In an unusual step, the Vatican official who deals with matters of justice at the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith speaks publicly on the sexual abuse crisis we are facing. Prayers, please! This is going to be a bumpy ride. John Allen's article on this subject may be helpful.
Vatican City, March 13, 2010 (VIS) - Given below is the text of an interview, published today by
the Italian newspaper L'Avvenire, with Msgr. Charles J. Scicluna,
promoter of justice of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith,
concerning the investigative and judicial activities of that dicastery in cases
of "delicta graviora", which include the crime of paedophilia
committed by members of the clergy:
Msgr. Charles J. Scicluna is the
"promoter of justice" of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.
He is effectively the prosecutor of the tribunal of the former Holy Office,
whose job it is to investigate what are known as "delicta graviora";
i.e., the crimes which the Catholic Church considers as being the most serious
of all: crimes against the Eucharist and against the sanctity of the Sacrament
of Penance, and crimes against the sixth Commandment ("thou shall not
commit impure acts") committed by a cleric against a person under the age
of eighteen. These crimes, in a "Motu Proprio" of 2001, "Sacramentum
sanctitatis tutela" [the Vatican Latin version is here], come under the competency of the Congregation for the
Doctrine of the Faith. In effect, it is the "promoter of justice" who
deals with, among other things, the terrible question of priests accused of
paedophilia, which are periodically highlighted in the mass media. Msgr.
Scicluna, an affable and polite Maltese, has the reputation of scrupulously
carrying out the tasks entrusted to him without deferring to anyone.
Question:
Monsignor, you have the reputation of being "tough", yet the Catholic
Church is systematically accused of being accommodating towards
"paedophile priests".
Answer: It may be that in the past - perhaps
also out of a misdirected desire to protect the good name of the institution -
some bishops were, in practice, too indulgent towards this sad phenomenon. And
I say in practice because, in principle, the condemnation of this kind of crime
has always been firm and unequivocal. Suffice it to recall, to limit ourselves
just to last century, the famous Instruction "Crimen sollicitationis"
of 1922.
Q: Wasn't that from 1962?
A: No, the first edition dates back to the
pontificate of Pius XI. Then, with Blessed John XXIII, the Holy Office issued a
new edition for the Council Fathers, but only two thousand copies were printed,
which were not enough, and so distribution was postponed sine die. In any case,
these were procedural norms to be followed in cases of solicitation during
confession, and of other more serious sexually-motivated crimes such as the
sexual abuse of minors. [The 1962 text of Crimen sollictationis: Crimen sollicitationis.pdf]
Q: Norms which, however, recommended secrecy...
A: A
poor English translation of that text has led people to think that the Holy See
imposed secrecy in order to hide the facts. But this was not so. Secrecy during
the investigative phase served to protect the good name of all the people
involved; first and foremost, the victims themselves, then the accused priests
who have the right - as everyone does - to the presumption of innocence until
proven guilty. The Church does not like showcase justice. Norms on sexual abuse
have never been understood as a ban on denouncing the crimes to the civil
authorities.
Q: Nonetheless, that document is periodically cited to accuse the current
Pontiff of having been - when he was prefect of the former Holy Office -
objectively responsible for a Holy See policy of covering up the facts...
A:
That accusation is false and calumnious. On this subject I would like to
highlight a number of facts. Between 1975 and 1985 I do not believe that any
cases of paedophilia committed by priests were brought to the attention of our
Congregation. Moreover, following the promulgation of the 1983 Code of Canon
Law, there was a period of uncertainty as to which of the "delicta
graviora" were reserved to the competency of this dicastery. Only with the
2001 "Motu Proprio" did the crime of paedophilia again become our
exclusive remit. From that moment Cardinal Ratzinger displayed great wisdom and
firmness in handling those cases, also demonstrating great courage in facing
some of the most difficult and thorny cases, "sine acceptione
personarum". Therefore, to accuse the current Pontiff of a cover-up is, I
repeat, false and calumnious.
Q: What happens when a priest is accused of a
"delictum gravius"?
A: If the accusation is well-founded the bishop
has the obligation to investigate both the soundness and the subject of the
accusation. If the outcome of this initial investigation is consistent, he no
longer has any power to act in the matter and must refer the case to our
Congregation where it is dealt with by the disciplinary office.
Q: How is that
office composed?
A: Apart from myself who, being one of the superiors of the
dicastery, also concern myself with other matters, there are the bureau chief
Fr. Pedro Miguel Funes Diaz, seven priests and a lay lawyer who follow these
cases. Other officials of the Congregation also make their own vital
contribution depending upon the language and specific requirements of each
case.
Q: That office has been accused of working little and slowly...
A: Those
are unjustified comments. In 2003 and 2004 a great wave of cases flooded over
our desks. Many of them came from the United States and concerned the past.
Over recent years, thanks to God, the phenomenon has become greatly reduced,
and we now seek to deal with new cases as they arise.
Q: How many have you
dealt with so far?
A: Overall in the last nine years (2001-2010) we have
considered accusations concerning around three thousand cases of diocesan and
religious priests, which refer to crimes committed over the last fifty years.
Q:
That is, then, three thousand cases of paedophile priests?
A: No, it is not
correct to say that. We can say that about sixty percent of the cases chiefly
involved sexual attraction towards adolescents of the same sex, another thirty
percent involved heterosexual relations, and the remaining ten percent were
cases of paedophilia in the true sense of the term; that is, based on sexual
attraction towards prepubescent children. The cases of priests accused of
paedophilia in the true sense have been about three hundred in nine years.
Please don't misunderstand me, these are of course too many, but it must be
recognised that the phenomenon is not as widespread as has been believed.
Q:
The accused, then, are three thousand. How many have been tried and condemned?
A:
Currently we can say that a full trial, penal or administrative, has taken
place in twenty percent of cases, normally celebrated in the diocese of origin
- always under our supervision - and only very rarely here in Rome. We do this
also in order to speed up the process. In sixty percent of cases there has been
no trial, above all because of the advanced age of the accused, but
administrative and disciplinary provisions have been issued against them, such
as the obligation not to celebrate Mass with the faithful, not to hear
confession, and to live a retired life of prayer. It must be made absolutely
clear that in these cases, some of which are particularly sensational and have
caught the attention of the media, no absolution has taken place. It's true that
there has been no formal condemnation, but if a person is obliged to a life of
silence and prayer, then there must be a reason...
Q: That still leaves twenty
percent of cases...
A: We can say that in ten percent of cases, the
particularly serious ones in which the proof is overwhelming, the Holy Father
has assumed the painful responsibility of authorising a decree of dismissal
from the clerical state. This is a very serious but inevitable provision, taken
though administrative channels. In the remaining ten percent of cases, it was
the accused priests themselves who requested dispensation from the obligations
deriving from the priesthood, requests which were promptly accepted. Those
involved in these latter cases were priests found in possession of paedophile
pornographic material and, for this reason, condemned by the civil authorities.
Q:
Where do these three thousand cases come from?
A: Mostly from the United States
which, in the years 2003-2004, represented around eighty percent of total
cases. In 2009 the United States "share" had dropped to around
twenty-five percent of the 223 cases reported from all over the world. Over
recent years (2007-2009), the annual average of cases reported to the
Congregation from around the world has been two hundred and fifty. Many
countries report only one or two cases. There is, then, a growing diversity and
number of countries of origin of cases, but the phenomenon itself is much
reduced. It must, in fact, be borne in mind that the overall number of diocesan
and religious priests in the world is four hundred thousand, although this
statistic does not correspond to the perception that is created when these sad
cases occupy the front pages of the newspapers.
Q: And in Italy?
A: Thus far
the phenomenon does not seem to have dramatic proportions, although what
worries me is a certain culture of silence which I feel is still too widespread
in the country. The Italian Episcopal Conference (CEI) offers an excellent
technical-juridical consultancy service for bishops who have to deal with these
cases. And I am very pleased to observe the ever greater commitment being shown
by Italian bishops to throw light on the cases reported to them.
Q: You said
that a full trial has taken place in around twenty percent of the three
thousand cases you have examined over the last nine years. Did they all end
with the condemnation of the accused?
A: Many of the past trials did end with
the condemnation of the accused. But there have also been cases in which the
priest was declared innocent, or where the accusations were not considered to
have sufficient proof. In all cases, however, not only is there an examination
of the guilt or innocence of the accused priest, but also a discernment as to
his fitness for public ministry.
Q: A recurring accusation made against the
ecclesiastical hierarchy is that of not reporting to the civil authorities when
crimes of paedophilia come to their attention.
A: In some English-speaking
countries, but also in France, if bishops become aware of crimes committed by
their priests outside the sacramental seal of Confession, they are obliged to
report them to the judicial authorities. This is an onerous duty because the
bishops are forced to make a gesture comparable to that of a father denouncing
his own son. Nonetheless, our guidance in these cases is to respect the law.
Q:
And what about countries where bishops do not have this legal obligation?
A: In
these cases we do not force bishops to denounce their own priests, but
encourage them to contact the victims and invite them to denounce the priests
by whom they have been abused. Furthermore, we invite the bishops to give all
spiritual - and not only spiritual - assistance to those victims. In a recent
case concerning a priest condemned by a civil tribunal in Italy, it was
precisely this Congregation that suggested to the plaintiffs, who had turned to
us for a canonical trial, that they involve the civil authorities in the
interests of victims and to avoid other crimes.
Q: A final question: is there
any statue of limitation for "delicta graviora"?
A: Here you touch
upon what, in my view, is a sensitive point. In the past, that is before 1889,
the statue of limitations was something unknown in canon law. For the most
serious crimes, it was only with the 2001 "Motu Proprio" that a
statute of limitations of ten years was introduced. In accordance with these
norms in cases of sexual abuse, the ten years begin from the day on which the
minor reaches the age of eighteen.
Q: Is that enough?
A: Practice has shown
that the limit of ten years is not enough in this kind of case, in which it
would be better to return to the earlier system of "delicta graviora"
not being subject to the statue of limitations. On 7 November 2002, Venerable
Servant of God John Paul II granted this dicastery the power to revoke that
statue of limitations, case by case following a reasoned request from
individual bishops. And this revocation is normally granted.
