How Churches Hide Sex Abuse

Clergy sexual abuse refers to sexual misconduct committed by religious leaders, such as priests, pastors, bishops or other religious officials. Because clergy often hold positions of authority and trust within faith communities, abuse can involve manipulation of these relationships or influence.

In abuse situations, church leaders may focus on protecting the larger religious organization instead of addressing the harms survivors experienced and punishing the wrongdoers.

Understanding how churches hide sex abuse involves examining institutional practices that may conceal allegations or delay accountability. Investigations into religious abuse scandals have identified patterns that investigators say contributed to institutional cover-ups.

Reliance on internal investigations instead of reporting abuse externally

Leadership structures can influence how religious institutions handle abuse allegations. In some institutions, leaders control internal discipline and investigations, which may affect whether abuse allegations are reported publicly or are addressed privately.

Some institutions conduct internal investigations when abuse allegations are reported directly or indirectly to church leaders. These reviews may be handled by clergy leadership, church attorneys or internal church committees rather than external law enforcement. Internal processes may include:

• Reviewing allegations through church leadership
• Applying church disciplinary rules or canonical law
• Unilaterally deciding whether clergy should remain in ministry
• Deciding whether or not to involve law enforcement

This practice can conflict with mandatory reporting laws.

A recently released seven-year investigation into abuse in the Diocese of Providence held true with this pattern. The report found 119 incidents of abuse in Diocese records that were not reported to law enforcement.

Transferring accused clergy

Another practice used in abuse cases involves transferring clergy members accused of misconduct to a different parish or ministry assignment instead of removing them from their position entirely.

Church leaders may reassign the individual to a new location while the allegations are being handled internally. This allows the accused to continue working within a congregation while the complaint is being investigated, thereby allowing a new pool of victims to be abused.

Investigations into the Catholic church sex abuse scandal found cases in which priests accused of abuse were reassigned to new parishes rather than permanently removed from ministry.

The Diocese of Providence investigation revealed the impact of these decisions. Of the 75 Catholic priests identified in the report as abusers:

• 21 were transferred at least 1 – 5 times
• 31 were transferred 5 – 9 times
• 8 were transferred 10 or more times

Transfers simply give problem priests access to an entirely new population of people to victimize.

Confidential settlements and nondisclosure agreements

Confidential settlements have also been used in some clergy abuse cases. These agreements may involve:

• Financial settlements with survivors
• Confidentiality provisions or nondisclosure agreements (NDAs)
• Limits on public discussion of abuse allegations

Some survivors choose confidential settlements to protect their privacy. However, widespread NDA use can silence victims and make it harder for the public to identify patterns of abuse.

Institutional pressure on victims

Religious authority can create barriers for victims who want to report abuse. Research on abuse in religious institutions shows that victims may fear losing their faith community or being blamed for the abuse. Some survivors also worry that reporting abuse could damage the reputation of their church or religious community. Survivors have described experiences involving:

• Pressure from church leaders not to report abuse
• Feelings of guilt, shame, or disillusionment tied to religious teachings
• Fear of harming the reputation of the church community

The Catholic church sex abuse scandal is one of the most widely documented examples of abuse within a religious institution.

In 2002, an investigation by the Boston Globe Spotlight team revealed that church leaders had reassigned priests accused of sexual abuse rather than removing them from ministry. The investigation found that several church leaders knew about abuse allegations involving multiple priests, but did nothing to address the issue of child sexual abuse.

These investigations drew global attention to the Catholic church’s systemic cover-up of sexual abuse. As a result, many dioceses adopted new reporting and accountability policies.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, also known as the LDS or Mormon church, has also allegedly covered up sexual abuse.

In several reported cases, members said they reported abuse to local church leaders instead of contacting law enforcement directly. In some situations, those leaders contacted a confidential help line operated by church attorneys to seek guidance on how to respond to abuse reports, while cloaking the complaints under attorney-client privilege to silence survivors.

Critics argue the system allows abuse allegations to remain within church leadership rather than being reported to authorities.

These disputes have contributed to broader discussion about the LDS sex abuse scandal. It is sometimes described in media coverage as part of a wider Mormon sex scandal, including lawsuits filed by survivors who say church leaders failed to protect them.

Sexual abuse allegations have also been reported in other religious organizations.

Investigations and lawsuits have described abuse cases involving leaders and volunteers connected to various churches and faith-based groups. Some cases involve congregations associated with the Southern Baptist Convention and Scientology.

These cases show that abuse allegations have emerged in many types of religious institutions and faiths.

Many survivors of clergy abuse do not report what happened right away. Fear, shame and pressure from religious communities can delay disclosure for years. In fact, most survivors of sexual abuse do not disclose that abuse until an average age of 52 years old.

Many states once had short statutes of limitations that prevented survivors from filing civil lawsuits by the time they were ready to come forward.

In recent years, some states passed lookback window laws that allow survivors to file civil claims even if the abuse happened many years ago, recognizing that these traumatic experiences are oftentimes not disclosed contemporaneously at the time of abuse itself. These laws temporarily reopen the statute of limitations so survivors can bring cases that were previously barred.

Lookback windows have allowed new lawsuits involving religious institutions and organizations accused of failing to protect children and vulnerable adults.

Civil lawsuits can help survivors seek compensation for harms such as medical treatment, counseling costs and other damages related to abuse. They can also help uncover institutional practices that allowed abuse to continue.

Motley Rice attorneys represent survivors of sexual abuse in cases involving institutions that allegedly failed to protect vulnerable individuals.

Our team has experience handling complex litigation involving abuse allegations connected to religious institutions, schools and youth organizations responsible for protecting children and vulnerable adults.

We approach each case using a trauma-informed perspective and recognize the lasting effects abuse can have on survivors and their families.

Read more about our sexual abuse litigation experience.