The following are excerpts from Canon Law: Letter & Spirit: A Practical Guide to the Code of Canon Law published in 1995 and edited by Mgr Gerard Sheehy.
The imprimatur for the book was signed by Cardinal Connell on November 4th, 1995.
From Canon 1395, on dealing with a cleric who "offends against the sixth commandment with a minor under the age of 16 years". Paragraph 2813 states that "the matter of imputability is of fundamental importance" in such cases.
"Before imposing any penalty for such an offence, the ecclesiastical authority must be morally certain that there has been an external violation of the law which is gravely imputable".
It continues "Among the factors which may seriously diminish imputability in such cases is paedophilia [their italics]. This is described as 'the act or fantasy of engaging in sexual activity with pre-pubertal children as a repeatedly preferred or exclusive method of achieving sexual excitement'.
"Those who have studied this matter in detail have concluded that proven paedophiles are often subject to urges and impulses which are in effect beyond their control."
It continues [Paragraph 2814]: "When the facts of a particular case are examined carefully, it may well emerge that the cleric did indeed commit a sexual offence, or a number of them, with a minor; as such, he may be liable to punishment by the criminal law of the State; nevertheless, because of the influence of paedophilia, he may not be liable, by reason of at least diminished imputability, to any canonical penalty, or perhaps to only a mild penalty, to a formal warning or reproof, to a penal remedy.
"In dealing with such cases, the ecclesiastical authority must tread very carefully, balancing the harm done to the victims, the rights of the cleric in canon law, and the overall good of the Church in its striving for justice for all."
[Paragraph 2815] - "In the first place, a clear distinction must be drawn between two not untypical situations, namely: (a) that of a cleric of such paedophile orientation that he stands accused of having, over a number of years and even up to the present time, sexually abused a minor or minors under 16 years of age: and (b) that of a cleric who stands accused of having, a number of years previously - perhaps, 10, 15, 20 - sexually abused such a minor, on one or a number of occasions, but who since the alleged offence has led a blameless clerical life.
"No real system of justice - least of all that of canon law - can equate these two situations, particularly in the manner in which it deals with them.
"Nor should this juridical and pastoral view be adversely influenced by the sometimes excessive statements of some psychologists and psychiatrists, to the effect that once such an offence, of however long ago, has been established, the ecclesiastical authority has on its hands an incurable paedophile.
"Experience has proven that the disregard of this interpretation of the law has itself led to yet further injustice.
"In particular, it would appear to be imprudent of any episcopal authority to be dependent upon the advice of any one psychiatric expert.
"It should be noted that in fact, whatever else, the advice of a psychological [their italics] expert should always be sought. It will then be for the bishop to balance the advice he is thus given and, in his own prudent judgement, to act accordingly."
Paragraph 2816: "Secondly, serious consideration should always be given by the diocesan bishop before the use of the penal process is involved in these cases. It should be used as a first response only in exceptional circumstances.
"It should never be used by way of threat of dismissal from the clerical state - not least because, in normal circumstances, the outcome of the penal process would not be in the bishop's personal control.
"There is the further consideration - relevant perhaps in some countries more than others - that the premature use of the penal process could lead to a requirement by the civil authorities of 'discovery' of the documents used in the canonical process.
"In accordance with Can.1344 2, the competent ecclesiastical authority may refrain from seeking to punish an offending cleric in such a case 'if the offender has been or foreseeably will be sufficiently punished by the civil authority'."