You are not signed in as a Premium user; you are viewing the free version of this program. Premium users have access to full-length programs with limited commercials and receive a 10% discount in the store! Sign up for only one day for the low cost of $1.99. Click the button below.
Church Militant has learned that anti-Viganò forces in the Vatican are rigging the upcoming papal investigation into the McCarrick situation in an effort to shield the homosexual network in the Vatican.
The plan is to release a final report shifting as much blame as possible for McCarrick's rise to power onto Pope St. John Paul II.
The plan is to point to what will be called the undue influence of a longtime female friend, who herself had fallen victim to McCarrick's scheming, lavishing her with his charm and financial assistance, in an effort to gain her confidence.
In other words, the fix is in, and the final report will be nothing but a massive whitewash, misdirecting the public from Pope Francis' direct involvement to that of John Paul speculated involvement.
But that narrative deliberately masks over and ignores one very important and influential person very close to John Paul, who has direct involvement in the promotion of McCarrick.
As a quick review, some 80 U.S. bishops have been calling for a thorough and independent investigation into McCarrick's rise following Abp. Carlo Viganò's bombshell testimony that Viganò himself, while acting as papal ambassador to the United States, had personally informed Pope Francis of McCarrick's homosexual predation of seminarians and priests as early as 2013, shortly after Francis was elected.
When the small U.S. bishops' delegation led by Cdl. Daniel DiNardo finally got an audience with the pope last month after waiting nearly a month, they asked Francis to launch a full investigation into McCarrick's situation as well as Viganò's charges of a homosexual network.
The pope flatly refused.
Then, seemingly out of nowhere, this past Saturday, news suddenly broke that the pope had reversed course and was now authorizing an investigation.
Here is a key quote from that Vatican statement, "a thorough study of the entire documentation present in the Archives of the Dicasteries and Offices of the Holy See regarding the former Cardinal McCarrick."
But now Church Militant has learned from sources in both Rome and Poland who are all very close to the situation that part of the "entire documentation" to be examined by the Holy See is more than 30 years worth of private correspondence to Pope John Paul. The letters themselves were, in the past, the source of speculation and controversy about the relationship between St. John Paul and the author of them, longtime personal friend, the late Anna-Teresa Tymieniecka, a Polish-born American philosopher who corresponded with the Holy Father throughout the course of their 32-year friendship.
The anti-Viganò Vatican operatives recently contacted the Polish National Archives in Warsaw and obtained the letters, a move that raised eyebrows with sources who immediately informed Church Militant.
In fact, there is now deep speculation that Pope Francis at first turned down last month's request of the DiNardo delegation for an investigation because details were still being worked out on how to make him appear as guiltless as possible.
The plan was hatched to try and pin it all on John Paul, and so the hunt was on for the letters to him from Tymieniecka, which were easily obtained and then scoured over. Once the letters were obtained, the approval was given for a go-ahead with the investigation whose outcome has already been determined, according to well-placed Church Militant sources.
Those sources repeat and stress to Church Militant that the Vatican's goal in using the letters from Tymieniecka, is to lay as much blame as possible for the McCarrick scandal on the saintly pope.
As a key point in all this, McCarrick befriended Tymieniecka as soon as he discovered she was a close personal friend and had the pope's ear, his reason as stated earlier for his financial and charm offensive with her. Tymieniecka's letters to John Paul II are thought to have many glowing references to McCarrick who sought to ingratiate himself with her in hopes that she would speak favorably of him to the Holy Father.
The pre-determined outcome will then be presented as Tymieniecka clouded the judgment of Pope John Paul II, who then promoted McCarrick contrary to the evidence of his sordid behavior.
On the surface, scapegoating John Paul II may seem to have merit, as it was under John Paul II that then-bishop McCarrick became archbishop of Washington, D.C. in November of 2000, and it was the same pope who made him a cardinal the following year in February of 2001.
However, again, according to sources, the whitewash investigation will leave out two very critical pieces of information.
First, in 1991, the Holy Father was diagnosed with Parkinson's disease, and by 2000 he was becoming increasingly impaired. That's an important point because, and this is the second point, as a result of his declining health, John Paul II had to rely ever more on his papal advisor, then-Monsignor Stanisław Dziwisz, who was made bishop by John Paul in 1998 and a cardinal by Pope Benedict XVI in 2006.
Multiple Vatican insiders knew that Dziwisz was the gatekeeper of all information going to Pope John Paul at the time, and was the power behind the throne, essentially, the de facto pope.
It was Dziwisz, who had the complete trust and confidence of Pope John Paul, who multiple sources tell Church Militant he sold to the highest bidder.
Our sources tell us in fact that anyone who wanted to see the pope had to pay Dziwisz $3,000 for him to arrange a private audience. It was passed off as a donation to the Holy See.
Sources tell Church Militant that Dziwisz was also regularly receiving large cash donations from McCarrick, who was infamous for regularly making quiet cash payments in envelopes to various members of the Curia during his multiple visits to Rome over the years.
Much of the secret cash payments made by McCarrick to Dziwisz were allegedly directed to the hospital that Dziwisz was building in Poland.
Further, our sources tell Church Militant that it was Dziwisz who called the D.C. nunciature in 2000 with the instructions to appoint McCarrick as its new archbishop in 2000.
Sources who were in the nunciature at the time that Dziwisz called and spoke with then-U.S. nuncio Abp. Gabriel Montalvo, tell Church Militant Montalvo was greatly surprised by the request from Dziwisz.
Indeed, Abp. Viganò, who became nuncio in 2011, testified in August that Montalvo himself had urged Fr. Boniface Ramsey to blow the whistle on McCarrick the day after his appointment to D.C. — the very next day.
In his testimony, Viganò affirms that, "According to what Nuncio Pietro Sambi wrote, Fr. Boniface Ramsey, O.P.'s letter dated Nov. 22, 2000, was written at the request of the late Nuncio Montalvo."
Viganò further relates the contents of Ramsey's letter to the Holy See.
In the letter, Fr. Ramsey, who had been a professor at the diocesan seminary in Newark from the end of the '80s until 1996, affirms that there was a recurring rumor in the seminary that the archbishop "shared his bed with seminarians," inviting five at a time to spend the weekend with him at his beach house. And he added that he knew a certain number of seminarians, some of whom were later ordained priests for the Archdiocese of Newark, who had been invited to this beach house and had shared a bed with the Archbishop.
Viganò also notes that then-Vatican secretary of state Cdl. Angelo Sodano never informed the nunciature in Washington of any measures taken by the Holy See following Ramsey's letter, leaving open the question, was anything ever done at all?
It should be noted here too that Sodano, along with Dziwisz, were the men in the Vatican most responsible for protecting the notorious Fr. Marcial Maciel, the now-disgraced homosexual predator and founder of the Legionaries of Christ, who many fault John Paul II with not censoring.
Sodano and Dziwisz continually shielded Maciel from a torrent of revelations about his degenerate lifestyle.
To that point, when Dziwisz was made a bishop in 1998, it was Maciel who threw a grand party in Rome, thus opening speculation regarding one portion of the highly placed homosexual current within the Vatican itself: Maciel, McCarrick — both known homosexual predators and both extremely friendly with Dziwisz and Sodano.
All these men were trusted by Pope John Paul and worked in concert with each other to present the best possible picture of each other to the sickly saint. In getting McCarrick appointed to Washington, not only did Dziwisz call Washington's nuncio, then-archbishop Montalvo, in D.C, but also personally contacted the Congregation for Bishops in Rome.
Church Militant has also confirmed that in the run-up to McCarrick's transfer from Newark to D.C., it was Dziwisz who picked up the telephone to tell the prefect of bishops, then-archbishop Giovanni Battista Re, that "It would please the Holy Father" if McCarrick were to be translated from Newark to Washington.
Incidentally, Re, who initially opposed McCarrick's appointment to Washington in 2000, was made a cardinal along with McCarrick the following year in February of 2001.
John Paul has received a lot of criticism for his failure to act with regard to Maciel, who raped each of his own two illegitimate teenage sons — among many others, including multiple young children.
But what's important here is to note that the same dynamic was at play with McCarrick, which created a blind spot for John Paul. Homosexual predators aligned themselves with greedy power brokers in the Vatican and used their money and influence to buy protection and cover for their sexual evils.
Church Militant sources explicitly confirm the veracity of Viganò's statement that McCarrick had the "financial means to influence decisions."
So any final report of the investigation coming out from the anti-Viganò forces in the Vatican that tries to lay the blame for the McCarrick scandal at the feet of John Paul being unduly influenced by a longtime female friend will conveniently overlook and ignore the sinister activities of known homosexual predators and their allies very close to the pope.
Our sources tell us any final report not revealing this bottom line will be a flat-out lie.
And here's a final note: There is a grave doubt whether St. John Paul was ever even told the truth about McCarrick. There is no doubt that Pope Francis was told, and revived his career anyway.