If reports are accurate, and given it is from La Stampa it can be reasonably supposed to be, the new head of the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate, Father Alfonso Bruno, imposed on the order as a result of Vatican intervention, has sued an Italian blogger for being critical of him.
Reading the posts in question, the worst thing said, the blogger in question called Fr. Bruno "A traitor to Fr. Manelli."
That is it. For this he sues the blogger. The blogger and his wife were interrogated by the police.
Rorate has the translation of the La Stampa article.
This is thuggery, pure and simple. This is a brazen effort to intimidate the blogger and all other bloggers from posting anything critical of the brutal suppression of the FFI.
But this should come as no surprise to anyone who has been following the story.
A Blog For Dallas Area Catholics runs through some of the litany of thuggery that has been imposed on the order.
Well, the above, this kind of heavy handed repression is why! I mean, who sues family man bloggers, other than trolls and thugs? This is hardly the first time the nouveau leadership of the FIs has stooped to such tactics. It has in fact been part and parcel of the new regime since its installation. What have we seen in less than a year? We have seen the founder locked up under house arrest, surely the most dangerous octogenarian on the planet. We have seen the former leadership forced under pain of obedience to endure scattering to distant missionary apostolates very far from the center of events. That certainly appears to be an attempt to get them out of the way. We have seen ludicrous stories of malfeasance on the part of the former administration, and even some of their lay associates and family members, made up well after the fact. Stories that have never been even remotely supported by any substantive evidence and, after having served their purpose of disparaging the reputations of certain individuals, have been quietly dropped.But I guess if you a re a crypto-something or other, you had it coming according to the thug in charge.
What else have we seen? We’ve seen the reputations of devout novices trashed because they asked uncomfortable questions of the nouveau leadership and the Pope, through completely fabricated and meaningless (but very revealing) claims that the individual in question “rejected Vatican II.” What would that even mean?
Don't like it? Sue me.