|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Should we forgive on behalf of others?
|
Twilight
Puddleglum's sister
# 2832
|
Posted
A well respected, retired policeman, school board member and builder in our town was convicted of raping eleven boys (age 13-15) who worked for him during the school holidays. He had been getting away with this for years because of his many connections in town.
Before he was sentenced, just after it all came to light, he cried before the congregation at his local mega-church and was forgiven by them.
At the time, we were thinking of buying one of his new houses and we backed out because I didn't want to support him or live in a house he had built.
I thought the church was wrong to publicly embrace him with forgiveness when some of the boys and their parents were right there, and others would hear about it. It seemed to me that we would be telling those boys that what happened to them was no big deal.
I think my view that public forgiveness should begin with the victim is more common in Jewish thought than Christian.
quote:
In The Sunflower, Simon Wiesenthal describes an incidence from his time as a prisoner in a Lvov work squad: he is summoned to the bedside of a dying SS man, who wants him, the Jew, to grant him absolution for his participation in the extermination of Jews. After listening to the young man’s lengthy confession, Wiesenthal leaves the room without saying a word. In the story he explains why he could not grant the man his last wish and forgive him for what he had done: he felt he had no right to forgive on behalf of others, in this case the people murdered by the man.
What do you think?
Posts: 6817 | Registered: May 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
blackbeard
Ship's Pirate
# 10848
|
Posted
Those who have not been wronged cannot "forgive", it is not in their power to do so.
Only the wronged can forgive. That's what the word means.
Posts: 823 | From: Hampshire, UK | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Twilight:
Before he was sentenced, just after it all came to light, he cried before the congregation at his local mega-church and was forgiven by them.
Base on the available information, I would be highly sceptical.
While I agree that forgiveness for the actual offence is for the victim to grant as and when they feel it appropriate to do so, I do however think there is a "social forgiveness" whereby an individual is accepted back into society or a group.
What stinks in this case is that it is by no means clear that the perpetrator had previously sought and received the forgiveness of the victims. If he had, then there might be a case for a more public action. If he hadn't, then I think the church is dumb to stage such an action.
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lord Jestocost
Shipmate
# 12909
|
Posted
Hugely impressed Wiesenthal didn't put his lips to the young man's ear and whisper "you're going to BURN".
That church was completely out of order. Sure, they could hear his confession; sure, they could utter a prayer that reminded everyone of God's forgiveness. And they would have been theologically correct to say "therefore you are forgiven, regardless of what your victims say."
Theologically correct but, pastorally, utterly, utterly wrong. The man shouldn't even be allowed back into the church unless the victims are unanimous that this is what they want. Not "are prepared to put up with"; want. And as a hallmark of genuine repentance is unconditionality, the man himself should have been the first to say that he didn't belong here until the victims had accepted him, and leave for another church.
Posts: 761 | From: The Instrumentality of Man | Registered: Aug 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
L'organist
Shipmate
# 17338
|
Posted
I'm appalled.
And how many of his 'connections' knew about his crimes but said or did nothing? Presumably some of them were in the congregation doing the forgiving - no doubt self-interest still to the fore.
If I were a victim or parent of a victim I'd be truly sickened by this.
--------------------
Rara temporum felicitate ubi sentire quae velis et quae sentias dicere licet
Posts: 4950 | From: somewhere in England... | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Raptor Eye
Shipmate
# 16649
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Twilight:
Before he was sentenced, just after it all came to light, he cried before the congregation at his local mega-church and was forgiven by them.
Forgiven by them? This is the nearest I've come to using the b**x word on the ship.
Who are they to release forgiveness?
I personally have serious doubts as to the authority of priests to release forgiveness on behalf of God, despite its 'loosing and binding' scriptural basis.
Yes, they all might pray for forgiveness and reconciliation between this man and God, and between this man and the people he has affected by his evil acts. But forgiveness is not theirs to give.
--------------------
Be still, and know that I am God! Psalm 46.10
Posts: 4359 | From: The United Kingdom | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238
|
Posted
This essay by a woman who discoverer her husband was a child molester may be relevant.
quote:
Through this whole process, I learned that much is required of those victimized, while little is asked of sex offenders. When my husband began to spin his story, it was received with affirmations of how courageous he was. He was even placed on the worship team within a few months of his confessions.
In contrast, I was expected to never be angry, bitter, or wrestle with forgiveness. I needed to heal quickly and quietly. And, of course, I couldn’t ever question his “recovery.” His was a wondrous redemption story, and to question his trustworthiness was to question God’s work in his life.
Christians are prone to be a naive bunch. We tend to want to take people at face value, and we want to envelope them with forgiveness and acceptance. Don’t get me wrong: these are good things. After all, Jesus said to be innocent as doves.
But He also admonished His followers to be as wise as serpents.
This is where we fall short. Within months of the victim’s disclosure, my husband, who had spent years skillfully living a lie, claimed he was recovered. And people simply believed him.
--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto
Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
It's not just naive though; it's collusive in crime. As others have said, quite appalling, and showing something quite disturbing, I suppose an identification with the criminal not the victim. It reminds me of those wives who have been asked to forgive their abusive husbands, and stay with them. Gordon Bennett.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
stonespring
Shipmate
# 15530
|
Posted
Forgive is not the right word for what a congregation would do to someone who has sinned gravely. I think what they should have said is that although he had hurt not only his victims, but the whole community with his actions, that they affirmed his membership in their family and continued to offer him support (while also insisting that he face justice for his actions). Any human forgiveness would have to come from the victims - or perhaps from his wife (if he has one) and others who have had also likely had their lives greatly damaged by his actions (although not as much as his victims).
It's only a matter of time before someone brings up the idea of confession to a priest. I think you either believe in it or you don't. Christian people who don't believe in confessing sins to a priest still feel a need to confess their sins "directly" to God. Whether you believe in confessing sins to a priest or not, you still have to face the consequences of your actions through the criminal justice system or through an attempt to spend the rest of your days helping others rather than hurting them. In the case of sexual abuse of children, that can't involve trying to make amends directly to one's victims - unless, when they are adults, they contact you and allow you to.
Posts: 1537 | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
argona
Shipmate
# 14037
|
Posted
There is a distinction between forgiveness and mercy. Forgiveness is entirely a matter for those who were wronged, no-one else can offer that. Mercy is for those with the power to punish, whether it's a court of law moderating the sentence given, or a congregation not entirely rejecting the perpetrator. In this case, as described, I'd need one heck of a lot of convincing to show mercy. At the very least, deep contrition, undoubtable understanding of the awfulness of what he had done. I really don't know what might count as evidence for that.
Posts: 327 | From: Oriental dill patch? (4,7) | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
Several points. First, sex offenders don't come forward or confess unless they are forced or they know they are going down, and they wish to mitigate consequences. Someone will try to take me on about this, but the data I know from consulting and from the literature shows that the very nature of sexual offending is all about the "me" of the offender and not about the people harmed. Probably someone knows of some isolated case where they believe the offender did the right thing all on their ownsome, but one case doesn't convince.
Second, I suspect the congregation in question has a desire among its members to feel good about themselves and their view of how things work. They are self centred in this act. They are out of line. I also wonder if the man in question is a rich donor to this church. This is one reason that I am not fond of churches without oversight, i.e., by bishops. Someone who can rein in stupidity.
Third, if the man is really sorry, has he agree to settlements financially with the victims? To fund their therapy, compensate for suffering, and compensate for the broader impact their life directions?
Fourth, has the man decided not to contest the court sentence suggested by the Crown prosecutor or what ever the person in this role is called in the relevant jurisdiction?
Fifth, has he been suicidal and dealing with other mental health issues, and can we believe if so that this is not manipulation, i.e., trying to have others feel sorry for him?
Sixth, has he been assessed by a psychologist and psychiatrist for psychopathy? What explanation is there for his empathy failure?
Seventh, has he tried to explain away his offences by his own victimisation?
-- I think there's probably more....
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379
|
Posted
Seems to me from God's viewpoint, forgiveness is a done deal. Cross grave "hell" resurrection. (and incarnation, teachings, examples, etc.)
As to each of us, *we* benefit from forgiving those who wronged us instead of hanging on to stomach tightening heart straining brain bursting anger & resentment.
Forgive does not mean forget, nor pretend it was OK to do. It means release the other person's hold on your emotional health.
The church leadership can pronounce forgiveness from themselves and the institutional shell they control, but not from each member because they cannot erase all the emotional effects inside each member, whether from being a direct victim from the shock of discovering someone you admired was so false.
True healing would include a request (not declaration of) forgiveness for the perp, AND an equally strong promise of help (counseling) for each affected person, AND a promise by the perp to start a scholarship fund (or some other kind of extra help) at his expense for each affected person, some effort to show a desire to "make up" for the wrong, however impossible full restitution may be.
Too often the concern for the victim's healing and the restitution factors are ignored in these public "forgive the big name" shows.
Of course we also need to ask how often we confess and try to repair our as yet uncaught bad deeds vs hope they stay hidden. "My sins aren't as bad as his" but didn't Jesus say if you break one law you are equally a lawbreaker?
Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
No murder, no rape is recovered in this life. Therefore no murderer, no rapist can be, as if they hadn't done it. That's God's business only. And yes the church generally (not in open fellowship in the victim congregation) must accept those with the mark of Cain, who must walk softly the rest of their lives, an open book. Once they're out of prison. In his case decades later. Although in theory we should be able to move away from prison with sufficient technology and social control. Norway leads with way with their equivalent of the Bulger killers.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tubbs
Miss Congeniality
# 440
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by blackbeard:
Those who have not been wronged cannot "forgive", it is not in their power to do so.
Only the wronged can forgive. That's what the word means.
This. The only people who can forgive this man for what he has done are the victims - and God. The church can support that process through prayer, counselling etc, but they cannot offer forgiveness on the victims behalf. By doing this, particularly if they have acted without consulting the victims, is denying them the right to choose whether to forgive or not. It's another form of abuse. If they don't want to forgive or need time to decide, then the influence of the local mega church is going to silence them just as much as this chap's influence did in the first place.
Tubbs
--------------------
"It's better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than open it up and remove all doubt" - Dennis Thatcher. My blog. Decide for yourself which I am
Posts: 12701 | From: Someplace strange | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Palimpsest
Shipmate
# 16772
|
Posted
Agreed that this is another form of abuse. I'm remembering discussing sexual abuse with a friend who was of Amish background. There's a huge pressure on the victims to forgive, sometimes repeatedly and sometimes called to do so in church.
This is not quite as bad, but it certainly encourages unrevealed victims of this man and others to stay silent.
Posts: 2990 | From: Seattle WA. US | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
GCabot
Shipmate
# 18074
|
Posted
I doubt the intent of the congregation was to forgive the man on behalf of his victims. If it is correct that they were forgiving him, it would be for the harm his sins have caused the church itself. This is similar to the parents of a harmed child saying they forgive the transgressor - in truth, only the child himself can forgive the crimes committed against him. The parents are, in reality, saying that they forgive the ancillary harm caused to them by the transgressor's actions.
--------------------
The child that is born unto us is more than a prophet; for this is he of whom the Savior saith: "Among them that are born of woman, there hath not risen one greater than John the Baptist."
Posts: 285 | From: The Heav'n Rescued Land | Registered: Apr 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nicolemr
Shipmate
# 28
|
Posted
I think this sort of thing is incrediably hurtful to the victims and their families.
--------------------
On pilgrimage in the endless realms of Cyberia, currently traveling by ship. Now with live journal!
Posts: 11803 | From: New York City "The City Carries On" | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
George Spigot
Outcast
# 253
|
Posted
I agree with the bulk of comments here. It's for the victims to forgive or not as they wish.
Posts: 1625 | From: Derbyshire - England | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tubbs
Miss Congeniality
# 440
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by GCabot:
I doubt the intent of the congregation was to forgive the man on behalf of his victims. If it is correct that they were forgiving him, it would be for the harm his sins have caused the church itself. This is similar to the parents of a harmed child saying they forgive the transgressor - in truth, only the child himself can forgive the crimes committed against him. The parents are, in reality, saying that they forgive the ancillary harm caused to them by the transgressor's actions.
A woman I used to know had a sister who was murdered by her ex-partner. The partner had been violent towards her sister throughout their relationship and their young children saw what happened.
As a Christian, the woman felt it was important to work towards some kind of forgiveness towards this man. Like you, she felt that there were some things she could forgive – her own loss and grief, the impact that it had on her life etc. But she couldn’t forgive on behalf of anyone else. The children would have to decide for themselves when they were older. And she couldn’t forgive him for the actual murder. Only her sister could do that and she was gone.
But Twilight’s OP doesn’t make it clear whether they were only forgiving the impact his actions had on them OR they were forgiving him on behalf of the victims. It’s possible that this church were forgiving him on behalf of the victims. Not everyone thinks that you can’t forgive on behalf of others. The woman I mentioned in the opening sentence said she would be regularly asked to forgive this man for what he had done. And, when she refused, was accused of not forgiving him properly.
Even if the church was only forgiving him for the damage his actions had done the church community, the timing – just before the sentencing – was extremely insensitive.
Tubbs
--------------------
"It's better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than open it up and remove all doubt" - Dennis Thatcher. My blog. Decide for yourself which I am
Posts: 12701 | From: Someplace strange | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lamb Chopped
Ship's kebab
# 5528
|
Posted
It is possible to forgive someone, even a dead and gone historical figure, if that person's actions have caused you some kind of grief. But what you are forgiving them for is precisely the impact they have had on you. Other people will have to forgive (or not) the impact he has had on them.
I see a difference between forgiveness and reconciliation. Forgiveness is entirely one-sided--you can forgive someone who is dead or even doesn't want to be forgiven. In that case, the impact is one-sided, and is on you. But reconciliation is always two-sided, because it requires some movement on the part of both parties--so that can't happen in the case of someone dead or unrepentant. And neither is possible if you're trying to do it on behalf of a different person--unless they've authorized you to do so.
--------------------
Er, this is what I've been up to (book).
Oh, that you would rend the heavens and come down!
Posts: 20059 | From: off in left field somewhere | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Moo
Ship's tough old bird
# 107
|
Posted
Years ago, on the Ungodly Fear board, a woman told of having been raped by a priest and told by church authorities that it was her Christian duty to forgive.
She was so angry that she could not pay attention to what other posters actually said. She took it for granted that everyone was saying it was her Christian duty to forgive.
Her experience with the priest was terrible, but the church's response made it extremely difficult for her to work through the situation.
Moo
--------------------
Kerygmania host
---------------------
See you later, alligator.
Posts: 20365 | From: Alleghany Mountains of Virginia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
Seems to me from God's viewpoint, forgiveness is a done deal. Cross grave "hell" resurrection. (and incarnation, teachings, examples, etc.)
At then time of terrible harm to you or someone close to you, God's forgiveness is completely irrelevant. It has nothing to do with the offender and nothing to do with that person's possible forgiveness, relationship to god or anything else about that person. Nothingwhatsoever. Not that you're doing this, but anyone who tries to point this out at the time is being disrespectful and in many situations additionally harmful to the person who has been harmed. It ignores the suffering and focuses on presumed redemption.
Jesus was killed on a Friday, and it was suffering and horrid. Three days may be a short time to recognize the horror, but the horror and suffering are integral. Please don't dismiss the suffering in a quest for an "all is well" Easter feeling.
For many, the suffering of the children of Israel in the desert is more akin to their lived experience. There's a little bit of manna periodically, but there is a possibility of 40 years of difficult wandering.
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tubbs
Miss Congeniality
# 440
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet:
quote:
Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
Seems to me from God's viewpoint, forgiveness is a done deal. Cross grave "hell" resurrection. (and incarnation, teachings, examples, etc.)
At then time of terrible harm to you or someone close to you, God's forgiveness is completely irrelevant. It has nothing to do with the offender and nothing to do with that person's possible forgiveness, relationship to god or anything else about that person. Nothingwhatsoever. Not that you're doing this, but anyone who tries to point this out at the time is being disrespectful and in many situations additionally harmful to the person who has been harmed. It ignores the suffering and focuses on presumed redemption.
Jesus was killed on a Friday, and it was suffering and horrid. Three days may be a short time to recognize the horror, but the horror and suffering are integral. Please don't dismiss the suffering in a quest for an "all is well" Easter feeling.
For many, the suffering of the children of Israel in the desert is more akin to their lived experience. There's a little bit of manna periodically, but there is a possibility of 40 years of difficult wandering.
Forgiveness is a process. You may start wanting to forgive someone, but it may take years to get to a point where you feel you actually have. It may need other things to happen as well. Like justice for the wrong done or an acknowledgement that a wrong was done etc. Expecting people to go straight to forgiveness without passing go is a bit unrealistic.
I remember the woman on the Ungodly Fear board that Moo mentioned as well. It always struck me as completely wrong that the church authorities expected her to forgive without offering her any kind of justice or acknowledgement that what was done to her was wrong.
Tubbs
--------------------
"It's better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than open it up and remove all doubt" - Dennis Thatcher. My blog. Decide for yourself which I am
Posts: 12701 | From: Someplace strange | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet:
quote:
Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
Seems to me from God's viewpoint, forgiveness is a done deal. Cross grave "hell" resurrection. (and incarnation, teachings, examples, etc.)
At then time of terrible harm to you or someone close to you, God's forgiveness is completely irrelevant.
I was reading the OP as asking about forgiveness in the eternal sense.
When Jesus said 70 times 7 he didn't say "except for this little of list specific sins."
My forgiving you has nothing to do with your need to repent and seek to make some kind of meaningful restitution for your own soul's health. I doubt the repentance of these big names who cry after being caught but make no move toward restitution.
Sure, you can't restore a murdered person, but Moses was a murderer, David had a man killed so he could take the wife, and yet God used these men. Don't write off someone forever.
No one said it's easy.
Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Horatio Harumph
Shipmate
# 10855
|
Posted
I just wrote an incredibly long reply to this thread, pressed send and then my broadband died and I appear to have lost it - count yourselves lucky ![[Biased]](wink.gif)
Short version of what I wrote is :
I agree with the majority of people who have commented on this thread.
And I like the comment above that made the distinction between mercy and forgiveness.
Going solely on the information in the OP I think it is outrageous and demonstrates once again 'the churches' inability to support victims/survivors of abuse/sexuall abuse/rape - something I was just tweeting about after a lengthy conversation with someone on it today.
As someone who was abused as a child, and raped as an adult in an unconnected situation to the childhood ones I have found myself subjected to horrendous 'Godly' advice over the years regarding forgiveness (and forgetting!).
I wrote a blog which got huge readership when I had my old blog space running on the Savile stuff and at the time I got into an article exchange with someone who also wrote but looking at the offenders - her point being there has to be a place for them in Gods Kingdom, and the church otherwise the cross in a nonsense.
This cut straight through me. And it led me to much much soul searching, feet stamping and general anger until I got to a place where I could accept that she was right. HOWEVER that does not mean I have to accept that I have to be any part of it.
So I whilst I accept there can be a place for offenders with in a church, to receive mercy (which I do believe is different to forgiveness) that I don't have to be the one offering it.
I also don't believe it is anyone else's right to forgive on my behalf.
--------------------
www.helenblogs.com
@helen_a13
Chocolate is proof that God wants us to be happy.
Posts: 2857 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
Sure, you can't restore a murdered person, but Moses was a murderer, David had a man killed so he could take the wife, and yet God used these men. Don't write off someone forever.
No one said it's easy.
But the point is that it is burdening the victim at the wrong time, in ways that damage their mental health. It is absolutely the wrong focus to ask a victimized person to forgive, when the proper focus on their welbeing. They usually need to be empowered to decide when or if they will get around to considering forgiveness. It it not for anyone to say when or if for them.
On the other, I don't think we are required to be as good as God. Thus, in my view, we may well need to write someone off forever. Not in the sense of that person preoccupying our minds, but in the sense of true apathy, that they do not exist for us anymore. This is not forgiveness, but it is an emptying of what might bind a person down and burden them.
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ethne Alba
Shipmate
# 5804
|
Posted
Mercifully in the Church of England, there are Now guidelines/ legislation/ obligations in place which would prevent a situation like the opening post's example from ever happening.
I wish to God this had been in place long ago. Much deep harm could have been avoided.
NB....Of course we can't forgive on behalf of others. Only the wounded have that trail ahead of them.....and maybe they will never manage it. And that's OK too. God Knows.
[ 24. June 2014, 18:10: Message edited by: Ethne Alba ]
Posts: 3126 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Horatio Harumph
Shipmate
# 10855
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet:
On the other, I don't think we are required to be as good as God. Thus, in my view, we may well need to write someone off forever. Not in the sense of that person preoccupying our minds, but in the sense of true apathy, that they do not exist for us anymore. This is not forgiveness, but it is an emptying of what might bind a person down and burden them. [/QB]
Is that even possible? Or is that going down the lines of saying it is possible to just forget someone? I don't think you can.
I agree however we can never be as good as God and I've had to come to the acceptance that God forgives. He can forgive anyone anything. It does not mean victims can or should be told they 'must'.
I believe God is a gracious compassionate God and that forgiveness is so black and white as I've often been told by charismatic leaders.
--------------------
www.helenblogs.com
@helen_a13
Chocolate is proof that God wants us to be happy.
Posts: 2857 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Horatio Harumph
Shipmate
# 10855
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ethne Alba:
Mercifully in the Church of England, there are Now guidelines/ legislation/ obligations in place which would prevent a situation like the opening post's example from ever happening.
I wish to God this had been in place long ago. Much deep harm could have been avoided.
NB....Of course we can't forgive on behalf of others. Only the wounded have that trail ahead of them.....and maybe they will never manage it. And that's OK too. God Knows.
THIS - if there was a 'like' I'd be liking this many times.
(I'm a member of a non denom church which also has policies in place which would prevent this happening and which also holds the victim and their well being in the most highest regards - I wouldn't be there if it didn't)
--------------------
www.helenblogs.com
@helen_a13
Chocolate is proof that God wants us to be happy.
Posts: 2857 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
stonespring
Shipmate
# 15530
|
Posted
What is forgiveness? And, in a human personal (rather than divine or legal) context, why does it matter? Unless the offender wants to continue a relationship with a person or group s/he has harmed, why should it matter to the offender if that person or group forgives them or not? It seems to me that deciding to forgive has much more of an effect on the victim than it does on the offender, especially when the victim is not a relative (or spouse) of the offender.
Rather than worrying about if someone (other than a relative or spouse) forgives them or not, an offender should concern him/herself with taking responsibility for his/her actions, acknowledging the harm they have caused, trying to prevent them from ever happening again, and trying to do good with the rest of his/her life. If, as has been noted, habitual child molesters have great difficulty having empathy or changing their behavior, then it is fair for society to restrict that person's freedom regarding interaction with children even if they appear to show repentance.
I'd be careful with the term "sex offender" for a habitual child molester. People who habitually commit rape (of adults or children) are very different from people who are put on a sex offender registry for life for sex with a post-pubescent teenager. Just because statutory rape is taking advantage of a young person too inexperienced and undeveloped to give legal consent, and should be punished legally, does not mean that everyone who does it is a monster that must be punished, humiliated, and tightly controlled for life.
Posts: 1537 | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Horatio Harumph
Shipmate
# 10855
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by stonespring:
I'd be careful with the term "sex offender" for a habitual child molester. People who habitually commit rape (of adults or children) are very different from people who are put on a sex offender registry for life for sex with a post-pubescent teenager. Just because statutory rape is taking advantage of a young person too inexperienced and undeveloped to give legal consent, and should be punished legally, does not mean that everyone who does it is a monster that must be punished, humiliated, and tightly controlled for life.
I beg to differ. Massively.
In fact a bit shocked that I just read that. And my mind is going round and round right now thinking 'did you just say what I think you did?'...
So did you?
Did you just say everyone who takes advantage of an underage person for sex i.e. abuses should not be punished?
I think I need you to clarify what you are saying before I respond any more ...
[code]
[ 24. June 2014, 19:56: Message edited by: Eutychus ]
--------------------
www.helenblogs.com
@helen_a13
Chocolate is proof that God wants us to be happy.
Posts: 2857 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tubbs
Miss Congeniality
# 440
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet:
quote:
Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
Seems to me from God's viewpoint, forgiveness is a done deal. Cross grave "hell" resurrection. (and incarnation, teachings, examples, etc.)
At then time of terrible harm to you or someone close to you, God's forgiveness is completely irrelevant.
I was reading the OP as asking about forgiveness in the eternal sense.
When Jesus said 70 times 7 he didn't say "except for this little of list specific sins."
My forgiving you has nothing to do with your need to repent and seek to make some kind of meaningful restitution for your own soul's health. I doubt the repentance of these big names who cry after being caught but make no move toward restitution.
Sure, you can't restore a murdered person, but Moses was a murderer, David had a man killed so he could take the wife, and yet God used these men. Don't write off someone forever.
No one said it's easy.
But to receive forgiveness, you have to acknowledge that you have done wrong and ask for it. It's a two way process between you and God.
Sure, a murderer can repent and be used by God etc but they cannot be forgiven by anyone on earth for what they have done. The only person who can forgive them for their actions is the person they killed. And they're not here to do so. Others can forgive the impact of the loss etc, but that's it.
And I don't think anyone has said that the whole business of forgiveness is easy.
Tubbs
--------------------
"It's better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than open it up and remove all doubt" - Dennis Thatcher. My blog. Decide for yourself which I am
Posts: 12701 | From: Someplace strange | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
stonespring
Shipmate
# 15530
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Horatio Harumph:
quote:
Originally posted by stonespring:
I'd be careful with the term "sex offender" for a habitual child molester. People who habitually commit rape (of adults or children) are very different from people who are put on a sex offender registry for life for sex with a post-pubescent teenager. Just because statutory rape is taking advantage of a young person too inexperienced and undeveloped to give legal consent, and should be punished legally, does not mean that everyone who does it is a monster that must be punished, humiliated, and tightly controlled for life.
I beg to differ. Massively.
In fact a bit shocked that I just read that. And my mind is going round and round right now thinking 'did you just say what I think you did?'...
So did you?
Did you just say everyone who takes advantage of an underage person for sex i.e. abuses should not be punished?
I think I need you to clarify what you are saying before I respond any more ...
[code]
I wrote:
Just because statutory rape is taking advantage of a young person too inexperienced and undeveloped to give legal consent, and should be punished legally , does not mean that everyone who does it is a monster that must be punished, humiliated, and tightly controlled for life.
So people who commit statutory rape (sex with a postpubescent minor) should be punished legally. I don't think all of them should be put on a sex offender registry for life - or if they are, there should at least be a different registry for them compared with the one for people who have molested prepubescent children or raped anyone, child or adult.
Posts: 1537 | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Horatio Harumph:
quote:
Originally posted by stonespring:
People who habitually commit rape (of adults or children) are very different from people who are put on a sex offender registry for life for sex with a post-pubescent teenager. Just because statutory rape is taking advantage of a young person too inexperienced and undeveloped to give legal consent, and should be punished legally, does not mean that everyone who does it is a monster
a bit shocked that I just read that. And my mind is going round and round right now thinking 'did you just say what I think you did?'...
I see two pictures. 40 year old with 12 year old. Monster.
18 year old with 17 year old. In some places that is statutory rape because 17 is under age. Are we really dealing with a monster here? Should two kids near in age who think they are in love face a lifetime of restriction on what jobs s/he can take and where s/he can live by being labeled a registered sex offender?
Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by stonespring:
So people who commit statutory rape (sex with a postpubescent minor) should be punished legally. I don't think all of them should be put on a sex offender registry for life - or if they are, there should at least be a different registry for them compared with the one for people who have molested prepubescent children or raped anyone, child or adult.
Adults who have sex with teens in their care (teachers, sports coaches, pillars of the community who employ schoolchildren during the summer and so on) are almost always repeat offenders. These people have a huge risk of reoffending.
That's why we have a sex offender's registry at all - the point is that people who have abused the trust placed in them and had sex with children in their care shouldn't be placed in that position again.
ETA: Belle Ringer's point about high school sweethearts, one over age and one not, is relevant - in most cases I wouldn't put someone like that on the register at all (nor would I register someone urinating in an alley).
[ 24. June 2014, 20:21: Message edited by: Leorning Cniht ]
Posts: 5026 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Curiosity killed ...
Ship's Mug
# 11770
|
Posted
stonespring, I suspect you are referring to US law, where as I understand it there is a possibility that teenage relationships can result in the boy being convicted of statutory rape and being put on the offenders register and sexting can be an offence. It is not so much a problem in the UK.
--------------------
Mugs - Keep the Ship afloat
Posts: 13794 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
18 year old with 17 year old. In some places that is statutory rape because 17 is under age. Are we really dealing with a monster here? Should two kids near in age who think they are in love face a lifetime of restriction on what jobs s/he can take and where s/he can live by being labeled a registered sex offender?
quote:
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
ETA: Belle Ringer's point about high school sweethearts, one over age and one not, is relevant - in most cases I wouldn't put someone like that on the register at all (nor would I register someone urinating in an alley).
A lot of jurisdictions have what is colloquially known as a "Romeo & Juliet" clause in their statutory rape laws which exempts couples who are within a few years of each other in age if one (or both) of them fall on the "minor" side of the age of consent.
--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto
Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Honest Ron Bacardi
Shipmate
# 38
|
Posted
quote:
(nor would I register someone urinating in an alley).
Are people caught urinating in an alleyway really put on a sex offenders register?
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
In what way is that deemed to be a sexual offence at all?
--------------------
Anglo-Cthulhic
Posts: 4857 | From: the corridors of Pah! | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
stonespring
Shipmate
# 15530
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Honest Ron Bacardi:
quote:
(nor would I register someone urinating in an alley).
Are people caught urinating in an alleyway really put on a sex offenders register?
In what way is that deemed to be a sexual offence at all?
Indecent exposure. Lots of Puritan laws still on the books in this country.
Abusing authority - as is the case with teachers, doctors, clergy, scoutmasters, etc., having sex with teenagers under their care - is a much more severe offense than a generic adult having sex with an older teenager. I know about Romeo and Juliet laws. Not every jurisdiction in the US has them, and different jurisdictions set different limits. Once you are past college age, you should do your best to stay away from teenagers romantically, and they law should reflect that. However, if an adult, regardless of age, who is not in any position of authority or care, has sex with a 17-year old - is that really in the same category as molesting a prepubescent child or raping anyone, child or adult? There should be a criminal punishment for this. But I don't think this is what the sex offender registry was created for.
Posts: 1537 | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Curiosity killed ...
Ship's Mug
# 11770
|
Posted
stonespring - with respect, we've just had two or three rape threads where we've discussed these points exhaustively.
Aren't we discussing whether a man who was both employer and much older and has been convicted for raping teenage boys should be forgiven by a church and what that says to the teenage boys? What the meaning is of forgiveness, mercy, reconciliation ...?
--------------------
Mugs - Keep the Ship afloat
Posts: 13794 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Honest Ron Bacardi:
quote:
(nor would I register someone urinating in an alley).
Are people caught urinating in an alleyway really put on a sex offenders register?
In what way is that deemed to be a sexual offence at all?
Indecent exposure - the same law that deals with flashers in dirty macs.
Here is a case where someone was able to withdraw his guilty plea for urinating in public because he hadn't been told that it would involve registering as a sex offender...
Posts: 5026 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
JoannaP
Shipmate
# 4493
|
Posted
This has reminded me of the Ealing Vicarage Rape 30 years ago; I can remember my parents' outrage when the vicar forgave the attackers. I cannot find an article from back then, however, so I am not sure exactly what he forgave them for, but the impression I have is that he did forgive them for raping his daughter very soon after it happened - and there was some discussion as to whether he had the right to do so or not. Clearly he could forgive them for beating him but could he go further?
--------------------
"Freedom for the pike is death for the minnow." R. H. Tawney (quoted by Isaiah Berlin)
"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." Benjamin Franklin
Posts: 1877 | From: England | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Horatio Harumph:
I believe God is a gracious compassionate God and that forgiveness is so black and white as I've often been told by charismatic leaders.
Really? I resonate with this from the article Croesus posted a link to above:
quote:
Suddenly, I resonated with C.S. Lewis’s words from A Grief Observed: “Not that I am … in much danger of ceasing to believe in God. The real danger is of coming to believe such dreadful things about Him. The conclusion I dread is not, ‘So there’s no God after all.’ But, ‘So this is what God’s really like. Deceive yourself no longer.’”
God is frequently neglectful and rather hands-off. God keeps God's compassion to God's own self, and deign to offer a little tangible comfort to the suffering. Which is actually only available through other people. No miracles on the earth, only in heaven. The rest is deception I think, and comfort is our duty to others.
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Horatio Harumph
Shipmate
# 10855
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
For having his skull fractured and burglary - the daughter's name is Jill Saward and she still campaigns for victims - article on 20th anniversary here which discusses forgiveness.
I have MUCH respect for Jill Saward.
--------------------
www.helenblogs.com
@helen_a13
Chocolate is proof that God wants us to be happy.
Posts: 2857 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
stonespring
Shipmate
# 15530
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
stonespring - with respect, we've just had two or three rape threads where we've discussed these points exhaustively.
Aren't we discussing whether a man who was both employer and much older and has been convicted for raping teenage boys should be forgiven by a church and what that says to the teenage boys? What the meaning is of forgiveness, mercy, reconciliation ...?
And as I said before, forgiveness' main effect is on the victim - unless it means the continuation or restoration of a
relationship with the offender.
So when the offender shouldn't ever interact with the victim ever again - forgiveness doesn't really matter for the offender - or at least I don't think it should. Regardless of whether the victim forgives him/her, an offender needs to take responsibility, face punishment, and forgive him/herself so s/he to try to change his/her life as much as possible.
Of course the offender also hurt the community and his own family by his actions so their forgiveness does affect him.
Posts: 1537 | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Horatio Harumph
Shipmate
# 10855
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet:
quote:
Originally posted by Horatio Harumph:
I believe God is a gracious compassionate God and that forgiveness is so black and white as I've often been told by charismatic leaders.
Really? I resonate with this from the article Croesus posted a link to above:
Just to clarify my above line was meant to say 'and that forgiveness is NOT so black and white ...'
--------------------
www.helenblogs.com
@helen_a13
Chocolate is proof that God wants us to be happy.
Posts: 2857 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gwai
Shipmate
# 11076
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by stonespring:
So when the offender shouldn't ever interact with the victim ever again - forgiveness doesn't really matter for the offender - or at least I don't think it should. Regardless of whether the victim forgives him/her, an offender needs to take responsibility, face punishment, and forgive him/herself so s/he to try to change his/her life as much as possible.
Disagreed that it shouldn't matter. For instance, imagine that a man takes illegal drugs, a lot of drugs. He ends up rather out of his mind whether from a bad batch or whatever and attacks someone (let's say non-sexually to make the story less charged from one angle) one of whom will die of her injuries. In the couple days before she dies, she asks to see him. He has had time to realize what he has done, and is overcome with grief. He realizes that his life has been going drastically the wrong way, and he needs to change. He apologizes intensely to his victim, and she forgives him. I think his time in jail might be much different knowing that the women he killed forgave him. Now did she owe it to him to forgive him? Hell no, but this theoretical women can be improbably forgiving because she's theoretical. I think it's easy to agree that her forgiveness would comfort him, particularly if he's a decent person. It's just that he is in no way entitled to it.
[ 25. June 2014, 13:23: Message edited by: Gwai ]
--------------------
A master of men was the Goodly Fere,
A mate of the wind and sea.
If they think they ha’ slain our Goodly Fere
They are fools eternally.
Posts: 11914 | From: Chicago | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
stonespring
Shipmate
# 15530
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gwai:
quote:
Originally posted by stonespring:
So when the offender shouldn't ever interact with the victim ever again - forgiveness doesn't really matter for the offender - or at least I don't think it should. Regardless of whether the victim forgives him/her, an offender needs to take responsibility, face punishment, and forgive him/herself so s/he to try to change his/her life as much as possible.
Disagreed that it shouldn't matter. For instance, imagine that a man takes illegal drugs, a lot of drugs. He ends up rather out of his mind whether from a bad batch or whatever and attacks someone (let's say non-sexually to make the story less charged from one angle) one of whom will die of her injuries. In the couple days before she dies, she asks to see him. He has had time to realize what he has done, and is overcome with grief. He realizes that his life has been going drastically the wrong way, and he needs to change. He apologizes intensely to his victim, and she forgives him. I think his time in jail might be much different knowing that the women he killed forgave him. Now did she owe it to him to forgive him? Hell no, but this theoretical women can be improbably forgiving because she's theoretical. I think it's easy to agree that her forgiveness would comfort him, particularly if he's a decent person. It's just that he is in no way entitled to it.
But if she died without forgiving him, he should feel no less capable of making better of the rest of his life because of it. The only way he had of knowing whether she forgave him or not is because she asked to see him. Otherwise, he would have never known.
Posts: 1537 | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
