Vilnius Archbishop Gintaras Grušas gave an exclusive interview to the portal 15min on Wednesday.
Read more At Arūnas Valinskas’s home – Oksana Pikul
The priest disagrees with G. Grušas’s position that now is not the right time for a broader independent investigation.
He also raises the question of what specific assistance should be provided to victims, how the Church should apply “zero tolerance” to sexual exploitation of minors, and whether responsibilities for communication and victim protection are properly separated.
G. Satkauskas also calls to look back to 2013, when G. Grušas took over the management of the Vilnius Archdiocese, and to find out how information about priests, complaints, and possible suspicions was transmitted at that time.
The priest expressed his thoughts on the social network “Facebook.” He agreed to share his post also with 15min readers:
“What did I hear – and not hear – from my Archbishop’s interview?
First of all – thank you for the Archbishop speaking out. I heard an apology to the victims, the Church, and society. I also heard an important acknowledgment: not everything is fine, there is room for change, and the Archbishop himself admits that due to many duties he cannot manage everything as much as he would like. That is important. However, as a priest of the Vilnius Archdiocese, I am left with even more very specific questions after this interview.
1. Where is the victim?
I heard the apology. But I still did not hear a concrete mechanism showing that help to the victim becomes not only a verbal but also a financial and institutional priority. Therefore, I repeat my proposal: let’s establish a national fund to help people who have experienced sexual exploitation. Polish bishops established the St. Joseph Fund back in 2019. It is financed by diocesan funds, the amount of which is linked to the number of bishops and priests, and it finances professional help for victims and prevention. Why couldn’t Lithuania go even further – using its Church resources to help not only victims within the Church but also contribute to assistance for all victims of sexual violence in Lithuania? To me, that would be the true Gospel.
2. Independent investigation – not now.
The Archbishop says he does not think now is the right time for an independent commission or a broader historical investigation. The priority, in his opinion, should be current prevention, and a broader investigation could come later. Here I respectfully disagree. Prevention and the search for truth about the past do not interfere with each other. They complement each other. How can we fix the system if we do not know exactly where and why it failed before? Therefore, I continue to propose an independent external audit. Not to accuse anyone in advance. To find out.
Read more LKT: Non-working friendships of employees with the capital’s prisoners become a problem
3. What is our “zero tolerance”? The Archbishop says in the interview that he does not think removal from the clergy is a panacea: a guilty clergyman could remain a priest, but his activities would be severely restricted – for example, no work with children and vulnerable people. But I still need a very clear principle: proven sexual exploitation of a minor = no return to active pastoral ministry. No ambiguities. This is the principle proposed by Zollner.
4. Who oversees our protection system?
Today the same person in the Vilnius Archdiocese is both the coordinator of communication and the protection of minors and vulnerable adults, and (!) assists in the Apostolic Nunciature. And the Nuncio is the Pope’s eyes and ears. In my opinion, there is already a great risk in this structure. Is it wise to concentrate the institution’s public communication and victim protection functions in one person, and also appoint him as an assistant to the Nuncio, for whom independence, impartiality, and objectivity are especially important? This is a structural problem, and during a crisis, these roles should be separated. Not only during a crisis.
5. And one more uncomfortable question – 2013. On April 23, Gintaras Grušas took over the management of the Vilnius Archdiocese. The ordinary changed. People changed. Responsibilities changed. Therefore, answers are needed:
How was information about priests transmitted at that time?
Were all complaints, suspicions, disciplinary problems, informal signals transmitted?
Was such transmission documented?
Can we today check what was known before 2013 and what after? I do not claim that something was concealed. But over the past week, people have approached me telling about possible silencing, insufficient response, priest transfers, and other painful matters. I cannot and do not want to publicly declare every such story as a proven fact. That is exactly why an independent investigation is needed.
So that the truth is established not by rumors. Not by me. Not by the curia investigating itself. But by a professional and reliable process.
I care about my Archbishop. I care about my brother priests. I care about the Vilnius Archdiocese. But most of all, I care about the victims. That is why I raise these questions. Not to humiliate the Church. But so that we no longer have to defend it from the truth. I will not give up and will continue to speak respectfully about what, in my conviction, we need to change. Because now we do not need camps “for” and “against” the bishop.
Read more Painful loss: famous mountaineer Jaroslav Okulich Kazarin has died
We need truth.
We need accountability.
We need help for the victims.
And we need concrete solutions.”
