(FRANCE)
Eurasia Review [Albany OR]
October 10, 2026
By Dr. Fr. John Singarayar
When Pope Leo XIV met seven survivors of abuse by French clergy in Lourdes, the most important moment of his visit happened away from the crowds and ceremonies. During a private meeting that lasted nearly two hours, he listened to their stories, thanked them for sharing their “painful testimony” and reaffirmed his commitment to ensuring such abuse never happens again.
That matters. Survivors who were doubted, silenced, or urged to forgive quickly deserve to be heard without defensiveness. But listening is only the beginning. The value of the meeting will not be measured by the pope’s words in Lourdes. It will be measured by what the Church does afterward.
A compassionate encounter can open the door to repair. It cannot, by itself, constitute repair.
Why France, and why now
Pope Leo’s four-day visit came as France continues to reckon with a devastating history. In 2021, the Independent Commission on Sexual Abuse in the Church estimated that approximately 216,000 people had been sexually abused by Catholic priests, religious, or other clergy between 1950 and 2020, while they were children. When lay personnel connected with Catholic schools, catechism, chaplaincies, youth movements, and other Church institutions were included, the estimated number rose to about 330,000.
These figures are not merely statistics. They represent children whose trust was exploited, families left carrying shame, and adults who often waited decades before finding the strength—or the safety—to speak.
The commission’s findings also revealed more than individual crimes. They exposed a culture in which institutional reputation was repeatedly placed above the protection of children; warnings were ignored; and victims were treated as threats to be contained rather than witnesses to be believed.
So, when the pope visited France, he was not simply entering a country with a troubled past. He was walking into an open wound.
Words are not enough
Thanking survivors is meaningful. It acknowledges that their suffering was real and that their courage in speaking matters. But testimony is not a performance offered for public consolation. It is evidence. And evidence demands consequences.
That means reporting credible allegations to civil authorities rather than managing them internally. It means independent oversight rather than investigations controlled by the institution under scrutiny. It means consequences for bishops and superiors who concealed crimes, transferred abusers, or placed institutional loyalty above children’s safety. It means compensation that recognizes the scale of the harm instead of treating survivors as inconvenient claimants.
A pope’s personal sorrow may be sincere. It may even be pastorally important. But sincerity is not accountability. Survivors need more than a church leader who is moved by their suffering. They need a church that changes because of it.
The danger of ‘behind us’
There will always be pressure to say that the worst is over. Institutions need closure. The faithful want reassurance. Leaders may understandably wish to turn the page.
But hope is not proof.
Abuse often becomes known only decades later. Survivors may need years to say what happened, confront the authority that silenced them, or believe that anyone will listen. A church that declares the crisis finished may simply repeat the old mistake in a new form: deciding that the institution’s comfort matters more than a survivor’s truth.
The safer message is more demanding: protection is never finished.
Safeguarding is not a sign that the Church distrusts its priests, religious, volunteers, or families. It is a sign that the Church understands power and takes vulnerability seriously. Vigilance is not an insult to the faithful. It is an act of love for them.
Where faith meets justice
The Church’s response is not only an institutional test. It is also a theological one.