Caught in the Middle: How the Political Divide in the Church Affects Victims of Clerical Sexual Assault

In both sides of the Church, both predators and victims are among us. 

Some of the links I include link to articles detailing cases of sexual assault. Use your best judgement.  

It frustrates me to no end that certain causes are popularly aligned with political factions. 

Just to throw out an example, people concerned with issues of racial inequality align themselves with the left, those interested in preventing human trafficking tend to lean to the right. If you express a certain approach to either one of those issues, you're almost immediately assumed to be a part of one political allegiance or another-- no matter what your opinion may actually be on other issues or politics. 

The world of those navigating the Church post clerical sexual assault is no exception. This particular issue is very divided along political and liturgical lines in the Church, to the point that any person seeking to cross the aisle on this faces very difficult cultural barriers. 

The more traditional, right leaning side of the Church has done good work in illustrating the influence of the dominant culture in systems that perpetuate abuse. To put it simply, when the Church allows itself to be influenced by a culture with sexual values that are diametrically opposed to its own, it's going to find its leaders acting in ways that don't align with its values. That in turn will be shrouded in secrecy, which allows the conditions for abuse to develop in spades. 

Unfortunately, they blame this culture on only one very specific non-Catholic influence. The consensus is overwhelmingly that sexual abuse is a direct effect of a homosexual agenda infiltrating the Church. According to their narrative, it wasn't for the lavender mafia, this issue would cease to exist, or at least the issue of diocesan level coverup would cease to exist. 

This narrative exists to the point that any instance of abuse that doesn't fit, or that seems to implicate one of their "tribe", is either ignored, deemed "excusable", or somehow tied back to a homosexual influence, no matter how tenuous the connection. Just read the comments on this article responding to allegations of a case of heterosexual abuse on 1Peter5, a right leaning Church website. (Perhaps the only exception to this is the far right religious media company Church Militant, who have taken to relentlessly lambasting the borderline schismatic SSPX community including stories of heterosexual cases of abuse. But even then, they can't seem to help themselves when they get a whiff of something they can tie to the big bad wolf of homosexual infiltration, even if they have to misrepresent huge parts of a story). If your abuse happens to fit into their narrative they'll assist you in getting out your story, but if you don't fit their narrative you are effectively persona non grata. 

Those who favor a more informal liturgy (or who don't have much of an opinion on it one way or the other) and lean more to the left politically are likelier to listen to survivor's stories without forcing them into an apparent agenda. They are also more focused on creating opportunities for survivors to connect to others with similar experiences and on creating resources to help people heal.  They look at the advances in the surrounding culture, and try to adapt the good they see in it to the institutions in the Church. 

The left leaning (for lack of a better term) Church also has a tendency to adopt terms used by left leaning social activists, such as "ally","inclusion",  and "privilege". While these terms are not bad or in any way immoral in and of themselves, they can suggest an alliance with certain groups and viewpoints that are not in line with traditional Catholic moral teaching.  Those from a more conservative background (whether that be politically or liturgically) may feel that they have to hide parts of who they are to receive help, or even that they may be betraying the faith as they understand it by working with these groups.

The left leaning Church also tend to be more accepting of opinions and positions that seem to favor changing Church teaching on issues such as the exclusion of LGBT+ marriage and the male priesthood. This can perhaps most easily be seen in what religious outlets choose to cover cases of abuse.  NCR has perhaps the best record of reporting cases of clerical abuse and concerns of victims regardless of the gender and age of the victims. They're also the Catholics news outlet with the greatest reputation for publishing pieces sympathetic to those fighting for LGBT+ inclusion and female clergy. Similarly, America Magazine has offered extensive coverage, but has as its editor at large the extremely controversial Fr. James Martin, SJ. 

In short, we have one side of the Church that shoehorns all the evidence into a pre-formulated narrative and ignores or perverts any evidence that seems to contradict it at the expense of denying the experiences of many victims. The other side of the Church seems substantially better at accepting the evidence as it comes in and at being pastoral to those who have suffered, but tends to utilize a vocabulary and has allegiances to a particular set of ideologies that alienates many survivors of abuse seeking help. 

What this means is that a conservative leaning victim of heterosexual abuse in the Church often has their existence ignored (or even actively denied) by the right and may feel alienated or deeply suspicious of the left, effectively limiting access to needed resources. 

There is at least one organization that has largely managed to steer clear of these traps. My experience with Awake Milwaukee has been largely positive and for the most part politically neutral.  I've been extremely thankful for them. But even in that case I've seen their efforts at outreach handicapped by the fact that left leaning institutions in the Church have an exclusive corner on media coverage and research on clerical sexual abuse. Half the conversation is simply missing. 

Clerical abuse is an issue that has affected the entire Church. Until the entire Church can talk to one another and work together to address this issue, any effort at reform will remain incomplete. We need to be aware of both the organizational advances and the moral conflicts of the surrounding culture to solve this problem; a focus on just one or the other isn't going to cut it.