Whistleblower – The Figueiredo Report Confirms Viganò Testimony…editor
Extracts below from the statement dated 28 May, 2019, by Monsignor Anthony J. Figueiredo (pictured left) entitled Follow the Path of Truth Wherever It May Lead… The Figueiredo Report
The former Cardinal Theodore E. McCarrick ordained me to the priesthood 25 years ago today.
I served as his personal secretary in the Archdiocese of Newark (September 1994 – June 1995) and also assisted him in a secretarial capacity during his many visits to Rome in my 19 years of ministry there. After long consideration, I have made the decision to place in the public domain some of the correspondence and other information related to McCarrick that I possess in my many years of service to him. I have spent time in prayer and discernment about the moral basis for revealing these. My decision follows attempts since September 2018 to share and discuss these with the Holy See and other Church leaders.
Realizing full well that the debate about McCarrick has become highly politicized, I wish only to present facts that will help the Church to know the truth. From the outset of this report, I pledge my unswerving affection, loyalty and support for Pope Francis and his Magisterium in his tireless ministry as the Successor of Peter, as I manifested also to Pope Benedict XVI, grateful for their paternal solicitude and efforts to address the scourge of abuse. Indeed, my actions in releasing this report at this time are encouraged by the Holy Father’s motu proprio “Vos Estis Lux Mundi” (“You are the light of the world. A city set on a hill cannot be hidden.” Mt 5:14), based on the overriding principle that it is imperative to place in the public domain, at the right time and prudently, information that has yet to come to light and impacts directly on allegations of criminal activity, the restrictions imposed on my now laicized former Archbishop, and who knew what and when…
It is my firm hope that this information will help the Church as she further endeavors to create a culture of transparency. This report, which may form the first of others, is a contribution to the wish of Pope Francis and the Holy See “to follow the path of truth wherever it may lead” in terms of the ongoing McCarrick investigation (Pope Francis, Philadelphia, USA, September 27, 2015; Press Statement of the Holy See, October 6, 2018). It aims to help the US Bishops in their promise last August to “pursue the many questions surrounding Archbishop McCarrick’s conduct … we are determined to find the truth in this matter” (Statement of Cardinal Daniel DiNardo, President, USCCB, August 1, 2018). What Archbishop Wilton Gregory expressed for his local Church, upon his appointment to the Archdiocese of Washington, I wish to do for the Universal Church: “The only way that I can serve this Archdiocese is by telling the truth” (Press Conference, April 4, 2019)…
My desire is for my experience to contribute to a new culture in the Church – a culture in which no victim, young or old, no priest or seminarian, no religious or superior, no bishop or nuncio need fear to speak the truth, a culture in which each knows where to seek help and all are held accountable, a culture in which no secret sins can fester and no corruption mar the Church’s maternal care. The Holy Father’s bold motu proprio “Vos Estis Lux Mundi” guides us in this direction. Only by such humiliating transparency does the Church imitate her Lord and fulfil her vocation as “the light of the world”: Wherever the proclamation of the Gospel and the celebration of the sacraments are public, let the self-discipline of the Church also be! Monsignor Anthony J. A. Figueiredo [all emphases added]
Click here to read the entire statement from Monsignor Figueiredo…
Some people – including some well-meaning people – will argue that Monsignor Figueiredo has done the wrong thing by publishing his statement today. That he is only making things worse, keeping the McCarrick scandals before the eyes of the unbelieving world. Others will praise him for keeping the authorities (including the Pope) in their toes, holding their feet to the fire because they promised thorough investigations and transparency in order to eradicate the shocking scandal of abusive priests and bishops. So, who’s right?
Definitely, the Monsignor is right to publish his statement – I have no doubt about that. We need more and more priests and senior clergy to stand up and speak out now, more than ever. If not, I don’t think we’ll see the Pope taking any action – his treatment of Cardinal Burke, Bishop Schneider and Archbishop Vigano show that he has no intention of doing anything to end the crisis in the Church, including the abuse of children. I’m not sure what to make of that, but I’m convinced he has no intention of acting against offending clergy if he can possibly avoid it.
So, I say “thank you Monsignor Figueiredo” – a very big thank you!
Well said, Josephine!
I liked the way he used Francis’ fraudulent concerns about clerical abuse against him, by pointing out, right in the first paragraph, that he is publishing this evidence because he has tried repeatedly to discuss it with “the Holy See and other Church leaders,” but has obviously gotten nowhere. He follows this by quoting numerous statements from Francis which justify his release of this information! Well done!
In other words, the Pope and the hierarchy’s response to homosexual scandals is precisely the same as the EU/NWO response to populism and the rejection of their agenda: double down, ignore the problem (or pretend to address it while doing nothing), and just “keep on keepin’ on,” as we hippies used to say in the 60s.
And why is their response the same? Because they are all leftists using the same playbook.
Yes, I noticed that, too – the Monsignor has been very clever in his presentation.
What you describe is quite a trick of management, generally speaking – to give the impression/use the rhetoric of action while doing sweet nothing. It’s actually very devious.
I am full of praise for this priest – if only there were more like him. Yes, he is totally right to publicise his knowledge in the McCarrick affair(s) !
We need to get the poison out before any healing can begin.
Thank God for priests like this monsignor – helps make up for the other kind (I’ve just posted on the “Pride Mass” blog.)
It will help to stem the critics of Archbishop Vigano who try to make out that he had some kind of ulterior motive for exposing the facts about the McCarrick scandal and how much people like Wuerl and Pope Francis knew.
Speaking of Abp. Vigano: https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/exclusive-abp-vigano-says-pope-is-lying-in-latest-denial-about-mccarrick
WOW! RCA Victor, that is dynamite. I mean, we know that Francis is not the most honest person in the world but, according to the above Lifesitenews report, he’s clearly an outright liar… well, at the very least it’s a toss up between Archbishop Vigano and Papa Francis and I know who I believe.
That report shows more than that the pope has lied – it shows he is a completely devious person. I copied the following bit to show this:
Pope Francis is suggesting that Archbishop Viganò has been exposed as unreliable because of a legal conflict with his brother that was settled in a Milan court.
In comments to LifeSite, Archbishop Viganò dismissed the Pope’s attempt to cast doubt on his reliability over a dispute with his brother concerning the management of their inheritance — a question he pointed out had “no relevance to the allegations regarding Cardinal McCarrick.”
“What Pope Francis said regarding the Milan ruling and my family has nothing to do with anything, because it has been completely clarified. It was only a division of property between brothers. I accepted it to make peace. Neither me nor my brother appealed the ruling, so the story ended there. And it has nothing to do with McCarrick. It is one of the many stories that they raised to destroy my credibility.”
I am so disheartened by this pope. I feel like he’s never going to go, and we’re stuck with this scandal of a terrible pope forever. I know that’s not the case but that’s how it feels. I think we need to pray very hard to ask Our Lady of Fatima to intervene in some major way now. Things are about as bad as they can get, surely.
I imagine we will be rid of him when we have done enough penance. But honestly, I’m at the point where I consider him to be just another EU/UN leftist, power-hungry demagogue, with his sham concern for the poor and the sex-abuse victims of his clergy, his constant irrational harangues about open borders and the non-existent climate change “crisis,” his surrounding himself with and promoting utterly corrupt men, his pretense about the “religion of peace”….
This pontificate is a litany of shame and disgrace….but that shouldn’t be surprising, since it was arranged by the globalist cabal.
I find it hard to agree with the idea that I need to do more penance to get rid of Pope Francis. I really don’t understand that, at all, although I hear it said a lot.
I prefer to think of it as all part of God’s big picture, his plan, and that somehow having to suffer bad popes like Francis is part of MY penance – LOL!
I do agree whole-heartedly with the rest of your post.
Here’s my attempt to reconcile your comment (“Francis is a part of my penance”) with mine (more penance needed), yes, Pope Francis IS our penance, but it doesn’t seem that we’re done squirming and suffering under him yet. After all, if this period is the Passion of the Church, then it doesn’t look like we’ve reached the Crucifixion yet. It looks like we’ve reached the beginning of the sentencing by the state (i.e. Pontius Pilate).
What say you?
I do see what you mean in your latest post, but I have a question to you about this “Passion of the Church” which you have mentioned before many times on this blog and which I, to be honest, don’t understand. This is my question. If this period of crisis in “the Passion of the Church”, what about previous periods of crisis, e.g. the Arian crisis, the Orthodox schism, the Protestant Reformation etc. Were they also “Passions of the Church”?
I’m not sure if this is just something you’ve maybe heard in a sermon (a priest’s personal view) or if you have read it in a book but, to be honest, I don’t like it. It strikes me as removing the blame for causing the crisis from the people concerned, the series of bad popes we’ve had (some now canonised, LOL!) to somehow coming from God.
I can be very slow on the uptake, so I apologise if you’ve explained this before but I honestly don’t really understand how what has been caused by popes defying Our Lady by not consecrating Russia and thus ending the diabolical disorientation in the world and the Church, is somehow not their fault, and once we’ve suffered enough from their defiance, then it will all come right. It doesn’t ring true with me, sorry.
The “Passion of the Church” is a description of this period I’ve heard from many a traditional priest, SSPX or otherwise. Another term is “Minor Chastisement” – i.e. a preview of the “Major Chastisement,” which is the brief reign of the antichrist.
My (limited) understanding of this label is that the Church – the Mystical Body – will experience an apparent death, as Our Lord’s Physical Body underwent real death. That was not true of any of the previous crises you cite, not even the Arian. What this will look like to our five senses and our intellects, I do not know, but I imagine it will be even more grim than what is already happening.
As for shifting the blame for this crisis, it doesn’t do that at all, because God works His mysterious ways through us humans, after all. In this case, through the corrupt, disoriented humans who populate the clergy (and in the case of Our Lord’s Passion, through a human called Judas). It doesn’t remove either their guilt or their responsibility.
Well, if that’s what the SSPX clergy think, they do not appear to be doing much about it – not least in their failure to mobilise the laity.
Yet again, last Sunday, when the epistle began with an exhortation to be “doers not just hearers of the Word” and ended with a mention of the need to keep our tongues in check in order to be charitable, what was the sermon about? You guessed it. Charity, the importance of not detracting from the character of another, keeping our tongues in check – you know, like, stuff we’ve never heard before.
I can guarantee that there was nobody in that church who does not know the gravity of lack of charity/detraction, but who have no idea that they have a duty to be apostles, spreading the Faith in their place of work, homes, places of leisure – in the world. To be, in other words, DOERS not just hearers of the Word.
So, interesting as the theory is about the Passion of the Church etc it would be a great deal more convincing if there were some accompanying external evidence that they really believe it!
Signed, Brutally Yours…, Glasgow…
I know who I believe, as well – no contest!
Editor & Laura,
(Out of reply room above)
The reason I prefer the term “Passion of the Church” to merely “crisis” is that the latter tends to lump the present situation in with all the other attacks against the Church – whereas, as far as my limited cranial powers can determine, this attack is quite unique in gravity, in that we have a series of Popes functioning as Judas did – nay, an entire cabal of Judases in the hierarchy and elsewhere in the clergy surrounding these Popes – all following a determined course of Satanic revolution and destruction as if it were something beneficial to the Church and to souls. Judas was clearly disoriented because “Satan entered into him” at the Last Supper. Our clergy, likewise, are in a similar condition (at least partially due, I speculate, to the satanic enthronement ceremony described by Malachi Martin in Windswept House, which took place in Charleston, South Carolina – a known Illuminati center – and simultaneously by phone somewhere in the bowels of the Vatican on June 29,1963).
But, Laura, if you aren’t comfortable with that term, I would suggest you corner your priest (presumably the same one of which Editor speaks above) after Mass and ask him to explain, because I’m not knowledgeable enough to do so.
From my experience with the SSPX over the past few years, “mobilize” means, to them, go to the chapel bookstore and buy more books about Abp. Lefebvre, the lives of the Saints, and Vatican II. It is certainly true that the SSPX has an excellent supply of books and similar resources available, but unfortunately, they do not supply the catechesis to go with them, leaving the faithful to read and draw their own (often mistaken and/or distorted) conclusions. Conclusions which, I’m afraid, include “let’s just sit back and wait this one out.”
This begs the question, “What so-called Catholic tradition told you that?”
Sorry, RCA Victor, just found this lurking in the moderation folder – can’t think why.
Anyway, I don’t mean to be too uncharitable about the SSPX – the simple fact is that they are all too young to have been around prior to Vatican II and they have fallen into the clericalist error which dictates that lay people like St Catherine of Siena should learn to know their place! They do mean well, though, so I need to be more charitable.
I don’t think you’re being uncharitable at all, and I also think that clericalism is only part of their problem. Their response to the “heresy” open letter shows definite signs of twisted thinking, and that sure isn’t the kind of thinking that’s going to help the Church. As the blogger Mundabor said, they should have written that letter themselves, not criticized it.
I’d forgotten about their response to the open letter – and Mundabor is absolutely right; the SSPX SHOULD have authored that letter, not criticised it.
I think the bigger picture, beyond clericalism, is the “bunker mentality.”
I agree about Monsignor Figueiredo – he has definitely done the right thing with his expose and he should be supported by all Catholics who want to bring out the truth about the scandals in the Church, as that is the only way everything can be put right.
Of course, I mean that as well as the Consecration of Russia as requested by Our Lady at Fatima – priests like Archbishop Vigano and Monsignor Figueiredo are the human elements helping to put right the crisis but we need the Consecration as well – otherwise, Our Lady would not have requested it.
Monsignor Figueiredo emailed me today to say a sincere “thank you” for the support offered to him on this thread. He is following the comments and is feeling vindicated in publishing his statement.
He very kindly sent me a couple of attachments which I’ve not had time to read yet. I have permission to publish them if I wish, so once I’ve read them over the weekend, hopefully, I’ll decide whether to simply post them here or to open a separate thread.
Monsignor is also under personal attack – unsurprisingly – so please keep him in your prayers.
The Monsignor was definitely correct to publish what he knows. As other bloggers say, the sooner the poison is brought out, the sooner we can begin to see goodness and faith restored in the Church. This is a terribly challenging time, when it is extremely difficult to speak about the Church to lapsed or non-Catholics who are rightly shocked at these scandals. So, well done Monsignor!
Here’s One Peter Five with an example of the way the Monsignor is being attacked for publishing his statement, and his enemies are trying to cast doubt on his motives.
Elizabeth Yore weighs in on this, on Breitbart:https://www.breitbart.com/asia/2019/06/04/yore-vatican-whistleblower-disgraced-cardinal-mccarrick-served-as-envoy-for-disastrous-vatican-china-deal/
Apparently the disgusting McCarrick, this disgusting Pope’s disgusting personal envoy, was the one who negotiated throwing the underground Chinese Church even further under – under the bus.
Thanks for that, RCA Victor – I’ll read the article properly later (paid a flying visit but there are detailed quotes which I’d like to read carefully).
The utterly disgraceful treatment of the Church in China is almost beyond belief. I say “almost” because almost (!) nothing is beyond belief in this pontificate, any more.