Background to the Process in ACSA

ACSA was a member of the ACC Safe Church Commission since 2016 and was represented on its executive by Bishop Brian of George. Regular updates on the work of the commission are made to both the Synod of Bishops as well as the wider ACSA structures. A meeting of the ACC Safe Church Commission was held in South Africa in George in June 2018.

At the Provincial Standing Committee meeting of September 2018, in reporting back on the work of the ACC Safe Church Commission, it was agreed that the screening requirements of Act XVFootnote ⁴ (of the Canons and Constitution of ACSA) would find expression in the requirement that all new ministers to be licensed or ordained would need to provide a police clearance certificate prior to licensing or ordination. By February 2019, the conversation had expanded to include screening of ministers (the wider definition used in Act XV) would also include clearance on the sexual offenders registerFootnote ⁵ as well as the completion of a SIC declaration. The declaration was introduced in response to the backlog of prosecutions in the criminal justice system and the levels of corruption that were beginning to emerge in the public domain. This declaration now included charges both civilly and criminally for safe church matters.

By October 2019, it was further refined to now include any accusation of abuse. Any adverse findings had to be referred to the SIC for a decision and bishops agreed that given the potential risk and liability that could face the church, it would be better that this be dealt with at a central level rather than at diocesan level.

However, in September 2019, the establishment of a permanent SIC faculty within ACSA was agreed to when the Resolution of Permanent Form was accepted at Synod. The intention is to develop this into an Act which will form part of the Canons of the Church.

While these governance and framework conversations carried on, the bishops also agreed at their Synod in 2019, that the due date for compliance with the screening requirements would be the end of September 2020. In the event that a minister did not comply by this time, this would translate into an automatic forfeiture and withdrawal of the ministerial licence. Given the advent of the COVID-19 pandemic, this date has been shifted to September 2021, and may – because of the disruption to the normal functioning of state for a multiplicity of reasons – need to be further extended at our next Provincial Synod scheduled for 2021.

Discerning the Safe and Inclusive Church Ministry for ACSA

The painful reality of abuse in the Church came to us through the first few cases being reported – globally and provincially. This was in the wake of the #MeToo movement and in some provinces, there was even a #MeTooChurch movement.Footnote ⁶ One of the first cases reported in ACSA was a follow-on from the resignation of Archbishop Tutu as the patron of Oxfam early in 2018. A well-renowned author came forward with allegations of abuse that were reported to a sitting Bishop but no details of the case were given until much later. Given the profile of the complainant, newspaper reports of the account quickly surfaced. ACSA’s leadership was sensitive to the fact that in the wake of this report, others were likely to follow. We had also received a highly publicized case of a report of sexual abuse directed at a sitting bishop from a minister in the church, which presented both personal and cultural challenges and continues to present a challenge to us as to what justice and restoration looks like in this context. We learnt how we could and needed to do better from this case and are left feeling that balancing justice with mercy may not have been achieved in this instance.

Based on this, ACSA then identified the need for the following:

• a standardized response to complaints of abuse – complaints process;

• resources to respond to the complaints – response teams in each diocese;

• training of the team – to ensure consistent and appropriate responsiveness.

All of these discussions were taking place parallel to the work ACSA was doing in the area of human sexuality. The conversation around this and its intersectionality with safe church was inevitable and hence led to the establishment of a SIC facility within the Province, with a separate commission looking at human sexuality in its broader sense.

Figure 1 demonstrates how this intersectionality is seen and makes visible how a single act of abuse on the part of a minister, causes a ripple effect that is experienced way beyond our spheres of influence and control and in an age of social media and instant messaging, this can only be exacerbated.

Figure 1.

The scope of human relations and the intersectionality with Safe Church – Revd Chris Ahrends

The ACC Safe Church Framework was then used to develop the Safe and Inclusive Church (Safe Church or SIC) charter with a preamble aimed at stating who we are as church and how we wanted to approach this intervention aimed at building a more safe and inclusive church.

Process for Developing a Safe and Inclusive Church Charter for ACSA

The Charter was the product of a workshop of cross-sectional members comprising bishops, clergy, laity, theologians, activists and academics. This meeting took place in January 2019 and the Charter was workshopped and accepted by the Synod of Bishops in February 2019. In order to contextualize the Commission Charter, participants were asked two questions: (1) What does a safe and inclusive church mean to you? and (2) What is the context that allows abuse to occur?

The Preamble positions the work of Safe Church in the context we find ourselves in at the foot of Africa, in a region marked by violence with alarming rates of femicide and gender-based violence. This crack in our society became fissures during the pandemic and enforced lockdown and we are still grappling with a holistic response as, unfortunately, despite it too having been declared a pandemic within ACSA, there is still no cohesive response, and the scourge continues unabated. Our church, its leaders and members are neither immune nor deaf to it, and there is a need for it to be addressed urgently.

The Preamble states:

We then set the framework in place around the same pillars that the communion uses, namely:

• Culture of safety and inclusivity

• Effective response to abuse

• Pastoral support where there is abuse

• Practice of pastoral ministry

• Suitability for ministry.

This response was not drafted in isolation as prior to this, ACSA had looked at the need for some pastoral standards, and this was in time expanded to form part of its Constitution and Canons as resolutions of permanent force and Act XV.

Using these frameworks, an iterative process was then designed to look at responses to abuse and this included the following principles in dealing with abuse and a set of definitions using a contextualized set of definitions for our context.

Principles and Process for Safe and Inclusive Church Ministry

This ministry has overall accountability for the reputational damage that accrues to ACSA as a result of contraventions of Act XV. This accountability is embedded in the recognition that we operate in the context of the larger Communion and must account for the seven different country legal systems bound by the Canons.

We therefore will abide by the following principles in responding to complaints:

1. 1. All our work is grounded in developing a strong theological foundation which can be tested against the four sources of authority in the Anglican Communion (namely: Scripture, Tradition, Reason and Experience). This theology will also be marked by a preferential option for the most vulnerable.

2. 2. All and every complaint will be investigated without fear or favour. There will also be a starting point of believing the complainant.

3. 3. The response teams will be set up on the understanding that prayerful discernment is of utmost importance rather than legalism.

4. 4. We abide by the principle of restorative justice, recognizing that instances of abuse create a crisis of faith for all parties involved. Thus, spaces must be opened for perpetrators of abuse to come forward and be embraced by the notion of ‘love the sinner, hate the sin’.

5. 5. The work of the ministry will be guided by the intention that prevention is better than cure. However, where cases do exist protocols will be developed to ensure a timeous response.

6. 6. Recognize that communication is key to ensuring each case is handled with the sensitivity and confidentiality that is necessary. The ministry will therefore develop a comprehensive communication strategy for each portion of its work, relying on the maxim ‘confidentiality not secrecy’.

7. 7. Recognize that when the Church falls short of its calling it is necessary to create pastoral support not only for those directly involved in the case, but also for those working on the case from the side of the ministry. Thus, a comprehensive pastoral care strategy will be developed for all involved.

Principles to guide a response process for adults:

• Complaint can be lodged in through a ‘safe church officer’ at parish, archdeaconry or diocesan level as well as through email or a dedicated Facebook account.

• Where appropriate, the complainant will also be encouraged to open a case with the relevant legal authorities (e.g. SAPS).

• The ministry will then work with the complainant to put the complaint into writing.

• The allegation will be put and responded to by the involved person.

• Giving the nature of the complaint the ministry will create and assign the matter to a response team.

• Once the complaint has been responded to, if appropriate there will be a public appeal through official church channels and Safe Church Ministry structures for those who have information to come forward (if the complaint is lodged against the bishop we use the dean for the official channels of communication).

• A comprehensive pastoral care strategy for all involved will be put in place.

• Every completed response will furnish recommendations for a journey of healing for those involved.Footnote ⁸

Types of Cases Being Reported

Given that the ministry is staffed by volunteers, we did not set out on a huge awareness campaign, and set up an email address (safechurches@anglicanchurchsa.org.za), which is the only mechanism available to people to report any case of abuse. We agreed that the core principle to ground all our work would be to investigate all complaints received, without fear or favour. Our point of departure is to believe the complainant and to use a process of prayerful discernment to arrive at a finding. We then assist the complainant and respondent with getting the matter into the canonical process and ensure that all parties have access to counselling and support as far as we can.

We have also contextualized the 13 categories of abuse definitions. Racism is still a major source of harm and abuse within our context and is presently not being dealt with by the ministry. A special commission on racism in schools was set up at the Provincial Standing Committee (PSC) in 2020, following the rising incidents of protest especially within our schools. It, too, is an area that requires ministry, teaching and healing as part of the formation of our people.

Despite the limited resources, we have received complaints in most areas of abuse. Unfortunately, sexual abuse continues to dominate.

Figure 2 sets out the breakdown of cases received since the formal establishment of the Safe Church within ACSA. We have identified 13 categories of abuse and the pie chart shows how the cases have been classified according to these definitions.

Figure 2.

Breakdown of cases into abuse categories.

As these cases emerged we were challenged with creating a process to deal with them. This process was built on the principles outlined above as well as the experience available to us in terms of the process of investigation and the work towards healing and restoration.

Our canons and constitution had been recognized by the courts as its own discrete legal process, and as long as we followed the rules of natural justice, did not act in violation of the country’s constitution and followed our own rules, the secular courts would not interfere. This then also creates an imperative for us to establish and maintain our own offenders’ register, which needs to be used as part of our screening process and assist with tightening out the process for internal transfers. We also need to think through how we share this information with the wider communion.

The process also included the fact that the Safe and Inclusive Ministry team would only be able to complete the investigation and that the process for discipline would be returned to the diocesan bishop for implementation. Given the different canons in place for discipline, we needed to design a process for bishops, priests and deacons and then for the laity.

At the initial phases, we wanted to introduce a system of arbitration to deal with offences, but these changes have not yet been introduced. So, for now, SIC would conduct the investigation and make recommendations, thereby replacing the role of the Board of Preliminary Inquiry.

The other difference that emerged from our process was that a complaint could be reported directly to SIC and does not need to follow any of the traditional reporting routes, thereby preventing the appearance even of any attempt to conceal. A dedicated email address accessible only to a limited number of people, also assisted in this regard.

The following standard body of letter was sent to both complainant and respondent (the preferred terms rather than victim and perpetrator):

• That we are God’s church and all we do have to meet the higher standard to which we are called.

• That we are all innocent until proven guilty

• That both parties to the matter, as well as the church as institution, have rights and obligations in this regard.

• That we all have the right to make or submit a complaint and that the person against whom the complaints are made, has a right of reply.

• That we will deal with all matters discretely and confidentially until certain facts have been established and will then disclose only what is necessary.

• That we have to strive for justice and truth for all of God’s children as we all live under the same state of grace and forgiveness.Footnote ⁹

We have also made the wishes and needs of the complainant central to the process, hence at the outset we try to establish what the intention of the complainant is and what it is they would like to see happen. This is particularly difficult where the complainant is also following a criminal route and concern for secondary harm cannot be ignored.

The questions below continue to inform our shaping and responses in this ministry:

• What does a safe and inclusive church mean to you?

• What constitutes abuse in the church?

• What is the context that makes abuse possible?

• What do we need to do to create a culture of safety and inclusivity?

In addition the cases were reviewed to assess how to improve the process used. The type of questions asked included but were not limited to:

• What worked well?

• What could have been done differently?

• What lessons are we learning and what are their implications going forward?

• What is the best way to deal with historic cases given what we continue to learn about the long-term psychological effects of childhood abuse that may only surface years later, often when the respondent would be deceased? How do we align or give meaning to our principles in this context?

Lessons We Are Learning and Questions We Continue to Grapple With

The work of the ministry continues to be shaped and challenged by our learning and we have from our experience distilled the following:

• Abuse in our church reflects our society (and some things are not seen as abuse – e.g. relationships with those in our pastoral care).

• Every statement we make reflects a belief about the nature of God.

• There are ways that we do church which create a context for abuse (conspiracy of silence, patriarchal theology, clericalism, power relations etc.).

• We have also found that being proactive is far harder than being reactive – we are overwhelmed with cases. However, we are also starting to think through approaches to the more proactive side of the framework and will focus on introducing some training and education material for 2021 onwards.

• Abuse creates a crisis of faith and has a ripple effect beyond those directly involved (the pastoral care imperative, spiritual direction involving other denominations, etc.).

• Discerning when we are being used as a Commission to extract revenge and our desire to create accountability, justice, restoration of relationships and ultimately a safe and inclusive church.

• The advent of the pandemic has shaped our thinking too, as we now have had to learn how to share empathy and care, build trust and show compassion via virtual platforms. This is particularly difficult when dealing with sexual assault matters. It has, however, also made it easier for us to build networks across the communion and we are planning on leveraging this network much more going forward.

The challenge of making material available in the different languages used within the province as well as establishing a team that reflects the diversity of the province remains.

Directions We Believe God Is Calling Us To

We continue to pray, reflect, learn and relearn what we hear God calling us to in this ministry. Despite the many hurdles and challenges that lie ahead, we have as a team discerned that we now need to tackle the following areas in addition to the ongoing work we are already doing and continue to improve upon.

In particular we have agreed that the following steps are now needed to take the next step in this ministry:

• Theological exploration to uncover new ways of doing church.

• Time for general lamentation and repentance.

• Call for mass confession opportunities.

• Restoration of relationships (finding justice with mercy) – how to create consequence, accountability and restoration/healing.

• We need a different canonical process to deal with complaints and bring them to resolution.

This ministry continues to be staffed by volunteers, some of whom are called and respond, and others we invite. We have now started work on how we expand the ministry to give effect to the different pillars of our charter. The different volunteers are heading up different pillars of the ministry and the intention is to use these pillars to build core teams and to continue the work of building strong diocesan structures. Concerns from complainants making use of the structures prevail and so we have agreed, for now, to continue to assign a member of the provincial team to lead the investigation. In high profile cases, there is also on occasion a reluctance on the part of the diocese to act, so more reliance is placed on the provincial team.

We have also learnt that having a lay provincial officer heading up the ministry makes a huge difference in access and responsiveness to complaints and so we have agreed to keep this as a central tenet of our structure and have also come to realize that membership of the Commission needs to be appointed and not elected, and that the Commission needs to be free to conduct its work and provide regular updates and reports on its work to both the Synod of Bishops as well as the wider ACSA structures.

Our focus going forward is then to split our work into reactive and proactive baskets that will, under the umbrella of seeking safety and inclusion, be the best way, for now, of achieving this outcome.

Figure 3 and Figure 4 set out the two pillars of work that SIC has identified in the further development of this ministry. Figure 3 sets out the different areas of work needed for us to react to complaints of abuse – reactive work. Figure 4 identifies the areas in which work needs to be undertaken in working towards a safe and inclusive church – proactive work.

Figure 3.

Different areas of work needed for us to react to complaints of abuse – reactive work.

Figure 4.

Areas in which work needs to be undertaken in working towards a safe and inclusive church – proactive work.