Vatican City, May 2, 2018 / 11:13 am (CNA/EWTN News).- After meeting with Pope Francis over the weekend, Chilean survivors of clerical sexual abuse said the pontiff was open, sympathetic and deeply impacted by the situation, at one point voicing sorrow for having been “part of the problem.”
Juan Carlos Cruz, a victim of Chilean abuser Fr. Fernando Karadima who met with Pope Francis privately Saturday, said he spoke to the pontiff for at least three hours, and found him “sincere, attentive and deeply apologetic for the situation.”
“For me, the pope was contrite, he was truly sorry,” Cruz said. “I felt also that he was hurting, which for me was very solemn…because it’s not often that the pope says sorry to you…he said, ‘I was part of the problem, I caused this and I am apologize.’”
Cruz was joined by fellow abuse survivors James Hamilton and Jose Andres Murillo, each of whom suffered abuse at the hands Chilean priest Fernando Karadima, who in 2011 was found guilty by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith of sexually abusing several minors during the 1980s and 1990s, and subsequently sentenced to a life of prayer and solitude.
Chilean civil authorities investigated Karadima but ultimately dropped charges since his crimes were beyond the statute of limitations.
Hamilton, Cruz and Murillo were invited to come to the Vatican after the pope received a 2,300-page report from Maltese Archbishop Charles Scicluna, highly regarded as the Vatican’s top abuse investigator, who had traveled to the United States and Chile in February to investigate allegations of cover-up in the Chile case.
Initially the investigation centered on Bishop Juan Barros of Osorno, who was appointed to the diocese in 2015 and who has been accused by Cruz and several others of not only covering up Karadima’s abuses, but at times also participating.
Allegations were also made against three other bishops – Andrés Arteaga, Tomislav Koljatic and Horacio Valenzuela – whom Karadima’s victims accuse of also covering the abuser’s crimes.
While on the ground, Scicluna interviewed some 64 people, most of whom were victims, but the scale of the investigation went beyond Barros. The final report is said to be much more extensive, including details from other cases.
Pope Francis had previous defended Bishop Barros, saying he had received no evidence of the bishop’s guilt, and called accusations against him “calumny” during a trip to Chile in January. However, just days after he made the comments, news broke that Cruz in 2015 had sent the pope an 8-page letter through the Pontifical Commission for the Protection of Minors with his testimony detailing Barros’ presence and involvement in the abuse.
After receiving Archbishop Scicluna’s report, Francis issued a major “mea culpa” April 11, saying he had made “serious errors in the judgment and perception of the situation, especially due to a lack of truthful and balanced information.”
He invited Cruz, Hamilton and Murillo to meet with him privately at the Vatican, and summoned all of Chile’s 32 bishops to Rome in the third week of May, where they will discuss the conclusions of Scicluna’s report as well the pope’s own conclusions on the matter.
Each of the three men met with Pope Francis individually with no time limit over the weekend, and then again as a group on Monday.
In a joint statement issued May 2, the survivors said they have been treated as “enemies” of the Church for nearly 10 years for their outspoken criticism of abuse and cover-up in the Church, but that this weekend’s meetings allowed them to meet “the friendly face of the Church, completely different form the one we had seen before.”
Pope Francis, they said, asked for forgiveness in his name and on behalf of the entire universal Church.
“We were able to speak frankly and respectfully with the pope,” they said, explaining that major themes brought up included not only sexual abuse, but also cover-up and abuse of power, which they said are not isolated to Chile, but are “an epidemic” that has affected thousands of people throughout the global Church.
Despite their abuse, the survivors said they have met many priests and men and women religious who are fighting for justice, and called them “courageous” people who have made progress in the fight against abuse and cover-up.
Pope Francis, they said, was “very attentive, receptive and very empathetic during the intense and long hours of conversation.”
During the audiences, the pope also asked the men for their opinion on both “specific and theoretical” aspects of the issue, and asked to stay in touch with them to hear their thoughts and recommendations for the future.
The victims also called for action, saying that the Church “has the duty to become an ally and a guide in the global fight against abuse, and a refuge for the victims,” something that they said is not sufficiently happening today.
“We hope that Pope Francis transforms his loving words of forgiveness into exemplary actions. Otherwise, all this will be in vain.”
In comments to the press during a May 2 news briefing on their meetings, the survivors unanimously said they believed the pope had been grossly misinformed about the situation by those around him, and was truly repentant for the mistakes he made.
Cruz said he didn’t ask about whether Francis had read his letter from 2015, but said he was able to communicate everything he had wanted during their face-to-face meeting.
“We spoke very frankly and very directly,” he said, adding that “it was clear that the pope was misinformed.”
Cruz said he told the pope that “it hurt tremendously” when he said their accusations against Barros were “calumny,” and told him to watch out for “these toxic people that surround him.”
In his comments to the press, Hamilton pinned a large part of the blame on Archbishop Ivo Scapolo, nuncio to Chile since 2011, and Chilean Cardinal Francisco Javier Errazuriz, Archbishop Emeritus of Santiago and a member of Pope Francis’ council of cardinal advisors.
Hamilton said that Errazuriz failed to act upon the abuse reports he raised, despite being told by the Chilean Promoter of Justice that they were credible and should be followed up with canonical prosecution.
“So Cardinal Errazuriz was covering up for more than 5 years the criminal of Karadima and all of his acts,” Hamilton said.
After their conversations, Hamilton said he believes Francis is now well informed on the situation, which is why he asked for the visit. “Everybody deserves a second chance, especially in this case,” he said.
However, all three men stressed the importance of following up with action after the meetings.
Murillo told journalists that he does not see the trip as “a triumph,” but rather as “a step further in a process.”
“Even if we saw the forgiveness that Pope Francis asked of us,” he said, “we are waiting for actions. We are not here for public relations, we are here for actions.”
He described the trip as long and tiring, “because I constantly work with children who were victims of abuse [and] during this trip I thought of them, but not only – I thought of all minors and adolescents who suffer abuse…also from professors, at home, in athletic training…I continue to think of all of them and I have to say, I am truly tired.”
Murillo said he hopes to that legal action will be taken against the bishops guilty of cover-up in the Chile case.
“I hope the governments of the rest of the world begin to think first of the victims…so that these events don’t repeat themselves.”
[…]
Romano Guardini foresaw one of the defining perils of modernity: man’s technological power would exceed his moral strength, and without spiritual growth to match it, he would be consumed by the very forces he unleashes.
Paul VI recognised that this dominion now extends not only over nature, but over man himself—his body, psyche, society, and even the mystery of life’s transmission. We no longer generate life; we produce it. The person becomes an object, fashioned by will and technique.
This unfolds within a culture of individualism and moral nihilism, where the criterion of the good is no longer objective truth but subjective self-determination. Relativism follows: if nothing is absolutely true, then everything is permitted—so long as it is willed. The person is reduced to a self-enclosed individual, cut off from relational truth. Freedom degenerates into solipsism.
Secularism completes this inversion: man lives as if God does not exist. Every natural or divine bond is now seen as an oppressive limit. The self becomes sovereign—and vulnerable to manipulation.
At root, this is an epistemological crisis. As Benedict XVI warned, reason has shrunk into a positivist shell, acknowledging only what can be measured and controlled. Spirit, value, meaning—these are exiled to the private realm, without public claim.
The result is a mutilated reason, unable to grasp the whole of human experience. Dignity, while often invoked, is detached from creation and reduced to the subject’s will. Body and soul are severed. Man is disincarnated, and the body becomes mere matter to be shaped or discarded at will. This is the gnostic anthropology now championed as liberation.
In this view, even invasive manipulation—surgical, hormonal, aesthetic—is not alienation but a creative act, an assertion of sovereign identity. The more unnatural, the more expressive of “authentic” selfhood. It is a reversal of creation: the body, once image of God, is now raw material; the will is the new demiurge.
We stand before a fundamental choice: either reality precedes and questions us—or we claim the right to redefine it, to recreate moral law and human nature itself. This modern revolution began with the fracture of reason (Ockham, Luther), continued through the Enlightenment’s rejection of divine law, and now culminates in gender ideology, where nature is seen as cultural invention.
The path forward begins with the rediscovery of reason enlarged by faith—what Benedict called “broad reason.” And with hope: the Eucharistic Lord reigns, and the Marian prophecies, from Fatima onward, promise the restoration of a moral and divine order. This is not merely resistance but evangelisation: to proclaim again the truth of the human person, made in the image of God.
The fact that Cardinal Eijk is a member of the Pontifical Academy for Life is reason for hope.
We read about: “International Chair of Bioethics Jérôme Lejeune, taking place in Rome from May 30–31. The theme of this year’s conference is ‘The Splendor of Truth in Science and Bioethics’.”
A most refreshing allusion to the encyclical, “The Splendor of the Truth” (St. John Paul II, “Veritatis Splendor,” 1993). https://www.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_jp-ii_enc_06081993_veritatis-splendor.html
Four key splendors:
“A separation, or even an opposition, is thus established in some cases between the teaching of the precept, which is valid and general, and the norm of the individual conscience, which would in fact make the final decision [not moral judgment] about what is good and what is evil. On this basis, an attempt is made to legitimize so-called ‘pastoral’ solutions contrary to the teaching of the Magisterium, and to justify a ‘creative’ hermeneutic according to which the moral conscience is in no way obliged, in every case, by a particular negative precept [‘thou shalt not…’]” ( n. 56).
“The relationship between faith and morality [!] shines forth with all its brilliance in the unconditional respect due to the insistent demands of the personal dignity of every man, demands protected by those moral norms which prohibit without exception [!] actions which are intrinsically evil” (n. 90).
“The Church is no way the author or the arbiter [synodality?] of this [‘moral’] norm” (n. 95).
“This is the first time, in fact, that the Magisterium of the Church [!] has set forth in detail the fundamental elements of this [‘moral’] teaching, and presented the principles for the pastoral discernment necessary in practical and cultural situations which are complex and even crucial” (n. 115).
“So we see that the gender discussion was very strong, you know, a few years ago,” he said. “They were almost pushing gender theory in society, culture, and also educational programs at elementary schools.”
By “they”, we can know through both Faith and reason, you count among the atheist materialist over population alarmist globalist , residing physically within The Catholic Church, attempting to create a counterfeit magisterium , with a counter church , and a counterfeit Papacy, that claims “If there is a union of a private nature, there is neither a third party, nor is society affected”, ipso facto deny ing The Unity Of The Holy Ghost, The Spirit Of Perfect Divine Eternal Love Between The Father And His Only Begotten Son, Who Proceeds From Both The Father And His Only Begotten Son, ipso facto denying our Call to be “Temples of The Holy Ghost” and thus our Call to Holiness, ipso facto denying The Divinity of The Most Holy Blessed Trinity, Father, Son, And Holy Ghost, and thus ipso facto placing oneself in a state of apostasy. This sentence alone is all the evidence one needs to recognize that Jorge Bergoglio was Baptized, but was certainly not converted and thus in communion with Christ and His One, Holy, Catholic, And Apostolic Church prior to his election to The Papacy.
Jorge Bergoglio’s “refusal of submission to the supreme pontiff or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him“, was evident, prior to his election to the Papacy, when his heresy was manifested and made public ,in his book, On Heaven And Earth, on page 117, when he stated, in regards to same sex sexual relationships and thus same sex sexual acts, “If there is a union of a private nature, there is neither a third party, (No Holy Ghost?),nor is society affected. Now, if the union is given the category of marriage, there could be children affected. Every person needs a male father and a female mother that can help shape their identity.”
Jorge Bergoglio defected from The Catholic Church , prior to his election to The Papacy, by denying sin done in “private” relationship is sin, denying The Sanctity of the marital act within The Sacrament of Holy Matrimony, and that we, who are Baptized Catholic, are Called to be, “Temples of The Holy Ghost”. (God’s Universal Call To Holiness), and thus deny The Unity of The Holy Ghost, making it appear as if it is Loving and Merciful to desire that we or our Beloved remain in our sin, and not desire to overcome our sinful inclinations and become transformed by accepting Salvational Love, God’s Gift of Grace and Mercy. If it were true that it is Loving and Merciful that we desire that we or our beloved remain in our sin and not desire to overcome our disordered inclination , and become transformed through Salvational Love, God’s Gift of Grace and Mercy, we would have no need for our only Savior, Jesus The Christ.
If Pope Leo is not aware, he must be made aware, as to deny The Unity Of The Holy Ghost (Filioque), The Perfect Divine Eternal Love Between The Father And His Only Begotten Son, Is To Deny The Divinity Of The Most Holy Blessed Trinity, which is apostasy.
Jesus’ Death is The Perfect Sacrifice Of Perfect Divine Eternal Love , atoning for our sins, and makes reconciling us to God now possible, creating The Bridge from Death to Life Everlasting with The Most Holy Blessed Trinity. There is only one Bridge to Heaven, “No one can come to My Father, except Through Me”.
Let us not forget that Pope Benedict addressed all the issues of the atheist materialistic overpopulation alarmist globalists and their ilk, who are attempting to subsist within The Catholic Church , establish a counterfeit magisterium, and a counterfeit papacy in communion with those whose agenda, is not to serve Christ, but to serve the UN’s Agenda for Sustainable Development, a global plan that is anti Christ, because it ipso facto denies God, The Ordered Communion Of Perfect Complementary Divine Eternal Love, In The Unity Of The Holy Ghost, Is The Author Of Love, Of Life, And Of Marriage, rendering onto the UN, what belongs to God, and thus illuminating the fact that the UN Declaration is, in essence pagan at its core.
“When the freedom to be creative becomes the freedom to create oneself, then necessarily the Maker Himself is denied and ultimately man too is stripped of his dignity as a creature of God, as the image of God at the core of his being. The defence of the family is about man himself. And it becomes clear that when God is denied, human dignity also disappears. Whoever defends God is defending man.” – Pope Benedict’s Christmas Address 2012
ND
About this comment. Is this the sixth time you’ve posted it, or only the fifth? And what does it have to do with Pope Leo XIV?
The study of the mind reveals a diverse spectrum of conditions where individuals hold strong convictions about their identity that diverge significantly from typical understanding. These can range from believing one is a famous person (historical figures like Jesus Christ or even aliens), to experiencing multiple personalities, or identifying as an animal (“furries”), a god, or even the opposite sex. The term “gender theory,” while referring to an academic framework, is sometimes mistakenly applied in discussions of these complex identity issues. It’s crucial to distinguish between academic theories and conditions where the mind may be experiencing a form of confusion, potentially akin to what occurs in conditions like schizophrenia.
I do not favor using or supporting the supposed “academic” field of gender theory. The conversation identity issues and confusion.
Thanks be to God for a voice of reason within the Vatican. Let’s hope he is one of many under the new pontificate. The culture shift in the US has been helped along by a new administration that sees it for what it is and rather than shoving it down our throats they have pulled on the reins.
P.S. The Pillar has an interview with Cardinal Eijk.
Daniel in the Lion’s Den that is today’s Netherlands.
There was another interview recently where he explained how the Netherlands got to where it is today.
P.P.S. Cardinal Eijk: I don’t give up – The Pillar, Oct. 30, 2023.
I am no champion for the LGBTQ “community”, but I ask, can we injure those whom we consider “evil”? I have a concern that our approach to “converting” LGBTQs is isolating them and perpetuating violence against them. My “holy” Italian Catholic neighbor disowned my good high school friend, her son, when he “came out” at age 18. He moved to another state.
Recently, DOD Secretary Hegseth was ordered to “isolate TG military soldiers to remove them.” Then, after an investigation, the TGs were found to be excellent military officers. When I was a Naval officer at the Bureau of Naval Personnel, an operator showed me two sets of discharge cards. I asked, Why are there two stacks. He said, “one is queers who will receive undesirable discharges.” I ordered him to remerge the cards.
LOrd save my soul.
“I am no champion for the LGBTQ “community”, but I ask, can we injure those whom we consider “evil”?”
Yet you constantly defend and excuse the LGBT lobby in your posts. Not very self-aware. Speaking the truth and allowing LGBT people to experience the consequences of their sin is not injury or evil. Stop defending the indefensible.
“Yet you constantly defend and excuse the LGBT lobby in your posts.” Your recall is amazing. Please tell me when I said anything relative to the LGBTQ lobby? My campaign to protect all life remains firm. My cruelly disowned close friend remains in my mind.
Remember, Jesus said while protecting the harlot from a raging all-male crowd, saying, “let HE who is without sin cast the first stone.” Basically, he means to HAKEN, we need more introspection.
morganD:
#1. We (the Catholic Church) do NOT consider anyone evil. We do say, as a Church, that certain acts are intrinsically evil. There are no persons who are unredeemable. None!
#2. When someone engages in persistent sin, despite efforts to counsel him or her, there comes a point in the relationship when to maintain the relationship pretending there is no sin, would be to do that person harm. Just because someone says their feelings are “hurt” because you cannot condone evil practices they are engaged in, does NOT mean you aren’t doing the most loving thing for them in those circumstances.
I saw this shared by Martina Navratilova about gender confused men competing in women’s sports:
“Gender ideology is male entitlement peddled as progressive.”
DiogenesRedux. I said I was no champion of LGBTQ. But I see weakness in our approach to evangelism.
You might remember when former Minnesota congresswoman, Michelle Bachman and her husband Marcus opened a “conversion therapy clinic” called “Pray the Gay away.” It was open only to men.
Times: The therapists at Bachmann & Associates aren’t very good at turning gay people straight.
The clinic was closed by authorities because they did not keep the required documents showing patient results.
I feel that our dogma does not address the potential pain inflicted by the isolation of Gays. Perhaps we might use a more holistic approach.
Thanks.