Codebook –
Religious Ceremonial Life
RLS 2023 identified three new items related to the sacramental or ceremonial lives of religious people. One item reflects the potential safeguard for penitential or otherwise confidential communication between congregant and minister in noting whether there are exceptions or exemptions for clergy within mandatory reporting laws targeting child abuse. Two other items comprise a safeguard related to the use of alcohol in religious ceremonies, reflecting that the fullness of a safeguard in this area of religious exercise would necessarily permit within the context of religious ceremony both the furnishing of alcohol by religious officials to minors and the consumption of alcohol by minors.
Safeguard/Item: Clergy as Mandatory Reporters
The federal government specifies a minimum set of actions that are considered child abuse and neglect but does not set a standard for reporting responsibilities. All states include mandatory reporting laws within child welfare laws, often enumerating categories of individuals who must report child abuse. This safeguard captures whether or not the state protects the right of clergy to maintain confidentiality by either excluding clergy from the group of mandatory reporters or by exempting clergy from the mandate when information is obtained through penitential or otherwise confidential clerical communication.
Federal Context
The federal Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (CAPTA) (42 USC 5106g) sets a minimum for the actions (or nonactions) considered child abuse or neglect but does not indicate a set of mandatory reporters. At the state level, laws can expand what is considered child abuse or neglect and specifically name groups of individuals who are required to report information that suggests instances of child abuse or neglect. All states have child abuse laws that define mandatory reporters. Some enumerate groups of individuals (teachers, physicians, childcare workers, etc.) while others indicate that “any person” is responsible for reporting when a child is involved.
External Sources
The Children’s Bureau, a federal agency with the Department of Health and Human Services, tracked mandatory reporting and privileged communication laws concerning clergy in cases of suspected child abuse and neglect as of April 2019. RLS 2023 uses the Children’s Bureau State Statutes Search (selecting all states and clergy as mandatory reporters) to locate current relevant mandatory reporting laws and clergy communication exemptions for each state.
Identifying Codes & Assigning Scores
We read each state law cited by the Children’s Bureau to determine if clergy are included as mandatory reporters, either with mandates that apply universally (e.g., “all persons,” “any individual”) or with clergy enumerated within a list of mandatory reporters. We then identified whether penitential communication or communication with clergy under the expectation of confidentially is exempted from laws mandating reports of child abuse and neglect, even if clergy are otherwise mandatory reporters (for example, in situations where they learn of child abuse outside of a role as confessor or, to adopt the language of the Federal Rules of Evidence, in a context other than “his professional character as a spiritual adviser”).
Some states privilege communication between clergy and congregants in rules of evidence within state statutes or elsewhere. To qualify as safeguarding for this item, though, RLS requires that not only are clergy not required to testify or provide information in courts but that they are under no mandate to report to any public authority, so long as the original communication was understood to be confidential. Some states reference rules of evidence or court procedures to help define what sorts of clergy-penitent communication is exempted from mandatory reporting, say, by referencing definitions given in rules of evidence but within the mandatory reporting laws. Other states mention such privilege only in the rules for courts and make no reference to a broader implication of the same for legal mandates by the state outside of the courts (e.g., mandatory reporting.) One state (Illinois) privileges penitential communication within the rules of evidence in terms that explicitly establish that clergy “shall not be compelled to disclose in any court, or to any administrative board or agency, or to any public officer, a confession or admission made to him or her in his or her professional character” (735 ILCS 5/8-803). Most exemptions in this safeguard are provided within the mandatory reporting laws themselves. These are the clearest cases of safeguarding, and, in general, RLS finds that a privilege that only addresses disclosure in court proceedings falls short of guaranteeing the fullness of confidentiality as required by many religions for their clergy.
Possible Codes
A = “Any person” is a mandatory reporter and clergy are exempted at least in some professional capacity
B = “Any person” is a mandatory reporter and clergy are not exempted
C = Clergy are enumerated as mandatory reporters and are exempted at least in some professional capacity
D = Clergy are enumerated as mandatory reporters and are not exempted
E = Mandatory reporters are enumerated and clergy are not included but receive an explicit exemption at least in some professional capacity
F = Mandatory reporters are enumerated, clergy are not included and receive no explicit exemption
Possible Scores
1 = State protects penitential communication in mandatory reporting laws (A, C, E, F)
0 = State does not protect penitential communication in mandatory reporting laws (B, D)
Verifying Data
Scores were verified with the Children’s Bureau list of statutes and state code citations. Because that report was last updated in 2019, there are a few differences between their data and RLS 2023. Additionally, RLS 2023 tracks clergy exemptions from mandatory reporting responsibilities, not exemptions from testifying or providing evidence in courts. In cases of disagreement with the Children’s Bureau, we note the reason for the difference in code or score within the public data file.
Missing Data
None. All states have laws outlining who is required to report instances of child abuse and/or neglect.
Safeguard: Ceremonial Use of Alcohol by Minors
(comprised of two items)
In many religious ceremonies, including communion, Eucharistic celebrations, and Kiddush ceremonies, the ability of a religious leader to offer some form of alcohol and the ability of the religious adherent to receive it are both required by the religious act/rite. This safeguard captures whether a state allows clergy to furnish alcohol to underage individuals and whether the underage individual can legally consume alcohol during religious rites and ceremonies. Some states do not allow any exceptions from minor legal drinking age (MLDA) laws. Of the states that do allow exemptions from MLDA laws, some states allow exceptions for religious ceremonies or parental consent while others do not. Some states extend these exceptions in ways that safeguard the religious liberty of clergy, minor religious adherents, or both.[1]
Federal Context
In order to receive federal funds, states must maintain a minimum age of 21 years for both the purchase and the public possession of alcohol. Notably, and critically for this safeguard, federal law does not make requirements on states with respect to furnishing broadly understood, which would include dissemination of alcohol by clergy in a religious ceremony, or consumption, which would include consumption by minors within ceremonies. All states comply with the federal requirement but may make exceptions to their own laws about furnishing and consumption for a variety of reasons, including parental discretion and consent, learning opportunities for culinary students, medical treatment, and participation in religious ceremonies.
Identifying Coding and Scores: A Note About Parents
Missing Data
Oklahoma does not generally prohibit the private consumption of alcohol by minors, but does restrict the public possession and purchase of alcohol by minors, and prohibits furnishing alcohol to minors.
Item: Furnishment of Alcohol to Minors—This item indicates whether a state allows exceptions for religious leaders to dispense/furnish alcohol to minors for religious reasons.
External Source
The National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism maintains the Alcohol Policy Information System (APIS) which tracks alcohol-related policies in each state. We use the “Policies on a Specific Date: Underage Drinking: Furnishing Alcohol to Minors” data table to identify the relevant laws that dictate if and/or when alcohol may be furnished to minors. The research team used the version of the table and citations updated as of January 1, 2022, to collect data for this item.
Identifying Codes & Assigning Scores
The research team read each state law cited by the APIS “Underage Drinking: Furnishing Alcohol to Minors” data to understand the restrictions to furnishing alcohol to underage individuals by those over 21. We then identified if the state allowed any exceptions to these laws and if so, whether the exceptions were extended to religious leaders directly (e.g., by granting an exception in the context of religious ceremonies).
Possible Codes
A = State offers exceptions for furnishing to minors in religious ceremonies or for religious reasons
B = State offers no exception for religious ceremonies but makes exceptions for furnishing to minors with parental involvement
C = State does not offer exceptions for furnishing in religious ceremonies or by parents
Possible Scores
1 = State makes an exception for furnishing to minors in religious ceremonies (A)
0 = State does not have exceptions that allow legally furnishing alcohol to minors in religious ceremonies (B, C)
Verifying Data
We verified our scores for this item using APIS’s “Underage Drinking: Furnishing Alcohol to Minors” data and the state statutes citations we collected. If the RLS 2023 characterization of the available exceptions and subsequent score did not align with the characterization offered by this external source, we recorded the reason for the disagreement in the public data file in the “Notes” column.
Item: Consumption of Alcohol by Minors—This item indicates whether a state allows exceptions for minors to consume or possess alcohol for religious reasons.
External Source
RLS utilizes Britannica Group’s “State-by-State MLDA Exceptions” table to identify the relevant underage consumption or possession of alcohol drinking laws in each state and the variety of exceptions states may allow within those laws. The research team used the version of the table and citations updated as of August 22, 2022, to confirm the data for this item.
Identifying Codes & Assigning Scores
The research team read each state law cited by Britannica researchers concerning exceptions to underage consumption or possession of alcohol, identified if the state allowed any exceptions to these laws and if so, whether the exceptions were extended to minors directly (e.g., by granting an exception in the context of religious ceremonies).
Possible Codes
A = State offers exceptions to minors for religious reasons
B = State offers no exception to minors related to religious reasons but does allow consumption with parental consent
C = State does not offer exceptions to minors for either religious reasons or with parental consent
Possible Scores
1 = State makes an exception for consumption by minors in religious ceremonies (A)
0 = State does not offer an exception for consumption by minors in religious ceremonies (B, C)
Verifying Data
We verified our scores for this item using Britannica’s “State-by-State MLDA Exceptions” table and the state statutes citations we collected. If the RLS 2023 characterization of the available exceptions and subsequent score did not align with the characterization offered by this external source, we recorded the reason for the disagreement in the public data file in the “Notes” column.
[1] Ten of the fifty states have an exception for religious ceremonies with respect to either furnishment or consumption but not both. While this may seem illogical, that consumption might be legal when furnishing is not (or vice versa), RLS records these codes according to the letter of the law, making apparent the opportunity that exists for reconciling the laws in these states to further safeguard religious individuals.
