Le rôle des Evêques dans la crise pédophile

témoignage de Mgr Vigano  concernant l'accusation qu'il aurait couvert des accusations d'abus contre l'archevêque Nienstedt de St Paul -Minneapolis  source  Blog :  aldovallini.it
désolé Florence , pas encore de traduction ...

Citation :

Statement by Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò regarding the Archdiocese of St. Paul-Minneapolis

Accusations against my person appeared in the media – in July 2016, when I had already left my mission in Washington, D.C. – following the publication of a memorandum written by Father Dan Griffith, the then delegate for the protection of minors in the Archdiocese.
These accusations – alleging that I ordered the two Auxiliary Bishops of Minneapolis to close the investigation into the life of Archbishop John C. Nienstedt – are false.
Father Griffith was not present during my meeting at the Nunciature with the Archbishop and the two Auxiliaries on April 12, 2014, during which several affidavits containing accusations against Archbishop Nienstedt were handed to me.
These affidavits were collected by the firm, Greene Espel, who was retained by Father Griffith on behalf of the Archdiocese to investigate Archbishop Nienstedt. This firm belongs to the group “Lawyers for All Families,” who fought against Archbishop Nienstedt over the approval of same-sex marriage in the State of Minnesota.
In one of these affidavits, it was claimed that Archbishop Nienstedt had had an affair with a Swiss Guard during his service in the Vatican some twenty years prior.
Private investigators from the Greene Espel firm had conducted an inquiry in an unbalanced and prosecutorial style, and now wanted immediately to extend their investigation to the Pontifical Swiss Guard, without first hearing Archbishop Nienstedt.
I suggested to the bishops who came to the Nunciature on April 12, 2014, that they tell the Greene Espel lawyers that it appeared to me appropriate that Archbishop Nienstedt be heard before taking this step – audiatur et altera pars – which they had not yet done. The bishops accepted my suggestion.
But the following day, I received a letter signed by the two auxiliaries, falsely asserting that I had suggested the investigation be stopped.
I never told anyone that Greene Espel should stop the inquiry, and I never ordered any document to be destroyed. Any statement to the contrary is false.
However, I did instruct one of the auxiliary bishops, Lee A. Piché, to remove from the computer and the archdiocesan archives the letter falsely asserting that I had suggested the investigation be halted. I insisted on this not only to protect my name, but also that of the Nunciature and the Holy Father who would be unnecessarily harmed by having a false statement used against the Church.
The very day the news appeared in the New York Times, on July 21, 2016, the Holy Father asked Cardinal Parolin to phone the Nuncio in Washington, D.C. (Christophe Pierre), ordering that an investigation into my conduct be opened immediately, so that I could be reported to the tribunal in charge of judging abuse cover-up by bishops.
I informed the Vatican Press Office in the persons of Father Lombardi and Mr. Greg Burke. With the authorization of the Substitute of the Secretary of State, then-Archbishop Becciu, Mr. Jeffrey Lena – an American lawyer working for the Holy See – went to the Congregation for Bishops where he found documents proving that my conduct had been absolutely correct.
Mr. Lena handed a written report exonerating me to the Holy Father. In spite of this, the Vatican Press Office did not deem it necessary to release a statement refuting the New York Times article.
The Nunciature also responded to Cardinal Parolin with a detailed report, which restored the truth and demonstrated that my conduct had been absolutely correct.
This report is found in the Vatican Secretariat of State and at the Nunciature in Washington, DC.
On January 28, 2017, I wrote to both Archbishop Pierre and Archbishop Hebda (who had succeeded Nienstedt), asking them to publicly correct the Griffith memorandum. In spite of repeated emails and phone calls, I never heard back from them.
August 26, 2018
  
  
  
  
 

d'autres éléments à prendre en compte :

1) En 2015 le principal expert des abus et promoteur de justice de la CdF Mgr Charles Scicluna a été nommé archevêque de Malte( la Valette ) . et simultanément nommé président d'une commission
consultative sur les abus avec une brochette de cardinaux tous plus enthousiastes les uns que les autres pour accélérer le rythme des réformes ...
est-ce que ce choix a été une neutralisation de la personne la plus efficace sous Benoit XVI ?
le seul qui puisse donner un avis autorisé est Mgr Scicluna lui même qui serait à même de tirer le bilan des 5 premières années de lutte contre les abus du pape François .
Honnêtement , je pense que la comparaison avec le pontificat de Benoit XVI n'est pas flatteuse .
à la décharge de François , il faut dire que ancien préfet de la CdF pendant 18 ans , Mgr Ratzinger
était totalement conscient de la véracité et acuité du problème en devenant pape .
On ne peut pas en dire autant de Mgr Bergoglio à qui il manquait cette expérience romaine et dont on peut douter que la situation en amérique du Sud refletait en quoi que ce fût celle des pays occidentaux .
2) le Pape a un rôle géopolitique parfois en urgence , on se souvient de la crise des missiles où jean XXIII aurait joué les intermédiaires entre Kennedy et Kroutchev .
Qui peut dire si le cardinal Mac Carrick qui servait d'interface entre l'administration Obama et le Saint Siège n'a pas été jugé primordial à ménager en cas de crise internationale et n'a pas été très utile quand le Pape François est intervenu en Aôut 2013 pour éviter une intervention américaine en Syrie à laquelle les russes s'opposaient déjà militairement par leur flotte et qui aurait pu dégénérer en conflit ouvert entre les deux superpuissances ? ( exactement comme ce qui est prévu dans les prochains jours ..)
Nous n'avons pas tous ces éléments cruciaux pour juger ...