Skip to content. | Skip to navigation

Sections

The legacy of clergy sexual abuse: A cry for restorative justice

Jun 15, 2009

By Lisa Rea

I first became active on the issue of clergy abuse of children in 2001 after reading a local story in Northern California of a high profile school superintendent who told his story to our local newspaper of being abused by the family priest when he was a child.  I read that man’s brave story on the front page of our little newspaper over a morning cup of coffee. But I can remember the impact then, as I do now, a reaction of shock, disbelief, and anger. How is this possible? What can we do? And how can we do nothing?

I was coming off a holiday when I read a news article entitled Legacy of Irish Abuse Revealed (Reuters; May 21, 2009) detailing decades of sexual abuse of children in Ireland by clergy dating from the 1930s to the 1990s.  I do not think there is one person active in the restorative justice movement that is not drawn to these stories of suffering. Though articles have appeared and some research has been produced, the restorative justice community seems to be largely silent.

For those of us who consider ourselves on the “cutting edge” of restorative justice, and I like to think of myself at that place after 17 years of working in the trenches, there is no way we can read of such horrific abuse and not stop and ask what can we do?  To do nothing seems almost criminal. What worries me about this story is the conclusion by the governmental Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse that religious orphanages and industrial schools in the 20th-century Ireland were “places of fear, neglect and endemic sexual abuse.”

After a nine year investigation into claims of sexual abuse by clergy against children, the conclusion is harrowing but more than that it is a call to action. But will there be action? Although originally the Commission intended to publish the names of the actual perpetrators of abuse, one of the largest providers of residential care of boys in the country, the Christian Brothers, was able to prevent that through litigation. No abusers will be prosecuted as a result of this inquiry.

In 2001, I felt compelled to get involved. That led me to partnering with a colleague in London, Theo Gavrielides, whom I had not met in person. We found that we both shared a passion for restorative justice and the idea of applying those principles to these emerging clergy abuse cases in the U.S. We tried many things, both through his research entity (Independent Academic Research Studies or IARS) and my nonprofit in the U.S. (The Justice & Reconciliation Project or JRP), but we encountered barriers which ultimately stopped our progress. Some of those barriers were internal and some external (i.e. lack of access to willing offenders through the Catholic Church and lack of necessary funding to lay the groundwork for (a) victim-offender meeting). What I had hoped then, and hope now, is that restorative justice be revisited as the needed response to extreme injury to human beings.

In 2001, I wrote an open letter to the U.S. Catholic Bishops, re-printed in various places, stating why applying restorative justice to these abuse cases was so critical. I stated that by applying restorative justice it was not only doing the right thing but it also clearly reflected a response based on the Christian faith. Yet, with every year that passes and with astonishing reports like this one coming out of Ireland we seem to get further and further away from a real response that will help heal victims, and communities, and hold offenders accountable. That reality could change, but I am afraid not without the action of some bold leaders who understand the need to go deeper into this problem.

I am reading a book on the life of Bishop Desmond Tutu called Rabble-Rouser for Peace by John Allen (Free Press, 2006). The author speaks of apartheid and a clarion moment when Tutu became convinced that it was time for the church to do the right thing. Those who had offended had to take stock and make things right with those they had injured. Accountability had to be a part of the process for it to lead to a place of peace and healing. 

Maybe that is what is needed now rather than whitewashing, as it were, the sins of many. As I wrote in 2001, no one individual can give a blanket apology for the sins of those abusers. Each must be held accountable and for those who are deceased there are other symbolic ways that restorative justice even then can be applied. Perhaps it is time for a truth and reconciliation commission or something similar. Whatever the response it is time to take the cutting edge principles of restorative justice and turn those principles into action.

It is not too late. Not for the victims. If we choose to say nothing we are saying something quietly by our silence.

 

Related content
Document Actions

Excellent heads up

Posted by martin howard at Jun 25, 2009 08:30 PM
I'd like to see a list of action points for this. Do we need to approach Victims groups, target the media? Peacemakers had very useful insights on the the matter of clergy abuse

http://www.peacemaker.net/[…]/content.asp?ct=1245453

Excellent heads up

Posted by Lisa Rea at Jun 29, 2009 02:47 PM
Hello, Martin. Thank you for the comment.
I am aware of Peacemakers and the work they do inside churches. They do excellent work. As with any case of sexual abuse, it is complicated. Cases like these related to clergy abuse are even more complicated especially when the victims are children. The work I have done since 2001 related to clergy abuse particularly in the Catholic Church has led me to believe that restorative justice can be applied in these cases. I believe it would be easier on a one on one basis. That is, you start with a willing victim and move on from there. Without a willing victim and a willing offender, who takes responsiblity for his crimes, the case cannot proceed.
Victims who want more healing, apart from whatever restitution they may have received (or might receive in the future)should always have the option to meet their offenders. There does need to be a "place" for victims to go to inquire about this type of assistance, the possibility of victim-offender dialogue (or perhaps a circle where more than victim and offender are present). My nonprofit, JRP, was one place where victims sought assistance to explore new ways to heal through restorative justice. More is needed. More organzing should occur inside the RJ community to create places for victims to go to explore what RJ has to offer them as victims of clergy sexual abuse.
  


RJ and Clergy Sexual Abuse

Posted by Bill Casey at Jun 30, 2009 12:54 PM
Lisa,
Thank you for your insights about RJ and the clergy sexual abuse revelations (mostly in, but not limited to, Catholic clergy since 2002). I too had a similar desire to offer a restorative approach to victims, offenders and the leaders that failed to respond to the horrific accounts of abuse and cover-up. I too have found minimal interest by all parties.

An RJ practitioner named Linda Harvey formed an organization for this very purpose several years ago. It is called Restorative Justice Council on Sexual Misconduct in Faith Communities (any denomination, although as a Catholic and as the revelations were predominantly in the Catholic sector, Linda focused foremost on the Catholic Church). I and several other practitioners were prepared to assist her, but she found active resistance by both victim advocates and Catholic leaders (some form of a mediated approach was tried by the Diocese of Albany, NY, to mixed reviews).

The victim advocates like the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests, for example, concluded that confidential agreements between the parties would result in hiding the fuller extent of the leaders' failures and keep offenders hidden from the community, most of whom escaped legal accountability through statute of limitation restrictions. Catholic leaders have been influenced far more by legal and insurance carrier considerations rather than pastoral considerations and thus they have largely shown no interest in RJ.

I also serve as Chair of the Board of Trustees of Voice of the Faithful, a national Catholic lay organization formed initially in Boston in response to the clergy sexual abuse scandal. One of our primary goals is to support survivors, but since most of the state of play has been in the legal arena, we have not been able to advance approaches such as RJ.

I just wanted to share these insights with you. By the way, if you wanted to contact Linda Harvey, you can reach her at rjcouncil@earthlink.net. She lives in Lexington, KY but she formed the Council under the Non-Profit Center for Policy, Planning and Performance in St. Paul, MN.

Feel free to contact me if you want to discuss any of this further.

Best,

Bill Casey
b13909@comcast.net
703.568.3438

RJ and Clergy Sexual Abuse

Posted by Lisa Rea at Jun 30, 2009 08:35 PM
Bill, thank you for your thoughful comments here. I have certainly heard of Voice of the Faithful.

Some of the individuals you mentioned in your message I know including Linda Harvey. In 2001-2002 a colleague of mine in London, Dr. Theo Gavielides, and I were in contact with Linda.
Some groundwork was done around that time.

Theo and Dale Coker, based in the U.S., have done some pretty extensive evidence-based research on clergy abuse scandals. That research is still available through Theo and his research nonprofit, IARS, Independent Academic Research Studies. The work was done with the intention of laying the foundation to work towards appylying restorative justice to clergy abuse cases, again primarily in the Catholic Church.

I have had some contact with the survivor's group, SNAP, Survivors Network of Those Abused by Priests. However, the idea of applying restorative justice to these horrific cases, at that time here in the U.S. only, was not something many considered. As you mentioned in your message there have been many barriers. Some of those barriers have been erected by the Catholic Church itself and some of the barriers were erected by the victims of abuse, which is not at all surprising. But the question now is can we move on and still attempt to bring restorative justice principles to bear on these cases?

Looking at your website I see much interest in healing. That is excellent. I believe that is what all victims want. The only hope I see with these cases whether here in the U.S., in Ireland where the documented evidence covers decades of systemic abuse, or in any other country that has yet to be fully exposed, is to apply restorative justice one case at a time.
If there is interest in doing that then we move forward to a place of a possible healing.

As I mentioned in my first blog entry I worked with one victim of abuse who was molested as a
child by a priest who was also a close friend of the family. That victim, now an adult, was able to tell me that he would consider contact with the offender through mediated victim offender dialogue. When I asked if he had ever considered such a meeting before, between himself and his abuser, he told me that no one had ever asked. That is part of the problem.
No one had ever asked. This must change.

Is there risk in such meetings? Some would say that there is. However, I would have to guess that once enormous sums of money are paid out by the Catholic Church in response to legal action there certainly is very little to lose from the church's perspective. Do victims of abuse want more than money? I think they do without a doubt. Healing is important. So is direct offender accountability.

Some tire of this subject, I know. Since 1992, I have done restorative justice in many forms and in many venues. But this is one subject that I find hard to drop (since 2001). I think the hope that restorative justice provides is that it can be applied and has been applied to crimes worldwide that some think are untouchable. An example, the genocide in Rwanda. PFI, and particularly the Centre for Justice & Reconciliation, has done some exceptional work there working to open doors for healing in the victims (family members) and their offenders. With the healing in the victims, which is certainly on-going, comes the hope for change and transformation in the offender. It is not a one way street. Of course, the community experiences restoration through these processes which is also essential.

Thus, with the cases of clergy abuse there is still hope for some kind of restoration. I do not believe that we have even scratched the surface yet in opening doors for this type of healing.

I remain interested and hope that somehow we might build greater awareness for restorative justice and what might allow this type of healing to be a reality and not just theory.
I hope to work with you.

Blessings,

Lisa Rea
Rea Consulting
Victims-Driven Restorative Justice
California, U.S.
916-367-1307

RJ and Clergy Sexual Abuse

Posted by Jo Anne Smith, MSW, LCSW at Jul 02, 2009 10:47 AM
I have worked for years with both vicitm and offenders and victim/offenders. I am also very involved in a restorative justice initiative here in Illinois. I feel that giving victims and offenders the opportunity for RJ regarding the issues coming out of clergy sexual abuse would be wonderful as clergy would have an opportunity to take responsibility and would have the opportunity to perhaps develop empathy for their victims. It would especially give victims a voice which SNAP has done but this would build on their interest in making a change. It would also give the church an opportunity to look at how they can move forward.

RJ and Clergy Sexual Abuse

Posted by Lisa Rea at Jul 02, 2009 08:03 PM
Hello,Jo Anne. Good comments. I think you are right. I think restorative justice processes would expand opportunities for direct accountability, by offenders, and allow for more healing in victims. But not just healing in the victims but also in the offenders as well. With offender accountability comes transformation (or the potential for change)and also healing. And that is just looking at the impact on the offender alone.

I remember around 2002 one priest in the U.S. who was publicly being charged with sexual offenses (with children) committed suicide. It was a horrible reality. To me, even that act could have been prevented. Through the healing processes of restorative justice offenders are not disgarded after they commit violent offenses. Instead, the idea of personal responsibilty, and coming to a point of remorse, is key to change. Is this something the public should care about? I think so.
The bottom line is we want lower crime rates, less recidivism (by repeat offenders) and more healing in victims, and communities. And not necessarily in that order.

The work of the victims' group SNAP, representing victims who have been abused by clergy, has served a great need. Victims of clergy abuse in the Catholic Church had no where to go. But I do believe that deeper healing is needed and if victims knew of its
potential would choose restoraive justice. But
as we know, it takes two. Victims and offenders have to voluntarily agree to meet.

Glad to hear of your work in Illinois.
All states need to invest in restorative justice. There is no time to waste.

Lisa Rea
  

Add comment

You can add a comment by filling out the form below. Plain text formatting.

(Required)
Tell us your name.
(Required)
Enter your e-mail address.
(Required)
(Required)
(Required)

About RJOB

Correspondents

LN-blue

 lp-blue

lr

dv-blue

kw-blue

mw-blue