The sensationalism of the press omitted the fact that Benedict XVI had sent a response to the accusations, which occupies 85 pages of the document, but also rehashed accusations which had already been repeatedly clarified years ago. In the case of the priest accused of abuse and transferred to the archdiocese of Munich in 1980, he was only allowed to live in the archdiocese to receive care and was be required to live in a residence for priests. When he was released to work in a parish, the decision came from the vicar general of the archdiocese, as Ratzinger was already at his post in Rome.

Sadly, it has been brought to my attention that some of our preachers have been using the pulpit and homily time to speak about the vaccine, political ideologies, and partisan agendas. I want to state unequivocally that I will no longer condone abuses in this area. If I am made aware that any clergy is using the pulpit to promote political opinions and denouncing current Church teaching, I will have no other recourse than to revoke their faculty to preach.

Lawyers for the victims asked the court’s Grand Chamber to hear the case, after a lower Chamber judgment in October agreed that the Vatican couldn’t be sued in a local Belgian court because it enjoys sovereign immunity. The lower judgment concurred with Belgian courts that had dismissed the case, also determining that the misconduct of priests can’t be attributed to the Holy See.

The inclusion of the term “even occasionally” recognizes that vulnerability of adults may be present in specific and temporary situations (like retreats) that may occur multiple times, and may cause a person to not understand what is happening to them or be able to defend against maltreatment or manipulation.

“The issue of whether the defendant’s conduct was extreme and outrageous depends on how the Archdiocese evaluated (the accuser’s) claims of sexual abuse, to determine whether or not they were in fact, credible,” the ruling says. “Resolution of the claim would also require the trial court to assess the Archdiocese’s meaning of ‘credibility,’ and whether that comports with commensurate standards under the law. Such an inquiry by the trial would be improper under the First Amendment because it would, in effect, second guess the Archdiocese’s decisions regarding how to best communicate allegations within its clergy with its parish.”