I serve as a church consultant for clergy and congregations where abuse has taken place. Individual and congregational healing is frequently limited by decisions which are made by judicatory leaders. These decisions include minimization of damage, asking victims to limit disclosures, reappointing clergy without transparency about prior violations, and failing to file charges against lay and clergy perpetrators. Victims are doubly harmed when systems and structures limit the telling of their stories and experiences, thereby shutting down the very process which would bring healing to their trust-betrayal and trauma.

Bishop Warner Brown, newly retired past president of the Council on Bishops, in his endorsement of this proposal writes, “We must admit that our past patterns have not always served us well, and there is a need to develop new patterns for the sake of our congregations and all potential victims.”

What are the roadblocks? How do leaders weigh a perpetrator’s repentance and Jesus’ forgiving love against the need to support a victim’s search for justice and safety? What stops leaders from disclosures that can heal and protect? I have hunches, but I don’t know why they are resistant. This project is designed to glean that information from three viewpoints, theology, psychology, and ecclesiastical polity.

This project will ask three hundred judicatory leaders in the United Methodist Church to explore the gap between their intentions to create safe sanctuaries through full transparency and their current practices. Differences in complaint resolution can be found across the country and may be dependent on the background, theology, and training of leaders themselves. Through survey instruments, interviews, and newly developed training modules, this project will determine the root causes of the ongoing silences victims and congregations face. The end result will be a safer church through problem identification and the dissemination of best practices.