Revised Vatican norms to cover sex abuse, attempted women's ordination
VATICAN CITY (CNS) -- The Vatican is preparing to update the 2001 norms that deal with priestly sex abuse of minors, in effect codifying practices that have been in place for several years.
At the same time, it will include the "attempted ordination of women" among the list of most serious crimes against church law, or "delicta graviora," sources said.
Sexual abuse of a minor by a priest was added to the classification of "delicta graviora" in 2001. At that time the Vatican established norms to govern the handling of such cases.
The revisions of those norms have been in the pipeline for some time and were expected to be published in mid-July, Vatican sources said. While the changes are not "earthshaking," they will ultimately strengthen the church's efforts to identify and discipline priests who abuse minors, the sources said.
The revisions will be published with ample documentation and will be accompanied by a glossary of church law terms, aimed at helping nonexperts understand the complex rules and procedures that the Vatican has in place for dealing with sex abuse allegations.
The revisions were expected to extend the church law's statute of limitations on accusations of sexual abuse, from 10 years after the alleged victim's 18th birthday to 20 years. For several years, Vatican officials have been routinely granting exceptions to the 10-year statute of limitations.
The revisions also make it clear that use of child pornography would fall under the category of clerical sexual abuse of minors. In 2009, the Vatican determined that any instance of a priest downloading child pornography from the Internet would be a form of serious abuse that a bishop must report to the doctrinal congregation, which oversees cases of sexual abuse.
In addition, the revisions will make clear that abuse of mentally disabled adults will be considered equivalent to abuse of minors. In the law on the sexual abuse of minors, the term "minors" will include "persons of who suffer from permanent mental disability," sources said.
When Pope John Paul II promulgated the norms on priestly sex abuse in 2001, he gave the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith juridical control over such cases.
The revisions incorporate changes made by Pope John Paul in 2003; those simplified some of the procedures and gave the doctrinal congregation the power, in some "very grave and clear cases," to laicize without an ecclesiastical trial priests who have sexually abused minors.
In April, the Vatican placed online a guide to understanding the church's provisions for sex abuse cases. That guide mentioned the revisions under preparation and said those revisions would not change the basic procedures already in place.
The sources said the Vatican was not preparing to publish other documents on priestly sex abuse. Although some have argued that some of the strict sex abuse norms adopted by U.S. bishops in 2002 should be universalized, the sources said there was no imminent plan to do that.
Pope John Paul's 2001 document distinguished between two types of "most grave crimes," those committed in the celebration of the sacraments and those committed against morals. Among the sacramental crimes were such things as desecration of the Eucharist and violation of the seal of confession.
Under the new revisions, the "attempted ordination of women" will be listed among those crimes, as a serious violation of the sacrament of holy orders, informed sources said. As such, it will be handled under the procedures set up for investigating "delicta graviora" under the control of the doctrinal congregation.
In 2008, the doctrinal congregation formally decreed that a woman who attempts to be ordained a Catholic priest and the person attempting to ordain her are automatically excommunicated. In 1994, Pope John Paul said the church's ban on women priests is definitive and not open to debate among Catholics.
Copyright © 2010 Catholic News Service/U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops
Defrocking
By Mark Chambers (not verified) on Tuesday, July 20, 2010Why is it always love the sinner if it;s a priest caught dipping his wick in a child. And the over zealous defrocking if a priest marries a woman?
Over the decades I've watched priests with "problems" sent to Arizona, to be rehabilitated and to come back looking like the cat with the canary feathers in the mouth. Now finally the church is looking more at the bottom line and saying oh father that's bad..repent.
But lets swing out directly to EXCOMMUNICATION if a woman wants to be ordained. Yeh, a little on the overkill there Vatican. How about we dicuss women being Deacons.
After alll there seems to be some historical evidence that was done, if I reading Paul right.
Excommunicated
By Michael Thomas (not verified) on Saturday, July 10, 2010Sexual abuse by a priest or protection of one of these predators does not result in excommunication?
excommunication?
By Matthew (not verified) on Monday, July 12, 2010Amazing is it not? Another great example of injustice of what is considered "rational" excommunication under Canon law - Alfred Loisy(1857-1940)a French RC priest and theologian - who paved the way for Catholicism to find a place in the modern world. Loisy also, put his opponent Adolf van Harnack's theology to the waste side, IMO.
Different crimes merit different penalties
By Fr. J (not verified) on Saturday, July 10, 2010No, it results in an expiatory penalty. Usual that is dismissal from the clerical state and perhaps a few other things added in. It is a crime and it is punished. The punishment is designed to fit the crime. Would you rather that the priest be punished with a medicinal penalty that MUST be lifted as soon as he repents? Then he would be restored to ministry. Is that what you want? Or would you rather he be dismissed and not allowed to act as a priest anymore?
Thanks for the comment
By Michael Thomas (not verified) on Sunday, July 11, 2010Father, thanks for the comment. I probably should have explained my opinion.
Abuse is a criminal matter and should be handled by the civil authorities. In my opinion this crime should at least be elevated to the level in cannon law that would result in instant excommunication.
It is foolish for me to engage you on the topic of women’s ordination. You are probably an academic and I am not. However, I hope you realize that the issue of abuse is a wedge issue that may result in a generational distrust of the clergy. Excommunication for dissent and only an expiatory penalty for a clergy that has destroyed lives is (excuse the comment – no intent to offend you) backwards.
The clergy should accept the responsibility for poor management. This includes full disclosure. I suspect that a number of lay persons (like me) have the perception that the clergy hide information and fail to act swiftly to punish Bishops and Cardinals that either committed the crime or covered the crime up. Full disclosure will result in additional criminal or civil actions. If the clergy expects to lead on moral issues the clergy must first lead by example.
He doesn't get it
By Anonymous (not verified) on Sunday, July 11, 2010"I hope you realize that the issue of abuse is a wedge issue that may result in a generational distrust of the clergy."
It seems that he does not realize this. He is frustrated that it comes up so frequently and feels that it is used primarily as a tactic to attack and deny things from the bishops and the Church that people don't like. He doesn't seem to get that the abuse and cover up destroyed trust in the clergy in many Catholics. This leads to a question not often asked. Beyond how normal Catholics can regain trust in the clergy how can those who were actually abused? How are they to not only trust but obey clergy again when that trust and obedience is what led to their abuse? Posters here say if one cannot obey the Church they should leave. Many of the abused have already left. Is it reasonable to expect them to come back and resume the trust, respect and obedience to clergy they had before? Would any abuse counselor advise that? But that is what the Church demands, not only participation but obedience to the authority of the clergy. It seems that asking someone who was raped and sodomized by a priest to again trust and obey priests is not only unreasonable but amounts to abuse in itself. Yet there is no allowance to obey clergy gradually on their own terms. What the Church says and what many here echo is that we need to surrender completely to the authority of the Church. How could abuse victims could ever do that again?
Thank you for the comment
By Michael Thomas (not verified) on Sunday, July 11, 2010Thank you for your comment. Please believe me (I am asking for trust) that I understand where you are coming from.
The Church has had scandal in the past. The Church will have future scandals. The Church will survive. Actually, scandal may result in good changes. You and I want immediate change. That will not happen. The Church is 2000 years old and she has to bring all of our baggage along in order to change. If you are blessed with children or grandchildren (I have 5), they will see the change.
Don’t give up on the Church. The management is corrupt but the teachings from Christ and the apostles are not. The clergy are just men. Some, not all, commit crimes. Please remember-- You and me – we are the Church. I will not give her up to corrupt clergy. I will continue to point out the scandal and challenge the clergy to accept their responsibility for this awful crime.
So-called Catholics that ask you to leave the Church should be ignored. Remember, there was a time that you and I trusted the clergy.
Thanks
By Anonymous (not verified) on Sunday, July 11, 2010I will not give up on the Church. If I did 10,000 dead Irishmen would swim across the ocean and beat the cr@p out of me.
But it's frustrating to know that I will watch the open window of Vatican II close until my eyes do too. I wish I could believe that my children and grandchildren will see the change we hope for but I don't. I think it will continue for generations and if it does turn back my children and their children's children will have fallen from the Church by then. That would be a tragedy after 1500 years of Catholics. I hear all these trads say how the new old Church will attract young people. Some of them are young trads themselves. But I think they are so few in number that they can't maintain the population the Church needs to survive as it has. It will survive but I fear in such a smaller purer form that pope favors as to resemble a cult. The "orthodox" zealots have won. They are a minority in the laity but they are a majority in the hierarchy. I see no hope of a turn-around. I would prefer my children not attend mass at all than become Protestants. That's my culture, but it doesn't matter to them. It doesn't even hold in Ireland. Catholics in the most Catholic country in Europe are abandoning the Church because of the its lies and betrayal yet it still runs over 90% of "public" schools and requires baptismal certificates for admittance. The theocracy holds.
I won't leave, but staying will be an act of sad fidelity.
Vatican II hijacked
By Fr. J (not verified) on Monday, July 12, 2010Read the Vatican II documents! I have. For decades it is the dissenters who have run the show. That is why we have scandals and falling numbers. They have hijacked Vatican II. In Europe it was 1968 that destroyed the Church not the orthodox Catholics. Your side has had its shot and failed miserable. Now it is time for real Vatican II reform.
How Long?
By Anonymous (not verified) on Monday, July 12, 2010"Your side has had its shot and failed miserable."
Very pastoral of you Padre. It sounds like you can't wait for the dissenters to leave. I want to seriously ask you and I hope you can seriously reply. If over 90% of married Catholics use or approve of contraception that makes them dissenters right? If they all left that would mean the Church would immediately lose over 90% of its members. Do you think the Church could ever make up for their lost numbers? If so how long do you think it would take? Decades? Centuries? I read this all the time from "orthodox" who say good riddance to Catholics like me, the whole smaller-purer thing. They either say the pews will fill up right away with people who have been just waiting for real "orthodox" worship or less outlandishly that it will take a while but eventually the numbers will be replaced through larger families and converts. But they never put an estimate on how long that would take. I know there's no way to know but what's your guess? You must have an opinion. You can guess mine, 100 years minimum if ever. If the numbers never come back all the way do you think it would be better to have a much smaller-purer Church long term than put up with dissenters in the pews?
U.S. Catholic insists on a civil and respectful dialogue on our website, following our Comment policy. Comments should be charitable, on topic, and brief. U.S. Catholic reserves the right to delete comments deemed inappropriate. Links are not allowed and comments with them will be moderated or deleted. We encourage you to choose your words wisely.

