1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Lutheran Pastor refuses to fire Pedophile receptionist.

Discussion in 'Religion and Spirituality' started by Pagan, May 7, 2008.

  1. DOLPHAN1

    DOLPHAN1 Premium Member Luxury Box

    i believe, because of the type of crime, he is required by law to register with the local law enforcement when ever he changes locations, that includes just around the corner. the problem with that is that it is up to the offender to register, good faith that they will.

    i see no reason why the pastor could not help this guy find a job doing something else in the community and counsel him in private. it's a lot to ask a family to trust some one that science is still trying to figure out and the % of rehab is really very small.
     
  2. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    The poster I was asking said the law should not be involved in limiting a pedophiles options for work. I wanted to know why not.

    As far as what you're saying, I absolutely agree. I think the reason rehabilitation through the church is believed, is because people are confusing rehabilitation with redemption. The simple fact of the matter is that this man has real, uncontrollable urges, it is up to the pastor to forgive him, but curing him, is beyond his grasp.

    Its like AA. They use the power of god to help them stay away from liquor. Problem is, every AA member relapses. So much so, that it is taught, they will relapse. However, when an alcoholic relapses, the odds are he's the only hurt, but if a pedophile relapses, then...
     
  3. Dol-Fan Dupree

    Dol-Fan Dupree Tank? Who is Tank? I am Guy Incognito.

    40,544
    33,044
    113
    Dec 11, 2007
    This guy has yet to be caught to actually be with children.

    Unless i missed something in the article
     
  4. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    No one said he was. A pedophile is an adult who is sexually attracted to children. Having kiddie porn, however, means he's absolutely responsible for those children in the photos, being abused. Especially, if he paid for them. If they weren't photos and he tricked a child into posing for porn, even if he never touched them, wouldn't that be the same as just looking at pictures?
     
  5. Dol-Fan Dupree

    Dol-Fan Dupree Tank? Who is Tank? I am Guy Incognito.

    40,544
    33,044
    113
    Dec 11, 2007
    I am not debating whether child pornography should be illegal. I am more on the idea of protecting the people's in the church's children. And unless their children are being taken naked pictures of and they are trying to destroy the market so the sick practice will no longer go on, their children should be safe.

    If he does have a relapse then some other child who is in an unfortunate situation will be given more of a reason to be in that unfortunate situation. Still will not effect anyone in the churches children.
     
  6. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    Fine, whatever. He should work there and no one should care. Its a wonderful scenario. Its not like he has a predilection for young children or anything. Its funny, to me how you know for a fact that the children of that parish are safe. Essentially, you are saying those who see this as a problem aren't allowed to assume that there would be a problem, yet, you are assuming that there won't be. The point in all of this is, he will be around children, by working there. He is a known and convicted pedophile. He shouldn't be allowed to work there. Whether he's ever been caught physically molesting a child or not, he's shown that he has an attraction to children and the poor judgment to act on it by seeking and collecting 100's of pictures of children, which is against the law. It is flat-out irresponsible of the pastor to put the man into a situation where other members of his parish could be hurt.
     
    DOLPHAN1 likes this.
  7. Dol-Fan Dupree

    Dol-Fan Dupree Tank? Who is Tank? I am Guy Incognito.

    40,544
    33,044
    113
    Dec 11, 2007
    Wow, talk about going to the other extreme with it.

    I do not know anything for a fact that the children of that parish are safe. Just going by history at this moment they are safe from him.

    I am assuming that there will not be, just in history that there hasn't been. The guy has shown to be a risk and it would be irresponsible for anyone to allow him to be alone with a child.

    There is still a disconnect between doing something online and doing something in real life.

    If the church preaches redemption and forgiveness then turns away this guy, then they do not practice what they preach.
     
  8. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    How is that the extreme? Actually his history points to the fact that they aren't safe.

    Again he has an attraction to young children, poor judgment, and a willingness to break the law. How does his history point to anything other than danger. Its one thing if he's only been suspected of pedophilia, but it is confirmed.

    His known history. For all we know he has done more. In fact, odds are he has. Again, this isn't some random guy off the street.

    Not with this. These are real life photos of children, they were hurt in real life. We're not talking about message boards or video games.

    No one is saying he should be kicked out or abandoned by the church. What we're saying is that he shouldn't work there. By working there he has access to children, and access to personal files of children. Its wrong. Should he be a receptionist for a day care center? A children's hospital? A family theme park?
     
    DOLPHAN1 likes this.
  9. Pagan

    Pagan Metal & a Mustang

    20,329
    39,767
    113
    Mar 22, 2008
    Newburgh, NY
    You want to hammer that point home? Answer me this....

    Would they allow an openly gay man to work there?
     
  10. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    I've purposely tried to steer clear of that. He's another one for you, though. My girlfriend at the time (who's now my wife) was let go (given the choice to be fired or quit) from her job as a child care worker at a church, because she was living with me before we were married. It was a Methodist church.
     
  11. Dol-Fan Dupree

    Dol-Fan Dupree Tank? Who is Tank? I am Guy Incognito.

    40,544
    33,044
    113
    Dec 11, 2007
    sorry dude, there is a big difference between photos and doing the action.

    That is like saying someone who loves going to ebaums world or watches faces of death enjoys watching real people die in front of their faces. It is a huge jump.

    What are the odds of him doing that? What is the correlation between looking at child porn on the internet and molesting a child?

    What files do they have at a church? What files do they have on children at that church?
     
  12. Dol-Fan Dupree

    Dol-Fan Dupree Tank? Who is Tank? I am Guy Incognito.

    40,544
    33,044
    113
    Dec 11, 2007
    they probably wouldn't.
     
  13. Pagan

    Pagan Metal & a Mustang

    20,329
    39,767
    113
    Mar 22, 2008
    Newburgh, NY
    Um....wrong.

    The photos of death and the Faces of Death movies are footage of death that happens anyway, regardless of people wanting to see the photos. No one killed anyone on purpose just so people could view the movie or the photos.

    With child porn, if no one looked at it, it wouldn't exist. Supply and demand.

    You couldn't be more wrong if you tried on that one bro.
     
    Last edited: May 14, 2008
  14. Dol-Fan Dupree

    Dol-Fan Dupree Tank? Who is Tank? I am Guy Incognito.

    40,544
    33,044
    113
    Dec 11, 2007
    Of course I disagree. What about bum fights?

    So in your mind the people are considering whether or not the child pornography exists when they are downloading it?

    You give people a lot of credit.

    You are also arguing a different subject.
     
  15. Pagan

    Pagan Metal & a Mustang

    20,329
    39,767
    113
    Mar 22, 2008
    Newburgh, NY
    I'm not arguing a different subject. You seem to be actually defending the guy by saying all he did was look and not touch. We're trying to tell you that by looking, he's feeding the fire. Bum fights are just as heinous. If no one bought it, it would go away. People don't keep making videos of things that no one is purchasing bro. That's just fact.

    By downloading those photos, he's every bit as responsible for the ruination of those children's lives as the people taking the photos and video.

    And then to top it all off with the ridiculousness of a church allowing him to work there, but probably not hiring a gay man and another church's firing of Finascious D's girlfriend for "living in sin" ( :rolleyes: ) makes it even worse.
     
    DOLPHAN1 and Fin D like this.
  16. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    Not when its real photos. Different thing altogether. No one looks at child porn for entertainment. They look at it for sexual arousal. Yes, I would say people who enjoy watching real deaths on video would also enjoy watching real deaths in real life. Your argument would make more sense if you were comparing watching real murder with wanting to commit real murder. And even then, I would say yes, those people have an astronomically higher propensity of committing murder. To say anything else is naive. Your point has a lot more to do with comparing stagged violence with wanting to commit real violence.

    This ought to answer that.
    Addresses for one. More than that if there is a daycare or any kind of child ministry were the children go off with a counselor away from the parents. Whether it b in the next room over or camp or sleep ins.
     
  17. DOLPHAN1

    DOLPHAN1 Premium Member Luxury Box

    actually not. pedophilia is a compulsion that is rarely overcome. even with counseling, pedophiles often are unable to control their urges, resulting in relapses. if he is drawn to pictures and willing to down load them to his computer, it is not unreasonable to assume that, if unchecked, will advance in his compulsion. meaning eventually pictures will not be enough. their is a possibility that he has the power to control himself, but not likely.

    i don't think the idea here is for the church to abandon this guy, but more realisticly placing him in the community. the pastor can still counsel him.
     
  18. quelonio

    quelonio Season Ticket Holder

    1,595
    727
    0
    Nov 27, 2007
    they might... they would just want to "redeem" him...
     
  19. DOLPHAN1

    DOLPHAN1 Premium Member Luxury Box

    the offenders could care less. they are only trying to satisfy their urges.
     
  20. Ohiophinphan

    Ohiophinphan Chaplain Staff Member Luxury Box

    I have been away for a week plus so I haven't seen this thread until this morning. I know this congregation though not the pastor. It is my denomination.

    Let's look at a couple of issues. First, it doesn't seem that the pastor hired the guy, but the business manager did. Did he/she use good judgement in hiring someone without a background check? Probably not. Once the pastor discovered the history there was a congregational disclosure. My only question/problem here is whether the fellow disclosed his past on his application? If he tried to hid his past, then there is a problem.

    This is not an ordinary congregation. It is on Lexington Ave. and has a loooooong history of being involved with the theater and arts worlds. They have no child care, pre school, or similar ministry during the week so his "contact" with children would only be if they came in. It is extremely unlikely that a minor child would come in unescorted especially during business hours.

    Pagan, yes this congregation would unquestioningly hire a gay person and likely has some on their very large staff.

    Is pedophilia curable? Likely not. Best evidence suggests that the compulsion is life long and deep seated. Can a person resist the temptations? Yes they can, though the loving thing to do is not to put them in a position of repeated temptation. A receptionist at this congregation is a place where the temptations would be minimal or non existant. I would not have fired the person either unless their hoinesty in their application became an issue.

    It is easy to bring in all sorts of scandels from the past. The "sins" in the Catholic pedophilia revelations, gay bashing/closet gay conservatives, pastors who have misused their trust with counselees. All have occured. I don't think rehashing them here is helpful to this discussion. The pastor is trying to protect his flock by being open and disclosing while at the same time trying to help someone who appears to be struggling to live a life that is lawful and just.

    I would hate to have had this happen where I was serving but I would hope I would have had the courage to be as open and caring as the pastor here was/is.
     
  21. Pagan

    Pagan Metal & a Mustang

    20,329
    39,767
    113
    Mar 22, 2008
    Newburgh, NY
    Then kudos to them for that, bro.
     
  22. DOLPHAN1

    DOLPHAN1 Premium Member Luxury Box

    since you are familiar with this congregation, just a question for you. even as you described, if the congregation as a whole requested that this person no longer be in the position that they are in, would you do as the congregation asked or do as the Pastor is doing at the risk of losing members?

    correct me if i'm wrong, but the church serves the members, and, obviously, they are not going to run the day-to-day aspects but if they are unhappy with this person in the position they are in, is it not their right to request his dismissal? i'm curious because of the members threat to leave the church. right or wrong, ultimately it is the members church, no?
     
  23. Ohiophinphan

    Ohiophinphan Chaplain Staff Member Luxury Box

    Yes and no. If you are asking a legal question, then yes, ultimately a number of people (depends on the size of the congregation and the exact wording of their constitution) could force a special meeting of the whole congregation for the purpose of firing someone. They can even do that with their pastor though in Lutheran circles, that becomes more convoluted.

    The other side of your question is more interesting to me though. What is a congregation? While no congregation is the full church, each congregation contains the fullness of the Church (lower case and upper case changes are deliberate). By definition, we are the called together people of God to live out and proclaim the Gospel (good news) of Jesus Christ to a world which, in our viewpoint, needs to hear the message. What message do we send by hiring, keeping, and/or firing a pedophile? How do we "love" him and "love" all the people he may come in contact with?

    If any congregation exists to serve only itself and its members, then it needs to rebrand itself as a social club and get out of the church biz. Certainly service to members is a part of what we do. Caring for each other is when we proclaim our message the best, but it can never be the only reason we exist.

    Speaking of all this I need to get to my office and do a little of that right now. If anyone wants anymore answers I will get back to this thread later in the day...................I hope!
     
    DOLPHAN1 likes this.
  24. DOLPHAN1

    DOLPHAN1 Premium Member Luxury Box

    thank you for your answer. if you read through my posts you will see that i have never said that the church must chose the receptionist over its members. i understand and applaud the intentions of the Pastor, how ever, under different circumstances (where the possibility of children come into the picture) i think the placement of this person is REALLY, TRULY questionable. again, do what you can to bring this person back into the community, but not at the possible risk of "my child".
     
  25. Ohiophinphan

    Ohiophinphan Chaplain Staff Member Luxury Box

    D1, I have no trouble with your posts. The portion of my message that you highlighted shows my dilemma in this as well. To love the neighbor, in my mind, sometimes means excluding folks from their presence. Some people belong in jail so no one, not even them, can be further harmed by their actions. How do I "love" your kid? I keep them away from folks who might be tempted to harm them. I think this congregation's setting makes that a reasonable guess.

    If this were my congregation where the offices are often empty except for the secretary and their is a pre-school in the building, I could not have him work here for anyone's sake.
     
    DOLPHAN1 likes this.
  26. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    The confusing part for me is, is it really the Bible's stance that we as regular people, be the one's that forgive such a sinner? Forgive him enough that it is our responsibility, that we should welcome him with open arms? It seems to me his chance for redemption would be in front of his god, not us. All sins are supposed to be equal in the eyes of your god, but they clearly aren't in our eyes. If that is the case, isn't it an injustice to that man that we with our imperfect thoughts and feelings, should judge him redeemed or not?
     
  27. Ohiophinphan

    Ohiophinphan Chaplain Staff Member Luxury Box

    Do not confuse forgiveness with escaping responsibility for one's actions. Also forgiveness here, by you and/or me, is about letting the hate leave our hearts. God's forgiveness is a related but differant issue. We forgive so we might not be changed/hardened/harmed by the hate that could fill us if we do not forgive.

    I believe God made creation "good" and human sinfulness has befouled it. If indeed God loves creation then it seems natural that God would need to expell the evil. Here is where God's forgiveness in the form of mercy and grace comes in. We are "saved' from the consequences of our actions eternally.

    But God's justice still reigns on earth. And justice demands we should be accountable for our actions. I may forgive a person for their wrong but to prevent them from harming others (whom I am also called to love) I hold them accountable.

    There is also a distinction between forgiveness and repentance. To ask for forgiveness or grant forgiveness is to regret an action or not allow an action to change our hearts. Repentance is literally to turn around, to change direction. It involves a fundamental shift in one's perspective. In Christian circles, repentence is the surrender of one's individual will to the perceived will of God. One does that to say thank you for what God in Christ has done and becuase we truly believe that history has shown that following God's will tends to lead to a better society.

    Certainly, institutions and individuals in the church have mis-read or misused their perspective on God's will over the years but the best keep trying.
     
    JCowScot likes this.
  28. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    Ok, but why give him a job? Isn't that part of his responsibility, for knowingly committing his crimes against man and god?
     
  29. His'nBeatYour'n

    His'nBeatYour'n Glass Ceiling Repairman

    4,454
    1,910
    0
    Dec 10, 2007
    New York
    Sorry, didn't see this until now.

    I'm going first by what the law states now, and the law doesn't prevent him from being able to have a job. Though different child sex offender laws justifiably restrict where a person can work, schools for example.

    Do you believe the law should be stricter and prevent a free man from being able to work? Otherwise I'm not sure what you're contesting.
     
  30. DOLPHAN1

    DOLPHAN1 Premium Member Luxury Box

    you give him a job because it is the right thing to do. there is always that hope that he may be in that small minority that can learn to control his urges and maybe even become productive in the community. the reality is that he is going to screw up some time in some way. being there as often as possible will also help reduce that possibility.

    proper placement in the community is the issue here. is the job as receptionist in the church an appropriate place for him?
     
    Ohiophinphan likes this.
  31. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    Yeah, that is exactly what we're talking about though, child sex offenders. I'm absolutely for the government restricting where they work. Aren't you?

    Again, this was specifically about child sex offenders. But on a broader scale, once you're convicted of a major crime, you're never totally free again. Which is part of the deal.
     
  32. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    Why is giving him a job the right thing to do? Not stoning him, is the right the thing to do. But where in any book of religion or law, does it say you must employ him, to do the right thing? The stigma that follows a convicted pedophile, is absolutely part of the responsibility, that follows that person, once they knowingly partake in such a heinous act. We are not talking about someone who has alternative sexual tendencies. We are talking about someone who receives pleasure by non-consensual children being forced into acts of sex. Not hiring this man breaks no rules of law or god. If you want to counsel this man, fine.
     
  33. His'nBeatYour'n

    His'nBeatYour'n Glass Ceiling Repairman

    4,454
    1,910
    0
    Dec 10, 2007
    New York
    Of course, that is the law as well.

    "Never totally free" to you means never being allowed to hold a job? That is ludicrous. Might as well keep them locked up.
     
  34. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    Ok this is getting out of hand. Let's start over. I asked you about a specific statement you made:
    I wanted to know why you felt the law shouldn't restrict a pedophile from certain jobs. Maybe you just missed typed or something, since you later agreed that is law.

    As for the second thing, no where did I say, "never totally free means never being allowed to hold a job". But just as a pedophile can't work around children, bank robbers can't work at banks, etc. So, as I said, when you commit a major crime, you do not have all the same freedoms as a everyone else, hence you're not totally free. I am all for that. Its part of the responsibility you should expect when breaking the law to such a degree, you can't have any job you want. If you can't get any job, because of your past indiscretions, then that is also your fault.
     
  35. His'nBeatYour'n

    His'nBeatYour'n Glass Ceiling Repairman

    4,454
    1,910
    0
    Dec 10, 2007
    New York
    I asked you to clarify the second half, and you reiterated the same point that 'breaking the law means losing rights.' Thanks for making it clear this time. You agree the law shouldn't prevent someone from being able to get A job. If a person finds it hard to find a job because of a criminal past, fine, but the law shouldn't prevent them from being able to work, simply restrict where.

    The law already agrees with me that he shouldn't be prevented from working as a receptionist in a church, though I suggested common sense perhaps should.

    We clear?
     
  36. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    OK, I get what you're saying now. For the record, I did not ever say the law should restrict a pedophile from getting A job. But the law should and does restrict a pedophile or any major criminal from getting certain jobs. I made it as clear as I could. After all, I did say:
     
    Last edited: May 16, 2008
  37. His'nBeatYour'n

    His'nBeatYour'n Glass Ceiling Repairman

    4,454
    1,910
    0
    Dec 10, 2007
    New York
    No I got that after your last post. It was just left a little vague before that. Thanks.
     
  38. DOLPHAN1

    DOLPHAN1 Premium Member Luxury Box

    ok. for me it is the right thing. i tend to be an optimist tempered with realist when it comes to my fellow man. make no mistake this person is gonna have this follow him the rest of his life. even if he was unjustly accused and convicted it will be with him. this is serious. assuming that he asked for help or was assisted from either the jail or a halfway house, i would not be surprised if he was a member of that faith and placing him in the church probably, at the time seemed like the correct thing to do. hind sight obviously shows something different, and i have said through out, this person should have been placed in a job somewhere else in the community. the odds are against him to not act on his urges so alienating him further will only hasten his lapse.

    i too am am for laws prohibiting pedophiles and sex offenders from certain jobs and, in some states, i believe they do. if not, then common sense should rule here. janitor in an elementary school for a child molester i would think be an obvious no-no.
     
  39. Ohiophinphan

    Ohiophinphan Chaplain Staff Member Luxury Box

    I would let the person work because everyone should be afforded the dignity of working.

    The questions in this thread for me are whether or not the hiring was done with full transparency (not clear either way), is the job putting unreasonable temptation on the individual and unwarranted risk to children (in this very specific case, I think not), and was the pastor following his ethics in the handling of the case both with parishoners and the receptionist (again, in this specific case, as it is laid out, it seems so).

    Would I be in favor of restricting sex offenders from certain jobs as a matter of law? Absolutely yes! I just don't put this job, in this place, in that category.
     
  40. PMZQ

    PMZQ Banned

    11,575
    2,518
    0
    Nov 24, 2007
    Miami, FL
    Like Father Gheogan in Massachusetts :

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Geoghan

    What happened in this case is just unbelievable.
     

Share This Page