What did Pope Francis know and for what reasons has he engaged in this “rare display of papal power.”

Transparency and accountability; accountability and transparency. These are the time-honored means of restoring credibility to an institution that has lost public trust. We hear the words often these days from Church leaders. But will we ever see more than the words? Will we actually see accountability and transparency in practice? That, too, is something we just don’t know.

Say it isn’t so, Holy Father. Have you acted this way for no good reason? In these times of stress and turmoil?

He’s having none of it, as explained in this detailed reportage about the whys, hows, at whose instigation.

Questions remain unanswered about the canonical process by which Bishop [Martin] Holley was removed.

While Pope Francis established in 2016 norms by which a bishop can be removed through a Vatican process, it is not clear whether that process was used in Holley’s case, or whether the Congregation for Bishops, on which Cardinal Wuerl [for whom he was an auxiliary bishop for
two years in Washington] sits, was involved [as Holley says].

Meanwhile, why isn’t it clear that process was used? The faithful don’t deserve to know? Francis recommends silence about his being the object of once-unimaginable public criticism, as by former ambassador to the U.S. Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano?

But about how the Memphis man was ousted, he is practicing that old devil secrecy. Ever with us, it seems, secrecy, secrecy, secrecy.

Sphinx-like pontiff.

I ask because it’s one of the big questions being pursued by investigators.

“These devices should be considered dangerous,” said William Sweeney, assistant director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. He said the probe is “in its early stages,” and the agency is working quickly to analyze clues from the packages at its facility in Quantico, Va.

Investigators are trying to determine whether the suspected bombs were operational, officials said.

A cautious assessment that.

More caution:

When asked whether the homemade devices were designed to explode, Mr. O’Neill said law-enforcement officials are treating them as “live devices” and not as hoaxes. “This is something that should be taken seriously,” he said.

The devices are being treated is if they are “live.” Designed to explosive and not set to explode. Not armed, as sometimes is said.

More:

The FBI’s Mr. Sweeney said a powder found in the package delivered to CNN’s Manhattan office on Wednesday and addressed to former Central Intelligence Agency Director John Brennan didn’t present a biological threat, but investigators were conducting further tests.

So far, nothing. But better safe than sorry, of course:

At the FBI facility in Quantico, Va., the suspected bombs will be tested for “everything under the sun,” a federal official said.

Go, FBI.