Last Saturday in Florida, a unanimous jury awarded
$12.5 million to a
man who, as a child, was sexually abused by a Southern Baptist minister. Significantly,
this verdict was assessed, not only against the local church, but against the
Florida Baptist Convention.
To my best knowledge, this is the first time in history that
a verdict has been handed down against a Baptist statewide denominational
entity in a clergy sex abuse case. Attorney Ron Weil
of Miami is the person who brought this “game-changer” of a lawsuit to fruition.
I’d like to imagine that Baptists will view this as a
wake-up call to begin implementing the sorts of systematic safeguards that
other major faith groups have. But Southern Baptists have shown themselves to
be recalcitrant in this arena, and so I expect it will likely take still more
lawsuits – and still more needlessly wounded kids – before that happens. For
now, the Florida Baptist Convention is simply saying that it plans
to appeal.
For twenty-five years, I practiced law as an appellate
attorney in Texas. So I know a thing or two about what can happen in the
appellate process and what the possibilities are. But whatever may happen next,
this case has already brought a seismic shift in the terrain of Baptist clergy
abuse litigation.
For far too long, Baptist denominational leaders have acted
as though they believed that by doing nothing, they could protect denominational
coffers against the risk of liability. In essence, they prioritized the safety
of denominational dollars over the safety of kids. Now however, denominational leaders
will have to consider that doing nothing also puts those dollars at risk.
This $12.5 million verdict will
also garner the attention of other trial lawyers, who
will now see that the Southern Baptist wall has been breached, and who will
bring still more lawsuits in an effort to widen that breach.
No more will Baptist officials be able to brag that they
always prevail on summary judgment. They likely had to incur much larger
attorney fees in defending this case in a full trial, and it is likely that many
more cases will go to full trial in the future. With trials, you get the
public disclosure of many more facts – facts that denominational officials
might prefer to keep hidden.
Because Southern Baptist officials have historically prioritized
the protection of denominational dollars, cases such as this are what are
needed if kids are to gain better protection against Baptist preacher-predators.
When Baptist officials are forced to spend down enough of their denominational dollars,
they may eventually see the sense in re-ordering their priorities for
the protection of kids. It’s a shame this is what it takes . . . but it does.
For far too long, preacher-predators have been able to
easily church-hop through this porous denomination because Baptist leaders have
pretended that their version of “local church autonomy” precludes any
systematic denominational sharing of information about reported clergy child
molesters. This religious rationalization has amounted to little more than a
candy-coating on Baptist leaders’ irresponsible inertia, and it has left a trail
of destruction in the lives of countless kids. But Baptist leaders have been
successful with this religious-sounding ruse . . . until now.
On the facts of this case, the Southern Baptist Convention’s
“local church autonomy” defense failed, and a jury found that a statewide
denominational office bears responsibility. Some may argue that this case was
unique or that other cases will be different. But while other cases may indeed
bring other facts to the table, most Baptist ministers bear commonalities by
virtue of their affiliation with the denomination. For example, it is common
for Baptist ministers to be aided in job searches through denominational
services and to be listed in denominational directories. In any event, there
are always variables in particular cases, and this is the very essence of how tort
law develops – i.e., case by case.
In the not-too-distant past, when a drunk driver caused
harm, only the drunk driver bore responsibility. But as the carnage caused by
drunk drivers became better documented, the law slowly changed, case by case
and through legislation, so that those who sold alcohol to already-intoxicated
people would also bear responsibility. Those who gave the drunk driver the
weapon of harm could no longer throw up their hands and say “not my problem.”
Similarly, I believe the law will eventually become more
uniform in recognizing the relational responsibility that Baptist
denominational entities should bear based on how they promote and facilitate
the employment of Baptist ministers. This is, after all, a cooperatively functioning
denomination that takes in over $500 million a year into centralized coffers. Abusive
Baptist ministers are not lone-wolf rogues, but rather, they are affiliated
with a denomination of enormous influence, and that affiliation aids in the
public perception of ministers’ authority.
To a very large degree, it is the denomination itself that places
the mantle of trust onto the shoulders of Baptist ministers, and so the
denomination should be held accountable when it irresponsibly allows that
mantle of trust to become a weapon for child sex abuse.
For far too long, Southern Baptist officials have been
distorting their “local church autonomy” doctrine to serve as what is, in
reality, a legal strategy for trying to shield the denominational structures
from the risk of liability. The doctrine has been functioning as a tactical
construct and not a religious construct. Ultimately, however, the law must look
to how Baptist denominational entities operate in the real world and not merely
to the abstraction of what denominational officials say.
Thankfully, that is exactly what the jurors in this case
did. They looked at reality.
