The Wall of Silence Returns

It has been close to 3 months since the last episode of the Wall of Silence podcast. I want to thank you as listeners for hanging in there as you have endured the confusion and disappointment of having the podcast be silenced in the form of a pause. For those of you that reached out to me offering support in various ways, I am truly appreciative. It’s been a trying few months and the support means a lot. As a number of people have pointed out, it’s a tragic irony that a podcast about the silencing of church abuse was itself silenced. It’s a sobering realization that has weighed on me up to this present moment.

I owe you an explanation, but first let me say that the upcoming episode, also releasing this week, belongs to Joanna Rudenborg. In it she concludes her account of Mark Rivera’s psychological manipulation and rape. But she also goes a few steps further than that, explaining how she came to the realization of Mark’s abuse, the part she played in it, and what she decided to do about it in the devastating, all-encompassing aftermath.

But now, an explanation on the podcast’s pause. Please realize this is not a full explanation. I hope to share more, at length and in depth at a future point, but to do the story justice would mean putting out a full, stand-alone episode. At the same time, if I were a listener, I would want to understand something about what has happened with the podcast and why. So, here is my shortened, condensed version.

In early June I first received news from my bishop, Alberto Morales, followed by a letter from him attached to an email that people “at a Provincial level” in the ACNA are calling for the podcast to be “eliminated immediately.” In this letter, he himself said, quote “by virtue of the vow of obedience that you made the day of your ordination to your Bishop,” that I am to pause the podcast.

I later received 3 separate assertions saying that the pressure to end the podcast was not coming from the Archbishop or the Province. One of these assertions was from Archbishop Foley Beach himself, sent in a “reply all” email in which my bishop was included. The other two came from the Provincial office, forwarded to me by priests in the ACNA who had reached out to me, offering their support.

In early July my bishop organized a meeting with me, which was recorded with the consent of everyone who attended, where he again called me to obedience to pause the podcast, told me the mission of the podcast does not meet the mission of the Diocese of Quincy and that (and these are important points), that if I continue with the podcast:

1. One, both he and I risked facing a civil lawsuit. It was not made clear to me, but I assume it would be some kind of defamation suit. What also was not made clear was on what grounds any suit could be made.

2. Two, both he and I risked facing a presentment, that is, an ecclesial trial. Again, under what grounds, was not made clear to me.

3. Three, that the podcast represents a conflict of interest for those in our diocese who have a role in Bishop Stewart Ruch’s presentment trial. Bishop Morales himself has a role in the trial by being in the College of Bishops where they are to declare sentencing if a guilty verdict is handed out, and our diocesan chancellor Tad Brenner is on the tribunal for the trial, as well as being an advisor to it. Here, also, despite their attempts at explanation, it was not clear to me how my podcasting about the trial (essentially serving as a reporter/commentator on the events) would create a conflict of interest for anyone involved in the trial, even those within my diocese.

I have spent the last few months in discernment, prayer, and receiving lots of counsel, and I do not feel that my calling to release this podcast has in any way lessened. Along with this, I do not believe my bishop’s call to obedience in this matter falls under his canonical or episcopal authority. To use the wording in the ACNA’s canons, it does not seem like a lawful command according to the canons, and, though discerning this has been incredibly tricky, it also does not seem like an honest request. 

As to why and how I’ve come to this decision, here are some brief examples. Based on the counsel of two lawyers, it has been communicated to me that none of the material in the podcast released so far would warrant a defamation lawsuit. Next, regarding the claim that the podcast is creating a conflict of interest, I have to say I found this immediately confusing when it was brought up in the meeting with my bishop, and it was an assertion I worked to understand. So, my response to this claim is that based on the disclaimer I made in the first episode of the podcast, the Wall of Silence is not affiliated in any way with the Diocese of Quincy. It’s my podcast. I am not currently working for the Diocese or a church within it, not receiving compensation from the diocese or its churches, and am in no way a part of Bishop Ruch’s presentment trial, nor am I working with anyone involved in it. If there are those in my diocese who have a role in the trial, then it would be up to them to choose to not listen to this podcast or to engage in any other media with material related to the trial, which would include other podcasts and websites on articles produced by ACNA priests and members. In their own wisdom they would need to decide not to expose themselves to this kind of media, or they would need to recuse themselves from the trial process, as anyone with a true conflict of interest should do who is part of a civil or criminal trial. Along with all of this, it is apparent there are a number of people currently part of the Bishop Ruch’s presentment trial who already have known conflicts of interest based on their relationship and history with Bishop Ruch, and they have as of yet not recused themselves. I tried to gain clarification about this assertion from the canon lawyer of my diocese through an email after the meeting, but his reply was that it wouldn’t be appropriate for him to comment about this at this time.

Moving on, it has so far not been pointed out to me how my work in the podcast has demonstrated behavior unbefitting a priest. The question that has been posed to me a number of times now is “How can a bishop inhibit you from telling the truth, especially if you are doing so as a matter of conscience and in the hopes of serving God’s people?” Along with all of this, I don’t believe this process has followed the Biblical model laid out in Matthew 18 or 1 Corinthians 6.

I have asked to meet with my bishop to get further clarifications and to address these issues and many more, all of which I have laid out in a letter to him. However, I have not yet given the letter to him in the hope we will still be able to meet. To my requests for a meeting he has told me “no,” and that he “feels a threat.” I don’t know what the threat is, but I assume it is because I have informed him that I believe I am not canonically called to obey him in this matter and that by planning to restart the podcast I would set in motion whoever is planning to bring civil and ecclesial suits against us. In order to come to some kind of resolution I have since suggested we could meet with an impartial, third party who would be brought in to mediate and help us dialogue. As of the recording of this announcement episode I have been told by the canon to the ordinary of my diocese, that is, the senior priest who works for and assists my bishop in matters of the diocese, that the bishop is not open to such a meeting. In releasing this episode I’m not sure what doing so will lead to next, but here we are.

As a conclusion, I want to offer a few points on the nature of this podcast.

The Wall of Silence is not a tribunal. There is no official church trial going on here. I felt compelled to help abuse survivors in the ACNA tell their stories in this medium in the hopes that they would be heard and changes could be made in the ACNA to how we respond to abuse and how we can create a culture that does not enable it. 

In the letter I wrote but did not send to my bishop about the podcast, I told him that the Wall of Silence exists:

to create a space, using whatever influence I have, that gives survivors of church abuse and those who advocate for them—people who have been silenced after trying to go through the Church’s official process and procedures—a chance to tell their story in their own voice and words. I acknowledge the story being told is difficult to listen to, but I am essentially calling the Church to gather around Job in his grief, loss, sorrow, and even anger. But unlike Job’s friends, who question his faithfulness and put the blame on him, my hope for this project is that people can learn to sit with these people who have been mistreated, to truly listen to them in their grief, and to then consider how our churches can change and become places where abuse and mistreatment will not—by God’s help—happen again.

Put another way, this podcast is a call for the ACNA and any church group listening to be willing to be brave enough to address abuse or the mishandling of abuse taking place in our midst. If we do not do it ourselves, someone else will eventually do it for us, and by then it will be too late. To quote from the first episode of the podcast, I have chosen to do this project because: “as a priest, I believe it’s time for leaders in the ACNA to take responsibility for how our churches operate and how we treat the victims of abuse. I’m hoping and praying we can be humble enough and broken enough to work toward seeing actual changes made. And if that’s not possible, then this podcast will still exist as a testament to why that process broke down.”

So here is my call: if you are listening to this and are somehow bound up in these stories, if you find yourself being accused, or feeling threatened by what is being said, if someone is claiming you’ve played a part in harming people, perhaps this is your chance to make things right, to figure out what you need to do on your end, to consider who you need to go to and ask forgiveness and begin the difficult process of reconciliation.

A recent Tweet on X from Eugene Cho says “Everyone loves the idea of reconciliation…until it involves truth-telling, confessing, repenting, forgiving, and peacemaking.”

Real reconciliation and restoration means putting in the hard work to do so. It’s work that takes a lot of time, involves many difficult conversations, and that ultimately breaks your soul open in the process as you realize transformation needs to take place both within you as well as the entire community.

To repeat: this podcast is not a tribunal, but maybe it’s our chance to make things right, with God’s help.

I hope you will join me as we continue this work in the next episode, Joanna’s Story, Part 2.