#ENGLISH - The deadline for answering was Tuesday, January 28, 2020. Arana had to answer whether he is the author of a slanderous letter against the Rev.Miguel Ángel Barco
Jacques Pintor, journalist Copyright @2020 JACQUES PINTOR Any quotation from this article should be made directly to this post, this Blog and the author Jacques Pintor ACCESSES THE OTHER ENTRIES AS WELL:
SEE ALSO V - SATAN, FATHER OF LIES: THE SPANISH BISHOPS IN THE HANDS OF JESUIT ARANA AND CARDINAL OMELLA (V) IV - THE GERMAN JESUIT ARANA EVADES JUSTICE AND DOES NOT APPEAR IN COURT II - POSSIBLE COMPLAINT AGAINST THE RECTOR OF THE SEMINARY OF COMILLAS IN MADRID ... I - ALL ABOUT THE "SCOUNDREL" FATHER ARANA (I)
Jesuit father, Germán Arana, a confidant of Pope Francis and rector of the International Seminary at Comillas in Madrid, has been summoned to testify before the judge in Madrid This was requested by the representation of Mr. Miguel Angel Barco under Article 256 1.1. of the Law of Criminal Procedure, and the judge has admitted this "On the request that the person to whom the complaint would be addressed declare, under oath or promise to tell the truth, about some fact related to his capacity, representation or legitimation, the knowledge of which is necessary for the lawsuit, or for him or her to exhibit the documents in which such capacity, representation or legitimation is stated" LEC, Article 256.1.1).
The letter was allegedly written by Germán Arana and about which he is now called to give an explanation includes terrible descriptions of the Rev. Miguel Ángel Barco
"(...) sinister. (...) who was part of a movement to promote the pre-conciliar liturgy (...) mythomaniac, effeminate, collector, of ancient ornaments, arrogant (...). (...) he deliberately swelled the accounts for the construction of his parish, presumably in exchange for an interest earned for himself. He gets a 17-year-old girl pregnant and she gives birth to a daughter. The scandal broke and Mgr. Manuel Ureña took him to Zaragoza where he had been transferred as bishop, making him parish priest of an important town, Épila. He enjoys Archbishop Mgr. Ureña's trust so much that he has a key to the Archbishop's room and spends his nights there often".
Thus, reads the lawsuit of the Rev. Barco presented with a prosecutor and lawyer as legal representation, insulted and slandered by Arana:
As I said in the previous entry, I communicated with Father Arana by telephone, and you can read the entire conversation by revisiting the Blog entry here, where you can also see the origin and the path that the letter followed.
The Court has contacted Germán Arana at his place of work, the international seminary at Comillas in Madrid, but Arana has not responded to the summons nor have any of his subordinates.
German Arana's slanderous letter to Pope Francis (see letter below)
Germán Arana and his sidekick in the "Trama Maña", Cardinal Omella, both have defrauded the trust of Pope Francis. Francis had to apologize to Chilean victims of pedophilia for the flawed information he received from Arana
"Dearest Holy Father,
With immense sorrow, moved by an indeclinable moral imperative, (...) I wish to inform you of the grave situation that the Archdiocese of Zaragoza finds itself in because of the disorder in the life and ministry of its Archbishop, Monsignor Manuel Ureña Pastor.
Five years ago, while I was exercising my ministry at the Gregorian [University, in Rome], some priest friends sent me to Rome for the recovery of Don Jesús Gracia, then Rector of the Seminary of Zaragoza. A young and honest priest subjected to strong pressure against his conscience by D. Manuel Ureña for the reception and ordination of candidates coming from outside, without reports or with negative reports, psychologically inconsistent, quite a few active homosexuals, and lovers of money, strongly defended and promoted by his Archbishop. The executive hand that by order of the Archbishop imposed his criteria and handled such a bad situation was his secretary Mr. Gonzalo Rupérez, a young priest brought from Alcalá by Mr. Manuel, with a strong history of scandals behind him.
To confirm the extent of that situation I contacted Archbishop Elias Yanes, Archbishop Emeritus, the Episcopal Vicar Mr. Carlos Salazar - now deceased - and the Spiritual Director of the Seminary Mr. Edilio Mosteo. People with extraordinary capacity for evangelical objectivity and impeccable judgment. They confirmed, and even amplified, the seriousness of the picture the Rector had described to me. So much so that on a trip to Spain to present a document on the formation of the Congregation for Catholic Education I put Mgr. Zani, then undersecretary of that dicastery, in touch with Don Jesús Gracia. From that conversation and from other information, above all from the punctual intervention of Bishop Yanes, the Congregation initiated an investigation that concluded in the convenience of an Apostolic Visit on the part of the Holy See. That decision was aborted by the strong opposition to it of Cardinal Rouco and two other Spanish purpurates who unfortunately did not know the gravity of the facts and moved along by criteria of prestige of the Spanish Church. At least that initiative served to curtail the path of D. Manuel towards the Head Diocese of Toledo. A path that then seemed to be clear in the ecclesiastical circles at that moment. Don Manuel's reaction was unspeakable: many witnesses in private and in public heard his laments for his truncated "career" (sic), and his insulting turpitudes to the bishops he supposed had informed Rome. The Holy See warned him of his bad practices in the reception of candidates, but he ignored it by continuing to receive and ordain undesirable candidates, making some of them suffer enormously for their sexual disorders and their misappropriation of parish funds.
This month I met with Bishop Yanes, who was extraordinarily concerned about the confidences he was receiving about the abuses of Don Manuel. At that time, the Bishop of Barbastro, a man of great moral and pastoral rectitude, sent me a deacon from the diocese of Zaragoza, a native of Barbastro, who was challenged by the Archbishop, to examine him in case he should be received and/or incardinated later in his home diocese. The result of the examination can be found in the attached copy of my letter to Bishop Alfonso Millán Sorribas: A deacon who was sexually abused and subjected to continuous humiliation by his parish priest, D. Miguel Ángel Barco López. Informed by the Archbishop, he simply wants to "cover up" the matter by removing the deacon from the parish and trying to accommodate him financially by preventing him from providing any precautionary and/or canonical measures. At the same time, he unashamedly defended the parish priest, without taking any action against him.
The priestly profile of Don Miguel Angel Barco, parish priest of Epila, is sinister. A Catalan seminarian who was part of a movement to promote the pre-conciliar liturgy, led by Bishop Mariné, an obscure and unbalanced man. He goes to the Opus Dei seminary in Pamplona, "Bidasoa. D. Manuel takes him under his protection and takes him to Alcalá to increase the local Seminary of recent foundation. Jealous and judicious priests I have spoken to in Alcalá de Henares describe him as a mythomaniac, effeminate, collector of ancient ornaments, overbearing. He becomes the man of confidence of D. Manuel: Secretary, auditor, does and undo with the works of the new parishes. A parish priest in Alcalá tells me that he deliberately inflated the construction accounts of his parish, presumably in exchange for interest earned for himself. He gets a 17-year-old girl pregnant and gives birth to a daughter. The scandal broke and Don Manuel took him to Zaragoza where he had been transferred as bishop, making him parish priest of an important town: Épila. He enjoys their trust so much that he has a key to the Archbishop's room and spends frequent nights there.
The implausible thing is the formative role of the deacon I examined: Daniel Peruga Martí, a seminarian from the "Bidasoa" in Pamplona, is expelled from that seminary with bad reports. A boy with homosexual tendencies, with great psychological weaknesses, is ordained a deacon against the advice of his superiors, and sent to the above-mentioned parish priest, whose immoral ways are well known to the Archbishop. The latter separates him from the relationship with the formators and delegates to this undesirable parish priest the responsibility for his formation.
Another extremely dark character is the former Secretary, Mr. Gonzalo Rúperez. Seminarian from Madrid who remains in Alcalá with the division of the diocese of Madrid and the constitution of the diocese of Alcalá. A handsome and confident boy who enters the graces of D. Manuel. Protected by Mgr. Manuel, he acts with arrogance and ease. At a parish camp, he gets a girl pregnant and gives birth to a boy. The bishop violently removed him from the diocese so that he would not be scandalized (sic) and he went to study at Bidasoa and Rome. There he moves with ease among monsignors and cardinals who do not know his history. Because of Mgr. Manuel's expenses, the diocese gets into financial difficulties, and Mgr. Manuel remembers that Fr. Gonzalo's father is a prominent Spanish banker. He calls Gonzalo back to his side to gain favor with his father and solve his financial problems. Gonzalo suddenly presents himself as a valid aid to D. Manuel and begins to act with notable arrogance. He is taken to Murcia as Secretary and acts with such impudence that the presbytery protests vigorously and must return to Alcalá. Later, Mgr. Manuel took him to Zaragoza as Secretary and there he again managed the affairs of the seminar leading the entry channel of undesirables. The priests of Zaragoza suspect embezzlement of diocesan funds in the steps taken by him. To avoid scandals, D. Manuel takes him out of Zaragoza and gets him to be received by Cardinal Rouco in Madrid. He has already caused a scandal in the first parish where he arrived, being transferred to a second one.
I have interviewed a former seminarian from Alcalá who had sexual relations with a young parish priest of Alcalá for quite some time as a young lay parishioner. The scandal broke. The parish came to know of the carnal trade between the two. The parish priest, transferred to Madrid, is currently the Archpriest of his area. To cover up the matter, Mgr. Manuel brought the young homosexual into the seminary and paid for his stay there for four years, preventing the Rector from throwing him out onto the street because of the problems he was creating for his classmates. This boy, so vulnerable in the clerical environment, confessed to me with great bitterness: -I haven't lost my faith, but I don't step on a church anymore because of the incoherence of its pastors.
More concrete examples could be given. I will limit myself to general questions arising from the hours of confidences I have received from well-meaning and upright priests in the dioceses of Alcalá and Zaragoza. I have also heard voices from Cartagena-Murcia, but my ministry has prevented me from traveling there for that purpose. From such confidences I have reached the following moral convictions:
1. All the people in the friend’s environment of Don Manuel are ambiguous, seminarians or young homosexual or heterosexual priests who are active, unbalanced people who live with a mask of empty religiosity, fond of the good life and accustomed to economic waste. Their relational environment is contaminated with people of disorderly living or recipients of economic or other benefits.
2. In the many scandals involving priests in his environment or in his presbyteries, D. Manuel has defended the most corrupt. He has not been concerned with his spiritual or human recovery. He has only worried that the scandals would not reach him with strategies of distancing or economic compensation.
3. His lifestyle is wasteful, tending towards a regal and sumptuous life, far removed from the austerity expected of a Church pastor.
4. In administrative dealings there is frequent suspicion of embezzlement by him or his protégés.
5. People who have lived with him have no record of him being a man of prayer. His preaching is empty and self-referential, without spiritual and evangelical breath.
6. He is a friend of doing favors and spending gifts in the hope of receiving benefits. It is well known his custom of making friends by means of invitations, banquets and bulky envelopes. And to make friends with the powerful of the earth and the Church. His dioceses have been a parade of high prelates awarded for the visit with splendid tips. He has gained a dense network of friends who may try to protect him when things go wrong for him.
7. He has not listened to the tried and tested men around him, with spiritual weight and ministerial solidity. He has surrounded himself with morons who support him in his arbitrariness.
8. Apart from the economic issues, and the moral problem of their arbitrary rule for their own benefit, there are well-founded suspicions of other disorders:
1) The ambiguous and disorderly nature of the men around him. 2) His defense of priests who are harmful because of their sexual disorders in the ministry. 3) His possessive affections for certain young people. 4) The fact that some of his relations, with heavy stories of scandals, spend the night in his residence. They come and go at night with a key to his room. 5) I can testify that a priest of Alcalá told me that he heard directly from the lips of a nurse that she had attended a surgical operation to repair an anal tear of D. Manuel, presumably the result of a penetration. I also heard from a nun who received a similar confidence from a health worker. Both the nun and the priest are not slanderers but worthy of all credit. I received them as highly confidential confidences.
I must add that the impunity with which Mr. Manuel Ureña has proceeded in his government has created deep bitterness and discouragement among the best priests in the diocese. This impunity has pierced the confidence of many in the actions of the Holy See, a discouragement that affects the evangelizing thrust of the Cesarean Church and its ministers.
With this painful panorama, so seriously damaging to the interests of Jesus Christ and His Holy Church, endorsed by the attached documents, one can only humbly, but at the same time earnestly, ask for the provision of an Apostolic Visitor, to directly assess the damage by a Visitor who has been warned and is resistant to flattery, banquets and gratuities, which can provide His Holiness with reliable information so that he can take the appropriate measures, in the open horizon that even contemplates the drastic measure of the removal of Don Manuel Ureña Pastor from his Archbishop's See.
With my hand on the Holy Gospels I declare that I am moved by no other intention to submit this report to Your Holiness than the good of the Church, and that what I declare truthfully reflects the testimonies I have received".
YOU MIGHT ALSO BE INTERESTED IN: ARANA'S OTHER LETTER: HE TELLS OFF MONSIGNOR VICENTE JIMÉNEZ