What Can Faith Communities Do To Support Clergy Abuse Victims?

Institutional Responses: Long Post: Mainly for those who are part of a faith community

Institutional Harm

From my Thesis:

“Institutional response to allegations of clergy sexual abuse is a critical area of concern. Research indicates that many religious institutions have historically responded inadequately to abuse allegations, often prioritising the protection of the institution’s reputation over the well-being of the victims (Garland & Argueta, 2010). Pooler & Barros-Lane (2022) study found that 47.1% of participants reported the way the church treated them after the abuse was worse than the initial abuse; after the abuse came to light, 51.9% were blamed for the abuse by members of the church, 52.9% were ignored by the church, only 15% of churches thoroughly investigated the report, only 8.1% felt they were supported by the church after the abuse, and only 8.6% felt the church was helpful.

This is known as ‘institutional betrayal’ (Smith & Freyd, 2014), where the institution’s response exacerbates and adds to the trauma and adverse health outcomes already experienced by the victim”

Artist David Hayward, known as the Naked Pastor, employs art to highlight problematic concerns in faith communities. His cartoon “It’s not that we don’t believe you” (Figure 1) accurately describes institutional betrayal and the experiences of women who, upon reporting, encounter a male-dominated hierarchical structure that leads to further victimisation and harm (Flynn, 2008; Garland, 2006; Kennedy, 2009; Woolston, 2023).

Image: Naked Pastor: It’s not that we don’t believe you. Image Purchased for Not-for-Profit Use - Please purchase from the artist if you would like to use it

What Can Faith Communities Do to Support Victim-Survivors of Clergy Abuse?

Importantly, if your church’s leadership (elders, pastors, board members) does not have someone with lived experience helping to create policies and procedures, I would seriously question how safe they are. Policies determine whether survivors feel safe reaching out for support or not. If you have always felt safe in the environment you are in, then you can’t be the one writing the policies! Without survivor input, churches risk creating guidelines that seem well-intentioned but ultimately fail those who need protection the most.

So, what can faith communities do to actually make a difference?

1. Confidentiality and Professionalism

Faith communities often share personal information too readily, disguising it as prayer requests, pastoral concerns, or small-group accountability. However, when sensitive details are disclosed without explicit consent, the impact can be devastating. What may seem like a harmless way to “support” someone can actually be a profound violation of trust, a professional breach of confidentiality, and, in some cases, lead to re-traumatisation.

I experienced this firsthand recently. I sent an email to a local pastor regarding concerns about domestic violence and youth recruitment. Instead of replying personally, he forwarded my email to someone else on his team—without my consent. That was unprofessional, unethical, and possibly even a breach of confidentiality.

Now, I’m comfortable sharing my story publicly, but imagine if I wasn’t. That email went to someone I know. What if I had a complex history with this person? (I don’t -but they do know me). What if they weren’t emotionally prepared to read it? They would have easily known who I was referring to in my email. It may have been a complete shock for them. What if this wasn’t me - someone able to discuss my story - what if it was someone who was still processing their trauma? This could have resulted in harm - suicidality often results when abusive information is disclosed without consent. These are not light issues to forward on to someone else to deal with.

This church lacks basic policies on handling sensitive disclosures, putting both survivors and their staff at risk.

What Churches Can Do:

• Explicit Consent Matters: Before sharing personal information in any form (prayer groups, pastoral meetings, or emails), obtain consent first. If someone hasn’t given permission, don’t share until you receive it.

• Clear Policies: Establish written, survivor-informed confidentiality guidelines that all staff, elders, and volunteers are required to follow.

• Anonymous Support Options: Enable survivors to submit prayer requests or seek support, or make reports without revealing their identity.

• Training on Trauma-Informed Responses: Mishandling disclosures can re-traumatise survivors. Church leaders must be trained on how to respond appropriately (and what to avoid) when someone shares an experience of abuse.

If faith communities genuinely want to be safe spaces, confidentiality must be a priority—not an obligation afterthought.

2. Zero-Tolerance Policies for Clergy Misconduct

Churches need clear, enforceable codes of conduct that explicitly prohibit clergy sexual exploitation. Every professional field—counselling, medicine, education—has ethical standards that protect clients, patients, and students. Why should clergy be any different?

I encourage churches to adopt a clergy sexual ethics agreement as part of their code of conduct. This document should:

• Define sexual harassment and abuse. Provide examples of behaviours.

• Acknowledge that any sexual misconduct within a ministerial relationship is exploitation (not a “moral failure” or “sexual sin”).

• Require full cooperation from the accused during investigations.

• Outline clear consequences, including immediate removal from leadership and no restoration to power.

Here’s an excellent policy and prevention guide from the Clergy Sexual Abuse Task Force of the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship:

Policy and Prevention Guide

3. Independent Investigations

Churches should never manage reports of clergy abuse internally. When churches "address it privately,” they protect the institution—not the survivors. Instead, all reports should be directed to external experts.

When a church leader faces investigation, the congregation and the wider community should be informed. Why? Because abuse is rarely an isolated incident. If one person has come forward, there’s a strong likelihood that others have been harmed as well. If no one knows an investigation is underway, other survivors may never feel safe to come forward.

What Churches Can Do:

• Make a public announcement that an investigation is underway.

• Provide a contact point for others who may have been affected to come forward.

• Ensure the investigation is truly independent—not run by church members or friends of the accused.

(For more on why an independent investigation should be the first response - read my ‘Fundamentally Flawed’ Substack.)

4. Restorative Justice Pathways

Not all survivors seek justice through legal avenues, but that doesn’t mean churches can neglect accountability. Faith communities ought to support survivor-led restorative justice processes, ensuring that those who have been harmed have a voice in how accountability is achieved and pursued. All I actually wanted was truth to be spoken!

What Churches Can Do:

• Public acknowledgment of the harm done. No victim blaming language or minimisation of acts perpetrated.

• Formal apologies from leadership / governing board (I requested an apology from the ACC for breaching my confidentiality and privacy - I didn’t even get an acknowledgement of my email!)

• Concrete commitments to prevent future abuse (e.g., implementing survivor-informed policies).

In Australia, our system is named the criminal justice system – not the survivor restoration system! The criminal justice system is designed to determine guilt and administer punishment, not to restore survivors or help them heal. Even when a perpetrator is convicted (which is rare), survivors are often left with no meaningful support, no accountability from the institutions that enabled the abuse, and no real sense of justice. This is why faith communities must step up. If churches genuinely care about justice, they can’t rely on the legal system. They need to have pathways for restoration that centre survivors’ restoration – not perpetrator restoration.

5. Public Transparency & Institutional Accountability

Churches need to stop prioritising their reputation over the restoration of survivors. There is excessive emphasis on reinstating pastors to the pulpit; they typically receive just a two-year slap on the wrist (if that) before they are back preaching somewhere. Meanwhile, there is little focus on what restoration means for the survivor. There is no attention given to the ongoing harm that survivors experience when they see the pastor who caused them harm re-promoted and receiving standing ovations for their confession of their ‘sin’.

What Churches Can Do

• Don’t re-promote someone to the pulpit who has caused someone harm!

• Acknowledges past cases of clergy abuse instead of covering them up.

• Regularly reviews policies—ensuring reporting mechanisms, codes of conduct, and training are up to date.

• Provides professional supervision for clergy—helping leaders address countertransference, boundary issues, and what to do if they develop feelings for a congregant.

• Conducts ethical performance reviews—evaluating pastors’ sermons and how they respond to feedback and how pastors handle power, influence, and moral concerns.

6. Education

Churches can’t just react to abuse after it happens. They need to prevent it. That means education at every level:

Understanding Power & Consent

• Clergy possess inherent power over their congregation. Any sexual relationship with a congregant is exploitation—not an “affair.”

• Avoid language suggesting mutuality like “moral failure” or “sexual sin.” Label it accurately: abuse of power.

• Educate on meaningful consent and undue influence—many Australian states now legally recognise clergy abuse as non-consensual due to power dynamics imbalance.

• Educate staff on intersectionality – how does your church discuss intersectionality? Some people are more vulnerable to clergy abuse due to gender, race, disability, or socio-economic status. Churches must understand these dynamics to prevent harm.

• Bystander Intervention Training - equip congregation members to recognise red flags and intervene safely.

7. Trauma-Informed Care

Trauma-informed care is an approach that recognises the significant impact of trauma and ensures that support systems do not re-traumatise survivors. It prioritises safety, choice, and empowerment while acknowledging how trauma influences a person’s emotions, behaviour, and ability to trust others. Churches must be adept at understanding trauma responses. Survivors might fawn, dissociate, or delay reporting. On average, it takes 24 years for a survivor to disclose their experience of abuse.

For faith communities, this means:

• Listening without judgment – Survivors should be believed and supported, not questioned (leave this to the investigator) or blamed.

• Ensuring confidentiality and consent – Survivors must have control over who hears their story and how it is handled.

• Avoiding harmful spiritual responses – Telling survivors to “forgive and move on” or “pray for healing” can cause deep harm.

• Providing clear, safe reporting mechanisms – Survivors need independent pathways for reporting abuse, not ones controlled by church leadership. Establish clear, survivor-centred protocols for responding to disclosures.

• Understanding trauma responses – Recognising that freezing, fawning, or delayed disclosures are normal reactions to trauma.

• Independent Advocacy & Pastoral Care: Survivors should have access to advocates.

• No contact: Ensure no contact between the perpetrator pastor/leader and survivor within the church setting.

8. Theology & Preaching: What Are You Teaching?

Churches must critically examine how their theology and preaching contribute to cultures of silence and complicity. Please see my thesis and the institutional messages that create an environment that facilitates abuse.

• Monitor how submission, forgiveness, mental health and purity are taught.

• Understand how perpetrators weaponise what comes from the pulpit as a means of control.

• Make it explicitly clear from the pulpit that abuse is never the victim’s fault.

• Teach that forgiveness does not erase accountability.

• Preach sermons that condemn abuse directly (naming what abuse is) and support justice-seeking.

• Provide education on power dynamics—so that congregants can recognise spiritual abuse when it happens.

• Provide hotline numbers in your bathrooms for sexual abuse / domestic violence support (1800 Respect, men’s helpline, Qlife, lifeline etc)

What other things would you like to see added to this post? I have a lot more to say on this topic, but this substack is getting a little too long already!