As a result of some information received recently regarding the case,” the Vatican said in a statement Tuesday, the church will send to Chile the Maltese Archbishop Charles Scicluna, who has been called the Vatican’s Eliot Ness in fighting clerical sex abuse. There, the statement continued, he will “hear those who have expressed the desire to provide elements in their possession.”
By
elements in their possession, the Vatican apparently means the testimony
and painful stories of victims the pope had previously dismissed as
slanderous accusations.
The pope’s belief
of a powerful bishop over victims outraged advocates for the survivors
of sexual abuse both outside and inside the church. The outcry over the
pope’s blind spot to clerical sexual abuse, and his tin ear to the
anguish of its victims, threatened to indelibly stain the pontificate of
a usually politically astute pope.
The pope’s supporters on Tuesday quickly embraced the decision as an important course correction.
“It
is a positive development in so far that it makes clear that the Holy
See is interested to learn from and hear the testimonies of witnesses,”
said the Rev. Hans Zollner, who served as a member of the Pontifical
Commission for the Protection of Minors. It was clear Francis had
“listened to the questions that some journalists have put to him,” Zollner added. “He has learned from the reactions.”
But victims in Chile said that while the news was welcome, they hoped it was not a public relations gambit.
“Nobody has said anything to us,”
said Juan Carlos Cruz, a Chilean who says he was sexually abused by the
Rev. Fernando Karadima. He has said that Barros witnessed the abuse and
did nothing about it.
He said he would
be willing to testify, as victims have been doing to church law
tribunals since 2005, and added, “We are encouraged.”
Francis’
trip to Chile in mid-January was overshadowed by his brusque remarks to
a Chilean reporter that the claims against Barros amounted to
“slander.” The pope said he would weigh in on the matter if there were
“proof” against the bishop.
Cardinal Sean
O’Malley, the archbishop of Boston and the leader of the pope’s
commission on the protection of minors, called the pope’s remarks “a
source of great pain for survivors” that relegated them “to discredited
exile.”
In a clumsy attempt at damage
control, the pope made a contradictory statement on the flight back to
Rome. He apologized for demanding proof from alleged victims, saying the
word was insensitive, but then reiterated that there was no “evidence”
against the bishop, who he again said was the victim of slander.
Some
victims of Karadima, a powerful priest convicted by the Vatican in 2011
for sexually abusing minors, have accused Barros of standing by as the
priest kissed and abused them in the El Bosque Catholic parish.
On
the plane, Francis said he had twice refused to accept the resignation
of Barros, and in January 2015 he moved the bishop from leading Chile’s
military ordinariate to the diocese of Osorno. The installation
fractured the faithful and clergy of the city, with many opposing a
bishop they considered complicit in sexual abuse.
The
pope’s response mystified observers and vexed his supporters. Possible
explanations tumbled out. Was he getting bad advice from his cardinal
advisers? Was he protecting a friend? Was he a member of a Vatican
faction that believes in “zero tolerance” or one that considers the
abuse issue finished business? Was the pope, someone who faced
accusations of supporting a violent regime as a cardinal in Argentina,
loath to give into public pressure?
Tuesday’s
statement suggested that public pressure had forced the pope to act and
that far from infallible, Francis had perhaps spoken in Chile without
knowing what he was talking about.
By
contrast, Scicluna has in the last decade emerged as the Vatican prelate
who most gets it when it comes to the issue of sexual abuse.
Scicluna,
who declined to comment for this article, acted as a prosecutor during
his time at the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith under Pope
Benedict XVI. He took on the powerful Rev. Marcial Maciel Degollado of
Mexico, the founder of the influential Legionaries of Christ, who was
considered untouchable because of his close ties to and protection under
Pope John Paul II.
For years, Vatican
prelates dismissed the accusations of Degollado’s victims as slander,
but Scicluna listened to them and, after John Paul’s death, convinced
the Vatican that Degollado had abused seminarians in his own order.
Benedict
sentenced Degollado to a life of penance and prayer in 2006. Degollado
died in 2008, and was later shown to have been a serial molester who
fathered children by two women.
Scicluna
subsequently explained that Benedict, previously John Paul’s chief
doctrinal watchdog, had undergone a conversion on the issue as he sat at
his desk reading horrific dossier after horrific dossier.
Advocates for Francis hope that Scicluna will now figure in opening up the eyes of another pontiff.
“It
is good that he has now looked anew and taken this step,” Marie
Collins, an abuse survivor who last year resigned in frustration from
the pope’s Pontifical Commission for the Protection of Minors, wrote on
Twitter.
Despite Francis’ early promises
to rid the church of abuse, many Vatican watchers consider him far less
effective than Benedict, who removed many priests. Francis has mostly
disappointed those who hoped he would bring accountability to the church
hierarchy.
Last year, he instead
recalled a Vatican diplomat accused of possession of child pornography
back to Rome, despite efforts by U.S. authorities to strip the priest of
his immunity. Last month, the terms of the members of the Vatican
commission on abuse expired. The pope has called the delay in restarting
the commission “normal.”
Zollner,
himself a member of that commission, said he had witnessed meetings
between Francis and victims. In Chile, he said, the pope, like any
leader, found himself in an “ethical dilemma” in which he wanted to
believe victims but needed to be sure that their allegations were true.
And
given the intense attention on the issue now, he said, Scicluna’s
mission to get to the bottom of it will be especially challenging.
“He needs to get as much evidence as possible now,” he said. “One way or the other.”
This article originally appeared in The New York Times.
No comments:
Post a Comment