In Pavone case, the Vatican’s silence is damaging

By Phil Lawler ( bio - articles - email ) | Dec 21, 2022

The apostolic nuncio in the US says that Frank Pavone was laicized in early November. Pavone says that, as of mid-December, he had not been informed of the Vatican’s disciplinary action. Something is very wrong here.

Bear in mind that we have only heard Pavone’s side of the story. Bishop Patrick Zurek of Amarillo, who initiated canonical proceedings against the pro-life activist, has not commented on the recent announcement. Archbishop Christophe Pierre, the apostolic nuncio, has provided two terse, vague paragraphs of explanation. The Vatican Dicastery for Clergy, which imposed the sentence, has told us nothing. In the absence of a clear explanation for this unusually severe penalty, many Catholics who admire Pavone’s work are understandably confused, upset, even outraged. Still the hierarchy remains silent.

If it is true that Pavone was not personally informed of the Vatican’s decision, that is inexcusable. He has never been hard to find; a letter or telegram, phone or email message, would have found its way to him. And if the Dicastery for Clergy did make a good-faith effort to reach him, is it asking too much to say that the Vatican should produce evidence of that effort? Otherwise we are left with the impression that the Vatican was primarily interested in reassuring the American bishops that a ticklish problem had been solved, rather than in reining in a wayward priest. It is absurd to criticize Pavone for continuing to present himself as a priest, if no one has given him official notification that he should not.

In this case the silence of the Vatican—and of the hierarchy generally—does real damage to the Church. Pavone and his supporters continue to suggest that he has been disciplined simply because of his outspoken defense of life. Doesn’t the Vatican have an interest in rebutting that charge? Silence betokens consent.

Canonical proceedings are routinely wrapped in secrecy—often for good reason—and the Vatican is notoriously parsimonious with information. But a public uproar cannot be handled on a “need to know” basis. Or rather, the entire American Catholic community has a need to know: to know the actual charges against Pavone, to know how the case was handled, to know how the announcement was handled.