Senior Quebec Church Leader Resumes Role After Six-Month Leave Due to Abuse Claims

Senior Quebec Church Leader Resumes Role After Six-Month Leave Due to Abuse Claims
Cardinal Gerard Lacroix reacts to his nomination by Pope Francis in Quebec City on Jan. 13, 2014. (The Canadian Press/Jacques Boissinot)
The Canadian Press
Updated:
0:00

Cardinal Gérald Lacroix is resuming his duties today as archbishop of Quebec City after a Vatican-mandated investigation found no evidence tying the senior church leader to sexual misconduct allegations.

Lacroix says he has resumed his role after taking a voluntary six-month absence beginning in late January when the abuse allegations first surfaced as part of a class-action lawsuit against the diocese for historical sexual abuse cases.

In response to the claims, Pope Francis mandated retired Quebec judge André Denis to investigate.

While the alleged victim did not participate, Denis announced in May that his investigation didn’t exonerate Lacroix but failed to uncover any evidence that would justify a canonical trial.

A lawyer representing the alleged victim said in May his client preferred to testify in court and did not wish to take part in the Vatican-mandated investigation because it was an internal church process that lacked credibility.

Lacroix has denied the allegations, which he has described as “unfounded,” and the claims against him have not been tested in court.

In a news release, the archbishop described the past months as a “difficult journey.” He said he’s resuming his duties because Denis’s investigation found no evidence against him and because of the support of those around him. As well, he said he is seeking status to intervene in the class-action lawsuit.

Lacroix’s name was among 15 added to a list in January of perpetrators in a class-action lawsuit, authorized by the Superior Court in 2022, alleging sexual abuse by clergy and staff dating back to 1940. The alleged sexual touching involving Lacroix took place between 1987 and 1988 in Quebec City when the unnamed female plaintiff was 17.