In re Lubbock

• Citation: 624 S.W.3d 506
• Decision Date: 11 June 2021
• Docket Number: No. 20-0127,20-0127
• Court: Supreme Court of Texas
• Parties: IN RE Diocese of LUBBOCK, Relator

624 S.W.3d 506

IN RE Diocese of LUBBOCK, Relator

No. 20-0127

Supreme Court of Texas.

Argued January 6, 2021

OPINION DELIVERED: June 11, 2021

Michael B. Bennett, Houston, for Amici Curiae Texas Ethics and Religious Liberty Committee of the Southern Baptists of Texas Convention, Baptist General Convention of Texas, Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention.

Allen Ryan Paulsen, Ryan N. Gardner, for Amicus Curiae Jewish Coalition for Religious Liberty.

Jessica C. Schidlow, Marci A. Hamilton, Alice A. Bohn, Tahira Khan Merritt, Dallas, Robert D. Friedman, for Amicus Curiae CHILD USA.

Cameron L. Davis, Scott A. Brister, Austin, Kathryn E. Boatman, Houston, for Amicus Curiae Members of the Texas Legislature.

Natalie D. Thompson, Kyle D. Hawkins, Atty. Gen. W. Kenneth Paxton Jr., Jeffrey C. Mateer, Austin, Ryan Lee Bangert, for Amicus Curiae The State of Texas.

Steven C. Levatino, Austin, for Amicus Curiae Texas Catholic Conference of Bishops.

Ryan E. Price, Nick Luis Olguin, Amarillo, for Real Party in Interest.

Eric Christopher Rassbach, Thomas C. Riney, Amarillo, Kerri L. Stampes, Dallas, William J. Haun, Eric S. Baxter, Alex L. Yarbrough, Amarillo, Victor H. Wanjura, for Relator.

Justice Devine delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Chief Justice Hecht, Justice Guzman, Justice Lehrmann, Justice Blacklock, Justice Busby, Justice Bland, and Justice Huddle joined.

The ecclesiastical abstention doctrine prohibits civil courts from delving into matters of "theological controversy, church discipline, ecclesiastical government, or the conformity of the members of the church to the standard of morals required of them." Serbian E. Orthodox Diocese v. Milivojevich , 426 U.S. 696, 714, 96 S.Ct. 2372, 49 L.Ed.2d 151 (1976) (quoting Watson v. Jones , 80 U.S. 679, 13 Wall. 679, 733, 20 L.Ed. 666 (1871) ). The doctrine is grounded in the First Amendment, which protects the right of religious institutions "to decide for themselves, free from state interference, matters of church government as well as those of faith and doctrine." Kedroff v. St. Nicholas Cathedral of Russian Orthodox Church , 344 U.S. 94, 116, 73 S.Ct. 143, 97 L.Ed. 120 (1952).

In this original mandamus proceeding, the Diocese of Lubbock, as relator, asserts that ecclesiastical abstention prohibits the trial court from assuming jurisdiction over a suit brought by one of its ordained deacons against the Diocese and that the trial court should have therefore granted the Diocese's plea to the jurisdiction. The suit arises out of an internal investigation by the Diocese into its own clergy, the inclusion of the deacon's name on a list of its clergy credibly accused of sexual abuse of a minor, and the Diocese's public statements regarding the list and church reforms following its release to the Diocese's public website. The deacon maintains that he has never sexually abused a child and that the Diocese defamed him by publicly implying that those on the list were indeed guilty of such abuse.

The court of appeals denied the Diocese's petition for mandamus relief, concluding that the Diocese's investigation lost ecclesiastical protection when it went beyond church walls and related to an issue—sexual abuse—that is not strictly and purely ecclesiastical. 592 S.W.3d 196 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 2019). Under the First Amendment, however, courts must abstain from exercising civil jurisdiction over claims that require them to "resolve a religious question" or "impede the church's authority to manage its own affairs." Westbrook v. Penley , 231 S.W.3d 389, 397 (Tex. 2007). We conclude that the substance and nature of the deacon's claims against his church will necessarily require the trial court to evaluate whether the Diocese properly applied Canon Law and are inextricably intertwined with the Diocese's internal directive to investigate its clergy. That is, the deacon's claims relating to the Diocese's publication and communication of the results of its investigation cannot be severed from its policy to investigate its clergy in the first place. Thus, we conditionally grant the Diocese's petition for writ of mandamus and direct the trial court to dismiss the deacon's underlying lawsuit.

I. Background

Jesus Guerrero was ordained as a deacon of the Diocese of Lubbock in 1997. Deacons are ministers in the Catholic Church, authorized to baptize parishioners, assist the priest at Mass, preach homilies, celebrate weddings, and conduct funeral rites. In 2003, the Diocese temporarily suspended Guerrero's diaconal faculties after receiving reports of sexual misconduct involving Guerrero and a woman with a history of mental and emotional disorders. Upon completion of an investigation, the Bishop of the Diocese indefinitely suspended Guerrero's diaconal faculties and privileges. In July 2006, the Diocese granted Guerrero's request for reinstatement of his diaconal faculties. However, a new allegation and subsequent investigation of sexual misconduct involving Guerrero and the same woman led Bishop Placido Rodriguez to permanently withdraw Guerrero's diaconal faculties in November 2008. Although Guerrero may no longer perform sacramental functions, he was not laicized and remains an ordained deacon.

The Texas Catholic Church consists of fifteen dioceses, each led by a bishop. Each diocese uses its own website to communicate with its members. In September 2018, to assist victims of abuse and improve transparency with Catholics in all the Texas Dioceses, the Catholic Bishops of Texas decided to release the names of those clergy against whom credible allegations of sexual abuse of a minor have been raised. After the individual dioceses completed a review of their files and compiled their lists, the respective lists were posted on each diocese's website on January 31, 2019, along with an accompanying statement.

Guerrero's name was included on the Lubbock Diocese's list. The list, entitled "Names of All Clergy with a Credible Allegation of Sexual Abuse of a Minor," stated its purpose and the process of determining who belonged on the list; it also invited others to report any sexual abuse experiences to the Diocese. The list included names of priests or clergy against whom a "credible allegation" had been made since the Lubbock Diocese's inception in June 1983. A priest or clergy had a "credible allegation" of sexual abuse of a minor if "after review of reasonably available, relevant information in consultation with the Diocesan Review Board or other professionals, there is reason to believe [it] is true." To prepare the list, the Diocese's attorney "engage[d] the services of a retired law enforcement professional and a private attorney to review all clergy files for any credible allegations of abuse of minors." The list, as originally published, did not include the canonical meaning of the term "minor," which the Diocese asserts—under Canon Law—includes "a person who habitually lacks the use of reason" and encompasses any "person deemed vulnerable due to a health or mental condition."

The Diocese issued a news release the same day that it published the list. The news release stated the Lubbock Diocese joined the other Texas Dioceses "to release names of clergy who have been credibly accused of sexually abusing a minor, going back at least to 1950 or to the year of the establishment of the [D]iocese." The decision to release the list "was made in the context of [the Church's] ongoing work to protect children from sexual abuse" and "to promote healing and a restoration of trust in the Catholic Church." Bishop Robert Coerver explained in a letter that the Diocese released the names as part of a broader, good-faith effort to restore the trust and confidence of its membership and because the Diocese is "serious about ending the cycle of abuse in the Church and society at large."

A local news station interviewed Chancellor Marty Martin, the Lubbock Diocese's principal notary and administrative manager, about the list. The report stated that while the Church had previously disclosed past incidents of sexual abuse to the authorities and to other church members, the recent investigation stemmed from a desire to ensure that the Church was a safe environment for everybody. It quoted Chancellor Martin as saying that "the [C]hurch is safe for children."

Guerrero demanded a retraction of his name from the list. See TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE § 73.055. In response, the Diocese sent Guerrero a letter explaining that the Bishops from the Texas Dioceses formulated a plan in 2018 to evaluate which of its priests and clergy had been credibly accused of sexual abuse of a minor. The Lubbock Diocese derived its plan from the Charter for Protection of Children and Young People (the Charter), which was authored by the United States Conference of Bishops. The Charter encourages more transparency within the Catholic Church around issues of sexual abuse and represents a shift in how sexual abuse within the Church is addressed. For instance, the Charter arranges review boards to assess allegations of sexual abuse of a "minor" to determine a priest's or clergy's suitability for ministry. Consistent with Canon Law, the Charter defines "minor" to include those who habitually lack the use of reason and are therefore deemed vulnerable adults. The letter also detailed some of the separate reports of sexual assault that the Lubbock Diocese had received against Guerrero. It went on to state that "[t]he adult female involved in these incidents ... is severely bi-polar, is not allowed to drive, and may not have been on her medications at the time of the various instances which were witnessed." Based on the investigation by the Diocesan Review Board and an independent review committee, the letter concluded, the Lubbock Diocese had determined that the allegations of sexual abuse of a "minor" against Guerrero were credible, as understood by Canon Law.

Guerrero subsequently filed suit, alleging defamation and...