Religious Duress and Reverential Fear in Clergy Sexual Abuse Cases: Examination of Victims’ Reports and Recommendations for Change

Abstract

According to prior research, approximately 14% of sexual victimizations by priests are reported to civil authorities. Victim grooming by the abuser is a main reason the number of reported incidents is low. The concept of reverential fear and religious duress is related to grooming, but very little empirical research focuses on the concept. Reverential fear and religious duress is a type of fear that limits the ability of clergy sexual abuse victims to disengage from their abuser; it intensifies when one has reverence and respect for the clergyman who abused them. In this article, available data from personnel files from several Catholic institutions are analyzed to gain a deeper understanding of reverential fear and religious duress. Findings suggest victims of clergy sexual abuse experience reverential fear and religious duress. The discussion focuses on why victims remain silent and provides recommendations for new policy and for improving existing policy.

The Prevalence of Sexual Grooming Behaviors in a Large Sample of Clergy

“…Benkert and Doyle (2009) suggested that as a consequence of their role within the religious hierarchy, victims of clergy-perpetrated CSA may experience reverential fear and religious duress which can influence the sexual grooming process. Spraitz and Bowen (2020) examined the use of religious duress and reverential fear in a sample of 51 clergy from three diocese who were accused of CSA. Overall, they coded 64 potential instances of religious duress and reverential fear as exhibited by 29 out of the 51 priests (57%).…”

“…the sexual grooming process and the perpetration of CSA (Raine & Kent, 2019;Tishelman & Fontes, 2017), including having easy access to children and the ability to achieve implicit trust from their families (Spraitz & Bowen, 2020). Benkert and Doyle (2009) suggested that as a consequence of their role within the religious hierarchy, victims of clergy-perpetrated CSA may experience reverential fear and religious duress which can influence the sexual grooming process.…”

“…For example, Farrell and Taylor (2000) proposed that priests used spiritual manipulation to abuse children through their position in persona Christi (in the person of Christ—meaning that a priest is understood by believers to act in the place of Jesus Christ on earth), given they hold religious power and authority as representatives of Christ and God. Therefore, priests can exploit the authority and honor of religious organizations and the community as part of the sexual grooming process and the perpetration of CSA (Raine & Kent, 2019; Tishelman & Fontes, 2017), including having easy access to children and the ability to achieve implicit trust from their families (Spraitz & Bowen, 2020). Benkert and Doyle (2009) suggested that as a consequence of their role within the religious hierarchy, victims of clergy-perpetrated CSA may experience reverential fear and religious duress which can influence the sexual grooming process.…”

“…In the U.S., only about 14% of cases of clergy sexual abuse allegations were reported to authorities, and many of those were reported only after the expiry of the statute of limitations (Terry, 2011). It is postulated that many cases of CSA within the Catholic Church were not reported because sexual grooming was involved in the abuse (Spraitz & Bowen, 2020). While there is still no consensus on an exact definition, sexual grooming generally refers to the manipulative tactics a person seeking to commit sexual abuse may use to lure the victim into the abusive situation, while simultaneously avoiding detection from others and reducing the likelihood the victim will disclose (McAlinden, 2006).…”

Juventudes robadas: relatos de vida de víctimas en Chile sobre abuso sexual cometido por sacerdotes católicos

“…La culpa, como fenómeno complejo, se ve acentuada además por lo que Spraitz & Bowen (2021) han denominado como miedo reverencial y coacción religiosa, comentados previamente. En este escenario, además, las distorsiones cognitivas (de la Villa & González, 2020), comprendidas como un conjunto de ideas erróneas que operan como verdad en el sujeto que las cree, contribuyen a acentuar la culpa ya que la víctima se percibe en referencia al agresor como una persona que: a) provocó el abuso; b) permitió el abusoy no fue capaz de frenarlo; c) tiene responsabilidad ante el abuso y; d) debe sacrificarse con su silencio en pro de algo mayor y ese algo mayor es la Iglesia.…”