That meeting occurred in early December and was reported on by the Anglican Journal\u00a0 on December the 9th.<\/p>\n
In an ironic twist that would be difficult to invent, the article is now the victim of an NDA: it has vanished and been replaced with the following<\/a>:<\/p>\n Of course, not much really disappears from the Internet so, for your edification, here is the article:<\/p>\n It took Julie Macfarlane, now a retired professor of law at the University of Windsor, four decades to come forward about the sexual abuse she suffered at the hands of a Church of England priest when she was a teenager. So when the church asked her to sign a non-disclosure agreement (NDA), she refused.<\/p>\n \u201cI said immediately to my lawyer that I\u2019d spent 40 years keeping this a secret and I wasn\u2019t going to sign an NDA now,\u201d she said. The church did not pursue it any further, she said, and Macfarlane insisted on personally drafting new guidelines for NDA use to be used by Ecclesiastical Insurance as part of her eventual settlement.<\/p>\n Julie Macfarlane Photo: Braunte Petric<\/p>\n Spurred by that first-hand experience, Macfarlane has since spent years urging churches, universities and other institutions to end the use of NDAs in cases of misconduct, abuse, harassment or discrimination with the organization she co-founded, Can\u2019t Buy My Silence (CBMS). She has worked with Anglicans in Australia, the United Kingdom and Canada, including with the Rev. Jeffrey Metcalfe, who brought a resolution to June\u2019s General Synod asking the national church to take its own stand against the misuse of NDAs.<\/p>\n Council of General Synod (CoGS) has now reopened discussion of that resolution, which called the church to scrap the use of non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) in cases of misconduct, discrimination or harassment. Metcalfe\u2019s original resolution\u00a0was the subject of intense discussion<\/a>\u00a0at June\u2019s General Synod gathering after Canon (lay) Clare Burns, chancellor of General Synod, pointed out several clauses which she said posed problems of legal and insurance liability. The motion was deferred to CoGS, whose members picked it up at the council\u2019s meeting this November.<\/p>\n In an informal breakout group discussion, CoGS members outlined the need for further information on the original purpose of the resolution and a clear breakdown of the specific dangers its current draft posed as discussed at General Synod. They also discussed what the role of the national church body should be in the discussion around NDAs. Summarizing on behalf of his table group, deputy prolocutor Brian Lee said General Synod\u2019s role was to ensure that the intent of the resolution was implemented while accounting for any liability concerns involved.<\/p>\n \u201cWe need to keep the objective while getting rid of the pitfall,\u201d he said. \u201c[And also] not take too much of the fang out of it.\u201d<\/p>\n Several dioceses across the Anglican Church of Canada are in the process of creating or passing resolutions curtailing or banning the use of NDAs.<\/p>\n When the original resolution was tabled in June, Burns (who has announced her intention to resign as chancellor by the end of 2025<\/a>) pointed out several clauses she said were either impossible to implement or could expose the church to lawsuits. For example, one section instructed the church not to use NDAs unless the complainant asked for one \u201cafter having had the opportunity to obtain independent legal advice that includes advice on alternative means to protect the confidentiality of their personal information.\u201d It is impossible for the church to verify the specifics of any advice a complainant receives from a lawyer, she said, as any such advice would be covered by attorney-client privilege.<\/p>\n Another clause directed the primate and officers of General Synod to contact any previous complainants and advertise the availability of pastoral support. Contacting a complainant after a settlement had been made could be a breach of the terms of the settlement, said Burns. Also, she added, pastoral supports are already part of any settlements the church makes with complainants in cases of misconduct. Reaching out to offer additional supports could be construed as saying that not enough had been offered to begin with, which she said might open the church to liability.<\/p>\n \u201cIt\u2019s tantamount to saying that somehow we think more than what we\u2019ve already done is needed. Our insurers are not going to let us do that. Or what they\u2019re going to say to us is, \u2018If you do it, you are not insured for whatever happens next,\u2019\u201d she said.<\/p>\n Burns said to her knowledge, General Synod has not requested any complainant sign a non-disclosure agreement at any time during the past 25 years. Speaking to CoGS in November, she also clarified that NDAs are distinct from non-disparagement clauses. The latter are not legally binding in the way NDAs are, she told CoGS. But she said the church does use them as a way of reminding signatories that the intent of a settlement is to put any further claims against the church to rest.<\/p>\n In June, Burns recommended the resolution be amended to include the phrase \u201csubject to legal advice\u201d in some sections she pointed out as problematic, allowing the church some discretion about how to implement them. The resolution\u2019s mover and seconder, Metcalfe and Bishop Sandra Fyfe, of the diocese of Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island, declined this phrasing due to concerns the church\u2019s lawyers could be more likely to prioritize protecting the institution over the purpose of the resolution.<\/p>\n Nevertheless, Metcalfe told the\u00a0Anglican Journal\u00a0<\/em>he is open to any good faith effort to redraft the resolution. He said he hopes any such redrafting reflects the broad agreement he heard at General Synod that many Anglicans want to prevent and repudiate any misuse of NDAs.<\/p>\n \u201cI don\u2019t think the chancellor, I don\u2019t think Clare, would disagree with that,\u201d he said. \u201cI think it\u2019s totally fair to say that the legislation we put forward is not perfect. I think my interest will be to see how the spirit of what it\u2019s trying to put forward can be taken up in a way that helps achieve that spirit.\u201d<\/p>\n Metcalfe\u2019s home diocese of Quebec is one of several across the country which have drafted or are in the process of drafting similar resolutions ending or limiting their use of NDAs. Quebec\u2019s resolution, passed in May, endorsed the principles embodied in\u2014and asks its bishop to sign\u2014the \u201cfaith pledge\u201d put forward by anti-NDA nonprofit Can\u2019t Buy My Silence (CBMS). It reads, in part, \u201cWe pledge never to request another party to submit to an NDA to stop them from raising complaints or discussing incidents of sexual harassment, abuse, or misconduct, discrimination, retaliation of bullying or other harassment.\u201d<\/p>\n The diocese of Edmonton\u2019s new safe church policy likewise contains language promising it will, \u201cwhen appropriate, seek to limit the usage of nondisclosure agreements as a condition for the resolving or settling of a complaint.\u201d<\/p>\n The\u00a0Anglican Journal<\/em>\u00a0has also confirmed that the ecclesiastical provinces of British Columbia and Yukon and of Northern Lights are working on policies of their own.<\/p>\n The diocese of Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island, meanwhile, has already passed a resolution ending its use of NDAs in cases of misconduct and endorsing CBMS\u2019s faith pledge. It was not a difficult decision to make, said Cynthia Pilichos, the mover of the resolution and a member of the diocesan social justice organization Anglicans Powering Potential. That was in part because the use of NDAs is already illegal in Prince Edward Island in cases of discrimination, harassment or sexual misconduct unless the complainant asks for one. As a result, she said, the diocese cannot use them in that part of its coverage area anyway. And it has a choice whether it wants to look like it is ahead of the law in Nova Scotia or just doing what it is required to, she said.<\/p>\n \u201cI think the church doesn\u2019t make itself look very good when it\u2019s hesitating on things like that. They don\u2019t have a good track record with respect to sexual misconduct \u2026 with respect to the residential schools and the abuse and misconduct there.\u201d<\/p>\n Pilichos said she first became interested in what she said is the harm NDAs can do when attending a talk at her local YWCA by Macfarlane and CBMS.\u00a0 Macfarlane founded CBMS with Zelda Perkins, a former assistant of former film producer Harvey Weinstein, who has been convicted of rape and accused of more crimes by dozens of women. The organization advocates for reform in the use of NDAs and publishes research on the impacts they have on complainants who sign them.<\/p>\n According to\u00a0a report<\/a>\u00a0published on its website, 93 per cent of respondents to a survey of people who either had signed an NDA or who \u201ccouldn\u2019t say [if they had] for legal reasons\u201d reported mental health impacts from having signed one. Respondents reported effects including anxiety, isolation and ongoing trauma. \u201cThe pressure to stay silent can exacerbate mental health issues, including depression and PTSD,\u201d the report read.<\/p>\n While NDAs do not prevent signatories from speaking to therapists, counselors or trusted loved ones about their experiences, Macfarlane told the\u00a0Journal,\u00a0<\/em>many either do not realize that or feel honour-bound to silence. The lawyers and organizations who use NDAs are not always aware of these impacts, she said.<\/p>\n \u201c[Because] they\u2019ve signed something, they feel obligated. And also, of course, there\u2019s the threat that if they break it, they could lose whatever compensation they\u2019ve received. So when I explain that to lawyers, 95% of them are like, \u2018Oh my goodness, I had no idea.\u2019\u201d<\/p>\n CBMS\u2019s faith pledge is one of several pledges the organization has created, with others targeted at universities, corporations and unions. They\u2019re intended to put pressure on governments to push the issue forward by building a moral consensus, she said. Legal jurisdictions from P.E.I. to Texas, the United Kingdom and Australia have introduced bills banning NDA use in misconduct and discrimination cases, she added. So signing the pledge also offers organizations an opportunity to demonstrate their own concern over the issue before legislation reaches their jurisdictions, she said.<\/p>\n \u201cTo say, \u2018Yes, we didn\u2019t actually realize these were harmful and we\u2019re not going to do them any longer\u2019 \u2026 looks better than saying, \u2018Okay, we\u2019re going to stop doing it now because it\u2019s illegal,\u2019\u201d Macfarlane said.<\/p>\n Karen Webb, chancellor of the ecclesiastical province of the Northern Lights and a member of the\u00a0Anglican Journal\u2019s<\/em>\u00a0editorial board, said the church has more to gain reputationally by promising not to use NDAs than it does by keeping them as an option. In the past, organizations have used them to try to prevent damaging allegations from going public, she said. But today, they make an organization look like it has something to hide while social media allows rumours to circulate anyway, she said. Conversations in her own province have concluded it is better for the church to show openness and\u2014should a rare false accusation arise\u2014prove its employee\u2019s innocence rather than try to keep the issue out of the public eye.<\/p>\n Regarding the potential liability issues Burns pointed out in her speech at Synod, Macfarlane pointed to several churches which have made similar resolutions on NDAs, including the Anglican Church of Australia. Its synod passed a 2024 resolution against using NDAs and subsequently sent out an apology to all its past signatories, she said.<\/p>\n She could see why it might be a concern from a lawyer\u2019s perspective that past signatories might take the offer of pastoral care recommended in the June draft of the resolution as an admission that not enough had been offered during settlement, she said. But she added that neither the Anglican Church of Australia nor any of the other institutions who have signed a CBMS pledge have so far had any problems with liability or anger from previous complainants. Instead, she said, not feeling silenced has given them less reason to be angry and less reason to take to social media with their grievances. \u201cLawyers are trained to be catastrophists,\u201d she said. \u201cSo they put everything they can possibly think of into an agreement just in case there\u2019s a 1 per cent chance.\u201d This is also why she believes including the phrase \u201csubject to legal advice\u201d would render any resolution useless, she said\u2014lawyers are likely to recommend every precaution available, including NDAs.<\/p>\n Asked to comment by the\u00a0Anglican Journal,\u00a0<\/em>Burns replied to this point saying \u201cProfessor Macfarlane may find it unlikely that someone would sue but my job is to identify risks to the [General Synod], which I did.\u201d She reiterated that the General Synod has not sought an NDA in any case during her time as chancellor or vice chancellor. Throughout the process, Burns has not made any statement to the\u00a0Journal,\u00a0<\/em>General Synod or CoGS on how church leaders should legislate on NDAs beyond her comments on the problems she says are raised by the phrasing of the resolution on them.<\/p>\n At CoGS, members also mentioned that General Synod could play a role in leading a conversation on NDAs for dioceses and provinces across the Anglican Church of Canada with its resolution. However, decisions made at the national church are not binding on individual dioceses, which are free to make their own policies.<\/p>\n Correction: This article has been emended from an earlier version, which incorrectly stated that Burns had not made any comments to the Journal, General Synod or CoGS related to NDAs other than the problems she said are raised by the phrasing of the resolution.<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" NDA\u2019s have been used by the church to prevent victims of sexual abuse and other misconduct from discussing the abuse, presumably after reaching a settlement with the church. Pressuring a victim to sign an NDA seems to me to be … Continue reading ![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.anglicansamizdat.net\/wordpress\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/2025-12-12_221947-1024x822.jpg\")
<\/p>\n\n
CoGS debates resolution on non-disclosure agreements<\/h1>\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.anglicansamizdat.net\/wordpress\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/Picture1.jpg\")
<\/p>\n