Fr Carlos Urrutigoity -- The Rest Of The Story

In Thursday's post, taken largely from Engel's The Rite of Sodomy. we saw how Fr Carlos Urrutigoity, an SSPX priest originally from Argentina, had been bouncing from assignments there, in Wisconsin, and in the Diocese of Scranton, PA, leaving each time on the heels of misconduct allegations, until in Scranton he brought litigation on the diocese and eventually destroyed the reputation of Bp Timlin. But that wasn't the end for Urrutigoity. (Many thanks to a visitor who sent me the links.)

Engel discusses Urrutigoity's strange magnetism, which seems to have let him continue his career even after Scranton:

Little wonder that in his warning letter to Bishop Timlin in February 1999, Bishop Fellay described Urrutigoity as “dangerous” and noted:

The reason why he got into trouble with the Superiors of the Society of St. Pius X is mainly because we felt he had a strange, abnormal influence on the seminarians and priests, whom he seemed to attach to his brilliant, charismatic personality. When he asked me to recognize the society he intended to found, among the reasons of my refusal, I explicitly mentioned this strange personal, guru-like attachment between the disciples and their leader (p 964)

Engel uses the Anthony Blunt-Guy Burgess Cambridge spy ring as one paradigm for gay infiltration of institutions, and there certainly seems to be a parallel between Urrutigoity and Burgess, who struck outsiders like Malcolm Muggeridge as a "moral leper", but who struck Martha Powers in Conspiracy of Silence as having something like complete influence over Blunt.

Urrutigoity resurfaced in Paraguary in 2014 -- you'd think his career would have ended in Scranton!

Pope Francis sent a cardinal and an archbishop to investigate Carlos Urrutigoity in the diocese of Ciudad del Este. The two men visited the country July 21-26.

The removal is the latest demonstration of the pope’s “zero tolerance” of clerical abuse, and it suggests priests suspected of child abuse in one country can no longer find shelter in other countries.

In 2002, Urrutigoity was accused of sexual abuse of minors in a highly publicized lawsuit in the Diocese of Scranton, Pa. He and another priest, Eric Ensey, were suspended by then-Bishop James Timlin amid allegations they had sexually molested students at St. Gregory’s Academy. The diocese reportedly reached a $400,000-plus settlement in the case in 2006.

Urrutigoity, a native of Argentina, was transferred to Canada before settling in Paraguay.

The Vatican’s spokesman, the Rev. Federico Lombardi, confirmed Wednesday (July 30) that Urrutigoity had been removed from his position as vicar general, or deputy bishop, of the diocese on July 14.

And later that year,

After a Vatican investigation, Pope Francis removed a Paraguayan bishop from his post as head of the Diocese of Ciudad del Este because of "serious pastoral reasons."

But the bishop shot back later the same day, charging in an open letter that he was the victim of an ideological campaign by Paraguayan bishops in league with Vatican officials.

Bishop Rogelio Livieres Plano, 69, was told to step down as head of the diocese effective Sept. 25. Bishop Ricardo Valenzuela Rios of Villarrica del Espitiru Santo will temporarily administer the diocese.

A Vatican statement said the "onerous decision" to dismiss Bishop Livieres was made after a "careful examination" of the findings of a Vatican investigation conducted by the congregations for Bishops and for Clergy. An apostolic visitation to the diocese in July was led by Spanish Cardinal Santos Abril Castello, archpriest of Rome's Basilica of St. Mary Major.

The order for Bishop Livieres, a member of Opus Dei, to step down was based on "serious pastoral reasons" and motivated by "the greater good of the unity of the church in Ciudad del Este" and among Paraguay's bishops, the Vatican statement said.

That someone on Guy Burgess's moral plane should rise to vicar general of a diocese would certainly be cause for removing a bishop. On the other hand, as events have unfolded, Francis has certainly been selective in removing bishops. That Bp Livieres is Opus Dei suggests there may be some merit to his claim of political manipulation in the move -- one interpretation of Francis's papacy is that it's driven by a feud between the Jesuits and Opus Dei, and Francis is said to have an animosity for another Opus Dei bishop, José Gómez.

Rorate Caeli has made the point that Livieres, a traditionalist bishop whose policies in his diocese were otherwise commendable, let Urrutigoity become a pretext for his removal.

Urrutigoity was not himself the central issue -- the bishop was the central issue -- but he was clearly the first cause and center of origin of all the maze which ended up suffocating the bishop, even if his past in America was not the cause of all the trouble, but the catalyst of its unraveling. It was predictable.

One purpose of corruption in a corrupt institution is that, if everyone is tainted, the powers that be have something on everyone, and everyone is subject to removal for "corruption" at any time at the whim of the clique in control. That Francis can summarily dismiss certain bishops after a token visitation -- he did this recently with Bp Holley in Memphis in a similar move -- while rehabilitating or leaving in place cardinals who are far more corrupt, is an indication of how this system works.

Francis has "zero tolerance" for abuse only when it suits him.