This post was formed, in part, from a speech intended to be made at Synod to direct the members of Synod to a report from the working group and to underscore the challenges we faced in attempting to work with the senior Diocesan leadership.
That non-indictable psycho-social harm occurs in Anglican parish settings is well known, anecdotally. So many of us, who call the Anglican Church home, have ‘war’ stories or know of friends and/or loved ones who have endured such harm. Yet, in a world that is heavily reliant on data to make strategic decisions, anecdote is simply not enough.
A team of Anglican clergy are seeking to address the lack of authentic data on harm. The team consists of the Rev’d Lizzie Gaitskell, Rev’d Sue Grimmett, and myself. The work is also forming part of my second PhD program of research seeking to explore and describe the prevalence of non-indictable psychosocial harm within Anglican parish settings, encourage people to tell their stories, and in a collaborative process, develop a practical theology of restorative practice in Anglican parish settings.
The original motion, Motion 12/2024, was passed in June of 2024. It sought leave from Synod to direct Diocesan Council to undertake certain measures to ascertain the prevalence of non-indictable psycho-social harm. Since that Synod 2024, the team had to take back responsibility for the implementation of the motion from Diocesan Council. It has been challenging to work through objections and misinformation caused by proposing the motion.
Some of the issues concerned a lack of understanding of the draft survey itself, the safeguards being put in place to protect people’s privacy and confidentiality, as well as the very need to provide anonymous and open access to all lay and clergy members of the Church to complete the survey. Rather, some tried to convince us that a pre-determined list of cases would be provided for us to examine. While I appreciate the sentiment of wishing to protect people, the intrinsic bias such a move would introduce to the data would render it unusable. It would also raise serious ethical questions about the integrity of the data, for example, excluding the voices of others who had experiences of harm, potential data manipulation, among others. Human beings avoid risk. The alarms of harm and abuse brought to light from the Royal Commission into Institutional Child Sexual Abuse have, for nearly 20 years, rung loud in our collective minds – rightly and justly so. May we never forget. The idea that yet another set of alarms may begin ringing through the ‘unearthing’ of more harm and abuse is a bit too much and too far for some. For those who have lived and breathed the impacts of the child sexual assault revelations, I can only imagine how tired they must feel.
Yet, remaining silent is not an option.
Motion 12, from 2024, sought to gain a deeper understanding of the experiences of non-indictable psycho-social within our Diocese. The aim is to develop a more accurate understanding of the prevalence of these experiences. The motion did not seek to gather detailed identifiable information of individuals. Quite the opposite. We do not want names of people, locations, parishes or other church institutions. Rather, the aim is to aggregate that data, that is pool it to present a singular picture of the issues. The motion did not seek to advocate a ‘witch hunt’. That is, to gather cases for investigation and/or disciplinary action. Again, it is simply to provide a desperately needed picture of people’s experiences of non-indictable psycho-social harm.
Last year’s motion forms a component of wider efforts to implement Restorative Practices within our Diocese. Rev’d Suzanne Grimmett, Rev’d Deb Bird, Ven Bronwyn Pagram and myself submitted an ANFINC grant in 2024. With that grant, and gracious support from the Archbishop, we were able to offer Restorative Practice training in May of this year. Twenty-seven leaders within the broader Diocese, including Anglicare and Anglican Schools, gathered for three days of training. More training will be forth coming.
The motion also forms part of my PhD program of research as a way of systematically implementing the aims of the motion. It also means any efforts to gather or disseminate information is strictly governed by the University of Divinity Human Research Ethics Committee which, in turn, is undergirded by Federal legislation.
Once we can construct a broad picture of experience, we can then start to think more effectively about how to approach implementing healing strategies. Healing and restoration are our primary goals. Restorative Practice shares that aim by seeking to restore shattered relationships and reduce the number of people who walk away wounded. When that happens, we are all diminished. We see too much of that.
Rather, we desire peace, true peace that comes about from understanding each other, respecting each other, appreciating each other, even if we may not agree with each other. It is a peace that comes from telling truth to each other, listening to each other, and developing new ways of being ‘together’, of being ‘us’. Yet, that cannot even begin to unfold if we don’t hear each other’s truth. We must hear the voices of those who have been broken within the ‘so-called’ safe places of our Churches. We must find ways to restore those relationships and heal those places so they can be truly ‘safe’.
Early next year, people within the Diocese will receive an invitation to complete a survey. Know that the survey seeks to capture your experience and blend it into a singular voice of the lay and clergy people of the Diocese. That voice needs to be heard.
Silence is no longer an option.
