It appears the Jesuits have washed their hands of the infamous Marko Rupnik. Not, mind, after the manner of Pontius Pilate, who unjustly sent an innocent man to his death. After the manner of the fellow from the parable recounted in Luke 18, who gives a woman some semblance of justice because of her incessant complaining.
The short of it is that the Jesuits have expelled Rupnik from the Society. They’ve kicked him out for disobedience, however, not for having spiritually, psychologically, and sexually abused at least fifteen women over three decades.
One big difference between the unjust judge of Luke 18 and the Jesuits of today, therefore, is that the latter have not given Rupnik or the faithful or the broad public even a semblance of justice.
The Jesuits were supposed to be doing an investigation – a criminal investigation – and apparently they did, and apparently they turned up over 20 highly credible reports of serial abuse spanning more than thirty years, and then thought that giving Rupnik one last shot at being a good little boy was the thing to do. Here’s what the Jesuits had to say about it:
[W]e imposed upon Fr. Marko Rupnik to change communities and accept a new mission in which we offered him one last chance as a Jesuit to come to terms with his past and to give a clear signal to the many injured people who testified against him, of his ability to enter a path of truth. In the face of Marko Rupnik’s repeated refusal to obey this mandate, unfortunately we were left with only one solution: Dismissal from the Society of Jesus.
If there was an appeal to the CDF/DDF (or whatever the acronym is for it this week) asking them to reconsider the 2022 decision not to waive the statute of limitations, it didn’t make the press release the Jesuits put out.
If the Jesuits asked the DDF to see whether among the more than twenty accusations now officially lodged, perhaps there should be at least one accusation on which statute of limitations hadn’t yet run out, news of it did not make it into the Jesuits’ press release, either.
That may be owing to the very strict reading of canon law regarding the abuse of adults which CDF/DDF has historically applied. It could owe itself to an unwillingness to force the issue in the face of the pope’s expressed reticence to waive the statute of limitations in cases involving the abuse of adults. In any event, any attempt to force the issue was always unlikely to move the wheels of what passes for justice these days in the Vatican.
For those of you following from home, it is worth recalling that the current head of the DDF is Cardinal Luis Ladaria SJ and the CDF’s chief prosecutor is Robert Geisinger SJ, both of whom work for a Jesuit pope who has a close relationship with Rupnik. None of that is eo ipso evidence of a Jesuit coverup or anything else nefarious. It is, however, a very bad look.
On its own, it ought to have been enough to convince leadership in both the Jesuits and the Vatican that a transparent course entirely above suspicion were in order, at least after the sordid details of l’Affaire Rupnik got out.
Never mind that Rupnik carried on for decades, right under the noses of his Jesuit superiors as well as three popes including the current one, who maintains he knew nothing of Rupnik’s depravities and insists he never interfered in any part of the investigative or judicial process except that one time he did.
It was also another Jesuit, Bishop Daniele Libanori SJ – an auxiliary of Rome – who blew the whistle on Rupnik after investigating the community of women religious Rupnik helped found in his native Slovenia. Despite Libanori’s best efforts, however, no real investigation into how Rupnik got away with his abominable behavior for so long appears to be forthcoming. With every development in the case, any such or similar investigation appears to become less likely.
As of Friday morning, by the way, that press release was available only in Italian. More than 24 hours after its release, apparently, no one in the central governing apparatus of the most highly educated religious order in the history of the world could be found with the language skills to render a press release just shy of 300 words soaking wet in any language other than Italian.
One supposes it is possible that the DDF will now prosecute ex officio, but a far more likely course of events is as follows:
1). Rupnik appeals the expulsion.
2). The Congregation Dicastery for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life rejects the appeal and confirms the expulsion.
a). Maybe Rupnik appeals that, and it goes to the Apostolic Signature – that’s the Church’s highest administrative court of appeal – and is there most likely confirmed.3). Rupnik’s expulsion becomes final.
4). Rupnik cannot find a bishop or other religious order to take him.
5). Rupnik’s time to find a bishop runs out – anywhere from six months to five years, depending on how things shake out – and Rupnik becomes a layman, putting him beyond the reach of ecclesiastical investigative arms and tribunals with purview covering only clerics.
Alternatively, DDF could notify Rupnik that he will likely face criminal indictment at canon law. That is highly unlikely, since DDF has already passed on prosecution of Rupnik for sex crimes against adults and refused to prosecute him on charges of spiritual abuse stemming from fraudulent – indeed blasphemous – mysticism.
Any eventual such notification would also advise Rupnik of his right to petition for dismissal from clerical state. Such petitions are for favors granted by the pope. Those petitions – frequently called requests for “voluntary laicization” – are handled by DDF, which would likely recommend that the pope grant the request.
Just to be clear on that last point, it is official Vatican policy to see that clerics facing criminal charges be apprised of their right to request such voluntary laicization.
The DDF – then styled CDF – published the official Vatican handbook for such and similar cases in July of 2020. That document insists on the right of a priest to petition the pope for laicization. There is a discernible preference for handling such cases quickly and quietly, with “economy of process” – to use the sanitized argot of canon lawyers practice – and thus to avoid the expense and bother of lengthy public trials.
All that is awfully convenient for the powerful men involved in this ugly business.
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.
Thank you, Mr. Altieri, for sorting through the bureaucratese and rendering an account that makes this convoluted grotesquery at least somewhat comprehensible.
By their fruits will you know them. Or, in this case, with the Jesuiticals, smell them.
Just perhaps Rupnik can join Theodore McCarrick wherever he’s hanging out these days. It seems that the Vatican has a unique way of washing their hands of problem clerics. Meanwhile, justice is being violated.
The only holdover from the pre-conciliar Church which remains firmly in hand is the practice of evangelical obedience, but an obedience bent in the service of promoting all that is not Roman Catholic. If you ain’t kowtowing to the man you will get kicked out of the Jesuits. But rape? Not so much… And he has not be laicized. His crude derivatives need be jackhammered from the walls. Not much of priest, not much of an artist. A charlatan.
The masquerade we presently inhabit is ruled by a weaponized obedience which is not evangelical obedience at all. There is not much obedience to the perennial Magisterium, but an obedience to a crew of Modernists who revision Divine Revelation to their own notions. They are quite comfortable with reverence for any number of idols – literal and otherwise — but not so comfortable with sound doctrine. Content with Pride Month, not so amenable to the reparation requested by and owed to the Sacred Heart of Jesus.
A weaponized obedience which, to be honest, was used to whip all of us into conformity to the now boldly exposed duplicitous agenda of Modernists, themselves contemptuous of the perennial Magisterium. The last ten years have served one purpose – exposing the theological cesspool of the Council. Noble efforts by John Paul and Benedict to redeem the mid-century cataclysm regretfully served only to masque the catastrophe. The positive effect of the Bergoglian debacle has been to rip the masque off. We now see it for what it is and presently we observe it boldly employed to eradicate the faith from within.
Rupnik SJ is out. Martin SJ remains with endearing notes of support from the Jesuit pope.
We are subsumed in pastoral malpractice.
If ecclesial courts won’t prosecute, there is a moral obligation to turn him over to secular prosecution as well as anyone and everyone who aided and abetted his protection including Pope Francis.
Similarly, we get the impression that Frank Pavone’s worst crime is disobedience, as if that’s the only thing that matters. What is becoming rather apparent is that anyone looking for any sort of public accounting of these grave sins is going to be seriously disappointed. It’s like putting Al Capone in jail for tax evasion. It’s Theodore McCarrick all over again, and it doesn’t look as though it will end any time soon.
Well said!
I do not excuse the women. What in the hell was going on that so many were so susceptible for so long?
Is Rupnik a criminal?
Is he worse than Bill Clinton?
Or Jack Kennedy?
As Jezzies go wasn’t he a hero until his dirty laundry was exposed?
Is he worse then Jezzie heretic James Martin who openly defies Church teaching with the blessing of an apostate bishop of Rome?
Now we know why Rupnik art always featured the one eyed monster.
Our suffering church has fallen into an abyss.
As St. Sheen said, the simple, Faith filled laity will save the Church.
The power mongers will abide with their master.
The CWR demonstrated its ignorance of law, both civil and canonical. For example, Kesuits cannot conduct a criminal investigation. They are not a sovereign entity. They can do a preliminary investigation and refer the findings to a competent authority, either civil or canonical or both.
Furthermore, they cannot bring charges on behalf of
Rupnik’s victims. They can only sanction him for things where they were hurt. The victims themselves can bring charges to competent authorities (and we heard in many cases, they decided not to do so).
The statement by the Jesuit authorities hints at more to come. If they decided to wait, maybe they did so in observance of civil and canonical rules which exist to safeguard the integrity of the process and the good name of those involved.
So, if CWR cares about its reputation (as well as that of individuals and institutions it covers), perhaps CRW could dedicate some if it’s resources to studying law and theology.
It is also quite possible that you are mistaking analytical shorthand for factual imprecision. CWR, especially Mr. Altieri, has carefully and dutifully reported this story from the get-go.
A preliminary investigation into criminal allegations is part and parcel of the criminal process. This piece acknowledges that when it notes that the Jesuits make no mention of any recommendation regarding charges to DDF.
The piece also considers possible developments in the wake of this action. Even as a hair-splitting exercise, yours fails.
I must admit I found it rich that Rupnik was axed for “disobedience.” If that norm were more loosely applied, no considerable number of Jesuits would be dismissed from the Congregation for disobedience to the faith.