Credibly accused

The Diocese of Davenport just released the names of 24 priests who were “credibly accused” of sexual abuse.

Meanwhile, Southern Baptist officials won’t even establish a system for assessing the credibility of sexual abuse reports, much less for releasing the names of credibly accused clergy to the public.

If you listen to the excuses and rationalizations of Southern Baptist officials, you might imagine that SNAP had asked them to do something radical and unprecedented in imposing clergy accountability measures. Nothing could be further from the truth.

We asked Southern Baptist officials to do LESS than what most other major faith groups are already doing. And still they thumbed their noses.

We didn’t ask Southern Baptist officials to exercise authority over local churches, or to control the hiring decisions of local churches, or to revoke the ordination of ministers.

We simply asked Southern Baptists to create an office where victims may safely report clergy abuse, and where their reports will be responsibly assessed. And we asked Southern Baptist officials to inform churches of the outcome of those assessments.

In other words, while other major faith groups are actually removing credibly accused clergy from ministry, all we asked of Southern Baptist officials was that they inform people in the pews about credibly accused clergy.

And Southern Baptist officials refused.

By now, we’ve all seen how they distort their autonomy doctrine to rationalize refusing to act on this. But that’s just one of their excuses. I’ve also seen much whining, wailing and gnashing of teeth about the “credibly accused” language.

“What’s the standard?” they ask. “How could anyone possibly decide whether someone was ‘credibly accused’?”

And then they act as though the very posing of the question renders the answering of it impossible and thereby justifies their own refusal to act.

Of course, that’s ludicrous. It’s just more of their excuse-making.

Thanks to their own extraordinary recalcitrance, Southern Baptist officials don’t have to invent the wheel on this. Other faith groups have already done the work of developing standards for assessing the credibility of clergy abuse accusations. So, Southern Baptist officials could draw from the models, examples and standards that are already being used by other faith groups.

For example, as paraphrased in the news article, the standard used by the Diocese of Davenport to assess whether a clergy abuse accusation is “credible” is this: “The abuse must be more likely than not to have occurred, corroborated with other evidence or other sources, and/or acknowledged or admitted to by the accused.”

There are also professional investigatory firms that help in assessing sexual abuse allegations. The Episcopal Diocese of Texas recently used a professional investigatory firm to assist with reviewing clergy abuse allegations dating back to the 1960s.

All sorts of factors are used in these sorts of assessments, including documentary evidence such as letters and diaries, any corroboration from other witnesses, circumstantial information, the context in which the event occurred, and statements by the alleged perpetrator (e.g., perpetrators sometimes admit to the conduct but rationalize it in some way such as by calling it “consensual” or saying it was "just" fondling). These sorts of factors are weighed every day by the clergy abuse review boards of other faith groups, by social service agencies, and by investigatory agencies.

Yet, Southern Baptist officials persist in throwing up their hands and acting as though it would be an impossible task.

It’s not. That reality is demonstrated by the fact that other faith groups are already doing it.

But of course, there may be other unstated reasons why Southern Baptist officials don’t want to start assessing clergy abuse reports in the way that other faith groups do.

The assessments of a denominational review board are something news reporters can write about. And that serves to bring clergy abuse into the light of day.

Perhaps that is exactly what Southern Baptist officials don’t want to happen. By refusing to provide any system for the responsible assessment of clergy abuse reports, Southern Baptist officials effectively assure that the public will not find out about most Southern Baptist clergy sex abusers. The predators stay hidden.

This may help to temporarily preserve Southern Baptists’ self-aggrandized image as a moral beacon. But it does so at the cost of kids’ safety.

That’s why it’s an illusory image. There's nothing moral about it.