It is well known that some three dozen dioceses in the United States have filed for bankruptcy over the last two decades, many of them driven to it because of the volume of claims of clerical sexual abuse. What is often not well known are the commitments the bankrupt diocese makes as a part of the settlement with claimants, represented by plaintiff lawyers. Last week, the Diocese of Norwich (CT) agreed to a plan of reorganization as part of their bankruptcy process. Here are some of the things which lawyers representing the Diocese agreed to do:
- to comply with mandatory reporting per the state statutes of New York and Connecticut, even though the latter, according to Connecticut’s General Assembly Office of Legislative Research, do not contain an exception for confidential statements made to clergy in the course of their ministry*;
- to apply a new non-canonical modifier to some accusations; i.e., “Allegations of Substance.” Many dioceses label accusations according to the vague standards of “credible” or “substantiated,” neither of which comports with the “moral certainty” standard under canon law (cf. c. 1608 §1, which is essentially equivalent to the “beyond a reasonable doubt” standard in civil law). According to this “Allegation of Substance” standard, the Diocese of Norwich will determine the truth of an accusation according to a “more likely than not” standard;
- to maintain in perpetuity (rather than destroy, according to the requirements of canon 489 in the 1983 Code of Canon Law) “clergy files,” including any “documents concerning any allegation of Abuse of a Minor,” any “documents concerning any internal investigation by the Office of Internal Affairs of the Diocese,” and the reports to the Review Board and the Bishop;
- to prohibit their employees, representatives, agents and spokespersons from referring either verbally or in print to sexual abuse survivors as “alleged” claimants, “alleged” victims, or “alleged” survivors;
- to “publicize prominently” on the diocesan website the results of any “canonical process for determination of clerical status,” and to publish the names of “former personnel of the Diocese” who have an “Allegation of Substance” against them for at least the next 25 years; and
- to “remove from ministry, employment, or volunteering” anyone once an “Allegation of Substance” is “brought against them.”
*According to a 1994 Report from the Connecticut General Assembly’s Office of Legislative Research, while there “may or may not be a conflict between the confidentiality and the reporting requirement” under state law (depending on whether the evidentiary privilege applies to the reporting requirement), “there is, however, a conflict between the reporting requirement and the general philosophical concept of confidentiality for statements made to clergymen.”
Anyone can read the plan, which is a public document. The link on the bottom of this page is to the entire 876-page document, filed on 10 February 2025, under the title “Sixth Amended Plan and Disclosure Statement.” Plan Exhibit G, “Non-Monetary Commitments to Healing and Reconciliation,” starts on page 245 of the 876-page document.