A priest - Father Giuseppe Rugolo - was convicted six months ago by the Enna court for aggravated violence against a minor; at the same time, the judges - in the reasons for the sentence - raised very serious criticisms of how the bishop - Monsignor Rosario Gisana - had handled the case.
He himself, in a wiretap, stated that he had covered it up.
To support Gisana, even Pope Francis intervened publicly, considering him persecuted.
The latest episode of this incredible story is Gisana's interview with the newspaper La Stampa, in which he rejects the accusations made against him by the Italian judges and contained in the reasons for Father Rugolo's conviction.
"The facts occurred before my appointment as bishop of the diocese."
Too bad his version was totally denied by the previous bishop.
"If I had been aware of these facts, which for me constitute a crime, I would not have hesitated to take action."
With this terse statement, Monsignor Michele Pennisi, emeritus bishop, cast further shadows on how the Church and the Vatican have dealt with an ugly chapter of cover-ups, silence, and transfers.
Pennisi, speaking to Ansa, seems astonished: "I have never received any report regarding Rugolo. When I was informed, as in a case in Gela, I immediately took serious measures."
PROSECUTOR'S OFFICE
In fact, it is the first time that a Prosecutor's Office strongly highlights the responsibility of a diocese in handling cases of child abuse.
The words in the reasons for the sentence are thought-provoking: "It appears that the curia's co-responsibility exists in the person of the bishop (Gisana, editor's note), who evidently authorized Father Rugolo, as a reference figure of his association, to operate within the church, thus allowing him, with the full complacency of the diocese, to create opportunities for meetings and interactions with young adolescents (...) the investigation revealed clear and unequivocal elements supporting a knowingly culpable conduct by Bishop Gisana, which legitimizes the condemnation of the curia, in its capacity as civilly responsible, for the damages caused by the sexual abuses perpetrated by Father Rugolo."
The judicial case was handled behind closed doors in court, although several scabrous, surprising details and an unjustified underlying silence emerged in the news, to which the persistent silence of the CEI and the Vatican must be added.
During all this time, they never took a stance, nor even hypothesized canonical sanctions either for the bishop for covering it up or for the priest, who was only convicted by the Italian court at the moment.
Monsignor Rosario Gisana, bishop of Enna, already in 2016 "and in the following years in which Father Rugolo continued to perpetrate sexual abuses against Giulio and Paolo (the names are fictitious, editor's note) was fully aware that the defendant had been reported to him for having previously engaged in similar conduct with very young boys."
Always from the written reasons by the judges, it is added: "This circumstance was admitted by Gisana himself during his examination, as well as emerging from the testimonies of several witnesses."
Before the judges, the bishop also admitted to having spoken with Father Rugolo even before meeting the victim's parents and the victim himself.
In a wiretapped phone call, Gisana, also in 2016, while "laughing nervously" about the events, said in Sicilian dialect that these are things that are part of the journey.
Adding that "homosexuals love in a visceral way or hate in a visceral way and that this is a revenge of a person who was rejected."
In another part, he repeated that he could not abandon his priest, "you have to excuse me."
In a conversation with the defendant, whom he called "my joy," he showed awareness of what was happening: "Now the problem is not just yours, the problem is also mine because I covered up this story."
MINORS
For the judges, the bishop "clearly failed to take any serious necessary initiative to protect the minors of his community and their parents, despite having specific powers conferred within the scope of his function to protect the faithful, facilitated the predatory activity of a prelate who had already been reported.
It would have been necessary for the religious authority leading the diocese not only to report these complaints to the religious authorities according to existing canonical procedures but even before that to prevent Rugolo from coordinating and managing numerous groups of young people in recreational activities with a religious background."
No control was thus activated to protect the boys, and Rugolo therefore committed abuses "sexually against two young adolescents, aware that he could count on the support of the religious leaders who instead contributed to strengthening the external image of Father Rugolo as a prominent member of the local clergy."
The judiciary's conclusion is terse: "The defendant and the curia must be sentenced to reimburse the same civil parties for the costs of constitution and defense."
A precedent in the fight against pedophilia and abuse among the clergy destined to open a new phase in Italy, in the general immobility of the Italian Church, which is not very inclined to follow the path taken by other European countries.
THE POPE
Shortly before the sentence, last December, while receiving a Sicilian religious association in the Vatican, the Pope wanted to praise the bishop of Piazza Armerina, Monsignor Gisana: "Bravo, this bishop, bravo. He has been persecuted, slandered, and he stands firm, always, just, a just man. For this reason, that day when I went to Palermo, I wanted to stop first in Piazza Armerina to greet him; he is a good bishop."
Francis did not add anything else, but his words produced a certain echo precisely because Father Rugolo had just been sent to trial.
According to investigations, coordinated by the Prosecutor's Office and conducted by the Caltanissetta Mobile Squad and the Gela Police Station, started in 2022, the victim had informed the bishop of the abuses suffered.
MOTU PROPRIO
A 2016 motu proprio by Pope Francis indicates that bishops who are found to be negligent should be removed from their positions.
It is naturally up to a canonical investigation to judge their behavior.
In practice, the provision established that, among the "serious causes" that canon law already provides for the removal from ecclesiastical office (of bishops, eparchs, or major superiors), negligence concerning cases of sexual abuse should also be included.
The decision must always be submitted to the approval of the Pope.