Alienum phaedrum torquatos nec eu, vis detraxit periculis ex, nihil expetendis in mei. Mei an pericula euripidis, hinc partem.
Following the guidance of Irish expert Ian Elliott, the Sodalitium Christianae Vitae (SCV) established the Listening and Support Office in May 2016. This was the official and permanent body responsible for receiving reports of physical, psychological, sexual, and other forms of serious abuse committed by members or former members of our institution (while they were part of it). In addition to providing a safe and welcoming space for listening, the Office was also responsible for proposing a reparation process to the affected person, which included a range of measures for reparation, including financial compensation.
On April 30th, 2016, the Ethics Commission for Justice and Reconciliation (ECJR) delivered to the Superior General of the Sodalitium Christianae Vitae 32 individual reports, each containing specific recommendations for actions to be taken for each person the Commission had identified as a victim. In some cases, the Commission recommended granting financial compensation as part of the reparation, but without specifying a particular amount.
After the contracted services of Mr. Ian Elliott concluded in January 2017, the Listening and Support Office was placed under the direction of Dr. Silvia Matuk.
On January 17th, 2025, the Sodalitium Christianae Vitae was informed of the decision by the Dicastery for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life specifically approved by Pope Francis to suppress the Sodalitium. In this new context, and with greater clarity regarding the responsibilities and competencies of the General Government, it was determined that the Listening and Support Office would conclude its functions on April 11th, 2025.
Through this Office, as of April 11th, 2025, the Sodalitium Christianae Vitae carried out 98 reparation processes. Among these, the 36 cases presented by the ECJR were addressed, resulting in agreements with 25 individuals. These were included among the 98 reparations mentioned previously. In accordance with the principles established at the beginning of the process, these 98 reparations were carried out through out-of-court settlements.
The work carried out over those years, the listening to the testimonies presented, internal reflection, dialogue with victims by some members of the Sodalitium, the recommendations of various prevention professionals, the experience of other communities, and the guidance of the Church all contributed to the continuous improvement and updating of the reparation process.
Abuse is a deeply painful reality that can cause serious physical, psychological, and/or spiritual harm. In some cases, this harm is irreparable and its consequences difficult to measure. Driven by an awareness of the damage caused by some of its members or former members, the Sodalitium Christianae Vitae issued an institutional apology, expressed both through personal letters from the Superior General and through the Message of Forgiveness and Reconciliation formulated by all perpetual members gathered at the 5th General Assembly of the SCV in January 2019.
We considered it an institutional duty to take concrete actions to repair the harm caused, beyond what might be determined by civil or canonical justice. For this reason, the reparation process aimed to be an act of justice that sought to contribute to the comprehensive improvement of the physical, psychological, and emotional well-being of the affected person, and in some cases, included members of their family.
We understood that the reparation process for each individual must be addressed in a personalized manner. Therefore, we sought to implement various actions to contribute as effectively as possible to each person’s healing journey. To that end, in addition to an acknowledgment and an apology, three specific forms of reparation were established:
1. Academic Support: Specific assistance for undergraduate or postgraduate studies, as well as other academic or professional training aimed at improving employment opportunities and supporting the individual’s life project.
2. Therapeutic Support: Specific assistance for psychological therapy, psychiatric care, or other medical treatments for a defined period. Support was also provided in obtaining medical insurance, with the aim of contributing to the comprehensive improvement of the affected person’s physical, psychological, and emotional well-being.
3. Financial Compensation: Provision of a financial amount as compensation for the harm suffered, based on referential amounts established according to the guidelines provided by Mr. Ian Elliott.
Several individuals received more than one type of support. The following chart shows the distribution of these types of support which were not mutually exclusive provided to the 98 victims who received reparations.
Scope of the ReparationsThe following considerations were established to provide clarity on the scope of what could be included in a reparation process:
| SCOPE | DETAIL |
| Regarding the Prepetrator | It was considered whether the person identified as responsible for the abuse was an active member or a former member who had committed the abuse while belonging to the Sodalitium. |
| Regarding the Timeframe | All abuse committed since the founding of the institution in December 1971 was taken into consideration. |
| Regarding the Circumstances | All abuse committed within Sodalitium communities or during any apostolic activity organized by the Sodalitium was taken into consideration. |
| Regarding the Type of Abuse | Situations considered included those classified as canonical crimes, as well as circumstances that caused harm to the person, such as physical abuse, psychological abuse, or sexual abuse of adults. |
| Regarding the Evidence | In cases of abuse involving minors, no probatory evidence was required; however, an investigation was conducted to assess the credibility of the allegations or to rule out the possibility of contradictory evidence. |
Recognizing the diversity of situations that may have occurred, efforts were made to address each case individually, applying a principle of proportionality and graduality in order to establish fair and equitable parameters whenever possible. To this end, several criteria were established to determine the level of severity in each case:
| CRITERION | DETAIL |
| The Degree of Physical Contact | Sexual abuse was considered more serious when it involved physical contact than when it did not. |
| The Age of the Victim | The abuse was considered more serious the younger the age of the person who suffered it. |
| The Duration of the Abuse | The abuse was considered more serious the longer it continued over time. |
| The relationship with the Perpetrator | The abuse was considered more serious when the relationship with the perpetrator involved a higher level of trust. |
| The victim’s vulnerability | The abuse was considered more serious when the person was in a situation or context of greater fragility or vulnerability whether it was psychological, physical, emotional, or of another nature. |
| The Harm Caused | The abuse was considered more serious the greater its impact on the person whether on their physical, psychological, and/or spiritual health. |
| The Nature of the Abuse | The abuse was considered more serious when it was classified as a civil or canonical crime. |
Based on the dates the out-of-court agreements were signed, the distribution of the reparations over time was as follows:
Reparations by Gender of the Victim of Different Types of AbuseAccording to the information available to the Listening and Support Office, the 98 reparations carried out were provided to 9 women and 89 men.
Time Period in which the 98 Repaired Abuses OccurredAccording to the information available to the Listening and Support Office, of the 98 testimonies that resulted in reparations, the abuses occurred over time as follows:
Circumstances of Non-ReparationThe Listening and Support Office evaluated each of the allegations found within every testimony submitted. In some cases, a single testimony included multiple types of allegations, each of which was assessed and investigated independently. Therefore, while certain allegations within a testimony may not have resulted in reparation, others from the same testimony could have been considered and led to a Reparation Agreement.
The following circumstances were not considered grounds for reparation according to the objectives of the Office:
A total of 13 individuals approached the Listening and Support Office with testimonies that fell under the circumstances described above. As a result, they were not recognized as victims and therefore did not receive financial compensation.
Some individuals who, according to the criteria mentioned, were not recognized as victims of abuse were offered solidarity assistance. This support was extended based on the principle of Christian charity, taking into account each person’s particular situation of difficulty. These cases were not included in the statistical data presented in this report. In total, solidarity assistance was provided to 12 individuals.
Since September 2021, the Office received advisory support from Eshmá, a Spanish institution specialized in caring for victims of abuse within the Catholic Church. Their recognized experience in accompanying victims, along with their professionalism and independence, supported the General Government of the Sodalitium in making the best possible decisions in the abuse cases presented to the Listening and Support Office.
From the creation of the Office in 2016 until April 2025, the total amount allocated for victim reparations was US$ 6,491,000.00.
The Sodalitium also made the following additional payments on behalf of the victims: payments for legal and canonical counsel, notarial expenses, travel expenses related to notarial signings and/or the presentation of testimony, among other related costs.