In the opinion of child protection expert Hans Zollner, the church should have always clearly and decisively punished all kinds of abuse – regardless of the social situation. The Jesuit priest thus contradicts Manfred Lutz.
Already due to the classical moral theology, abusers should always have been punished severely, said the Jesuit priest Hans Zollner to the Catholic weekly newspaper "Die Tagespost" (Saturday online).
Even if social positions and evaluations influence church attitudes and actions, this does not exempt the church from its own conscientious examination of the event and the corresponding decision, added the head of the Vatican's Child Protection Center and staff member of the Pontifical Commission for the Protection of Minors established in 2014.
Positioning against Manfred Lutz
Zollner contradicted at the same time the estimate of the psychiatrist, theologian and best-selling author Manfred Lutz. The latter had recently – also in the "Tagespost" – urged a classification of the actions of bishops in the respective time. Accordingly, according to Lutz, it could not be blamed on any church official responsible until 1990 if he had transferred a perpetrator at that time without informing the local community about what was happening: "Such behavior, which would be absolutely irresponsible today, was almost unavoidable at that time."
Lutz had justified his position, among other things, by saying that science had failed the bishops at the time. As recently as 1989, for example, reference books had said "that the investigations and interrogations that follow such acts do more harm than the act itself".
In contrast, Zollner said, "Whoever sexually or otherwise abuses children, adolescents and other charges has committed a serious crime at all times and in all places." This should have been clear to every church leader – "and appropriate punishments and measures would have been unavoidable.".
Supposed protection of perpetrator and church
The Jesuit added that denial and cover-up of abuse by bishops, abbots and other leading clergy can be "traced over decades and centuries". The main motivation was and lies probably in the attempt to protect allegedly the reputation of the church and the offender.