The handling of sexual misbehavior has been called “mistakes” by church officials, implying that they were neither crimes nor grave sins. So what are crimes and sins? How can crimes and sins be just "mistakes?"

The major canonical sanctions are excommunications, interdicts, and suspensions; these are either automatic or prescribed. They are applied to only five delicts, not sex crimes. Other sanctions include dismissal from the clerical state, but they are optional, not prescribed, as is the case for clerical concubinage (c. 1364) and clerical sexual sins with minors (c. 1395). Hence for the hierarchy that wrote or approved these laws, clerical sexual offenses are only minor delicts.

According to the CCC, adultery is a “grave sin,” condemned by the sixth commandment. “He who commits adultery fails in his commitment... and undermines the institution of marriage by breaking the commitment on which it is based.” (1381). So is clerical concubinage, in which the cleric fails in his commitment and undermines the institution of the clerical state. This is why in the 1917 code of canon law the offender “must be suspended a divinis.” This sanction was made optional in the 1983 code, depending on whether the delict "causes scandal" (that is, embarrassment to the hierarchy.) So, may we conclude that adultery, for instance, should be considered a “grave sin” only if it causes scandal? What happened to conscience?

The penalties for clerical sex against minors have similarly been downgraded. In the 1917 code (c. 2359, #2), the offender “must be suspended, declared infamous, deprived of any office, benefice, dignity, and responsibility they may have, and in more serious cases they must be deposed.” Now (c. 1395), the offender is to be punished “with just penalties”—including none at all. So, is now sex with minors—especially in the case of serial and multiple offenses—to be considered less grievous than adultery and clerical concubinage? What happened to conscience?

“Homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered” and they must be cured “by the virtues of self-mastery” rather professional therapy. (CCC:2357;2359) Pedophilia is similarly intrinsically disordered, yet in the church in recent times it has been considered a treatable disease to be cured through therapy, and therapy most often is its only punishment. What happened to conscience?

Cardinal Wuerl, who has been considered “better than most in dealing with sexual abuse” and was praised for his “nobility” by Pope Francis, admitted on several instances to have committed errors of judgement. During his tenure in Pittsburgh, all perpetrators of sex crimes with minors, he stated, “were removed from any ministry that would put them in contact with young people.” Is quarantining sex offenders the proper sanction according to canon law (not to mention civil law)? The cardinal added that some of these errors “were based on professional psychological evaluations.” Is pedophilia a disease to be evaluated by psychologists—to find out whether they are risky or safe? Is professional therapy the proper cure of souls for intrinsically disordered inclinations? What happened to conscience?

The cardinal also authorized a confidential settlement between a victim and the diocese at the cost of $900.000. This was actually the biggest error of judgement; it is based on the belief that the church can appease the victims through buying silence with money—instead of the confession of sins, penance, and reparation to achieve reconciliation. Since then, it has been the practice of the hierarchy to hand out money grudgingly rather than seek "justice and reconciliation."

Until the Boston Globe broke the silence in 2002, all clerical sexual misbehaviors were “covered-up” with silence to avoid “scandal.” After 2002, these “cover-ups” have been called “mistakes.” So, to this day bishops do not see their behavior as a matter of conscience—of “formed and informed conscience,” according to church language, only as "mistakes" or prudential judgements about what is risky and what is safe.

What is the difference between sin, crime, and mistakes? Could the bishops tell us?