I am grateful to stand with @Weejenbug and @ACNAtoo to encourage these stories to continue to be told and heard. Here's what really disappoints me most though about @anglicanchicago and @aarondamiani's response.
The first minimized the situation and avoiding mentioning the word "abuse"
The second, far more animated (because @ladyjessicahaze's thread had now gone public) made bold claims by @aarondamiani that @StewartRuch's leadership was "credible, transparent and trustworthy"
@aarondamiani also made pointed reference, at this point on June 30th, the day after we (the Perrines) had posted on Facebook to the distance between @anglicanchicago and @MidwestAnglican "in this particular situation"
.@aarondamiani then went on to offer strong assurances that @anglicanchicago creates a culture "where abuse cannot flourish." He assures his congregation "We are committed to responding to allegations of abuse within any of our churches in a forthright and godly manner...
And claims "[we] hold leaders accountable and protect and honor victims. There is zero tolerance for predatory behavior in our midst." Within 10 days, we would be hearing back from their vestry that they "have no independent role" and "would not be standing with us" in our case.
The bravado and bluster of this second blog by @aarondamiani reflect the very same type of mishandling by @StewartRuch in the initial allegations. Rushing to assure congregations of your "strong policies" and "sincere concern" when in fact neither exist.
They are PR maneuvers to strong arm congregations into unquestioning faith in your leadership. The point not to humility, or self-reflection, but to politics, egoism and the need to control the situation and paint yourself the hero.
By the final @MidwestAnglican letter, @aarondamiani is less confident. He finally calls the situation "devastating" and this time focuses on pastoral care. This was clearly not the focus at the start of his responses to the allegations of abuse.
Why is it so hard for leaders like @aarondamiani, @StewartRuch to be humble in response to allegations? Why do vestry like Josh Evans rush to support them? Why does @anglicanchicago's vestry move so quickly to dismiss even the possibility of concern or accountability?
We sincerely love @anglicanchicago and @MidwestAnglican but we need policy reform, and transparent repentance. Stop posting blog updates assuring your people you know what you're doing and start taking credible actions to protect victims of abuse. #ACNAtooacnatoo.org
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Thread 2: Another specific point of concern. When a congregant of abuse expresses discomfort and @StewartRuch "adamantly" insists you continue attending. There are two possible reasons a bishop/rector /pastor would respond this way
The first reason: spiritual pride. You sincerely believe your church to be "the best kind of church" for healing, or to maintain some kind of "distinctiveness" that offers a care no other congregation nearby might.
I know from experience @ChurchRez and @MidwestAnglican often views themselves that way. Many churches do. But when you have a case abuse connected in any way to your congregation, you should NOT attempt to reassert the distinctive or special quality of your community
Thread 1: I want to zoom in on a particular point. As a pastoral resident at @ChurchRez for two years I can confirm multiple statements said by Katharine Ruch that match the horrifying rumor that reached CM, that KR indicated a “bad home” could dismiss allegations
Katharine Ruch (and therefore @StewartRuch by extension) repeatedly in private dismissed family and parenting models that don’t mirror their own. This creates a toxic elitism and spiritual pride by extension for those who adopt their views.
@veni_vidi_ceni has an incredibly insightful thread chronicling how the problem and the hope for scandal/abuse is polity to address failed polity, even as charismatic streams exacerbate the problem.
When you add to the mix a highly charismatic cocktail of revivalism, prophetic ministry, and hierarchal authority, what you get is a scenario that makes reporting of concerns impossible, and those who question anointed leaders villainized as spiritually immature