Vatican issues first child protection report. Here's what it says
A Vatican commission weighs in on safe environment policies
The pope’s safeguarding commission released its long-awaited first annual report Tuesday on the Catholic Church’s efforts to combat abuse worldwide.
The Pontifical Commission for the Protection of Minors (PCPM) issued the 98-page Annual Report on Church Policies and Procedures for Safeguarding Oct. 29, exactly two and a half years after Pope Francis publicly requested it.
The report is couched in diplomatic language, but offers a pointed critique of the state of safeguarding in the Church today.
Here’s a quick overview of what it says, what it doesn’t say, and what it means.
✅ Access to information
What it says
The report’s executive summary presents seven main findings. The first is “the need to better promote victims’/survivors’ access to information.”
The report calls for measures to guarantee that abuse victims have the right to view information held on them by Church bodies, while respecting data protection laws.
“As two examples, a procurator for the aggrieved party and a role comparable to the function of an ombudsman are proposed for consideration and study by the relevant institutions of the Roman Curia,” it says.
What’s the context?
The report notes that one of the highest priorities expressed by abuse victims is “access to the truth.” But finding out what Church authorities knew about their abusers and what steps (if any) they took against them can be a years-long struggle, and the Church has no policies regarding open access to information.
The PCPM is asking for the Church to assist, rather than hinder, victims as they seek the truth through a system that is frequently difficult to navigate.
✅ Critiquing the Curia
What it says
In the executive summary, the report highlights “the need for consolidation and clarity around the jurisdictions held by dicasteries of the Roman Curia, to ensure the efficient, timely, and rigorous management of cases of abuse referred to the Holy See.”
Further on, it says: “The commission found a persistent concern regarding the transparency in the Roman Curia’s procedures and juridical processes. The commission notes that this will continue to foment distrust among the faithful, especially the victim/survivor community.”
What’s the context?
While the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith (DDF) is responsible for handling abuse cases against minors, other Vatican departments oversee other kinds of cases — for example, those concerning the abuse of an adult classified as a “vulnerable person.”
Vatican departments seem to have clashed over some high-profile cases. The DDF and the Secretariat of State, for instance, appeared to disagree recently over whether the Argentine cleric Ariel Alberto Príncipi, twice convicted of child abuse, should be dismissed from the priesthood.
Typically, there is little to no public information about how the Vatican handles a particular case, such as which dicasteries are involved. The PCPM is calling for that to change.
✅ The DDF’s deficiencies
What it says
The report offers a critique of the DDF’s processing of abuse cases. It highlights a lack of “information and updates” for victims, expresses concern at “lengthy canonical proceedings,” suggests the DDF lacks the resources to cope with a heavy, complex workload, and encourages the dicastery to be more transparent about its work.
What’s the context?
Following Pope Francis’ 2022 apostolic constitution Praedicate Evangelium, the PCPM was formally “established within” the Vatican’s doctrinal dicastery, while retaining its officials and continuing to follow its own internal regulations.
Given this institutional relationship, the PCPM’s recommendations for changes to the DDF are bold, however gently they are couched.
✅ Defining ‘vulnerability’
What it says
The report calls for the Church to adopt a “more uniform definition” of “vulnerability” — a fundamental concept in 21st-century safeguarding.
What’s the context?
Adults as well as children have reported suffering abuse within the Church — seminarians in the high-profile Theodore McCarrick case, nuns in the Fr. Marko Rupnik case.
In Church law, older victims are defined as “vulnerable adults.” Yet the precise definition is inconsistent, causing confusion among canon lawyers and Church officials, and hampering efforts to secure justice in such cases.
✅ Bishops’ resignations
What it says
The report appeals “for a streamlined process for discharge from office, to enable a smooth and simple pathway for the resignation or removal of a Church leader, when warranted.”
It says: “In its 10 years of service, the commission has seen Church leaders who have been subjects of past administrative actions and/or inactions that have been the source of additional harm to victims/survivors of sexual abuse. Such a reality reveals the need for a disciplinary or administrative proceeding that provides an efficient path for resignation or removal from office.”
What’s the context?
Five years ago, Pope Francis published Vos estis lux mundi, a document establishing a mechanism for holding bishops responsible for the mishandling of abuse cases.
Commentators have argued that the norms are being applied inconsistently and opaquely worldwide. In Poland, for example, at least a dozen bishops have been subject to Vos estis investigations. Initially, Church authorities made public a summary of the findings, but later stopped the practice, leaving an information vacuum.
In France, meanwhile, there was considerable anger when it emerged that Bishop Michel Santier, who stepped down as head of the Créteil diocese in 2020 citing health reasons, turned out to have been disciplined by the Vatican for spiritual abuse.
The PCPM is highlighting the damage caused by the lack of transparency surrounding the removal of bishops.
✅ Compensation questions
What it says
The report stresses “the need to study damages and compensation policies to promote a rigorous approach to reparations, as part of the Church’s commitment to the healing journey of victims/survivors.”
“Compensation in the Church is not merely reduced to financial aspects, but embraces a much broader spectrum of actions,” it says, including offering public apologies.
“Nevertheless, economic reparations are also particularly relevant,” it notes, “and the commission will continue to offer its cooperation to key Church bodies so that standardized and known procedures are developed in a more comprehensive way.”
What’s the context?
The Catholic Church’s approach to compensation varies from country to country. In Belgium, for example, the Church has established “listening posts” where victims are offered “accompaniment” and given information about accessing compensation. The German bishops have set up an independent nationwide commission to oversee compensation.
But in many countries, abuse victims are offered little or no help in accessing compensation funds. The PCPM suggests this inconsistency undermines the Church as a whole.
✅ Inadequate resources
What it says
The report says: “The commission’s findings within the continental regions varied. While parts of the Americas, Europe, and Oceania have benefitted from substantial resources available for safeguarding, a significant part of Central and South America, Africa, and Asia have inadequate dedicated resources.”
What’s the context?
It’s no secret that Catholic safeguarding is generally more advanced in prosperous countries than in poor ones.
The PCPM is stressing that a Catholic child in Nairobi deserves just as much protection as one in New York. That won’t happen without a sharing of resources, a process that has begun through the PCPM’s Memorare initiative, supported by the Italian bishops’ conference.
✅ Assessing Mexico
What it says
During their 2023 ad limina visits to Rome, Mexico’s bishops were asked to complete a safeguarding questionnaire with around 10 questions.
“In total, the commission received 20 responses, representing a response rate of 20% out of 98 total local Churches in the country,” the report says.
Among the safeguarding challenges in the country, it cites “significant cultural barriers to reporting abuse that prevent the process of justice.” It calls for “consistent domestic funding for safeguarding formation and victim/survivor accompaniment services.”
What’s the context?
Mexico has the largest number of Catholics of any country except Brazil. If its safeguarding procedures aren’t working effectively, millions of people are potentially affected.
The 20% questionnaire response rate and the “challenges” mentioned in the report suggest the Mexican Church’s response to abuse is patchy at best.
✅ A safeguarding encyclical
What it says
The report highlights the importance of underpinning the fight against abuse with “a unified and theological-pastoral vision”
“The commission believes that the desirable end point might be a document of the Magisterium unifying these perspectives — as an encyclical, dedicated to the protection of the child and vulnerable adults in the Church’s life,” it says.
What’s the context?
Encyclicals are seen as the highest form of papal teaching and are typically the most widely read Vatican documents.
The PCPM is suggesting that a good way to galvanize the struggle against abuse would be for the pope to dedicate an encyclical to the topic.
There are, of course, plenty of papal documents addressing abuse, including Pope Benedict XVI’s 2010 pastoral letter to Irish Catholics. But none of them is as weighty as an encyclical.
❌ Referring to Rupnik
What it says
The report does not refer to the Rupnik scandal, arguably the most highly publicized abuse case since the McCarrick affair.
What’s the context?
A year ago, the Vatican announced that Pope Francis had requested the opening of the Rupnik case after the PCPM identified “serious problems” in the handling of accusations against the Slovenian mosaic artist.
The Vatican has given no update since October 2023 on the case, which is assumed to be ongoing. Perhaps this lack of closure explains why Rupnik is not mentioned in the report. The PCPM may also be following its general practice of not addressing individual cases, focusing instead on underlying principles in the battle against abuse.
On a positive note, it seems the commission's main theme seems to be what people have been wanting: transparency. So at least someone seems to be getting it. Now it remains to be seen if more transparency actually happens. I suspect that getting some of the higher Churchmen to do so will take a lot of humility because many of them, possibly even Pope Francis himself, are going to look very bad if we find out what really took place behind the scenes in cases such as Rupnik or Principi (and many others as well).
Thanks to Mr. Coppen for a great summary! He really knows how to make salient details accessible, for which I’m grateful.
I hope this report touches the consciences or at least the pride of those in charge to spur them to better address the manifest problems in this area!