Archbishop Vigano: Martyr, or Zealot?

It is always frustrating when an individual who is otherwise ideologically correct and valuable to the preservation of Church tradition becomes a victim of their own zeal, and such is my frustration at the Excommunication of Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano.  More frustrating still is the aftermath within the Church and the inevitable conflict between the “progressives” and the “conservatives” his excommunication is sure to ignite.  Progressives will laud his fate as ensuring progress in the “Spirit of Vatican 2”, while conservatives on the other hand will assuredly hold up Vigano as a political martyr who has fallen to the intrigue of an agenda driven Vatican.  The most nefarious aspect in these two opposing sides?  Neither side is entirely wrong.

To assume the investigation into Archbishop Vigano’s past schismatic statements was not at all politically motivated is to deny both human nature and the history of the current Pontiff’s judicial inquiries.  No one of authority with an agenda and vision for the future appreciates their power being questioned, and we can assume Pope Francis is no exception to this.  He has been a vocal opponent of the Roman Tridentine Rite, even taking certain steps to restrict it’s celebrations.  His stance towards the Rite has been met with severe criticism from conservative Bishops throughout the world, but most notably in the Americas and in Africa.  In fact, the tenacious desire for the Tridentine Rite has been so prevalent in the US, Pope Francis recently specifically took aim at more traditional Catholics in the US in his comments.

Moreover, several high-profile figures who have over the last few years been equally vocal in their dissent from the Pope’s restricting the Rite have been targeted in apparent political retaliation.  Perhaps two of the most notable critics who have earned the ire of Pope Francis have been Cardinal Burke and Bishop Strickland.  Without widely publicized justification, both figures have been subjected to official actions which appear to be politically motivated in one form or another: Cardinal Burke lost his Vatican subsidized apartment, while Bishop Strickland was removed from office entirely.  

Clear, vocal animosity and agenda against the Tridentine Rite, combined with official actions barely removed from obvious retaliation for political opponents create a legitimate platform for those who would choose to consider Archbishop Vigano a martyr.  As a political target, he fits the bill of one coming under personal fire.  He has been a vociferous defender of the Tridentine Rite, as well as staunch believer in more conservative theories at odds with Pope Francis’ stance (such as vaccine mandates).  And, the Archbishop has not kept his criticisms of Pope Francis to himself.  His opposition to the Pontiff’s Liturgical policies and even his accusations of Pope Francis having prior knowledge of the sexual abuses within the Church before their exposition may be harsh, but in the eyes of the Church licit criticisms and dissensions from Papal positions.  One might even make the case of these dissensions being warranted.  If these were the only charges against Archbishop Vigano, we might well hold him a martyr who stood up for conservatives Catholics everywhere in the face of another Roman overreach of power.  Alas, we are offered no such liberty.

Archbishop Vigano was summoned to Rome last month over an investigation into schismatic claims, particularly claiming Pope Francis’ pontificate to be illegitimate and calling for his immediate resignation.  Calling for papal resignation is not in itself wrong or unprecedented; what made this case necessary was the claim of illegitimacy.  In this, the Archbishop in essence forced the Vatican’s hand.  Such a claim from a high-ranking official cannot go unchallenged, nor ought it to.  Pope Francis’ dubiousness, his peculiar methods and his occasional overreaches of power do not therefore make him an illegitimate pontiff.  The throne is held by the authentic successor of Peter.  Beyond the schismatic attack on papal succession, Archbishop Vigano renewed his schismatic stance by refusing the summons.  He extended his stance by declaring he did not recognize the authority of the tribunal or its proceedings, thereby rendering their summons worthless.  Whether or not the Vatican was searching for a reason to act against him for political reasons or not, the Archbishop in his zeal all but made it a matter of duty for Rome to investigate, charge, and convict him.

It sounds like a description of bygone days to claim that history is full of otherwise holy individuals who become victims of their own zeal for the Faith.  In truth, we see this is true even in our own day.  As recently as two year ago, a similarly justified proceeding was levied against the Rev. Frank Pavone, a heavy hitting name in the Pro-Life movement.  His laicization has been held up by some as either political retaliation or general silencing of another good priest; however, his actions when held under scrutiny reveal a similar story to the Archbishop.  Extreme disobedience to several Bishops with legitimate authority over him all but forced a pontificate already eager to exert force against critics to act harshly.  

I think we can expect some serious backlash and long lasting negative effects in the Church as the Faithful struggle to decide whether Archbishop Vigano is a martyr for the conservative cause or a man caught in his own hubris.  Either way, his plight is cause for sadness within the Church.  And, I think it provides us with an opportunity to reflect upon our own legitimate criticisms of Pope Francis’ actions.  It is imperative that in our own zeal for the truth, we make clear distinctions between attacks/criticisms of the man vs. attacks on doctrines of Faith.