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

[Wade]

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.

I know I was on leave but had some moments for short visiting....



Thank you for this Dan.
Either you changed your mind about restoration or I was unable to see by your other posts early that you do support restoration including apologizing directly to victims if possible.
I apologize for my misunderstanding and cutting words at times.

Thank you again for this post.

[Dan Z]

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.

You raise some really valid points here Ken about consideration for victims when a convicted abuser comes back into the community. Putting the victim's concerns and emotional (& physical) safety first seems paramount. I like your universal consent idea.

While I don't think permanent excommunication (as some have suggested) is an idea that is in harmony with the teachings of Christ, I will say that, practically speaking, if a convicted abuser wishes to be restored into a faith community, he should prove his sincerity by doing so with great regard and deference for the emotional well-being of his victims and their families. In all likelihood this would mean finding an affiliated congregation that would be willing to accept him (with full disclosure) in a different location...perhaps far away from his original home area.

[mercysfree]

To know that abusers acknowledge the full extent of their wrongs, and the resulting effects on victims would go, I think, a long way toward healing for those victims.

Especially when the abuser is family...everyone in the family is devastated and warped by secrecy and separation. A repentant abuser and/or people who enabled him moving away would not fix the longings of everyone most nearly involved. If repentant, they should absolutely be willing, however, to accept distance or any other safety measures.

But I am speaking mainly from the victim perspective saying---that is no answer. *Everything* about my personal situation (unconnected with Anabaptists) was handled abysmally, but the one thing I think would have made it even harder to understand anything about true forgiveness was if I had cut them from my life out of a desire to avoid pain.

From the Bible, I have thought much about when Paul was converted and those who survived his persecution struggled to accept his conversion and his presence among them.

[Dan Z]

I agree Mercysfree - the idea of restorative justice that I mentioned in the original post is dependent on the abuser deeply and honestly repenting, seeking both forgiveness and treatment, taking full responsibility for their actions. Without these things I don't see how restoration for the abuser is possible.

[temporal1]

I agree Mercysfree - the idea of restorative justice that I mentioned in the original post is dependent on the abuser deeply and honestly repenting, seeking both forgiveness and treatment, taking full responsibility for their actions. Without these things I don't see how restoration for the abuser is possible.

Much of what you are saying, which is inarguably noble on face value, is what has led to exploitation by predators (they learn the language+actions required to get their passes to continue in sin) then they are often relocated to places with new potential victims.

The pattern repeats in all settings, not just Anabaptist settings.
It works just great, and has for hundreds of years, if not since the Garden.

[Dan Z]

I agree Mercysfree - the idea of restorative justice that I mentioned in the original post is dependent on the abuser deeply and honestly repenting, seeking both forgiveness and treatment, taking full responsibility for their actions. Without these things I don't see how restoration for the abuser is possible.

Much of what you are saying, which is inarguably noble on face value, is what has led to exploitation by predators (they learn the language+actions required to get their passes to continue in sin) then they are often relocated to places with new potential victims.

The pattern repeats in all settings, not just Anabaptist settings.
It works just great, and has for hundreds of years, if not since the Garden.

That's where transparency comes in. A serial abuser's actions (even a repentant and treated one) must never-again be hidden, nor can he ever in his life be given unsupervised access to children - in any community. Restoration does not mean all is forgotten, nor does it mean life goes on as if these things never happened. That would be irresponsible both to the abused, the abuser, and the potentially abused.

However, we as a Christians cannot turn any sin, even one as detestable as this, into something unrestorable. The message of the Gospel is grounded upon Grace - undeserved favor - we have no right to claim it for ourselves if we are not willing to extend it to others.

[mercysfree]

...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...

You raise some really valid points here Ken about consideration for victims when a convicted abuser comes back into the community. Putting the victim's concerns and emotional (& physical) safety first seems paramount. I like your universal consent idea.

While I don't think permanent excommunication (as some have suggested) is an idea that is in harmony with the teachings of Christ, I will say that, practically speaking, if a convicted abuser wishes to be restored into a faith community, he should prove his sincerity by doing so with great regard and deference for the emotional well-being of his victims and their families. In all likelihood this would mean finding an affiliated congregation that would be willing to accept him (with full disclosure) in a different location...perhaps far away from his original home area.

Much of what you are saying, which is inarguably noble on face value, is what has led to exploitation by predators (they learn the language+actions required to get their passes to continue in sin) then they are often relocated to places with new potential victims.

The pattern repeats in all settings, not just Anabaptist settings.
It works just great, and has for hundreds of years, if not since the Garden.

I think what DanZ is suggesting as a possible application of openness and accountability would be better than mere (not an alternative to) registration as a sex offender. He is theorizing, as I understand it, about an offender who has been convicted legally and is desiring Christian reconciliation. A receiving church, even if not the church where the offenses occurred, would know the particulars and consent to receive him with conditions. Nothing in this plan is like how I have seen it handled with typical.ineffectiveness. To me, this is solid thinking. I just add, from the victims' perspective, they should carefully consider how learning to accept this person in their midst, with openness and preventive restrictions, may eventually be of spiritual benefit and comfort to them also.

Nothing we do could absolutely eliminate all possibility of reoffending. Better to have that one in the support and watchful eye of believers, if all are willing, than out in the world! Where exactly is your disagreement?

[KirkDaniel]

When we talk about restoration, do we just mean restored to fellowship? What about to leadership down the road?

Jeriah was restored and was later given tremendous leadership responsibility.

[Dan Z]

When we talk about restoration, do we just mean restored to fellowship? What about to leadership down the road?

Jeriah was restored and was later given tremendous leadership responsibility.

Good question - I would say that restoration would imply a return to some level of usefulness and relevance in the work of the Kingdom. That being said, discernment wouldn't put a serial pedophile in charge of children any sooner than it would put an alcoholic in charge of the communion wine. If someone has a heart to serve, and the humility to do whatever is needed, I believe there is a task for all, even if every task is not open to all (e.g. 1 Tim 3:2 - The overseer then must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, temperate, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, an able teacher...)

[KirkDaniel]

When we talk about restoration, do we just mean restored to fellowship? What about to leadership down the road?

Jeriah was restored and was later given tremendous leadership responsibility.

Good question - I would say that restoration would imply a return to some level of usefulness and relevance in the work of the Kingdom. That being said, discernment wouldn't put a serial pedophile in charge of children any sooner than it would put an alcoholic in charge of the communion wine. If someone has a heart to serve, and the humility to do whatever is needed, I believe there is a task for all, even if every task is not open to all (e.g. 1 Tim 3:2 - The overseer then must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, temperate, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, an able teacher...)

Communion wine?????????????????????? Surely you meant Welch's grape juice?????????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I'm thinking restoration means restored to fellowship, but that there are probably things that are going to be off limits in cases like this. Proverbs 6:32, 33 implies that there are certain sexual sins like adultery that sully one's reputation to such a degree that the reproach never goes away. So that is definitely limiting, since, as you quote, overseers must be above reproach.

This does not mean, however, that the Lord cannot so redeem a life that it is still very useful to the church in other respects.

So I see it as restored to fellowship and the ability to benefit the kingdom of God in many ways, but probably not leadership.