|
|
Post by emy on Apr 11, 2015 10:51:14 GMT -5
Changing the culture.... 1. As you say, parents or other adults in the church often do not believe the children...why is that? Because they believe that the workers are good...elevated in goodness even above the innocence of their children. This is a cultural thing that should change. 2. "Children are afraid to report abuse." I would add to this that adults are often afraid too. And this is a cultural problem. They are afraid of punishment for being honest and looking for help, for good reason. 3. Like you suggest, people need to start taking the issue to the police. But there's a culture problem preventing them, which fixit has tried to explain. There are consequences of losing status or membership if someone reports a worker to the police. Status and membership are pretty important when you believe that membership=salvation and being in the inner circle of most compliant saints gets you rewards on earth and in heaven. Taking all blame away from the church is problematic. Let's take your allegations in light of the general population (especially 50 years back): 1. As you say, parents or other adults in the church often do not believe the children...why is that? Because they believe that the workers are good...elevated in goodness even above the innocence of their children. This is a cultural thing that should change. General population: they believe Grandpa, Uncle Joe, whoever are much too "nice" to do anything like that. P.S. Not all children are completely innocent, especially after they get beyond school age. 2. "Children are afraid to report abuse." I would add to this that adults are often afraid too. And this is a cultural problem. They are afraid of punishment for being honest and looking for help, for good reason. General population: They are afraid of disrupting the family, ruining friendships, being disrespected in the community. 3. Like you suggest, people need to start taking the issue to the police. But there's a culture problem preventing them, which fixit has tried to explain. There are consequences of losing status or membership if someone reports a worker to the police. Status and membership are pretty important when you believe that membership=salvation and being in the inner circle of most compliant saints gets you rewards on earth and in heaven. General population: There are consequences for reporting an upstanding citizen or family member to the police (see #2). Social standing and status are pretty important when your self-worth depends on those things. And if you are NOT up in the community status, you for sure don't want to point any fingers that would lower you in anyone's eyes, cause people to stare, or whisper behind their hands. So you see it's not just the culture of the fellowship that needs to change; it's culture in general. Do you believe that in the general population abuse is reported more frequently? |
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Apr 11, 2015 15:14:24 GMT -5
Let's take your allegations in light of the general population (especially 50 years back): 1. As you say, parents or other adults in the church often do not believe the children...why is that? Because they believe that the workers are good...elevated in goodness even above the innocence of their children. This is a cultural thing that should change. General population: they believe Grandpa, Uncle Joe, whoever are much too "nice" to do anything like that. P.S. Not all children are completely innocent, especially after they get beyond school age. 2. "Children are afraid to report abuse." I would add to this that adults are often afraid too. And this is a cultural problem. They are afraid of punishment for being honest and looking for help, for good reason. General population: They are afraid of disrupting the family, ruining friendships, being disrespected in the community. 3. Like you suggest, people need to start taking the issue to the police. But there's a culture problem preventing them, which fixit has tried to explain. There are consequences of losing status or membership if someone reports a worker to the police. Status and membership are pretty important when you believe that membership=salvation and being in the inner circle of most compliant saints gets you rewards on earth and in heaven. General population: There are consequences for reporting an upstanding citizen or family member to the police (see #2). Social standing and status are pretty important when your self-worth depends on those things. And if you are NOT up in the community status, you for sure don't want to point any fingers that would lower you in anyone's eyes, cause people to stare, or whisper behind their hands. So you see it's not just the culture of the fellowship that needs to change; it's culture in general. Do you believe that in the general population abuse is reported more frequently? People who profess to follow Jesus shouldn't be using moral failings in society as an excuse for moral failings in the church. Are the following questions unreasonable? |
|
|
|
Post by withlove on Apr 11, 2015 19:26:17 GMT -5
Changing the culture.... 1. As you say, parents or other adults in the church often do not believe the children...why is that? Because they believe that the workers are good...elevated in goodness even above the innocence of their children. This is a cultural thing that should change. 2. "Children are afraid to report abuse." I would add to this that adults are often afraid too. And this is a cultural problem. They are afraid of punishment for being honest and looking for help, for good reason. 3. Like you suggest, people need to start taking the issue to the police. But there's a culture problem preventing them, which fixit has tried to explain. There are consequences of losing status or membership if someone reports a worker to the police. Status and membership are pretty important when you believe that membership=salvation and being in the inner circle of most compliant saints gets you rewards on earth and in heaven. Taking all blame away from the church is problematic. Let's take your allegations in light of the general population (especially 50 years back): 1. As you say, parents or other adults in the church often do not believe the children...why is that? Because they believe that the workers are good...elevated in goodness even above the innocence of their children. This is a cultural thing that should change. General population: they believe Grandpa, Uncle Joe, whoever are much too "nice" to do anything like that. P.S. Not all children are completely innocent, especially after they get beyond school age. 2. "Children are afraid to report abuse." I would add to this that adults are often afraid too. And this is a cultural problem. They are afraid of punishment for being honest and looking for help, for good reason. General population: They are afraid of disrupting the family, ruining friendships, being disrespected in the community. 3. Like you suggest, people need to start taking the issue to the police. But there's a culture problem preventing them, which fixit has tried to explain. There are consequences of losing status or membership if someone reports a worker to the police. Status and membership are pretty important when you believe that membership=salvation and being in the inner circle of most compliant saints gets you rewards on earth and in heaven. General population: There are consequences for reporting an upstanding citizen or family member to the police (see #2). Social standing and status are pretty important when your self-worth depends on those things. And if you are NOT up in the community status, you for sure don't want to point any fingers that would lower you in anyone's eyes, cause people to stare, or whisper behind their hands. So you see it's not just the culture of the fellowship that needs to change; it's culture in general. Do you believe that in the general population abuse is reported more frequently? Who are children beyond school age? It seems like most minors are in school...it must depend on where you live. I'm not an expert on abuse in any population, general or otherwise, but would say that there couldn't ever be too much awareness and sensitivity on the subject, anywhere. This board, and WINGs, focus on the church. |
|
|
|
Post by emy on Apr 11, 2015 20:01:16 GMT -5
By beyond school age, I meant those who have started school but are not yet away from home.
Fixit:
I agree. But doesn't it seem as if some posters write as if those failings are ONLY in the culture of the fellowship? There are no humans, even those who follow Jesus and have God's Spirit in their hearts, who will never fail or sin.
1. yes
2. In the case of child sexual abuse OR unrepentance, yes
3. No blanket opinion - see #2
4. Yes, to any I would open my home to.
5. Is there any possibility that we can make our homes completely free from immorality, even if we do not open them to workers? If not, then we need to set boundaries for ourselves and our families AND keep lines of communication open.
6. Matt. 18:15-17
7. This seems a little like shutting the barn door after the horse is out. Needing OPEN apology would be the last step in the verses above.
8. Yes, I believe they can be actively engaged, but I don't believe it is our place to force it upon them. If the workers are non-responsive to suggestions, then employ safeguards of your own.
It seems as if some believe that God will not forgive erring workers and they should be shut out of fellowship entirely. IMO, that is really limiting the power of God when we should believe that with God, all things are possible.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 11, 2015 22:43:02 GMT -5
They need consistency in other areas! Not one "worker" can accept someone not believing in them no matter how great their belief may be in the Lord God. Yet that determining factor directs all decisions for a life time, as they cannot admit to ever being wrong in their judgment of their fellow man, it all hinges on their being God's only true servants, preachers, ministers, on the face of the earth, no matter how evil or wicked their lives or treatment of their fellow believers may have been.
Surely this will destroy them, and their fellowship, and must face change. Otherwise they will martyr many, even till death.
|
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Apr 12, 2015 0:08:05 GMT -5
Emy, do you think the following scripture is relevant with respect to immorality in the work and fellowship, including child sexual abuse?
This thread is about a worker who sexually abused kids, didn't apologise to his victims and was rebaptised privately.
It seems that after abusing kids in the work this man was still allowed around children and attended convention in Victoria.
Workers run the conventions, they have all the contacts, yet they seem unwilling to shoulder responsibility for CSA issues.
From the BTS board:
|
|
|
|
Post by whyisitso on Apr 12, 2015 1:06:39 GMT -5
By beyond school age, I meant those who have started school but are not yet away from home. Yes those pesky kids hey? I mean if they were to do or say something inappropriate to an adult then just say that adult was a pedophile and had been 'grooming' them we really would have a small window here to blame the child, especially if they were school age.... There's no room there to be saying that pedophile adult should have kept their bits to themselves right? I mean the child practically asked for it!! Like those girls that get raped because they wore something too skimpy or jogged through a park jogging track at dusk or something... They were totally asking for it!! I seriously hope I've completely misunderstood your statement here Emy and I'm going off half cocked.... But just in case I didn't, I'm disgusted!!! |
|
|
|
Post by Roselyn T on Apr 12, 2015 2:06:31 GMT -5
I agree whyisitso ! Once again blame the victim instead of the worker ! Better still re-baptise a abuser who has NOT apologized to his victims but make sure its all done in secret !! And we wonder why things are not changing in regard to CSA in the fellowship !
|
|
|
|
Post by whyisitso on Apr 12, 2015 2:30:31 GMT -5
I agree whyisitso ! Once again blame the victim instead of the worker ! Better still re-baptise a abuser who has NOT apologized to his victims but make sure its all done in secret !! And we wonder why things are not changing in regard to CSA in the fellowship ! I know this thread is about Noel Harvey and being rebaptized but this mentality in general is disturbing. It is far wider than the meetings that people are more than capable of saying the victim of CSA or rape have some major part in instigating the offense |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 12, 2015 3:54:27 GMT -5
People with certain responsibilities in positions of authority and who should know better should not allow themselves to make serious unwise decisions that will seriously impact on the lives of others, and then turn around and seek to justify their actions by making further unwise decisions that are offensive and totally unacceptable.IMO.God loves the truth and that is how I see it, from where I stand. That is my final pronouncement.
|
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Apr 12, 2015 5:37:55 GMT -5
By beyond school age, I meant those who have started school but are not yet away from home. Fixit: I agree. But doesn't it seem as if some posters write as if those failings are ONLY in the culture of the fellowship? There are no humans, even those who follow Jesus and have God's Spirit in their hearts, who will never fail or sin. If they fall into sexual immorality they are not very serious about ministry and would be better to do something else with their lives. If they sexually abuse a child, they can never again be trusted around children. The fellowship culture that needs to change is the concept that workers are not accountable to the friends, and that the friends will be blessed for submitting to the workers even when they're wrong. Also the idea that children are somehow to blame for getting abused. And that CSA should be dealt with internally and covered up "for the kingdom's sake". Here's an example of professing culture that needs to change: |
|
|
|
Post by snow on Apr 12, 2015 10:28:48 GMT -5
Changing the culture.... 1. As you say, parents or other adults in the church often do not believe the children...why is that? Because they believe that the workers are good...elevated in goodness even above the innocence of their children. This is a cultural thing that should change. 2. "Children are afraid to report abuse." I would add to this that adults are often afraid too. And this is a cultural problem. They are afraid of punishment for being honest and looking for help, for good reason. 3. Like you suggest, people need to start taking the issue to the police. But there's a culture problem preventing them, which fixit has tried to explain. There are consequences of losing status or membership if someone reports a worker to the police. Status and membership are pretty important when you believe that membership=salvation and being in the inner circle of most compliant saints gets you rewards on earth and in heaven. Taking all blame away from the church is problematic. Let's take your allegations in light of the general population (especially 50 years back): 1. As you say, parents or other adults in the church often do not believe the children...why is that? Because they believe that the workers are good...elevated in goodness even above the innocence of their children. This is a cultural thing that should change. General population: they believe Grandpa, Uncle Joe, whoever are much too "nice" to do anything like that. P.S. Not all children are completely innocent, especially after they get beyond school age. 2. "Children are afraid to report abuse." I would add to this that adults are often afraid too. And this is a cultural problem. They are afraid of punishment for being honest and looking for help, for good reason. General population: They are afraid of disrupting the family, ruining friendships, being disrespected in the community. 3. Like you suggest, people need to start taking the issue to the police. But there's a culture problem preventing them, which fixit has tried to explain. There are consequences of losing status or membership if someone reports a worker to the police. Status and membership are pretty important when you believe that membership=salvation and being in the inner circle of most compliant saints gets you rewards on earth and in heaven. General population: There are consequences for reporting an upstanding citizen or family member to the police (see #2). Social standing and status are pretty important when your self-worth depends on those things. And if you are NOT up in the community status, you for sure don't want to point any fingers that would lower you in anyone's eyes, cause people to stare, or whisper behind their hands. So you see it's not just the culture of the fellowship that needs to change; it's culture in general. Do you believe that in the general population abuse is reported more frequently? Emy I am finding the comment about children beyond school age to not be completely innocent very disturbing. While children may display some sexuality that they are experimenting with, which is normal development btw, they should never be blamed for CSA. It is the responsibility of the adult to understand and not respond in a way they would to an adult. A child never should be blamed or even take one iota of the blame for the sexual abuse of an adult. That is equivalent to the age old belief that women get raped 'because they were asking for it' because of what they wore for example. Sexual abuse at any age is illegal and there is no excuse for it but to say a child isn't completely innocent really is disturbing and concerning. |
|
|
|
Post by rational on Apr 12, 2015 12:32:13 GMT -5
When the abuse subject was discussed the senior worker made it very clear that they felt it was the parents responsibility. This completely sickens us as we have always made them welcome in our home and they have taken the opportunity to stay for as long as they wanted, and the ones in question of this abuse are the ones we opened our home to, yet it seems they are holding the parents responsible for the workers abuse. The responsibility for the safety of children falls, ultimately, to the parents. If parents leave their children in the care of another adult it is the parents who have chosen to do that. If they have misplaced their trust it is still their responsibility. In the larger sense, it would be ideal is everyone took responsibility for the safety of children but the harsh reality is that some of those are going to be people who abuse children. It is known that there are workers who have abused children and them been moved to other places. Moving them is not the issue. The issue is that there were people, including the workers, who were aware of the abuse and did not report it to the authorities. The blame can be assigned in a lot of ways. The workers for covering up the crime and moving the accused to another location. The parents for not reporting the crime. The workers for convincing the parents that the reporting the workers was wrong. The parents for believing that the workers were above the law. Etc., etc., etc. So you have a child. You have the parents. You have workers. You have a collection of family and friends. You have all the people who come in contact with the child. At the end of the day, the responsibility for the child's safety lies with what group? Exactly what sickens you about telling parents they are responsible for the safety of their children? |
|
|
|
Post by rational on Apr 12, 2015 12:50:14 GMT -5
Emy I am finding the comment about children beyond school age to not be completely innocent very disturbing. While children may display some sexuality that they are experimenting with, which is normal development btw, they should never be blamed for CSA. It is the responsibility of the adult to understand and not respond in a way they would to an adult. A child never should be blamed or even take one iota of the blame for the sexual abuse of an adult. That is equivalent to the age old belief that women get raped 'because they were asking for it' because of what they wore for example. Sexual abuse at any age is illegal and there is no excuse for it but to say a child isn't completely innocent really is disturbing and concerning. The 17 1/ 2 year old who seduces the 27 year old teacher is, in the eyes of the court, the victim. Six months later it is consensual sex. The knee jerk reaction that the action of the child is not part of the possible dynamics of the event makes no sense. I don't think anyone is saying that the child is to be blamed for the crime. But, after all, the child was involved. This is not equivalent to a woman who is raped and the excuse is that she is "asking for it". And, of course, CSA cover such a wide range of circumstances it is difficult to make blanket statements like 'A child never should be blamed or even take one iota of the blame for the sexual abuse of an adult'. I have worked with high school students and with preschool children and trying to cast them all into the role of "child" doesn't make much sense. |
|
|
|
Post by rational on Apr 12, 2015 12:51:49 GMT -5
Emy I am finding the comment about children beyond school age to not be completely innocent very disturbing. While children may display some sexuality that they are experimenting with, which is normal development btw, they should never be blamed for CSA. It is the responsibility of the adult to understand and not respond in a way they would to an adult. A child never should be blamed or even take one iota of the blame for the sexual abuse of an adult. That is equivalent to the age old belief that women get raped 'because they were asking for it' because of what they wore for example. Sexual abuse at any age is illegal and there is no excuse for it but to say a child isn't completely innocent really is disturbing and concerning. The 17 1/ 2 year old who seduces the 27 year old teacher is, in the eyes of the court, the victim. Six months later it is consensual sex. The knee jerk reaction that the action of the child is not part of the possible dynamics of the event makes no sense. I don't think anyone is saying that the child is to be blamed for the crime. But, after all, the child was involved. This is not equivalent to a woman who is raped and the excuse is that she is "asking for it". And, of course, CSA cover such a wide range of circumstances it is difficult to make blanket statements like 'A child never should be blamed or even take one iota of the blame for the sexual abuse of an adult'. I have worked with high school students and with preschool children and trying to cast them all into the role of "child" doesn't make much sense. |
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Apr 12, 2015 15:54:55 GMT -5
When the abuse subject was discussed the senior worker made it very clear that they felt it was the parents responsibility. This completely sickens us as we have always made them welcome in our home and they have taken the opportunity to stay for as long as they wanted, and the ones in question of this abuse are the ones we opened our home to, yet it seems they are holding the parents responsible for the workers abuse. The responsibility for the safety of children falls, ultimately, to the parents. If parents leave their children in the care of another adult it is the parents who have chosen to do that. If they have misplaced their trust it is still their responsibility. In the larger sense, it would be ideal is everyone took responsibility for the safety of children but the harsh reality is that some of those are going to be people who abuse children. It is known that there are workers who have abused children and them been moved to other places. Moving them is not the issue. The issue is that there were people, including the workers, who were aware of the abuse and did not report it to the authorities. The blame can be assigned in a lot of ways. The workers for covering up the crime and moving the accused to another location. The parents for not reporting the crime. The workers for convincing the parents that the reporting the workers was wrong. The parents for believing that the workers were above the law. Etc., etc., etc. So you have a child. You have the parents. You have workers. You have a collection of family and friends. You have all the people who come in contact with the child. At the end of the day, the responsibility for the child's safety lies with what group? Exactly what sickens you about telling parents they are responsible for the safety of their children? Bear in mind these are not my words - they were from BTS. So I can't answer for the writer. The ministry has taught that workers are to be highly esteemed and that friends will get the blessing for obeying workers even when they're wrong. The ministry has also sent known CSA perpetrators into friends homes as workers. Now the ministry is taking no responsibility, saying that it's up to parents to protect their children. The protection of children is everyone's responsibility. Parents can't watch their children 24/7. Children have been sexually abused when they went to the bathroom at night. And while the mother was busy preparing a meal. It takes a village to raise a child. To protect a child. The "professing village" needs some training on child protection. How can that be achieved? From the BTS board: |
|
|
|
Post by snow on Apr 12, 2015 15:55:14 GMT -5
Emy I am finding the comment about children beyond school age to not be completely innocent very disturbing. While children may display some sexuality that they are experimenting with, which is normal development btw, they should never be blamed for CSA. It is the responsibility of the adult to understand and not respond in a way they would to an adult. A child never should be blamed or even take one iota of the blame for the sexual abuse of an adult. That is equivalent to the age old belief that women get raped 'because they were asking for it' because of what they wore for example. Sexual abuse at any age is illegal and there is no excuse for it but to say a child isn't completely innocent really is disturbing and concerning. The 17 1/ 2 year old who seduces the 27 year old teacher is, in the eyes of the court, the victim. Six months later it is consensual sex. The knee jerk reaction that the action of the child is not part of the possible dynamics of the event makes no sense. I don't think anyone is saying that the child is to be blamed for the crime. But, after all, the child was involved. This is not equivalent to a woman who is raped and the excuse is that she is "asking for it". And, of course, CSA cover such a wide range of circumstances it is difficult to make blanket statements like 'A child never should be blamed or even take one iota of the blame for the sexual abuse of an adult'. I have worked with high school students and with preschool children and trying to cast them all into the role of "child" doesn't make much sense. I think I covered that Rational. I did acknowledge that they could do something that could be interpreted as sexual even as a child, but the difference is the adult should never blame the child if another adults acts on it. As far as your example of a 17 year old I see what you mean there. I was thinking younger children that are just school age and as far as I can see they should not be to blame for CSA. The adult has a responsibility to protect that child even if the child may be testing out their sexuality. I also understand why you question preschool children bunched into the same category as a high school 'child'. But having said that some high school kids are still pretty naive and not completely cognizant of the repercussions of some of their actions. So it should still be the adults responsibility to make sure that high school child is safe. Also, I was under the understanding that Emy meant after a child becomes school age when she made the comment about 'beyond school age'. So if I misunderstood that and she meant older teens that are out of school and beyond CSA age restrictions then I retract my concern. |
|
|
|
Post by rational on Apr 12, 2015 16:52:42 GMT -5
Bear in mind these are not my words - they were from BTS. So I can't answer for the writer. Fair enough. I cannot speak to what the workers are teaching but if people continue to worship workers who have been convicted of crimes because they feel these same criminals have the power to deny them entrance to eternal life there is little anyone can do. OK. That is the responsibility of parents. You seem to want other people to co-opt that responsibility. Parents turning over the responsibility of protecting their children is what has resulted in some cases of child abuse. No it is not. I can choose whether I want the responsibility of taking care of your children or not. I do not have that option regarding my children. Sure. We locked ours in the closet when we needed a break. Children have died falling down the stairs. That does not relieve parents of their responsibility of protecting their children. Platitudes. A village helps unless some of the inhabitants are child abusers. The training is really brief. Report cases of child abuse or suspected cases of child abuse to the authorities. They have the training. Have them read the paragraph snow wrote for a few hours every day. The goal of identifying abusers before they abuse has not been filled with success. |
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Apr 12, 2015 18:16:43 GMT -5
A village helps unless some of the inhabitants are child abusers. I see it differently. If some of the inhabitants are child abusers, then it's even more important that the village looks out for it's children. |
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Apr 12, 2015 18:22:08 GMT -5
The training is really brief. Report cases of child abuse or suspected cases of child abuse to the authorities. They have the training. How would you suggest this could be taught? You're missing the most important aspect of training though - prevention. |
|
|
|
Post by emy on Apr 12, 2015 21:56:39 GMT -5
Oh dear!
I wasn't very clear about why I wrote "not totally innocent."
This is what withlove wrote: ...elevated in goodness even above the innocence of their children. ...
I replied: Not all children are completely innocent, especially after they get beyond school age.
I didn't intend to insinuate that if abuse occurs it is in any way the fault of a young child. But we do hear a lot about the innocent children, but after a certain age, kids surely know how to fabricate to save their own skin. I don't think anyone should assume fabrication or exaggeration about CSA. It should be properly investigated. But if we believe that children don't ever lie, especially when they are old enough to know they can get someone in trouble, then we are being duped. I'm really not referring to the 16-17-18 yo, though they aren't exempt of course.
Along with everyone else, I cringe at the thought of an adult taking advantage of a child, but my point really was that innocence (in any event) is not universally a characteristic of a child old enough to prevaricate if it will get him out of trouble. Generally speaking, the word of an any adult will have more weight than that of a child.
|
|
|
|
Post by emy on Apr 12, 2015 22:23:45 GMT -5
Emy, do you think the following scripture is relevant with respect to immorality in the work and fellowship, including child sexual abuse? I understand several accusations were made about this man and and have no reason to doubt they were true. But please take the first part of the verse as seriously as what you emphasized. And then give me a list of which sins require reproof before everyone. CSA is heinous and that is why there are laws about it and we are biblically encouraged to honor the law of the land. But to God, a sin is a sin, and sin is forgivable except for blasphemy. Is there any verse that says sexual sin, of any kind, cannot be forgiven? Personally, if I ever abused a child, I would tremble at the verses that say if I offend a little one (not limited to little children) it would be better to have a millstone hung on my neck and cast into the sea. IMO, this is in reference to GOD'S judgment of me. Furthermore, offense can be viewed from different perspectives, so I may have offended without realizing it. I would hope that the offended one would deal with me personally if that is the case, so that I could make amends in the way the Bible says to. And conversely, if I am ever offended, I would want to set the other free, so s/he didn't suffer the punishment that is worse than the millstone. This is a good universal guideline, but I'm not sure it is completely true, and sometimes offenders are allowed leeway WITH SUPERVISION. I think implying this as culture staple in the fellowship is greatly exaggerating. Because a few workers have made such statements does not mean all of them hold that attitude. I have not found such to be true, and except for this board, have not heard it expressed by other friends. |
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Apr 12, 2015 23:03:39 GMT -5
The fellowship culture that needs to change is the concept that workers are not accountable to the friends, and that the friends will be blessed for submitting to the workers even when they're wrong... I think implying this as culture staple in the fellowship is greatly exaggerating. Because a few workers have made such statements does not mean all of them hold that attitude. I have not found such to be true, and except for this board, have not heard it expressed by other friends. Of course, this is only relevant where the culture exists. Some individuals, and some families, won't stand for any nonsense from workers and will ensure the same for their kids. And some workers would never expect people to submit to what is wrong. |
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Apr 12, 2015 23:06:12 GMT -5
If they sexually abuse a child, they can never again be trusted around children. This is a good universal guideline, but I'm not sure it is completely true, and sometimes offenders are allowed leeway WITH SUPERVISION. By never trusted around children I meant "never trusted around children without supervision". |
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Apr 12, 2015 23:13:55 GMT -5
Emy, do you think the following scripture is relevant with respect to immorality in the work and fellowship, including child sexual abuse? 1 Timothy 5:19 Do not entertain an accusation against an elder unless it is brought by two or three witnesses. 20 But those elders who are sinning you are to reprove before everyone, so that the others may take warning.I understand several accusations were made about this man and and have no reason to doubt they were true. But please take the first part of the verse as seriously as what you emphasized. And then give me a list of which sins require reproof before everyone. CSA is heinous and that is why there are laws about it and we are biblically encouraged to honor the law of the land. But to God, a sin is a sin, and sin is forgivable except for blasphemy. Is there any verse that says sexual sin, of any kind, cannot be forgiven? Did anyone on this thread suggest that sexual sin shouldn't be forgiven? This man offended as a worker, then continued to be around children and attend conventions in another state. Recently he was baptised privately without first apologising to his victims. If "reproof before everyone" is not appropriate for CSA offenders, perhaps you could give me a list of sins for which "reproof before everyone" might be appropriate? |
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Apr 13, 2015 0:03:32 GMT -5
Emy, do you think the following scripture is relevant with respect to immorality in the work and fellowship, including child sexual abuse? 1 Timothy 5:19 Do not entertain an accusation against an elder unless it is brought by two or three witnesses. 20 But those elders who are sinning you are to reprove before everyone, so that the others may take warning.I understand several accusations were made about this man and and have no reason to doubt they were true. But please take the first part of the verse as seriously as what you emphasized. I'm not sure that I understand where you're going with this Emy. Are you suggesting there should be no accusation unless two or three CSA victims come forward to accuse the perpetrator? |
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Apr 13, 2015 0:07:32 GMT -5
Oh dear! I wasn't very clear about why I wrote "not totally innocent." This is what withlove wrote: ...elevated in goodness even above the innocence of their children. ...I replied: Not all children are completely innocent, especially after they get beyond school age.
I didn't intend to insinuate that if abuse occurs it is in any way the fault of a young child. But we do hear a lot about the innocent children, but after a certain age, kids surely know how to fabricate to save their own skin. I don't think anyone should assume fabrication or exaggeration about CSA. It should be properly investigated. But if we believe that children don't ever lie, especially when they are old enough to know they can get someone in trouble, then we are being duped. I'm really not referring to the 16-17-18 yo, though they aren't exempt of course. Along with everyone else, I cringe at the thought of an adult taking advantage of a child, but my point really was that innocence (in any event) is not universally a characteristic of a child old enough to prevaricate if it will get him out of trouble. Generally speaking, the word of an any adult will have more weight than that of a child. I'm not sure what you mean by a child lying to get out of trouble. What kind of trouble did you have in mind? |
|
|
|
Post by emy on Apr 13, 2015 0:33:56 GMT -5
Much of what I was saying was not specific to CSA, but abooout children in general... not all kids are innocent!
|
|
