So, former Jesuit Marko Ivan Rupnik, the priest dismissed by the Society of Jesus after it was determined that charges of his sexual “misconduct” with between nine and 20 or more women, and at least one man, were credible, has been incardinated as a priest in Slovenia’s Diocese of Koper.

To be clear, the Jesuits themselves said they cut Rupnik loose not because of the many allegations of his spiritual, psychological and sexual abuse of people over whom he had spiritual authority — the credibility of which the Jesuits deemed “very high” — and not even for his self-excommunicating (or “latae sententiae”) act of bestowing absolution upon one of the woman with whom he had sexual relations, but “due to stubborn refusal to observe the vow of obedience” after the finding. …

Marko Rupnik — excuse me, I cannot bring myself to call him “Father” — is still a priest; he is still able to publicly celebrate Mass, and hear confessions and give absolution and offer last rites. Perhaps he will not, once again, prey upon those who have put their spiritual well-being into his hands, but I have no reason at all to believe that. Sexual “misconduct,” just like sexual abuse, is about power, not sex. The credible allegations against this man suggest he has demonstrated repeatedly that this particular power feeds him. Furthermore, Rupnik’s artwork is still on display in sacred prayer spaces all over the world, and the Vatican still puts forward its offerings featuring images born out of his hand and mind. This fact alone gives rise to a suspicion that this is an arrogant man who feels untouchable — empowered by a private law requiring nothing of him — because, yes, he is in fact protected.

[Bear in mind that Catholic parishes have been scouring their liturgical music to keep from using accused predator composer David Hass’ music for the last couple of years. I have not followed the Rupnik story closely; Elizabeth has (and so has my friend Christine Rousselle). If Rupnik has been cleared of these allegations, that would be one thing, but that apparently isn’t the case. This isn’t the only problem with the Synod either; I’ll have another headline up later on that. — Ed]