Anglican Watch warns of problems with Episcopal clergy disciplinary process
ALEXANDRIA, Va., March 17, 2025 /PRNewswire-PRWeb/ -- Anglican Watch, a leading church watchdog group, is sounding the alarm over declining trust in the Episcopal Church's Title IV, the denomination's labyrinthine and slow-moving clergy disciplinary process. In doing so, the organization is calling for Presiding Bishop Sean Rowe to take immediate action to improve the handling of Title IV complaints at both the national and diocesan levels.
The group's concerns emphasize the process for bishops, which it believes influences outcomes in Title IV cases handled at the diocesan level. Those cases involve priests and deacons.
"We have been directly or indirectly involved in almost all the roughly 20 national-level cases involving bishops from the last two years," says Anglican Watch official Eric Bonetti, a retired attorney.
"In every instance, we have observed multiple issues that violate both the letter and the spirit of church canons. These violations erode public trust in the Title IV process, hurt survivors of abuse, and cause lasting reputational harm for all involved," Bonetti continues.
"Our concerns include:
- Multiple instances have occurred in which the intake officer overstepped their canonical authority by making unauthorized findings of fact. The canons expressly forbid this, instead requiring that all matters complained of be assumed to be true at intake. Based on that assumption, the intake officer must assess whether the matter would be a material violation of church canons and forward an intake report to the Title IV reference panel. The intake officer has no discretion in the matter.
- In almost every instance, the intake officer has failed to contact the complainant. This nonfeasance results in inaccurate intake reports, bias toward the respondent, and an inability of the intake officer to assess the scale and scope of the pastoral response mandated by canon.
- The intake officer has repeatedly added terms and conditions to the Title IV process not authorized by Title IV. For example, in one case, the complainant was told that allegations of criminal conduct are only actionable if they result in a criminal conviction. This claim is facially inconsistent with the express language of the canons.
- Title IV expressly requires that a bishop provide a pastoral response any time a complaint is made to the intake officer. Yet intake officers claim that, if the bishop in question doesn't have jurisdiction, no action is required. That ignores the fact that no such exception exists in the canons, and victims of abuse who are not church members may not know which bishop is responsible.
- Intake officers have continued to slow-walk multiple complaints over the past several years, with no acknowledgment or action for more than a year. This situation violates church canons, which establish a 15-month timeline for resolution absent exigent circumstances.
- Intake officers repeatedly ignore mandatory child sexual abuse laws, which require that a report be made in every instance in which allegations of child abuse arise. Thus, Episcopal bishops continue to ignore these provisions, even in cases involving child sexual abuse.
- The intake officer has repeatedly dismissed complaints in which the complainant alleges that the respondent bishop either ignored their Title IV complaints or refused to provide the required pastoral response. (The latter is not the same as pastoral care.) Yet church Title IV training materials expressly state: "Pastoral Response is a vital component of Title IV. It is one of the first priorities to accompany all phases of the process for all participants. The canonical requirement for Pastoral Response is one of the important differences between past disciplinary processes and Title IV."
- The refusal to hold bishops accountable for providing a pastoral response and otherwise honoring the terms and conditions of Title IV engenders feelings of mistrust and betrayal by complainants and others hurt by the church. Indeed, there is no point in having church canons if bishops and other church officials are allowed to treat specifics as optional.
- A continued refusal to treat dishonesty, deceit, fraud, misrepresentation, and other non-sexual misconduct as actionable under Title IV.
- An ongoing use of non-disclosure agreements, which is forbidden by church canons unless requested by the complainant.
"We take seriously Presiding Bishop Sean Rowe's call for the Episcopal Church to act as one denomination versus a series of free-wheeling regional churches," Bonetti adds. "We, therefore, are deeply concerned about the ongoing mishandling of Title IV complaints, which serves only to erode trust in the church and the integrity of church leaders.
"Furthermore," Bonetti adds, the feckless handling of Title IV complaints at the national level sets a dismal example for bishops diocesan, who often act by the seat of their pants when it comes to clergy discipline.
"The time to act is now," he concludes.
Anglican Watch is the unofficial watchdog of the Episcopal Church and addresses sexual and non-sexual abuse in various faith communities. Founded in 2015, the organization is online at www.anglicanwatch.com.
Media Contact
Eric Bonetti, Anglican Watch, 1 240-630-3767, [email protected], www.anglicanwatch.com
SOURCE Anglican Watch
Share this article