Child Sex Offenders at Church

[Suzie]

Oh, if you know the person is a sex offender, there's no question. He is a sex offender. Do what you need to do. My point is when we start looking for excuses to be afraid and begin making up reasons. There's a legitimate difference between someone being a sex offender and the unfounded guess someone is a sex offender and making decisions without looking further into the situation. The latter is how reputations are destroyed.

It's not so much the actions that bother me, it's the mindset of unfounded fear and making decisions based on it.

Oh, I thought you was referring to the OP since the sex offender in question spent 18 months in prison for sexually abusing his granddaughter (after 20 years of abusing his own daughters).

However, if you are referring to generally unfounded fears such as "That person looks like a pedophile" therefore let's not talk to him/her and avoid Church, I agree with your line of thinking about being paranoid. Having said that, sometimes we get the feeling that might tell us something isn't right and we should be more observant.

[Tough Grits]

• My feelings on the punishment of child sex offenders is even more extreme than DeborahC's and I will not be sharing in detail just what I feel should happen to them because I expressed it to several close friends and was told I need mental help. I will only say that I have to temper it with Christ-like thoughts.

I appreciate your honesty!

[Guest DeborahC]

Oh, if you know the person is a sex offender, there's no question. He is a sex offender. Do what you need to do. My point is when we start looking for excuses to be afraid and begin making up reasons. There's a legitimate difference between someone being a sex offender and the unfounded guess someone is a sex offender and making decisions without looking further into the situation. The latter is how reputations are destroyed. I have witnessed this very thing. Someone, who tragically was a victim, made unfounded accusations in a ward. Stopped coming to church, and told everyone it was because she thought so-n-so was a pedophile. Just because she happened to fit a few signs.

It's not so much the actions that bother me, it's the mindset of unfounded fear and making decisions based on it. People may not start at the paranoid idea someone is an uncaught pedophile, but there is a slope, especially if one has truly experienced a bad situation.

This is also a real concern. We need to be VERY careful not to accuse people who are innocent. We must be SURE before we cast any doubt on a person at all.

We also have to be very careful around victims of child abuse, they they themselves do not entrap adults. This is especially true in the case of female children who have already been abused. They often tend to act out inappropriately and can get unsuspecting adults in a "situation" before they know what's happened.

Famous cases include the McMartin Preschool Trials and the Kern County events written about in a book called Satanic Panic, written by a police officer.

These people were put through hell because of unfounded accusations.

[RipplecutBuddha]

Just my two cents here, actually it's Christ's two cents first;

Doctrine & Covenants 64:8-10

8 My disciples, in days of old, sought occasion against one another and forgave not one another in their hearts; and for this evil they were afflicted and sorely chastened.

9 Wherefore, I say unto you, that ye ought to forgive one another; for he that forgiveth not his brother his trespasses standeth condemned before the Lord; for there remaineth in him the greater sin.

10 I, the Lord, will forgive whom I will forgive, but of you it is required to forgive all men.

Now, when Christ says we are "required to forgive all men." what does that mean to us individually? More to the point, why would Christ say this to us?

We must forgive all men because there can be no hatred in our hearts if we wish to enter the Celestial Kingdom, which is surely Christ's goal for us all. Yes this includes child molesters. Yes, they have access to the atonement just as anyone else does. Their road is surely more difficult, but it is there for them if they stay the course.

Suppose a guilty child molester actually did obtain forgiveness from God for his/her evil, yet you didn't forgive him, what then?

The fact is Only Christ can judge. None of us are clean enough to even attempt it.

At the same time, forgiveness does not mean we forget the lessons we have learned. We ought to modify our conduct around such individuals. Maybe the buddy system could work. Maybe not.

Yes Christ said, in Matthew 18:6

6 But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea.

BUT.....did he say that such a punishment is what he wants to happen? No.

Of course it's a difficult situation. Life is difficult. How easy should it be to get into the Celestial Kingdom? This is one of those trying moments for many of us; possibly equating to the trial of Abraham with his son Isaac. Will we let our emotions guide us, or will we hearken to the will and voice of our Savior?

I've never had children. I've never seen so much as hints of abuse in my family, direct or extended. Does that mean I can't speak here? Of course not. I cannot speak to the suffering caused, nor the pain felt through such sins, but then I never intend to try.

At the end of the day, when we stand before Christ, this will be the issue; did we forgive all men or not? How we deal with a known abuser should be based on sincere love and concern for his/her soul/eternal welfare as well as the same for the children of the ward. Christ left nobody out of the atonement. We certainly have no right to exclude anyone ourselves.

[applepansy]

In this emotionally charged discussion I have be hesitant to add more but I feel I should remind everyone of this scripture:

D&C 64:10 I, the Lord, will forgive whom I will forgive, but of you it is required to forgive all men.

This is hard for me. My grandson's half sister was sexually abused/raped by multiply men. My grandson was there and heard it all as an infant. He has issues with strangers and is very sensitive to people. He can spot a bad person a mile away.

However, I am required to forgive his mother who made it possible for these very terrible things to happen to her children. Its hard. But if I don't forgive then I'm saying Christ's suffering wasn't enough and I'm not prepared to say that.

In the ward the sexual offender is in, the Bishop should be informed and is responsible for taking appropriate action with this person so that others are safe, and that he can attend church and repent of his sins.

We are also commanded to support and sustain our leaders. I would hope people in that ward could support the Bishop in his decisions. If there are feelings or a person feels there is more that needs to be done they should talk to the Bishop and express their concerns.

Forgiveness means we don't hold a grudge. Forgiveness doesn't mean you stand put yourself or your children in harms way.

[Suzie]

My grandson's half sister was sexually abused/raped by multiply men. My grandson was there and heard it all as an infant.

How horrible Applepansy!

[Jean]

This can be a gut wrenching topic. Speaking as a mother who has a daughter who at the age of 8 was touched inappropriately by a 42-year-old neighbor man, and I called the police when I learned about it, my feelings are definitely -- protect your children. They depend on you and this is not a theoretic discussion. I do feel that the Holy Ghost can guide you. That's the only thing you can do in this life -- pray with all your heart and use wisdom in all things. Teach your children that if an adult tells you to keep it a secret -- tell the nearest trusted adult. Adults should not tell children to keep secrets and our children should be taught this.

As far as not going to church because a child sex offender is in attendance, I would go. But I would be fasting and praying all the while. Different wards handle this in different ways. My daughter, who is now an adult, told me that a few years ago in their ward a child was assaulted during mutual which was on a Wednesday night. Evidently one of the mutual workers brought their children to an activity, and the assault took place in an empty classroom. A member of the bishopric read a letter to the Relief Society the next Sunday stating that members should know where their children were in the building at all times. They also stated that the person who committed this act had a restraining order placed against them and was not allowed to come within a certain distance of the church. I had never heard of this before so found it interesting.

This is an extremely difficult subject and my sympathies go out to victims.

Gentlesoul

[skippy740]

Forgiveness DOES NOT MEAN to trust without qualification.

Matthew 7:1

1 Judge not, that ye be not judged.

Anybody ever look at the JST footnote?

JST Matt. 7:1–2 Now these are the words which Jesus taught his disciples that they should say unto the people.

Judge not unrighteously,

that ye be not judged:

but judge righteous judgment.

Alma 41:14 (14–15)

;

3 Ne. 14:1 (1–27)

;

D&C 11:12

.

The Lord is the ultimate judge. However, He does NOT command us to give up our own judgment and common sense.

If someone was convicted of embezzlement... do you let him have a job as a bank teller? NO. You don't put temptation in their path.

Yes, the Lord forgives and forgets. But He does not require us to forget and use foolish judgment.

Anybody ever read D&C 98 about forgiveness?

As a matter of fact, it appears to be PERFECT for this thread:

Doctrine and Covenants 98Â*

D&C 98:23-31

23 Now, I speak unto you concerning your families—if men will smite you, or your families, once, and ye bear it patiently and revile not against them, neither seek revenge, ye shall be rewarded;

24 But if ye bear it not patiently, it shall be accounted unto you as being meted out as a just measure unto you.

25 And again, if your enemy shall smite you the second time, and you revile not against your enemy, and bear it patiently, your reward shall be an hundred fold.

26 And again, if he shall smite you the third time, and ye bear it patiently, your reward shall be doubled unto you four-fold;

27 And these three testimonies shall stand against your enemy if he repent not, and shall not be blotted out.

28 And now, verily I say unto you, if that enemy shall escape my vengeance, that he be not brought into judgment before me, then ye shall see to it that ye warn him in my name, that he come no more upon you, neither upon your family, even your children’s children unto the third and fourth generation.

29 And then, if he shall come upon you or your children, or your children’s children unto the third and fourth generation, I have delivered thine enemy into thine hands;

30 And then if thou wilt spare him, thou shalt be rewarded for thy righteousness; and also thy children and thy children’s children unto the third and fourth generation.

31 Nevertheless, thine enemy is in thine hands; and if thou rewardest him according to his works thou art justified; if he has sought thy life, and thy life is endangered by him, thine enemy is in thine hands and thou art justified.

[Guest]

Something happened to one of my young children at the hands of a cousin who was much too old to not know better. I was angry for a long time. I certainly don't trust him. We take extreme precautions to keep all of our children from ever being in a position where he could be alone with them, even for a second. But that doesn't mean my husband and I don't still have love and concern for him, and it's important to us that he isn't cast out of the family. Unfortunately that means a lot of the consequences are on us because we miss family functions and such, but it's what feels right.

[BadWolf]

I don't understand why some people equate forgiveness with no consequences.

For example:

- My son cops am attitude about his Videogames. He then loses the privilege of being able to play those games. Forgiving him for copping an attitude doesn't negate the consequences of those actions.

- Consequence of beating your wife; your wife divorcing you. For all eternity.

- Consequence of raping children: Not being allowed to be in church with children in it for life.

The idea that in order to 'forgive' one has to NOT suffer the consequences of ones actions? Beyond me.

My son shouldn't be grounded from his games?

All battered women should stay with their spouses?

Child rapers should be allowed in the presence of children?

This is "forgiveness"?

...

[BadWolf]

I completely disagree with the idea that a pedophile can actually change, although they may (or may not) want to. A schizophrenic can WANT to be neurotypical, not gonna happen.

HOWEVER ... For the sake of fairness... Lets assume I'm wrong, and pedophiles CAN truly repent:

Why, exactly, would someone who is TRULY repentant not jumping at the chance to be in an adult only ward? Or proving their words with action by keeping themselves away from children (sacrement at home, that adult-only ward, etc.). Why, instead, are they forcing themselves into family wards with children in them? Why is that not throwing up HUGE flashing ::WARNING:: signs? A pedophile insisting on being around children. How skilled of manipulater IS that man, that people start blaming themselves, instead of going... Wait one durn minute... Your actions are in no way lining up with your words.

A gifted manipulator, indeed.

[pam]

Where exactly would you find an adult only ward other than the singles wards?

[selek]

Maybe this is a discussion that should be limited to survivors and people who are empathetic or who at least validate their fears and feelings.

Maybe those who don't fit into the above category should just stand by and watch and listen and learn.

Maybe...

This is at least the third time this sentiment has been expressed.

It boils down to once again trying to limit the discussion to those who agree with you. The rest of us should just sit down, shut up, and do as our betters tell us.

To put it somewhat bluntly: Get over yourselves.

I have nothing but sympathy for your pain and your fears. I have been there myself.

But my sympathy ends when you redefine "compassion" to mean "shut and agree with me."

That having been said, your position is not privileged.

Your opinions are not sancrosanct.

You are not above correction.

I- and others- have suffered just as you have and still do not agree with you.

This is at least the third time in which someone has tried to dismiss or delegitimize someone who disagrees with them in the name of "compassion".

Having been there, I have plenty of compassion, empathy, and understanding of their fears.

But "empathy" is not defined as "I can't say anything to challenge their prejudices and fears".

And that's the bottom line: the OP and her various defenders are hung-up on what-if's and boogey men.

And they are demanding that the rest of us placate them in their near-hysteria.

I, too, am a survivor of abuse.

Additionally, I married a victim of abuse and watched helplessly as her abuser did everything in his power to destroy my marriage and continue to dominate every aspect of his daughter's life.

I watched like a hawk every time he was around my daughters, and I made it amply clear that if he so much as looked at my daughter's funny that prison would not be his worst fate.

I, too, have spent long hours standing watch in the dark spaces of the night, worrying about how best to protect my children.

I, too, have felt that worm of fear in my stomach whenever they have been out of my sight.

And I still disagree with you.

As a survivor of abuse myself, I'm gonna throw just a bit more gasoline on this grease fire.

Before you make any more demands about what the Church MUST do "to protect the children", ask yourself the following question and consider:

Just who are YOU to condemn this man?

He has not harmed YOU.

He has not harmed YOUR family.

Atonement for his crimes is between himself and the Lord, between himself and his victims.

He owes YOU nothing.

And neither do the rest of us.

By all means, exercise every bit of prudence and precaution available to you. Take every rationale step you feel is necessary to protect your children.

But remember that it is not your place to bar the Chapel door, nor to gather the tar and feathers all in the name of "preventing" another crime.

Edited January 20, 2013 by selek

[selek]

This is "forgiveness"?

...

No.

"This" is a strawman.

No one here has advocated that a RSO or CSO not suffer the consequences of his (or her) actions.

No one here has advocated that we as members of the Church do not behave prudently and wisely in protecting our children.

The disagreements lie in the exact nature of the precautions to be taken and in precisely whose opinions are considered "valid" on the topic.

[selek]

I doubt anyone will fault you for not putting your child in a dangerous place, even if it means skipping out on some standard church actions. However, I really don't think avoiding church is the best first step. I believe that as long as the ward has taken reasonable precautions and your kid knows you want him to avoid so-n-so, there's no reason to avoid church.

The only pause I have is when we truly start ostracizing others from the gospel. Not from the church building, not from our circle of close friends, but from the gospel (which is what I believe some here pointed out). We can certainly say "I avoid Brother/Sister So-n-SO because he/she is a child predator" but we have no right to say they will be denied whatever blessing.

Now, child safety is a big deal and I believe it is worthy of real caution and real thought. However, where is the line? We avoid church because there is a registered sex offender in the ward. We avoid church because there might be a registered sex offender in the ward. We avoid church because maybe someone is an uncaught pedophile. This can go all the way down to We avoid church because we don't like so-n-so.

Again, if you really believe your child will be in danger from a sex offender at church, do what you need to do. I just think we also need to be careful about the mindset that can evolve from this situation. I understand that I cannot truly understand what a victim has felt. But I also believe there are big differences between real and imagined fears.

Is it worth indulging an imagined, unfounded fear if it means avoiding our gospel duties (not attending church can lead to greater spiritual problems) and accusing others of imagined things?

Amen and Amen!

[BadWolf]

Where exactly would you find an adult only ward other than the singles wards?

EXACTLY.

The average 20/30/40yo is more capable of dealing with "We have a sexual predator in our ward." And to handle themselves accordingly, than the average 5yo, 7yo, 10yo.

Granted, still not my first choice, but operating on the assumption that I'm wrong a pedophiles really can repent, we DO have adult only wards. Rather a lot of them. Many with older groups (30+).

Instead of "Im a pedophile, but Ive given up my evil ways, and am joining the family ward."

Major cognitive dissonance.

[Guest]

So are you advocating wards for those who are not welcome elsewhere? As in, "I belong to the Bountiful, Utah Pedophile Ward"?

[BadWolf]

No.

"This" is a strawman.

No one here has advocated that a RSO or CSO not suffer the consequences of his (or her) actions.

No one here has advocated that we as members of the Church do not behave prudently and wisely in protecting our children.

The disagreements lie in the exact nature of the precautions to be taken and in precisely whose opinions are considered "valid" on the topic.

1) Nope. As a matter of fact, its an honest question.

We've had several different views if forgiveness brought up.

My own being one, forgiveness does not equal trust being another, this being a third.

I honestly don't understand the reasoning nor actions in this type.

My understanding of this type was as I wrote, which makes little sense to me (outside of victim mentality... Which while it makes 'sense', is a broken thing).

People here have many different virwpoints, which can be illuminating in an 'aha! THAT makes sense, now' or "I disagree but can respect that POV" kind of way. Or it can simply be a misunderstanding of intent.

Typically, when I don't understand something... I ask. And give examples of my current understanding (so that those whole hold or practice it can say: yep, exactly... No no no, not at all... In some ways, extra.). As I did. In good faith. I completely fail to understand why some people equate forgiveness in a way I see as inherently dangerous.

My failure to understand it doesn't make it wrong, nor does it make my view right. I am not mocking anyone's system. I just don't get it.

2) There are FAR more disagreements going on, or laid to rest, than you've listed. By and large they've mostly followed the maxim that reasonable people can and do differ.

I am suggesting that not being allowed around children is less a facet of forgiveness or the lack thereof, and more a natural consequence of those actions.

[MorningStar]

What a difficult issue. In the ward I grew up in, there was a guy who had sexually abused his step daughter and he was never near children at church. I never worried about him doing anything because so many people were watching him and didn't trust him. His step daughter told a friend at school what was going on, then she told my mom (who was legally required to report it), and then she moved out of state to live with her dad. Her mom never talked about her again and didn't have any pictures of her in her home.

There was another guy who was never charged with anything that I know of, but he was around children all the time in a way that made everyone uncomfortable, even more than the first guy because he spent all of his free time around children. There are guys who are just awesome and love children, but this was different.

[selek]

We've had several different views if forgiveness brought up.

My own being one, forgiveness does not equal trust being another, this being a third.

Can you please cite a specific post (by number) where this view of forgiveness is expressed?

To be honest, I took it as a rhetorical device attempting to present us with a false dichotomy (and to force us to pick from singularly bad choices).

I honestly don't understand the reasoning nor actions in this type.

Nor do I- but more importantly, I missed where any LDS member has actually espoused such a view...

My understanding of this type was as I wrote, which makes little sense to me (outside of victim mentality... Which while it makes 'sense', is a broken thing).

This I can agree with. I understand the mental construct and worldview under which the OP and others are laboring- but that does not make it a valid or healthy worldview.

And we do people no favors by allowing them to insist upon judging the world through carnival fun-house mirrors or lenses.

People here have many different virwpoints, which can be illuminating in an 'aha! THAT makes sense, now' or "I disagree but can respect that POV" kind of way. Or it can simply be a misunderstanding of intent.

I agree- which is why I am asking that you cite a specific source for this "third view of forgiveness".

Typically, when I don't understand something... I ask. And give examples of my current understanding (so that those whole hold or practice it can say: yep, exactly... No no no, not at all... In some ways, extra.). As I did. In good faith. I completely fail to understand why some people equate forgiveness in a way I see as inherently dangerous.

My failure to understand it doesn't make it wrong, nor does it make my view right. I am not mocking anyone's system. I just don't get it.

Fair enough. I will take your clarification at face value.

But until you can show us where this idea originated, we will be unable to determine whether it is a chimera, a misunderstanding, or an actual point of view.

2) There are FAR more disagreements going on, or laid to rest, than you've listed. By and large they've mostly followed the maxim that reasonable people can and do differ.

I disagree- for the most part, posts in this thread have fallen into one of two camps: 1) those who believe that child sex offenders should be completely barred from any circumstance where they might have even the most remote possibility of offending again, and 2) those who believe that less extreme measures might strike a better balance between Christian charity and parental prudence.

I cheerfully admit that there are a range of opinions within those two camps, but on the whole, there is a bright dividing line between the two.

I am suggesting that not being allowed around children is less a facet of forgiveness or the lack thereof, and more a natural consequence of those actions.

I am inclined to agree- but "not being allowed around children" is a nebulous term, at best- and subject to varying interpretations.

Would I allow someone I even suspect of being a pedophile unfettered access to my child? Not in a million years.

But allowing someone to worship God in the same building as my child is NOT the same thing as "unfettered access".

Between my military service and civilian law-enforcement/public safety, I have spent my entire adult life standing between innocents and those who would do them harm.

This situation is not a binary choice, an "either/or" dilemma in which we must choose either the penitent offender or the child.

There is a middle ground here.

The "no way/no where/no how" standard being espoused is not reasonable, and is predicated upon unreasoning fear.

By that definition, it is not rationale, it is not justifiable, and in my opinion, is inconsistent with both Christian charity and the Atonement.

Your mileage on the thoughts above may vary, of course, but the canard that "good and caring people must agree with me or should shut up" is both a logical and a moral failing.

"Shut up" has never been an argument noted for its cogency, integrity, or suasive merit.

Edited January 20, 2013 by selek

[Echo2002]

I'm sure we come in contact with sex offenders every day in public. It's no different than being around them at church, except for the fact you know what they have done.

If you are aware of it you can warn your children.

[Dravin]

EXACTLY.

The average 20/30/40yo is more capable of dealing with "We have a sexual predator in our ward." And to handle themselves accordingly, than the average 5yo, 7yo, 10yo.

Granted, still not my first choice, but operating on the assumption that I'm wrong a pedophiles really can repent, we DO have adult only wards. Rather a lot of them. Many with older groups (30+).

Instead of "Im a pedophile, but Ive given up my evil ways, and am joining the family ward."

Major cognitive dissonance.

Do you also see it as a major cognitive dissonance for someone convicted of adult sexual assault to join a ward with members of the same sex as their past victim(s)? Now what about when we remove the aspect of force, because that isn't crucial to temptation and repentance, do you see the same issue with those who have repented of past fornication joining a ward with members of their preferred gender? Now lets remove it from the realm of sexual temptation, what about a repentant pick pocket, do you see the dissonance with them joining a ward in which wallets and purses are present?

Just so you know where I am going with this, you say "operating on the assumption that I'm wrong and pedophiles really can repent", but I don't think you are actually doing so. Your words may be claiming the assumption but I suspect your reasoning isn't.

Edited January 20, 2013 by Dravin

[pam]

EXACTLY.

The average 20/30/40yo is more capable of dealing with "We have a sexual predator in our ward." And to handle themselves accordingly, than the average 5yo, 7yo, 10yo.

Granted, still not my first choice, but operating on the assumption that I'm wrong a pedophiles really can repent, we DO have adult only wards. Rather a lot of them. Many with older groups (30+).

Instead of "Im a pedophile, but Ive given up my evil ways, and am joining the family ward."

Major cognitive dissonance.

I guess I'm just not aware of, even in Utah, of wards that cater to adults only 30+.

[Backroads]

I guess I'm just not aware of, even in Utah, of wards that cater to adults only 30+.

I am pretty sure they exist, I hear about them. I know people who know people who attend them.

I'm just hoping they're not some urban legend.

[Backroads]

Here's the thing about hovering- I can do it for the next few weeks, months, even year. I think most of the women in the branch will be clucking around like crazy mother hens- for awhile. Then, as some time passes w/o incident people will relax and not be as vigilant. This is a charming man, who I am sure will win back trust of the people around him - just like he did after he molested his daughters. He even convinced one of his daughters that he had truly repented and changed. She believed him until he molested her daughter.

I suppose it's human nature to relax when the fox is away, so to speak. But I don't understand how the ward can completely control how the individual members are feeling about and reacting to the situation. The ward can put in place all the protective measures possible, but you as a parent will have to keep yourself vigilant.

Involve your kids in the situation. Let them know in no uncertain terms to avoid Brother So-n-So.