Hermenuetics

Comments

If by restoration, you mean specific counseling, than by all means, yes, that should be for those who are trained in that area.

However the "federal agencies" are bound by law to never EVER mention Christ!! Separation of church and state, so we know that the story of forgiveness cannot come from them.

I am a registered sex offender AND a Christian. I grew up in the church and I am actually a PK as well. My story is for another day, but I certainly am vested in this story!!

I live in North Carolina as well and was told by probation that this law COULD be applied to all RSOs. My church has been very supportive during the last few years and when all of this first came out, their belief was that the church was THE BEST place for me!!

Now, I am VERY careful that I am not placed in a situation where a child could be left around me unsupervised. This is something we want to prevent to protect both the child and myself.

I am involved in our worship music, and even work on committees for publicity, etc.

This law was written so vaguely, I could be in violation of it if I fall sick and go to the hospital!! (The pediatric ward/floor is easily be within 300' of the entire hospital since that is over 10 stories!!)

I spent 2.x years in therapy in a state mandated program and from the first day I participated and made sure I was learning what they had to offer. I successfully completed my probation and therapy last year and now I attend a local men's group.

Naturally I am in contact with LOTS of RSOs (Registered Sex Offenders) and I can tell you, they need Christ AND Christians!! It is almost impossible to find work OR a place to live. Shelters will not allow RSOs to stay overnight and the registration law is causing more problems than it is solving. (Thousands are now homeless and "on the run" because they simply had no place to go)

Our Bible is FULL of sexual offenders. King David certainly is the most notorious and yet, beloved of God!

Please protect the children, BUT find a working solution so your church can minister to those who really need it.

DC

Posted By: DC | January 6, 2010 1:14 PM

Sex offenders NEED to spend some time in law-mandated counseling. There are many who would not voluntarily seek this help on their own, especially in the grips of such an offensive sin (please note: I am not saying that this sin is worse than any other, just that it has the potential to hurt far more people that what we would consider "minor" sins). And legitimate, medical/clinical counseling from a licensed therapist is something that cannot always be provided by the church - which is OK! A sex offender cannot be receptive to the grace and forgiveness of the church until he or she has had the chance to be in therapy and to genuinely start changing and healing.

I was part of a church in my youth that had an elder who molested many, many, many of us over a period of 20+ years. My church had the chance to really step up and encourage the affected families to press charges. However, the other elders took the position that "the church isn't the law" and "the church isn't a counselor" and more or less let him slip away after writing an apology note to the girl who finally brought his actions to light. What makes the matter worse is that, when a family did press charges and the elders were approached by the police to get the note he'd written, the elders demanded a subpoena. (Way to protect the children, folks.)

I am now part of a WONDERFUL church family where former RSOs who have been through counseling and/or jail time (whatever sentence they served) are more than welcome to worship; however, the elders and ministers are aware of their presence and make sure that they are never alone on the grounds, much less with children. And the RSOs that worship with us are perfectly OK with this - because they KNOW the effect of their sin on peoples' trust, and because they are reformed, they have no problem being accompanied to help keep them from temptation.

The first job of a group of elders/shepherds is to PROTECT THEIR FLOCK. There are ways to do this AND have RSOs be part of the church family. The elders of my current church family handle this dilemma with much grace and prayer, and are an example to be followed, as they try their best to follow Christ.

Posted By: MF | January 6, 2010 3:01 PM

Big difference between King David and a registered sex offender. What David did was apparently consensual; it was not the abuse of a child or a violent act against an adult. Leprosy is a disease; a sex offense is a CHOICE.

Is it worse than other sins in the sense that it is an offense against God and damning to hell? No. I deserve hell as much as any sex offender. But the consequences in broken lives is far greater than from many sins.

Am I saying sex offenders shouldn't be allowed to go to church or receive forgiveness from Christians? No, of course not. But let's not try to reduce the sin and crime by comparing apples and oranges.

Posted By: Ann | January 6, 2010 3:24 PM

Having been on the side of the desk where you are left to deal with similar cases as these, I have had to wrestle with the concept of protection and ministering. To protect the innocent and the young is our duty as a society and especially as Christians. However, to abandon the one who had been caught in sin and overwhelmed by lustful desires is as much a sin.

We are to still minister and in this day we are finding it to be a challenge as more and more of our culture is driven by sex and pornography and the fulfillment of the flesh.

The state programs only reinforce the idea of the sexual act. They deny the power of the flesh but reinforce the power of a person to better him or herself. There is no good in us and the only thing that can make us do right is when we are right with God.

Accountability and the establishing of right perspectives based upon Biblical truth is the only things that will flush the minds of these caught up in such sinful acts.

The sex offenders are still human being whose desires have run in a dangerous and destructive direction. But in many ways no different from the man who ignores his family, the wife who is a gossip, or the child who is a klepto. We all have the potential to live with out of control passions and they can lead to destructive behavior.

The sex offenders deserve their punishment, deserve their restrictions, but do not deserve to be ruled out as useless for the cause of Christ.

Posted By: AL | January 6, 2010 3:53 PM

I agree, Ann. To compare molesting children with the sin of David and Bathsheba in adultery is a sign that this person does not yet understand the magnitude of what it means to harm a child. For the most part, except in the case of rape, adults have the ability to make a choice. Children depend on adults to guide them in their choices. An adult who violates this trust must suffer the consequences of that violation. The exile from children or the vicinity of children may seem harsh, and perhaps being drowned by millstone would be better; and while all sin may be forgiven by God when we place our faith into Jesus atoning sacrifice, it does not remove the consequences or magnitude of that violation. We must guard and protect the children who place their trust into us. We do not risk their well being on the altar of forgiveness. God expects us to protect them, it is a higher moral duty.

Posted By: Ben | January 6, 2010 4:09 PM

I agree with Ann wholeheartedly! May I add that there is NO such thing as a "reformed" sexual offender/pedophile!!! There is also no comparison in the evil desires of a pedophile and a gossip or a klepto. I resent the comment that "DC" made when he compared himself to King David. What a major joke!

Posted By: Sue | January 6, 2010 4:28 PM

Pastor Alfred Proirier, a friend of a friend, has a registered sex offender as a member of his church.

In his book "The Peacemaking Pastor: A Biblical Guide to Resolving Church Conflict", he outlines how he counseled the individual as well as how he handles the situation in the church, in light of the young members there.

Part of the stipulation for the offender's membership is that he must speak at each new member class and let the parents know of his crime, and that he is forbidden to be alone with young children.

Being as he is repentant and understanding of the repercussions of his crime, he is agreeable to doing this.

The other case studies in this book are just as moving, and I highly recommend this book for pastors or anyone else interested in Biblical peacemaking.

Posted By: Sarah Joy Albrecht | January 7, 2010 6:50 AM

What is interesting is that all of you immediately assume that a sex offenders offense was against a child.

Pedophiles are those with an attraction to children that have not reached puberty. There is a term for those sexually attracted to puberty / teens but they are NOT pedophiles. Then there are adult offenders.

THEN there are youthful offenders, the Romeo and Juliet cases. Now we have teenagers who are sexting and by all statutes of the law are sex offenders / engaging in child pornography, etc.

King David's sex crime was that of sexual harassment, using the position of power and authority to literally kill Bethsheba's husband. Can you not compare that against most modern sexual harassment cases / rape? Did she really / truly have a choice? Are you sure it was consensual?

What we studied in therapy was that offending takes many forms over the years INCLUDING simply being selfish in our sexual desires. Is it criminal, no, is it offensive, yes.

I am not comparing myself to anyone in the Bible, but it is full of stories of sexual sins and forgiveness.

We are reading the chronological One Year Bible this year and the trials and tribulations of Job are really heart wrenching. I have to wonder about the anger / helplessness he feels / that our victims must also feel.

DC

Posted By: DC | January 7, 2010 6:53 AM

I fail to see your point DC. The question is should any sex offender be placed in a position of trust near our children under the banner of "forgiveness." David suffered the consequences of his sin even though he was forgiven.

This should not even be questionable!
First. The CHILDREN are our greater moral responsibility. Adults make choices that have ramifications. Being forgiven does not mean those ramifications go away. A child trusts the adults to look out for their safety. It is inexcusable for a church to willfully put any child in potential danger with the rationale that they are forgiving a sex offender. The safety of the children must come first.


Second. There is no way to screen sincerity. You can only hope they are sincere. And sincerity does not guarantee future behavior. Unfortunately people lie. "I have changed, I am a Jesus follower now..." does not guarantee that person is not setting up a situation to be in a position of trust. The only way to screen is through background checks. To ignore a background check because we are to "forgive" is willful negligence.
I find it very alarming that people in positions of church leadership are even discussing this. Those who post that we do not understand "them" concern me the most.

Posted By: Children's Ministry | January 7, 2010 7:17 AM

Ok, so we perform a background check for all attending church or just those in ministry to children?

I would agree, children 100% need to be protected, I am not sure how you think that the article or the questions / answers above do not support that?

Unless, you are saying the ONLY way to protect children is to make sure NO sex offenders attend that church?

That IS a solution...and even is a solution being posed in the article. I am guessing from your post, you believe that is THE solution.

I agree that is a legit point of view, BUT I want to point out that the next 86 to 93ish out of 100 victims, will be molested by someone NOT currently on the RSO list. See the following if you want some pretty accurate statistics on this:

http://www.oncefallen.com/

So, we have now eliminated 7-14% of the problem, by disallowing RSOs from attending your church.

I agree, you have reduced the threat, slightly, but MY issue is that you may now have CREATED a situation where the church is lulled into a sense of safety that historically / statistically is false!!??

There are 600,000 RSOs in the USA, if we look at the numbers that means for every 7-14 RSOs that your background check finds, there is 86-93 that is will not.

The point or main question is the article is this...what do we do with those that have already sinned?

Do we shun them? Refuse to allow them into our church? Because THEIR sin is so bad, we are "hoping" they suffer forever because of it?

DC

Posted By: DC | January 7, 2010 7:39 AM

DC -

No I am not advocating that they be shunned and not allowed into church. Our church has protocol on who can enter the children's area. If someone is a registered sex offender then they are not allowed in the area as a children's worker or volunteer (position of trust). We go to a great amount of effort to make sure that our children are safe.
I'm aware that are many unregistered sex offenders. That is a major concern to me. It is why we have rules in place. In essence, we don't allow any adult to be alone with a child.


Not all churches are large enough to have a locked isolated protected area for the children. But they can have strict regulations in place. They can do background checks and have rules so that any who slip through the cracks are accountable to the rules. There is no perfect system, but there is a responsibility to protect to the best of your ability.


Children are my primary concern. Those who minister to or with registered or former sex offenders also have a responsibility to protect them. Scripture is clear on how God feels about those who hurt or offend a child. I'm not writing to argue that Scripture as I am aware it entails all forms of abuse that may not be sexual in nature, but the warning is clear. Don't hurt them.

So I say, yes extend forgiveness as Jesus would extend it.
Allow access to worship, but do not allow access to the children. I am sorry if that sounds harsh, but we must be wise in all things.

Posted By: Children's Ministry | January 7, 2010 7:59 AM

I've covered the issue of redemption for the convicted sex offender at my website, www.oncefallen.com. First off, I'd lke to add something to the story of David. While it is true David received punishment for his actions (despite his praying not to be punished), David repented and God restored his blessings after the punishment had been meted out.

In other similar stories, people brought out the "mark of Cain" to justify scarlet letter laws. However, the Bible states the mark was a mark of protection from axt of vigilante justice. Cain was also allowed to live, have a wife, and start a family.

In our modern culture, the Christian concept of "mercy" eludes us. Our focus is on retribution. Current sex offender legislation is a tool of retribution, and despite what legislators claim the intent of the law is regulatory and not punitive, in reality the average person knows the intent of these laws are to exact vengeance.

We're no longer content with the punishment meted out by the criminal justice system; we now feel we need to blast everyone convicted of sex crimes on public pillories, deny them housing and employment, harass and assault them, and dictate every aspect of their lives from where they live to who they can date, all beyond the date they finished their sentences.

Honestly, if God didn't have mercy, and gave us all what we deserved, then we'd all be nailed to a cross. Thankfully God shows mercy to all people. Unfortunately, we squander it like the man in Christ's parable who was forgiven of his own debts then attacked someone who was indebted to him[Matt. 18:21-35]. Sadly, even Christians are not immune to this.

We need not just punishment, but mercy. Punishment alone has not solved the issue of sexual deviancy and criminal behavior. During the days of public executions, pickpockets worked the crowds while their brethren were hanged for pickpocketing. A new approach should be done. There are precious few resources out there for those struggling with deviant sexual thoughts and desires, or for educating sexual responsibility and accountability. Nor are there reintegration programs for the registrants in order to assist them in living offense free lives after their sentences are completed.

Our revenge-oriented system of justice has backfired. It has failed to address the root causes of sexual offending in America. Even the Bible says "violence begets violence." Our violent approach does nothing to solve the issue. Getting tough on crime is a catchy slogan for pandering politicians during election season, but it is not solving the problem.

It is time we take a new approach. It is not about being tough or soft, it is about getting smart. As Christians, we hold ourselves accountable and responsible first, then we help others achieve this goal. This does not mean let the registrant run children church. Having an accountability partner is good for his own good and that of the Church. The Church needs a healthy yet Biblical view on sexuality; as it stands now, most never talk about it.

There are resources available at my website for those seeking existing faith-based initiatives to dealing with sex offenders and sexual addiction.

Posted By: THe One | January 7, 2010 8:17 AM

I really don't know what the answer is concerning RSOs attending church services. I also don't know the true percentages of children being molested by RSOs/pedophiles, registered or not, however I do know that 100% of those precious souls who have been abused, have their lives turned upside down this side of eternity, so maybe I'm just not too concerned about where a sex offender worships.

There is a profound reason that Jesus Christ says it is better for a millstone to be hung around the neck of those who do abuse children....

Posted By: Sue | January 7, 2010 8:18 AM

By the way, Ann, you forgot to mention a few things about King David's sin. First off, he also abused his position of power by committing his act. Secondly, he had the woman's husband killed to cover up the crime. Thirdly, after David received his punishment and repented, he was restored to God's good graces. Again, we've forgotten the concept of mercy, and sadly, the comments I see here reflect that.

To Children's Ministry, while I never say let a registrant run children's church, let me ask you this: how do you screen sincerity among those who are NOT on the registry? Sandra Cantu's killer was a FEMALE Sunday School teacher.

And to Sue: On what basis do you claim people cannot be reformed/ rehabilitated, even a "pedophile?" The facts state otherwise. Recidivism among those convicted of sex crimes have the lowest re-offense rates of any convicted criminal out there, and treatment has been proven to reduce those rates even more.

Posted By: The One | January 7, 2010 8:32 AM

Thank you, Sue, for misquoting Scripture. The context of the Scripture you quote, Matthew 18:6, is in the context of Jesus teaching Christians should be as receptive to the Word of God as children and how we all have a responsibility in helping ALL members of God's church avoid sin in general. I think it is ironic you've quoted the same chapter as I did in my original comment here. Anyways, I suggest going back and reading the entire chapter.

Posted By: The One | January 7, 2010 8:43 AM

"THE ONE" ~ Your defensive sarcasm and quoting all of your little facts and great knowledge of Scripture tells me enough already about you.

Yes we are all responsible to God for how we influence others, and any person, male or female, who sexually abuses any child, has already influenced that child's concept of God and helps to "turn them from the faith", especially if the sex abuser is in a position of authority, which most are. Jesus knows that a child is trusting by nature and is easily led to faith in Christ so I figure the opposite is true as well. HE says as much.

Pedophiles who abuse both boys and girls have the highest rate of relapse ... with hundreds of victims each, in some cases. I maintain that "they" do not change their evil desires for little ones but with treatment may be able to not actively abuse a child.

Posted By: Sue | January 7, 2010 11:56 AM

Forgiveness does NOT mean giving someone unfettered access to you or your life. No where does the Bible tell us to be stupid.

I do not think that sex offenders should be banned from all church activities, but boundaries are important. If we were talking about an alcoholic, and the church served wine for communion, would you have the alcoholic in charge of preparing it? No.

It also depends on the offense. "Sex offender" is a broad category and can include consensual encounters such as "statutory rape." It is important that cautions fit the crime. Obviously a CHILD sex offender, such as Nichols in the original post, should not be allowed anywhere near youth ministry.

WISDOM needs to balance grace so that everyone is protected, while all are still free to seek to worship and be discipled.

Posted By: Robyn | January 7, 2010 1:13 PM

Just a bit of food for thought this afternoon.

We have a situation in our church now where a young man's life has been destroyed by drugs.

He has been arrested multiple times now, for owning/using drugs (then resulting probation violations) and recent car crashes, etc.

He lies, steals, because that is what addicts do. He is also in the choir with me and most of the church has no idea what is going on in his life. A few are starting to find out that something is going on, and to prevent gossip we just ask that they keep him in their prayers.

Would you like to guess WHERE he got started on drugs? Who provided the marijuana..and now the marijuana laced with ACID?

It was from another church members son(s) once is in currently in jail and the other is out for the moment.

Was there a "Registered Drug Dealers" website? Background checks? (This started late teens / but the dealer did not work in ministry of any kind but attends occasionally)

What I am saying is this, SIN destroys lives. I agree with several recent comments that we need to protect our children and use common sense when it comes to WHO is in positions of trust / ministry.

But would I deny the dealer access to our church? No, he certainly needs to be and so does the young man whose life has been devastated. Should we be more proactive to watch for this, certainly.

But is a registry of all criminal activity the answer? Registered DUIs, Drug Dealers, Tax Cheats, Men/Woman who have had affairs, Speeders, those who don't read their Bible every day.....

Here is something I wrote / my Pastor asked me to place on our website (We are a Friends Church):

The WORLD has lots of labels for folks:
Adulterer
Lier
Speeder
Cheater
Alcoholic
Gossiper
Offender
Druggie
Sinner

Here at ###, we accept YOU and YOUR history! There is none that have not sinned, NOT ONE!! It is all washed by the Blood of the Lamb and we have ONE label for you:
FRIEND!!!

We believe that the church is literally a spiritual hospital, for all people to come and receive positive hope, encouragement and salvation.

Thank ALL of you for your responses. I hope this article made all of think a little more about our ministries and how we can be his servants.

Posted By: DC | January 7, 2010 3:44 PM

I can see both sides of this issue, as someone I am very close to is an RSO, and I didn't find out until June of last year. I went through the struggle of "how do I reconcile what I know of this person legally to what I know theologically, that this person, as a believer, is a new creation in Christ, and the past now no longer dictates how I should respond to this person?" It tore me up inside for quite some time.

The person was incredibly forthcoming about the details of their crime, and the treatment they had gone through, and that helped set my mind at ease. I find myself more along the lines of what DC, Robyn and TheOne have said, after going through what I went through. I realized that God had put this person in my life so that I could be Christ to them, and support them in their ongoing repentance. I could therefore no sooner turn away from this person than I could from myself! It hasn't been easy, and still isn't. But by the grace of God, I have seen so much healing come into this person's life, and through that journey, been drawn closer to God. Had I turned away in judgment, I would have missed so much. I'm rambling, but I hope my story sheds a litle light on dealing with an RSO in a more compassionate way.

Posted By: Allie | January 7, 2010 9:11 PM

DC,

With all due respect, I do not agree with your definition of a church being a place for everyone. I think this is where we have skewed the picture of body life. We are killing our own by not removing the sin among us. We are afraid to make rules, we don't want to drive the seeker away as if it is up to us to do the job of the Holy Spirit. We are saying this is a place for everybody and it doesn't matter what you do or how you live your life. We don't place Biblical restrictions on church attenders because we fear offending them. Scripture defines the Church as The the body of Christ, of which He is the head (Eph 1:22-23). The body of Christ is made up of all believers in Jesus Christ. Anyone who believes is part of the body of Christ, but our gatherings have become safe havens for sinners who are not required to change. This is a cancer that destroys from within. It is not the case that we are not to help our brother who stumbles and sincerely repents. But Scripture does give us strict guidelines as to what to do with unrepentant sin as Paul told the church at Corinth, "you must not associate with anyone who calls himself a brother but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or a slanderer, a drunkard or a swindler. With such a man do not even eat. What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside? God will judge those outside. "Expel the wicked man from among you."

Posted By: Ben | January 8, 2010 12:09 PM

In answer to The One's question, "How do you screen sincerity....Sandra Cantu's killer was a FEMALE Sunday School teacher."

I believe I already addressed this in my last comment. I am not omniscient as God is. Should I give up screening because some SO's are not registered? A great deal of thought is given to the possibility of someone slipping through the system. AGAIN...this is why you have rules and regulations in place to make sure that volunteers and staff are not given unwise liberties. Accountability provides safety for both the child and the adult.


One, I am not sure if you are The One with a mercy-based ministry to sex offenders, but part of that ministry is to help them face the consequences of sin. This is done in Christian rehab. Nothing will ever be the same due to the sin. This does not mean that God can't take that sin and evil and use it for good as in the case of Joseph's brothers. But, one of the consequences is that our society will always hold them suspect. Their job is to live Godly lives and keep themselves accountable through programs such as yours and accountability partners. But mercy should never promise that things will ever be the same. What it does promise them is hope for a future with an eternal perspective.

Posted By: Children's Ministry | January 8, 2010 12:53 PM

Wow Ben, so you are saying when I asked forgiveness for MY sin I am not forgiven?

That forgiveness is only for lesser sins that do not include sexual immorality, greed, idolatry, or slander?

Or maybe you are saying I am ok since I already happened to know the secret (to ask) but we should turn away all those folks you mentioned, because they are living in sin and instead the Holy Spirit will simply come into their life on its own?

Which is it exactly? My sins are unforgiveable, and yours are ok, OR... we ignore that part about Go ye unto all the world and preach the gospel?

I have to admit, I expect some knee jerk reactions from non-Christians, but it looks like it is a good thing my church allows sinners to still come in. That some of these other churches must be full of only perfect people.

Just reading into what you are typing, I realize that sometimes we lose the subtleties when text online, but wow.

DC...feeling bummed

Posted By: DC | January 8, 2010 3:06 PM

There is a difference between sarcasm and conviction, Sue. I merely pointed out an error in your logic. You are also clinging to myths rather than the reality. Here is a good link to dispel some of the myths you brought up.

http://www.oncefallen.com/SOMyths.html

While there are always a small number of people who abuse the mercy God gives us, the fact remains many people still wish to generalize and judge base on myths rather than facts. What if this was an article about young black males and someone came in and said that more blacks with criminal records re-offend? What would we call that? We'd call it racist. Sue, think about what you say before you make personal attacks, it really testifies to your character.

Posted By: The One | January 9, 2010 10:18 AM

The One,

Sexual Offenders are NOT a class of people. Your attempt to place sexual offenders in the same category as a race is wrong. Committing sexual offense is not the same as skin color or gender. Sexual Offender's behavior is chosen even if the desire is not...skin color and race are NOT chosen. This issue is not about discriminating against people, but against the potentially harmful behaviors of people. All laws discriminate against behavior.

Your approach is flat out wrong.

Posted By: Children's Ministry | January 11, 2010 5:48 PM

There's only one thing to do with rapists and child molesters.

Lock them up and throw away the key.

Problem solved. Let the jail chaplain minister to them.

Posted By: Shannon | January 12, 2010 9:30 AM

Children's Ministry: You say I'm wrong simply because you like the approach, but in the end, the only wrong one is you. Are you even a Christian? Because so far you haven't sounded like it. Jesus ate with sinners and tax collectors. He forgave the woman caught in adultery. He tells us we're all equal and all fall short of the glory of God. What I find offensive is so-called Christians trying to justify laws that are not just unconstitutional, but fueled by vengeance and wrath.

Judge Sylvia Hendon called sex offenders a class of people: "Their conviction of felony offenses puts them into a class that has already been deemed to have no expectation of finality in the consequences of the judgments
against them"

Eric S. Janus, in his book, "Failure To Protect," calls sex offenders the "degraded class."

Denying the truth does not make it any less true. We've justified this nonsense long enough.

Posted By: The One | January 18, 2010 8:10 AM

Why are some people so quick to NOT forgive a sex offender? Or that some feel that they should not be in church. But, you can have the guy that has a drinking problem with several convictions. Sitting in the front row and everyone forgiveing him. Even though that is the person that has taken my child away for me forever. Except when I go to cemetary for their birthday,Christmas,and what would have been their graduation. But, for me to go to heaven i'm told that I have to forgive this person. So, I guess I can't understand how you make one crime worse than the other. They made a mistake and I have learned that if I don't forgive, then I will pay also.

Posted By: Guest | June 8, 2010 11:44 PM

This definitely is a topic that gets people's emotions going, as it should. Naturally, as someone who works with children's church security software, I feel pretty strongly about preventing sex offenders from being around children. And it doesn't help that an orphanage I used to work at almost got shut down because it turns out the founder had had some inappropriate sexual relationships (best I know they weren't with children) but as a result he was too willing to give people the benefit of the doubt when one child said another was molesting them, until finally a doctor found evidence of rape in some of the youngest kids.

But, I also believe that everyone should be allowed in church. Ben is right that we can't read the heart like God can and we can't know whether a person has repented or not, but I don't think that's our role to judge where we have no evidence. If they continue to sin or if they openly admit they haven't repented, then we can judge based off of that without having to read minds at all. We shouldn't be stupid. But, if we're talking about past events and it's a matter of did they repent for something that happened 3 years ago and before they underwent treatment, then if they haven't repented, it's our job to give them a chance. If they have, then it's our job to forgive them (and either way not to allow them in a situation where temptation and sin could occur). We can have the appropriate level of lack of trust without barring them from church.

That's why security systems are so important, because there are people who come to church that shouldn't have access to kids, but should have access to grace. It's not just sexual offenders either, what about divorced parents? They pose just as much of a threat because if the custody doesn't come out the way they want they could take the child and flee the state. It's not unheard of for a parent to do crazy things in order to be with their child. What about those with mental disabilities who don't understand how to care for a child and could allow them to be in dangerous situations without knowing what is wrong.

The key is to be vigilant and careful of any danger, not to blame all our problems on one kind of sin, no matter how repulsive it is.

Posted By: Trevor from Excellerate Children's Church Security Software | September 23, 2010 4:48 PM

I been sitting reading all these comments, some are pretty harsh, some just plain stupid and a small Percent actually makes sense. My question is when did we become GOD? What gives us the right to decide who can worship and who cannot. Just because you are a RSO, drug dealer etc, we are not the ones to decide weather this person goes to heaven or not, and if we deny this person to be saved and live for the Lord are we not just as much as a sinner as that person?There is a thing that has been around for ages called Common Sense. USE IT people. If you know your dog bites, do you let it run free? Use the same common sense judgement on people that attend your church that has a past history of sex offending, drinking or drug dealing. But I am telling you now, if you know these people are attending your church and you shun them or treat them any less then you would any of your fellow christians, then you better drop to your knees and ask for forgivness before you wind up dancing with the devil and they are singing with the angels.

Posted By: Anonymous | November 16, 2010 7:37 AM

Keep an eye on your kids and keep an eye on those watching the kids. If possible make sure two unrelated, screened people are at all children's functions and they are within sight of each other as much as possible to provide accountability. The "unrelated" rule is because you want 2 adults who are each willing to call the police on the other if the need arises.

Monitored AND recorded video surveillance can substitute for one vetted adult IN SOME but certainly not all cases.

Small churches that only have only a few kids and only 1 adult per age group may have to compromise and have a "rover system" with random frequent spot-checks among the children's Sunday School rooms.

In worship, coffee hour, and other large gatherings have a few people whose job it is to watch the entire room for unusual or inappropriate behavior and to monitor hallways leading to restrooms, out-of-the-way areas, etc and go in if the same minor and same adult are alone in the bathroom for an unusually long period of time or an unusual number of times over several months.

Do this and it won't matter as much if you have a registered sex offender or sexual predator with no criminal record at your church - they won't have much of an opportunity to offend and, because it won't matter you won't need to put additional restrictions and stress on them that may interfere with their spiritual growth.

--

You do need to alert parents that the church cannot adequately protect their kids at smaller mixed-aged gatherings such as "supper club" meetings and that they, the parents, are responsible for deciding whether their kids attend such gatherings and if so, who they will trust to watch them. Offering and encouraging parents, youth, and children to take child safety classes similar to what the Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts offer can mitigate this risk.

Posted By: davidwr | November 7, 2011 6:58 PM