In all the rightly indignant ferment over appalling developments in the Rupnik Affair and the soap opera stramash over Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò’s richly deserved comeuppance, two news items worth everyone’s attention skated under the radar.
The first concerns provisions in new Vatican laws Pope Francis issued on June 29th—the Solemnity of Sts. Peter and Paul—disciplining the conduct, attire, and personal appearance of employees in St. Peter’s Basilica.
Visible tattoos and body piercings are verboten (cf. art. 9.1), as is “belonging to institutions or associations, the purposes of which are not compatible with the doctrine and discipline of the Church,” or even participating in the activities of such organizations, or “carry[ing] out activities or tak[ing] part in events that are not in keeping with the character of an employee of an organization connected to the Holy See (art. 14l-m).”
Article 7 states that permanent staff “undertake to observe exemplary religious and moral conduct, even in private and family life, in accordance with the doctrine of the Church.”
That last one is unsurprising, or would be, were it not for the reluctance of senior Church leadership to police the bedrooms of powerful clerics like Rupnik.
It leads one to wonder with what alacrity the Vatican types are going to be policing the conduct of custodians who pull down €1300 a month in regular pay.
The regulations in themselves are entirely reasonable and sensible. I cannot recall the precise wording they had when I came into the Vatican service, but some version of them existed.
The failure of Pope Francis and the Vatican to deal with Rupnik (inter alia) in anything close to an acceptable manner makes it impossible for them to enforce even very reasonable regulations without appearing hypocritical and even a bit thuggish.
The second story concerns the second collection this past Sunday, for Peter’s pence, the annual campaign touted for years as a chance for the faithful around the world to participate in the holy father’s charitable activities, which help the least and neediest around the world, but in fact goes largely to defray the cost of operating the Church’s increasingly dysfunctional central bureaucracy.
It remains to be seen whether converging scandals all somehow arising from one protracted crisis of leadership culture long unaddressed will continue adversely to affect the Peter’s Pence collection. If sincere diligence and genuine concern for the faithful are not sufficient motive forces of real reform on the part of high leadership, perhaps a really big hit to the bottom line will be.
The dreadful botch of the whole Rupnik business, start to finish, has brought Pope Francis’s conduct of the Church’s government under much needed scrutiny. A sober and unflinching look at the Francis pontificate makes it impossible to see the Rupnik Affair as a mere misstep or aberration. History will judge Francis’s conduct of the office with which the cardinals entrusted him under God eleven years ago.
In the present, the Prefect of the Dicastery for Communications of the Holy See confirmed his outfit’s use of images by accused serial rapist Fr. Marko Rupnik, long decried by victims of abuse as atrocious, is in fact intentional and programmatic. Ruffini offered a full-throated defense of the position in the face of questions from journalists.
Exactly everyone found his position execrable and his defense utterly implausible.
On Wednesday of last week, Cardinal Sean O’Malley sent a letter to the heads of all Roman dicasteries, urging them to rethink their use of Rupnik and Rupnik-studio images.
“[P]astoral prudence would prevent displaying artwork in a way that could imply either exoneration or a subtle defense of alleged perpetrators of abuse or indicate indifference to the pain and suffering of so many victims of abuse,” Cardinal O’Malley wrote.
The Pontifical Commission for the Protection of Minors—which has reportedly styled itself the Pontifical Commission for the Protection of Minors and Vulnerable Persons in some recent correspondence—issued a statement on Friday, June 28th, specifically naming the Dicastery for Communications and Rupnik’s art.
“In recent months,” the statement said, “victims and survivors of power abuse, spiritual abuse, and sexual abuse have reached out to the PCPM to express their increasing frustration and concern at the continued use of artwork by Father Marko Rupnik by several Vatican offices, including the Dicastery for Communications.”
The Commission issued the statement making knowledge of O’Malley’s letter public on the feast of St. Irenaeus of Lyon, which the Vatican Media liturgical calendar illustrated with an image pulled from a Rupnik mosaic in the chapel of the Paris nunciature.
The image had been scheduled for some time. In fact, the dicastery used the same image last year. The Internet Archive has the image placed on the page in June of 2021. If folks were waiting to see how the Dicastery for Communications would respond to the general outcry in the wake of Ruffini’s remarks, they had their answer on Friday.
Business as usual.
“Pope Francis has urged us to be sensitive to and walk in solidarity with those harmed by all forms of abuse,” O’Malley wrote. “I ask you to bear this in mind when choosing images to accompany the publication of messages, articles, and reflections through the various communication channels available to us,” he wrote.
On the other hand, a word—one—from Francis would have kept the comms dicastery from using the Rupnik image last Friday, which also happened to be the day before O’Malley turned eighty years old and lost his voting rights in conclave.
Meanwhile, the DDF continues its lucubration over the case files containing the copious evidence already collected against Rupnik, who only escaped justice because the DDF decided the charges against him were statute-barred and Pope Francis didn’t waive the statute of limitations until he did.
The faithful deserve a complete account of the entire Rupnik Affair from start to finish. Its awful mismanagement at almost every turn must be laid bare. Another secret trial—if any should come at all—will only make it impossible to avoid the conclusion that Francis’s decision to lift the statute of limitations was a hopelessly cynical reaction to legitimate outrage.
Msgr. John Kennedy, who heads the DDF’s discipline section overseeing the review of the Rupnik case, has said “the aspect of the impact on the Church” makes the Rupnik Affair a “delicate” matter. Basically, the full truth—even a better, fuller picture—of the Rupnik business would make many senior churchmen look very bad, indeed. So, it is unlikely said churchmen will volunteer any more than they absolutely must.
Under current law—and under the current pope—that is evidently very little.
In any case, the damage is done.
If you value the news and views Catholic World Report provides, please consider donating to support our efforts. Your contribution will help us continue to make CWR available to all readers worldwide for free, without a subscription. Thank you for your generosity!
Click here for more information on donating to CWR. Click here to sign up for our newsletter.
Archbishop Virginia? You mean Vigano, right?
It has been corrected. Thanks.
About this pontificate, Fr. Weinandy has a damning piece about this pontificate today over at The Catholic Thing.
With regard to the Peter’s Pence collection this past Sunday, it was a sheer joy to allow the basket to pass without even a glance in its direction. The Vatican deserves not a dime; what it needs is a thorough house-cleaning.
Thanks Deacon Edward, for calling my attention to this excellent article by Fr. Weinandy who points out the divergence (hypocrisy?) between what is often said and done in this papacy.
Saying the right things, but putting in place clerics whose policies disavow the right thing is a shell game!
And people wonder why Archbishop Vigano and others are angry!
And I shared your delight in letting the Peter’s Pence collection go by without my support!
You deserve a lot of credit and respect for reporting on these issue the way you do. In the age of the internet, with information and disinformation spread all over the world, your reporting is very necessary.
I agree with everything but your comment regarding Vigano–he does not deserve a comeuppance. Vigano is absolutely correct in his assertions regarding the vacant Chair of St. Peter.
This is beyond weird.
Bergoglio refuses to “judge” people whose lifestyles are dedicated to committing deadly sins, and yet forbids the hiring of people with decorative piercings and tattoos?
Not to mention outlawing the Latin Mass that’s been said for millennia?
While, as Mr. Altieri points out, Rupnik is still Rupniking to his heart’s content.
The hypocrisy is astounding. Colossal. Stultifying.
How long will God allow Himself to be associated with this fiasco?
You know someone’s clambering for distractions when they start filling the view of the Vatican with the more minor issues while ignoring the major ones, such as clergy sexual activity (over 50%) and clergy sexual misconduct/abuse against adults – still no clear guidelines there. Meanwhile the victims continue to suffer and the adolescent ignorance and mentality of ‘celibate?’ clergy reigns.
Dear Stephen, you are correct, I think.
‘Flim-Flam Artist’ PF is tweaking the news feed, so we, the global faithful, will not notice what he’s stealing from us.
Strange days, indeed. Yet, we have the certainty that Jesus reigns above it all.
It is a classic symptom of narcissism. A person with this disorder believes that others must follow the rules (when it suits him) but he himself is exempt from those rules because of his entitlement. Furthermore, he changes the rules for others as he pleases because in his mind he is a center of the universe. That makes him a natural hypocrite, capable of ordering “no tattoo” while having a tattoo himself (I am constructing an example here). It is illogical yet fits a narcotic logic “I am above all”.
A narcissist also notoriously lacks self-awareness hence he cannot see how absurd a combination of “Rupnik rupniking – no tattoos” is. It can be grasped if applied to this situation an extreme “I will”, “my will be done”.
Sorry, a mistake: not “narcotic logic” but “narcissistic logic”
History will reveal?
With all due respect, at this moment in Time, surely what may have appeared to be hidden has certainly already been revealed to those who are not still sleeping in Gethsemane.
There are many of us who do not believe that Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò merits a “richly deserved comeuppance” any more than the excommunicated St. Athanasius when he was almost the lone voice defending the truth against the Arian heresy.
Archbishop Viganò is speaking out like Jesus and John the Baptist who rightfully and angrily called out “the brood of vipers” among the religious leaders who distorted religious truth and led people astray.
Well said, dear Maggie.
Yes, AV is imperfect but his insights on PF’s misfeasances & malfeasances are of great importance in helping reign-in the anti-Apostolic antics in Rome.
“anti-Apostolic antics.” Dr.Martin, you are spot on with your apt accurate alliteration (-:
Peter’s Pence has been a very deliberate object of my neglect since March 13, 2013.And really…”Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò’s richly deserved comeuppance…” God reward Archbishop Viganò is one of the few members of the episcopate doing his job. That he is held in contempt by the present occupant of the Chair of St. Peter only magnifies that person’s pastoral malpractice. Martin, Rupnik and not a few others run wild proclaiming the good news of promiscuity, while faithful priests, bishops and contemplative nuns enjoy Rome’s lash.
And God forbid anyone notice it or comment upon it.
And, in addition to Rupnik and his artwork, there’s also Archbishop Paglia and his homoerotic wall mural in his former cathedral church of the Diocese of Terni-Narni-Amelia, just 100 kilometers from Rome: https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/leading-vatican-archbishop-featured-in-homoerotic-painting-he-commissioned
Said the mural artist Cinalli: “The one thing that they didn’t permit me to insert [in the catch-all mural] was the copulation of two people within this net where everything is permitted.” Instead, Fernandez’s anti-binary “irregular couples.”
As for Paglia, recall that he’s the Grand Chancellor of the renamed and purged John Paul II Pontifical Theological Institute for Marriage and Family Sciences. Just another day at the orifice!
PF & Co. are resurrecting the pornographic art of Pompeii.
Let no sensible person be unaware of the spirit at work in this.
Brethren,
I believe it will be of great help (to yourself and to the Church) if you see what is happening as consolidation of a selfish (narcissistic) vector within the Church, as the opposite of the vector of Christ. I do not think I am overly “clinical” or “psychological” here because Our Lord has two natures, human and divine. His human nature then is a source of true psychology and his divine nature – of true theology. However, His two natures are united in His Person hence one cannot be considered without another: if Our Lord had a warped psyche (impossible of course) then theology would become warped as well as a result. He is an image of God the Father; if an image is humanely warped then God the Fathers appears to be different and warped as well. This paradigm is applicable to everyone in the Church since we were created in God’s image. If the bishops and priests are very warped psychologically = narcissistic they cannot lead people to Christ – true Christ.
This crookedness of a human psyche is the source of the rot in the Church. It was rotting slowly (in a parallel with true holiness) but, in our times, all rot seems to come to light and it is very hard to deny. This process was predicted at the very beginning of the Church. Think of it, who is antichrist but the opposite of Christ, in his psyche as well? Christ is the Son of God yet He was humble hence the antichrist must be nothing really but have satanic pride covered by a mask of a humble servant. This is a vector of narcissism that is nothing else but a human being thinking he is above all (yet wearing a mask of humility). That vector leads straight to disintegration/death. We all have this selfish tendency by the way so none of us is safe. Well, look then at Rupnik and others entitled and see how them, like tiny particles, are now making an emerging figure of antichrist. They are consolidating along the vector that leads away from Christ. It is unmistakable – in that emerging figure everything is opposite of Our Lord, everything is perverted. It is all about entitlement, hypocrisy, manipulation, zero empathy and compassion, lies, “I will” instead of “let Your will be done” and so on. There is a huge temptation to join that figure because as soon as one does it, he is secure, untroubled and free from pain. Most importantly, he feels he is following Christ – while following himself, his own ego.
To remain in the vector of Christ is very costly because not only it means uncertainty, confusion, etc. The worst of all, it demands an ongoing painful self-scrutiny, of measuring own psyche by Chrit’s psyche as it is revealed to us in His dealing with others and in our own expiries of Him. What I am saying is that the only way here is to surrender to Christ totally and let His Person be our guide in all this mess. To be faithful only to Him, not some “institutions” or “opinions” or whatever but Him first and foremost i.e. to verify all that the bishops, priest etc. say by His Person.
As for the abuse within the Church much discussed here, such abuse is only possible along that narcissistic vector. There is no sexual abuse without emotional abuse and the abuse within the Church is unmistakably narcissistic (only an entitlement and hypocrisy and lack of empathy can explain it). I believe it was given us to see now as the last test (the test of our empathy that makes us human if you like) so the vector of antichrist would be revealed. Hence, those who now refuse to see that abuse or excuse it in any way are joining to the vector contrary to Christ. The revelation of abuse was given to the Church so it would repent and change its ways.
Thank you, dear Anna, for this genuinely apostolic & prophetic depiction of the causes of our beloved Church’s current travail. GOD’s Holy Spirit is addressing our leaders in your godly discernment.
There is not much that we ordinary sheep can do to put right what false shepherds are imposing. Yet, if we do not speak out the truth to our best ability, we will be judged.
May there be more true Catholics who boldly witness against corruption, confident that it is only The Truth that can set us free.
I seem to hear The Apostles of our Lord saying: “You don’t have to win (Jesus is doing that), but you do have to witness to your best ability.”
Always seeking to hear & lovingly follow King Jesus Christ; blessings from marty
Excellent, Anna. So cogently said.
Going by what is presented in the news media, Rupnik maintains an obedience to whomever he is following. If this is the case then I think it is a consideration you might have to temper the narcissism analysis; since it might be possible for him to be redirected so that the interior issues to do with him could be given a right kind of discipline. You might object that he is free to make a change to alternative leadership; however, this can have many practical limitations within a set period not under his control and meanwhile he is plodding through with his own outlooks.
Or, on the other side of this perspective, right leadership would prove how amenable he is to true interior direction; and we are precluded from seeing that evolve.
Why is so much confidence placed in his present circumstances and those who lead him? If his personal circumstances require a seclusion why take so long and generate so much publicity? Is it merely because his art has been set up in certain sanctuaries?