Leaks, transparency and misconduct: Lessons from St. Thomas Fifth Avenue

Screen cap of “Saint David of Wales” by porn producer 
and St. Thomas resident Erich Erving. Full frontal nudity redacted. 
Original is exclusively the property of the creator.

One of the amusing things for those of us who cover the church abuse beat is how clueless church officials are about leaks of information in the midst of crises like the situation at St. Thomas’ Fifth Avenue. Specifically, judicatories lose sight of several key factors:

1. Although the Title IV clergy disciplinary canons recognize that privacy issues are a factor in any Title IV case, the reality is that the Episcopal Church is very small. As a result, there are very few secrets in the denomination. 
2. There is an important distinction between secrecy and confidentiality. Healthy churches have numerous confidential matters, but there should be few, if any, secrets. Indeed, a desire to keep issues secret almost always evinces a toxic organization.
3. Disclosure is vital to healing. Per one Episcopal publication: “Getting at that truth isn’t always easy, but the process is essential, adds Bishop Clay Matthews, executive director of the Office of Pastoral Development for the Presiding Bishop. “It makes a tremendous difference, especially with incidents of misconduct, whether they be boundary violations or sexual misconduct or financial misconduct. Should the issues remain in the closet, those are the ones that will come back and affect the health of congregations.” 
4. Disclosure needs to occur at multiple levels for healing to occur in family systems like a church. Per Robin Hammeal-Urban, an expert on the topic and former Canon for Mission Integrity to the Diocese of CT, “As Christians, we are called to tell about misconduct in our congregations on the intrapersonal, interpersonal, institutional, and cultural levels. Communicating accurate information, or telling the truth about what has been secret, can be transformative and healing to many when all four of these levels are addressed.”
5. The Title IV obligation to confidentiality only extends to clergy, as Title IV only covers clergy. Victims have an inherent right to disclose, and efforts to prevent them from doing so are inherently abusive. Victims should, however, be cautioned that a decision to disclose may result in retaliation from others and should be clear-eyed about this possibility.
6. In our experience, clergy often violate the Title IV confidentiality provisions, especially when they believe doing so will advance their own interests.
7. Victim-blaming is common in the church. Per Bishop Justin Holcomb,” Victim blaming is strong in America,” he said, because it’s easier for people to cope with the horrors of abuse if they think someone brought it upon themselves rather than recognize that perpetrators exist. This especially is true around sexual trauma.”
8. Coming forward to tell of abuse — whether sexual or nonsexual — takes tremendous courage. Holcomb notes, “The moment of disclosure is one of the most powerful times in a survivor’s life,” he said, because they are taking a risk and hoping they aren’t met with shame or suspicion.”
9. The person or organization disclosing misconduct is not the wrongdoer. It is a Christian imperative to resist injustice and oppression. Thus, responsibility for misconduct remains entirely with the perpetrators.
10. Sitting silent in the face of disclosure leads to speculation, gossip, and blaming all the wrong people. Such behavior rarely results in positive outcomes.
11. Folks at St. Thomas would like some clear communication on the issues facing the church. And yes, there are ways to communicate in this space that respect the criminal justice system, Title IV, and avoid potential defamation.
12. People aren’t stupid. Sometimes, Diocesan officials get so far into the weeds that they don’t realize that some situations are facially obvious, especially to those who deal with the topic of church abuse on a regular basis.

We predict multiple criminal charges in the case of St. Thomas’ Fifth Avenue.

Despite this, Bill Davis, one of the alleged perpetrators, continues to enjoy full access to St. Thomas, even as Bishop Heyd tries, without legal or canonical authority to do so, to bar one of the victims from the churches of the Diocese.

To that, we say the Diocese’s behavior is:

1. Hardly reassuring.
2. Proof that the Diocese is woefully uninformed on the topic of trauma.
3. Evidence that Diocesan officials are untrained in even basic aspects of maintaining a safe church environment.

Thus, Diocesan officials would be well-advised to re-focus their efforts to emphasize conduct that evinces care for those hurt by the church.

Further, to be clear: The alleged sexual assault and battery at St. Thomas Fifth Avenue is part of a dysfunctional culture that has been prevalent at the parish for far too long.

Indeed, one need look no further than the parish’s recent efforts to defend its culture to recognize just how toxic it has become. Or the fact that COO Matthew Moretz attacked and ignored people who complained about sexual harassment and no one saw a problem with Moretz’s behavior.

All this, despite the fact that clergy are supposed to be, per Title IV itself, held to a higher standard by virtue of the vows made at ordination.

Still worse, the issues at St. Thomas’ arise in the context of a recent scandal involving child sexual abuse at the Choir School. And every member of the St. Thomas’ vestry has life and professional experience adequate to understand that sexual harassment and assault/battery are never acceptable — even if their faith wasn’t adequate for them to recognize these issues.

As a reminder, sexual harassment and assault/battery are not consistent with the Baptismal Covenant.

Full stop.