Pope Leo XIV accepts resignation of Spanish bishop accused of abuse in first known case for pontiff
Pope Leo XIV accepted the resignation of Spanish Bishop Rafael Zornoza, who is under investigation for alleged sexual abuse. The accusations against Zornoza involve alleged abuse of a young seminarian in the 1990s, when Zornoza was a priest. The El País newspaper reported the accusations, including details from a letter by the former seminarian. The Diocese of Cádiz denied the accusations but confirmed the investigation by the church court in Madrid. This is believed to be the first known case of Pope Leo XIV removing a bishop accused of abuse.
24 days ago
Pope Leo XIV accepted the resignation of Bishop Rafael Zornoza of Cádiz, Spain, on November 22, 2025.1
This marks the first known instance under the new pontiff where a bishop accused of sexual abuse has been removed from office.1
Zornoza, aged 76, had submitted his resignation the previous year upon reaching the mandatory retirement age of 75 for bishops.1
The bishop faces a church investigation for allegedly abusing a young former seminarian in the 1990s while serving as a priest and seminary director in Getafe.1
According to a letter from the accuser reported by El País, Zornoza fondled the seminarian and regularly slept with him from ages 14 to 21.1
The letter further claims Zornoza heard the young man's confessions and convinced him to seek psychiatric treatment to "cure" his homosexuality.1
The Diocese of Cádiz has denied the accusations, labeling them "very serious and also false" and referring to events nearly 30 years old.1
Zornoza is cooperating with the probe conducted by the Rota, a church tribunal in Madrid, and has suspended his duties while receiving treatment for an aggressive form of cancer.1
The Vatican issued a brief statement confirming the resignation acceptance without detailing the reasons.1
No temporary leader has been appointed for the Cádiz diocese yet.1
This case emerges amid Spain's ongoing reckoning with decades of clerical sexual abuse and cover-ups.1
A 2023 official probe by Spain's ombudsman, based on 487 victim testimonies, suggested potential victims could number in the hundreds of thousands.1
Spain's Catholic bishops rejected the report's scale as a "lie," noting abuse occurs more widely outside the church.1
In response, the church's 2024 audit identified 728 abusers since 1945 and initiated a victim compensation plan, supported by government mandates for reparations.1
Examine canon law’s response to episcopal abuse allegations
Canon law provides a structured and evolving response to allegations of abuse, particularly sexual abuse of minors or vulnerable persons, committed by or involving bishops. This framework emphasizes accountability, protection of victims, due process, and the Church's commitment to justice, drawing from the 1983 Code of Canon Law (CIC), motu proprio documents like Vos estis lux mundi (2019, updated 2023), and As a Loving Mother (2016). These norms distinguish between direct abuse by a bishop and negligence in handling abuse by others under their authority, mandating prompt investigations, cooperation with civil authorities, and potential removal from office. The process prioritizes the presumption of innocence while ensuring safeguards for victims and the common good, reflecting the Church's pastoral responsibility to prevent scandal and promote healing.
The Church's canonical response to abuse allegations has roots in earlier legislation but intensified in the late 20th and early 21st centuries amid global scandals. The 1983 CIC established foundational norms for penal processes, including preliminary investigations under Canon 1717, which requires an ordinary—such as a metropolitan archbishop when dealing with a suffragan bishop—to inquire into facts, circumstances, and imputability upon receiving credible knowledge of a delict, while protecting reputations. This canon applies broadly to delicts like those against the sixth commandment (Canon 1395 and 1398), which include sexual offenses with minors, now encompassing acts up to age 18 and grooming or possession of child pornography.
Historically, the 2001 motu proprio Sacramentorum sanctitatis tutela reserved grave delicts like clerical sexual abuse to the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF), with a 10-year prescription period extended to 20 years in 2010. While initially focused on priests, this evolved to include bishops, especially after 2002 papal addresses highlighting zero tolerance. By 2011, the CDF's Circular Letter urged bishops to cooperate with civil law on reporting abuse, extending to cases involving ecclesiastical structures. These foundations underscore that abuse is both a canonical delict and a civil crime, requiring ecclesiastical authorities to act without prejudice to secular processes.
The 2019 motu proprio Vos estis lux mundi (VELM), made permanent in 2022, marks a pivotal advancement by establishing universal norms for investigating bishops accused of abuse or covering it up. It applies to all forms of sexual abuse offending the dignity of minors or vulnerable adults, including abuse of power or conscience. Title II specifically targets bishops and equivalents (e.g., eparchs, major superiors), mandating structured procedures to ensure impartiality and transparency.
Upon receiving a report against a bishop, the metropolitan archbishop (or equivalent) must immediately request appointment from the competent Dicastery—typically the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith—to initiate the investigation. The Dicastery provides instructions within 30 days, guiding the process. If the report appears manifestly unfounded, the metropolitan informs the Dicastery via the Apostolic Nuncio, potentially archiving it unless directed otherwise. This step ensures centralized oversight, preventing local biases, and aligns with Canon 1717's preliminary inquiry. Reports can come from anyone, and systems for receiving them must be established in each diocese or eparchy.
Once appointed, the metropolitan (or delegates) carries out a thorough probe, collecting evidence, accessing ecclesiastical archives, and cooperating with other ordinaries if needed. They may request information from civil institutions, respecting state laws, especially when interviewing minors or vulnerable persons. To prevent tampering, measures preserve documents at risk. The metropolitan remains responsible for the investigation's direction, assisted by a notary, and must act impartially, recusing if conflicts arise.
The accused bishop enjoys the presumption of innocence and protection of reputation. If requested by the Dicastery, the metropolitan informs the bishop of the allegations, hears their defense (possibly with counsel), and submits periodic reports. This process integrates Canon 1722's precautionary measures, allowing the ordinary to restrict the bishop's ministry, impose residence bans, or limit Eucharistic participation to prevent scandal. These end once the cause ceases or the process concludes. For funding, ecclesiastical provinces or conferences may establish a dedicated fund under Canons 116 and 1303.
The investigation's outcome is forwarded to the Dicastery, which decides on further steps, potentially including judicial or administrative processes per CIC Book VII.
VELM complements earlier norms by addressing bishops' negligence, formalized in the 2016 motu proprio As a Loving Mother. This document specifies that "grave reasons" for removing a bishop from office (Canon 401 §2; 193 §1) include negligence in handling sexual abuse cases, such as failing to investigate or protect victims.
If foundational proof exists of such negligence, the competent Dicastery (e.g., CDF) opens an inquiry, informing the bishop and allowing defense through documentation and testimony. The bishop can meet superiors and present arguments; a supplementary investigation may follow. This leads to potential resignation or removal, per Canon 1742's process for pastoral removal, involving consultation with peers and paternal persuasion. If removed, the bishop vacates office promptly, though health exceptions apply (Canon 1747). Recourse is possible under Canon 1733, seeking equitable solutions via mediation.
These norms ensure bishops are held to the same accountability standards as others, reinforcing the Church's "zero tolerance" for abuse or cover-ups.
If guilt is established, penalties range from suspension to dismissal from office or the clerical state (Canon 1398 §1; 1342). For direct abuse, the CDF reserves judgment on grave delicts. Permanent penalties require judicial processes, not extrajudicial decrees by the ordinary.
Canon law mandates victim support, including spiritual and psychological assistance, and educates communities on prevention. Cooperation with civil authorities is obligatory, reporting crimes per local laws without delaying canonical action. Episcopal conferences must develop guidelines harmonizing with universal law.
Controversies arise in implementation, such as varying national laws or delays, but recent sources like VELM take precedence, emphasizing transparency. Where sources like the 2011 Circular Letter predate VELM, the latter's specifics for bishops supersede general cleric norms.[1†L overall] [11†L overall]
Canon law's response to episcopal abuse allegations balances justice, mercy, and protection, evolving from general penal norms to targeted motu proprio like Vos estis lux mundi and As a Loving Mother. It mandates swift, impartial investigations led by metropolitans under Dicastery oversight, with penalties up to removal, while prioritizing victim care and civil collaboration. This framework embodies the Church's call to conversion and safeguarding, ensuring bishops model accountability as successors of the Apostles.