US bishops considering new safeguarding document beyond ‘Dallas Charter’
A proposal from Archbishop McKnight would see bishops commit more concretely to justice for abuse victims and to due process for clerics.
Committees of the U.S. bishops’ conference are reviewing a proposal that would see the bishops make a set of new moral commitments in response to clerical sexual abuse and misconduct in the Church.
In response to a request from Archbishop Shawn McKnight, the USCCB committees for canonical affairs and child protection are reviewing a proposal that would see the bishops draft “a new statement … recognizing the historic character of the Charter [for the Protection of Children and Young People] but also incorporating recent universal legislation and the wisdom of 25 years of experience,” according to a February request obtained by The Pillar.
A draft document provided by Archbishop McKnight of Kansas City, Kansas, would see the bishops commit more concretely to responding both pastorally and legally to alleged victims of abuse, protecting whistleblowers, communicating decisions, and protecting the due process rights of priests.
Most especially, the draft text also emphasizes a “safeguarding culture” in the Church, aiming to draw from the lessons of recent decades, and especially the hard lessons learned by the Church since the 2018 Theodore McCarrick scandal.
According to one leading canonical expert, “the time is right” for revision to the U.S. Church’s policy documents on handling cases of clerical abuse and misconduct, toward a focus on “the role of all of the faithful in creating an environment in which we are all held to certain standards of how we treat one another, especially the most vulnerable among us.”
—
According to documents obtained by The Pillar, Archbishop Shawn McKnight, then the bishop of Jefferson City, Missouri, wrote to the U.S. bishops’ conference earlier this year using a formal mechanism called a varium. He asked if the USCCB would consider a process for substantially revising the U.S. Church’s policy and practice documents on clerical abuse.
The bishops’ current documents were first developed in the immediate aftermath of a media firestorm in 2002 and culminated in the “Dallas Charter” and the adoption of the USCCB Essential Norms.
McKnight asked the USCCB to consider whether there existed “a willingness by the bishops to advance the commitments made in the ‘Charter for the Protection of Children and Young People’ as we approach the document's 25th anniversary.”
The archbishop proposed “issuing a new statement that clearly advances our moral commitments to safeguarding while taking into account 25 years of experience as well as recent updated universal legislation.”
The archbishop explained that his proposal contained three parts:
The first, “a new text for approval by the body of bishops, which would be organically developed from the Charter, acknowledge its rightful place in history, and build upon its successes.”
The second, “clear guidelines from the competent USCCB committees to assist bishops in implementing the canonical provisions for penal and disciplinary processes, including the revised law of the past 25 years, which would also address due process concerns for the accused.”
And third, “provid[ing] assistance to bishops who wish to erect new canonical structures, such as interdiocesan penal tribunals, as means to fulfill the commitments expressed in the new statement of moral commitment.”
To elaborate on his suggestions, McKnight provided an “illustration” document, intended to convey the sense of what might be accomplished by a new text, while he emphasized that any final text would be appropriately developed by extensive conversation among bishops.
“It would be very important to have a thorough consultation of the body of bishops, perhaps in a session of fraternal dialogues, before drafting a text by the competent committees to be debated later by the bishops during a public session of our General Assembly.”
—
McKnight explained in a letter to the USCCB general secretary, Fr. Michael Fuller, that the idea for a new document emerged from a consultative session he had held with “a number of respected canonists” who are expert in the Church’s work on penal discipline and child protection.
The six-page draft text provided by McKnight — which was recently obtained by The Pillar — emphasized that “healing the wounds of sexual abuse is integral to the mission of the Church received from our Lord and Divine Physician, Jesus Christ, who healed the sick, expelled demons, and brought glad tidings to the poor. As a sanctuary of mercy, the Church is called to be a safe environment where the Lord encounters his people and shepherds them to wholeness and holiness.”
The draft text proposes a significant shift in both tone and substance from the USCCB’s 2002 “Charter for the Protection of Children and Young People.”
That document, known as the “Dallas Charter,” has been criticized by canon lawyers, victims’ advocates, and safeguarding specialists, many of whom say the text was written hastily, without sufficient input from experts, victims, or the clerics who would be directly impacted by it.
The draft text’s preamble aimed to recognize the consequences for Catholics of both clerical sexual abuse and misconduct, along with episcopal cover-ups and perceived inaction on the issue.
“Since the adoption of the Charter, we have learned so much about the painful reality of trauma caused by abuse and what happens if we fail in our responsibility to take action. Sexual abuse by those in positions of trust, and the failure of some bishops to respond appropriately, has deeply wounded not just the survivor-victims but the whole community of the Church,” the text expressed.
Bishops “know that we cannot accomplish the full reconciliation and healing of wounds caused by the scourge of abuse all on our own, or in only one action. The trauma of deep wounds of abuse affecting the Church move us to renew our commitment today, in solidarity with our Holy Father, the rest of our clergy, those in consecrated life, and the laity.”
“Only by fully engaging the whole People of God, who are called and empowered by the Holy Spirit, each according to their own office, charisms, talents, and expertise, are we able to work together in a spirit of mutual respect and with a sense of co-responsibility for our mission to proclaim Jesus Christ risen from the dead,” the illustration text added.
The draft text included a sample commitment from bishops “to expand our efforts to include all those who act on behalf of the Church and to advance a holistic approach to safeguarding the People of God.”
“These efforts are about preventing harm by protecting the health, well-being, and personal dignity of everyone in the Church. They are also about responding justly and fairly, in a timely manner, to allegations of crimes against our children, young people, and vulnerable adults,” said the text.
“To accomplish these goals, we realize that it is necessary to move beyond the groundbreaking response we made in the Charter and the Essential Norms, and that we act to fulfill our obligations from recent universal legislation to promote the mission of the Church as a sanctuary of mercy.”
“Care for the most vulnerable, especially minors and vulnerable adults, must always be of foremost concern. They must be placed in the center of visibility, concern, and protection,” the draft added.
“By setting forth these updated standards, we commit ourselves anew to transparency, compliance, and accountability, which are the foundational elements for upholding a culture of safeguarding in the Church in the United States.”
“The Church, therefore, affords her greatest attention and sense of maternal obligation to those who have been harmed physically, spiritually, psychologically, and emotionally by someone holding a sacred trust in the Church. When one of our clergy or lay ecclesial ministers are guilty of sexual abuse, we recognize our duty to respond justly and pastorally to the person who has been harmed,” the preamble stated.
“We, therefore, hold ourselves accountable to ensuring that survivor-victims of sexual abuse in the Church are provided what is necessary for healing, including the use of restorative justice practices, as defined in this statement. What we do flows from who we are.”
After the preamble, the text delineated seven areas in which bishops might commit to specific and standard practices across the U.S.: “Safeguarding embedded in our culture,” “assistance and pastoral care of persons,” “protection of minors and vulnerable adults,” “prevention,” “education,” reporting,” and “response.”
In that context, the draft text called for “just and fair response[s] to any reports of sexual abuse,” acting “with transparency” by “making public the outcome of canonical processes,” engagement of lay people at various levels in the life of the Church, and taking seriously an “irreplaceable moral duty to accompany survivor-victims and offer pastoral assistance to address the harm they have suffered, regardless of whether it occurred recently or in the past.”
With regard to victims of clerical sexual abuse, the draft text call for the use of “restorative justice” practices, “commitment to support for survivor-victims,” and “Masses, and other healing services that invite reconciliation and healing from the painful wounds caused by abuse.”
Many of the suggested commitments draw from the practices of several U.S. dioceses already perceived to have developed fruitful approaches to engaging or supporting survivors of clerical sexual abuse.
Most notably on that front, the draft text included a commitment for bishops “to meet, when requested, with a survivor-victim and/or with his or her support person(s), at times that may be reasonably arranged and with all due respect for the needs of the survivor-victim,” and to make “provisions for counseling, spiritual assistance, support groups, and other social services that are mutually agreed upon. In cooperation with social service agencies and other Churches, our dioceses, eparchies, and parishes may foster support groups for survivor-victims and others affected by sexual abuse.”
“The work of restoration and healing will always be the work of the Church,” the draft text explained.
—
In addition to commitments toward victim-survivors, the draft text called for transparency on canonical processes regarding sexual or administrative misconduct, clear and consistent processes of investigating allegations, and for “upholding the procedural rights of the accused.”
Several rights of accused persons are specifically delineated in the draft text, including the right to clear information about the nature of allegations, the opportunity to manifest a defense against charges, the right to legal counsel, and the stipulation that “If the allegation is deemed not substantiated, every step possible is to be taken to repair any harm caused to the accused person’s reputation.”
Those provisions will likely be seen as a response to criticisms of the Church’s 2002 response to sexual abuse, which some canonists said frequently diminished the ordinary rights of due process for clerics accused of abuse or misconduct.
The draft text also provides considerably more specificity than the 2002 Charter document on the role of diocesan review boards in assessing both policies and particular cases in U.S. dioceses, along with suggesting clear limitations on the authority and mandate of those bodies.
And amid charges that clergy and laity who report concerns about illicit conduct have faced sanction or penalty in the Church, the draft text provided that “all who act in good faith and report knowledge, suspicion, or concern of abuse or misconduct are to be afforded protection against retaliation. They are to receive timely responses to inquiries and may be provided periodic update(s) as to the status or resolution of the report.”
—
Fr. John Paul Kimes, a former official in the disciplinary section of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, and now a faculty at Notre Dame’s law school, told The Pillar this week that the 2002 documents written on sexual abuse and misconduct by the USCCB are out of step with best practices in the field, and due for significant revision.
“Where the Charter describes the strong and necessary commitment of the U.S. bishops to protect children, the language of universal law – and the best practices in this field – have moved to a tone of a ‘safeguarding culture’” in recent years, Kimes told The Pillar.
The 2002 documents — revised slightly in 2005 — “are indelibly marked by the extraordinary pressure under which they were written,” Kimes said, noting that the texts were drafted amid intense media scrutiny after the Boston Globe published a blockbuster series on the extent of clerical abuse and cover-up in the Archdiocese of Boston.
Further, Kimes said, “neither of these documents – despite multiple revisions over the past 20 years – accurately takes note of the changes introduced into universal law in the meantime.”
“The time is right for a revision of both documents,” he added.
Kimes is not alone in that assessment. In recent years, the bishops’ Charter has been criticized frequently by U.S. Catholics.
Canonists and clerics have raised concern that the text does not sufficiently delineate due process rights, define the mandate of the diocesan review board, or limit the scope of the Charter’s mandate.
This has led to widespread concerns about the phenomenon of “Charter creep,” in which ever-increasing types of alleged misconduct are treated according to the procedures of the Charter, even when canon law requires otherwise.
At the same time, victims’ advocates have said the Charter does not provide any directives on the rights of alleged victims during canonical investigations, or their rights to pastoral care or support from the Church.
Further, since 2018, the Charter has been frequently criticized by Catholics who say it does not provide whistleblower protections, call for transparency, or emphasize the accountability of bishops to properly handle allegations of misconduct.
While Kimes said he could not comment on the specific proposals floated by McKnight, he told The Pillar that “the Charter should be revised to include efforts of safeguarding culture that have advanced over the past years.”
“First, on a technical level, the use of the diocesan review board – an institution now fully integrated into the life of all dioceses in America – should be clarified. Either dioceses should have a separate review board to analyze and advise a bishop about other forms of clerical misconduct, as is the case in many dioceses already,” Kimes said.
“Or, if only one review board is maintained, other cases of clerical misconduct should be examined by the appropriate applicable law, rather than merely extending the standards for sexual abuse of minors to all episodes of clerical misconduct,” the priest added — suggestions in line with the guidance provided by McKnight’s submitted draft text.
“This simple change would go a long way to ameliorating one of the legitimate concerns consistently raised by priests and deacons across the U.S.,” Kimes explained, adding that clarity on the role of the review board “can help restore a more effective, and legal, application of the law. This helps protect the rights of both victims and accused.”
Kimes also told The Pillar that “other changes to the Charter could better reflect a theological and ecclesiological understanding of the complex series of wounds created by clerical sexual abuse of minors.”
Drawing from a 2010 letter of Pope Benedict XVI to Catholics during the sexual abuse crisis in Ireland, Kimes said that Church should have “a unique response to the scandal of child sexual abuse rooted in a theological understanding of the Church.”
Pope Benedict’s “Christological ecclesiology,” Kimes said, allows him to reconcile what others see as polar positions in tension, proposing a model of justice and reconciliation that is based on the Church's accountability to the truth.”
“The Church favors an inquisitorial process,” he pointed out, “which has the search for truth as the highest goal … because it is Truth that liberates, and the Truth that saves.”
On the issue of transparency, a core theme of McKnight’s draft text, Kimes pointed out that “accountability necessarily includes transparency. This can and must be a hallmark of any revision to the Charter, as much work has been done on the universal level in this area.”
The U.S. bishops have led in this area in recent years, so it is easy to expect that any revision of the Charter will include a strong emphasis on transparency, as a check on accountability, not only of the bishops themselves but of all those involved in the work of safeguarding,” said Kimes.
—
The draft text, along with the general suggestion that a full text be developed by the entire body of American bishops, is now under consideration by the conference’s Committee for the Protection of Children and Young People and the Committee for Canonical Affairs and Church Governance, according to a March 28 letter sent to McKnight in response to his proposal.
It is not clear when those reviews will be completed, or whether the prospect of new commitments on safeguarding culture will be discussed this month, when the U.S. bishops’ meet in San Diego for their triennial episcopal retreat, held in place of their spring business meeting. The Charter itself is subject to its own separate review process currently underway at the conference.
Developing guidelines for bishops on implementing Vatican and USCCB penal law on sexual misconduct would likely take several years, but the Vatican itself has urged U.S. bishops in recent years to take more responsibility for conducting penal trials in cases of alleged delicts, and developing particular law regarding safeguarding and sexual misconduct.
The USCCB itself has declined to comment on questions from The Pillar on the varium proposal. Archbishop McKnight did not respond to requests for comment.
Editor’s Note: This article has been updated after publication.
The most interesting thing about this project is that most bishops in the US now were just priests when the Dallas Charter was implemented. I know they have a much different perspective and experience from the bishops who were just trying to put out fires in the early 2000s.
Frankly, my new archbishop could not have made a better first impression. This is excellent. I especially appreciate the commitment to transparent processes and outcomes, due process rights for the accused, and the right of victims to meet personally with the bishop.