“Righteous” reputations of churches that don’t care (Protestant Caucus)

Religion News Service ^ | Feb 28, 2015 | Boz Tchividjian

[Gamecock]

Earlier this week, the Dallas Observer published a cover story about a former minister who was recently convicted of sexually abusing children in Mississippi. According to the article, prior to this offender getting caught for these crimes, he served as a youth minister in a Dallas area megachurch. The story reports that while serving in that position, a minor who had been part of the youth group stepped forward and disclosed to another pastor on staff that this individual had sexually abused him. The article reported that instead of reporting the youth minister to the police, the megachurch allowed him to leave town where he eventually found employment at another church. Not only did the church fail to report the offense and warn others about this offender, but it made no effort to find out if there were others who may have also been victimized.

Why do so many churches fail to do the right thing when they learn that one of their own has been accused of sexual abuse? All too often it’s because the victimized are repeatedly overshadowed by the need to protect a “righteous” reputation.  I’m afraid it’s a rationale embraced by so many church leaders because it’s convenient and sounds so “godly”. Here is an example of this distorted thought process:

The reputation of the church will be damaged when the public learns that it employed an alleged child molester -> a church whose reputation is damaged will lose members -> a church that loses members is a church that loses income -> a church that loses income is a church that will be required to tighten it’s budget, including reducing salaries and laying off staff -> a dwindling church is a church that has less relevance in the community -> a church that has less relevance in the community is a church that is failing to impact the world for Jesus.

Tragically, this type of response to the evils of abuse destroys lives, emboldens offenders, and produces churches that are rotting at the core. There’s nothing “righteous” about it.

What is the right thing to do when a church learns that one of its own has been accused of victimizing a child? First and foremost, it must immediately turn its focus and care away from institutional reputation and towards the victimized and the vulnerable.   Though there are multitudes of ways this can be done, let me suggest three basic first steps for a church that cares:

1. Caring for the victim: A church that cares will encourage and assist the victim to immediately report the crime to the police, regardless of the consequences such a report will have upon the church’s reputation. A church that cares will immediately remove the alleged offender from the church staff and prohibit him/her from being on the church premises. A victim should never have to fear encountering this offender in the place that should be the safest. A church that cares will work tirelessly to connect the victim and his/her family with qualified and professional assistance and provide the necessary financial resources for such assistance…with no strings attached.
   

   Dark & velvet sky – courtesy of Ani-Bee via Flickr (Image source)

2. Caring for other potential victims: A church that cares will inform its members of the allegations knowing that sexual offenders often have many victims. It will also encourage them to immediately report any suspected abuse to the police. A church that cares will not limit its efforts to only current members. It will reach out to those who previously attended the church and had interactions with the perpetrator and may have been targeted for abuse. A church that cares will not sleep until each and every person victimized by the offender has been found. A church that cares will offer to provide any newly discovered victims the resources to receive any needed professional assistance.

3. Caring for other survivors within the church: A church that cares will work to understand the traumatizing impact sexual abuse disclosures have upon other abuse survivors within the church, some whom have never told anyone about their prior abuse. A church that cares will help to facilitate the development of a survivor support network and work to assist these survivors obtain professional assistance.

How would things be different if more churches cared by encouraging and assisting victims to report these crimes to the police? How would things be different if more churches cared by informing their congregations about the allegations made against tone of their own, knowing that there may be other victims? How would things be different if more churches cared by making efforts to locate and notify former families of the church about an alleged offender who had access to their children? How would things be different if more churches cared by reaching out to other survivors in their congregations who are struggling after hearing about an allegation of sexual abuse? How would things be different if more churches simply cared?

Though I don’t know the answer to all of these difficult and painful questions, I do know that a caring church reflects Jesus by treasuring, protecting, and empowering the victimized and the vulnerable.

[Gamecock]

Protestant Caucus

Remember the rules!
Protestants only!
Don't discuss other faith groups outside of the "Protestant umbrella!"

[aMorePerfectUnion]

Good post

[Gamecock]

The article reported that instead of reporting the youth minister to the police, the megachurch allowed him to leave town where he eventually found employment at another church

I think this reflects one of the problems of non-denominational churches. In most denominations you can't simply change churches. In my own denomination, even as a member, you are required to have a letter of transfer from your old church. Keeps those undergoing church disciple from jumping from church to church.

[Alex Murphy]

I think this reflects one of the problems of non-denominational churches. In most denominations you can't simply change churches. In my own denomination, even as a member, you are required to have a letter of transfer from your old church. Keeps those undergoing church disciple from jumping from church to church

This is a great point. The biggest issue with non-denoms IMO is accountability, whether it's to an organization or even to a written Statement of Faith. They simply don't have an accountability to anyone higher than themselves, and therefore nothing external to keep them in check morally and theologically, and nothing in writing that informs the congregation about what is actually believed by the institution and it's pastorate.

[RnMomof7]

I think I have recounted this before.. I belonged to a small church where the music leader was accused of "fondling" a preteens breast

He was immediately removed from his ministry and the pastor told the entire congregation of the event and reported it to the police.. no cover up ...

[CynicalBear]

>>They simply don't have an accountability to anyone higher than themselves, and therefore nothing external to keep them in check morally and theologically<<

It seems to me that the underlying premise to that statement is in error and I wonder if you see that the statement itself is correct regardless. The "accountability" should be to Christ and His written word. Creating a hierarchy of so called "denominations" is Nicolaitanism. It's basically the idea of a "ruling class" over the people. Christ spoke against it in Matthew 20:26 and again in Revelation.

So while your statement is correct in that they don't recognize the authority of Christ the authority of a ruling class is as much in error.

[CynicalBear]

>>He was immediately removed from his ministry and the pastor told the entire congregation of the event and reported it to the police.. no cover up ...<<

That's exactly the way it should be handled.

[Mr Rogers]

When asked, Jesus said “Church discipline is maintained by working things up the chain of command...”

At least among Baptists, the hiring of a new pastor requires a vote by either the deacons or the congregation as a whole. It is upon them to exercise due diligence...and they are the ones who will suffer if they do not.

[chuckles]

I didn't see the perps new church address. Was he Baptist or non denom? I came out of Baptists to non denominational and they do background checks and get letters from previous employers. I suppose you could get into a cult meeting in a garage with no paperwork, but most churches of any size need something. This stuff is just too wide spread to ignore anymore. One problem, ( IMHO) is the spread of homosexuality. They are not chastised in the general public anymore, so you could get one applying for youth minister and not really find out if he/she doesn't volunteer info. It would be easy to have a job or come from teaching and pass yourself off as normal unless you have hurt someone and police were called. What we find is a youth leader that is watched like a hawk around young girls, but no one cares if he hangs with the boys, so no one watches. A female could start the girls softball team and no one would care,...easy pickings.

I hate to say it but any adult WANTING to work with young people should be double watched no matter the setup.

[metmom]

And the recommendations are all Scripturally sound.

We are told in 1 Corinthians how to deal with immorality within the church.

The biggest problem with the whole issue is how it’s dealt with. It’s virtually impossible to make any guarantees that a person perpetrating these kinds of crimes can be stopped before hand.

However, once it’s known, there’s simply no excuse for not dealing with it in the correct way and moving the guy around is NOT the right way.