BishopAccountability.org
	Spirit of Trust What Can Religious Institutions Learn from the Secular World in Order to Regain Confidence after Sexual Abuse Scandals? The Guardian [United Kingdom] April 28, 2007 http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/mike_ion/2007/04/spirit_of_trust.html It was once said that the Church of England could be likened to the proverbial fish that understood how desperately it needed water only when it landed in the bottom of a boat on the end of a hook. Many faithful and sincere Anglicans (and Roman Catholics before them) have only recently grasped just how much the Anglican community relies on trust - now that they have so little of it. What the latest church-related sexual abuse scandal has done is to highlight an ongoing erosion of trust. Trust is a social practice. Humans are social beings who swim in an ocean of trust. What happens when this ocean begins to drain away - as is the case with many Christian churches - is that we become sceptical, often cynical and perhaps even a little paranoid. The case of the ex-choirmaster, Peter Halliday (jailed on Thursday for 30 months after admitting sex offences from the 1980s), yet again highlights the failure of church leaders to act. Some of the more disturbing aspects of the Halliday case were the attempts by the Anglican Church to control information, prevent public disclosure and silence dissent, even in this case, the anguished cries of abused children and their families. In fairness, cultures of this sort are not unknown. Tendencies toward centralisation of power and control of information exist in all institutions. The fact is that well-governed institutions ensure full disclosure of information, institutionalise checks and balances on the exercise of power and establish independent boards to advise and participate actively in choosing the chief executive officer. The church is no ordinary institution. For believers the church is guided by the Holy Spirit - a community in which God's saving work is accomplished and God's kingdom proclaimed. But the church is also a human institution, managed by humans with all their failings, including susceptibility to the corruptions of power and mistaken judgment. Therefore it would seem to follow that the Christian churches could make use of some of the practices adopted by secular institutions to check inevitable abuses. One example is the need for a formal grievance and appeals procedure. Some of the most heart-wrenching testimonies from abuse victims are their reports of having nowhere to turn when their priest was part of the problem and of their attempts to engage others within the church that were ignored or rebuffed. Similarly, the laity has no formal recourse when their pastors are insensitive or incompetent. Surely, formal grievance and appeals processes, with recourse to independent outside bodies, could serve the people of God well? In the Catholic Church in particular, pressures to reassign rather than remove priests and to cover up both abuses and incompetence are certainly exacerbated by the serious shortage of priests. Many have suggested that the long-term solution to this problem can come only with the ordination of married men and of women. Here too, borrowing good practices from other sectors would suggest ways of using independent boards and expert groups to solve problems, ensure that abusive and unqualified priests are not exercising ministry, open up the institution and allow the laity to use their gifts in the service of their church. Many mistakes and cover-ups, involving the abuse of children by clergymen, have been made by bishops. What is clear is that the responsibility for resolving or moving beyond the present crisis of trust lies primarily with the bishops themselves. The problem is that both the Anglican and the Catholic churches appear to be suffering a form of paralysis. The people who can do something (the conference of Anglican or Catholic bishops) have apparently done all they want to do or think they can do as a group. Yet those who want to do something to help to move things on, namely the laity and some clergy, have no real vehicle for doing so. Despite the long-ingrained tendency of lay men and women to defer to the hierarchy, lay people have both the right and the responsibility to make their voices heard. Many of them are now tragically aware of the consequences that follow from the concentration and misuse of power and lay deference to hierarchical authority. For too long, the Anglican and the Roman Catholic churches have, for whatever reason, refused to talk openly, candidly and even compassionately about the crisis of trust that clearly now exists. It will be difficult to regain that trust but without it there can be no growth or development.
Any original material on these pages is copyright © BishopAccountability.org 2004. Reproduce freely with attribution.