As the absurd declaration of "suspension" hangs over the head of Father Nicholas Gruner, the faithful watch with disgust as rebels and Church-wreckers like Bishop Lehman and Bishop Kasper of Germany are made cardinals.

       Then there is Archbishop Cormack Murphy-O'Connor of Westminster, England, who was also made a Cardinal on February 22, 2001. This is the same prelate who failed to do anything about the pedophilic activities of one of his priests, Father Michael Hill, during the late ‘70s and ‘80s, despite warnings that the man was a predator of young boys.

               Although warned by an expert report that Father Hill presented "a high risk" and "could well commit further pederastic acts," Murphy-O’Connor did nothing to remove Hill from his priestly ministry, but instead installed him as a chaplain at Gatwick airport. There he met and seduced another young boy. Murphy-Connor’s defense? Twenty years ago he didn’t understand the danger posed by pederasts!

               Quoting the late, great Father Paul Crane, S.J., Christian Order magazine rightly observes that our "smiling Shepherds clearly refuse to see that dissenting ideas have deadly consequences; that their tolerance of heterodox seminary professors, liturgical 'cowboys', homosexual sympathizers, radical literature in diocesan bookshops etc., etc., reaches fruition not only in a plague of spiritual death and apostasy but, ultimately, in ecclesiastical perversion and the suicides of sexually abused adolescents."

               A "shepherd" turns a blind eye to the predations of a wolf amidst his flock, of which he was clearly warned, and then denies any culpability for the resulting harm to the wolf’s victims. His reward is to be made a prince of the Church. Meanwhile, Cardinal Castrillón-Hoyos of the Congregation for the Clergy declares Father Gruner’s "suspension" on no basis whatsoever and further threatens an equally groundless "excommunication" - for the "offense" of offering well-founded objections to prudential judgments of Vatican bureaucrats who seem determined to bury the Message of Fatima.

               Cardinal Castrillon-Hoyos claims that "vigilance over the clergy" and "the good of souls" require the constant hounding of Father Gruner and even the threat of excommunication, but the priest who seduced young boys and the Archbishop who coddled him are allowed to remain within the bosom of the Church, and the latter is elevated to Cardinal and given the privilege of voting for the next pope.

               Who is securing red hats for prelates of this character? And who is orchestrating the effort to destroy Father Gruner and his Fatima apostolate? I believe it is the very same people in both cases. From this Fatima perspective, something stinks in the Vatican.