What Would You Do? (Sensitive/Not family-friendly)

I wouldn't venture to say he's not going to answer you. He keeps avoiding this question.

I'm torn on the issue. We had a sex offender in our small church, and it was relatively known. He stayed away from kids, but ultimately he ended up leaving.

I felt for the guy, simply because he wanted to get as right with God as he could. He was repentant, and when he and I became more acquainted he was up front with me about it.

I guess my thought would be this: In the state I live in (and I think it's all 50 states, but I don't know for sure)...sex offenders are registered. By law they have to. Since this is a law, every person in that church (and city) has a right to know that John Doe is a sex offender.

It's how that information is presented that is key. No matter what church you go to, a person with this history is going to create animosity. That is straight up human nature, no way around it. But this man should be afforded the same opportunity and access to the ministries that everyone else in that church has, because his spirtual growth is just as important.

But a penalty (everlasting) for his crime/sin is the role he can portray in the church. That is something he'll have to live with no matter where he goes. That kind of crime (no matter the reason) should keep him from being a leader in most (if not all) aspects of the church.

 

I will later.

 

Sure they can. Just so that they are not allowed to handle the finances or be near the cash. But does this former thief blame his victims for being a thief?

It depends on the situation. If the former adulterer blames the person they had an affair with---probably no.

Murderers can go to church services where they belong--in prison.
Lot's of nice prison ministries. We're all safer with murderers behind bars. And I really think that.

Again, this is a "what would you do" thread. And I have stated what I would do. At the end of the day, it is up to the local body whether to accept or reject membership of anyone whether they be a law abiding citized or a convicted _____fill in the blank_______.

In any case, I've done my best to answer your questions. Have great weekend.

 

But Mark_13 said in Christian love, abcgrad. That makes it ok.
"I mean this in Christian love" gives the speaker or writer the same privileges as the phrase "bless his/her heart." :laugh:

It is quite obvious that we all have strong opinions on this. I'm not mad at anyone for theirs.

But I stand by my original point: it is the Pastor's job to protect the sheep from the wolves.

 

At the end of the day, Batt4Christ is the only person in this thread who really knows what's going on. He can explain it to the best of his ability, but unless any of us are at that Church and know what's going on, it makes it really hard to give advice.

Batt...pray. Simple as that. And I know I'm not telling you something that you don't already know.

 

The answer is really quite simple. The church is to be a place of reconciliation, healing, forgiveness and restoring. He has dealt with his sins, seems with both the law of the land, and with his Maker. We are called to restore those who fall, not continue to condemn them for sins of the past.

 

I see that several are still in favor of pretending everything is fine because jail time was served, and letting this man remain in the congregation as is. If our church were to do that, our insurance company would drop us immediately. Maybe we are in a much more litigious area, but due to the large number of sexual lawsuits involving churches in the Northwest, that is part of our coverage. Every staff member and volunteer is required to have a background check in order to do anything within the church (body, not just building). If we knowingly let a registered sex offender attend any gathering with children, we will lose our insurance immediately. Which means our doors would be locked and no more church.

 

Just FYI, no insurance carrier would drop any church for having attenders who have less than clean past records. It doesn't work that way.

 

Incredible reply. Sad state we find ourselves in when we reject those we are called to restore in order to maintain insurance. "No insurance, no church." All I can say is WOW.

 

Well, we weren't even one of the churches being targeted with allegations, but we are on a very short leash with our insurance company. And a bit of confusion almost shut us down last summer. We are being watched closely. It took about a year working with our convention to put the requirements into practice.

 

Sure it is. At least the answer is. Just follow what the Bible says about restoring one over taken in a fault.

You say you believe it, but you wouldn't practice it in this case apparently.

Seems for the past 6 years since being released, the man, according to the OP, has given evidence of dealing with it fairly well. Perhaps not according to what YOU might suggest is "dealing" with it, but nevertheless, he is dealing with it. If he blames his ex wife for what he did, he needs to be counseled by the appropriate person to help him see that his choices lie directly in his own hand. This would be part of the restoring process.

Never said it was.

Yep. I'm suggesting one of those consequences shouldn't be to throw him out of the church as was advised by the leaders of his present church.

I don't disagree here. And part of protecting the children is the restoration of the man in the body of Christ.

 

Interesting. I write church insurance policies on a fairly regular basis, and this isn't even a question on our application. I wonder how many other states do this.

 

First of all, restoration can not take place without accountability and humility. Concealing the facts and blaming others for his sin indicates he wants to be restored his way, not God's way. That is, he wants the perks of attending the church without being held responsible for his continual lack of repentance. He wants mercy but without justice.

Secondly, complete restoration IS NOT POSSIBLE in this case. He has no business EVER holding a place of respect or authority in the church. He cannot be "restored" back to preaching or being counted trustworthy. Unlike a thief who steals money, this man can never replace what he took from his daughter. It cannot be restored.

Third, the hard facts are that sex offenders are repeat offenders. Period. If you want to debate this, I would gladly challenge anyone here to prove me wrong by providing the stats or experience. It cannot be done. If you "restore" a sex offender back to the point where they were, they WILL repeat the behavior again. Even IF they are truly repentant, they must always be kept under supervision, whether they are forgiven or not. To "restore" a sex offender back to being esteemed and trusted is to do him and any potential victims, and great disservice.

 

It must be difficult to present your "hard facts", when the real facts don't back up your made up ones.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=misunderstood-crimes

http://www.livescience.com/776-predator-panic-reality-check-sex-offenders.html

http://www.sexoffender.com/sorecidivism_review.html


So much for all sex offenders being repeat offenders.

 

This man's sin does not exist in God's eyes, and should not exist in anyone else's who claim to know Jesus. Anything else is fear and unbelief in redemption. This situation is exactly what one purpose of the church is for. I pray they do not fail.

 

Did you even read the OP?

 

You must be reading a different thread than me. It has been said more than once on this thread that he should not be allowed to attend church.

 

If it doesn't break any BB rules, we can debate this in the "General Discussions" area of the board so as not to go off topic on this thread.