We've discussed collusion here before, but the recent reports on Panama and Bolivia has brought the topic back into my mind, with a reminder from a recent Facebook post by MK SafetyNet which led me to this site:
http://www.takecourage.org/CollusionMain.htmLook especially at the first five links. I'll quote some relevant sections from them here for the tl;dr people. (Emphasis mine.)
Quote:
Behind collusion one will always find some form of DIM Thinking* (Denial, Ignorance, and Minimization). Ignorance here may refer to one or all of the following: mis-information about the dynamics of abuse, resistence to attempts to provide education, or a choice to ignore what one knows. Colluders may be guilty of DIM Thinking about the abuse, about collusion itself, or both.
Quote:
Not only are we dealing with DIM thinking issues from the wider culture, we must also consider specific one's which tend to be even more prominent in religious communities:
Closed-system thinking--"We don't need outside help. This church or denomination can find its own answers within its own ranks, thank you."
Naivete'--When one's life revolves primarily around the activities of the cloistered "protection" of the institutional church, it is much easier to ignore the realities about both the outside the world and those of the institution of which one is so much a part. The theology of many religious communities encourages followers to see the outside world as "evil" and those within its circle as "good." Not seeing what is real greatly increases individual and collective vulnerability to victimization.
Narcissism--Members of religious communities like to see themselves as "special" children of God. This sense of being exceptional makes it easy to justify collusion for many people.
Patriarchal thinking--Patriarchy, according to Joan Chittister, O.S.B., is "elitism without merit." Not only does it enhance the god-image of religious leaders, making them exempt from accountability in the warped world of collusion. It also demonizes anyone who would call their behaviors into question. Finally, it provides help from the larger culture in giving preferential treatment to men, a problem which is even more magnified within religious circles.
Quote:
A clergy perpetrator, usually with years of being in the public eye, is skilled at convincing almost everyone, including victims, that he is really innocent or just “made a mistake.” He uses his charisma and status to enhance this skill. Even if he breaks down and "confesses," he finds ways to minimize the problems and the harm already done. It takes an enormous amount of energy to find one’s way to reality through the fog of deception which has been created by the offender and the many colluders who have already been misled.
...
Certainly there has already been a lot of effort, on the part of most denominations, to consult attorneys and instruct clerics about the "new rules." With all of these activities, at least a lot more fear has been instilled into the system. Unfortunately, just like many spouses of alcoholics, the concerns seem much more about protecting the image of the "family" than protecting its most vulnerable members.
Quote:
The mission community, on both an agency-level and as a collective community, functions as a closed family system. Closed family systems have some inherent characteristics which have allowed abuse to go unchecked in many settings. The followings are some key areas where this is true, particularly regarding systemic abuse.
In a closed family system, the authorities set the rules. These rules are to preserve the integrity of the organization. Outside input, e.g. civil law, psychology, etc. is seen as irrelevant at best and dangerous at worst when the input is perceived to threaten the organization. The primary directive of leadership is to protect the organization at all cost. The key prerequisite for systemic change in a closed system is referred to as “intentional effort”. Even with intentional effort there are many blocks which make change difficult. Some of these blocks come from within the personal history of mission leaders and staff members, other barriers come from organizational structures.
Leadership of a closed system almost always comes from within, and has been inculcated with the values and norms of the organization. In the case of mission agencies and denominations, almost all mid and top-level leadership fall in one or more of the following categories:
a. MK’s who were raised primarily by people other than their own parents and—as a consequence—this is normative for them
b. their own children attended international boarding schools
c. they were themselves abused as children in settings where abuse was not considered criminal and/or was never discussed.
There's much more, but I'll leave it at that, as this has already gotten very long.
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
