Rome
From our permanent special correspondent
Rumors, denunciations, information published in the press… In Rome, the follow-up of delicate cases – whether it is about abuse of power, spiritual abuse, sexual abuse, disciplinary deviations or financial embezzlement – concerning priests or bishops is part of the daily life of Vatican administrations. “Our daily bread”, says a Vatican source.
Almost every day, a ” fire “ declares itself at one point in the world, constraining the competent congregations (equivalent to ministries in the Vatican) (clergy, bishops, religious, evangelization of peoples), and – in cases of sexual violence against minors – the disciplinary section of the Congregation for the doctrine of faith, to trigger an investigation.
Concerning the Archbishop of Paris, Mgr Michel Aupetit, questioned in his governance and in his private life in an article in the Point published Monday evening November 22, the information is probably passed very quickly to Pope Francis himself. In such a case, the Congregation for Bishops systematically launches a first investigation. She first turned to the nuncio (ambassador) on the spot. The representative of the Pope in the country is responsible for verifying the credibility of the information that is reported, and analyzing the extent of the unease in Catholic opinion, the possible political consequences …
In cases deemed to be of concern, the Vatican may also choose to send one or more apostolic visitors there, as recently in Cologne, Germany. Visitors can then be either bishops from a neighboring diocese, or superiors of religious communities, when the object of the inquiry is a community.
The Vatican, on the other hand, has no investigative brigade to dispatch to the scene, even in the most serious cases such as sexual abuse. “We manage everything remotely, details a Vatican source. This sometimes raises the question of the independence of investigators, especially in the most distant countries. But we cannot afford to do otherwise. “ When it is a bishop who is implicated, the final decision always rests with the pope himself.
The Congregation of Bishops – or that of the Doctrine of the Faith, in the most serious cases – submits the conclusions of its investigation to the Sovereign Pontiff. The Curia can propose a decision, but it is indeed up to the Pope to decide, as is moreover the case for the appointments of bishops. Obviously, the investigation process becomes much more sensitive when the resignation request is made public, which has happened several times recently.
Particularly in Lyon, where the archbishop, Cardinal Philippe Barbarin, was accused of having covered the sexual assaults of Bernard Preynat, or in Cologne, where Cardinal Rainer Maria Woelki blocked the publication of a report on the management of the abuses sexual intercourse by his diocese. The refusal of Pope Francis to accede to the resignation request of these bishops sparked a media outcry and fed the incomprehension of some faithful.
In the case of the Archbishop of Lyon, the Pope had also started by refusing the resignation, before accepting it secondly. With regard to Cardinal Woelki, the Pope had granted him to perform “A spiritual break outside the diocese”, but without accepting his resignation. Well aware of the risk of embarrassing the Pope, Bishop Michel Aupetit did not want his resignation to be made public.
Alas, the leak on the arrival of his letter of resignation in Rome, Friday November 26 in Le Figaro, put an end to this hope… and turned all eyes to the Pope. Who hates more than anything, constantly insist his close collaborators, being forced to make a decision under public pressure.
.
