Friday, October 12, 2018

Can Coccopalmerio Remain a Cardinal Another Day?

(Rome) Cardinal Coccopalmerio is already the second close confidante of Pope Francis to make revelations about a degenerate double life. At noon today, the Vatican announced another sensational move in connection with the McCarrick case and the Pennsylvania report: Cardinal Donald Wuerl was retired as Archbishop of Washington. 

What's wrong with this pontificate?

The events come thick and fast. At the end of July, Cardinal Theodore McCarrick was forced to renounce his cardinal status because he had led a degenerate double life abusing his position and engaging in inhumane sexual contact with subordinate priests and seminarians. It was the first denial of this kind in Church history.

Cardinal's presence confirmed in sodomite drug orgy

Cardinal CoccopalmerioCardinal Coccopalmerio

Since then, his successor as Archbishop of Washington, Cardinal Donald Wuerl, has been in the crossfire. Wuerl was accused of knowing McCarrick's misconduct and covering it. Pope Francis had to drop his friend McCarrick, but tried to hold on to Wuerl. However, a few weeks ago it was speculated that Francis might also drop Wuerl to rescue at least one other McCarrick protégé, Cardinal Kevin Farrell. Farrell had been called to Rome by Francis, allegedly on McCarrick's recommendation, and made Prefect of the new Dicastery for Lay, Family, and Life, and made cardinal. Farrell lived with McCarrick in the same house for several years, but the Pope does not want to hear about his homosexual double life. Not everyone believes that.

Two days ago, the next scandal burst already. LifeSiteNews lit the bomb Coccopalmerio, another pope confidant. Cardinal Coccopalmerio was President of the Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts until last April. After the revelations, the US news portal Church Militant wrote:

"True. We have our own well-placed sources in Rome, which confirmed it to us weeks ago. Cardinal Coccopalmerio was present at the gay drug orgy by his secretary. Capozzi got busted. Coccopalmerio got off scot-free. Now he advises the Pope on sanctions against Viganò."

On August 26, Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò, the former nuncio in the United States, had sounded with a dossier with which he made serious accusations against Pope Francis and demanded his resignation. He accuses the ruling Pope of having known about the "perverse and diabolical" homosexual double life of Cardinal Theodore McCarrick since June 2013, but did nothing. Rather, Francis made the scandal cardinal into his personal confidant for the United States.

In his dossier Viganò listed numerous names, which he assigned as working in the Vatican "gay lobby". It was only with the help of this gay lobby that it had been possible to cover up McCarrick's machinations and to keep his personnel file clean.

Coccopalmerio is examining how Archbishop Viganò could be punished

On 5 September, the Roman historian Roberto de Mattei warned that Pope Francis would not clean up after the revelations, but let heavy sanctions against Archbishop Viganò be tested. De Mattei asked, "Will Archbishop Viganò be punished for telling the truth?"

De Mattei wrote:

"Pope Francis is examining this possibility. If true, as confirmed by several sources, he has consulted Cardinal Francesco Coccopalmerio and several other Church lawyers to study possible canonical sanctions to be imposed on the Archbishop beginning with the suspension of a divinis.

If this news were correct, it would be extremely grave and a bit surreal, especially as the 'expert' called to punish Msgr. Viganò would have been Cardinal Coccopalmerio, who was accused by the former nuncio of being a part of the United States “gay lobby" that is at work in the Vatican.

It should not be forgotten that the Cardinal's secretary, Msgr. Luigi Capozzi, is involved in a case of homosexuality, in which the position of his superior has yet to be clarified. The real problem is of course another. The Catholic Church as a visible society has a criminal law because it has the right to punish the faithful who have violated their laws."

On October 10, the Canadian press agency LifeSiteNews revealed that in the "case of homosexuality" not only the secretary Capozzi, but Cardinal Coccopalmerio was personally involved.

“Silence is not a solution"

Famous Spanish columnist Francisco Fernandez de la Cigoña today indignantly raised the question:

"Can Coccopalmerio stay cardinal for another day?"

The revelations are either "compellingly denied, or a drug addict and practicing homosexual can no longer be Cardinal."

The Catholic publicist went even harder into court:

"Silence, which suddenly now seems to be pleasing to this pope, whose pontificate has so far been conspicuous, does not solve anything and does not give Francis much time when others of his charges are involved in even greater scandals and disgraceful impudence.

Above all, it would be painful if the pope, whose sympathies were obviously in many respects with the wrong persons, would distrust even the decent ones now. 

This afternoon, Cardinal Wuerl announced his retirement as Archbishop of Washington. He still remains cardinal and can thus participate in an upcoming conclave. However, the pontificate of Pope Francis loses important supports. McCarrick and Wuerl controlled another McCarrick pupil, Bishop Michael Brandsfield, a million-dollar foundation in the US that can be described as this Pope’s “private account".

Of the three, only Wuerl is left. McCarrick lost his dominating position with his cardinal dignity, his protégé, who was president of the foundation, had to be retired by Francis in mid-September. He was accused of sexual abuse in the Pennsylvania Report.

At the moment, some things are falling apart, and that could even be the pontificate of Pope Francis.

Text: Giuseppe Nardi
Image: InfoVaticana / MiL
Trans: Tancred


JBQ said...

Surreal. It is like Ichabod Crane having problems with the headless horseman in "The Legend of Sleepy Hollow".

Peter W said...

All bishops and superiors of clerical institutes are still bound under Canon Law (Paul VI's 1974 'Secreta continere') to 'cover up' clerical sexual abuse except in civil jurisdictions where reporting is mandatory.

The honest thing would be to acknowledge the Wuerl was/is subject to this atrocious Canonical provision just like every bishop in the world. There are no standout heroes or villains in this wretched story.

Tancred said...

If only they actually followed canon law.

Peter W said...

The most appalling scandal of all is that cover ups of clerical child sexual abuse - among other things - is mandated under Canon Law. So the Church's Law trumps the teaching of Jesus Christ.
No wonder the governance of the Catholic Church is rightly seen by the Faithful to be systemically dysfunctional and disgustingly 'on the nose.'

Tancred said...

Progressive agendas trump Christ in the minds of evil modernists like your boy Cocco all the time, Gabrielle.

Peter W said...

It was Pius XI who introduced the cover up Canon 'Crimen sollicitationis' (1922), later updated several times until 'Secreta Continere'. Coverups have nothing to do with modernists (Pius XI was hardly one) or anyone's agenda except the need for the Culture of clericalism to protect its own.
BTW, who is Gabrielle?

Anonymous said...

To denounce the criminal priest who solicited a penitent during confession or to cover up?

Peter W said...

Canon Law on the 'Pontifical Secret' went through several stages from crimes of solicitation in the confessional (1922) to clerical child sexual abuse and other matters. The most recent form of the 'Secret' is found in Paul VI's 1974 'Secreta Continere.' This Canonical provision is still operative and obligatory for all bishops and superiors of clerical institutes except in civil jurisdictions that have mandatory reporting, ie, very few world wide. Until the Pontifical Secret is excised from the Code, abuse will remain unreported and the clerical predators will continue to 'graze' on the innocent.

Maybe this will all change when the lid is blown clear off very soon in Poland, Latin America, India and parts of Africa.

JBQ said...

Actually, Bernie Law did what was mandated by Canon Law in Boston. His motives were sincere albeit flawed. It was believed that sin could be forgiven with a sincere motive to reform.---The problem is that pedophile abuse or teen abuse is an addiction just as deadly as heroin. The individual loses control. It is like alcoholism in that the first steps are under control and the result of sin. Once one is an alcoholic, the only recourse is AA and the acceptance of a higher power.---Modern man has decided that heroin addiction is under the control of the individual. One can solve one's one destiny. There is no reaching for God. The issue of sex abuse would be a parallel.---The only answer is to turn to God for heroin reform as well as the overindulgence of the sexual revolution. Modern man in the progressive era actually believes that heroin and sexual indulgence are good. When either get out of control, then one can just "turn off the spigot".---Since God is now dead, there would be no other answer for the enlightened. There are rules and regulations set by the Almighty. Man does not make the rules. Bernie Law found that out the hard way.

Anonymous said...

At least Chrissy Blasey Ford revealed her own identity. LifeSite News (how much money do they get from opus devil timi busch--i see they are hiring again(!) and less and less coverage of abortion) wrote a totally unsourced story containing these allegations and everyone 'believes' it.

Imagine if this had been the evidence to not confirm Kavanaugh: "A highly-placed Vatican source with direct knowledge, who must remain anonymous for fear of reprisal,"

Like the democrats you try to use accusations of sexual immorality to get (what you think is) your way politically. Unfortunately, you all are being played on all sides and yet it is your own fault since no side (or you) hold or practice the Catholic faith.

Imagine pinning on st jp2 the appointments of bergoglio, mccarrick, or wuerl (not to mention coco, paglia, maradiaga, marx, kasper, schonborn, Murphy-O'Connor, Mahony and all the rest) -- what a slander that would be (it might call into question his declaring commie jose maria escriva a saint).

Tancred said...

Extra-Extra read all about it! Anonymous commenter complains about the journalistic practice of using anonymous sources to tell a story.

John Paul “the Great” made a lot of terrible appointments.


Tancred said...

I think it’s more important to get rid of people Inncharge who are of lawful evil alignements

Tancred said...

Cardinal Law’s mistake, as it is with many churchmen these days, is they think they can find refuge in the Synagogue of Satan.

Joseph R said...

Don't go near the Saudi Consulate in Istanbul, Abbas Khan or, for that matter, anywhere near
the Mea Shearim, Jerusalem.

Eccles said...

Confidante, not confidant? I suppose he's one of those transgender blighters.

Constantine said...

@Anonymous: For years I have been neither Republican, nor Democrat. But for years I have noticed the savage bullying and violence found among "Black Lives Matter", and all the lesbian, gay, and people like Hillary Clinton, who had full totalitarian control of the Democratic party, worse and more terrifying even than the Bush family.Both parties are uncatholic, because both parties believe and facilitate in various degrees in advancing the Enlightenment. The "useful idiots" Paul VI, and JohnPaul II helped it along and allowed the Enlightenment to seep into the Church. When a news source claims that a person fearing his or her life is made, the terror apparatus is undeniably true. One cannot speak a Catholic opinion on general websites, Colleges(even allegedly "Catholic"ones, nor in the public press(because companies do not like strong ideologies or faiths because business cannot thrive best whrere there are differences how to live one,s life and behave), nor for the same reasons in the workplace and entertainment (We get homosexuality of the worst kind, pushed on us when we go to a Broadway show such as "Rent", expecting a nice story based on "La Bohemme", only to find the original story subverted, and a homosexuality ideology underlying it.
In the "Black Lives Matter" movement there is contempt for MLK even calling him a "homophobic Christian" by some of their leadership.Yes, John Paul II should not be called a saint. He as all other Church leaders, and political leaders facilitated the people with wrong ideologies in both Church and State.

Anonymous said...

You publish some spanish blogger -- is he opus devil? And act like we're supposed to get rid of a cardinal because of the opinion of this person we don't even know. The same w/you publishing info on the papal foundation--it's all coming from opus devil. Why do you believe their info? They are using you to tear down the priesthood and the hierarchy. They are manipulating you into communist class warfare to democratize, protestantize and globalize the church. This is the agenda Bergoglio. This is the agenda of chaput and gomez (Opus Dei). This is the agenda of the Jesuis (CWR).

Bishop Olson condemns McCarrick's predatory sexual behavior, but not his heresy, because Olson holds the same heresies:
Here’s the Remnant on Bishop Olson:

You all are implementing Francis thinking you are fighting him (note he quotes opus devil weigel 2 times)

As you ignore Oulette's heresy, so you ignored Maradiaga's: "On the other hand, if condemned error is now preached openly by a premiere Cardinal of Christ’s Church and is not resisted, but instead applauded by “orthodox” Catholics, we can truly join Our Savior in asking: “When the Son of Man comes, will He find Faith on earth?”

What is agenda Opus Devil? "along with Philadelphia Archbishop Charles Chaput, who has been a frequent public critic of pro-choice Catholic politicians (but doesn't chaput give communion to them; spsonsor world family meetings w/them?), Busch co-founded the Napa Institute in Napa Valley to prepare for what the archbishop has described as “the next America,” ...[they'd have you believe the next America is something 'conservative catholics' want but:] "Archbishop Jose Gomez of Los Angeles, the largest Catholic diocese in the United States, represented a rare voice at the meeting to speak out strongly on an issue that challenges the Trump administration. President Trump touts the need for a “great, great wall” on the border..."

"Today is ‘hour of the laity,’"

"Moreover, His Excellency’s comment that the story of Our Lady of Guadalupe “is the story of America” because it is about “the encounter of cultures, European and indigenous”

Gomez/Opus Devil New America

The papal foundation as reported in lifesite (their source--just like vigano it all traces back to busch/opus devil) denied francis some moola earlier this year: so far wuerl and bransfield; we'll see what happens to Dolan.

"That document, sent by Foundation President Bishop Michael Bransfield, and signed by Cardinal Wuerl, Cardinal Timothy Dolan... the request for the donation came directly from Pope Francis"

Wonder how much money francis has bagged between factions feuding it out. And all so modernist commie perverts can continue controlling the church under a different hat to keep all you know it all laity on board because you won!

Paul Haley said...

One wonders about the validity of the sacraments confected by these abuser priests and higher-ups. The catechism says even if the priest/celebrant himself is in the state of sin - as long as the matter and form are correct, and the priest/celebrant has the right intention (to do what the church does) the sacrament is valid but the priest/celebrant sins grievously. This seems correct in that Almighty God would not hold it against the victim if the perpetrator was acting sinfully.

We are also informed that the degree of holiness of the celebrant has an effect on the efficaciousness of the sacrament (with Padre Pio being used often as an example) and for the perpetrators "Hell to pay" for their crimes. One wonders as well why any of them would use the Catholic priesthood as a quick pathway to Hell. Even more puzzling is why Francis would allow such things to occur without immediately laicizing the culprits and turning them over to the law enforcement authorities for criminal prosecution in whatever jurisdiction they are residing. It says something about the mind and motivations of Francis himself.

Tancred said...

Did Opus Deli take your lunch when you were a younger child?

Why do you think Cigoña is Opus, because he’s Spanish?

I don’t read the Remnant.

There are lots of reasons to get rid of Coco, besides the fact that he was seen by the Carabinieri at the party and secreted our before they busted his protege and other clerical friends. He’s an open supporter of legitimizing sodomy. So, I guess I find the charges being leveled by LifeSiteNews and Voris that they have credible, anonymous sources that he was present with other buggers at a party with illegal drugs and buggery going on, to be credible.

Tancred said...

We already know that Bergoglio covered for predators in his own diocese. So that’s not a shock that he’s perpetuate the cycle in Rome.

Moreover, what better way is there to destroy the Church from within?

Anonymous said...

To answer the title question: No. He shouldn't remain a Cardinal for one more second.

Peter W said...

All bishops including Bergoglio, Ottaviani, Siri, Lefebvre, Schneiders, Burke, superiors of clerical religious institutions have been and are required by the still in force Pontifical Secret of 1922 to cover up the crimes of paedophile priests and not report unless this is mandatory in civil jurisdictions.
Selectively pointing the finger at Bergoglio is disingenuous at the very least.
If you really want things to change, then agitate your cause with your local bishop to petition Rome to excise the Pontifical Secret on paedophile clergy from Canon Law.

Tancred said...

You keep blathering about rules as if they mean anything to the people being hung up to dry right now. There’s Canon 915, but nobody cares about that. Why should they care about that legislation and ignore other canons?

Peter W said...

Why should they care about this particular Canon, Tancred? Because it enshrines in Church Law a provision that not only protects clerical child rapists but, in many cases, allows them to continue to destroy the lives of the innocent and all to save the honor and glory of the priesthood. How on earth could the Church authorities since Pius XI's change to Canon Law sleep straight in their beds knowing that an ecclesiastical positive law has been elevated above the teaching of Jesus Christ (Mt 18: 5-6; Mk 9: 42)?

Tancred said...

What a load of mystical poppycock. It did a lot of good for Shanley or hundreds of predators who were thrown in jail, didn’t it?

Constantine said...

@ Paul Hanley: Brother, I just want to point out first the heresy called Donatism: it simply is when a person believes a priest's or bishop's or Pope's sacraments are invalid if sacraments are performed in a state of serious sin.
That being said, a sacrament must have a priest's intention to do the sacrament for the sacrament to be valid. If, for example, a priest were to not intend the bread and wine to be made into the Body and Blood, then it is not going to happen. We may not know at a Novus Or do Mass if the intention is there, especially if the priest does not really believe it can happen. But we cannot know the priest's ulterior mind. ONLY God knows for sure. @ Peter w:For this same reason I wrote to "Paul Hanley", so too no canon law can regulate a person's subjective state of mind. And no canon law can prevent an illicit action,sin, or sacrament such as ordination or Consecration from taking place. What is best is educating laity and seminarians and religious and priests and not subverting the end goals of doctrine (sacraments leading to Salvation) and replacing it with "pastoral" or political or social emgineering.

Peter W said...

Constantine, this is not a matter of sacramental gymnastics, it's about criminality of the clerical child rape variety.

Tancred said...

When you can demonstrate that the clergy consistently follows canon law in all cases, (even in the spirit of the law) you might have a point.

Paul Haley said...

My posts in this forum are under the name Paul Haley not "Paul Hanley" and I am a refugee from the inaccessible blog in which mu username was "phaley" so please correct your records. My website is: and I would appreciate it very much if my identity on this blog is correct. Thank you very much.

Constantine said...

@Paul Hanley: My apologies for misspelling your name. BTW, Why is angelqueen "inaccessible"? Did something happen to it?

Anonymous said...


Why did you drag your crazy self over to this blog?
You were annoying enough on Angelqueen.

Paul Haley said...

Why are you afraid to identify yourself, you bonehead. I'll test my pedigree any day against yours.

Peter W said...

Cannibalism rampant.

Tancred said...

Just look at Bergoglio’s courtiers attacking each other.