I imagine most people with Southern Baptist ties are reeling this week from a bombshell report that concluded that leadership consistently chose to protect themselves legally instead of protecting church attenders from sexual abuse. As one Twitter user put it, when something is outrageous, the proper response is outrage.
I’m outraged. I’m also not completely surprised, because I’ve already seen the dark side of church culture. Once I was an insider – a preacher’s kid who grew up to be a minister’s wife and a missionary. Then I became an outsider – someone with a chronic illness/disability that keeps me out of most church buildings because of the product choices people make. Believe me, the view is different from here.
The way that leadership treated the women who came forward with abuse allegations is eerily similar to the way that people with chemical intolerance or other illnesses or disabilities have been treated. As I put it in my book, if ignoring us doesn’t work, we’re labeled, blamed, viewed as a problem, beaten with the Bible, and judged like Job. Abuse survivor Christa Brown said that church leaders shunned and disbelieved her and communicated “you are a creature void of any value—you don’t matter.” I can’t count the number of times that someone in the chemical illness community has said the same thing.
People in power are saying the right things now. Here are a few good quotes from denominational leaders.
“This is the beginning of a season of listening, lamenting, and learning.”
“This much is clear: we have much, much work to do.”
“Every cry for help deserved to be heard.”
This is a time to deal with the issue of sexual abuse and to listen closely to what survivors are saying. I also pray that the courage and tenacity of those who came forward will change the culture enough that the disability community will be heard, too.
As churches are wrestling with the report, I hope they’ll take a broad view when they answer these questions.
1. Is it dangerous to come to your church? In the context of the report, the danger is sexual abuse, and it’s a real danger which deserves focused and intense attention. However, it’s not the only threat. When you don’t choose non-toxic options when you build, renovate, clean, treat your lawn, or deal with pests, you put people’s health and sometimes their very lives in danger. I know it’s hard for people who haven’t had to learn about the dangers to really believe that, but it’s true. For people dealing with chronic illness or disability, church can also feel emotionally dangerous, for reasons I’ve already mentioned and more.
2. Who or what are you defending? This is a question that has stuck with me since I heard a women’s minister say it during a forum on racial reconciliation.
The report indicates that leaders were defending the image of the church instead of defending the people that attended. Are churches doing that when they choose to build a building that looks impressive instead of one that doesn’t make people sick? What about when they say they can’t put a notice in the bulletin about coming fragrance free because it might offend people? Who are they defending? People who have power or the vulnerable and outcast?
When I first became part of the chemical illness world and I started hearing the stories of how people were ignored, dismissed, or denigrated by their faith communities, my first reaction was to defend the church. At some point, though, I realized I couldn’t do that anymore. I still love the church and the people in it. In fact, it’s because I love it that I want it to be safe and accessible for everyone. I can’t defend it, though. Something is very wrong and we need to fix it.
SBC president Ed Litton is optimistic. He says, “I think the trauma of what we’re seeing at this moment is waking people up to the need for culture change.” May it be so.