Permanent version of Vos estis lux mundi meaningless without will to use it

A complete analysis of the new and apparently permanent version of Pope Francis’s signature reform law is certainly in order. Nevertheless, the fundamental issue really is not one of parsing legal niceties.

Argentine Bishop Gustavo Zanchetta, accused of sexually abusing young men in northern Argentina, sits in court in Or·n, Argentina, Feb. 21, 2022. Bishop Zanchetta, the retired bishop of Or·n, was sentenced to 4 1/2 years in prison for abusing students at St. John XXIII Seminary. (CNS photo/Judiciary of Salta/handout via Reuters)

Pope Francis issued a permanent version of his signature reform law, Vos estis lux mundi, on Saturday. First promulgated in 2019 as a three-year experiment, Vos estis purported to facilitate the investigation of abuse and coverup in the Church and to streamline the procedures for trying churchmen accused of abuse, coverup, or both.

The new, permanent version of the paper reform changes some language in notable ways.

The inclusion of the term “vulnerable adult” is one, though the new version of the law defines the term in the same way the original defined “vulnerable person” – nebulously – as “any person in a state of infirmity, physical or mental deficiency, or deprivation of personal freedom which in fact, even occasionally, limits his or her ability to understand or want or in any case to resist the offense.”

The change is unsurprising, given the explosion of scandal involving adult victims of Church leaders – especially though by no means exclusively clerics – but tweaking the language may be ineffective even as a sop if Francis continues in his unwillingness to apply the law with vigor.

Another modification makes it explicit that the law is applicable to lay leaders of movements and organizations who abuse people or cover up abuse. Men like the disgraced founder of l’Arche, Jean Vanier, come to mind. That said, a Vos estis investigation of his case would extend to the entire leadership of the Order of Preachers in France, virtually the entire Roman curia, much of the French hierarchy, and all the popes going back to Pius XI. In any case, there was nothing to suggest the law as originally written did not already apply to such figures as Vanier and similar.

As for churchmen, well, one need only ask Bishop Malone how he feels about Vos estis, or Bishop Hoeppner. The latter faced a Vos estis inquiry. Bishop Malone escaped investigation, despite mountainous evidence of coverup. Both retired with honor. It is worth mentioning in this regard that Francis, on Saturday, at last obtained and accepted the resignation of Osnabruck’s Bishop Franz-Josef Bode, the vice-president of the German bishops’ conference, whose admitted mishandling of abuse cases has destroyed his reputation and caused immense damage to the faithful and the Church in his home country.

A complete analysis of the new and apparently permanent version of Vos estis lux mundi is certainly in order. Nevertheless, the fundamental issue really is not one of parsing legal niceties. It is one of will to use the law. There, Francis has given candid observers ample reason to be skeptical.

One of the most astounding things about making the rounds of Catholic parishes and apostolates and outreaches – sometimes even of Catholic and Catholic-adjacent media – is the apparent strength of the Francis-as-successful-reformer narrative, coupled with the creeping sense among the faithful and interested outsiders that something is just a little off with the whole business.

A visit to a neighbor’s house this week drove it home for me.

On the coffee table in the living room was a little booklet published by the Knights of Columbus, talking about ways to build the domestic Church. The K of C are a terrific organization, and I am sure the booklet was choc-full of helpful suggestions, but I couldn’t get past the cover art.

Right on the cover, in fact, was a detail from a mosaic by Fr. Marko Rupnik SJ, the disgraced celebrity artist facing accusations of serial sexual, psychological, and spiritual abuse from at least fifteen women. The accusations are appalling: “Savage,” “violent,” “perverted,” “ritualistic,” are all accurate. To call Rupnik’s alleged deeds “diabolical” is prosaic. “Satanic” would not be too strong.

“How would anyone know that?” a dear friend and confidant asked from the passenger seat of my car on a trip upstate a day or two later. “Maybe they read my copy?” I quipped, smiling wryly. “I read your copy,” he said, playing straight. “Even if I read every word of it, I wouldn’t have made the connection.”

All that drove home for me how the crisis of abuse and coverup in the Church is baked-in, part of the works.

We are used to thinking of it as something like termites eating through once sound structures or groundwater undermining a foundation, but really it is in the brick, like Rupnik’s art, and from there it gets into everything. Rupnik’s art decorates our shrines and chapels from Rome to Lourdes to Fatima to San Giovanni Rotondo to Washington, DC, to New Haven and even on the far side of the world in Brisbane, Australia, and in dozens of lesser-known places in between.

Rupnik’s gruesome work shows up in stamps issued by the Vatican and logos he designed or inspired for everything from the World Meeting of Families to World Youth Day. Rupnik’s craft adorns our parish literature and catechetical resources. Rupnik’s work is here, there, everywhere. We can’t escape it, even if we can avoid seeing ourselves see it.

The Rupnik case is crying to heaven for precisely the justice Vos estis is supposed to secure, but using it properly would require investigators to toss the entire Slovenian province of the Society of Jesus, the Jesuit generalate in Rome, the corner office in the DDF, and the pope himself.

I think of a ’ronatide talk I gave about covering the Vatican beat, to a group of people active in the Church and in their community. I gave the talk from Rome, via Zoom, and skipped most of the set piece in favor of a free-wheelin’ Q&A. If memory serves, I took a question about Francis’s efforts to improve transparency in the Vatican, and turned the tables on my audience with a question of my own: “How many of you have heard the name, Zanchetta?”

Because L’Affaire Zanchetta is precisely the sort of business for which Vos estis appears designed. But Zanchetta is the pope’s man.

Gustavo Zanchetta is the Argentinian prelate and olim general secretary of the Argentinian bishops’ conference who knew Francis when the latter was Archbishop of Buenos Aires and ex officio conference president. Francis made Zanchetta a bishop and put him in a see, then let him quietly retire after several rounds of abuse allegations and sent him to have his head shrunk before placing him in a bespoke sinecure inside the Vatican’s sovereign asset manager (even though Zanchetta had allegations of irregular asset management against him as well).

The name may have rung a few distant bells, but mostly, no one had heard of him or his vicissitudes. A criminal court in Argentina eventually convicted Zanchetta of abusing seminarians and sentenced him to jail time.

In June of last year, Pope Francis sent the canon lawyer who represented Zanchetta to investigate some of the very clerics who had denounced him to the Vatican when he was their bishop and testified against him in the criminal trial that saw Zanchetta convicted of sex crimes.

That is of a piece with Francis’s decision to task Fr. Jacques Servais SJ – a serious scholar and much beloved university professor, who is also a skilled confessor – with investigating misconduct allegations against the prefect of the Congregation for Bishops, Cardinal Marc Ouellet, even though Ouellet was a senior board member of the Rome-based Casa Balthasar where Servais serves as director.

The Casa Balthasar is a terrific place for academic formation and spiritual discernment, as far as I know, though my only personal recollection of it or Servais was an afternoon meeting to discuss a possible academic collaboration maybe a dozen years ago. I crossed town (taking public transport) to make that meeting, after a long and boozy Roman lunch with fellow scribblers. I think I was late. Servais was the very picture of patient and gracious hospitality.

Servais, by the way, had no experience as an investigator until Francis tapped him to examine the allegations against Ouellet.

The investigation Servais conducted completely exonerated Ouellet, who has always maintained his complete innocence and called the allegations against him defamatory.

Careful parsing of the statement Servais issued after concluding his investigation and submitting his report actually suggests that the allegations, even if correct, did not rise to a level that could engender suspicion of criminal conduct on Ouellet’s part.

“There are no grounds to open an investigation into the sexual assault against person ‘F’ [the accuser’s identifier -ed.] by Cardinal M. Ouellet,” Servais said in a statement. “Neither in the written report sent to the Holy Father, nor in the testimony via Zoom that I subsequently gathered in the presence of a member of the Diocesan Ad Hoc Committee, did this person make any accusation that would provide grounds for such an investigation.”

The editors of the National Catholic Reporter – not exactly unsympathetic to Francis in the main – called the pope’s handling of the Ouellet business “baffling” and called on the Vatican to outline clearly just how Servais conducted his investigation and what he did or did not find. “The pope should also consider asking another investigator to reexamine the findings,” the NCR editor suggested.

They weren’t wrong.

“[T]he Vatican’s handling of the Ouellet allegations does not engender confidence,” they concluded in a masterly subtle display of litotes.

“The law remains an opportunity and also a tool,” the adjunct secretary to the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Archbishop Charles Scicluna – certainly among the most experienced investigators in the Church and a chief architect of several reforms – told Vatican Media on Saturday, “but it is up to us to assimilate the values engraved in these regulations and apply them.”

“Behind the law,” the Church’s leading sex crimes expert went on to say, “there must be the will, so often encouraged and advocated by Pope Francis, for feasible solidarity.” Given Francis’s record of governance, the squandered opportunities to use the law and his flagrant gaslighting of the faithful, one frankly wonders what that even means.

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 198 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. Rupnik’s monstrous “art” reflects the state of his soul — and maybe the soul of the Church that commissioned it.

    Rupnik’s entire oeuvre is predictable, empty — void of wisdom, of truth, of humanity even.

    Its figures are uniform — expressionless forms with gigantic eyes that stare out like black holes, sucking up all understanding.

    It is disturbing that this man was allowed to prey so sadistically upon vulnerable women.

    Just as disturbing is that his soulless “art” has been able to defile so many of the Church’s most sacred places.

    ‘Vos estis’ — if it were vigorously enforced (a very big if) —might be able to help curtail the hideous sexual assaults that have been assailing the Church’s innocents in recent decades.

    But it cannot, unfortunately, do anything to ensoul those responsible for the proliferation of Rupnik’s grotesque army of staring, soulless zombies.

  2. Altieri’s analysis suggests to the reader that the Motu proprio Vos Estis provides the veneer of prosecuting adult sexual predation for a Church that is seemingly trending to accommodate it. Not the document itself, or by changing the wording of the document, in fact improved with changing vulnerable adult to vulnerable person – that in context of Fr Rupnik’s alleged victims. Rather, in the simple fact that His Holiness doesn’t implement it.
    There is a pattern of appointments to the Vatican’s governing apparatus of the fallen. I’m reminded of a humanist’s thought that this is the way humans are. Perfection is idealistic. It runs through Amoris Laetitia and Francis’ sense of merciful acceptance.
    While it may prove realistic and workable, even compassionate to some it isn’t identifiable with Christ. Although, even there the Pontiff alludes to that interpretation of Christ in the woman caught in adultery, the woman at the well. Repentance loses its redemptive force as revealed by Christ, Amoris Laetitia becoming a revised edition of the Gospels.

  3. Justice, the protection of children and the vulnerable, and the veil of confession can all coexist. Outside the confessional, in the courtroom, Pope St. Peter’s Justice was feared by all the people.

    Acts of the Apostles 5 Ananias and Sapphira.
    A man named Ananias, however, with his wife Sapphira, sold a piece of property. He retained for himself, with his wife’s knowledge, some of the purchase price, took the remainder, and put it at the feet of the apostles. But Peter said, “Ananias, why has Satan filled your heart so that you lied to the holy Spirit and retained part of the price of the land? While it remained unsold, did it not remain yours? And when it was sold, was it not still under your control? Why did you contrive this deed? You have lied not to human beings, but to God.” When Ananias heard these words, he fell down and breathed his last, and great fear came upon all who heard of it. The young men came and wrapped him up, then carried him out and buried him…

    The Blessed Mother of Fatima told the seer children that Archangel Michael will bring with him a transparency to people’s actions on earth. In Acts of the Apostles, we see Ananias and his wife trying to lie to St. Peter in the courtroom. By the end of their testimony, St. Peter, all his flock, and we the readers, have a clear and transparent view of Ananias and Sapphira’s true actions.

    Matthew 18 outlines Jesus Command to His Catholic Leaders on the use of Catholic Anathema to protect the innocent, when personal, civil and Church litigation fails.

    Matthew 18:17 Fraternal Correction
    “If your brother sins [against you], go and tell him his fault between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have won over your brother. If he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, so that ‘every fact may be established on the testimony of two or three witnesses.’ “If he ignores them, refer it to the church . If he ignores even the church, then treat him as you would a Gentile or a tax collector. I assure you, whatever you declare bound on earth shall be held bound in heaven, and whatever you declare loosed on earth shall be held loosed in heaven.”

    Matthew 18:5
    “Whoever welcomes one such child for my sake welcomes me. On the other hand, it would be better for anyone who leads astray one of these little ones who believes in me, to be drown by a millstone around his neck, in the depths of the sea. What terrible things will come on the world through scandal! It is inevitable that scandal should occur. Nonetheless, woe to that man through whom scandal comes! If your hand or foot is your undoing, cut it off and throw it from you! Better to enter life maimed or crippled than be thrown with two hands or feet into endless fire. If your eye is your downfall, gouge it out and cast it from you! Better to enter life with one eye than be thrown with both into fiery Gehenna.

    What I hear, Jesus in Matthew 18 and the Holy Spirit in Acts 5, telling us, is that Pope Francis has to pull out Jesus’ sword of Catholic anathema to protect our children and the vulnerable in our present clergy child molester, and Fr. Marko Rupnik, scandals. Pope Francis has to anathematize all child molesters and rapists, and those clergy who aid and abet them, until they confess their crimes against children and the vulnerable to civil prosecutors, judges and juries.

  4. The secrecy and CYA in the Catholic Church is endemic. In fact, it’s the very way the Church operates. The ecclesiasts in the Church protect their own and, just a with our secular government and its operatives in the US, they proceed to do as they choose, break God’s law and run roughshod over people as long as they like. They only (temporarily) stop their misdeeds when caught with their pants down. This Pope has lost all credibility in my book and his posturing mean nothing. He is like too many men/fathers these days – a lot of talk but MIA.

  5. Rupnik, the Jezzie with the ludicrous art that signifies the unnatural afflictions infecting the Church, he manages to sexually abuse 18-20 women? And these women are professed religious? And the scurrilous cur even goes for a threesome?
    I’m male. I am subject to deep affections at times. But I cannot imagine getting it on with so many different women and religious ones at that.
    One had to wonder how Rupnik had the power to ravage those unfortunates? What is his dark secret? A demonic trance by the intent gaze of a mesmerizing serpent? And how does his power also persuade the Church to protect him?
    Let us not excuse the women either.

  6. On the observation made about “the faithful” not paying attention to reality, my sense is it is due to what Adam DeVille (among others) has called “the infantalization” of the faithful, which seems to be what many Catholic Bishops (etc) wsnt the Church to be. It recalls to mind the remark made by the Pontiff Francis during I believe the “Excellency Barros” sex scandal, when the Pontiff Francis insisted that “the faithful always feel close to their Bishop,” which sounded like a thinly veiled accusation against the faithful in Osorno, shortly before the Pontiff Francis, having seen his failure to quell the incident, pulled the stunt of calling the faithful of Osorno “stupid” for believing the accusations against Barros et al (if I recall which of the numerous sex abuse scandals was involved).

    In the USA, where Mr. Altieri has returned, he is seeing the faithful sleep-walking through this ten-year-long “toxic nightmare,” to quote Cardinal Pell, because I believe the default mindset is to avoid the ugly and painful pathologies that have spread like a cancer through the Body of Christ.

  7. I read and listened to the media reports in French about the accusations levelled by Cardinal Ouellet’s alleged victim. I came to the conclusion that the supposed acts, if true, were at worst inappropriate. The victim’s lawyer managed to get his client widespread media attention. Québec media are no friends of the Catholic Church or of Cardinal Ouellet and did not manage to paint a picture of an abusive Cardinal. Unfortunately, your article associates Cardinal Ouellet with Rupnik er al. which, in my humble opinion, does a great disservice to him and to your readers.

    • That’s your opinion re: the allegations; Mr. Altieri’s point is that the investigation was handled in a questionable manner and didn’t engender trust.

3 Trackbacks / Pingbacks

  1. Permanent version of Vos estis lux mundi meaningless without will to use it | Franciscan Sisters of St Joseph (FSJ) , Asumbi Sisters Kenya
  2. Permanent version of Vos estis lux mundi meaningless without will to use it – Via Nova
  3. MONDAY EDITION – Big Pulpit

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.