Hyper-urgent lessons that Rome needs to learn from the Rupnik case and the abuse crisis
Abuses: the Catholic Church stopped halfway
Regarding the systematic cover-ups of abuses, this has been the constant: there is silence and cover-up until the media brings the information to light.
The Rupnik case and the “damage” it caused and continues to cause went beyond the borders of the Loyola Community, becoming a paradigmatic case, with harmful direct and indirect effects on the Catholic Church and society.
The worldwide projection that this priest gained, resulting from his artistic works, theology books and his skills in seducing people, amplified the impact of the abuse and the impact of the cover-up of the abuse.
Given Rupnik's prestige, not only as an artist, but also as a theologian, lecturer, leader of retreats and spiritual exercises, including at the invitation of the Pope, the denunciation of his egregious abuses transformed him into the “elephant in the middle of the ecclesiastical institution”.
Although the scandal only became public on December 1, 2022, the situation had been known to the Jesuits and the Roman Curia, including the Pope, for many years – at the initiative of some of the victims. Were there special monitoring and surveillance measures?
What was the reaction? Concealment and silence. The victims who dared to expose their wounds and suffering were left to fend for themselves. “Culture” was well expressed by the Jesuit general, in his first reaction to questions from 7MARGENS and Renascença, during his visit to the Portuguese Jesuits:
“We have to make public statements when it is public; when it's not public, there's nothing to do about it and that doesn't mean hiding it. We didn’t hide anything.”
And it was like this, in a trickle, under pressure from the cases that were being publicized that the institution responded there, until it came to present a chronological framework that went back (only) to 2018. But at least the Company, pressured or not, ended up reacting . On the contrary, the Roman Curia and particularly the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith have been characterized by total opacity, creating the idea that for some there is zero tolerance and for others there is… tolerance.
It must be said that, especially since the case of the investigations by the Boston Globe newspaper, in the USA, into the systematic cover-ups of abuses, this has been a constant: there is silence and cover-up until the media brings the information to light. In other words, nothing was learned. The argument that cover-up was once the usual way of dealing with cases continues, in essence, to be the culture of today: we don't act, we react, which means always following the events.
There is an urgent need to revolutionize the concept of vulnerability
At least 100 summaries of the first phase of the synodal consultation of the planned 114 Catholic Episcopal conferences have already arrived in Rome.
In the Vatican and, in general, in ecclesiastical circles, the assumption is that spiritual, psychological and, in general, abuses of power are not serious matters that cause alarm bells to ring.
The Rupnik case, however, raises other problems that, in general, the Church has hidden and which are related to the abuse of adults, especially women and, in particular, religious women.
On the one hand, the current ecclesiastical normative framework always speaks, regarding victims of abuse, of “children and other vulnerable people”. But it all depends on the concept of vulnerable people with which we operate.
In the Vatican and, in general, in ecclesiastical circles, the assumption is that spiritual, psychological and, in general, abuses of power are not serious matters that cause alarm bells to ring. In the case of sexual relations, if they are adults, it is assumed that there is romance and consent.
The matter is so serious in curial environments that the Italian academic Lucetta Scaraffia - who Pope Benedict XVI invited to direct the monthly supplement Donne, Chiesa Mondo [Women, Church, World) - suffered pressure and threats of all kinds, when she wanted in this publication, to address the issue of sexual abuse of nuns by members of the clergy. She managed to publish. But, because of that or for other reasons, she ended up leaving her role straight away.
Pope Francis was questioned specifically on this point, in an interview in January this year with Nicole Winfield, from the Associated Press:
“[A] vulnerable person… is like a minor, isn’t it? Someone can be vulnerable because they are sick, they can be vulnerable because of their mental disability, they can be vulnerable because of their addiction. Temptation happens sometimes. A seductive personality that manipulates the other’s consciousness, thus creating a relationship of vulnerability and enslavement.”
If we compare this exemplary picture of the Pope, there are two problems that remain to be addressed and which are perhaps more frequent than the examples given.
On the one hand, we are faced here with individual cases, whether on the side of the victims (a sick, disabled person…) or the abusers (a seductive personality). What seems to exist are particular, isolated, case-by-case situations and relationships… of someone who succumbs to temptation or is caught in a vulnerable situation. There is no equation here in which power relations, government models, control and surveillance strategies, cultures of domination instead of cultures of service can intervene.
From the Loyola Community, the question will be asked: but can women who have completed their higher education courses, many with masters and doctorates, who are involved in different workplaces and roles, be considered vulnerable?
The question would be relevant if one worked with a conception of the person based predominantly on the rational dimension of vulnerability (the ability to understand the situation in which one is being manipulated, without being able to defend oneself). Now, as shown in a recent article by psychologist Fabrizia Raguso (*), who was a member of the so-called Loyola Community, it is necessary to adopt an anthropologically much broader and multidimensional view of vulnerability, including fundamental human rights.
The disciplinary decree of Bishop Libanori, a Jesuit like the Pope, is the most complete demonstration of what has just been mentioned. And they must, at the risk of being abandoned to their fate, as, in general, they have been, at least in this case.
An aggravating factor, in the case of adult victims, lies in the difficulty of reporting, as experienced and highlighted by several teams of researchers and caregivers who have been working in this field in recent years.
The prevalence and hypersensitivity to the problem of sexual abuse of children also ends up contributing to the invisibility of abuse of women (and not just women: it would be enough to remember the case of Cardinal McCarrick, with seminarians).
An aggravating factor, in the case of adult victims, lies in the difficulty of reporting, as experienced and highlighted by several teams of researchers and caregivers who have been working in this field in recent years.
If many continue to suffer, others have found a way to live with this painful past. In either case, it is always the risk of a second victimization that is at stake.
As the American theologian James N. Poling wrote more than three decades ago, “as long as churches and synagogues understand abuse by male clergy as disorders of intimacy and sexuality, without attending to a social analysis of male domination and violence, it is unlikely to move decisively to stop the abuse.”
Reflection on power and authority in society and the Church; attention to the socio-psychological phenomenon of narcissism with the historical burden that, in the case of the clergy, comes from symbolic dimensions and privileges; the idealization of women and objectification of women; sexualities and body languages – these are aspects that it is important not to lose sight of, in the search for a culture of overcoming abuse, but above all of promoting people's dignity and happiness.
What to expect from the Synod?
It is time to reflect “systemically” on this issue and find ways to overcome the apparent impasse we have reached.
Without a doubt, something has happened since the time of Benedict XVI until today. There is greater sensitivity, there are beginning to be structures for listening and monitoring. But the feeling is that we have found a way to contain the risks and shake off our fears, but we don't want to go any further.
There is no awareness that the reactive and defensive way in which the Church dealt with this issue constitutes one of the great reasons for the Church's discredit and distrust towards its ministers. And the cases, not just from the past, instead of stagnating, continue to emerge and with no less seriousness, as they affect a significant number of new (charismatic) communities, largely emerging post-Vatican II. On the other hand, there are numerous cases of bishops accused of abuse or, more commonly, of cover-ups and silence.
“Zero tolerance for abuse” began to be a “mantra” that, after being repeated so much, is becoming less and less.
Apparently, a path was opened, but it stopped in the middle of the road, around “minimum limits” that do not even guarantee that abuses of various types will not continue to occur. The Pope himself seems to have little new to say on the matter.
Almost a year ago, the Italian-American theologian Massimo Faggioli and the young German Jesuit Hans Zollner, then a member of the Pontifical Commission for the Protection of Minors, wrote a joint article in the newspaper La Croix (16.11.2022), in which they argued that "the abuse crisis should be at the centre of the synodal process" initiated by the Pope. This process is about to enter a decisive and decisive phase, with the Synod of Bishops in Rome.
Various summaries from dioceses and countries have drawn attention to the importance of this issue, both for its intrinsic significance and for its role as a symptom of other difficulties and challenges in the life of the Catholic Church.
Now is the time to reflect "systemically" on this issue and find ways out of the apparent impasse that has been reached. Many have given up hope. But Christians believe that "the Spirit blows where it wills".
.jpeg)
Comments