[Cath Cauc] McCarrick Case. The Question Was There, But Francis Didn’t Want To Hear It

L'Espresso ^ | June 10, 2019 | Sandro Magister

[ebb tide]

[Catholic Caucus] McCarrick Case. The Question Was There, But Francis Didn’t Want To Hear It

In the new curia in the process of being reshaped, the biggest new development is perhaps the dicastery for communication, in terms of both how it is structured and how it now functions.

Its structure centralizes within itself the control of all Vatican media, including “L’Osservatore Romano,” the radio and TV, which previously were subject in everything to the “supervision” of the Vatican secretariat of state, while now this has been left with only the bureaucratic task of “giving guidelines concerning official communications.”

As for its functioning, in point of fact this is entirely in the hands of the prefect of the dicastery, Paolo Ruffini - the nephew of a famous cardinal and a former executive of RAI, La 7, and TV 2000 - of editorial director Andrea Tornielli, a close friend of Jorge Mario Bergoglio since before he was elected pope, as well as - but on a lower level - of “ad interim” director of the Vatican press office Alessandro Gisotti and of “L’Osservatore Romano” director Andrea Monda.

Plus there is the Jesuit Antonio Spadaro, director of “La Civiltà Cattolica,” acting as the éminence grise of the dicastery, without any role on the staff but highly influential through his proximity to Pope Francis.

The assumption of the command posts by this squad took place last winter with lightning speed and brutal tactics. Kicking out the previous directors overnight, or in any case provoking their departure.

After which the team went to work as one man, even beyond the Vatican periphery, for example hammering the Italian episcopal conference with the request to convene in short order a national synod “in the style of Pope Francis.” The first to launch the pressing request was Fr. Spadaro, in “L’Osservatore Romano.” In spite of the resistance of the president of the CEI, Cardinal Gualtiero Bassetti - he too close to Francis, but evidently less heeded - the newspaper of the Holy See continues to this day to harp on the same string, with a series of interviews with prominent laymen, from Giuseppe De Rita to Stefano Zamagni, to Mauro Magatti, to Luigino Bruni, all routinely prodded to reiterate the urgency of a synod of the Italian Church.

*

But the most spectacular innovation brought about by this team is control over the very words of the pope, both in the speeches that he gives off the cuff and in the press conferences that he holds onboard the plane every time he returns from his journeys outside of Italy.

When Francis lets himself go a bit too far, the team purges this from the official transcription of his discourse.

One glaring example is this passage of the off-the-cuff speech that Francis addressed on April 7 to teachers and students of the Liceo San Carlo in Milan, where the words underlined here disappeared from the official transcription:

“And here I touch on a sore spot: do not be afraid of migrants. ‘But, Father, the migrants…’ We are the migrants! Jesus was a migrant. Do not be afraid of migrants. ‘But they are criminals!…’ We too have so many of them: the mafia was not invented by the Nigerians: it is a ‘merit,’ in quotes, of the nation, eh? The mafia is ours, made in Italy: it is ours. We all have the possibility of being criminals. Migrants are those who bring us riches, always. Europe too was made by migrants! The barbarians, the Celts… all these who came from the north and brought their cultures, Europe grew like this, with the contrast of cultures.”

Another correction, in the same speech, was made where Francis, to the question “Why are there so many wars in Yemen, in Syria, in Afghanistan,” had replied: “Because we, wealthy Europe, America, sell weapons to kill children, to kill people.”

In the official text the reply became: “Because other countries sell weapons, with which they kill children, people.”

It must be said, however, that these corrections have a weak point, because the pope’s speeches still persist as video recordings.

And in fact on the website “Vatican News” it is still possible to hear again in Francis’s own voice his words on migrants and the mafia censored in the official transcription.

*

As for the inflight press conference, however, the control exercised over the pope’s word is preventive. Naturally with his agreement.

One sensational example of this preemptive control took place on Francis’s flight back from Romania, last June 2. And it concerns the McCarrick case.

But let’s hear from John L. Allen Jr., the top American vaticanista, who has brilliantly recounted, situated, and evaluated it in this article on “Crux,” which we reproduce in its salient passages.

*

Pope’s latest press conference a study in the dog that didn’t bark

by John L. Allen Jr.

A large part of the reason news organizations are willing to pay the exorbitant costs of traveling aboard the papal plane with Pope Francis has nothing to do with the trip itself - it’s about the press conference at the end.

Since that magical first trip in July 2013, when, on the way back from Rio de Janeiro for World Youth Day, Francis gave us the immortal “Who am I to judge?” soundbite on gay clergy, reporters and editors have seen the possibility of another such thunderclap as worth it to be on the plane, even if the outing itself doesn’t necessarily have much sex appeal. […]

Of late, however, these in-flight news conferences have been considerably less spicy. […] Sunday’s brief encounter with the press coming back from a three-day swing in Romania was a good case in point.

First, in part because of the brief duration of the flight, it was short - just about a half-hour bell to bell. Moreover, the first few minutes were eaten up by the pope’s spokesman, Italian layman Alessandro Gisotti, inexplicably asking the pope to offer a reflection on the World Day of Social Communications.

(Perhaps, though, it’s not inexplicable at all, given that every minute the pope is talking about something else is a minute he’s not answering serious questions.)

Next up were two questions from the local press in Romania, which is tradition in these settings. That left space for just four questions from the world’s press, which were devoted to the following subjects:

- Catholic/Orthodox relations, including the difficulties of joint prayer.
- A recent electoral victory by Matteo Salvini, Italy’s anti-immigrant Deputy Prime Minister, and whether the pope will meet Salvini.
- Francis’s relationship with Pope emeritus Benedict XVI.
- The future of Europe. […]

What’s the problem? Well, the press conference was basically a classic case of the dog that didn’t bark.

In the week leading up to the trip, there was a clear winner for biggest Vatican story: A double-barreled combination of Francis saying he knew “nothing, nothing” about sexual misconduct and abuse charges against ex-Cardinal Theodore McCarrick, combined with revelations of correspondence from an ex-aide to McCarrick confirming that Vatican restrictions had been imposed in 2008 and were progressively ignored.

The obvious question was something like: “Last October, you pledged a ‘thorough study’ of the McCarrick case. Especially in light of this week’s news, when can we expect the results, and, based on its results, will anyone be held accountable for failure to act?”

English-speaking journalists aboard the plane were planning to ask something along those lines, but the plug was pulled before it was their turn. […]

Here’s the thing: Such a question was the most foreseeable thing in the world, as was the fact that any news conference would be considered a disappointment - by some, even, a sham - if it wasn’t asked and answered. By calling a halt before it came up, the only possible conclusion many observers can draw is that the pope himself, or his Vatican team, or both, didn’t want to talk about it. […]

From the very beginning, a large part of the charisma Francis exudes has been about his spontaneity and openness. […] Increasingly, however, there’s a sense that the pontiff and his advisers are becoming more restrained, sometimes trying to avoid putting Francis in a position where that spontaneity might once again be triggered.

If so, and if it continues, it might come at a cost - and not just because news outlets might find themselves dubious about footing the costs of papal travel. […] The reform Francis has pledged rests in part on transparency - and declining to even engage an obvious question likely will strike many people as a bit less than transparent.

[ebb tide]

Ping

[carmen2017]

I don’t Trust Frankie.

[Wonder Warthog]

How are they gonna control EWTN???

[Marchmain]

Magister, top notch as usual. One of the few journalists you can trust completely.