(LifeSiteNews) — The Vatican on Wednesday denied reports that Father Marko Ivan Rupnik was acquitted in his Vatican canonical criminal trial of all charges of “violence” related to his alleged sexual abuse.
Matteo Bruni, the Director of the Holy See Press Office, issued a statement on July 22 calling widely circulated reports that a five-judge panel had acquitted the disgraced ex-Jesuit priest and favorite of Pope Francis “entirely unfounded.”
MessainLatino and AdVaticanum had reported just two days earlier that a five-judge panel had acquitted Rupnik of all allegations of “violence” in his alleged acts of sexual abuse. The sources indicated to these outlets that the court has not ruled on all allegations of sexual abuse themselves, and a further case is being prepared against Rupnik.
“Reports concerning any decision whatsoever by the judges handling the case of the Reverend Marko Ivan Rupnik are entirely unfounded,” Bruni said in the statement.
“The assessment of the case is still underway, and the panel is examining the documentation received from the dioceses concerned, the Jesuits, the persons involved, and the press,” he added.
READ: Alleged abuser priest and Pope Francis favorite Fr. Rupnik cleared by Vatican court: Reports
Bruni further underscored that “during the proceedings, as with any judicial process, no information regarding the ongoing work can be shared in any way, out of respect for the process itself,” to “avoid causing further hurt” to all those “involved in the case, as occurred in recent days.”
As extensively reported by LifeSiteNews, Rupnik has been accused of sexually, spiritually, psychologically, and physically abusing nuns as well as male victims. The credibility of the well-documented allegations of Rupnik’s serial abuse is deemed to be “very high” by his former Jesuit superiors.
Despite Rupnik’s case being very high-profile, canonical trials before the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith (DDF) are kept under seal unless the Vatican decides otherwise, as Bruni suggested. Thus, the Holy See may not disclose any details about the proceedings, which has led some to question the lack of transparency in such a high-profile case.
Alleged victims of the priest have attested that he raped women under his charge, that he told a former nun to get an abortion in case she became pregnant after raping her, and that Rupnik’s sexual abuse is deeply linked to his icons, which used his victims as models.
In 2023, Pope Francis delegated the case to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (now Dicastery). In October 2023, the DDF announced that it had appointed a panel of five judges to decide the canonical trial of Rupnik. The reported acquittal concerns charges of “violence” in his alleged acts of sexual abuse, as indicated by news outlets in July 2024.
Bruni also stressed that, as Rupnik is subject to a canonical trial, the Vatican court “is proceeding notwithstanding the statute of limitations applicable to any alleged offences,” and will determine only whether the priest is guilty under canon law.
He added that Rupnik “remains subject to the legislation of the countries in which any alleged crimes may have been committed,” and that each sovereign country in which he allegedly committed crimes determines the statute of limitations for those offenses.
READ: Vatican appoints judges to decide Rupnik sexual abuse case
The ex-Jesuit has also become notorious for his distinctive and disturbing “art,” which portrays Christ and the saints with large “black hole” eyes and had remained on display in the Vatican and several prominent churches. These include the Sanctuary of Saint Pio of Pietrelcina in Giovani Rotundo, Italy, which houses the relics of St. Padre Pio, the Saint John Paul II National Shrine in Washington, D.C., and the Basilica of Our Lady of the Rosary at the Shrine of Our Lady of Lourdes in France. Some of these pieces have since been covered or removed.
In addition to their deeply disturbing nature, Catholic writers and art historians such as Hillary White have written extensively on how Rupnik’s “artwork” is in fact a demonic “parody” of medieval art and traditional Byzantine iconography.