A Survivor's Call for Soul Survivor to Truly Face Its Past
The story of Soul Survivor, once one of the most influential evangelical youth ministries in the UK, is not simply a tale of one man's abuse. It is a story of institutional failure, misplaced loyalty, cultural entrenchment, and the ongoing harm that survivors continue to live with. As someone who has survived the fallout of this scandal, I am asking not just for acknowledgment, but for deep, structural engagement with those harmed, and for Soul Survivor's leadership to respond with honesty rather than carefully curated messages and press statements.
What Happened - The Facts We Cannot Ignore
In 2023, safeguarding concerns relating to Mike Pilavachi, the founder of Soul Survivor, became public and sparked widespread scrutiny. Pilavachi had been a charismatic evangelical leader for decades, well known within the UK and internationally. The Church of England's National Safeguarding Team and the Diocese of St. Albans found substantiated safeguarding concerns spanning some 40 years of ministry, concluding that Pilavachi abused his spiritual authority, exercised coercive and controlling behaviour, and engaged in inappropriate physical conduct with young men — including wrestling and massages framed as "mentorship."
The formal investigation described Pilavachi's behaviour as deeply inappropriate and harmful. It was not a quirky church practice - it was recognised as abuse of power, with serious psychological effects on those involved. Yet, when he resigned from Soul Survivor, and later from the Church of England, there has been no significant moment of public reckoning or restorative justice involving his victims.
Institutional Response: Too Little, Too Late
Soul Survivor’s official responses have followed a now-familiar institutional pattern: official statements expressing "sadness" and regret, announcements of investigations, and assurances that lessons will be learned but little concrete, survivor-centred action. The organisation commissioned an "independent" review led by Fiona Scolding KC, which confirmed abusive behaviour but was widely criticised for its limited scope, lack of transparency, and minimal survivor engagement. Despite public statements and the publication of an executive summary, the narrative remains tightly controlled by Soul Survivor's leadership - framed more around protecting the organisation's continuity, reputation, and donor base than confronting deep cultural failures.
The Leadership That Looked the Other Way
The scandal is not solely about Pilavachi. A damning truth is this: many within Soul Survivor's leadership and wider evangelical networks either knew something was wrong or were told, and did not act. Leadership structures tolerated or ignored troubling behaviour for decades, privileging Pilavachi's celebrity status and drawing strength from his public persona rather than asking tough questions behind closed doors. Critics have pointed out that this was never just about one man's misconduct, it was about a culture that elevated leaders to near-untouchable status, stifled dissent, and valued institutional preservation over safeguarding the vulnerable. Remaining silent when allegations first surfaced, or responding with vague corporate language, is not neutrality. It is complicity.
Survivors Still Bear the Cost
Articles on SoulSurvived.org detail what many church statements avoid: the enduring harm to individuals, the spiritual confusion, psychological scarring, and loss of trust in church communities. Survivors speak of feeling ignored, dismissed, or tokenised, with institutional responses framed around reputation management rather than genuine empathy. One of the most painful omissions in the official response is the absence of any platform for survivors to be heard fully and publicly, on their own terms. There has been no forum for victim impact statements. No open, facilitated space where healing begins with being heard rather than buried behind press releases.
This matters because statements of regret cannot undo trauma - only acknowledgment, listening, and meaningful restitution can begin to address harm.
A Critical Question No One Is Asking
Over and over, Soul Survivor's leadership has used language like "we are committed to learning lessons" and "we are truly sorry." But apology without demonstrable action is inadequate.
So ask this:
When will Soul Survivor provide a public space for survivors to tell their stories?
Not behind closed doors, not in a grudging "listening session," but in a transparent, survivor-centred forum, where the voices of those harmed are recognised as central to the church's reckoning, not marginal to it. Any attempt to move forward without this constitutes:
A refusal to engage with the real cost of harm,
A prioritisation of reputation over restoration, and
A continuation of the mechanism that silenced survivors for decades.
What True Accountability Must Look Like
If Soul Survivor and the broader church leadership around it truly wants to move beyond platitudes, then the following must be on the table:
1. A Public Reckoning, Not a Press Release
A public, survivor-centric forum where individuals can choose to speak, with rigorous safeguarding and emotional support in place, must happen. This is not "media fodder"; it is restorative justice.
2. Transparency Beyond Selective Publishing
Make every part of the independent review, communications, and leadership responses accessible - not just a sanitised executive summary.
3. Structural Reform with Oversight
Independent governance outside the current leadership network must be instituted, with clear safeguarding, whistle-blower protection, and external review to prevent future pathogenic leadership cultures.
4. Committing Resources to Survivor Support
Not token referrals. Not handing people off to third-party services with a "thank you for your courage." Comprehensive, long-term counselling, compensation, and community support must be resourced and sustained.
5. Leadership Accountability
Not merely symbolic "stepping back," but clear examination of what senior leaders knew, when they knew it, and the role their inaction played in enabling harm.
The Core Issue: Culture Over Covers-Ups
The underlying failure was not merely human frailty. It was a culture that idolised charismatic leadership, resisted accountability, and weaponised loyalty. That culture continues to this day if leadership equates "continuity" with "healing" without deeply engaging those who were harmed. The evangelical emphasis on authority and submission cannot override the evangelical command to protect the vulnerable. When systems choose reputation over people, they replicate harm. Soul Survivor must transform from an institution defensive about its legacy to one that embraces radical honesty, survivor empowerment, and systemic transformation.
Conclusion: A Call to Real Engagement
To every leader, trustee, and voice within Soul Survivor and its wider network: the question is not "What is the minimal statement we must issue?" The question is:
What does justice look like for those whose lives were altered irrevocably by the very ministry that promised life and hope?
The answer is not more words. It is action.
Until Soul Survivor stops apologising about itself and starts engaging with the voices it has silenced, it will remain trapped in the same culture that allowed abuse to thrive.
Not reconciliation built on corporate messaging.
Not reform engineered around optics.
Not healing that leaves survivors invisible.
But real community shaped by truth, listening, accountability, and change.