The Dicastery for Legislative Texts issued
guidance to bishops last year, which said that canon law prohibits
published lists denoting clerics “credibly accused” of sexual abuse
crimes.
In a letter likely to spark
backlash from some victims’ advocates, the dicastery said that such
lists can violate fundamental legal rights when published.
The
Vatican department, which responsible for issuing authoritative legal
interpretations for the universal Church, issued its directives in a
September 2024 letter published online by the dicastery on Feb. 22.
The
Dicastery for Legislative Texts is the most recent Vatican department
to criticize or prohibit the practice of dioceses releasing lists of
“credibly accused” clergy. Both the Dicasteries for the Doctrine of the
Faith and for Clergy — and Pope Francis personally — have previously
warned against the practice.
Many
dioceses in the United States adopted the practice of publishing lists
in the wake of the clerical abuse scandals of the last 25 years,
especially amid state-level investigations into clerical sexual abuse,
and the passage of “look back” laws allowing for civil lawsuits related
to abuse to be filed well after the standing statute of limitations.
In
its September letter, the dicastery responed to a request for
clarification from an unnamed bishop wrote seeking guidance in July
2024.
In the guidance, the dicastery’s
prefect and secretary, Archbishops Filippo Iannone and Juan Ignation
Arrieta, wrote that Vatican guidance came after “a careful examination
of the delicate question” of published lists, and said the dicastery
had consulted “two esteemed canonists who are experts in the matter.”
Noting
the general canonical protection of a person’s good reputation from
“illegitimate” harm, the dicastery explained that while “in some cases
the harm of good reputation can be legitimized, for example to avoid any
danger or threat to individuals or to the community,”, it would “not at
all be legitimate when such a risk is reasonably to be excluded, as in
the case of presumed deceased criminals, where there can be neither a
legitimate nor proportionate reason for the damage to their reputation.”
The
dicastery added that it is not permissible to publish lists of accused
clerics “for alleged reasons of transparency or reparation (unless the
subject consents and therefore once again excluding deceased persons).”
The
letter stressed that Vatican objection to the practice of publishing
lists of accused clerics goes beyond the practical inability of deceased
clergy to defend themselves.
According
to the dicastery, the core issues are instead fundamental legal
principles: the presumption of innocence and the illegitimacy of
charging anyone with a crime which was not codified at the time it was
allegedly committed: “For example, with regard to the so-called
omissions of the general duties of vigilance,” the letter said.
“Such
principles,” the dicastery said, “cannot reasonably be overridden by a
generic ‘right to information’ that makes any kind of news public
domain, however credibly, to the concrete detriment and existential
damage of those personally involved, especially if inaccurate, or even
unfounded or false, or completely useless as in what concerns deceased
persons.”
The letter also noted that
diocesan determinations about whether an accusation is credible or
“founded” are often made without regard for established legal standards,
and “require a relatively low standard of proof,” and “without the
benefit of any exercise of the right to defense,” for the accused.
The
Dicastery for Legislative Texts’ letter is the latest in a series of
Vatican condemnations of the practice of publishing lists of names of
clerics, living and dead, against whom “credible” or “substantiated”
accusations have been made.
During his
2019 global summit on clerical sexual abuse and episcopal
accountability, Pope Francis specifically ruled out such practices in
his own published “Points for Reflection,” which stated that “the right
to defense, the principle of natural and canonical law of the
presumption of innocence until the proof of the guilt of the accused
must also be safeguarded.”
“Therefore, it
is necessary to avoid publication of the lists of the accused, even by
the dioceses, before the prior investigation and the final
condemnation,” the pope wrote.
In 2022,
the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, which has jurisdiction over
cases of clerical sexual abuse of minors, issued updates to its legal
handbook on the procedures for handling such accusations.
Initially,
according to canon law, the DDF explained, the bishop is only supposed
to determine if the allegation is “manifestly false or frivolous” — that
it doesn’t allege a person committing a crime in a place at a time that
would be clearly impossible. If it’s not obviously impossible, the
bishop is to open a canonical preliminary investigation to determine if
the allegation has a minimum “semblance of truth.”
“It
must always be kept in mind that the preliminary investigation is not a
trial, nor does it seek to attain moral certitude as to whether the
alleged events occurred,” the DDF said.
While
bishops can, when they consider it prudent, remove an accused priest
form ministry before or during the preliminary phase, both canon law and
the DDF stress the need to avoid the impression that a verdict has been
reached before an actual legal process has begun.
In
its 2022 guidelines, the DDF specifically warned against any public
statements which “could prejudice successive investigations or give the
impression that the facts or the guilt of the cleric in question have
already been determined with certainty.”
“Statements
should be brief and concise, avoiding clamorous announcements,
refraining completely from any premature judgment about the guilt or
innocence of the person accused,” it says.
Nevertheless,
many U.S. dioceses have continued for years with the publication and
maintenance of public lists of “credible” or “substantiated” accusations
against clerics who have not been subject to any legal process,
canonical or civil.
In 2002, in
the wake of the year’s emerging sexual abuse scandals, the U.S. bishops
adopted the Dallas Charter and the Essential Norms for
Diocesan/Eparchial Policies Dealing with Allegations of Sexual Abuse of
Minors by Priests or Deacons, the latter of which became particular law
in the United States.
In line with those
norms, bishops were required to set up diocesan review boards — lay-led
independent consultative bodies, which included experts from fields like
law enforcement, the psychiatric and therapeutic professions, and
victims-survivors’ advocates — to act as a “confidential consultative
body to the bishop” on policy as well as on the assessment of individual
allegations of abuse of minors.
While
review boards have been crucial to the Church’s efforts in the U.S. to
rebuild trust following the scandals of recent decades, it is often
unclear how exactly they fit into the canonical process.
But
review boards are tasked with giving recommendations to bishops about
whether allegations have a “semblance of truth” — the low threshold
which is supposed to trigger a formal canonical trial.
In
communicating their findings, review boards sometimes issue public
statements which could seem to cut against the DDF’s canonical process,
or even appear to arrive at settled conclusions about allegations before
a formal canonical process has begun.
Most
notably, review boards in the U.S. have standardized the use of terms
like “credible” and “substantiated” to describe allegations, which have
been criticized by defense advocates as giving the impression that
allegations are proven, even before any formal canonical legal process
has begun.
Diocesan-published
lists of accused clerics, especially when using language about
credibility, have been used by U.S. courts as proof of wrongdoing,
despite no legal process or determination of guilt having been made.
In
New Orleans, a bankruptcy judge ordered the archdiocese to cease paying
stipends to clerics on the public “credibly accused” list in 2020, and
last year extended the order further to include even to those whose
accusations were not deemed “credible” — even if those priests hadn’t undergone any kind of legal process at all.
Critics
have also warned that when an accusation isn’t proven, the fact that a
priest’s name has been on a list at all can make it difficult —
sometimes impossible — for the bishop to return him to pastoral
ministry, creating a class of “unassignable” priests who haven’t been
found guilty, but cannot be practically engaged in pastoral ministry.
But
others argue that naming names of accused clergy is an essential part
of recognizing the suffering of survivors. While publishing the name of a
deceased cleric might seem unfair, they argue, it’s often the closest
to justice their victims can get.
Further,
some survivors’ advocates also argue that a list of “credibly accused”
clergy from the diocese can help victims come forward — seeing the name
of their abuser on a diocesan list can give them confidence that they
will be taken seriously, they say, and assure them that they are not
alone.
While many U.S. dioceses and
bishops have adopted the publication of such lists as a matter of policy
— Vatican instructions to the contrary notwithstanding — a minority of
U.S. bishops have refused to do so, and come under considerable
criticism.
In 2023, Bishop Robert McManus
of Worcester, Mass., released an updated report on clerical sexual
abuse in his diocese, going back to the 1950s.
The
report did not include the names of clergy accused of historical acts
of abuse, and the diocese does not maintain a public list of “credibly
accused” clergy.
“I have been asked
over the years why our diocese does not publish a list of accused
priests as do some other dioceses in the country,” McManus said. “I am
convinced a single list will not accurately reflect the various concerns
and outcomes.”
“There is no other
precedent for the publishing of lists of the accused in society - even
of those accused in other positions of trust such as medicine, education
or law enforcement,” the bishop said at the time.
“Such
lists can be a cause for deep division among many members of our Church
who see this as publicly branding as guilty those who never have been
charged by law enforcement or had a chance to defend themselves in a
court of law,” said McManus.
Instead, the
Worcester diocese publicizes the names of accused clergy on an
individual basis, when a cleric is removed from ministry after an
allegation of misconduct.
