Perpetuating Sins of the Church

Photo by Lorenzo Colombo on Unsplash

A friend of mine posed this question on social media this morning: “If all the rapists from the Catholic diocese of Pennsylvania and all those that have covered for the rapists are fired, how many people would remain in the diocese?” If you’re unfamiliar with the story (or the latest specific instance of this all-too-familiar story), she’s referring to the 300+ Roman Catholic priests from 6 Pennsylvania dioceses who have been named in a grand jury report who abused over identified 1,000 children over a period of 70 years, with countless other church officials covering up the abuse. 
 
Anyway. My friend’s question raised one in me: If all those who perpetuate or cover up or turn a blind eye to any abuse in the church were fired/excommunicated/whatever, how many would remain? 
 
Setting aside the question, for today, the questions of when should someone be fired from the church and whether someone should be excommunicated from the church, really, how many would remain if those involved in abuse systems were no longer part of the church?
​

How many clergy/leaders have been directly involved in enacting abuse upon other leaders or parishioners?

How many leaders have been aware of such abuses by other leaders, and have helped to cover it up?

How many leaders have summarily dismissed reports of abuse committed by other parishioners?
 
For example:

• Sexual abuse and harassment of children, both by church leaders and by church members or youth.
• Sexual abuse and harassment of adults, both leaders and laity (related: 2009 Clergy Sexual Misconduct study by Baylor University ; 2018 #metoo stories from the Episcopal Church).
• Emotional abuse and manipulation, by clergy (including pastoral/spiritual abuse) or by church bullies who seek power.
• Domestic violence, including church leaders “encouraging” victims to stay in abusive relationships.
• Perpetual use of insider language (“Christianese,” “church words”) without explanation, in effect denying access to those who have not been “involved enough” to understand church jargon.
• Abuse of church resources, i.e. poor stewardship – perhaps a more gray area, but a worthy discussion nonetheless.
• Financial abuse, knowingly burning out volunteers, pressuring people to provide highly skilled and time-involved services without any compensation.
• Upholding white supremacy, promoting euro-centric “church culture,” neglecting to do the hard work of racial reconciliation, dismissing reports of racially-charged insults or crimes, allowing systemic abuse to continue within our own churches against people of color and people who don’t relate to a European and English-speaking “cultural” ideal (e.g., lutefisk and green jello as “Lutheran” traditions, only 20% of church services provided in Spanish despite an 80% Spanish-speaking composition).
• Upholding cisheterosexism, allowing systemic abuse to perpetuate against women, femmes, people who are trans, and other members of the LGBTQIA+ community.
• Disengaging working women by holding "women's events" during weekday hours only. 
• Neglecting to provide any sort of ADA accommodation (wheelchair ramps, accessible restrooms, accessible parking and/or a valet ministry, ASL interpreters, sermon transcripts, etc.) since it’s not ‘legally’ required for churches.
• Upholding classism and elitism, neglecting to distribute public transportation information or ride-sharing ministries, effectually requiring car ownership for church membership, requiring that all potluck attendees bring a dish to share, shaming people who are not dressed “nicely,” etc.
• Upholding ageism by ignoring thoughts, ideas, and reports of abuse from more senior parishioners or by those who are "too young" to be taken seriously.
• Promoting the father-mother-children “family unit” as more Godly and superior to single parent households, parents who are LGBTQIA+, non-parents who are LGBTQIA+, couples who cannot have children, ​couples who choose not to have children, people who are unmarried, people who are divorced, etc.  
• Holding fast to our own ignorance of harmful practices instead of pursuing liberation for everyone. Neglecting to be active in our communities, to speak truth to power. Allowing the kyriarchy to persist. Et cetera. Et cetera. Et cetera. There will never be an exhaustive list.

 
The grand jury report mentioned earlier says that special agents had identified a series of practices that regularly appeared, a sort of “playbook for concealing the truth” and maintaining the ultimate goal of avoiding scandal:

• use euphemisms (“inappropriate contact” or “boundary issues” instead of “rape”);
• ask inadequate questions and have investigations led by non-objective personnel;
• present the appearance of integrity by having church-run organizations “evaluate” and “diagnose” the abuser based primarily on the abusers self-reports;
• don’t provide reasons if a priest is eventually removed, or provide an excuse such as “nervous exhaustion”;
• transfer the abuser to a community where his reputation is unknown, rather than remove him completely;
• definitely don’t involve any authorities outside the church.

 
Sound familiar to anyone? These methods are not unique to cases of sexual abuse in the Roman Catholic dioceses of Pennsylvania.
 
There is a saying that the church is a hospital for sinners, not simply a retreat for the saints. If that is true – if the church is a place for healing, growth, reconciliation, love, grace – then we must commit to the hard work of allowing a safe enough space for that to happen and for all systems of abuse to be dismantled.

So it's beyond time that we ask ourselves and our church: are we doing this work? Or are we complicit in the abuse as well? 

If all those who perpetuate, cover up, or ignore abuse in the church were to leave...would we ourselves be among those who remain?