6 ICSA TODAY
publicized sexual abuse perpetrated by priests in the Catholic
Church. However, as Pat Wingert quotes Ernie Allen, President
of the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, in an
article on Newsweek’s website, “Priests Commit No More Abuse
Than Other Males”:
We don’t see the Catholic Church as a hotbed of this or
a place that has a bigger problem than anyone else. I
can tell you without hesitation that we have seen cases
in many religious settings, from traveling evangelists to
mainstream ministers to rabbis and others. (Allen, cited
in Wingert, 2010)
Unscrupulous leaders who use their positions in the church
to prey sexually on those in their congregations add another
layer to spiritual abuse. A victim may feel that submitting to the
abuser is tantamount to submitting to God. The perception of
normalcy generally associated with these dominations can make
it harder for victims to divulge what has happened to them,
and they can suffer for years in silence. By the very nature of
their position, clergy are inherently held in high esteem by their
congregants. Thus, victims are often left even more conflicted as
they try to understand not only their sexual abuse but also their
own spirituality.
How Do Mainstream Churches, Fringe Churches, and
Cults Differ?
There are varying degrees of abuse. On the far end of the
continuum, there may be high levels of control, psychological
isolation, exploitation, and manipulation. Although the abuse
in extreme situations may be easier to see, other abuse may be
subtle. In a mainstream church, abuse may be more difficult
to identify than it might be in a fringe church. And sometimes
the abuse those in a fringe church experience might be more
difficult to identify than if they were in a cult. But all levels of
abuse can occur in all of these situations.
A mainstream church and a fringe church might not look
too different from each other on the surface, thus making it
even harder to identify abuse. Because cults tend to be more
obviously deviant from the mainstream, persons who leave a cult
or cultic environment may find it easier to label their experiences
as abusive. They feel bad, and the group was obviously bad.
Persons who leave a fringe church, in contrast, may have an
uneasy feeling that they experienced abuse, but they find that
abuse harder to identify. People in cults are frequently cut off
from the outside society, either because of a communal lifestyle
or the massive amounts of time, energy, and money required of
them. Fringe churches may impose similar demands, but those
demands might be couched in subtly misleading terms.
In a cult, giving money or time might be an absolute
requirement in a fringe church, however, such requests might
be disguised as religious expectations. Congregants might
hear, for example, “You can’t outgive God. The more you give,
the more blessings you’ll receive” or “After what God has
done for you, how can you tend to your own houses while
neglecting the house of God?” or “If God doesn’t have your
wallet, he doesn’t have anything.” The common thread of these
kinds of exhortations is the general sense that congregants
are not currently living in the fullness of God, and only deeper
involvement in the church will allow them to live more in that
fullness.
In a mainstream church with a controlling leader, such control
techniques may be directed at targeted individuals or even
at the entire congregation but because the denomination is
likely not to be abusive and extreme, abuse victims are more
likely to doubt themselves than question the church’s leaders,
who may use the denomination’s reputation as a cloak to hide
behind. For instance, the priest-abuse scandal festered so long
in part because many Catholics found it hard to believe that
their bishops would allow such abuse to occur consequently,
they tended to doubt the allegations of victims and cause other
victims to remain silent.
Individuals who leave less obviously abusive environments
may walk around with wounds they don’t understand and for
which they may not get help. They may even compare their
experiences with those in extreme environments, and because
their experiences don’t seem so extreme, they don’t recognize
the similarities and thus cannot acknowledge just how pervasive
the abuse they experienced was.
Unhealthy church environments induce feelings of shame.
Persons are made to feel that somehow they are to blame for
anything unhealthy that they may perceive or experience,
thus shouldering blame for something that is not their fault.
In The Subtle Power of Spiritual Abuse, David Johnson and Jeff
VanVonderen (1991) wrote that
People who have been spiritually abused tend to have
a negative picture of self, or a shame-based identity
...Shame is an indictment on you as a person ...You
feel shame even when you’ve done nothing wrong
you feel defective as a human being, and like a third-
rate Christian undeserving of God’s blessings and
acceptance. (pp. 44–45)
...it is important to recognize
the full scope of abuse that
can occur in Bible-based
environments so that more
individuals can get the help
they need, come to grips with
what happened to them, and,
if they so desire, continue
on their spiritual journey.
publicized sexual abuse perpetrated by priests in the Catholic
Church. However, as Pat Wingert quotes Ernie Allen, President
of the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, in an
article on Newsweek’s website, “Priests Commit No More Abuse
Than Other Males”:
We don’t see the Catholic Church as a hotbed of this or
a place that has a bigger problem than anyone else. I
can tell you without hesitation that we have seen cases
in many religious settings, from traveling evangelists to
mainstream ministers to rabbis and others. (Allen, cited
in Wingert, 2010)
Unscrupulous leaders who use their positions in the church
to prey sexually on those in their congregations add another
layer to spiritual abuse. A victim may feel that submitting to the
abuser is tantamount to submitting to God. The perception of
normalcy generally associated with these dominations can make
it harder for victims to divulge what has happened to them,
and they can suffer for years in silence. By the very nature of
their position, clergy are inherently held in high esteem by their
congregants. Thus, victims are often left even more conflicted as
they try to understand not only their sexual abuse but also their
own spirituality.
How Do Mainstream Churches, Fringe Churches, and
Cults Differ?
There are varying degrees of abuse. On the far end of the
continuum, there may be high levels of control, psychological
isolation, exploitation, and manipulation. Although the abuse
in extreme situations may be easier to see, other abuse may be
subtle. In a mainstream church, abuse may be more difficult
to identify than it might be in a fringe church. And sometimes
the abuse those in a fringe church experience might be more
difficult to identify than if they were in a cult. But all levels of
abuse can occur in all of these situations.
A mainstream church and a fringe church might not look
too different from each other on the surface, thus making it
even harder to identify abuse. Because cults tend to be more
obviously deviant from the mainstream, persons who leave a cult
or cultic environment may find it easier to label their experiences
as abusive. They feel bad, and the group was obviously bad.
Persons who leave a fringe church, in contrast, may have an
uneasy feeling that they experienced abuse, but they find that
abuse harder to identify. People in cults are frequently cut off
from the outside society, either because of a communal lifestyle
or the massive amounts of time, energy, and money required of
them. Fringe churches may impose similar demands, but those
demands might be couched in subtly misleading terms.
In a cult, giving money or time might be an absolute
requirement in a fringe church, however, such requests might
be disguised as religious expectations. Congregants might
hear, for example, “You can’t outgive God. The more you give,
the more blessings you’ll receive” or “After what God has
done for you, how can you tend to your own houses while
neglecting the house of God?” or “If God doesn’t have your
wallet, he doesn’t have anything.” The common thread of these
kinds of exhortations is the general sense that congregants
are not currently living in the fullness of God, and only deeper
involvement in the church will allow them to live more in that
fullness.
In a mainstream church with a controlling leader, such control
techniques may be directed at targeted individuals or even
at the entire congregation but because the denomination is
likely not to be abusive and extreme, abuse victims are more
likely to doubt themselves than question the church’s leaders,
who may use the denomination’s reputation as a cloak to hide
behind. For instance, the priest-abuse scandal festered so long
in part because many Catholics found it hard to believe that
their bishops would allow such abuse to occur consequently,
they tended to doubt the allegations of victims and cause other
victims to remain silent.
Individuals who leave less obviously abusive environments
may walk around with wounds they don’t understand and for
which they may not get help. They may even compare their
experiences with those in extreme environments, and because
their experiences don’t seem so extreme, they don’t recognize
the similarities and thus cannot acknowledge just how pervasive
the abuse they experienced was.
Unhealthy church environments induce feelings of shame.
Persons are made to feel that somehow they are to blame for
anything unhealthy that they may perceive or experience,
thus shouldering blame for something that is not their fault.
In The Subtle Power of Spiritual Abuse, David Johnson and Jeff
VanVonderen (1991) wrote that
People who have been spiritually abused tend to have
a negative picture of self, or a shame-based identity
...Shame is an indictment on you as a person ...You
feel shame even when you’ve done nothing wrong
you feel defective as a human being, and like a third-
rate Christian undeserving of God’s blessings and
acceptance. (pp. 44–45)
...it is important to recognize
the full scope of abuse that
can occur in Bible-based
environments so that more
individuals can get the help
they need, come to grips with
what happened to them, and,
if they so desire, continue
on their spiritual journey.
