Dan Ziegler - A Way Forward for CAM and all of us...

[Dan Z]

What do you understand as “restoration?” What does it mean for Mast to be restored to his community? What are the limits to this restoration? What kind of safe guards does his community need to put into place?

...

Anyway, I’d like to hear your thoughts on what you envision restoration looks like,

Good question SZDfan -

The model again and again in scripture, and especially the New Testament, is restorative justice - that justice be served, wrongs be owned, debts be paid, but not with a goal of retribution (punishment and vengeance) but with a goal of restoration (fixing that which is broken, bringing things into right order, reconciling that which is estranged). As serious followers of Christ, we have to think this way - even when it is an affront to the sensibilities of those who would see justice in punitive or permanent terms.

Regarding justice, Jeriah first must pay for his crimes - legally answering the criminal charges against him in Haiti and the US - which will likely involve extended prison sentences, his name appearing on sex-offender registries, and severe restrictions on his interaction with children the rest of his life. He also must confess, apologize personally and directly to each victim, and make financial restitution as he is able for the suffering and harm his actions caused to these families. He must also apologize to CAM and his faith community for the wrongs he did while misrepresenting the cause of Christ. Finally, and most importantly, he must confess his sins before almighty God, "who is faithful and just to forgive his sins and to cleanse him of all unrighteousness."

In a restoration sense, Jeriah's life still has worth. As heinous as his crimes were, he is still a beloved child of God like anyone else. He should receive rehabilitative counseling and treatment to control his addictive and violent behavior, and spiritual counseling that, with the Spirits help, can lead him into maturity and right relationship with God - and in the community of faith he should ultimately find forgiveness and restoration into fellowship. However, as my friend Wayne in Maine likes to say, "forgiveness doesn't mean forgetness." He can be forgiven, and even brought back into fellowship, but if he is ever released from prison, his family and church community must recognize that the addictive/uncontrolled behavior he exhibited will always represent a latent potential within him. HE MUST NEVER again be placed in a position of direct contact with or supervision of children (even his own), and there must be full disclosure from one church or community to another if he moves around. The hope is that despite what he has done, as a redeemed sinner he can still serve God with the days he is given.

Hope that helps clarify where I would come out here.

[Szdfan]

Dan, I appreciate your thoughtful response. I do struggle with knowing what is the right approach with predators after they have been caught and have gone through the legal consequences. So much of my own focus is on the shortcomings in our churches and institutions that enable these things to happen in the first place. The problem of sexual abuse in churches and church affiliated institutions is massive and ongoing. I do think there needs to be conversation and careful discernment about how to deal with predators after they’ve “paid their debt to society,” I’m not sure that’s the primary conversation for me. I’m glad if thoughtful and careful people are having that conversation.

There’s a part of me that wonders whether redemption and restoration is really even possible (I know this is not a Christian thing to say). I’m not a sexual abuse survivor, but have experienced secondary trauma from someone close to me who was abused. I have seen how trauma gets passed across generations — the “sins” of the parents are certainly visited upon the children. I’ve known victims of abuse who themselves became abusers, perhaps not sexually, but in other ways.

The consequences of abuse are not just something that affects a perpetrator’s victims, but it reverberates across communities and generations. We may pray for healing, but Mast’s victims will struggle with what happened to them for the rest of their lives. So will their families. So will their communities. So will their children and maybe even their grandchildren.

I realize that I’m painting a really bleak picture here and that dealing with trauma is part of the human condition. There are ways, of course, to mitigate the damage and to heal. There are healthy ways to live with trauma. It’s not all hopeless.

But I wonder whether the emphasis on Mast’s redemption and restoration also minimizes the damage he caused. Is it even possible to fix what Mast broke?

(Edit: I want to add here that I don’t believe in punitive justice either, just that what’s been broken may not be fixable and I am concerned about the church’s tendency to want to declare “restoration” and move on, especially since it appears that there was a certain degree of complicity by Mast’s faith community with his abuse.)

[Dan Z]

SZDFan - I understand. You are struggling in a very human and honest way with whether there should be the possibility of restoration for one like Jeriah who has done so much harm. I think part of this is you recognizing that the damage and violence done to these boys is, in some was, irreparable - they will never outlive it, and the pain and dysfunction caused will very well ripple out generationally through the lives of those they will be in relationship with. So, why should a person who causes damage that people will never outlive be given the opportunity of finding his own redemption? Where is the justice in that?

The answer sounds trite and churchy - and I don't want it to - because it is actually quite profound. But the thing is, the Christian concept of Grace (unmerited favor) ultimately transcends justice. Grace is not justice, in fact in some ways it is an affront to justice, because in the end it forgives the unforgivable. However, it is the only thing that breaks the cycle of an eye for an eye - and it is the only thing that can reconcile us to a holy God. Grace also recognizes that, apart from merit, God places value on the least-worthy of his children. In the end, and I don't say this lightly, in situations like this heinous crime it may come down to what often happens in matters of faith - we need to accept that which we can't humanly fathom.

[joshuabgood]

The scandal of grace.

[Neto]

People talk about "tough love" - maybe this is "tough grace".

[Ken]

SZDFan - I understand. You are struggling in a very human and honest way with whether there should be the possibility of restoration for one like Jeriah who has done so much harm. I think part of this is you recognizing that the damage and violence done to these boys is, in some was, irreparable - they will never outlive it, and the pain and dysfunction caused will very well ripple out generationally through the lives of those they will be in relationship with. So, why should a person who causes damage that people will never outlive be given the opportunity of finding his own redemption? Where is the justice in that?

The answer sounds trite and churchy - and I don't want it to - because it is actually quite profound. But the thing is, the Christian concept of Grace (unmerited favor) ultimately transcends justice. Grace is not justice, in fact in some ways it is an affront to justice, because in the end it forgives the unforgivable. However, it is the only thing that breaks the cycle of an eye for an eye - and it is the only thing that can reconcile us to a holy God. Grace also recognizes that, apart from merit, God places value on the least-worthy of his children. In the end, and I don't say this lightly, in situations like this heinous crime it may come down to what often happens in matters of faith - we need to accept that which we can't humanly fathom.

Dan:

What would this restoration look like in practical terms?

I am comfortable with the idea that JMast might find redemption and grace within a prison cell and may find a way to serve God within that context and setting. There are prison ministries and prison chaplans and with 2.3 million people currently in American prisions it is a whole culture on its own.

I am also comfortable with the idea of a JMast who has served his time to, upon his release, find a voluntary community of similarly broken men with which to find restoration and fellowship and attempt to turn around their lives. There are many many churches who minister to former conficts and criminals and who see this as their mission. Churches can take many forms. JMast can find or form an AB fellowship of former convicts and abusers. There are plenty of them. In fact this might be a fruitful mission field for AB churches to preach redemption and nonviolence.

What I am not comfortable with is someone like JMast being welcomed into an existing church community that may have his former victims in attendance or other vulnerable and wounded souls who will be threatened and made to feel unsafe by his presence. That is what many victims of abuse in the AB community tell us is exactly the problem. When church authorities welcome abusers back into their midst without the assent or even the acknowledgement of the wounded and vulnerable members of their fellowship. Because that simply perpetrates the emotional violence and sometimes the physical violence. I understand that churches are not necessarily democracies. But churches are communities and have obligations to all of their members. This is one place where I think something close to universal consent by the ENTIRE congregation would be required. Without pressure like with a secret ballot. Not simply something the church leaders decide by fiat and impose on the congregation as usually seems to be the case with AB congregations who welcome abusers back into their midst. Honestly I would think that these sorts of crimes and victimization of the most vulnerable within a church community would be grounds for permanent excommunication. Churches do it for far less.

[Hats Off]

I agree with most of what you are saying, Ken, but do not like the idea of permanent excommunication. But Again I have enough experience with victims to know how difficult it can be when the perpetrator is welcomed back "at the expense of the victim." The victim needs to forgive, tho only way to healing is to forgive, but I really object to the doctrine of forgive and forget "as though it had never happened."

[Josh]

Permanent excommunication isn't biblical nor humane.

However, there are a few concepts I think are worth exploring:

1. Repentance is a life long process and often has very visible signs. One key sign of repentance is that a repentant person doesn't demand trust or go back to seeking positions of power from or over people they've abused. I can cite a few examples of very repentant sex offenders who are in conservative Anabaptist circles. One that comes to mind in particular makes sure to avoid anything that has even the remotest appearance of impropriety. Whilst he didn't offend against children, he avoids being around children by himself and also lets people know fairly quickly from meeting him that he's a registered sex offender. Everybody in his church knows, and visitors find out too. I think this is a good testimony and a good witness.

2. Some people have mental deficiencies that make "repentance" impossible. The legal equivalent are people who are judged mentally incompetent to stand trial. Such a person needs to be kept isolated and away from situations where they can cause damage and hurt. Their brain may be incapable of "repenting" or not re-offending. Such a person's soul and responsibility I leave up to God.

[ragpicker]

Permanent excommunication isn't biblical nor humane.

However, there are a few concepts I think are worth exploring:

1. Repentance is a life long process and often has very visible signs. One key sign of repentance is that a repentant person doesn't demand trust or go back to seeking positions of power from or over people they've abused. I can cite a few examples of very repentant sex offenders who are in conservative Anabaptist circles. One that comes to mind in particular makes sure to avoid anything that has even the remotest appearance of impropriety. Whilst he didn't offend against children, he avoids being around children by himself and also lets people know fairly quickly from meeting him that he's a registered sex offender. Everybody in his church knows, and visitors find out too. I think this is a good testimony and a good witness.

2. Some people have mental deficiencies that make "repentance" impossible. The legal equivalent are people who are judged mentally incompetent to stand trial. Such a person needs to be kept isolated and away from situations where they can cause damage and hurt. Their brain may be incapable of "repenting" or not re-offending. Such a person's soul and responsibility I leave up to God.

Wise words.

[Neto]

I have already told the story of how one young Banawa man shot & killed his cousin, and how the parents of the murdered young man agreed to allow God to take care of it, instead of following everything their emotions and their culture told them was right, which would be to do a revenge killing. (In this case, the murderer would die, not another family member.) They had not long been followers of Jesus, and yet they did this. Did they forgive right away? Have they now forgiven (now some twenty years later)? I don't know for sure, but unforgiveness there reasonably means that they would have at some point killed the murderer, so I really believe that they did.
I have said it before, & I'll say it again - I have learned a lot from those people. Faith and belief is something that goes all through and through for them.