AND NOW FOR THE REST OF THE STORY A LA PAUL HARVEY…

This reporting by the Pillar is sad and tragic  indeed and for all parties concerned. But the question has to be asked in terms of “equity”. Had Pavone been faithful to his promise of obedience to his bishop although failed in his promise of celibacy, would he have been laicized? 

I ask this because of the Rupnik case. He is forgiven of his even more grievous sexual abuse of consecrated women in an order which he co-founded. He gets forgiven of the more mild and merciful penalty of excommunication. I presume he was not a pain in the neck in terms of obedience to his superiors. But let’s face it, Jesuit superiors are more lenient towards breaking their vows. 

Equity is the question now, press title:

Pavone was accused of 'sexual misconduct' before laicization

Laicized priest Frank Pavone was accused before his laicization of sexual harassment, grooming behavior, and coercive physical contact with young women.