Although human beings have gone through traumatic experiences since the birth of mankind, the conclusion of the Vietnam War brought the evaluation of trauma to the forefront of psychological study with a resolute determination never before applied to the pursuit. Since then, dozens of scientists and researchers have urged the mental health community and the American government to bring comprehensive trauma research to light, in order that victims of trauma may better recover from their pain and society may better understand and embrace them. The psychologists’ efforts have proven successful to an extent, but the realities of trauma are not fully acknowledged by a large portion of American society, resulting in greater risk of damage to those who will inevitably experience trauma by preventing them from fully understanding their condition.
A beneficial factor in overcoming trauma is the influence of religion within the victim’s life; religion provides those who participate with a sense of comfort and hope in spite of hardship and pain. For Christians, Christ’s message of redemption offers a clear avenue for healing and recovery; therefore, as the entity which intends to communicate the fullness of truth and bring comfort to the lives of those afflicted, the Catholic Church has a responsibility to accurately convey information on an experience so relevant to many Catholics’ lives. The Church, fully aware of this responsibility, has endeavored to provide some pastoral ministry and informed teaching on the issues of trauma—but have these efforts been enough to prepare members of the Church for the realities of trauma and to help them heal sufficiently?
This essay endeavors to present and investigate the realities of trauma and its effects on so many members of American society, while both exploring what information and resources the Church has offered in response to various forms of trauma and evaluating the accuracy of the information provided.
EARLY TRAUMA RESEARCH
In his insightful work The Body Keeps the Score, Dutch psychiatrist Bessel van der Kolk investigates the effects of trauma on both children and adults, exploring the many symptoms trauma patients undergo and analyzing both effective and ineffective treatments for their conditions.1 Most beneficial for this essay is his book’s eleventh chapter, “Uncovering Secrets: The Problem of Traumatic Memory.” Here van der Kolk traces the development of trauma-related diagnoses through the history of psychiatry. Psychological trauma was first studied under the title of “hysteria,” characterized by “emotional outbursts, susceptibility to suggestion, and contractions or paralyses of the muscles unexplained by anatomy.”2 Hysteria was an affliction believed by doctors to affect only women, caused by the movement of their uteruses.
However, three pioneers of psychiatry—Jean-Martin Charcot, Pierre Janet, and Sigmund Freud—realized that hysteria was preceded by trauma of some sort, usually sexual abuse during childhood.3 Jean-Martin Charcot studied hysteria extensively in both men and women, examining their symptoms (especially those connected with memory loss).4 Judith Herman, renowned authority on trauma and its related disorders, describes Charcot as a man of “great courage” for studying hysteria; before Charcot, hysterics were treated with disdain and left to hypnotists for treatment, not psychiatrists.5 Charcot gave credibility to the condition, deeming it “the Great Neurosis” and studying its effects on the patient, particularly neurological damages such as paralysis, convulsions, and amnesia.6
Although Charcot did great work with hysteria, his pupils Sigmund Freud and Pierre Janet strove to find the cause of the condition itself.7 Janet helped Charcot build his laboratory devoted to hysteria research and published the first lengthy scientific account of traumatic stress: “L’automatisme psychologique.”8 Van der Kolk explains his account:
Janet proposed that at the root of what we now call PTSD was the experience of “vehement emotions,” or intense emotional arousal. This treatise explained that, after having been traumatized, people automatically keep repeating certain actions, emotions, and sensations related to the trauma. And unlike Charcot...whose research focused on understanding the phenomenon of hysteria, Janet was foremost a clinician whose goal was to treat his patients.9
Janet may have been a pioneer in the clinical treatment of trauma-related disorders, but Freud offered significant contributions to the study as well.
According to Herman, both Janet and Freud recognized not only “the essential similarity of altered states of consciousness induced by psychological trauma and those induced by hypnosis” but also “that the somatic symptoms of hysteria represented disguised representations of intensely distressing events which had been banished from memory.”10 Based on the strong influence of these traumatic memories on the patients’ conditions, treatment for hysteria was centered around the memories themselves, aimed at the recovery both of the recollection of the traumatic event and the intense emotions that accompanied them.11 Janet termed the treatment “psychological analysis,” while Freud named it “catharsis,” later changing the name to “psycho-analysis.”12
Psychoanalysis endeavored to dig past the delusions and amnesia presented by the patient in order to successfully reach the true traumatic memories hidden beneath. Freud famously worked with women, primarily those of the upper class; in engaging their hysteric symptoms through psychoanalysis, he discovered the traumatic memories to be centered around sexual experiences, such as—to his horror—sexual assault, abuse, and incest.13 In his work The Aetiology of Hysteria, Freud makes a bold claim: “I therefore put forward the thesis that at the bottom of every case of hysteria there are one or more occurrences of premature sexual experience.” However, Freud later altered his direction due to social pressure to end his claims that bourgeois families in Vienna were rife with sexual exploitation of women. He changed his tactics, asking his hysteric patients to explore their erotic feelings rather than the traumatic events that caused their neuroses.14
With this shift from investigation into the sexual exploitation of young girls to their supposed desire for the experiences to occur, Freud moved into a new method of psychoanalysis which concluded that neuroses are caused by repressed sexual desire rather than traumatic events.15 This shift brought an end to the dedicated study of hysteria, with the original pioneers devoted to other pursuits: Jean-Martin Charcot to the mysteries of faith healing and Pierre Janet to the phenomenon of American Christian Science.16 The study of traumatic memories in women was put to rest at the turn of the century, leaving more women to suffer with the all-encompassing condition “hysteria.”
However, it was not long before trauma was studied once more, brought back by a painful impetus; the awful conditions of the First World War subjected men to terrors far beyond the normal realm of human experiences. Herman elaborates:
Under conditions of unremitting exposure to the horrors of trench warfare, men began to break down in shocking numbers. Con ned and rendered helpless, subjected to constant threat of annihilation, and forced to witness the mutilation and death of their comrades without any hope of reprieve, many soldiers began to act like hysterical women. They screamed and wept uncontrollably. They froze and could not move. They became mute and unresponsive. They lost their memory and their capacity to feel. The number of psychiatric casualties was so great that hospitals had to be hastily requisitioned to house them. According to one estimate, mental breakdowns represented 40 percent of British battle casualties.17
At first, these hysterical symptoms were attributed to concussions suffered from nearby explosions, resulting in the popular name “shell shock.”18 When doctors were eventually forced to recognize that no physical damage had occurred in these men, combat neurosis was attributed to the moral character of the men, who were deemed cowards or malingerers. British psychiatrist Lewis Yealland advocated a treatment plan involving “shaming, threats, and punishment.”19 However, not all psychologists approved of this approach. Physician W. H. R. Rivers sought to provide humane treatment based on Charcot, Janet, and Freud’s “talking cure,” which created an atmosphere of safety for patients and enabled them to return to combat.20
Although Rivers’ treatment plan was deemed a success, and his principles were followed by military clinicians for years, medical interest in psychological trauma faded once more after the end of the war, with veterans now brought back into society and attention turned elsewhere.21 Research came back to the forefront of investigation with the dawning of the Second World War. In 1941, American psychiatrist Abram Kardiner penned a complex clinical and theoretical study, The Traumatic Neuroses of War, in which he developed clinical outlines of the traumatic syndrome as it is understood today.22 Kardiner and other American psychiatrists concluded that any man in combat could fall victim to combat neuroses—200 to 240 days were deemed sufficient to break any soldier—and that “each moment of combat imposes a strain so great that men will break down in direct relation to the intensity and duration of their exposure.”23
Although their employment of techniques similar to the “talking cure” allowed for an unburdening of traumatic memories, these psychiatrists recognized that unless these memories were integrated into a patient’s consciousness, the process of amnesia would begin again. Unfortunately, military doctors did not heed their advice and sent the soldiers back into combat immediately after treatment; once the war was over, little attention was given to the mental states of the returning men.24 As Herman puts it, “The lasting effects of war trauma were once again forgotten”—at least until the outbreak of the next large-scale conflict. 25
The end of the Vietnam War brought the largest systematic investigation of the long-term psychological effects of combat yet undertaken.26 By the end of the 1970s, pressure from veterans’ organizations resulted not only in a legal mandate forcing the Veteran’s Administration to create a dedicated psychological treatment program but also in the commission of in-depth psychiatric studies examining the impact of combat on the lives and psychological conditions of veterans. Finally, in 1980 the American Psychiatric Association created a new category in its official manual of mental disorders called “post-traumatic stress disorder.” “Thus,” Herman concludes, “the syndrome of psychological trauma, periodically forgotten and periodically rediscovered through the past century, finally attained formal recognition within the diagnostic canon.”27
THE COMPLEX SYMPTOMS OF TRAUMA
With the addition of PTSD to the APA’s diagnostic manual, trauma-related disorders entered once more into popular study. However, the area of investigation broadened to cover more than just combat-induced trauma—now the traumatic symptoms of rape, battery, and other forms of sexual assault and domestic violence were included under the umbrella of traumatic disorders.28 Trauma, it came to be realized, is a scourge affecting many victims from diverse backgrounds and rendering them severely limited in their emotional capacities. In her book’s second chapter entitled “Terror,” Herman explains why all of these traumatic events are included under one category and thus provides an accurate account of what qualifies an event as truly psychologically traumatic:
Traumatic events are extraordinary, not because they occur rarely, but rather because they overwhelm the human adaptations to life. Unlike commonplace misfortunes, traumatic events generally involve threats to life or bodily integrity, or a close personal encounter with violence and death. They confront human beings with the extremities of helplessness and terror and evoke the responses of catastrophe. According to the Comprehensive Textbook of Psychiatry, the common denominator of psychological trauma is a feeling of “intense fear, helplessness, loss of control, and threat of annihilation.”29
Horrible events such as these, in which the victims are made to feel entirely helpless and are confronted with great fear and danger, are considered by clinicians to be traumatic.
Such danger triggers a complex system of responses in the human body, beginning with the arousal of the sympathetic nervous system, causing an adrenaline rush and an intense alertness to and concentration on the threat at hand.30 The body is prepared for strenuous action and often disregards simple feelings of hunger or fatigue and replaces them with intense emotions of fear or anger.31 These responses become traumatic when no action may be taken against the threat in the form of resistance or escape; components of the sympathetic response, no longer useful, persist in a heightened state long after the danger has passed.32 Responses to the event become fragmented, with emotion, cognition, physiological arousal, and memory all altered to the point of disconnection. This dissociation results in the typical symptoms of trauma.33
There are three categories into which the symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder are placed: “hyperarousal,” “intrusion,” and “constriction.”34 Hyperarousal, as the name suggests, is the constant engagement of the sympathetic nervous system, the body acting as though the dangerous threat may return at any moment. Patients suffering from hyperarousal symptoms sleep poorly, startle easily, and react irritably to stimuli; their bodies are constantly alert, the baseline level of anxiety heightened to a constant state of fearful anticipation.35
“Intrusion” is similarly self-explanatory. Trauma victims suffer from episodes of relived memories in which they experience the event over and over again as though it was presently occurring.36 Regular life cannot resume while the episodes occur, which can take place for years on end and thus keep the victim in a cycle of reliving their painful past. Traumatic memories are not encoded in the same way as typical memories, in which events are usually integrated into consciousness in verbal, linear accounts; rather, traumatic memories “lack verbal narrative and context,” and are instead encoded “in the form of vivid sensations and images.”37 Those who experience traumatic events are often innately compelled to relive the trauma, in an attempt—as Freud claims and others support—to assimilate the memories and possibly achieve some mastery over them.38 Although these instances of repetition can be used by clinicians to achieve some healing in their patients, the victims typically dread the occurrences, leaving them in a constant state of fear.39
The final category of symptoms, labeled “constriction,” involves the numbing or paralyzing effects of the traumatic event on the victims. Constrictive symptoms are centered around an alteration of consciousness wherein—rather than the evocation of terror or anger—a state of detached calm overtakes the sufferer.40 The victim dissociates from normal life and its components, perceptions becoming numbed or distorted, and the sense of time appearing altered.41 While the trauma is taking place, an overwhelming dissociative state may also set in, in which the victim seems to observe the event from outside their own body.42 Those victims who cannot separate themselves from the trauma through spontaneous dissociation “may attempt to produce similar numbing effects by using alcohol or narcotics.”43 The ultimate “goal” of these constrictive responses in a trauma victim is to split the painful memories from ordinary awareness. This allows the victim to either slip into a state of amnesia or hold truncated memories, both of which enable them to protect themselves against overwhelming emotional states. However, constrictive responses force the victim to live in a constant state of numbness that lacks any direction, preventing them from coping with the trauma and moving past the event.44
WHO ARE THE VICTIMS OF TRAUMA?
These three categories of physiological and psychological responses to trauma—hyperarousal, intrusion, and constriction—are common within victims of sexual assault, domestic abuse, extensive combat, and captivity; however, these are not the only events that may cause PTSD symptoms. As Judith Herman explains, “According to the Comprehensive Textbook of Psychiatry, the common denominator of psychological trauma is a feeling of ‘intense fear, helplessness, loss of control, and threat of annihilation.’”45 These feelings of fear and helplessness, accompanied by a close encounter with danger or even death, are what render an event traumatic for its victim.
Van der Kolk presents a terrifying reality in his book: a majority of Americans have experienced some level of trauma in their lives, usually as children (which causes the most distress throughout life).46 This statistic was determined through the use of a detailed medical questionnaire called the Adverse Childhood Experience (ACE) test, created through the collaboration of internist Vincent Felitti and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.47 This test is comprised of a series of ten questions “covering carefully de ned categories of adverse childhood experiences, including physical and sexual abuse, physical and emotional neglect, and family dysfunction, such as having had parents who were divorced, mentally ill, addicted, or in prison.”48 An answer of “yes” to each question is scored as one point, allowing a range of scores from zero to ten. In a study including 17,421 participants from the Department of Preventive Medicine, the ACE test revealed that “traumatic life experiences during childhood and adolescence are far more common than expected.”49
The results are astounding: out of 17,421 participants, sixty-seven percent reported at least one adverse experience.50 Of that two- thirds, eighty-seven percent scored two or more. Then comes the most shocking statistic: one in six of all respondents had an ACE score of four or higher.51 This study reveals that trauma is far more common than was typically believed, with an incredible two-thirds of all participants having had some traumatic event or condition take place in the past. Trauma during childhood—the factor evaluated by the ACE test—is even more significant than trauma during adulthood, making the results far more concerning.52 However, childhood trauma is highly correlated with negative outcomes in adult life. For example, the likelihood of suicide attempts rises by five thousand percent from an Ace score of zero to six.53
Van der Kolk further explains that a number of other “psychologists led by English psychiatrist James Bowlby have demonstrated that a child’s relationship with its primary caregiver indicates the child’s ability to function normally in the future.”54 A lack of attunement between children and their caregivers typically results in an insecure attachment between the two, with the child receiving a de cit of love and attention. When the child’s emotional or physical needs are not met, the child will have no secure base from which to explore the world; this absence has devastating results.55 Van der Kolk describes the research established through Bowlby’s work:
Over the subsequent five decades research has firmly established that having a safe haven promotes self-reliance and instills a sense of sympathy and helpfulness to others in distress. From the intimate give-and-take of the attachment bond children learn that other people have feelings and thoughts that are both similar to and different from theirs. In other words, they get “in sync” with their environment and with the people around them and develop the self-awareness, empathy, impulse control, and self-motivation that make it possible to become contributing members of the larger social culture.56
To put it succinctly, trauma occurring during childhood prevents a person from functioning successfully during life. Victims of trauma with unresolved symptoms are likely to perpetuate trauma through means such as interpersonal violence, alcoholism, and stunted emotional growth, thus leading to a traumatic family environment which causes adverse experiences for children. Traumatic experiences have been proven to cause those devastating symptoms once associated with hysteria—whose victims had been abused as children—and then recognized in many of those who have suffered a traumatic experience, such as combat, rape, and domestic abuse. As two-thirds of respondents in the ACE study demonstrate, trauma has become a common thread in American life, its accompanying effects constituting a huge problem for many Americans. This must be addressed and hopefully prevented for the sake of those suffering now and for generations to come.
WHERE DOES THE CHURCH COME IN?
The Pew Research Center reports that in 2014, twenty percent of American adults identified as Catholic, suggesting that the teachings of the Catholic Church and the influence of her hierarchy affect millions of Americans to some extent.57 For many adults who identify as Catholic, the information the Church disseminates and endorses holds great value, going so far as to strongly influence their decision-making and overall life experiences. This suggests that the members of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) hold power over the minds of millions of American adults through their mission to act as the representatives of Christ and His teachings to His Church in the United States.
This directive is doubtless a heavy burden, as the bishops must choose carefully what resources on Christian life they promulgate to their flock; however, they have still managed to release a plethora of information, producing or publishing hundreds if not thousands of documents and reports since the Conference’s foundation in 1966. With such a wide range of documents covering topics that span almost every aspect of daily life, how can the USCCB be sure that everything it presents is entirely accurate and truthful? And more to the point, does the Conference include guidance on topics that are not in the realm of normal human experience, or situations that are awkward, painful, or even controversial to discuss?
As part of the hierarchy of Christ’s Church, the only institution to which Christ has imparted the fullness of truth, the bishops have a responsibility to communicate that truth to Her congregation in everything they promulgate.58 This responsibility for truthfulness extends not only to moral directives and biblical analyses but also to teachings on domestic abuse, rape, violence, war, alcoholism, divorce, and any other form of trauma that has definitely affected members of the Catholic Church. The question is, have they succeeded in that directive?
THE CHURCH AND TRAUMA – ARE HER TEACHINGS ACCURATE?
The USCCB prints, publishes, and disseminates a great deal of information regarding anything and everything that has to do with Christian life, thus covering a wide array of topics. The best place to examine this information is not a library or archive but rather the Conference’s website, where Americans typically get their information.59 Of interest to this evaluation are teachings regarding traumatic events such as domestic violence, rape, combat-induced PTSD, and child sexual abuse. As the USCCB was officially founded during the Vietnam War, it seems most appropriate to begin by discussing combat-induced PTSD.
After analysis of the USCCB’s website, it becomes abundantly clear that the Conference offers no resources for veterans returning from combat; if any exist, the information must be buried within the hundreds of documents available on the site. The only information regarding combat is under the title “War and Peace,” in which the Conference offers teachings on recent conflicts and ethical dilemmas, such as landmines, nuclear weapons, and the arms trade.60 There is a subheading entitled “Conscience, War and Peace,” which one would think might offer some insight into the Church’s teachings on the application of Christian conscience in war (suggesting some insight into the minds of soldiers), but the link only leads to information on arms trading. After careful examination of the website and the many resources it offers, it appears that the Conference does not have any information on either veteran reintegration after combat or the diagnosis of PTSD itself. This is a failing in the USCCB’s ministry, as there are an estimated one hundred thousand Catholic soldiers in the military today, with many thousands of veterans living in the US.61 By not including any information on veteran health, PTSD, or the challenges of returning to civilian life, the USCCB forsakes a large portion of its flock. If their PTSD symptoms are left untreated, these men and women may resort to self-harming measures or even suicide, an evil fought by the Church since its founding two thousand years ago.62 These men and women must be ministered to by the Catholic Church in America and their trauma recognized, for as Herman explains, the recognition of trauma is crucial for healing.63
It must be acknowledged, however, that there are other resources for veterans from the Catholic Church in America. These come mainly from the Archdiocese for the Military Services—a diocese comprised solely of those in military service and their families—which provides a wealth of innovative information on how to properly minister both spiritually and corporally to veterans returning from long periods of combat.64 However, the USCCB’s website has neither information regarding the ministries, initiatives, and resources provided by the Archdiocese of the Military Services nor any link to its website. Therefore, it should not properly be included in this evaluation.
Although it does not present any information or teachings on combat-induced PTSD, the USCCB certainly provides information on rape and its traumatic effects. Under the tab “Pro Life Activities,” an article is published entitled “Life Issues Forum: Supporting Both Victims of Rape” by Richard Doerflinger, the USCCB’s Associate Director of the Secretariat of Pro-Life Activities.65 This article is not only easy to access but also filled with accurate information about rape and its effects from a Catholic standpoint. Doerflinger’s main point is a commentary on rape and abortion in the US, explaining that abortions due to conception by rape only occur in one percent of abortion cases, yet politicians use rape as an excuse to support abortion in all situations.66 Doerflinger holds that this is a blatant misuse of women victimized by the trauma of rape, in that their trauma is glossed over and their condition is turned into a warped statistic. By citing rape as an abomination and recognizing the emotional and physical trauma undergone by the victims, Doerflinger shows the USCCB’s sensitivity to the painful realities of rape for the victim and thereby assures Catholic women that they are loved, supported, and understood by the bishops.
Another concrete account of the stark realities of sexual abuse is found in the USCCB’s published pamphlet “Building a Culture of Healing with the Magisterial Teachings.”67 It begins with a clear directive for Catholic ministry on sexual abuse:
To build a culture of healing requires recognizing the culture of abuse that contributes to sexual abuse. This culture of abuse shames its victims and abuses power to silence the truth of Jesus’ teachings. Also words that blame victims inappropriately are used in the culture of abuse in our everyday language. Such words, although not necessarily intentional, do perpetuate the harmful myth that sexual abuse includes the victim’s participation and consent in their own abuse. The reality is that abuse is never the fault of the victim, and they should never be shamed into thinking it was.68
This directive is crucial for recognizing and assisting the victims of rape, who often feel intense guilt despite their lack of responsibility for what has occurred.69 The pamphlet continues on to quote the Catechism of the Catholic Church, which defines rape as “the forcible violation of the sexual intimacy of another person” which “causes grave damage that can mark the victim for life.”70 This appears to be a direct reference to the trauma undergone by rape victims and the lasting symptoms the victims undergo, which will “mark them for life.” This further demonstrates both the USCCB’s apparently well-informed perspective on rape-induced trauma and its devotion to ministering to victims of rape from a standpoint of loving service rooted in Christ’s teachings.
As there are approximately 433,648 new victims of rape and sexual assault each year in the United States, to publish resources on Church doctrine and health information regarding rape and trauma—even if not in the exact terms of PTSD—is hugely beneficial to a significant portion of the Catholic congregation in America.71 However, any information on the definitive symptoms and consequences of trauma or links to resources that provide support to victims of rape are noticeably absent from the site; in order to fully and clearly present the truth of trauma and the painful realities victims will undergo, the USCCB must clearly connect rape with diagnosable trauma so that those exhibiting symptoms may fully understand their condition.
The next type of trauma evaluated is closely linked to rape, although the victim differs greatly; childhood sexual abuse has become a well-documented occurrence within the American Catholic Church, especially since the publication of the grand jury report on the sexual abuse of minors by members of the Catholic Church in Pennsylvanian dioceses.72 Although members of the Church hierarchy have been known to bury information on abuses taking place throughout the nation, the bishops now recognize the need to address this crisis and work to end the cycle of abuse. In order to do so, the USCCB has acknowledged that sharing information on the sexual abuse of minors can only aid the effort to end its occurrence—thus, the Conference provides a great deal of resources on the effects of abuse, the reasons it occurs, and the steps that must be taken to prevent its occurrence.73
The primary source published by the USCCB on child sexual abuse is the Charter for the Protection of Children and Young People, published first in 2005 after the large media upheaval regarding child sexual abuse in the Boston area and since updated in response to other crises. While the Charter marks an admirable movement by the USCCB to end child sexual abuse in the Church, the document noticeably lacks any concrete references to the psychological effects of abuse upon the child victims. As the document that has served for almost fifteen years as the basis for the Church’s initiatives to end this tragedy, this is a de nite misstep.74 However, there are a number of other documents that make up for this gap. At the symposium held in February of 2012 by the Pontifical Gregorian University and attended by many representatives of the USCCB, no fewer than fifteen papers were presented on the subject of child sexual abuse within the Church.75 Of these, a handful directly address the effects of abuse on the victims. “The True Cost of the Crisis – Piercings to the Heart of the Church” was presented by the National Catholic Risk Retention Group under the name of VIRTUS, a system of programs intended to prevent “wrong- doing” within the Catholic Church and its associate organizations.76
This article shows profound insight into the realities of sexual abuse within the Church, not as a scandal or a great show of hypocrisy but as a tragedy that burdens thousands of victims’ lives for many years. Although it does discuss the various direct costs involving financial restitution and loss of members, the article directly addresses the victimization of those who were abused and the many effects the trauma has on their lives. It explains: “Victims typically exhibit after-effects of abuse in seven distinct but overlapping categories: emotional reactions; post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD); self-perceptions; physical and biomedical effects; sexual effects; interpersonal effects; and social functioning.”77 After continuing on to give a comprehensive list of any and all symptoms a victim may exhibit—both psychological and physiological—the section on victimization concludes:
Even in victims who “recover,” they are always occasionally haunted by the experience of what they endured (memory artifacts)...We “Rejoice in Hope” [Romans 12:12] each time we encounter victims who have moved through surviving and ultimately thriving in our Church. Indeed, many have healed through the thousands of programs run throughout the world to assist those who have been abused. This is our prayer for every victim—that they not remain chained to their victimization, rather to move to becoming the best they can be—affirmed, supported, and viable members of our communities.78
This acknowledgment of the awful and overwhelming reactions among victims of childhood sexual abuse is admirable, showing clear attunement within the USCCB to the true effects of trauma in their congregation’s lives. By recognizing that trauma undergone by minors affects their lives for many years to come, the Conference is better prepared to minister to those who have been abused and to recognize the symptoms of abuse in its congregation, hopefully ending the cycle of trauma within families that so often starts in childhood abuse. Since this article was published, other reports regarding the victims of sexual abuse at the hands of clergy have been disseminated by the USCCB, many of which also provide accurate information on trauma and its effects.79
Although this initiative to provide accurate accounts of the realities of childhood sexual abuse is certainly commendable, the large-scale crisis in the American Church demanded that such an action be undertaken. This move to assist those abused by members of the Church does not account for the many other victims whose trauma did not occur at their hands. Victims of rape, war, and domestic abuse must also be ministered to and provided with resources, in addition to the victims of churchly corruption. To that end, there is one final category of trauma to be evaluated within the USCCB’s resources: domestic violence.
Violence between spouses is an experience suffered by many—both men and women—and is not often correctly recognized within American society. The USCCB addresses this issue directly in its published article “When I Call for Help: A Pastoral Response to Domestic Violence Against Women.”80 Even more so than the documents on rape or childhood abuse, this article shows a remarkable level of insight into the realities of trauma for victims of domestic abuse. The Conference makes clear the fact that violence in any form, be it physical, sexual, psychological, or verbal, constitutes domestic violence.81 This wide-ranging classification of abuses is not often recognized in society, as domestic violence is usually expected to constitute only physical altercations.82 Furthermore, the article explains that domestic violence can be committed by a woman against her male partner; however, since eighty-five percent of the victims of domestic abuse are women, this document focuses primarily on their needs.83 It concludes by telling Catholic women that they should not stay with their abusive partners in order to protect the Church teachings on the permanence of marriage—instead, they must take action to find safety and, if they decide to leave permanently, recognize that an annulment may be possible.84 As physical and emotional separation from the abusive spouse may be the only means toward the healing of trauma, the USCCB’s clarification of Church doctrine on abusive marriages shows its awareness of the realities of trauma and its effects on its victims.85 In addition to this insightful information on the realities of domestic abuse in America, this article addresses not only the trauma undergone by the victimized woman in the form of battered woman syndrome but also the trauma undergone by the children in the home. It explains:
Violence against women in the home has serious repercussions for children. Over 50 percent of men who abuse their wives also beat their children. Children who grow up in violent homes are more likely to develop alcohol and drug addictions and to become abusers themselves. The stage is set for a cycle of violence that may continue from generation to generation.86
This inclusion echoes clearly the warnings given by the CDC in the ACE test, that children who experience trauma against either themselves or loved ones will suffer greatly and potentially perpetuate the cycle of abuse in their own families. To publish this information is a huge step forward for the USCCB in recognizing the prevalence of trauma in society, especially within their congregation.
CONCLUSIONS
In the thirteenth chapter of her book Trauma and Recovery, Judith Herman explains that the key element for the healing of trauma is social support.87 Those who have been traumatized typically have a shattered sense of self, feelings of helplessness, constant terror, and a complete lack of human connection.88 In order to experience healing by reestablishing ownership of their body and mind, as van der Kolk says, victims require safety, empathy, and—most of all—recognition of the trauma they underwent.89 This recognition is crucial for healing, as it allows the victim to feel seen, their pain to be acknowledged, and a sense of their place within the world to be regained. Recognition of trauma allows a victim to reconcile their “rational and emotional brains,” so that they may once again “feel in charge of how [they] respond and how [they] conduct [their] life.”90
By recognizing the deeply painful experiences undergone by victims of trauma, the Catholic Church enables the victims within its congregation to heal. Even more helpful is the publishing of information regarding traumatic events and the symptoms they create, so that people displaying those effects may not only gain a greater awareness of their condition but also find solace and support within the Church, whose mission is to minister with great love to its flock. Besides the recognition of trauma and the offering of resources, the USCCB can use its spiritual ministry to directly influence the healing of trauma victims. In a chapter for the book Traumatic Stress and Long-Term Recovery, Anna R. Harper and Kenneth I. Pargament address the benefits religious belief provides for victims:
In times of crisis, sacred dimensions of life become especially salient. Religion and spirituality are often embedded within multiple aspects of the posttraumatic recovery process, including the ways in which people understand crises, the methods they select to cope with adversity, and the short- and long-term outcomes of trauma. For many, religion and spirituality offer promising pathways to long-term posttraumatic adjustment and growth.91
Thus, the Catholic Church in America can do more than provide recognition and resources for victims of trauma; through spiritual ministry directed toward interaction with the symptoms of PTSD, the Church can provide greater healing and spiritual growth for its hurting members.
The Catholic Church, as that which endeavors to communicate the fullness of truth and bring comfort to the lives of the afflicted, has a responsibility to minister to those affected by trauma and accurately convey information on an experience so relevant to many Catholics’ lives. Although the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops provides insightful resources on traumatic events such as childhood sexual abuse and domestic violence, it should minister more effectively to those experiencing other forms of trauma. By not offering resources on the symptoms of trauma and how to identify and manage them, the USCCB fails to help the many members of its congregation who seek solace and assistance from the Church; these victims will be unable to receive information on what afflicts them and are, essentially, turned away in their suffering to seek assistance elsewhere. The USCCB must not allow anyone to be turned away—it must make the resources needed for healing available to those who are in pain. In order to fulfill the Church’s mission of right teaching and charitable ministry, an initiative must be undertaken by the face of the Catholic Church in America, the USCCB, not only to understand the symptoms of trauma and its painful effects on victims but also to offer resources for those victims to facilitate their healing. Only then will the many Catholics affected by trauma find healing within their Church and will hope be kindled for an end to the cycle of abuse in American families.
