In the article, Jakub Sewerynik explores the complexities of moral certainty in canon law, particularly in relation to allegations of misconduct within the Church. He highlights the distinction between guilty and innocent verdicts, introducing a third category known as "non constat," which arises when moral certainty regarding the accused's guilt cannot be established due to insufficient or contradictory evidence. This concept plays a significant role in Church proceedings and raises questions about the effectiveness of canon law compared to civil law in addressing allegations of abuse.

The recent claims by another individual alleging abuse by the late Bishop Jan Szkodoń amplify the discussion around how the Church handles such sensitive matters. Sewerynik raises important questions: Is the canon law system adequate, or does it fall short compared to secular judicial systems? The implications of these questions extend beyond individual cases, as they touch upon the Church's credibility and the need for transparency and accountability in addressing historical abuse.

Ultimately, Sewerynik calls for an examination of how the Church's processes can be improved to ensure justice and moral certainty for both the accused and the victims. His analysis emphasizes that reconciliation is necessary not only for individual cases but for the Church's moral standing in society, which has been deeply affected by the ongoing revelations of abuse within its ranks.