Crux

ROME – As the world’s most exclusive club prepares to elect the new pope, they face an immediate test of just how seriously they will take the issue of clerical sexual abuse in the case of a Peruvian cardinal who is participating pre-conclave meetings despite allegations against him.

Peruvian Cardinal Juan Luis Cipriani, 81, is not eligible to vote in a conclave due to his age, but in 2019 was subject to restrictions on his ministry imposed by Pope Francis over allegations lodged a year prior that he had sexually assaulted an adolescent boy.

Those sanctions, which Cipriani accepted and signed off on just before turning 75, apparently barred him wearing his red cardinal robes and other symbols associated with the cardinalate, from returning to Peru without permission, from making public declarations, and from participating in a future conclave while he was still of age to do so.

Cipriani has repeatedly denied the allegations, which went public in January when Spanish newspaper El Pais revealed that Cipriani’s ministry had been restricted after an apparent victim complained to the Vatican in 2018, and that another similar complaint was lodged in 2002, but had apparently come to nothing.

These restrictions were confirmed by Vatican spokesman Matteo Bruni in January, who said Cipriani in 2019 “was imposed a penal precept with some disciplinary measures” which he said, “appear to still be in force.”

These measures, Bruni said, were “related to his public activity, place of residence and use of insignia,” and were “signed and accepted” by Cipriani himself.

Despite these restrictions, Cipriani has repeatedly violated them, traveling to Lima in January to receive a prestigious award from the city’s mayor, Rafael Lopez Aliaga, and issuing several public statements over the past two months denying the allegations against him, accusing Pope Francis of undue process, and demanding that the Peruvian bishops rectify statements confirming the restrictions on his ministry.

He has also disobeyed the order not to use his cardinal insignia and symbols, showing up to pay respects to Pope Francis April 24 while the pontiff was lying in state, and at an April 27 Vespers service for the pope in the Basilica of St. Mary Major, where he is buried, in his red cardinal robes.

Cipriani has also been seen leaving the Vatican’s Paul VI audience hall, where pre-conclave general congregation meetings are taking place, with the gaggle of other cardinals present.

Vatican spokesman Matteo Bruni said the issue of clerical abuse was addressed by cardinals Monday as part of discussion on the many challenges the Church faces.

When asked about Cipriani’s participation, Bruni said that the Vatican constitution governing conclave rules, Universi Dominici Gregis, made it clear that all cardinals without personal impediments such as illness were summoned to participate.

While the document does not include any specific rules barring prelates accused of sexual abuse from participating in a conclave or pre-conclave meetings, it does include provisions allowing cardinals to handle urgent matters as a collective body.

Point six of the constitution says, “should there be a problem which, in the view of the majority of the assembled Cardinals, cannot be postponed until another time, the College of Cardinals may act according to the majority opinion.”

The third paragraph of point seven in the document said that “During the time of the election, more important matters are, if necessary, dealt with by the assembly of the Cardinal electors.”

It thus falls to the cardinal electors, presumably under the leadership of the Dean of the College of Cardinals, Italian Giovanni Battista Re, to determine whether Cipriani ought to continue attending the general congregations.

Asked about Cipriani’s participation again during an April 29 briefing, Bruni did not respond to observations that Cipriani was disobeying orders from Pope Francis, but referred to his January statement in which he confirmed the restrictions on Cipriani’s ministry, and that they were still in effect.

The bruhaha over Cipriani’s participation comes after another scandal involving Italian Cardinal Angelo Becciu, who was stripped of his rights and duties as a cardinal by Pope Francis in 2020 for financial crimes and found guilty and sanctioned for these crimes by the Vatican’s court in 2023.

Becciu had initially when general congregations began argued publicly that he was never banned from participating in a conclave, however, he withdrew after reportedly being shown documents signed by the pope confirming it was his will that Becciu should not participate.

The question cardinals now face is what to do, if anything, about Cipriani, given the allegations against him and his blatant disobedience of the restrictions imposed on him by Pope Francis.

The Peruvian bishops earlier this year confirmed the existence of a penal precept against him, presumably incurring sanctions for disobedience, but it is unknown what these sanctions involve, and who might impose them during the sede vacante.

Although Cipriani is not an elector, his presence at general congregations has caused alarm among victims and activists who believe his presence is an insult to survivors and hypocritical given the apparent concern over the clerical abuse scandals among the College of Cardinals.

Multiple victims, experts and advocacy groups have condemned his presence, with advocacy group Bishop Accountability saying Monday Cipriani’s participation “reassures abusive bishops of their colleagues’ continuing support even as it sends a distressing message to abuse victims. It revives the haunting idea that the Church is safer for accused clergy than for children.”

On the whole, many observers note that generally, while Pope Francis made his share of mistakes on the abuse issue, he ultimately tried to do the right thing, and decisions such as defrocking former cardinal and priest Theodore McCarrick and suppressing the Peru-based Sodalitium Christianae Vitae marked significant progress on this front.

The case of Cipriani marks the first real litmus test after Francis as to how the current body of cardinals will respond to the abuse crisis, and what sort of action can be expected when it comes to high-ranking, influential prelates who face allegations.

It will be especially noteworthy if, despite age and eligibility to vote in the conclave, a cardinal accused of and punished for financial crimes was forced out, and a cardinal accused of and punished for sexual crimes against minors is not.

If paragraphs six and seven of Universi Dominici Gregis are applied in this case, the cardinals can collectively make a decision about his participation, though what they will decide, if anything, remains to be seen.