The Fr. Rupnik case: What is wrong with these people?

Every time we learn something new about the case, the mishandling of it at every level appears more appalling.

Pope Francis greets Jesuit Father Marko Rupnik during a private audience at the Vatican in this Jan. 3, 2022, file photo. Father Rupnik, whose mosaics decorate chapels in the Vatican, all over Europe, in the United States and Australia, is under restricted ministry after being accused of abusing adult nuns in Slovenia. (CNS photo/Vatican Media)

What if I told you that a man with power of his own and access to more of it serially abused unsuspecting women who had turned to him for various reasons, both professional and personal, for help and guidance?

What if I told you that he followed a playbook to warp their minds, exploit their vulnerabilities – including their desires to be loved and appreciated – in order to get them to do the sorts of things for which Lulu White would charge her clients extra and women like Cora Pearl would not countenance for all the petites Tuileries in the world?

What if I told you that lots of people knew what he got up to, most of them very powerful and in a position to stop him if they had half a mind to do so, but also had their own uses for the fellow and in any case didn’t want the trouble?

Am I talking about Jeffrey Epstein? Harvey Weinstein? Jim Jones?


I’m talking about Fr. Marko Ivan Rupnik, SJ, the celebrated artist-priest who has digs attached to the Jesuit mother church in Rome, founded a religious congregation in his native Slovenia and an art school in Rome, received commissions from major shrines and chapels from Fatima to Queensland, Australia, to New Haven, Connecticut, and lots of places in between, including the Apostolic Palace.

Fr. Rupnik is accused of serial sexual, psychological, and spiritual abuse of at least nine women over several years, and possibly more than two decades. Several of the women were religious sisters attached to the Loyola Community he founded in the 1980s. A Vatican decision in 2019 confirmed and administratively imposed an excommunication Rupnik had received when he absolved one of his “accomplices” in a “sin against the Sixth Commandment” – that’s Church-speak for sexual misbehavior – which was lifted almost immediately after Rupnik apparently pinky-swore he was really super-duper sorry.

One accuser – “Anna” – gave graphic depiction of the horror she suffered under Fr. Rupnik. The Pillar reproduced the Italian original with permission of the Italian investigative news magazine, Domani:

Father Marko asked me to have threesomes with another sister of the community, because sexuality had to be, in his opinion, free from possession, in the image of the Trinity where, he said, “the third person would welcome the relationship between the two.” On those occasions, he would ask me to live out my femininity in an aggressive and dominant way, and since I could not do so, he would deeply humiliate me with phrases that I cannot repeat.

Jesuit superiors both in Rupnik’s native Slovenia and in Rome had heard of his behavior more than a decade before any of this came to light, but never took meaningful action against him. Instead, they either winked at efforts to discredit and sully the names of Rupnik’s accusers, or actively participated in efforts to make sure he would never face significant consequences for his action.

When formal accusations – rather than mere informal allegations – finally reached Rome in or about 2019, a Jesuit was in charge of the department in which the office that handles investigations and eventual prosecutions is juridically established and physically located. There was a preliminary investigation, after which the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith decided not to lift the statute of limitations.

The Associated Press obtained the correspondence of one investigator – an auxiliary of the Rome diocese and a Jesuit, Bishop Daniele Libanori – who says the allegations are correct, and that Fr. Rupnik’s victims had “seen their lives ruined by the evil suffered and by the [Church’s] complicit silence.”

It’s hard not to run up against the statute of limitations when superiors systematically refuse to consider allegations until after the statute of limitations has expired. The subsequent handwringing – of the “Oh, there’s nothing we can do!” variety – fails to convince, not least because the Code of Canon Law provides for the waiving of the statute.

The Jesuit pope and the Jesuit Prefect closed the books on the celebrity Jesuit creep who lived just across the river and up the street.

(If you are doing a double take right now, wondering how it is that there should be no independent investigative arm or judicial tribunal for these sorts of matters even this late in the day, well, you are not alone.)

It appears that Fr. Rupnik’s 1993 departure from Slovenia had something to do with allegations of grave misbehavior. It was in that year – 1993 – that Rupnik came to Rome and established his Centro Aletti institute for art and culture. He would go on to decorate chapels and shrines the world, over. He would receive awards and accolades even be invited to preach – in March 2020, more than a year after the Jesuits received the allegation of crime in the confessional and months after the Vatican panel of judges had unanimously decided that Rupnik had done the thing of which he was accused – to preach a Lenten retreat to the Papal Household.

The case of Fr. Marko Ivan Rupnik, SJ, keeps getting worse.

Every time we learn something new about the case, the mishandling of it at every level appears more appalling. There was the fine distinction between “covering up” and merely not saying anything, which Fr. Arturo Sosa – Superior General of the Society of Jesus – offered in the wake of the story’s breaking. There was the egregiously thin timeline the Jesuits published along with improbable assurances that victim “will be listened to with understanding and with empathy.”

The Jesuits’ response to this unutterably awful business has been ghastly, vile, horrid.

To hear one accuser tell it, the Jesuits knew about him in the ‘90s: Fr. Francisco Egaña SJ heard of Fr. Rupnik’s behavior no later than 1998; so did Tomáš Josef Špidlík, SJ – a close friend to Rupnik and a board member of the Centro Aletti art center of which Rupnik was the founding director – created Cardinal in 2003. All this puts the Dec. 14th statement from Fr. General Sosa in glaring light.

“The case of Fr. Marko Rupnik, which became public last week [i.e. the first week of December, Ed.],” said Fr. Sosa, “is a good example of how much we still have to learn, especially about people’s suffering.”

A candid observer may reasonably conclude that Churchmen – including, senior Jesuits, and including among those the one in the Apostolic Palace – are still trying to perfect the playbook they have employed in cases from Maciel, to McCarrick, to Danneels (who begged a child abused by his uncle – a priest – not to go to the police, after which Pope Francis appointed His Eminence to the Synod on the Family) and Delft (the Caritas director who had his way with boys on at least two continents) and Leatherby (whose grooming and abuse playbook tracks eerily with that of Rupnik) and … for God’s sake, how many others?

In 2018, Pope Francis said that he was “part of the problem” plaguing the Church. One is tempted to say, sic et simpliciter, that today Francis is the problem. Nevertheless, it is not just Francis. It is not only Francis with all his coterie of implausible goons. Leadership culture in the Church has been rotten for a very long time. Now, it appears that corruption permeates the Church’s whole leadership apparatus.

The Slovenian bishops have issued a statement – just this morning, December 22nd – saying, among other things: “[T]he current Slovenian bishops have learned about [the criminal perversion of Fr. Marko Ivan Rupnik, SJ] from publications in the media.” That is very carefully worded, indeed, though precisely no one struggles to believe that the former Slovenian bishops knew of the allegations against Rupnik and did what they could to keep them under wraps.

“The news about the abuses committed by Fr. Rupnik have shocked the Slovenian and global public,” the statement goes on to say. “We have known Fr. Rupnik as an outstanding artist and insightful spiritual leader who has marked many personal lives and communities and created many works of art and spiritual literature.” They say they “understand that many of you are hurt by this news and that you are wondering whether or not it should all be thrown away.”

“We beg you,” they say, “with this tragic realization in mind, to distinguish his unacceptable and reprehensible actions from his extraordinary spiritual and artistic accomplishments in mosaics and other areas.” They’re worried about their stuff.

“Only by working together,” the Slovenian bishops say, “and breaking the silence, which sides with the perpetrators, can we stop this evil.” That is absolutely true, and every word of it is still a lie.

All this has been a long time coming, too, but it has emerged on Francis’s watch.

If Pope Francis would not have this be the sum of his legacy, he should dispense with half-measures and paper reforms, and pick up the Augean shovel. At the very least, he should explain himself in respect of Marko Rupnik, inexplicably styled Fr. Rupnik, SJ.

If you value the news and views Catholic World Report provides, please consider donating to support our efforts. Your contribution will help us continue to make CWR available to all readers worldwide for free, without a subscription. Thank you for your generosity!

Click here for more information on donating to CWR. Click here to sign up for our newsletter.

About Christopher R. Altieri 230 Articles
Christopher R. Altieri is a journalist, editor and author of three books, including Reading the News Without Losing Your Faith (Catholic Truth Society, 2021). He is contributing editor to Catholic World Report.


  1. This sort of thing is exactly why I completely dismiss the actions taken against Fr. Frank Pavone. The hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church has simply lost all credibility and all claim to obedience.

    • I’ve long had concerns about Fr Pavone. But I have to say, in reading accounts like this, I really do feel the anger so many of his defenders feel over the blantant double standards that apply to the friends and courtiers of those in power.

  2. Totally gross and scandalous beyond belief. Yet Fr. Frank Pavone is defrocked (excuse me, Mr. Pavone). What did Jesus say about straining the gnats?

    • Well, both those guys are camels. Just different species. Thankfully, we don’t get a limit on the number of bad priests we need to eject from ministry.

      That said, let’s remember that the cover-up crisis of 2001 and the subsequent charter never addressed priest misbehavior against adults. Only children. The clerical culture protects its own: it delayed six years for Mr Pavone’s blasphemy, and 29 on his disobedience. I think Fr Rupnik will be out a lot sooner.

      • That said, let’s remember that the cover-up crisis of 2001 and the subsequent charter never addressed priest misbehavior against adults.

        That, definitely; but it also failed to create any process of accountability for bishops, either. And that’s really what made this crisis so severe.

        • I certainly agree. People knew for decades that priests and nuns abused their authority. We even made jokes about rulers rapping knuckles and weird priests in the confessional. No, what many bishops have missed, including the last three popes, is that the most severe scandal is their own leadership and defense of the clerical culture.

          Church teaching on holding bishops accountable is in serious need of update.

  3. Boycotts.



    Against these vermin and those in the Vatican who enable the vermin, nothing except comprehensive lay boycotts has any hope of working.

    For the love of the Crucified God, stay home from Mass this Christmas Day. And keep staying home every Sunday until the sacerdotal trailer-trash get the message.

    Not one dollar to diocesan schools.

    Not one dollar to diocesan charities.

    Until at the very least the election of a future pipe.

    Let the priestly predators eat, not cake, but grass.

    • I don’t agree with skipping Mass, where we receive the Lord Jesus Christ Himself, Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity. I also don’t agree with withholding funds from Catholic charities and schools. What I think should happen is the appointment of more women to leadership positions (not priests!) in the Church–women are more likely to sense, confirm, and report sexual sins, and be tireless and unrelenting in the pursuit of justice for the victims, which include Holy Mother Church.

      • “What I think should happen is the appointment of more women to leadership positions (not priests!) in the Church–women are more likely to sense, confirm, and report sexual sins, and be tireless and unrelenting in the pursuit of justice for the victims”

        Oh? Any statistics on that?

        • There’s possibly nothing wrong with women in senior positions in the Church. The problem is the type of women who would be attracted by these posts.
          Too dangerous, keep them out! The last thing the Church needs on top of all the other appalling scandals is a an influx of feminists. We have enough of them in every parish under the sun.

      • Have you seen what has happened with the many Protestant Denominations that have given great influence, power and rank to women, from making them deacons and Pastors, to power to decide which doctrines to approve and dissaprove? Corruption in those churches has exploded and as a direct consequence, they now fully embrace more and more of the corruption, language and delusions of the world, including abortion, homosexuality, transgenderism, imaginary identities, critical race theory, etc.

        Women are by no means inferior but neither are they superior and, on top of that, generally more easily influenced by false sentimentalism, false compassion, false love, false justice, etc. Ask Eve from the Garden of Eden, as Satan preached “equality” from the “patriarchal”, “colonialist”, “misogynist”, “oppressor” God by portraying Him as supposedly cheating Adam and Eve away from higher glory and power. It is those power-hungry women that are showing to be more devastating than any crooked man ever.

        It is the women like Mary, much stronger than any man ever in defeating pride, that have built the Church for 2,000 years. We must all, women and men, learn from Mary, who being the absolute very highest among all humans, never demanded power, position, priesthood or any privilege. God’s tough love and loving order is infinitely superior to Satan’s disguised-as-love, soft, poisonous, deceiving feelings.

        • Until now, I have refrained from commenting on any articles on this website, but, Phil, I just HAD to give them my name and email just to say – you hit it right on the head inasmuch as women thinking that if they have more power they can fix this. I am a woman. I believe that with Vatican II, women have already been given too much power…. I don’t have to say anything else because you’ve said it all and so well and correctly. I don’t have an answer to the disgust and evil that permeates the Church, but I do know that softer and more emotional is NOT better.

        • Perfectly stated Phil.

          As one woman convert observed about her journey from her Protestant church to the Catholic: the purpose of women priestesses is to sanctify abortion.

        • What also tends to occur in denominations that ordain women are ageing, shrinking congregations. Last time I checked the mainline branch of US Presbyterians had the oldest average age of church members in America.
          I saw a photo of a local Presbyterian female minister and her flock in our hometown weekly newspaper. They were performing some charitable deed at Christmastime. The church appeared to consist of half a dozen congregants. I suppose those were the able bodied ones.
          My grandpa was Presbyterian when it meant something. The hero of Chariots of Fire was Presbyterian. There are still old school, conservative Presbyterian congregations that are thriving but none of those ordain women.

      • I agree ! But I also see a problem with that. Many women that seek leadership roles are also radical activists in supporting and promoting the women’s rights movements , many of which I do not support.

      • The poor female victims of Fr.Rupnik weren’t especially prompt or tireless in reporting his misdeeds. I don’t blame them considering their circumstances but women have just as many conflicting issues reporting abuse as men do. Having more women in leadership roles is not going to solve that institutional problem.

      • “–women are more likely to sense, confirm, and report sexual sins, and be tireless and unrelenting in the pursuit of justice for the victims”

        Ghsilaine Maxwell and Allison Mack would like a word with you.

      • A lot of children abused by their mothers’ boyfriends would argue with you. Even when the mothers call themselves feminists.

    • Right, its all the fault of those “diocesan schools” and “diocesan charities”. And by suggesting people stay home from mass you should understand what spirit you are being inspired by.

    • You advocate boycotting mass, starting with Christmas? Putting ourselves in mortal sin, deserting Christ on his birthday, of all days? Shame on you!

    • That is exactly what Satin wants.
      He infiltrates the Church with some bad Priests. Why? to get Catholics to blame the whole Church for their actions, and leave. DO NOT do what the Devil calls you to do!!
      You are going to Mass for God, not for a priest, bishop or anyone else. You go there to worship God and receive his Strengthening Presence.

      • Dear Athanasius:

        Christmas blessings.

        We fight for the church because God wants us there and to give our good witness. We help one another because it lifts us up. Our presence is needed and our responsibility is to support the church financially and to pray for one another. The Catholic Church is too important not to fight for. Bad people come and go, let the faithful stand strong.

        In Jesus name,


    • That is already happening in fact. One need only look at the average (Novus Ordo) parish and see that it is overwhelmingly grey-haired. Marriages, childbearing, and baptisms are way down. Vocations to the priesthood are down. So are weekly collections.
      Catholic School enrollment has increased in recent years, but there are often charges that they are simply schools for the wealthy who can afford to escape the public school system.
      Catholic charities often get large sums from “public-private” partnerships and tend to behave in a more secular fashion.
      Tridentine Rite communities and religious orders have seen growth, but they must be very careful not to allow the, um, corrupt types back into their ranks.

    • Robert, how can you suggest this action? In the swirling lies of today in civil and church(Pachamama) government, the only refuge I have is the Eucharist (Mass) and the Rosary. As far as the funds, there are smaller local charities like pregnancy life centers and soup kitchens that directly honor the Corporal Works of Mercy. I’ve witnessed two healthy church communities lately. One in PA and one in TX. Both led by pastors with diametrically different backgrounds. One led by a man in his 80’s and the other by a man in his late thirties. One who had a very typical Archdiocese of Philadelphia upbringing (I know this, me too.) The other priesthood born of incredible hardship for him and his entire family as a Catholic at the hands of the Communist Viet Cong. There are miracles happening in the church too. Not always reported or too visible. Watch how the communities hold each other up. Stand by with your lamp post watching, waiting, listening and don’t miss Mass!

    • Charles, I know! I was stunned by the Trinity comment. I often wonder where the church will go with the Holy Family as an image for marriage. (It isn’t Joseph, Joseph and Jesus or Mary, Mary and Jesus after all.) It all seems in line with “Don’t believe your lying eyes” we’ve all been subjugated to lately.

  4. Isn’t this what we’ve come to expect from those in positions of authority in the Catholic Church?

    And not one other bishop among the thousands there are raises his voice to decry the scandals among the hierarchy… NOT ONE! Not one bishop calls on these others to resign their office…NOT ONE. That, too, is a scandal.

  5. The picture speaks a thousand words, a famous Jesuit, and known sex-abuser, previously excommunicated for criminal sexual abuse of nuns, is restored and invited to meet face-to-face with the Pontiff Francis.

    That says it all about such men.

  6. Weak indecisive leadership emboldens the degenerate to do his part to destroy the Church. Let Rupnik face criminal charges. Where is the protection for sisters in the Lord? Some will say that Papa has lost control.

    • I agree, Brian. He should face criminal charges. Harvey Weinstein deserved his criminal prosecution, as does this priest for his more grievous offenses.

    • Indeed. Seminarians I know ridicule Rupnik’s “Year of Mercy” theme piece as The Three-Eyed Mercy Monster. The overlapping third eye appears elsewhere in Rupnik’s portfolio of repulsive, disturbing mosaics and one wonders if there is an occult demonic inspiration behind it.

      • For anyone who’s read Michael D. O’Brien’s *Voyage to Alpha Centauri: A Novel* (2013, Ignatius Press), this is just too bizarre. In the novel, the Luciferian god to which a lost civilization made human sacrifices was depicted as having three eyes.

    • Hard to disagree with Sandra. I suggest that we use Rupnik’s art as a new Rorschach projective test for seminary admissions. The rule is this: if the seminary applicant admires that art, he should be denied entry; if he finds it “creepy” or “repulsive”, he gets admitted. ; > )

  7. Christopher Altieri wrote: “(If you are doing a double take right now, wondering how it is that there should be no independent investigative arm or judicial tribunal for these sorts of matters even this late in the day, well, you are not alone.)” Let’s not ignore that this is part of a pattern under Bergoglio. In Pope Francis’ name, Cardinal Cupich sabotaged the USCCB’s rational proposed plan in November 2018 to institute bishop accountability in the wake of the McCarrick scandal. Not only was the USCCB forced to wait until the February 2019 summit on clerical abuse in Rome when it was already ahead of the other bishops’ conferences in grasping the gravity and nature of the problem, but even worse, afterwards Cdl. Cupich was able to force the inferior “Metropolitan Plan” on the U.S. With Bergoglio’s blessing, the investigation of sexual misconduct by a suffragan bishop would be headed by his metropolitan and any such investigation of an archbishop would be overseen by one of his suffragan bishops. Partiality is guaranteed and the corruption will continue!!!

      • Any immoral act makes anyone, no matter what his status, accountable to his victims, which whould include any and everyone involved institutionally, and to God. Joseph Ratzinger would school you on it.

        • Except that he was a bit slow on institutional accountability. Though he did take action against Maciel once his boss moved along into eternity.

          My observation of the pattern isn’t an endorsement of clericalism. I just recognize that the previous two popes weren’t that far ahead of Pope Francis, and the years 1978-2005 weren’t shining moments for bishops and their (in)ability to side with survivors and help heal the Church.

  8. This papacy along with the Biden admin is tiring & destructive. I will not give a cent to any papel or bishop appeal. I go to mass tobe with Jesus and to recieve him and I’m starting to ignore anything that comes out of the Vatican I can hardly wait till this self destruct

  9. Mr. Altieri has written a grimly satisfying column. “Francis with all his coterie of implausible goons” is particularly good. Having read his work here for years now, I get the impression of a very decent man whose seemingly unlimited reservoir of patience has been just about exhausted.

  10. The Bergoglian rule for the Church is simple: If Bergoglio sees that you are one of the beautiful people, you can do no wrong; if he sees you as an untouchable, you can do no right. It is futile to look beyond Bergoglio for any other rule, as long as Bergoglio is Pope.

  11. Alexis de Tocqueville said that in a democracy, the people get the government they deserve.
    As part of the prophesied chastisement, God Himself has given us – the worldly, the lukewarm, the apostate, the sinner – the Church leadership we now deserve. It isn’t just the other person’s fault. Each of us, in our own unique way, is also culpable.

  12. We Seminarists from the Eastern Catholic Churches back in the 90’s were obliged by the Congregation for the Eastern Churches to follow upon our arrival in Rome a preparatory course of one month, plus a Supplementary Year between Philosophy and Theology, organized by the Centro Aletti, headed by Fr. Marko Ivan Rupnik at the Pontifical Oriental Institute. He was teaching us for the discernment of the heart and was responsible to report to the Congregation who was worthy to be ordained and who’s not. I remember in 1996 a Woman who was preparing her doctoral thesis at the above mentioned institute accused Fr. Marko Ivan Rupnik that he proposed to her having sex in exchange of good grades. Everyone knew about this in the Institute and the Pontifical Congregation and all covered father Rupnik. Nothing has been done. Everyone knew about him, in the Vatican and the community he was directing and all covered him, Cardinal Spidlik included, according to my opinion.The Centro Aletti he was directing was also ironically called Centro A Letto.

  13. A long and unrelenting pattern indeed from the Pontiff Francis, which, as noted by Chris Altieri, was signaled with his personal “rehabilitation” of the repulsive sex abuse coverup Cardinal Godfried Danneels of Belgium, a bishop publicly retired in 2010 in utter disgrace, having been caught in the act of trying to protect and coverup for his friend and fellow Bishop Roger Vanguelhue, the homosexual predator who chose as his victim his own nephew. And while the entire nation of Belgium knew the story, and the entire Church hierarchy and Church establishment, the Pontiff Francis brazenly signaled his tyranny, and apparently his complete disregard for the victims of sex abuse everywhere, by rehabilitating the fraudulent coverup Cardinal Danneels, and placing him on Francis’ committee steering “The Family Synod of Pontiff Francis.”

    This pontificate is, as St. Paul warned against, the preaching of “a different gospel.”

    • “This pontificate is, as St. Paul warned against, the preaching of ‘a different gospel.’”

      Mmm. Not unlike the previous two. All those JP2 bishops. Promoted, still under B16. And priests like Maciel. A lot of Catholics have blind spots, especially to the figures they support.

      • It rings hollow that you attempt to defend Bergoglio by pointing to two previous Popes. It falls into the category of hearing someone say, “Biden socks as a president” and the responder commenting, “But, but, but…Trump.”

        I’ll say it again, along with the groundswell of faithful Catholics who think similarly, “Bergoglio is one lousy Pope.”

        • I’m hardly defending Pope Francis. In fact, I associated him with two other popes who were often painted as ditherers in confronting scandal. I’m merely pointing out the great momentum of the institution, and perhaps how powerless even sainted popes are from its shadows, and how similar the stories of the past three papacies seem to be.

          Perhaps it’s not about the popes, but about the human indulgence for the cult of celebrity. Perhaps we do best to focus on Jesus and to commend all others to prayer, be they heroes or goats.

      • Dear Mr. Flowerday:

        The Pontiff Francis has distinguished himself from this predecessors by his unfailing preference and restoration of sex abusers and coverup artists.

        There can be no doubt that observers, regardless of their preference or not for the Pontiff Francis, know that the Pontiff Francis and his entourage reject and live for dismantling the teaching of JP2 and B16.

        And as candid observers can all recall, or make recourse to, years ago in First Things, both Jody Bottum as editor and Cardinal Avery Dulles as contributor, attested that indeed, JP2 was certainly enchanted with Maciel, and it was B16 who was facing the reality of mounting evidence. Dulles chalked to up to JP2 not admitting the Augustinian candor about the power of sinfulness.

        When B16 became Pope, Maciel was taken down. And many other predator priests and coverup Bishops were likewise removed.

        We can all recall that the “trusted voices” of the McCarrick Establishment didn’t like the fact that even bishops we’re getting taken to task, so the serpents led by Danneels and McCarrick (as they themselves have publicly attested), worked harder in 2013 to finally get their candidate Jorge Bergoglio elected Pontiff (after failing at it in 2005).

        They all knew that the Pontiff Francis would protect and promote Bishops and celebrity priests of their “value system,” and the Pontiff Francis has done what they elected him to do: restore sex abusers and sex abuse coverup artists.

        So while humming around at this inflection point, some might ponder whether there was just too much neglect of governance by JP2, and to a degree B16 himself, as Father Gerald Murray has stated.

        On the other hand, no one can deny that the distinction between JP2/B16 and the Pontiff Francis is this: for the former, sex abuse is a grave problem mishandled, for the latter, it is apparently a preferred feature.

        That preference is quite apparent, as we can be sure the photo is intended to convey.

      • And I’m sure other readers, like myself, appreciate your concern for the all of the blind.

        And three cheers for clear-sightedness…

      • And as the topic is about the Pontiff Francis, it seems off topic (though understandable) that any reader might prefer to divert one’s attention to other matters.

        • I think the topic is “these people,” according to the headline. And “these people,” being plural, part of an institution, part of ordained ministry, are very definitely part of the problem.

          “What is wrong” didn’t start in 2013. My criticism of Pope Francis is very much like my criticism of his two predecessors and many of the bishops of the past forty years. Those prelates qualify as “these people.” Including a sainted pope and his top theologian.

          Perhaps Mr Altieri would like to change the title of his opinion piece.

      • Sorry, but your argument of equivalence falls flat and is, as most progressive arguments, short on facts. JPII and BXVI, on their worst days, were nothing like Francis. Neither of them met to support and encourage the homosexualist priest James Martin, SCH or his ilk, for example. Francis did it twice. Francis has had many opportunities to exercise firm leadership and deal decisively with these predators but has dropped the ball more times than I can count. Once again, you are defending the indefensible.

  14. I’d suggest Rupnik be made a Cardinal ASAP, along with James Martin. Then, include them among the inner circle of advisors to St. Pope Francis I of Argentina & Italy. These two would round out the current group of Cupich, McElroy, Tobin and Gregory. What a Church we have!

    • God has sent men such as you mention as a scourge and wake up call to the church. Good men and women must repudiate heresy and protect the church thru their witness. Some denominations have let the gates down and it has made for chaos.

      God bless you in your desire to proclaim Christ crucified and stand for godliness.

  15. I’d suggest all readers for Christmas to reread Philothea’s chapter 28, and in particular the final words,”it’s the occupation of an idle person to be busy with scrutinizing the life of another. I make an exception of those who have charge of others whether in the family or in the state. For a great part of their responsibility consists in looking into and watching over the functions of others. Let them accomplish their duty with love. Beyond this, let them abide in themselves for their own improvement.”

  16. The church has become the church of “situational ethics”. Church leaders for years have downplayed all violations of the 6th Commandment. It’s not a big sin for them. Does anyone really believe they take the abuse crisis seriously? They don’t think God punishes forever. There is no Hell for them. Fornication, adultery, masturbation, pornography, sodomy, homosexuality, are all downplayed by leaders in the highest position. These are small sins for them. Little imperfections. They are children of the 60’s sexual revolution. Don’t expect these leaders to fix this crisis. They are part of the crisis. They caused the problem. The younger clergy, who have seen the destruction of the church and society by this sexual license will have to fix it. That is if God doesn’t intervene first. Our Lady of Fatima, who taught us Hell exists, and many are the damned due to sexual sins, Pray for us!

  17. Canon Lawyer Fr. Gerald Murray expressed being troubled by the fact that dismissal from the clerical state goes far beyond what Canon Law prescribes for those offenses. But I am very troubled by another factor. This dismissal came just months after the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in the Dobbs Case overturning Roe v. Wade. This created great political turmoil in the U.S. as you know. There are some who interpret the Father Pavone decision as political payback. He has alluded to evidence that some progressive bishops may have lobbied his bishop to push for this outcome. If there is any truth to that, it would be a scandal of immense proportions for the pro-life community and the Church. This is my primary concern. What a terrible thing to be debating at Christmas.

  18. Putting this all on Francis is disingenuous, when you too easily skip over the period of time in which action should have been taken and instead accusations were covered up – the 1990s. The failures of John Paul II on similar cases are well known, it would hardly stretch the imagination to acknowledge this crisis, too, is a result of his negligence at least. It was under Wojtyla, after all, that Rupnik came to fame, and even decorated a Vatican chapel. The criticism of the Jesuit superiors of Rupnik are valid, but that does not include the current pope. It seems that an opportunity for transparency and accountability is missed in the reporting here, not only in the hierarchy.

    • This is exactly right. There is a certain misconception that as long as one “side” rails against sexual sins they and their heroes are somehow more virtuous than their opposites. This is hardly the case.

      Pope Francis and his two predecessors are all men formed by the same system. Different flavors, perhaps, coming from a religious order or a diocesan priesthood. But all three are men of the institution. They each nurtured blind spots and were betrayed by people they favored.

      There are certainly good aspects of the clerical subculture in Roman Catholicism. But it is having a very difficult time pulling itself into a modern accountability to the laity. As long as it misdiagnoses the problem, it will continue to flail when its members fail and give scandal. Likewise, as long as ideological elements get the root problem wrong, they will continue to be on the sidelines. Irrelevant at best. Unhelpful at worst.

  19. I can think of a certain homosexualist, also a Jesuit, who should be laicized. I mentioned his name in a previous comment that was omitted.

6 Trackbacks / Pingbacks

  1. Father Rupnik's Abyssal Eyes - TruthRow
  2. The Abyssal Eyes Of Father Rupnik - Conservative Notion
  3. The Abyssal Eyes Of Father Rupnik - The American Conservative
  4. Comentarios confusos y contradicotios sobre el jesuita Rupnik generaron revuelo
  5. What legacy will Pope Francis leave behind?
  6. A pesar de violar sus votos y abusar serialmente de religiosas, el jesuita Rupnik no fue expulsado de la Orden; él pidió salir de ella

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

All comments posted at Catholic World Report are moderated. While vigorous debate is welcome and encouraged, please note that in the interest of maintaining a civilized and helpful level of discussion, comments containing obscene language or personal attacks—or those that are deemed by the editors to be needlessly combative or inflammatory—will not be published. Thank you.