1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

What Would Jesus Say

Discussion in 'General Baptist Discussions' started by Timsings, Feb 16, 2008.

Top Posters
Page 2 of 2
  1. Joe

    Joe New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2006
    Messages:
    2,521
    Likes Received:
    0
    Do NOT yell at me Rbell. Ever

    Since post #14 didn't suffice, here's an update.

    http://www.christianpost.com/articl..._Prevent_Clergy_Sex_Abuse_in_SBC_Churches.htm

    "D. August Boto, general counsel and vice president for convention policy with the Executive Committee of the Southern Baptist Convention, said they are examining the possibility of a national database of sexual offenders - a recommendation that Christa Brown of the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests (SNAP), a victim-advocacy group had made."

    Hopefully, we can all agree to pray for them :praying:
     
    #21 Joe, Feb 16, 2008
  2. rbell

    rbell Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Messages:
    11,103
    Likes Received:
    0
    wow. someone's grumpy.
     
    #22 rbell, Feb 16, 2008
  3. J.Wayne

    J.Wayne New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2008
    Messages:
    131
    Likes Received:
    0
    The SBC does not have any authority over what it's member churches do or do not do. Each individual church makes their own decisions. It may very well 'resolve' that their desires are followed, but it can not force any one to do as they are asked...sorta similiar to how God treats us all as individuals, by showing us the truth, but He will never forse anyone to accept it. This is one of the most important reasons that most call themself Baptist! We have the God given right to choose for ourselves. God is not a dictator, nor is the SBC.
     
    #23 J.Wayne, Feb 16, 2008
  4. Timsings

    Timsings Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2006
    Messages:
    585
    Likes Received:
    0
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Because most churches are reluctant to look to the state for opinions about anything. Having a place that they could go that is run by fellow Baptists would be a more comfortable situation for everyone. It would also run less risk of publicity for the church. Churches might also be more willing to report problems to such an agency. Although they need to get over this reluctance. Churches who are victimized need to fight back. They need to stand behind their members, file charges against the abuser, and assist the perpetrator to receive the punishment and treatment he deserves.

    The two examples in the article show how complicated the issue is. In one case, the church continued to support and employ the minister even after allegations were made against him. They re-hired him after he had admitted being the father of his victim's baby. He is still working in churches. In the other case, the preacher continued to be recommended for positions after he was charged with offenses.

    I have not done extensive study of clergy sexual abuse, but it seems to me that churches are afraid to confront this kind of issue. They just want it to go away, so they look the other way. They are afraid that negative publicity will reflect badly on the congregation, so they deal with the problem quietly, pay the guy to leave, and hope the next church will be better equipped to deal with this guy than they were. The other problem is that confronting the problem and involving civil authorities go against the idea of forgiveness that churches preach.

    So, when the abuser is finally charged with crimes, it is usually after many offenses. But this is no different from domestic spousal abuse or child abuse. Family members are ashamed that one member's conduct will reflect on the whole family, so they try to deal with it themselves.

    The process is a little like alcoholism. It is time that the SBC (and other denominations in similar positions) admits that it has a problem and that it is time to deal with it. As the article suggests, this is not an issue of autonomy. In fact, it seems to me these abusers use the structure (or the lack thereof) of the SBC to their advantage. It is an issue of cooperation, just as missions and education are. The SBC needs to do what it has to do to try to insure that churches can protect themselves, their members, and especially their children from this kind of predator. If you can't feel safe at church, then where?

    Tim Reynolds
     
    #24 Timsings, Feb 17, 2008
  5. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    52,013
    Likes Received:
    3,649
    Faith:
    Baptist

    The SBC doesn't need to do anything nore does it need to admit to anything. The SBC hasn't created the problem nor doe sit encourage it or even hide it. These hypothetical churches that are "reluctent" to look in the approrpiate places are being silly and they are in fact the problem. Not the convention. The Southern baptist Convention is not a nanny to the churches. However if you feel so strongly about this maybe this is a ministry for you to get involved in.
     
    #25 Revmitchell, Feb 17, 2008
  6. J.Wayne

    J.Wayne New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2008
    Messages:
    131
    Likes Received:
    0
    Amen...Amen...Amen...this is a prime example of the reasoning behind the thread I just started...What do you think? Are we dry-eyed Christians in a Hell-bound world.
     
    #26 J.Wayne, Feb 18, 2008
  7. blackbird

    blackbird Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2002
    Messages:
    11,898
    Likes Received:
    4
     
    #27 blackbird, Feb 18, 2008
  8. Joe

    Joe New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2006
    Messages:
    2,521
    Likes Received:
    0
    For blackbird

    It appears the SBC has taken more than a strong stance against alcohol. Churches who do not hold to SBC beliefs do not need to be members, correct?

    Yet if this was included as a part of the bylaws instead of a Resolution, the SBC may be obligated to auomatically deny that churches membership based upon their Pastor drinking alcohol. This is something I am not ready to support though I am against alcohol consumption for anything except medicinal purposes. Imo, it means godly men would possibly be eliminated from SBC membership.

    As men, we have a biblical obligation to protect women and children. There should be no question as to whether an organization which includes woman and children should not to everything in their power to follow the Bible.
    The SBC is doing all it can to enact a Resolution which would train and support churches regarding child abuse. They state there is already Lifeway materials which are available to us.

    If child abuse measures are included in the bylaws, it would become legally binding which could, imo, place the SBC in greater legal risk due to the ramifications. It wouldn't necessarily protect the children any more than a Resolution.

    The SBC appear to have the ability (upon a Resolution being enacted) to deny churches membership upon a case by case basis regarding Child abuse situations which occur in their churches.

    As foster parents, we went through 100 hours of training upon child abuse yet I still didn't make all the right decisions. We're only human.

    I believe the SBC cares for the children within its organization and will come through with a Resolution for the churches to follow. It shows good faith. Most churches care about their kids and would welcome training materials, support and guidelines upon how to handle these unfortunate situations when they arise.

    Thus upon a Resolution, when SBC churches reject the SBC's teachings by harboring child molesters, then it appears they can deny their membership, as they should. We are to follow the laws of the land, period.

    The SBC should be commended for their efforts.
     
    #28 Joe, Feb 18, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 18, 2008
  9. rbell

    rbell Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Messages:
    11,103
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'm all for the SBC taking as strong a stance as possible against molesters.

    I'm just not sure I'm following your thoughts here.

    SBC churches are autonomous. The resolutions passed are non-binding.

    I just don't think the SBC is set up to do this as it is proposed.

    I'm not against the idea...I'm just saying I don't know if it can be done procedurally.

    For instance: IFB churches have been hammered pretty hard regarding molesters--primarily because of several high-profile cases in which the churches blew it--big time.

    But, since IFB's are totally autonomous, there can be no overseeing body, because they don't answer to anyone above the local church structure.


    SBC's are in a similar boat...I think...
     
    #29 rbell, Feb 18, 2008
(You must log in or sign up to post here.)
Page 2 of 2
Loading...