Bench Warrant For Vigano’?

We don’t have bench warrants in canon law.  We don’t have bail either.  So that leaves the Holy Father with the question of what to do about a problem like Vigano’?  It’s not like Vigano’ is some ordinary guy sitting in the pews, no, he reached Cardinal status and was Papal Nuncio to the U.S.  That meant he could not be ignored.  Add to this the fact that he was accused of schism, so serious a Catholic Crime, that it is one of the few actually defined in the Code of Canon Law (Canon 751). (Schism is the refusal of submission to the Supreme Pontiff or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him.)     What I find interesting isn’t so much the alleged crime, as I am that on June 20, 2024, the trial date set by the Holy See, Vigano’ failed to appear.  In secular courts, that usually triggers a bench warrant and a cessation of all court proceedings until the defendant is again brought before the Court.  When back before the Court, the defendant is held with increased bail or no bail, until the case is concluded before the Court.  In secular courts, “Trials in Absentia” are very rare.  Vigano’ had one of those.  And I doubt anyone from the Holy See was looking for Vigano’ with any great effort. 

Since 2018, Vigano’ has been on the Vatican radar.   Although some people think that Vigano had been doing things most cardinals would not do, (let alone regular Catholics) it was in 2018 that he first gained some schismatic traction by, among other things, publicly calling on Pope Francis to resign because it was Pope Francis who was schismatic!  While there was no rush by supporters up the Via della Conciliazione to sack St. Peter’s Basilica, curial eyes were now laser focused on Vigano.   Canon Law doesn’t have a Speedy Trial Act either, so it was six years before a trial date was set. 

We don’t have any info on what happened at that trial, Pontifical Secret controls that.  We don’t have any of those Pontifical Secret concerns in secular law.  In secular law proceedings, we are use to court reporting and cameras and published decisions.  So, who would not want to be a fly on the wall for the Vigano’ case, especially without the star defendant present?  Who advocated for him at trial or did anyone? 

In Canon Law we don’t have the possibility of “Guilty by Reason of Insanity”.  This might have served Vigano’ well after a Google of what he’s been up to in the last six years.  The Catholic Capital Punishment came simultaneous with the verdict.  In secular law that might only happen in convictions for first degree murder.  Vigano’ was tried and excommunicated all at one time, cut off from the sacraments, either giving or receiving.  That’s death in the Catholic Church.  Vigano’ might have had a chance in a secular justice system.  As it stands, there are only a few limited ways out of his situation now, but no one thinks he cares about those.