Abstract
Abstract
This article examines safeguarding failures in Catholic diocesan seminaries through a qualitative comparative analysis of the cases of Argentine bishops Edgardo Gabriel Storni and Gustavo Oscar Zanchetta. Drawing on judicial decisions, ecclesiastical documents, published testimonies, journalistic investigations, and contextual consultations, it investigates how episcopal authority, vocational dependence, complaint trajectories, and institutional responses interacted to sustain abuse and delay accountability. Using Sara Ahmed’s concept of strategic inefficiency, complemented by institutional betrayal and safeguarding culture, the article shows that institutional failure was not reducible to isolated misconduct or administrative dysfunction. In the Storni case, strategic inefficiency operated primarily through the cumulative neutralization of warnings, records, testimonies, and formal inquiries. In the Zanchetta case, it appeared mainly through jurisdictional fragmentation, canonical opacity, and the disconnection of knowledge, protection, decision-making, and accountability. Across both cases, concentrated and sacralized authority, spiritualized fatherhood, favoritism, and vocational vulnerability blurred relational boundaries and increased the costs of complaint. The comparison contributes a preliminary typology of safeguarding-failure mechanisms and argues for mediated authority, independent reporting, external oversight, and traceable institutional decision-making in seminary formation.