International Journal of Coercion, Abuse, and Manipulation Volume 3 2022 2
Subsequent studies, however, from around the 1980s
onwards, shifted attention away from this stereotype
to address the reality that most abused children are
violated by someone they know (Craven, Brown, &
Gilchrist, 2006 Finkelhor, 2008 Lanning, 2005. See
also Darkness to Light, 2018b, about perpetrators) and
oftentimes by someone whom they trust (Bottoms
et al., 1995 Lanning 2005 van Dam, 2001). Hence,
in addition to abuse that sometimes occurs at the
hands of strangers, children may be sexually abused
by family members—familial abuse by known
individuals outside of the family—extrafamilial abuse
and in other settings such as in schools, sports teams,
daycare facilities, and religions—institutional abuse
(Lanning, 2005 McAlinden, 2006 &2012 Pilgrim,
2018 Williams, 2015). Furthermore, Kenneth
Lanning emphasizes the importance of research on
abusers whom the child knows—persons he defines
as “acquaintance molesters” (Lanning, 2005, p. 529).
Critically, offenders may occupy more than one social
role simultaneously (Lanning, 2005), such that, for
example, the sexual offender may be both the child’s
sporting coach and fellow church member.
Increasingly, researchers also have identified the need to
examine the process of grooming children for abuse—a
practice that is part of the entire “offence chain” when
the sexual abuse of children occurs (Williams, 2015, p.
31). This vitally important feature of the abuse process
now receives more academic and legislative attention
than in the past, although additional research and legal
development and application is needed (McAlinden,
2012). Of course, not all sexual offenders groom their
victims prior to abusing them. For example, “chance/
opportunistic” offenders do not typically use grooming
strategies as their contact with, and subsequent assault
of, children, is unexpected and therefore unplanned
(Ward, Louden, Hudsen, &Marshall, 1995, cited in
Williams, 2015).
The goal of this article is to examine the grooming of
children for sexual abuse in religious settings—a context
that is scarcely addressed in the literature. We propose
that in addition to the many features that the broader
literature on grooming has identified already, grooming
in religious settings requires a discussion of the very
specific elements of this context—characteristics that
likely are not present in other grooming situations.
Therefore, to expand upon current understandings
of grooming techniques, we integrate extant findings
on grooming with some of the specific features of
religious environments. Although some other scholars
have written about sexual abuses in religion, they have
not identified the grooming process and the distinctive
features of it. Thus, our work adds to the literature on
grooming as well as to sociological (and other) research
on abuse within religious settings more broadly.
To this end, first, we provide a synopsis of the grooming
literature. Second, we present a discussion of the
religious context of grooming. This segment comprises
a general overview of the relative importance of religion
in many people’s lives in addition to an examination of
some of the distinctive features of religious settings and
how they may influence grooming. Third, we examine
some specific case studies in which this grooming
process is evident.
2. Grooming: Defining and Understanding the
Process
Defining ‘grooming’ has been a complex task for
researchers of child sexual abuse and exploitation.
Moreover, relatively little research on this process exists
(Craven, Brown, &Gilchrist, 2006 Williams, 2015
Winters, Kaylor, &Jeglic, 2017),6
1
despite the large body
of literature on child sexual abuse and child sexual
offenders. The term ‘grooming’ often appears in media
headlines and accounts of the sexual abuse of children,
and this popular usage of it has resulted in stereotypes
about what it is and where it takes place (McAlinden,
2012 Ost, 2009). Specifically, contemporary media
directs its focus mostly to online grooming, but the
process of grooming is a substantial component of
abuse that takes place in the offline environment too
(Fernandez, 2006, cited in McAlinden, 2012) indeed,
research indicates that “many more offenders make
contact with victims and gain acceptance via off-
line methods” (McAlinden, 2012, p. 12). Therefore,
this type of grooming requires academic and policy
attention.7
6 Some research examines the specific nature of online grooming
versus face-to-face grooming practices (for example, Winters et al., 2017).
This article does not examine online environments.
7 Aside from popular usage and misperceptions of grooming, Anne-
Marie McAlinden proposes that academics in a range of disciplines including
psychology, sociology, criminology, and legal studies often do not understand
the process very well. Moreover, at the legislative level, only a few countries
have introduced measures to deal with grooming, and again, the focus is on
the online environment (McAlinden, 2012).
Subsequent studies, however, from around the 1980s
onwards, shifted attention away from this stereotype
to address the reality that most abused children are
violated by someone they know (Craven, Brown, &
Gilchrist, 2006 Finkelhor, 2008 Lanning, 2005. See
also Darkness to Light, 2018b, about perpetrators) and
oftentimes by someone whom they trust (Bottoms
et al., 1995 Lanning 2005 van Dam, 2001). Hence,
in addition to abuse that sometimes occurs at the
hands of strangers, children may be sexually abused
by family members—familial abuse by known
individuals outside of the family—extrafamilial abuse
and in other settings such as in schools, sports teams,
daycare facilities, and religions—institutional abuse
(Lanning, 2005 McAlinden, 2006 &2012 Pilgrim,
2018 Williams, 2015). Furthermore, Kenneth
Lanning emphasizes the importance of research on
abusers whom the child knows—persons he defines
as “acquaintance molesters” (Lanning, 2005, p. 529).
Critically, offenders may occupy more than one social
role simultaneously (Lanning, 2005), such that, for
example, the sexual offender may be both the child’s
sporting coach and fellow church member.
Increasingly, researchers also have identified the need to
examine the process of grooming children for abuse—a
practice that is part of the entire “offence chain” when
the sexual abuse of children occurs (Williams, 2015, p.
31). This vitally important feature of the abuse process
now receives more academic and legislative attention
than in the past, although additional research and legal
development and application is needed (McAlinden,
2012). Of course, not all sexual offenders groom their
victims prior to abusing them. For example, “chance/
opportunistic” offenders do not typically use grooming
strategies as their contact with, and subsequent assault
of, children, is unexpected and therefore unplanned
(Ward, Louden, Hudsen, &Marshall, 1995, cited in
Williams, 2015).
The goal of this article is to examine the grooming of
children for sexual abuse in religious settings—a context
that is scarcely addressed in the literature. We propose
that in addition to the many features that the broader
literature on grooming has identified already, grooming
in religious settings requires a discussion of the very
specific elements of this context—characteristics that
likely are not present in other grooming situations.
Therefore, to expand upon current understandings
of grooming techniques, we integrate extant findings
on grooming with some of the specific features of
religious environments. Although some other scholars
have written about sexual abuses in religion, they have
not identified the grooming process and the distinctive
features of it. Thus, our work adds to the literature on
grooming as well as to sociological (and other) research
on abuse within religious settings more broadly.
To this end, first, we provide a synopsis of the grooming
literature. Second, we present a discussion of the
religious context of grooming. This segment comprises
a general overview of the relative importance of religion
in many people’s lives in addition to an examination of
some of the distinctive features of religious settings and
how they may influence grooming. Third, we examine
some specific case studies in which this grooming
process is evident.
2. Grooming: Defining and Understanding the
Process
Defining ‘grooming’ has been a complex task for
researchers of child sexual abuse and exploitation.
Moreover, relatively little research on this process exists
(Craven, Brown, &Gilchrist, 2006 Williams, 2015
Winters, Kaylor, &Jeglic, 2017),6
1
despite the large body
of literature on child sexual abuse and child sexual
offenders. The term ‘grooming’ often appears in media
headlines and accounts of the sexual abuse of children,
and this popular usage of it has resulted in stereotypes
about what it is and where it takes place (McAlinden,
2012 Ost, 2009). Specifically, contemporary media
directs its focus mostly to online grooming, but the
process of grooming is a substantial component of
abuse that takes place in the offline environment too
(Fernandez, 2006, cited in McAlinden, 2012) indeed,
research indicates that “many more offenders make
contact with victims and gain acceptance via off-
line methods” (McAlinden, 2012, p. 12). Therefore,
this type of grooming requires academic and policy
attention.7
6 Some research examines the specific nature of online grooming
versus face-to-face grooming practices (for example, Winters et al., 2017).
This article does not examine online environments.
7 Aside from popular usage and misperceptions of grooming, Anne-
Marie McAlinden proposes that academics in a range of disciplines including
psychology, sociology, criminology, and legal studies often do not understand
the process very well. Moreover, at the legislative level, only a few countries
have introduced measures to deal with grooming, and again, the focus is on
the online environment (McAlinden, 2012).
