Southern Baptist Church Hit with Sexual Abuse
___________

Two weeks ago, a woman claimed that she had been sexually abused by a minister in the Southern Baptist Church organization. She claimed that not only was she abused but others have been sexually abused as well. Lawyers are now culling for cases to bring a class action law suit against that organization. The Southern Baptist organization stated that unlike the Catholic Church, they do not have tight control over their churches, and most are independent entities.

The control issue may be a factor, but what is happening is that we are beginning to see that sexual abuse is not just  in the Catholic Churches, but it may be widespread among many churches, especially those who hold great sway over their congregants. Jim Jones was one such minister who held great sway over his congregation; he had them sign their Social Security and Welfare checks over to his organization; he used men's wives for his own sexual pleasure, and he used some husbands for his sexual pleasure as well. Finally, he took the lives of almost 1,000 people.

For many years there have been cases reported of Catholic sexual abuse, but about seven years ago, the floodgates opened and the world was introduced to widespread and systematic sexual abuse in the Catholic Church by priests and a cover up of those abuses by the Bishops and Cardinals of that church. The Catholics awaken the nation and the world to the sexual acts that were taking place in the church; now the Southern Baptist Church organization is starting to experience its day of shame.

Without controversy, such abuses are shameful and they diminish the moral authority of the church to speak on issues that society needs guidance on. A few months ago, the staunch political conservative and pastor, Ted Hazzard, was ousted from his positions of authority when a gay man revealed that Hazzard had been having regular sexual relations with him over a two year period, yet Hazzard was preaching against homosexuality on TV. The Rev. Hazzard headed a congregation of some 14,000 members and he was the head of an Evangelical organization of some 30 million members. He was also a prominent  Bush supporter, directing his congregants who to vote for and why.

These sexual scandals have been going on for many years, and if there is any good that can be seen of them, it is that the Rev. Hazzard was removed from his positions of power. In many instances the offender stays in his position of power and the congregants hide behind some notion of forgiving that offender for his wrong. Forgiveness is good, but anyone engaging in sexually inappropriate or criminal behavior should be removed from leadership posts--they are role-models by which others measure and conduct their lives; this is especially true of moral leaders. And if that person has committed a crime, he should be prosecuted; if that person has not committed a crime but offended in some inappropriate way, that person should be removed from his position. Why allow such a person to remain in the same position, exposed to the same temptations that got him into trouble? And why send the wrong message to those who follow such a person's leadership?

But many imprudent church organizations are allowing forgiveness to cover behavior that is inappropriate--aren't leaders to shun the very appearance of evil; aren't they instructed to examine themselves to see if they are in the faith? Aren't those of the church supposed to be lights of the world? And, aren't these admonitions as potent as the forgiveness scripture? To allow a sinning minister to stay in his post after openly violating the tenets of the faith sends the wrong message to the world about the church; it is bad enough that these ministers cannot keep  the commandments by which they are suppose to live, but to see them openly abuse those commandments by abusing others (real people) and receive no chastisement for their wrong-doing is the wrong message to send to a morally needy world.

In Oakland, one local Baptist church pastor has been arrested several times for soliciting prostitutes, he has served time in prison for burglary, and generally he has an on-going  criminal background. But in spite of this pastor's notoriety for having been arrested for soliciting prostitutes and having a criminal background, his church retains him as pastor and buys him fine cars and expensive clothing--this seems as if sin is not an issue to be taken seriously by that church. How can a church claim moral standing under those circumstances?

In Chicago, a Bishop of an Apostolic church (a very fundamentalist church)  was indicted by the federal government for misappropriation of church funds and tax evasion. It seems as if congregations allow their leaders to engage in many inappropriate behaviors and still serve as leaders. Why? No church minister claim moral  authority to guide a congregation when he is so morally flawed. The Apostle Paul admonished Christian ministers to be perfect and an example to believers! But the notion of forgiveness has been abused. Forgive, yes, but move the sinning minister out of temptation's way and move him so he will not bring a reproach upon the church and its moral authority to speak truth and morality. A sexual predator, a criminal minister, a liar, etc., should never be leading a church, which is supposed to be a beacon of light.

The picture we are seeing coming out of the churches is that the church needs cleaning up from within, and even the church admonishes itself to do self-examinations to see if they are in the faith, but that does not seem to be what is happening. Therefore, it will have to be cleaned up by forces outside the church, and that poses serious dilemmas, but the church's unwillingness to clean its own house may bring this upon itself.

Frank A. Jones
3/5/07

Home