Get Rid of the Old Yeast: Responding to Clergy Sexual Misconduct
Part 2: What I'm Not Talking About
Silence is central to Orthodox Holy Tradition but it might be helpful if distinguish what we might call “holy silence” or maybe better “dogmatic silence” from quietism. The former is active; I open my heart to receive the Word of God Who is Christ. To receive Christ means seeing His Presence in not only my life but your life and in the persons, events, and things that make up our life together.
This holy silence is dogmatic because it bears fruit in words and deeds that incarnate our participation in Christ’s work of reconciling the sinner to God and bridging the gap between the created and the Uncreated.
Holy silence also bears fruit in accepting our responsibility for our decisions. This, in turn, means embracing our human vocation as our brother’s keepers and our Christian vocation to follow Christ as His disciples and witnesses.
Quietism, on the other hand, is passive though not necessarily inactive. Rather than receiving and acting, the quietist reacts. Like the passionate individual, the quietest is dragged first this way than that by persons, events, and things. And though he strives to shape the world according to his own plans and projects, on closer examination we realize the quietest is rather shaped and eventually deformed by external forces.
Affectively holy and dogmatic silence is characterized by peace and a thankful acceptance of the limits of self and others (i.e, chastity). And quietism? Here we meet an individual who is frequently frantic and always resentful.
All of this is to say that when stepping up to respond pastorally to clergy sexual misconduct we must be clear about what we can—and more importantly, cannot—do. In other words, we must respond in holy silence.
One last point about what I’m not talking about.
I’m not going to address the forensic and legal aspects of investigating clergy misconduct. Not only is this outside our remit here it also requires technical knowledge that is best left to specialists in law enforcement and law.
We’ll also not be discussing the pastoral care of those offended against or those who offend. Here again, this would take us too far afield and require more discussion than our limited time together allows. Let me simply say that in both cases, pastoral care must build on the findings of forensic and legal specialists. We can fruitfully add to this consultation with mental health professionals as well as those who specialize in caring therapeutically for both victims and perpetrators of sexual abuse.
Finally, to all this, we must be guided by the Scriptures, moral theology, and the Christian tradition of the cure of souls. It is this that is our specific concern here.
I’m also not going to discuss pastoral care for a community where there has been a case of clergy sexual misconduct. Again, this is a complex matter and requires good, local knowledge of the harmed community as well as the larger Christian and non-Christian communities. And like with those other themes, we will leave unexamined this knowledge is best gained in situ; I can do great harm to the community or the person if I proceed theoretically rather than existentially.
At the same time, none is meant to minimize the seriousness of these matters; these are all important issues to be sure. Again, though it would simply take us too far afield to examine them in our very limited time together. To help fill in the gaps, I've given you a handout with some online sources you might want to look at (see below).
Here’s what I can say.
After 15 or 20 years of working with clergy sexual misconduct, I think what is most important is for Christians to understand that this isn’t merely or even primarily a private matter. Clergy misconduct undermines the life of the church and our response to it has serious implications for the fidelity of the church to the Gospel.
Moreover, and this is another issue that often gets muddled, the forgiveness of the offending pastor doesn’t mean he gets to continue in ministry. Let me make this stronger.
Over and above the moral argument I’m making, pastorally it is in the best interest of all involved as well as for the integrity of the congregation and for our shared witness to Christ that the offender be removed permanently from ministry.
Online Resources
Inclusion does not imply endorsement.
AdvocateWeb: https://www.advocateweb.org/
Clergy Sexual Abuse research: https://socialwork.web.baylor.edu/research-impact/ongoing-research/clergy-sexual-abuse-research
Clergy Sexual Abuse (CSA) Resources: https://socialwork.web.baylor.edu/csa-resources
Clergy Sexual Misconduct: Information & Resources: https://clergysexualmisconduct.com/
FaithTrust Institute: https://www.faithtrustinstitute.org/
Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests (SNAP):
Agree with this 100% especially the emphasis on "permanently." Not that there cannot be forgiveness, grace and restoration for the individual, but there is a particular arrogance in a person who believes that the harm he does to others' hearts, minds, and bodies with his sin is wiped away from the collective consciousness as easily as returning to the store an paying for something you accidentally left in your cart. It is not the same. To my mind, the true clergyman who fails and accepts his discipline with humility and grace and does not expect to be restored has the potential to do more good in the long run.