JOSE COBO, ARCBISHOP OF MADRID, AND THE REVEREND FR GONZALO RUIPEREZ, VICAR AT SAN JUAN DE DIOS
"Quod licet Iovi, non licet bovi" (What is permitted to Jupiter, is not permitted to an ox).
The Diocese of Madrid’s decision to repeatedly summon Auxiliary Bishop Jesús Vidal to meet with the alleged lover of Father Gonzalo Ruipérez, parish priest at San Juan de Dios Catholic parish church in Vallecas, over the last several months —without achieving any significant changes in ten months— raises serious questions about the effectiveness, transparency, and integrity of the ecclesiastical leadership in Spain. The lack of action, combined with the prior knowledge of the existence of the priest’s two children from two different women, who are seminarians in Madrid and have changed their last names to maintain appearances, suggests a concerning tendency towards institutional protectionism at the expense of justice and the well-being of the community. This situation requires a critical review and decisive intervention to correct course and restore trust in the ecclesiastical authority.
In section 3 (see Directory "In This Entry" or go to Section 2 directly below), we provide screenshots of most of the emails exchanged. A woman who has been the priest’s lover for nine years is now complaining that her lover is a shameless and dishonourable man.
Happy reading.
Jacques Pintor
Copyright © 2024 JACQUES PINTOR, Investigative Journalism. Any reference to this information must cite its origin, “Jacquespintor.com”. For more information, to provide it, or to request interviews with sources, write to jacquespintor@gmail.com.IN THIS ENTRY:
1. Allegations Against Spanish Priest of Abusing and Seducing Vulnerable Women
2. The handling of the crisis and the Diocese’s attitude towards the abusive priest in San Juan de Dios Parish in Vallecas
3. The content of the email exchanges between Archbishop José Cobo and the priest’s lover in Vallecas. PLUS TRANSCRIPTION
4. Final reflection on the ecclesiastical managementTHIS ARTICLE IS PUBLISHED FOR THE FIRST TIME ON THIS PORTAL ON SEPTEMBER 14, 2024. UPDATED 8 OCTOBER 2024
Allegations Against Spanish Priest of Abusing and Seducing Vulnerable Women
The case of Father Gonzalo Ruipérez, the abusive priest in Vallecas who allegedly maintained a nine-year-long sexual relationship with one of his victims, has been covered extensively in previous entries. Protected by Archbishop José Cobo of Madrid for unknown reasons (just as they conceal the identities of his two children born to different women, who are, to add insult to injury, seminarians at the Conciliar Seminary of Madrid), the Spanish Church has turned a blind eye to Father Gonzalo’s continued abuse over many years.
2. The Pain-causing Crisis Management and Deplorable Attitude of the Diocese of Madrid: The Priest’s Lover of Nine Years in Vallecas
As is often the case with such scandals, this crisis has spilt over into the public sphere due to Archbishop José Cobo’s inadequate handling. As a case study in crisis management, this has been a disastrous failure, marked by a clear lack of skill in redirecting the situation.
Acceptance of the Complaint and Lack of Action:
Admittance of the Complaint: The fact that the diocese acknowledged the conversations with the alleged lover of the priest indicates a de facto recognition of the seriousness of the accusations. However, the lack of tangible actions following the admittance of these complaints over a prolonged ten-month period suggests a passive or ineffective approach to addressing the situation.
Prolonged Inaction: The absence of disciplinary measures or significant changes in the priest’s situation, despite the accusations and the diocese’s knowledge of the priest’s children, highlights a disconnect between recognising the problem and the will to solve it. This pattern of inaction can be perceived as an attempt to salvare faciem (save reputation) and protect the Church’s reputation at the expense of properly addressing the misconduct.
Complicity or Cover-Up:
Structural Complicity: The situation worsens when considering that the diocese, being aware of the existence of the priest’s children and their passage through the seminary in Madrid, appears to have allowed this duplicitas (double life) to continue unchallenged. Even after this information surfaced, the lack of concrete measures could be interpreted as a form of complicity or, at the very least, passive cover-up.
Clergy Protection: This attitude could form part of a broader Church strategy to protect its members, even when they face serious accusations. By keeping the priest in his position despite the evidence and complaints, the diocese may prioritise institutional stability over justice and correct inappropriate behaviour—a clear pax Ecclesiae misunderstood.
Impact on the Church’s Credibility:
Public Distrust: The prolonged inaction of the diocese, combined with the acceptance of conversations without clear consequences, subvertit fidem (undermines trust) among parishioners and the general public in the Church’s ability to adequately manage misconduct cases. This is especially critical in a context where the Church already faces significant challenges related to handling scandals and abuses.
Perception of Impunity: The apparent impunity with which the priest of San Juan de Dios in Vallecas, Rev. Gonzalo Ruipérez, continues in his position, despite complaints, reinforces the perception that clergy can act impune (without fear of repercussions). This perception can have a corrosive effect on the moral and commitment of parishioners, who may feel betrayed or abandoned by an institution that fails to act decisively in the face of immorality within its ranks.
The Ethical and Pastoral Dilemma:
The diocese faces a complex ethical and pastoral dilemma. On the one hand, it is responsible for protecting the community from any harm that may arise from the priest’s actions. On the other, the possibility of publicly exposing the priest’s double life, including the existence of his children, which have been concealed for more than 25 years while paying for their maintenance, could cause a more significant scandal that would further compromise the Church’s image. This dilemma may have contributed to inaction in an attempt to handle the situation discreetly, albeit at the cost of justice and transparency. Fiat iustitia, ruat caelum (Let justice be done, though the heavens fall) should guide the diocese’s actions.
Need for a Strong Response:
However, the situation requires a strong and clear response from the diocese. Justice and pastoral integrity must prevail over concerns about scandal, and the lack of action only perpetuates the harm and aggravates the situation. Transparency and accountability are essential to restore trust and demonstrate that the Church in Spain is committed to the values it preaches.
3. The Content of the Email Exchanges Between Archbishop José Cobo's Office and the Lover of the Vallecas Priest
3. Transcription of the Emails
From: [Redacted]
Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2023, 10:33 AM
To: Eduardo Aranda Calleja earanda@archidiocesis.madrid
Subject: Attn. Jesús Vidal
I hope this email is not misinterpreted, nor do I wish to be seen as someone seeking to cause harm. You have called me twice, and until today, I have not dared to send this. I’ve held onto it and thought a lot. I just received a call from the mother of the child for whom I am to be the Confirmation godmother this coming Sunday, telling me that yesterday this priest informed her that he had a young man from the parish in mind to be the godfather, even though he has known for three weeks that the child had chosen me. I believe that the level of brazenness shown by this priest in the parish is reason enough for a strong reprimand. It is not fair for him to want to control everything.
I do not judge a priest for falling in love because it is natural and can happen without seeking it. If that is the case, God bless and let things be done correctly and responsibly. The vocation to marriage is also a Sacrament. We are human and can make mistakes. What I find abnormal is that we make the same mistake so many times —this constant search for love or sex without considering the image it gives.
I raised the alarm over a series of incidents that seemed like abnormal behaviour. Although he was already leading a double life, he had not shown himself to be so frivolous and manipulative.
In June of this year, I found out that this priest had been hosting a single mother with her children in the parish house for a year in complete secrecy: all the blinds were closed, and where there weren’t any, a sheet was used. The parish was paying for apartments and rooms for families. Among other families with both a father and a mother present, he decided to host a single mother there, despite never having made such arrangements available for the new student priests who had arrived or his niece who came to study. The parish house has two floors, each with three bedrooms, connected by a door. The young woman has been living there since last October. Supposedly, no one knows she lives there. She avoids being seen entering or leaving the building. If it is a case of charitable assistance, why hide it? Additionally, although she works and does not need to pay for services in the house, she is given money for the nanny’s payment, and other expenses. I also point out that the children often do not sleep at the house because the mother has “business trips,” which is false. Has he slept with her? Yes. She is not a catechist, but she attends activities with him, and he introduces her as such. Even during a May parish pilgrimage, they behaved like a couple or a married pair. Those present noticed, but nothing could be said because it was the vicar.
Adding to this, last August, he met with a girl about 20–21 years old to talk, but it led to physical contact. I know this because I had access to the parish’s cameras, and I saw it. I do not put all the blame on him because it is clear that she seduces him. What surprised me was that he let himself be carried away. He seemed like a man very much in need of sex to have gone that far. I asked him to go on a retreat, and he promised that he would. He went everywhere except on retreat.
Before this incident, I also caught him with a catechist. He had been treating her with what I would call excessive courtesy, which seemed unusual for a catechist. I confronted him, and he said nothing was happening, but his behaviour said otherwise. Eventually, I saw messages dedicated to the girl saying, “I love you, my darling,” and similar phrases.
To summarize the summer in one paragraph: in June, he tells the catechist that he loves her, but by July, he tries to mend things with the woman he already had a relationship with; then, in August, he gropes a girl, keeps insisting with the woman he had a relationship with, and it’s around this time I realise he’s also hit on the young woman living with him. A month later, she moved in with him. It’s the behaviour of a womanizer, a player, which one might expect from an ordinary man with no principles, but, from a priest?
I can identify a pattern: He uses his status in the parish office to get to know young women —immigrants, Latinas, educated, in their 30s— and seduces them using the money he obtains for the parish, gifts, and more-than-exquisite attention. All three of them have the same profile and similar physical appearance. The modus operandi has been the same.
Adding to this is a very compromising article that appears on Google, in which he claims to have children and states that he has been involved in scandals in other dioceses.
Last year, he was very unstable. He was never present from Monday to Wednesday or even Thursday. He only barely managed to celebrate a Sunday Mass. He no longer participated in the Exposition of the Blessed Sacrament or celebrated weekday Masses. He was always away with “his sister” or involved in some activity. It was impossible to have a meeting with him. It is true that his sister is ill, and he spends a lot of time with her, but it just so happens that he also has a woman living in his house who is constantly on “business trips.” Neglecting the parish to such an extent because of a woman had never happened before. Similarly, sometimes it seemed that he was more interested in numbers (many children in catechesis, many baptisms, many confirmations, an entire church…) than in truly living the faith. In the 10 years I have known him, I have never seen him pray alone, kneeling in the temple.
Since his mother’s death, I have seen him as if he were in a phase of liberation, less worried, and the situation with his sister’s cancer has made him even more nervous. Given everything that has happened, I can assure you, without a doubt, that he is waiting for his sister to pass away so he can leave and even abandon the ministry. His mother’s death came just after the pandemic ended. I think he may have been overwhelmed with so many donations, so much money, and so many wealthy and influential people wanting to help that it clouded his mind because everything has gone downhill since then.
I tried to speak with a priest friend to see if he could sit with him. He avoids them all because he never has time and can deny everything. He is closed off in a phase of denial about what is happening. He is incapable of admitting his mistakes or asking for forgiveness. At one point, I called the Secretary of the Diocese Vicar delegate and told him; he said something had reached him from Caritas indicating that families were being housed in the parish house. He asked Fr Gonzalo, who said it was not happening in his parish. Lying when it is a form of assistance makes no sense. I was surprised when a colleague told me, “He already had a reputation in Italy.” I was in shock: How can someone with so many scandalous antecedents, with such a predisposition for relationships with women, still be in the Church? How can one live with such a lie for so long?
The truth is, I no longer know what goes through his mind and heart. He is not the person I have known for 10 years. When you discover all these events, one after another, it means something. The relationship between us became very tense due to all these things I knew and kept to myself, but there came a point where I could no longer keep so many secrets, and his lack of empathy disgusted me. I kept these things to myself for a long time to avoid hurting the parish.
When I met him, he told me he did not feel like a priest and was one because his mother wanted it that way. When you get to know him, you realize he is very independent and different from the rest. He is a very intelligent, hardworking person. I would say that, deep down, he is good (but I am no longer sure), he has that gift of speech that can captivate anyone, and he can lie, even when you present him with the evidence and the facts. He does it extraordinarily well when he plays his role as a priest.
It causes me sadness, embarrassment, and even some discomfort to have to speak about this at such high levels, but I have fought so hard and suffered so much, and I feel alone. And yes, his brazenness and shamelessness bother me. I am labelled as evil for confronting him and wanting him to do things properly, while he is seen as an impeccable priest. Ultimately, if things that happen do not directly affect us, we ignore them. We only become outraged when a woman becomes pregnant, or a child is raped, but we do not care about the behaviours that precede these events. Many people in the parish know about this situation but prefer to turn a blind eye because “it’s his life.”
You may wonder how I can know so many things and be so concerned. We have been together as a couple for 9 years, and although we have been intimate, it was never a relationship based on sex. When I asked him about chastity and sex before marriage, he replied that because he saw me as his “wife,” it did not matter. (Yes, I was very naïve, I know.) We were supposed to be waiting for the perfect moment to start a life together, for which we had already made plans without ever finalizing anything. He has even grabbed me by the neck in front of many parents. I did not report him because he said he would also report me for invasion of privacy. I promise that if I were in the same situation, I would review his phone again because he lies whenever he can, and even more so, looking you in the eye. A person who plays like this with people and goes through life pretending to be a victim because “everyone who criticizes him wants to harm him” is a narcissist in every sense.
These attitudes of arrogance, authoritarianism, manipulation, lying, pride, shamelessness, and violence are not behaviours that should be displayed by a priest or anyone else. I held him in high esteem, but he has ultimately disappointed me.
Under the light of the Gospel, I wanted to correct him, but the Pope also tells us not to judge others’ sins, and I do not know if I am acting correctly. I am not a saint, but I have always sought his good. I have always tried approaching him to discuss these behaviours, but he avoids the topic. The answer is “don’t meddle in my life.” Certainly, it is his life, but he is also a person who should set an example of what he preaches. If all this came to light, the Church would look very bad because he is a well-known priest, especially in Aravaca and Pozuelo. I have pressured him to make him come to his senses because I must be one of the few people who dare to speak out.
As they say: he is a candle in the street and darkness at home. To outsiders and those who come to collaborate, he treats them like royalty, always very correct in his behaviour. To those in the parish, he is dismissive. He gets angry easily when things don’t go his way or when he’s nervous. He shouts too much. He disrespects you but approaches you as if nothing happened, skipping over “excuse me” or “sorry.”
I must have been emotionally blind to have allowed so many things, so many imprudent and unethical behaviours: I constantly criticised him for meeting girls alone in the office at 3 or 4 PM when no one is at the parish or for sitting young girls on his lap, for charging three different people for the same image to be placed in the temple just to get the money. Or, like what’s happening now with the Epiphany's Day campaign: the foundation he usually works with has explicitly asked that no child receives a duplicate gift. If a child is already going to receive a gift from another entity or through another channel, please do not participate so as not to take away opportunities from other children. But no, he works with La Caixa and this foundation, saying that he will divide the children, when in reality, all the children have written two letters, one for each entity. The same goes for the hidden bank accounts he has for the parish. He prefers to give the impression that he is a poor parish, so he passed on those two hundred thousand euros to the Archdiocese so that the bank account would be empty. In the end... it angers me that power always wins.
I promise you that every word I express in this email is accurate, and I can prove many. I have risked a lot to do so.
When he approached me in 2013, he told me that falling in love had never happened to him. Later, he said he wouldn't try again if it didn’t work out. Everything I have seen since last summer is contrary to those claims. And I repeat, I don’t care if he is in love; what I judge (and maybe I shouldn’t, but it affects me a lot) is his manipulative and shameless behaviour, getting everyone wrapped around his finger and making people always do what he wants. That is not right. My intention in pressuring him was for him to hit rock bottom and reflect on his actions. He needed to take some time to think about what he wanted to do with his life. I often questioned how I could distract him from his incredible work in the parish, but seeing him in his current state, I doubt he ever questioned his double life. He needs someone to bring him back down to earth. He goes through life ignoring what he preaches; he doesn’t care what people think, opine, or say about him. I never thought he could manipulate and lie just to save his reputation. And he always has the luck of coming out on top. So many years of living a lie is too much. I believe God wanted to open my eyes by showing me so many imprudent acts on his part.
He has started at 100% this year, but I have no idea what is behind that behaviour. Maybe the Vicar delegate has spoken to him.
This is not about jealousy or wanting to harm him or anything similar. The truth is, I am not handling this well. I feel a lot of shame, and I even feel dirty. It is not easy for me to confess this to you. I am criticising something I have been capable of doing, but it was never in the same way. We never gave reason for talking and always put the parish above personal desires.
I have spoken with the Archpriest and the Vicar delegate's Secretary about the facts that do not involve personal matters. I confessed to the Vicar, who said he would take the matter into his own hands and told me that I could even report it to the Archdiocese, but that was not my intention. I just wanted someone to sit down and discuss his reality. I went and spoke with an Abbot in Covadonga, to whom he has confessed several times, and he bluntly told me to leave him alone and let him do whatever he wanted with his life. I spoke with his classmate, who told me he already had a reputation and that it would explode at any moment. This was months ago, and I still see him acting shamelessly.
If you think it’s worth it, I can let you learn about the whole story in full detail, from the beginning, as painful as it is unpleasant. Please handle this email with the delicacy it deserves. I know that it can cause a lot of damage and that it will be hard for me to forgive, but I take full responsibility for my actions.
X
From: Eduardo Aranda Calleja
Sent: Monday, October 23, 2023, 2:29 PM
To: [Redacted]
Subject: RE: Att. Bishop Jesús Vidal
Dear X,
I have presented your letter to Bishop Jesús. He has asked me to arrange a meeting with you, if possible, this Thursday, the 26th at 10:00 AM at the Archdiocese (Calle de Bailén, nº 8). Thank you very much for your cooperation.
Best regards, Fr Eduardo Aranda.
From: Eduardo Aranda Calleja earanda@archidiocesis.madrid
Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2023, 8:39 AM
To: [Redacted]
Subject: RE: Att. Bishop Jesús Vidal
Dear X,
Bishop Jesús Vidal has asked me to contact you to ask if you could come to the Archdiocese on Monday, the 30th, or Tuesday, the 31st in the afternoon, both days at 5:30 PM. Would that be possible?
I look forward to your response. Best regards, Fr Eduardo Aranda.
From: [Redacted]
Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2023, 11:33 AM
To: Eduardo Aranda Calleja earanda@archidiocesis.madrid
Subject: RE: Att. Bishop Jesús Vidal
Good morning, Fr Eduardo,
Tuesday is perfect for me. See you at 5:30 PM at the Archdiocese.
Best regards, X
From: Eduardo Aranda Calleja earanda@archidiocesis.madrid
Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2023, 9:41 AM
To: X
Subject: RE: Att. Bishop Jesús Vidal
Dear X,
See you then on Tuesday, the 31st, at 5:30 PM at Bailén 8.
I will inform Bishop Jesús. Best regards, Fr Eduardo Aranda
From: [Redacted]
Sent: Thursday, November 2, 2023, 12:25 PM
To: Eduardo Aranda Calleja earanda@archidiocesis.madrid
Subject: Concerns
Good morning, Fr Eduardo:
You left me quite thoughtful about some topics, and maybe a little upset. You must be used to these complaints, and I imagine your response follows protocol.
When I decided to speak with you, I did so consciously, with much shame, but with a very clear idea of what I wanted to convey. I know you are always interested in knowing, first and foremost, whether there was consensual sex or not.
I have put Gonzalo's double life on the table, but my indignation is more with his behaviour and character. As I already told you, right or wrong, I do not judge his double life because he is a man and a person, and love can be found without looking for it, as I believe happened in my case.
Given his nature, I believed his words and, without being sure, I took a risk in building a relationship I thought had a future since he was “certain” he would leave the ministry. I made a mistake. Well, yes, I admit it, and I apologise for it.
Now, what I find neither average nor typical in a priest is the false honesty he portrays:
He is a liar: He can look you in the eye and tell you anything, even if it’s a complete lie, just to come out unscathed. He could lie to the Vicar’s secretary when asked if he had a family living in his house. I have witnessed how he has done this many times before donors, volunteers, and me. Or simply lying about the number of beneficiaries to increase the donation amount.
He is manipulative: He approaches immature people (like the young ones in the parish) and tells them not to come near me because anything I say about him is a lie. Or, as happened with a catechist, he sat down with her this summer to tell her not to pay attention to my hints, that my problem was that I was in love with him and didn’t want any woman near him, that I was spiteful towards the girl he is now involved with, knowing perfectly well that none of that is true. You can understand that after how he’s behaved since my mother’s death —exactly a year and a half ago— my feelings of love have completely faded. Or when he sat down with someone over coffee after a physical confrontation and took the opportunity to say that I was the one who hit him, showing his scratches, when I was just trying to defend myself from his blows. It takes a very small man to do something like that. He called me a “venomous tongue” just because I said that what he did was not right. Or telling catechism parents who ask about me that they should rather not speak to me because who knows what nonsense I might tell them—that’s not right either.
He is violent: He has many fits of rage; I think he’s bipolar because after verbally or physically mistreating you, he approaches as if nothing happened. He has been capable of hitting me, and I will never forgive him for that. Under no circumstances can I justify that kind of violence, no matter how angry he is. He continuously speaks harshly to people in front of others, but if it’s done to him, it’s a lack of respect. Or simply tailing a car on the street to do to them what they did to him: blocking the way or not letting them pass. Hitting a woman is an act of cowardice.
He is unethical: He doesn’t mind charging different people for the same service or donation. He cannot say no to donations that make no sense for the parish. He cannot be honest when companies ask for assurances that there will be no duplicate gifts.
He is imprudent: He doesn’t care about meeting girls alone at the parish at inconvenient hours. He is overly affectionate with women and children, but since that’s just “the way he is,” it’s overlooked.
He is shameless: He doesn’t care if he’s seen with one woman today and another next month. He usually lives with his girlfriend without worrying about what others might say or think. Whether it’s going to the movies, shopping, taking a walk, or strolling through the neighbourhood—he doesn’t hide his intimacy with the girl of the moment, even in the parish.
Mismanagement of money: He lives a lifestyle marked by financial extravagance. He travels frequently and only stays at Paradores (luxury hotels), always paying for meals, coffee, and gas and always footing the bill. A priest who earns around €1,200 has a lifestyle thatis far from normal. He is generous, lavish even. I know well that the money he uses to pay for his girlfriends’ whims comes from the “C fund” of the parish—the one he keeps hidden at home in small folders. I know he doesn’t spend a single euro of his own money.
He abuses his status: I think you would call it an “asymmetric relationship.” He uses his position as parish priest to meet young women in vulnerable situations and recruits them as volunteers, and if he likes them, he presents himself as the good Samaritan, the saviour, through his excessive concern for their well-being and the many gifts he offers. I know this because it happened to me, to the catechist, and to the young girl he groped and now lives with. We all share the same profile and same similarities, and the modus operandi he used with me is the same one he used with the others.
False humility: He is in a poor parish, but he only associates with wealthy people from whom he can extract some benefit. And I confess, it bothers me how he fawns over the rich people who come to the parish: no shouts, no insults, just sycophantic pleasantries... while the local volunteers are treated with disdain.
Favoritism: I assure you he does not treat an unattractive girl the same way he treats a pretty one. Not even God could change his mind when he gets fixated on someone.
He loves sex: It’s not that I know this because we’ve slept together frequently or infrequently —it’s because he’s always been obsessed with it. He once told me we would do it daily when we lived together. And I’m sure he “stopped loving me” because I refused to sleep with him in recent years, unwilling to be treated like a sexual object when I prioritized quality time as a couple or feeling valued. And I know well that his decision to move that girl into his house also stems from the convenience of having someone to sleep with living under the same roof.
He is a womanizer: I have never met a man capable of being involved with and flirting with four women at the same time.
He is not a praying priest: In 10 years, I have never seen him pray alone; he always prioritizes social work over prayer.
He is incapable of recognizing his mistakes and apologising: He often offends people, yells at them, or behaves badly and cannot apologize unless he needs something. With everything I’ve experienced over the past two years, he has only apologized to me twice, both through email and because I forced him to. Not even when he’s been violent towards me.
He uses food distribution to families as an easy way to attract money and wealthy people. That’s the only reason he continues to do it. You cannot imagine the toll it takes in terms of resources and volunteers. The parish comes to a standstill for the monthly distribution. He has no time to hear confessions (he rarely does it), but he has time for everyone who comes looking for food or financial aid.
He demands what he doesn’t give: He asks for respect and good treatment, but he doesn’t offer it. He asks for punctuality, yet he is never on time. He asks the cleaners to stop their activities during Mass but continues his tasks. The Blessed Sacrament could be exposed, but he would still be attending to people in his office. His Masses always start late, and he is always late to meetings.
His reputation precedes him: With his history in Zaragoza, Murcia, Alcalá, Madrid, and Italy with women and these irreverent behaviors, I don’t understand how he hasn’t been called to account yet.
He plays the victim: I don’t know what you think, but I have dedicated my body and soul to him, to his work, to the parish for 9 years. I have always accompanied him, been faithful, honest, concerned for him, supported him, and ensured he didn’t waste money and did things right. I have forgotten myself, my desire to be a mother, waiting for him—only for him, after doing everything he did (infidelity, playing with my feelings, always keeping me waiting with hope even after we ended the relationship, humiliating me, hitting me)—to now treat me like just any woman and try to erase 10 years of hard work in the parish by telling others that I am out to get him just because I tell the truth, that I hit him, that I am spreading lies about him. It is not fair. I have given up my job at the parish, my friendships, doing the things I love, and my daily routine over 10 years in Madrid just to keep the peace and calm things down, but he continues living his life as if nothing has changed, with his girlfriend by his side, and I’m the bad one. How can he be capable of that?
Don’t think everything I tell you is only from the last two years. No. Due to my emotional blindness, I’ve covered up and justified many of these behaviours to others. I have always tried to protect his image, but I have also personally criticized him for it. His blunt response has been: “Let me be who I am, don’t try to change me, don’t try to control me, I need to improve.” But it ends there as an empty promise.
It pains me deeply to tell you these things about him, but I will not allow myself to be judged while he is put on a pedestal when he is an utterly despicable man. He cannot prohibit me from telling the truth about my experience. I swear I am not lying. I recognize that I have behaved poorly with him, but it was a reaction to his utterly inappropriate behaviour.
Knowing part of what is happening (getting involved with the catechist, groping a young girl, and having a romantic relationship with a woman living in his house) is known by about 15 of the 30 catechists, the closest volunteers, Father Carlos, the Vicar’s Secretary, the Archpriest, the Vicar, and even some parents of the catechism students (my departure and the lack of talk about me has caused some commotion among parents who miss me). By saying that you will wait to speak with him, you are projecting a disastrous image of passivity for the Church because many, like me, wonder how he can still remain in his position as if nothing is happening while half the parish knows what’s going on. His sister being hospitalized hasn’t deterred him from continuing to live with a woman at his house or parading her around the parish. He’s not the first nor the last in that unfortunate situation. Once his sister passes, you won’t be able to grasp its scope. He has always said that he will disappear when it happens. I know you can handle the situation subtly. Worse will be the scandal when the problem becomes more public than it already is due to the endless comments, which keep growing, and more people find out and start commenting on it in their way. So many people know they are already watching what’s happening inside and outside the parish and in the neighbourhood.
I cannot do more; everything is now in your hands. But I wanted to make things even clearer if that’s possible.
Thank you for your attention and for listening to me.
X
From: Eduardo Aranda Calleja earanda@archidiocesis.madrid
Sent: Friday, November 3, 2023, 11:52 AM
To: X
Subject: RE: Concerns
Dear X,
I am sorry to have left you with that impression, and I will try to explain myself briefly. Certainly, there are two dimensions, one juridical and the other pastoral. Perhaps we focused on the more juridical, penal aspect of offences, but we must also address the pastoral, personal, and priestly dimensions. Your message yesterday clarifies many aspects.
Thank you very much. I will also pass it on to D. Jesús Vidal, and we will try to help D. Gonzalo.
I send you my warmest regards. Fr. Eduardo Aranda
4. Final Reflection on the Ecclesiastical Management
The use of terms such as “dilemma,” “juridical,” and “pastoral” in the official communication of the diocese may give the impression of a considered and reflective response, but it can also seem like a tactic to avoid directly confronting the more serious and urgent problems affecting the parish community.
The words of the diocese, while seemingly well-intentioned, risk being perceived as inane (empty) if they are not accompanied by actions that reflect a real commitment to justice and authentic pastoral care. Separating the “juridical” from the “pastoral” can divert focus from what should be the true priority: the well-being of the parish community affected by the priest’s actions. Authentic pastoral care should center on protecting and serving the faithful, ensuring that justice and integrity prevail in all decisions and actions of the Church.
Superficial Words
When the diocese speaks of a “juridical and pastoral dilemma” and of “looking to help the priest,” these words can sound superficial or, in some cases, insincere, especially if not accompanied by concrete actions to support those principles. The lack of significant changes over a period of ten months suggests that these words might be more verba pro veritate (words for truth) than genuine, designed to give an appearance of concern and deliberation without truly committing to a solution.
Evasion of Responsibility
Referring to a dilemma might be seen as a way to dilute responsibility, presenting the problem as complex and difficult to resolve, when what is really needed is a clear and decisive response. This can give the impression that the diocese is more interested in justifying its inaction than in effectively addressing the issue.
Artificial Separation
The separation between the “juridical” and the “pastoral” in the diocese’s response might be seen as a dicotomia ficta (fictional dichotomy) that does not necessarily reflect the true priorities of the Church. In theory, pastoral care should be at the center of the Church’s mission—not only in relation to the priest, but also, and perhaps more urgently, in relation to the parish community affected by his actions.
Misplaced Priorities
Speaking of “helping the priest” from a pastoral perspective might be necessary, but it should not overshadow the need to prioritize the well-being and safety of the community entrusted to him. The focus seems misplaced if too much emphasis is placed on protecting or rehabilitating the priest while downplaying the devastating impacts of his conduct on the parishioners and the Church’s reputation.
Responsibility Towards the Community
From an authentic pastoral perspective, the priority should be the protection, support, and guidance of the parish community. This involves not only addressing the damage already done, but also preventing future abuses. Authentic pastoral care should involve a firm response that ensures ecclesiastical leadership acts with justice and transparency, always placing the well-being of the faithful above institutional protection.
Lack of Coherence
The lack of coherence in how these values and responsibilities are managed can erode trust in the Church. If the pastoral approach is addressed solely in terms of “helping the priest,” and the juridical becomes an excuse for inaction, the Church fails in its essential mission to be a refuge and a spiritual guide for its faithful.
Need for Comprehensive Pastoral Care
A coherent and comprehensive pastoral response should integrate the juridical and the pastoral into a single mission centred on justice, truth, and service to the community. There should be no separation between discipline and mercy; both must be applied in a way that prioritizes the common good and the integrity of the ecclesial community.
YOUR COMMENTS AND CONTRIBUTION TO OUR TWITTER ACCOUNT
TWITTER - click here to tweet
You can order the THIRD volume of the work in this link.
And through it, read for free several chapters of the two volumes.
DONATE THROUGH PAYPAL You may want to consider making a Donation. From 1 €, through the Paypal button below. The expenses to sustain the WEB page are substantial, and include the legal service to defend this work from the lawsuits filed by those people that we denounce in this collegiate investigation.
Comments