In some dioceses, it has unfortunately been all too common to resort to such a convenient yet illegitimate expedient: encouraging Rome to accept the voluntary resignation from the clerical state of priests accused of abuses or serious crimes under the pretext of “resolving” an uncomfortable matter as quickly as possible. Through this escape route, a canonical penal process is avoided, the facts are not documented, and the case is closed falsely, as if everything were reduced to a simple administrative resignation.
This practice, which unfortunately has tended to be tried in especially embarrassing cases, constitutes a fraud against ecclesial justice and an affront to the victims. The Code of Canon Law is clear: the loss of the clerical state is not an automatic right of the priest, but a concession that can be granted by pontifical rescript, never as a ploy to escape a judicial process that the Church is obligated to carry out.
Accepting the resignation in such circumstances is not only pastoral cowardice, but a direct violation of canonical legality. Rome has reiterated this on numerous occasions: when there is a pending penal process, the request for reduction to the lay state must be rejected or, at least, suspended until the trial concludes. Otherwise, it becomes a subterfuge to evade a possible conviction and deprive the ecclesial community of the truth.
The temptation of certain bishops is evident: accepting the resignation means avoiding painful statements, media scandals, or documentation of sordid facts. But that apparent pastoral relief is in reality a capitulation of the episcopal mission. The Church cannot preach the Gospel of truth and justice while allowing those accused of the gravest crimes to leave discreetly, without rendering accounts and without official record of their offenses.
The damage caused by this practice is twofold: justice is denied to the victims, and the faithful are given the idea that the institution protects itself before the innocent. It also fosters a perverse incentive: every accused cleric knows they can try to “escape” by requesting the dispensation, relying on the convenience of their diocese to accept the procedure.
This is not a mere internal management error, but a scandal with serious spiritual and juridical consequences. The Church’s justice cannot be sacrificed on the altar of convenience. Bishops have the duty to instruct processes, clarify the facts, and ensure that the truth prevails. Anything else is active complicity with injustice.