I would find it hard to be in the same room with Father Marko Rupnik, given the apparent moral monster that he is. That such a monster would be permitted by the Jesuit father general to preach to his fellow Jesuits, Pope Francis and Cardinal Luis Ladaria and the rest of the prelates of the Roman Curia, is frankly obscene.
And yet, Father Rupnik, should he be repentant and willing to do penance for his sins and crimes, has a place not only in the Church but also in the priesthood, albeit without ministry in a quiet life of prayer and penance. It would be difficult to exact justice and extend mercy, but it can be done.
As to Pavone, I would have no trouble being in a room with him, even though we have never met. I admire much what he has done for the pro-life cause, though demurring from his excesses. Nevertheless, a “rogue” priest is a contradiction in terms. His dismissal is an outcome of his own making, even “overdue” in Lawler’s judgment.
But not only of his own making. Bishops can abuse their authority, too, and the necessity of authority in any society — a symphony, a football team, a police force — does not mean that it is exercised well. Indeed, Pope Francis has repeatedly called attention to “abuse of power” and “abuse of office” as serious temptations for clerics.
Pavone’s case — a priest at persistent loggerheads with his own superior — is not at all common, but neither is it vanishingly rare. With even minimal goodwill, pastors find a way to work through it.
[This is the way I see it as well — a failure on all sides, including the Vatican’s for not interceding and separating the two at some point over the last few years. — Ed]
Join the conversation as a VIP Member