Kelly Sibthorpe

Roger,

The + or - 3% is the statistical variation of 100 individuals in a sample.

I am a man Roger and my wife is my pastor at Good News CRC in London Ontario. She has been ordained  as a Minister of Word and Sacrament for 11 years. Please look at the avatar on my post. That's me with the beard, my daughter and grand-daughter.

And again, church article 83 disqualifies your "opinion". Please take the time to read it. Synod has ruled against your opinion on this matter.

Kelly

Bev,

 

Thank-you for the link to the "Pyramid of  Abuse". It is a fine summary of organizational systems theory, surrounding the foundations of abuse of power in its forms. Church systems have similar organizational structures, varying of course by denomination and therefore open to the development of abusive practices. I'm sorry you have to know many of the stories. Its hard to ingest and remain unchanged. I do not believe most pastors talk about this. When pastors get together, the talk surrounds theology, preaching, troubles or success with council. I do believe that most pastors understand "emotional affair". The pastors I know are men  and women of good character. I personally do not know, the 1 in 50 pastors that are serious abusers. I did know one, but thankfully, deposed. 

I remember studying in my pastoral theology class that women sometimes will set a "trap" for a pastor and ensnare him. We were taught to be wary of this type of woman as she could "ruin your ministry." (We now understand that the pastor ruined his ministry, not the woman). We were taught to report such a person immediately to wife and council. In other words, keep your professional boundaries. 

A pastor whose marriage is not functioning well may be vulnerable to transference and thus the temptation to overlook  proper boundaries, This continues to be known by some as "incitement" and thus victim blame and shame are the result, the sacrificial lamb to save the more "Important" ah-hem... "shepherd".

 

For those interested, here is the link to some of the research papers produced by Baylor.

The document by Dr. Garland, "Wolves in Shepherd's Clothing" (see the link for bibliography) is of particular interest and outlines the progression of the "Grooming Process" of victims used by predatory clergy. This paper among the other academic papers listed was referenced extensively during the article 83 process of revision for Synod 2016. I'm sure you will find it "eye-opening". It is a great educational tool for safe church and was used in our presentations to Classis.

 

https://www.baylor.edu/clergysexualmisconduct/index.php?id=68148

peace,

Kelly

 

 

 

Hi All,

This public forum is important. The hearing of stories helps to bring to light to abuses of power in our midst. Thank-you to "The Network", for publishing sensitive personal histories of people who have the courage to go public.

I myself was the recipient of two incidents of abuse as a young man. I was groped in the genital area twice by perpetrators. I barely escaped one incident in our school washroom by screaming as loud as I could. The perpetrator let go and fled, thankfully. Throughout the remainder of my time at this school, I was terrified of retribution and did not dare tell anyone out of fear and shame. This incident remains in my psyche. God has been gracious in allowing me through grace to bear it.

Of course there are differing interpretations of incidents involving harassment and abuse. From a judiciary view, opinions don't count, only facts count. If the event brought forth by the courageous story teller is true, there is only one interpretation, " guilty of sexual abuse and harassment" based on the incident. The perpetrator has no right to offer an explanation of "I did it in fun" and my intent was misinterpreted. The facts are as follows:

1) A person of unequal (greater) power, granted through ordination, ignored their fiduciary responsibility to respect the sexual safety of someone with lesser power (the retreat participant) contravened this person's right (through church order) to sexual safety.

Roger, or others who may not understand the fiduciary responsibility of a pastor please take the time to research it. A short definition from Webster's dictionary is as follows:

Definition of fiduciary 

 of, relating to, or involving a confidence or trust: such as

a : held or founded in trust or confidence a fiduciary relationship. All pastors and office bearers through ordination vows have a fiduciary responsibility to honor and respect and never contravene the right to sexual safety, a person under their pastoral power and authority. Period. This includes any incidents of sexual innuendo or any form of touch not in keeping with that  responsibility. Sadly, in the nineties and even today, the 2%, give or take of office bearers within the CRC who abuse their relationships of trust are often defended as "wandering for a time". 

2) Professional associations including the Canadian Medical Association, Governments, Police Associations, the military, National Counseling Associations and other bodies that employ professionals have strict codes of codes of practice outlining the grounds for sexual harassment and assault. Research shows that professional associations all experience the same rates of abuse, i.e., approximately 2% of the professionals in their ranks abuse their power.

The penalties within these associations vary, however within medical associations, any contravention involving sexual harassment or abuse against patients requires relinquishing of professional credentials. The same is true for Psychiatric and Counseling Associations of professionals. Interestingly, the same holds true for our denomination through the institutional and constitutional framework of church article 83 (revised 2016, Acts of Synod). For anyone reading this blog who believes their opposing opinions matter regarding contraventions of church order article 83 would do well to inform themselves of the dangers in 2018 of abuse of power. This is not 1993. A lot has changed since our courageous story teller was harassed by this pastor. Unfortunately, the ecclesiastical power structures still in place may lead to the protection of those in power and the silencing of victims and survivors due to the very nature of how power is exercised. For every victim that tells their story, there are 10 victims who remain in silence out of fear of the power that dominates them.

There is still much work to do to make our churches safe. Proceeding with initiatives including Classical Safe Church Coordinators for every Classis with ongoing education of congregations and pastoral education courses at seminary outlining  the nature of abuse and its consequences are a step forward. A reminder to those who believe their is room for interpretation or opinion regarding incidents of harassment that are in fact true, take heed.

As in a court of law, when there is proof beyond reasonable doubt of a break in the relationship of trust, through boundary crossing, the accused is guilty and should bear the necessary consequences of their actions, including relinquishment of professional credentials.

Kelly

Hello Roger and all,

With due respect to your office Roger, please take the time to do your own investigation into this issue. There have been a variety of current resources cited here to read. It will be much more helpful to you if you read all the information cited in this blog in a process of discovery, rather than asking me questions. Clearly, you do not believe the information I provided.

The research and information you discover will enlighten you surrounding changes that have taken place since 1995. The changes to attitudes in society and the practical re-engineering of church order to reflect those changes  would not have resulted in the exoneration of the accused pastor nor would have judged the judgment of the elders in question as correct or disciplinary. 

Kelly

Hi Roger and all.

Thanks for attempting to answer the "power differential" question.

Power is more than having people voted into positions of authority and knowing their titles and roles. Inherent in the position of power are psychological, moral and spiritual advantages (power) that come with the office. Because of the power differential in the relation between pastor and parishioner, any sexual innuendo or act in that relationship is never consensual and therefore an abuse of power. The pastor or office bearer, through their fiduciary responsibility to protect the relationship charged to them  is responsible for placing proper boundaries to protect the relationship from harm, so "incitement" from a parishioner may never be used as a defense by the bearer of power. Any breach of safe boundaries is never consensual. There is no such thing as "incitement", because of the imbalance in power in the relationship.

Please read the following for a full explanation of this, then respond. Others please respond too :)

https://futuristguymedia.wordpress.com/clergy-sexual-misconduct-fiduciary-duty/

Kelly

Hi Roger and All,

Frank, you just made a correct observation. The penalty was staid, likely, and of course I admit conjecture, yet I do know that dismissal or cover-up has been common practice, to protect the reputation and career of a man with power and influence. About 75% of the time according to national statistics, charges of adult clergy abuse against the accused are dismissed in deference to "sacrifice" and minimize a less powerful congregant, usually a woman to protect against the much greater loss of a man's career, job or reputation. Bev, in her recent post outlined that the numbers of cases she's aware of ending in dismissal are probably greater than the national average.

Regarding, "I’m wondering (you don’t have to answer) if a woman pastor takes advantage of a male member of the church, even should she have been provoked by him, is she the one who is at fault for sexual misconduct and not him?  It seems that, according to your understanding, he bears no responsibility for any misconduct.  As a pastor, it is solely her responsibility and any fault is on her shoulders as the one with pastoral power.  This could sound like a double standard."

This is a great question and thanks for asking. Yes, it is her sole responsibility to protect the pastoral relationship by maintaining emotional, spiritual and sexual  boundaries and be able to perceive inappropriate behaviors in parishioners, i.e., "incitement".  She is responsible in her calling and profession to know, understand and respond with pastoral care to inappropriate behaviors. When she does just that, the male parishioner who is in error, will receive the spiritual care he needs to move forward in Christ.

 

 

 

Roger,

keep going. What is my position on this entire topic?

Kelly