Here’s a thought: the sex offender you know about isn’t nearly as dangerous as the one you don’t know about.

Not in this case. Minor child, convicted, served time. He should never be allowed to work with children again. This has nothing to do with grace, just common sense. You have to protect the kids.

I am the father of four sons and the grandfather of one grandson and eight granddaughters. I have been a Christian since the age of 21. Prior to that I was one of the most retched individuals you ever saw. I guess the only sins I have never been guilty of are having sex with children, animals, or other men. I don’t know if my past disqualifies me from posting on this topic or not. I will let each of you decide.
One of the hardest things for me to understand is the magnitude of God’s grace in my life. When I look at the man I was vs. the man I am, even though I still fall so short, I am amazed at what God has done. Without Him I would probably be dead from overdose or murdered. Yet though Him I truly am a new creature. If there is a limit to God’s ability to transform a man I have yet to find it.If a man is truly redeemed, God can use him in any capacity He chooses.
My problem is not so much with this man’s past but with his present. He has chosen to attend and be ordained by a church that promotes gay rights. I can overlook the sinful lifestyle prior to coming to Christ provided the transforming power of the Holy Spirit is evident. We need to not only be discerning but open to the transforming power of Holy Spirit.
If we look at the sins of man before he comes to Christ to determine his qualifications, would it have been such a good idea to let Paul know where to find all the church leaders?

[...] a pastor? October 6, 2009 Leave a comment Go to comments My friend Cory posted a link to this discussion going on about a sex offender in Kentucky who has been appointed a to a pastorate. …experts [...]

” Even though we’re all redeemed sinners and no sin is too big to be forgiven, I’m cautionary when putting someone close to temptations that he/she has struggled with in the past.”

I agree that it probably more wise not to, since one of the cautions that addicts of any kind are given in recovering from their addiction is deliberate avoidance of things which were or still remain triggers.

There also is quite a big difference in welcoming prodigals back into the fold, which we are commanded to do when they are repentant, and putting them in career positions in the church, which could clearly put innocent others at potential risk again.

Certainly, we have seen that very scenario play out in horrific detail in the church in the last few years, over over, especially when several pedophile priests, who were moved from one parish to another after committing these lewd acts against minor children, continued to do it until they were caught and exposed.

So, it’s one thing to give second chances, but quite another to deliberately put the fox back in charge of the henhouse, so to speak, especially when we are talking about the life long and often irreparable damage that the innocent children of such sexual abuse suffer.

And, certainly the Lord Himself said that it would be worse for anyone doing harm to a child than having a millstone around his neck. While our sins are forgiven, they still carry consequences, like it not, not only for the perpetrator, but for the victim. Sometimes I think we forget to give the same kind of grace to the victims as we do the one who committed the crime, in our over-emphasis nowadays on the rights and the rehabilitation of the perpetrators.

As a parent of grown children myself, I know that an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. To continue to put our children at potential risk from known pedophiles, even with the best of Christian intentions, in my opinion is not adequately extending God’s grace and protection to those innocent ones He has given us that cannot protect themselves.

Blayne

From your comments I deduce that you didn’t seem to read some of the posts and more importantly it doesn’t appear you read the original article either. Besides that, the comments such as But I guess it is far easier to chuck the baby with the water. seem a little accusatory. So allow me to respond:

1) Not the case here. Read my earlier post or the original article. It is a case of a 26 year old with a 11 year old. Would that qualify as a ” Case with a high risk of recidivism” ?

2) Even though it is accurate to say that a lot of us can do a lot more to help lost sinners like ourselves, the statement The not in my backyard policy seems to be far easier than actually getting involved in the life of a sinner saved by grace. is once again rather accusatory. You don’t know what most of us do and whether or not we do any ministries out there. From firsthand experience I can assure you that any ex-addict giving a message of redemption is quite powerful to those lost.

3) Once again, I think I gave some examples with regards to what I would consider appropriate for prostitutes, gamblers, alcoholics, drug addicts, divorcees, etc.. and I can fall in more than one category of those (for all you know)

4) I can definitely appreciate the call and applaud it ! I would only recommend caution when the call involves getting real close to ones past. For instance, if your Church serves the Lords supper with actual wine and an ex-alcoholic feels he is “called” to prepare the Lords supper each week, purchase the wine, serve it and keep the keys to the cabinet, I would be somewhat concerned as well.

We say, Christ can and will free them from the chains of sin and slavery to live as new creatures. Amen to that !!

If the world does not want them and the Church does not want them, then to whom and where will they turn? [....] If we push these sex offenders into the outskirts of the the Church, never letting them get past their past life and sin but always forcing them to be reminded of the former self, then how can we expect them to grow and be killing sin?

I don’t think anyone here on this blog has said this. I definitely know that was not the message in CMP’s original post. Churches are full of sinners. “Noone is righteous.. not even one”. Romans 3:10

Overall, I concur with parts of your message, even though they’re besides the point. Even though we’re all redeemed sinners and no sin is too big to be forgiven, I’m cautionary when putting someone close to temptations that he/she has struggled with in the past.

Hope this helps
In Him
Mick

*Continued from the above post*

All of this to say: Let us not become like the world in our understanding of these things. The world says that these kinds of people *cannot* change. We say that all things are new and that the old has passed away. The world would rather condemn them to jail for life, never letting them out. We say, Christ can and will free them from the chains of sin and slavery to live as new creatures. If the world does not want them and the Church does not want them, then to whom and where will they turn?

Be diligent, Yes! Be wise, Of course! But above all be Christlike and seek to lead such as these into holiness and Christlikeness. If we push these sex offenders into the outskirts of the the Church, never letting them get past their past life and sin but always forcing them to be reminded of the former self, then how can we expect them to grow and be killing sin? Instead, get involved in their lives. Let them know that they are forgiven and that they are new in Christ. They have crucified the old man and now live in the newness of the Spirit of Christ. This will do more good for not only the sex offender’s personal holiness and growth, but it will also do wonders for the body of Christ, the body of which he is a part of.

Thanks for listening, brothers and sisters in the Lord Jesus Christ.

While I agree with the vast majority of concerns and insights, I cannot help but wonder if we are still throwing the baby out with the bath water. Let me explain.

1. There is a lot of talk on dealing with sex offenders in the church, both in leadership positions as well as those in the pews. This is a wise thing to do no doubt. There is nothing wrong whatsoever in wanting to be aware of ones surroundings. But what I have a hard time swallowing in the one size fits all labeling being done. Yes there are some serious offenders who are a genuine threat, but not all who are given the label of “sex offender” are ones to be considered a threat. What is being done in this regards? Are we to say that an 18 year old who had sex with his 15 year old girlfriend is the same as the 40 year old who molested a 9 year old boy? The studies show that the most likely to repeat their offense are the latter, not the former. But I guess it is far easier to chuck the baby with the water.

2. The easy thing to do say (which I have read at least twice here) is just let someone else handle these people. The not in my backyard policy seems to be far easier than actually getting involved in the life of a sinner saved by grace. Answers like “let them [a sex offender] minister to other sex offenders” sound so noble. But I ask, Why not you!? What about the grace of God and salvation through Christ does a sex offender know than a non-sex offender? Maybe it is easier to just let them be with their “own.” I think if Jesus were on earth today, these offenders would be the ones coming to him and the ones which he would be seen with (forget not the shame of the prostitute in 1 century Palestine, it is liken to that of the sex offender in todays self righteous American culture).

3. This is not to say that one should not use wisdom and discernment when dealing with such issues. But why does the label sex offender automatically mean threat and without hope for change? Why do we not feel the same when we hear other labels such as murderer, adulterer, divorcee? Scripture has far more to say in regards to these labels than he does with the one at hand.

4. Again, calling to leadership is not something to be taken lightly. If one has a call, then the Church he ministers at needs to be very much involved in his life in order to confirm or deny such a calling? But if the life lived before conversion disqualifies him for ministry after he is converted, then this would disqualify all expect Jesus himself. Let us not forget this. No one, regardless of his past life, should jump right into ministry the day after his conversion. It takes time to mature and grow in Christ before one can even be considered ready to answer his call, that is if his call is genuine and if he fits the qualifications given in Tim and Tit.

*Will continue in a following post*

A.M.Mallett

I’ll address some of your statements directly, partly because I feel they are a bit accusatory to the rest of this audience.

Shall you ostracize the converted prostitute in fear she might lapse into her old ways and bring ruin upon the men of the congregation?
No, but I’m not going to let her do a belly dance at my Men’s retreat either.

What about the former rapist in his past life?
I would worry if he was put in charge of the women’s breakfast group

Does this same church speak the same things about homosexuals, those same things the world would have us deceived of, that homosexuals can never be healed of those sins by Christ?
Absolutely not ! I know some of them personally. Yet I’m not taking them to a male strip club here in Dallas either.

You made a very good point:
I do know that my LORD heals every affliction, every disease and has made each of us clean and whole to approach the throne of grace boldly.
Jerry made that also very clear in post #4 by quoting 1Cor 6:9-11 . But in the same book in 1Cor 8:9 we read to not be a stumbling block to other by what we do. If nothing else, we should perhaps think about that part and the message this Church is sending out. Is it now OK to be a sex offender ? Is it condoned to be one ? Do we risk sending out that message by putting a person with this past in a leadership position ?

Do I take a bottle of alcohol when I visit AA meetings ? Do I take a bag of weed when going to NA ? Do I bring a certain type of magazine when I go to SA ? No.. the temptation is too great for those that are still struggling.

Putting this person in a leadership position over children would be challenging indeed and wouldn’t be a loving thing to do as a Christian brother. If it’s strictly adults, I may be less worried, yet still concerned.

Hope this clarifies
In Him
Mick

Interesting topic !

Facts
Let’s look at some of the objective facts first as I read the original article.
Original situation
1) The incident happened in 1993-1994. The gentleman in question was then roughly 26 years old
2) The victim at the time was 11 years old
This hardly falls in the category of an 18 year old having a relationship, however inappropriate, with a 16 year old.
Current situation
There’s several references that Mr. Hourigan is trying to cope with his past. As in the article “he has learned not to put himself in situations where he might be tempted and to seek counsel when he’s having “emotional problems … so it doesn’t turn into something that it has in the past.”
From dealing with all kinds of addicts (alcohol, drugs, sex, etc) this is a fundamental part of how they have to live and deal with their bent. Looks like he’s trying.

So what now ?
Theologically speaking, the guy can be forgiven. Only God will know the true spirit of his heart. However, it is our role as Christians to support and hold others accountable as well. I personally would support the guy, ask him regularly how he’s doing, ensure I motivate him to keep seeking support groups.
On the other hand, I think there are certain past sins that would interfere with one taking up a leadership role that involves getting too close to your past. If he wanted to start a ministry supporting other sex offenders. Great ! The best examples for other addicts are those that went through it.
But one doesn’t put an alcoholic in charge of the liquor cabinet, a gambler in charge of finances, etc. It’s not quite clear from the article whether he’ll be involved in youth music ministry or purely adults, but if it were to involve youth or childrens music programs, no, I would not let any of my four children be in youth choir if that is what he’s directing. And I would have a big challenge to the Church leadership if they put him in a role like that. I don’t think it’s fair to Mr. Hourigan if he were put in a role that would lead to temptation. And it wouldn’t be fair to the body to expose them to that risk.

In Him
Mick