 |
David Clohessy
Executive Director, SNAP
|
Dear Dr. Page and Dr. Moore:
With the approach of the Southern Baptist Convention’s
2016 annual meeting, we are writing with two requests:
First Request. We ask for the creation of a denominationally-funded
“safe place” office to which Baptist clergy abuse survivors may file a report
about their alleged perpetrators and that the “safe place” office be widely
publicized.
Reason for First Request. It is flat-out cruel for Baptist denominational officials to persist in
telling clergy abuse survivors that they must go to the church of the accused
pastor if they want to report him within the faith community. This is like
telling abuse survivors that they must go to the den of the wolf who savaged
them. It is a response that inflicts additional harm on greatly wounded people
and that turns a cold shoulder to those who seek only to protect others. To avoid
the hopelessness that often besieges survivors who see no realistic avenue for
even making a report, and to encourage Baptist clergy abuse survivors to speak
out, the SBC needs to provide a “safe place” where survivors may report their
perpetrators to people who have the professionalism and experience to receive
those reports with compassion and care.
Because of the traumatic damage that is done to them,
most clergy abuse survivors are well into adulthood when they seek to formally
report those who abused them in childhood. Often, their claims can no longer be
criminally prosecuted. Indeed, most experts estimate that less than 10 percent
of child molesters wind up in the criminal justice system. Church cover-ups
frequently contribute to the failure of prosecution because many survivors made
some outcry in childhood only to have their outcry suppressed within the church
while the perpetrator was allowed to move on. Yet, despite these harsh
realities, many survivors still strive in adulthood to protect others by
reporting their perpetrators within the faith community. By providing a “safe
place,” the SBC could facilitate their reports rather than stifling them.
As you know, in the past, we requested that the SBC
provide its affiliated churches with the resource of trained outsiders for assessing
clergy abuse reports that cannot be criminally prosecuted and for informing congregations
about credible allegations. These were reasonable requests because realistic
response protocols are essential to the prevention of clergy sex abuse, and
realistic response protocols require the use of outsiders. Sadly, the Executive
Committee declined those requests, claiming that “local church autonomy”
precluded them, and that is why we are now making this smaller request for the
creation of a “safe place” to receive reports. The mere fact of denominational
record-keeping -- i.e., of receiving reports and logging allegations --
presents no plausible possibility of interfering with local church autonomy.
Frankly,
our hope is that, if the SBC Executive Committee would simply begin to receive
reports and systematically log allegations, there would eventually come a point
when SBC officials would realize the need to provide churches with a
professionally-staffed office for responsibly assessing those reports and for
informing churches about credible allegations -- and would also realize that
providing churches with this kind of information doesn’t violate their autonomy.
In other words, we hope for incremental change. Our view is that an outsider’s assessment
should happen whenever a minister has even a single allegation, but even if you
disagree with us on that, surely you would agree that there would be some point
at which multiple allegations against a minister should be responsibly assessed
and churches should be warned. For example, if a minister had accrued 3 abuse
allegations in 3 churches in 3 different states, would you think this was
enough to warrant a denominational assessment as to whether churches should be
informed? What if the minister had accrued 10 allegations? 20? Surely there
would be some point at which you would agree that denominational officials
should help churches with the provision of information about church-hopping
ministers who have multiple credible accusations of child sex abuse? Whatever
that point may be, the place to start is with receiving reports and systematically
logging the allegations.
The SBC Executive
Committee has the power. Dr. Page, your
predecessor, Morris Chapman, described the role of the Executive Committee as
the “fiduciary of the Convention” and as the denominational entity “empowered
to function” on behalf of the SBC. Therefore, we ask that the Executive
Committee exercise its power for the creation of a “safe place” office for
receiving reports about clergy sex abuse in SBC churches.
Alternatively,
the SBC Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission has the power. In 2008, when the Executive Committee rejected the proposal for a
denominational database of admitted and credibly-accused clergy sex abusers, it
pointed to the existence of the SBC’s Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission
and said that no additional office was needed because the ERLC was “fully
capable” of “the provision of ministry called for by sexual abuse
victimization.” The Executive Committee further stated that “should the ERLC
arrive at a different conclusion in the future about the advisability of
receiving reports of sexual abuse … and desire to serve as the office of
receipt, it may so advise the Convention….” Dr. Moore, although your ERLC predecessor
chose to do essentially nothing for the provision of ministry to clergy abuse
survivors, we are asking you to choose differently and to “serve as the office
of receipt” for reports about clergy sexual abuse in SBC churches. Put an end
to the dysfunctional denominational cruelty of insisting that survivors report
to the church of the accused perpetrator.
Second Request. Dr. Page, nine years ago on April
19, 2007, you wrote a column, published in the Florida Baptist Witness, in which you demonstrated the antithesis
of compassion and care for clergy sex abuse survivors, and once again, we are asking
for an apology.
Reason for Second
Request. Writing as the president of the largest Protestant
denomination in the country, you labeled those who were speaking in the media
about Baptist clergy sex abuse as “nothing more than opportunistic persons.” As
was noted in EthicsDaily at the time,
the only group that was publicly speaking out about Baptist clergy sex abuse
was our organization, SNAP, whose members are, for the most part, people who
were molested and raped by clergy when they were children. Your words were
extremely hurtful, set a terrible example, and helped to foster within your
faith group a climate of hostility toward clergy abuse survivors. We are still hoping
that, someday, you will understand the harm of what you wrote and will make a
public apology, which we would be happy to receive.
Conclusion. Data gathered by the Associated Press demonstrated that clergy sex abuse
is not only a Catholic problem but also a huge problem for Protestants. If the
SBC persists in denominational do-nothingness, we predict that the next
“Spotlight”-style exposé will be focused on the nation’s largest Protestant
denomination, the Southern Baptist Convention. Before that time comes, we
earnestly implore you to at least take the step of creating a “safe place” for
denominationally receiving clergy abuse reports.
__________________________
Reported by Baptist News Global, "Victims' group asks Southern Baptists to create 'safe place' for reporting sexual abuse," June 3, 2016.
__________________________
Reported by Baptist News Global, "Victims' group asks Southern Baptists to create 'safe place' for reporting sexual abuse," June 3, 2016.
Posts
