too senile and incompetent to know what to do, he was embarrassed and squeamish about discussing such issues, or he sympathized with a fellow modernist heretic even one who was a practicing predatory sex pervert who molested and groped seminarians and was willing to let that pass. None of these is tolerable in a bishop or priest of the Catholic Church, let alone the Supreme Pontiff.

    So what should happen? Is it really to be left up to Pope Francis ( radical modernist Jorge Bergoglio, S.J., patron saint of the dissembling situation ethics) to supervise an investigation of homosexualist infiltration of the hierarchy? Will the Holy Father now lie about this and persist in a shameless cover-up in order to hold on to papal power to push forward his modernist agenda of situation ethics?

    Should a U.S. grand jury call Pope Francis as a witness to explain his do-nothing decision about the homosexualist pervert cardinal?

  4. Sadly, the Holy Father MUST explain his inaction and inertia on criminal allegations about a U.S. cardinal. He can deny that he was informed of this or claim that he did not understand the situation, but dissembling denials by a seasoned modernist heretic and LGBT enabler will do very little to revive confidence in the Holy See at this point. He could resign and Pope Benedict could resume the papal office or there will have to be another conclave.

    • Francis won’t be resigning. He’d have to find a conscience first and try to revive it. Ain’t going to happen.

      The between-the-lines reading of +Viganó is that the conclave was manipulated. The mafia machinations stacked the deck. Uncle Ted would have had particular reasons to stick it to Benedict.

      If a preponderance of the evidence calls the conclave into question, then things could get really interesting.

      • As long as Francis is Pope , all the perps are safe , unless criminal charges are filled against them ! If that is the case, he can just whisk them away to Vatican 🇻🇦 Disneyland, like they did with Law ! The question is how many spots in the Magic Kingdom will there be ? Don’t touch that dial, Mouseketeers ! Rats 🐀 jumping ship 🚢?

        • I agree with everything you say. As JP2 did with Boston’s Cardinal Law, FrankenPope can accept Wuerl’s resignation (which was mandatorily made – but not yet acted upon – almost three years ago when he turned 75) and transfer him from DC to the Vatican – a sovereign state – supposedly to take advantage of experience and advice there – and make him the archpriest (pastor) of a Roman basilica church (which position is honorary but has living quarters and a monthly stipend, although it is usually the last earthly positon that a churchman has, because the next one is before the judgment seat of God).

          How many places are there for such in Rome? At one point during JP2’s papacy, he had three: The Arab Abp. Hilarion Capucci whom the Israelis caught running guns to the PLO in his diplomatically-protected car and was offered prison or exile, the latter of which he accepted – to Rome; the African Abp. Emmanuel Milingo who was transferred to Rome from Zambia because of his Charismatic exorcisms and healing services; and a Lithuanian bishop who was transferred to Rome at the request of the laity, because he was too compliant to the then Communist government. Tha Vatican did or could not keep a tight leash on them: Capucci tried to return to Israel aboard a ship in a supposed mercy flotilla fleet to the land- and sea-blockaded Gaza Strip but was caught and returned to Rome; and Milingo got mixed up with the Moonies and ended up with a Moonie wife and later founded a schismatic African church for “married” priests and bishops (the latter of whom he illictly consecrated as such) and was formerally excommunucated and laicized by the Vatican.

  5. Since he’s a head of state, I doubt we’ll see him testifying, even electronically, as a result of any US court action.

  6. If what Vigano alleges is true, what if McCarrick had molested someone AFTER Pope Francis suspended Benedict’s punitive sanctions suspending McCarrick from public ministry? Wouldn’t that make Pope Francis criminally negligent, reckless, and irresponsible? (i.e., in restoring a known predatory sex pervert to public and diplomatic functions as a cardinal)

  7. This is an attempted coup. Pope Francis has 4 options. Yes he could resign. But coming from a Pope who likes to be in control, not likely. Second option, he could get his Latin American friends like Maradiaga& co to form a new “government” against what he considers the “rascist” European Progressivists. Third, Bergoglio can stay in power as a “token” leader, with his European progressivists in Italy, France, Germany, and Austria, pushing him more to the left.
    The Fourth choice is the most interesting: Bergoglio could try to realign himself with Traditionalists, and ask for heads.
    BERGOGLIO could try another option, the option of launching a countercampaign to discredit the credibility of Vigano. But for someone like Vignano to openly come out in the papers with this, means he is burning all the bridges behind, and he is confident of his faction’s victory. No doubt Parolin, and the cardinals that are living in fear of saying anything in Rome. But please keep in mind, whether it is Khrushchev trying to oust a Stalin, or the Us liberating Germany from Naziism, or Protestant Anglican king trying to oust Oliver Cromwell, they are still the left. That the victorious Liberals will appear will appear as the victorious knight with shining armour, and a conservative restoration, when in fact, But in fact, it is replacing, as Cardinal Ratzinger once said, a “hard” totalitarianism, as compared with a “soft one”.

    • Ghebreyesus , you make excellent points ! It does have the feel of an attempted coup , but for a coup to succeed one must have a successor and Have enough “tanks in the street “ to accomplish a successful conclusion! I just wonder who they have in mind and if it will make any difference! Or is this just a ploy to take the heat off the Church and save it from an inevitable criminal investigation and eventual bankruptcy! Obviously there has been vast corruption in areas of the Church , from the Vatican Bank, to the 🌍 Worldwide Sex abuse scandals , where the investigations have only scratched the surface, to the collection of Federal Tax monies, for migrant relocation , the list goes on ! Name a few names in High Place, they get minor rebukes and all the serious investigations go away maybe ! There is a lot more to this than a letter to a paper calling for the Pope’s resignation! Most of the accusations were known, or had been stated by some on this site for a while now ! They were not just affirmed as the letter did ! Or the good archbishop had a guilty conscience as he stated and just threw himself off the bridge ! Somehow I just do not think so ! There is always a game within a game in the shadow world !

    • [The National un-Catholic Reporter also calls it an attempted coup but using the German word “putsch” with the implication of those involved in it as Nazis]

      Vigano letter exposes the putsch against Pope Francis

      Aug 26, 2018 – by Michael Sean Winters

      Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano’s testimony proves one thing: The former Vatican ambassador to the United States is to the clergy sex abuse crisis what Oliver Stone is to the assassination of President John Kennedy, a trafficker in conspiracy theories who mixes fact, fiction and venom to produce something explosive but also suspicious. When you finish reading this testimony, as at the end of Stone’s 1991 movie “JFK,” you can only conclude that the product tells us more about the author than it does about the subject.

      Vigano is certainly correct that Cardinal Angelo Sodano, longtime Secretary of State to Pope John Paul II, was a patron of disgraced former-cardinal Theodore McCarrick. Stone recognized the assassination happened in Dallas. But why does Vigno fail to mention the key role played by Cardinal Stanislaus Dsiwisz in protecting McCarrick?

      Vigano alleges that Pope Francis lifted sanctions against McCarrick that had been imposed by Pope Benedict. Indeed, the headline on the Edward Pentin story that broke the news of this testimony reads “Ex-nuncio Accuses Pope Francis of Failing to Act on McCarrick’s Abuse.” But, Francis did act. He is the one who removed McCarrick from ministry in June. The central focus of this testimony is the claim that Benedict issued sanctions against McCarrick: “the Cardinal was to leave the seminary where he was living, he was 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,” Vigano writes.

      During the Benedict papacy, with my own eyes I witnessed McCarrick celebrate Mass in public, participate in meetings, travel, etc. More importantly, so did Pope Benedict! If Benedict imposed these penalties, he certainly did not apply them. He continued to receive McCarrick with the rest of the Papal Foundation, continued to allow him to celebrate Mass publicly at the Vatican, even concelebrating with Benedict at events like consistories. (See photo above taken in 2010.) But, as Vigano tell is, it is all Pope Francis’ fault.

      Vigano is more than a little obsessed with homosexuality and names prelates whom he accuses of supporting efforts at “subverting Catholic doctrine on homosexuality.” Filmmaker Stone was obsessed with the grassy knoll. Back in my seminary days, when one of the seminarians would give evidence of this kind of obsession, making wild claims about homosexuality, its sources and its effects, ignoring the emerging scientific and psychological data, the rest of us would look at each other and someone would say, “I would like to take a look at her dance card.”

      Something similar is playing out all this summer. Bishops and archbishops speak about gay people with such hatred, you ask yourself how a minister of the Gospel could speak so nastily about other human beings and then it hits you: They are not speaking about other human beings. and you’ve got to wonder if what you are watching is self-hatred unfolding.

      Unfortunately, Vigano’s tissue of misinformation will leave its mark. In the midst of a feeding frenzy, no one stops to ask basic questions and even journalists can forget to undertake basic tasks like asking for corroboration or looking at the questions a text such as Vigano’s poses. Here are a few of my questions:

      Vigano says he must unburden his conscience now. Why now? If he felt as disturbed by the filth as he claims to have been, why did he not say anything publicly or at least speak to the bishops conference? I recall a few years back, at a meeting of bishops’ conference, sitting outside the ballroom in Baltimore chatting with a monsignor from the nunciature. He was waiting for Vigano who was in the executive session of the bishops’ meeting. Why did he say nothing then?

      If, as he claims, McCarrick had such great influence with Francis, how does he explain McCarrick’s fisticuffs with the Argentine bishops over Fr. Carlos Buela and the Institute of the Incarnate Word? When the Argentine bishops, under the leadership of then-Cardinal Bergoglio, refused to ordain the Incarnate Word seminarians, McCarrick stepped in to do it.

      McCarrick had nothing, zilch, to do with the selection of Bishop Blase Cupich to become archbishop of Chicago, nor with Archbishop Joseph Tobin going to Newark. It is true that these major sees were filled without the nuncio’s consent or input, which tells you only that Francis recognized just how sick he was before the rest of us did. My dog Ambrose has more influence with Pope Francis than McCarrick did.

      Vigano even reaches back to recruit the late Jesuit Fr. Bob Drinan for his conspiracy, and the signatories of the 1967 Land O’ Lakes statement on Catholic higher education. Really? I am reminded of an old Joan Rivers joke about the fact that a UFO has never landed at Harvard or Yale or Stanford. It is always three yahoos in a pick-up drinking beer: “I saw it! There it was!” Church Militant, the Cardinal Newman Society, LifeSiteNews, these are the church’s drunk yahoos and it has been clear for some time that Vigano sees eye-to-eye with these characters. Remember how he tried to ruin a different papal trip? It was he who in 2015 brought Kim Davis, the Kentucky county clerk who refused to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples, in to meet Francis and falsely presented her as a champion of religious liberty. In fact, Davis was sent to jail because she sought to impose her religious views on others.

      And, as my colleague Joshua McElwee pointed out, we know how much Vigano cares about the victims of clergy sex abuse. In Minnesota, Vigano encouraged Auxiliary Bishop Lee Piche to destroy documents relating to the investigation of Archbishop John Nienstedt.

      Vigano is a disgruntled former employee. Such people are always a bit angry. They are also often a bit unreliable. He was always a crackpot. But, make no mistake: This is a coordinated attack on Pope Francis. A putsch is afoot and if the U.S. bishops do not, as a body, stand up to defend the Holy Father in the next 24 hours, we shall be slipping towards schism long before the bishops meeting in November. The enemies of Francis have declared war.

      • Most public reports indicate that McCarrick was the one that engineered Bergoglio’s election to Pope ! One would think that would give McCarrick some leverage with the Pope ! Having seen some other stories this Winters has written, one could assume his dog 🐶 is a lot smarter than he is and would have more influence with anybody than he does ! Methinks he protesteth too much ! Winters has the agenda to keep the Heretic in office !

  8. I hope Bishop Vigano has good and reliable security protection. He is likely to be in danger of being “Fostered” like Pope John Paul I or Roberto Calvi of the Banco Ambrosiano/Propaganda Due Lodge scandal. ( “God’s Banker” / Banchiere di Dio).

    Say some prayers for this courageous bishop. He is not just going up against the queers and Lavender mafia, but the anti-Catholic secret societies and the Illuminati for whom Bergoglio is their puppet to geld and neutralize Catholicism in their demonic Luciferian quest for totalitarian global socialism and coercive Malthusian population control.

    At least he got this document published before they could disappear him.

  9. Shifty characters, separated at birth:

    Apb. Viganó seems to have known about Uncle Teddy for a decade or more, but decides to speak now. Why?

    Shoot-from-the-hip Rudy … but ya gotta love him.

  10. Cyprian, the Abp’s letter documents all his personal efforts to lay hard evidence before those required to correct the problem. The delay is on them, not him. At least, it would appear so.

  11. A papal nuncio serves at the pleasure and will of the Supreme Pontiff. As with all matters coming before the Vatican diplomatic corps, discretion and confidentiality would be the norm
    for a nuncio reviewing personnel matters or canonical litigation and jurisprudence. With the exception of a level of corruption and crime which would require candor in the interest of truth and moral rectitude on a moral level for the good of the Church and the defense of the true Catholic faith.

    For full disclosure: in order to dispel any rumors, I did not write or contribute to the passages on the “deviated wing of the Society of Jesus” but would encourage Bishop Vigano to compose a separate article on the modernist heresy and situation ethics in the Jesuit order among such modernist cabals since Vatican II, particularly with respect to the controversy regarding Georgetown University and the cardinal archbishop of Washington, DC. While fresh air is still blowing in the windows…

    It would continue to shine light on areas of the Church greatly in need of illumination and disclosure.


    • Howl writes: “With the exception of a level of corruption and crime which would require candor in the interest of truth and moral rectitude on a moral level for the good of the Church and the defense of the true Catholic faith.”

      Bingo. +Viganó knew for more than 20 years the depravity of Ted and knew that nothing was happening despite his efforts. I shouldn’t impugn his efforts now – better late than never. His letter is exactly what is needed. Unfortunately there are some guys with sore backsides and destroyed lives who would have appreciated a warning from a respected clergyman 20 years ago.

      On the flipside, suppose someone else wrote this letter a month ago, and we found out later that Viganó knew all about it. What would we think of him then?

      • For every believing Catholic who has ever held a leadership position in the Church there are occasions and situations that expose one to information about corruption, infiltration, heresy, and/or sins of fellow Catholics, some perverse or disgusting. It becomes a matter of judgment, prudential judgment, regarding whether to share that information with others and with whom. You have to make a judgment call on how likely it is that the person you tell will be able to handle that properly and whether it is likely they will do anything about it. If I told a member of the hierarchy about corruption at my Jesuit university, is he really going to do anything about it? Or will revealing that blow back on me negatively and detrimentally?
        (i.e., primarily issues which are not crimes).
        I have never witnessed a crime in the Church, although I can be fairly certain I have seen heretical modernists who were also perverts (in their private life) say the Novus Ordo Mass sacrilegiously. Two or three for sure, just based on diocesan records.

        If you are not an eyewitness and are just passing on rumors, your reports are not likely to be acted on because they don’t constitute proof.

        I know it as a fact that initiates of anti-Catholic secret societies have infiltrated modernist Catholic universities, seeking to lure others into sin and apostasy and to promote evil and immorality. Proving that would require private detective and surveillance work. Who should I tell that will really do something about that?

        It’s not a given that allegations lead to reform, correction, or justice, as the McCarrick case and Bishop Vigano’s testimony make clear.
        At any rate, Bergoglio is not going to do ANYTHING to remove heretics and anti-Catholics from the faculty of Notre Dame or Georgetown (and the rest).

        So, as you can see from the hysterical reaction of the liberal progressive modernist writer at The National Catholic Reporter, a whistleblower on this corruption is just a wild-eyed “conspiracy theorist” (with an absurd analogy made to German fascism in the 1930s). As if that elevates the discussion or clarifies anything.

        The situation is probably FAR worse than what Vigano alleges. I know it is.

        • In 2018, one bishop finally had enough and decided to speak out. One.

          “Everybody” knew Uncle Ted was a pederast; this for at least 30 years. “Everybody” knew Bernardin was a flaming homo. Catholic schools have had perverse SIECUS-inspired sex indoc programs for 40+ years. My mom had “gaydar” and pulled me from grammar school in the 60’s; the priest subsequently got sent away.

          All this, and we waited until 2018 for one bishop to squawk. I don’t want to hear about “prudential judgment” anymore. It doesn’t exist among those in charge. They haven’t the faith, they haven’t any Christian judgment. This applies to all the bishops generally, and some more than others specifically.

          Yes, Aug 25, 2018 is a good day. But a gaggle of heinous Judases have kept this day at bay for 20, 30, 40+ years. May they all burn in Hell.

          • I was not arguing that Vigano should haver remained silent.
            We don’t know who Vigano told or when. Or why he chose now as opposed to five or ten years ago. Obviously, there is a moral requirement and duty to report sex abuse. But Vigano was not a witness to the crimes. He had heard and read reports of such.
            Rules regarding slander still apply to priests and bishops. It’s obvious Notre Dame’s president is a flamboyant homo with a man crush on Obama and a commitment to the modernist heresy. Saying that isn’t going to get Pope Francis or the Congregation of the Holy Cross or ND’s board to remove him.


            I am NOT saying that Bishop Vigano should have remained silent AFTER his 2013 conversation with Bergoglio about McCarrick. Merely suggesting possible reasons which might explain that.
            Even Sherlock Holmes would have to be able to prove that Professor Moriarty was a bugger. Merely saying it wouldn’t get a judge to lock him up.

            “Attention Pope Francis:
            Homosexualist perverts, modernist heretics, and pro-abortion anti-Catholic secret societies have been infiltrating Catholic colleges, universities, and seminaries.”
            [drum roll]
            We can expect no comment. He “will say not one word.”

  12. A. At least we know, now.
    B. Vigano’s portfolio is diplomatic. Both Church and State protocols demand high secrecy procedures.
    C. Vigano has been on Francis’ case since the beginning of the pontificate. He was professionally restricted from disclosure unless and until he did what he now has actually done.

Leave a Reply