Why did the Vatican punish a Catholic journalist?

By Phil Lawler ( bio - articles - email ) | Sep 27, 2024

Two very curious things happened this week. On Wednesday, the Peruivan bishops’ conference announced that ten members had been expelled from the Sodality of Christian Life (SCV), a lay association that has been the target of Vatican investigations for several years—an action that was taken with the approval of Pope Francis. Almost immediately, the Archdiocese of Denver issued a statement expressing misgivings about the disciplinary action. Some of the men expelled from the SCV had been active in Denver, and the archdiocese unabashedly proclaimed that the Vatican’s action was “inconsistent with our longstanding experience of the men who have served within the Archdiocese of Denver.”

Why is the Vatican authorizing the expulsion of members from a lay association, without charging them with any canonical crime? And why is an American archdiocese questioning actions announced by the Peruvian episcopal conference? Something extraordinary is happening here.

It goes without saying, I hope, that if members of the SCV have engaged in serious abuse, or covered up such abuse, the disciplinary action is warranted. I have been pleading for strict treatment of abusers for thirty years, beginning long before it was fashionable. I am not changing my attitude now.

The results of the Vatican investigation that prompted the disciplinary action have—as usual—not been disclosed. So I am not in a position to judge the evidence. I will only observe that previous investigations had not uncovered widespread misconduct. Maybe the latest probe was much more thorough. Or maybe, on the other hand, the Vatican was determined to find wrongdoing. Since I know nothing about the specifics of the case, again I shall withhold judgment.

But one detail of the September 25 announcement struck me as especially troubling. Among the SCV members expelled from the group was Alejandro Bermudez, an important figure in the world of Catholic journalism. I have known Alejandro for years, counted him as a friend, and although we have not been in touch recently, I have always admired his work.

In August, when it became clear that Bermudez was a target of the Vatican investigation, our mutual friend Fran Maier—longtime aide to Archbishop Charles Chaput—came to his defense in an essay for First Things :

Bermudez in particular—whom I count as a close friend—is guilty of a hot temper and an abrasive leadership style. But that warrants correction, not expulsion. His real “sin” may lie elsewhere. He was the longtime director of the ACI Prensa news organization and founder and director of the English-language Catholic News Agency—both now owned by (the ill-favored, in some quarters) EWTN.

What was the offense for which Bermudez was punished? He was not charged with sexual abuse. He had never held any leadership position in the SCV, so he could not have been the mastermind of any cover-up. The charge against him, he disclosed in a public statement, was “that I abused the journalistic apostolate.”

And what, exactly, is punishable abuse of the journalistic apostolate? A former employee charged that Bermudez had criticized her harshly. That charge may be true. But if so, as Fran Maier points out, the offense calls for a mild rebuke, not for expulsion from an association to which he has dedicated his life. A Vatican official complained that Bermudez had “spread aggression and disinformation”—in other words, had criticized Vatican policies. That is certainly true. Is it a canonical offense?

Yes, Bermudez can be acerbic in his commentary. He can be aggressive in debate with his rivals (as they are aggressive in their attacks on him). And he undoubtedly takes a conservative line on developments within the Catholic Church: a line that is unpopular with the current Vatican leadership. In his statement recorded after the Vatican action, Bermudez said that it was “a victory for the people who basically detest me for doctrinal or ideological reasons.”

Personally, I take a keen interest in this case because the charges that have been levelled against Bermudez could also be (in fact have been) levelled against me. Is he being punished because of his character defects—defects which he has acknowledged, and which he shares with more than a few other journalists? Or is he being punished for his criticism of Vatican policies?

Speaking more broadly, isn’t it time for us all to acknowledge a blatant double standard in Vatican disciplinary actions? Anyone who is seen as hostile to the Pope’s initiatives—be he a prelate or an employee or now even a journalist—may be dismissed if he is charged with misconduct. The Pope’s allies receive the benefit of the doubt—even sometimes in the face of overwhelming evidence.

In Belgium this week, Pope Francis is coping with the fallout of a sex-abuse scandal that boiled over after the late Cardinal Godfried Danneels advised a victim not to report his abuser. When Danneels died in 2019, the Pope said nothing about the cover-up, but saluted the Belgian cardinal as a “zealous pastor.” On the day the Vatican announced the disciplinary action against SCV members, the Vatican News site again featured the art of Father Marko Rupnik. Enough said.