perpetrators – Mormons Speak

May 5, 2018

Teaching Correct Principles about Sexual Abuse

We appreciate the efforts the Church makes to help victims of abuse. However, more help is needed, especially for victims of sexual abuse. Whenever leaders hold a victim responsible for being abused, they teach incorrect principles that protect perpetrators and harm survivors.

Each statement about sexual abuse in Church curricula should be evaluated to determine if it blames victims or if it holds the perpetrators responsible for the crime. The Church should revise any of its teachings that blame and shame victims of abuse. For example, consider the following statements:

The woman must resist an attacker “with all her strength and energy” or she is “guilty of unchastity.”– 1974 LDS First Presidency statement

Correct principle: A victim of sexual assault is not guilty of unchastity if she did not resist the attacker with all of her strength. Only the perpetrator is guilty.

“Think of it—unchastity is second only to murder. Perhaps there is a common element in those two things—unchastity and murder. Both have to do with life, which touches upon the highest of divine powers. Murder involves the wrongful taking of life; sexual transgression may involve the wrongful giving of life, or the wrongful tampering with the sacred fountains of life-giving power.”Elder Bruce C. Hafen, “The Gospel and Romantic Love,” adapted from a September 28, 1982, BYU devotional address.

Correct principle: Victims of sexual violence are not guilty of a crime like murder.

The loss of chastity is “far-reaching. Once given or taken or stolen it can never be regained.” … It is better to die in defending one’s virtue than to live having lost it without a struggle.” President Spencer W. Kimball, The Miracle of Forgiveness

Correct principle: A victim of sexual assault or rape does not lose his or her chastity or virtue.

“Your[young women] influence on the young men will help them remain worthy of their priesthood power, of temple covenants, and of serving a mission.” (See Guardians of Virtue, Elaine S. Dalton, April 2011 General Conference; and Be Not Moved, Elaine S. Dalton, April 2013 Young Women’s Conference)

Correct principle: Young men—not young women– are responsible for the choices they make. When young women are held responsible for the choices young men make, that results in victim blaming if they are raped.

“The body is something to be kept pure and holy. Do not be afraid of soiling its hands in honest labor. Do not be afraid of scars that may come in defending the truth or fighting for the right, but beware scars that spiritually disfigure, that come to you in activities you should not have undertaken, that befall you in places where you should not have gone” Jeffrey R. Holland, The New Era, February 2000.

Correct principle: The scars of sexual abuse do not spiritually disfigure a person; a sexual abuse survivor should never be blamed for the abuse by saying that she should not have undertaken an activity. The responsibility is solely that of the perpetrator.

“The victim must do all in his or her power to stop the abuse. Most often, the victim is innocent because of being disabled by fear or the power or authority of the offender. At some point in time, however, the Lord may prompt a victim to recognize a degree of responsibility for abuse” Richard G. Scott, General Conference, April 1992.

Correct principle: Victims have no degree of responsibility for abuse although perpetrators often believe that they do.

“Any sexual intimacy outside of the bonds of marriage—I mean any intentional contact with the sacred, private parts of another’s body, with or without clothing—is a sin and is forbidden by God. Elder Richard G. Scott, “Serious Questions, Serious Answers,” October 1994 general conference address.

Correct principle: Many victims of sexual assault have been groomed by perpetrators who coerced and manipulated them to engage in sexual activity. These victims are never responsible for the actions of a sexual perpetrator even though they may have had “intentional contact with the sacred, private parts of another person’s body.”

Church leader, teacher or speaker must eliminate all teachings that imply that victims are responsible for the sexual abuse they suffered and that they have lost their virtue. Leaders reading these statements may believe that they are responsible to determine the culpability of a victim who reports sexual abuse. In addition, they may choose to protect perpetrators.

The Church must review its teachings to make certain that they do not implicitly or explicitly hold victims responsible for being raped. The idea that one who is sexually abused is somehow responsible for being assaulted is just as flawed as if one were to say that a murder victim is responsible for being murdered or a robbery victim is responsible for being robbed.

Whenever a church leader writes or speaks about chastity or sexual purity, they must remember that many of those who read or hear their statements are survivors of sexual assault. Church leaders need to clarify their remarks so that their statements do not shame, blame or disparage abuse victims. Our Church must become a safe place for survivors to heal.

The following are some helpful teachings about sexual abuse in Church publications:

• …In instances of abuse, the first responsibility of the Church is to help those who have been abused and to protect those who may be vulnerable to future abuse.” [2]

•“Church leaders should never disregard a report of abuse or counsel a member not to report criminal activity to law enforcement personnel. [3]•

• “Help survivors of abuse understand that they are not bad because bad things were done to them. Appropriately place responsibility on the perpetrator. Don’t imply that being abused was the victim’s fault. People do not have to repent of evil that was done to them; in fact, they cannot do so.” [4]

• “Victims of rape or sexual abuse frequently experience serious trauma and unnecessary feelings of guilt. Church officers should handle such cases with sensitivity and concern, reassuring such victims that they, as victims of the evil acts of others, are not guilty of sin, helping them to overcome feelings of guilt and to regain their self-esteem and their confidence in personal relationships.”[5]

•”What exactly is sexual abuse? By definition, it involves ‘any sexually stimulating activity between a child and an adult or another child who is in a position of power, trust, or control.[‘”6]

•”‘Perhaps [child abuse] has always been with us,’ says President Gordon B. Hinckley, first counselor in the First Presidency, ‘but has not received the attention it presently receives. I am glad there is a hue and cry going up against this terrible evil, too much of which is found among our own’.” [7]

Leaders need to consistently state that abuse victims are not responsible for their abuse and that the Lord loves them unconditionally and infinitely. Leaders need to mourn with abuse survivors and listen with love when they talk about their feelings. They need to help them, not harm them. The Church should be a place of healing for all of its members, including victims of abuse.

We pray that our Church will eliminate any incorrect statements about sexual abuse from its curricula and teachings. We ask that they seek to love abuse survivors as God loves them in all that they say and do. As they do so, they will walk in the Savior’s footsteps, who taught, “A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another. By this shall all men know that you are my disciples, if you have love one to another.” [8]

1.For the Strength of the Youth, 36

2. (Book 1: Stake Presidencies and Bishoprics [1998], 157–58

3. Preventing and Responding to Abuse, Mormon Newsroom, March, 2018

4. Ann F Pritt, “Healing the Spiritual Wounds of Sexual Abuse,” April 2001 New Era

5. First Presidency letter to General Authorities, Regional Representatives, and other priesthood leadership, 7 February 1986

6. Child Abuse: Helps for Ecclesiastical Leaders, [Church pamphlet], 1985, 2

7. Lisa A. Johnson, “Hidden Agony,” New Era, March 1992

8. John 13: 34-35

May 2, 2018May 5, 2018

Reducing Ecclesiastical Sexual Abuse in the LDS Church

Most men who are called to positions of authority in the Church are kind, caring individuals. I have seen miracles performed by Church leaders who served members with love and compassion. Many bishops and branch presidents serve faithfully and tirelessly. They reach out to the elderly, sick, widowed, poor, and needy. Faith-filled Church leaders—and members—become instruments in God’s hands when they serve others.

Unfortunately, some leaders misuse the authority they receive. Some bully members into compliance. Others lure members into dishonest financial schemes. Some are physically or sexually abusive. Studies demonstrate that faith communities are even more vulnerable to abuse than secular environments since 93% of sex offenders describe themselves as “religious” and they tend to have more victims and younger victims.[1]

Studies indicate that up to 38% of women and 16% of men were molested before turning 18 years old.[2] In an extensive research study of many religious denominations that included Latter-day Saints, Dr. Diane R. Garland found that 32 members of congregations that average 400 members have experienced clergy sexual misconduct.[3]

Sexual predators often target churches because the church provides them with easy access to victims, because members tend to trust their leaders and to assume that the church is a safe place, and because perpetrators are often supported or quickly forgiven by the Church when victims report abuse.

Current LDS policies create a culture that encourages and protects ecclesiastical abusers. Some include:

Teaching members that they should trust their leaders explicitly
Dismissing reports of ecclesiastical sexual and physical abuse
Assuming that some abuse victims are responsible for being abused
Punishing those who report abuse by blaming, silencing or shaming them
Presuming that abusers are not guilty unless convicted in a court
Failing to adequately train leaders and members on abuse recognition, avoidance, reporting, and treatment.

When an abuser is called as a church leader—or when a church leader becomes an abuser— they can use their position to groom victims. Predators can target people of any age and tend to seek out those who are vulnerable, trusting, and naïve. Child, youth, and adults can be more easily abused since many believe that their leaders and teachers are trustworthy.

Some ways that some ecclesiastical predators groom victims include:

Paying special attempt to the victim and making him or her feel special
Convincing the victim that the predator can be trusted[4]
Asking the victim to share concerns, fears and even details of sexual trauma which should only be revealed in a professional counseling setting
Telling the victim that the predator has special insight into their needs and feelings which others lack
Isolating the victim by creating situations where they are alone together
Breaking down a victim’s natural defenses until he can coerce or manipulate the victim to do his/her bidding
Conditioning a child to become used to various degrees of physical touch and intimacy
Sharing secrets with the adult victim, ie., saying that they are unhappily married and would have married the victim if they had known them sooner; claiming that God would want them to share a sexual relationship; causing them to believe that the predator has received inspiration regarding them; convincing the victim that he or she is the love of predator’s life
Manipulating the victim to tell no one about the abuse, ie., telling the victim that no one would believe what she said or that she could be punished for disclosing what happened
Maintaining control by using threats or guilt to force continued participate and silence
Grooming friends and family of the victim by convincing them that the perpetrator is a charming, faithful, trustworthy person to make certain that a victim’s report of abuse is discounted or ignored

No organization can prevent all incidents of sexual abuse. However, organizations, especially churches, can and should implement policies and procedures that better protect its members and promote recovery for abuse victims. The LDS Church can reduce the prevalence of serious abuse by:

Providing a help line for victims of ecclesiastical abuse with skilled trauma counselors who are authorized to provide survivors with needed medical and mental health care and to hold perpetrators accountable.
Training members on abuse recognition and avoidance.
Instructing leaders that perpetrators—not victims– are responsible for abuse.
Discontinuing practices or teachings that blame, shame or silence victims.[5]
Eliminating one-on-one interviews that discuss sexually explicit questions with children.
Teaching members to use discernment and caution in all of their interactions in and out of the Church.
Preventing known perpetrators from holding Church positions where they can abuse others.
Requiring a leader or parent to attend bishop interviews
Requiring bishops to refer all members who need psychological counseling to skilled professionals.

Most Church members and leaders are compassionate and caring. However, some use their Church positions as a means to abuse others. We pray that the Church will make essential procedural and policy changes to better protect its members from abuse and to ensure that its leaders help—and do not harm— survivors of ecclesiastical abuse.

1. Ann Salter, Ph.D., Predators: Pedophiles, Rapists, And Other Sex Offenders, 2004.

2. Nora Harlow, M.D., and Gene G. Abel, Stop Child Molestation Book, 2001.

3. Diane Garland, Ph.D., “The Prevalence of Clergy Sexual Misconduct with Adults: A Research Study,” Baylor University, 2008. https://www.baylor.edu/clergysexualmisconduct/index.php?id=67406

4. In the LDS Church, this is additional problematic, since members are taught that all local leaders have been called by God. For example, see President Henry B. Eyring’s October 2017, General Conference talk in which he quoted Elder James B. Faust, who said: “We … need to support and sustain our local leaders, because they … have been ‘called and chosen.’ Every member of this Church may receive counsel from a bishop or a branch president, a stake or a mission president, and the President of the Church and his associates.”

5. Examples include excommunicating victims or members who report or document ecclesiastical abuse, stating that victims are somehow responsible for the abuse they suffered, punishing the victim but not the perpetrator, forcing victims to sign non-disclosure agreements in order to receive help, and disclosing confidential Church information about victims.

RESOURCES:

Mark Scheffers, M.S.W., Child Trauma Assessment Center, Western Michigan University.

Joe E. Trull & James E. Carter, Ministerial Ethics: Being a Good Minister In A Not-So-Good World (Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 1993), 81.

Dr. Kris Helge and Bradley T. B. Toben, “Sexual Misconduct of Clergypersons with Congregants or Parishioners,” Clergy Sexual Misconduct and Prevention, Baylor University.

“Grooming Dynamic,” National Center for Prevention of Crime.

Rosemary Webb and Jennifer Mitchell, “A Profile of a Child Molester,” Child Lures Prevention, 2018.

Tim Challis, “Six Reasons Why Sexual Predators Target Churches,” 9 March 2015.

April 28, 2018May 5, 2018

How the LDS Church Can Better Protect Its Children from Sexual Perpetrators

In the book The Sins of Brother Curtis: Story of Betrayal, Conviction, and the Mormon Church, the author shows how the LDS Church lacked essential safeguards to protect children from a serial sexual predator. Because lay leaders are seldom trained about abuse prevention and detection, have access to children and youth in one-on-one interviews, and do not consistently annotate records of abusers, the Church continues to leave children vulnerable to sexual abuse.

The Church must become more proactive in implementing procedures and policies that hold offenders responsible and that exonerate victims of shame and blame. The following solutions can reduce the number of sex offenses in the Church and can make the Church a safer place for all members:

1. Problem: Predators recognize that authority is usually unquestioned in the Church. Church members are told to only speak positively about their leaders and to always obey them.

Solution: Church must teach members that leaders are fallible. Church members should be taught how to recognize and report abuse–even if trusted leaders are the abusers.

2 Problem: Unhealthy reverence for power and authority of male priesthood leaders.

Solution: Church should teach members to worship God alone and to remember that all members of the Church are imperfect, including Church leaders.

3. Problems: Little oversight of Church leaders and priesthood holders.

Solution: The Church needs to implement increased supervision of leaders to ensure that they are not abusing children.

4. Problem: Perpetrators have easier access to victims through ministering and church assignments.

Solution: Two -deep service must be implemented for every Church calling where members have access to children, including bishop’s interviews.

5. Problem: Victims are often shamed by Church leaders so survivors seldom report abuse.

Solution: Church leaders must be trained to eliminate any procedure or policy that shames abuse victims.

6. Problem: Perpetrators know that the Church seldom reports abuse to police.

Solution: After the Church determines that the victim is safe, abuse should be reported to police.

7. Problem: Church leaders often rationalize sex abuse or blame the victims.

Solution: Church leaders on every level need extensive training on the dynamics of sexual abuse, including grooming and how perpetrators tend to isolate and shame victims.

8. Problem: The Church does not consistently annotate records of abusers, which allows them to abuse others.

Solution: Abusers’ church records should always be tagged and ward leaders should never call perpetrators to positions where they can abuse others.

9. Problem: Priesthood leaders tend to cover up the offenses of their colleagues and friends.

Solution: Church leaders should be appropriately monitored to make certain that they hold abusers accountable. The Church must create a hotline for abuse victims, including ecclesiastical abuse victims.

10. Problem: Perpetrators observe that victims are sometimes silenced by the Church. This increases the likelihood that they may be attracted to join the Church or become involved in Church callings that involve children.

Solution: The Church must implement policies and procedures that make certain that survivors are not silenced.

11. Problem: Since the Church does not perform background checks on members who work with children in a Church calling (except in Scouting), serial sex offenders may be baptized and moved into Church positions.

Solution: Church should perform a background check before anyone is called to serve youth or children.

12. Problem: With the Church’s emphasis on missionary work, some members invite others into their homes and lives without due diligence.

Solution: Members should receive regular training on how to protect themselves and their families from sex offenders.

13. Problem: Church leaders often deal with pedophilia as a sin and not as a crime.

Solution: Church members and leaders should be taught that abuse is a crime and that is should be reported to police.

14. Problem: Church literature asks bishops to help pedophiles turn away from their sin, something they are unqualified of doing.

Solution: Bishop should be advised to turn all counseling over to trained professionals.

15. When abuse is reported, the Church does not implement meaningful reforms to protect LDS children. Bishops, for example, can still interview children alone even though there are some bishops perpetrated on children during interviews.

Solution: Church should eliminate all one-of-one bishop interviews with children and youth.

16. LDS Church officials and its lawyers typically attempt to evade responsibility by hiding behind the “free exercise of religion” clause of the Constitution, statute of limitations technicalities and clergy-penitent privilege statutes.

Solution: Church must adhere to high ethical standards and determine than protecting its members from abuse is more important than protecting its reputation.

The Church must use its resources and practices to protect children, not to protect offenders. Over the years, too many abuse survivors were further victimized by Church leaders who refused to listen to victims or who shielded their friends who were perpetrators. Too often, the Church has hired skilled attorneys to attack victims and to defend offenders. This is unacceptable.

The Church must implement critical safeguards to better protect its children and members. As it does so, it will better represent the Savior who asked us to love, serve, and defend the “least among us,” who include children, the vulnerable, and the abused.