Registered Sex Offender To Be Ordained As Minister

[dolfan]

God can and does, no thanks to me or anyone else, save and call whom He will. That's for sure. Whether that includes pedophiles is His business and is uniquely His. I'm not telling God who to save and who shouldn't be saved.

At the same time, and with whatever paradox or contradiction it might cause or show, I'm not putting myself or my child around a pedophile who claims to be a Christian now. Whether he/she is a believer is known really only to God and him/her. Where fruit from this person shows to the discerning believer that he/she really is converted and follows Christ, my applause and thankful prayers are offered from a distance.

I've known molesters, I've represented them. I'll do my job professionally and as vigorously as the facts and law apply. There are even some things about the law that, in my view, too easily lump some cases in as sex offenses that should not be (i.e., a 19 year old male and a 15 year old female having sex is statutory rape or is sexual abuse in Alabama and I think that is too much cure for the problem). So, I'm not just a shackle 'em and forget 'em guy on everything that the law designates as a sexual offense. But, in the case of children, and I'd err on the side of caution and define child as anyone who hasn't reached their 15th birthday, anyone who is 20 or more who has sexual contact with them ought to be punished as a sex offender.

Having said that, I can see where a mistake can occur even between someone of those two ages where a guy might think a girl was older. Tough. ID her before you do that with her. If you are going to have sex outside of marriage, you're in your early 20's, and you can't find a woman to have sex with you who you know is at least your own age (i.e., you grew up with her or you know what year she was in 7th grade and dropped out or whatever), then you've got some other issues going on anyway. No reason for society to exercise any leniency if you fail to take on the burden of verifying the age of your "partner". That's the least you can do to keep from victimizing a 14 year old or younger. If you're too lazy, stupid, ignorant, sorry or whatever to do that much, then welcome to the pen.

The far more common case, though, is the real pedophile who goes after the young as a predator does prey. It isn't a "mistake" --- you've seen the Predator shows on NBC. None of those guys is innocently mistaken. I've never seen personally represented someone in a real and reasonable mistake in that regard. It happens, but it is HIGHLY unusual.

In church settings, I'm all for people of the worst sort coming to Christ. BUT, I'm all for pedophiles not having a crack at anyone's kids, and especially not mine. I do not know how you reconcile all that. All I know is I'm looking out for my child and if I see anything risky or fishy about yours, I'm not going to sit quietly. For me, that means complete isolation from and no contact with a pedophile and not having any connection so that the person may find any advantage toward having contact with my kid.

[Brian]

God can and does, no thanks to me or anyone else, save and call whom He will. That's for sure. Whether that includes pedophiles is His business and is uniquely His. I'm not telling God who to save and who shouldn't be saved.
.............................................................

For me, that means complete isolation from and no contact with a pedophile and not having any connection so that the person may find any advantage toward having contact with my kid.

So basically your saying that even if the person is truly God called into that position that you would reject there teaching and leadership and go your own way? Have you ever considered the fact that that person may be the one who brings about a teaching from the Lord that changes your entire life? That maybe that former sex offender becomes one of the greatest tools used by God that the world has ever known. (unlikely I know, but possible given Gods sovernty)

Too many times we hold the position of , "ol well, I know I won't be around to get dupped" when there is no dupping going on!

Caution is great. I wouldn't be a good father if I didn't guard after my children. But at the same time if I recognise that it is God's call to make on whom he calls to ministery why would I pack up and leave that body? How far would you go? Would you leave if a known former gambler was placed into leadership? A former complulsive liar? A former homosexual? A former theif? Where do you draw the line because I can think of a dozen ways to let my personal prejudices get in the way of who I let minister to me. Kinda like alot of folks don't recieve leaders who are tattooed or are in there second marriage or an interacial relationship or use chistian rock as a ministering tool. Get the idea?

[Brian]

1 Corinthians 6:9-11
9.Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders 10.nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. 11.And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.

I would imagine that the "sexual immoral" would incorperate all manner of sexual sin and illicit behaviour. That would probably include the pedophile. But notice verse 11 says "but you were washed, sanctified, and justified" in the name of the Lord! Who am I to continue to deny them the respect of being my brother/sister in Christ?

Like I said, don't be foolish. I myself am a convicted felon for grand larceny and I doubt anyone would offer me a treasurey positon. but then again I wouldn't seek that out. Wisdom should be used on boths sides. The former sexually immoral person, in this case pedophile, should not be seeking childrens ministery leader or day care. Duh. I have a former drug addiction, which is what lead to my larceny conviction, I wouldn't go into the inner city to minister to drug users and crack addicts because that would probably be plain foolish on my part. While I might have special insight into there lives being around that could spark old behaviours and I am not willing to put that to the test. But that is wisdom on MY part. Just as the pedophile should use wisdom and uderstand that certain leadership positions could potentally bring back old demons that were dead and buried.

Just my cent and a half.

[dolfan]

God can and does, no thanks to me or anyone else, save and call whom He will. That's for sure. Whether that includes pedophiles is His business and is uniquely His. I'm not telling God who to save and who shouldn't be saved.
.............................................................

For me, that means complete isolation from and no contact with a pedophile and not having any connection so that the person may find any advantage toward having contact with my kid.

So basically your saying that even if the person is truly God called into that position that you would reject there teaching and leadership and go your own way? Have you ever considered the fact that that person may be the one who brings about a teaching from the Lord that changes your entire life? That maybe that former sex offender becomes one of the greatest tools used by God that the world has ever known. (unlikely I know, but possible given Gods sovernty)

I'm saying that God's call on a person's life does not erase the consequences of what they've done. A consequence of what they did, if they're a molester, is that I keep my kid away from him/her. This is not haughty; it is biblical par. There are many, many warnings against evil conduct, strong warnings to guard one's heart/mind, even down to the most mundane sort of matters, disqualifying people on the basis of not having your house in order/children in obedience/wife in subjection, etc. Those seemingly smaller things can have huge consequences (Phineas and Hophni, the sons of Eli, are examples of probable lives that turned beginning on fairly minor slips). Why in the world would anyone be the least bit dismayed at the idea of even more severe consequences of rejection, isolation, etc., of a man who was a molester?? God can call whomever He will, but when He does, He does it with full knowledge of everyone and everything. There's simply no instance I'm aware of (and if I'm incorrect, let me know) where someone guilty of this grave violation is placed into a position of trust over his victims or those similarly situated.

You might offer Paul himself as an example of that, but I find a huge difference with Paul. First of all, Paul's actions were not born from a personal compulsion to do harm; he was willing but he was ordered also. He was working in at least some measure of public view and accountability. Even if he was a murderer, he was not a pedophile. His situation is more akin to a police officer who isn't too sorry that he's wrongfully shot a drug dealer to death; he may not remain a police officer, but when he's done his time, he may very well be a suitable unarmed security guard. And, if he comes to realize that his actions are truly wrongful, he may even be a good guard ---- but no one in their right mind will give him a gun while on the clock again. Paul had to prove himself time after time. It isn't as if people said, "Oh, he's God-called, so let's hear him." And, there's not any condemnation for their reluctance. There is understanding.

Ananias even protested and God had to tell him DIRECTLY in a vision, "Look, I've called him. It's okay. Do what I tell you. Get him, feed him. Don't think this is 'Saul Gets Off Scot-Free'. This is a call to suffering at the hands of people for Me."

We don't get that kind of vision about the garden variety molester in our midst. There must be a reason why, don't you think? On Paul's first trip to Jerusalem after his conversion, only James and Peter saw him. After that brief stay with Peter, Barnabas had to accompany him to get the other Christians in Jerusalem to believe he was a believer! And, in my view, the case was easier to make that he wasn't who he had been just because of the nature of what he'd done. Had Paul been a pedophile, I don't think he's the author of much of the New Testament. That's just my opinion, of course. In any event, it was years and years before he would meet the other apostles and be accepted. And, how did that happen? Paul tells it in Galatians 1:22,23:

Then I went into the regions of Syria and Cilicia. I was still unknown by sight to the churches of Judea which were in Christ; but only, they kept hearing, "He who once persecuted us is now preaching the faith which he once tried to destroy."

When he'd departed from that first visit to Jerusalem after becoming a Christian, he had not been introduced to the Judean believers, not even to the other apostles, and it took the repeated message to them -- over time -- about the veracity of his conversion to convince them. In other words, he was made to and did prove himself to them. Consequences, no condemnation for putting him to the proof.

Too many times we hold the position of , "ol well, I know I won't be around to get dupped" when there is no dupping going on!

But, without the proof of time and living up to the call, you can't (and I don't see where God does) put the burden on everyone around the person to trust their testimony, either. That's what you're implying ought to be. That's not mercy and gentleness, Brian; it is recklessness.

Caution is great. I wouldn't be a good father if I didn't guard after my children. But at the same time if I recognise that it is God's call to make on whom he calls to ministery why would I pack up and leave that body? How far would you go? Would you leave if a known former gambler was placed into leadership? A former complulsive liar? A former homosexual? A former theif? Where do you draw the line because I can think of a dozen ways to let my personal prejudices get in the way of who I let minister to me.

Some good points. That's why I go back and use Paul as an example. I wouldn't put a former gambler or thief or liar in control of money. I wouldn't put a former homosexual over the church ministry to married couples or, more especially, over young men. I think you draw the line at common sense to start with. Require proof over time of trustworthiness. It was how the apostles and early believers themselves approached Paul himself. And, I return to the nature of Paul's action, too. Hauling off Christians for punishment or death was not a secret compulsion; it was a public and heinous act, but it was not a hidden act. Pedophilia thrives in secrecy and darkness, and that is all the more reason why someone who is/was that must be put through the severest of all 'wringers' of time, proof and trustworthiness before allowing anything close to even resembling access to children or youth. Personally, I'd say they'd reached the point of proof when they die, but there might conceivably be instances where you don't have to be a dead pedophile to be a wholly reformed one. I just can't imagine it, though. Haven't seen it yet, let me put it that way.

Kinda like alot of folks don't recieve leaders who are tattooed or are in there second marriage or an interacial relationship or use chistian rock as a ministering tool. Get the idea?

No, I don't get the idea. Tattoos? Remarriage? Interracial marriages? Musical styles? No, and not only do I not get it, I don't think you get it, either, my friend. It isn't just not "kinda like", it is nothing like.

[Brian]

hey dolfan, I hope you see that I wasn't trying to compare the actions to each other. Like using christian rock to minister is the same as a pedophile preacher. What I mean is the manner in which each of those are recieved. And I only said that because you made comment that even if God had appointed a former pedophile as pastor that you would leave. I took that to mean that you don't trust that person and nothing they say has any intristict value.
I myself have seen some folks set in the pews, arms folded, snarly look on there face all the while the praise and worship team are rocking out some AWESOME music to worship the Lord. Those poeple could be missing out on some of the greatest blessings they may ever recieve. That was my comparison. I know it's kind of a poor one. sorry

[dolfan]

Another thought --

I read that this guy is going to be a praise/worship leader and possibly the pastor? Wow. Just wow. Look, how does a man who has been thoroughly discredited address the important questions of life.

How can a pedophile speak to anything? Every single thing has an impact on kids, right? Is there any area of life that does not directly connect to how your kids will live and be?? Is there any area of teaching by a minister that you wouldn't expect would have some impact on your kids?? Wouldn't you want a preacher to have at least the integrity to disqualify himself from certain topics?? Wouldn't you, then, conclude that a pedophile really has and can never have anything to offer to your children????? Shouldn't a reformed pedophile who's honest about his conduct have the integrity in his 'reformation' to withdraw from such a position? I think so. And, the fact that this cat hasn't suggests to me he's positioning himself for his next victims.


Oh, yeah .... the church ordaining this guy. "We are a GLBT affirming church." So, there y'go.

[JohnDB]

There was one part in that tape of the story that was particularly disturbing to me.

The pedophile tried to keep his conviction and police record a secret.

Brian, I know you truly are on the road of straight and narrow...you have true wisdom and knowledge of a personal relationship with My Jesus. You freely and willingly confess your past...you have no desire to be put in a compromising situation or testing situation whatsoever.

And yeah...I would want you in any congregation I was a member of...no questions asked.

This pedophile wanted to keep his past a secret instead of bringing it out into the light. People unaware could have easily engaged in behavior with this man that could have had drastic consequences...if it weren't for a former leader of that church bringing this story out into the news. This whole situation smells really bad.

[Mike Vande]

Most forget the fact that Sampson was a faithful Judge for 25 years before he went after Delilah.

That part gets really underplayed a lot.

You'd better read Judges again. Sampson was the worst example of a judge for the Lord that was recorded in that book. He was childish, arrogant, willful, rude to his parents AND God, bloodthirsty, promiscuous, impure, and foolish. Even at the end, he told God what he wanted, and committed suicide. He never realized God was in charge and not him.

Sampson is the poster boy for the saying "If you won't work at being a good example, you won't escape being a bad one."

[JohnDB]

OK Mike,

Take it up with scripture...
(and I mispoke..it was only 20 years)

JDG 15:20 So he judged Israel twenty years in the days of the Philistines.

I agree...many of Sampson's attitudes were wrong. But that doesn't mean that he didn't die with digniy and honor.

JDG 16:31 Then his brothers and all his father’s household came down, took him, brought him up and buried him between Zorah and Eshtaol in the tomb of Manoah his father. Thus he had judged Israel twenty years.
The "buried with his father" part speaks to going to the restful part of Sheol...the grave...meaning that he did learn his lesson eventually. He was a dedicated servant of God. These Philistines had touched in an unholy manner what was sacred and needed to pay a price for it. So had Sampson and he recognized that part as well.

[pastorables]

pa,
Very few left prison alive.

TW

That's true, yet Christian history also shows us that many were tortured, beheaded, sawn asunder, and killed in all manner of pernicious ways. Do you actually believe that Stephen is the only Christian who was stoned or killed during Saul's reign as a Pharisee? I'm not saying that Saul threw one stone, though he could have. I am saying that his associated actions against the church as a religious zealot were heinous and murderous.

We will just have to agree to disagree on this one. The man was ferocious and the church was afraid of him even after his conversion. That should speak for something.

Galatians 1:13

Paul... had beyond measure persecuted the church of God, and wasted it. He had not only been a rejecter of the Christian religion, notwithstanding the many evident proofs that were given of its divine origin; but he had been a persecutor of it too, and had applied himself with the utmost violence and rage to destroy the professors of it. (Matthew Henry)

I have no problem deriving from the scriptures we have available concerning Saul's history that he persecuted Christians to the death. Was he not a Pharisee? The spirit of Pharisaism has a marked history of plotting death to Christians. The Bible will back this thought up.

I believe we have enough scripture to offer an informed statement concerning Paul's past life. I stand by my current conclusions in this area.

Regards,
pa

[JohnDB]

pa,
Very few left prison alive.

TW

That's true, yet Christian history also shows us that many were tortured, beheaded, sawn asunder, and killed in all manner of pernicious ways. Do you actually believe that Stephen is the only Christian who was stoned or killed during Saul's reign as a Pharisee? I'm not saying that Saul threw one stone, though he could have. I am saying that his associated actions against the church as a religious zealot were heinous and murderous.

We will just have to agree to disagree on this one. The man was ferocious and the church was afraid of him even after his conversion. That should speak for something.

Galatians 1:13

Paul... had beyond measure persecuted the church of God, and wasted it. He had not only been a rejecter of the Christian religion, notwithstanding the many evident proofs that were given of its divine origin; but he had been a persecutor of it too, and had applied himself with the utmost violence and rage to destroy the professors of it. (Matthew Henry)

I have no problem deriving from the scriptures we have available concerning Saul's history that he persecuted Christians to the death. Was he not a Pharisee? The spirit of Pharisaism has a marked history of plotting death to Christians. The Bible will back this thought up.

I believe we have enough scripture to offer an informed statement concerning Paul's past life. I stand by my current conclusions in this area.

Regards,
pa

I'll stand with ya...and even use deoderant when I do.

[pastorables]

I'll stand with ya...and even use deoderant when I do.

[free]

I wonder how many unregistered sex offenders are ministers already?

[Brian]

There was one part in that tape of the story that was particularly disturbing to me.

The pedophile tried to keep his conviction and police record a secret.

Brian, I know you truly are on the road of straight and narrow...you have true wisdom and knowledge of a personal relationship with My Jesus. You freely and willingly confess your past...you have no desire to be put in a compromising situation or testing situation whatsoever.

And yeah...I would want you in any congregation I was a member of...no questions asked.

This pedophile wanted to keep his past a secret instead of bringing it out into the light. People unaware could have easily engaged in behavior with this man that could have had drastic consequences...if it weren't for a former leader of that church bringing this story out into the news. This whole situation smells really bad.

Thanks John. I don't deserve the compliments but I sure do like 'em!

[ImaPK]

Look I can forgive my first wife for catching her in bed with another man but forget? RIGHT I'm with you dolfan