What they wore

[Josh]

it is obvious to me that josh is not a safe person to confide in regarding any sexual abuse

reminds me of the time years ago that an md poster said he WOULD KNOW if there was any abuse going on in his church
he found out he was wrong.

I'm not sure what the intent of this is other than to be some kind of vague accusation or character assassination; however, questioning a statistic of 1 of 3 women in BMA or Keystone circles being a "victim of sexual abuse" does not make me "not a safe person to confide in" one way or the other.

The 1 in 3 statistic is obviously bogus and made up, and false information like this makes actually talking about abuse and dealing with it much harder. "Advocates" tend to do this, and reasonable people simply quit listening to them.

In the case of Keystone it is particularly absurd with the culture of mandatory reporting that exists there now. Every little thing that might be overheard in a school setting has to be handled formally. I don't have firsthand experience with this but I hear Easterns there are now the same way. If the rate really is 1 in 3, there is a vast conspiracy that includes government social services, the police, and the victims themselves to keep it such a well kept secret.

The Keystone churches you’re familiar with must be very different than the one I am familiar with. They weren’t interested in complying with the mandatory reporting and background checks that were required in the wake of Sandusky. I was assured by those in charge that they would report serious things, but the official document outlining the policy was incredibly wishy washy.

This was in 2016 or so. It was made very clear how important mandatory reporting was, a booklet published by the Easterns was distributed, and contact info for the plain people liaison within the state.

No background checks are “required” for church volunteers who eg sweep the floor or teach Sunday school class, though. Not sure where you got that idea from.

[Sliceitup]

I'm not sure what the intent of this is other than to be some kind of vague accusation or character assassination; however, questioning a statistic of 1 of 3 women in BMA or Keystone circles being a "victim of sexual abuse" does not make me "not a safe person to confide in" one way or the other.

The 1 in 3 statistic is obviously bogus and made up, and false information like this makes actually talking about abuse and dealing with it much harder. "Advocates" tend to do this, and reasonable people simply quit listening to them.

In the case of Keystone it is particularly absurd with the culture of mandatory reporting that exists there now. Every little thing that might be overheard in a school setting has to be handled formally. I don't have firsthand experience with this but I hear Easterns there are now the same way. If the rate really is 1 in 3, there is a vast conspiracy that includes government social services, the police, and the victims themselves to keep it such a well kept secret.

The Keystone churches you’re familiar with must be very different than the one I am familiar with. They weren’t interested in complying with the mandatory reporting and background checks that were required in the wake of Sandusky. I was assured by those in charge that they would report serious things, but the official document outlining the policy was incredibly wishy washy.

This was in 2016 or so. It was made very clear how important mandatory reporting was, a booklet published by the Easterns was distributed, and contact info for the plain people liaison within the state.

No background checks are “required” for church volunteers who eg sweep the floor or teach Sunday school class, though. Not sure where you got that idea from.

It’s my understanding, and seemed to also be the understanding of the church, that Sunday school teachers were legally required to have background checks in PA.

[Josh]

It was on hold when the background checks were not free, and then got tied up in courts concerning whether or not the state can require fingerprinting and FBI clearances for all volunteers at a church. (This may be hard to imagine, but there are lots of religious people in other denominations who do not want to submit fingerprints to the government just to be the volunteer church janitor.)

[Sliceitup]

It was on hold when the background checks were not free, and then got tied up in courts concerning whether or not the state can require fingerprinting and FBI clearances for all volunteers at a church. (This may be hard to imagine, but there are lots of religious people in other denominations who do not want to submit fingerprints to the government just to be the volunteer church janitor.)

I’ve never heard this before. I tried doing a Google search but didn’t find anything relevant. Do you have any links?

I can understand that a volunteer church janitor doesn’t need the clearances, but I would be surprised if a childrens Sunday school teacher would be exempt.

[Josh]

It was on hold when the background checks were not free, and then got tied up in courts concerning whether or not the state can require fingerprinting and FBI clearances for all volunteers at a church. (This may be hard to imagine, but there are lots of religious people in other denominations who do not want to submit fingerprints to the government just to be the volunteer church janitor.)

I’ve never heard this before. I tried doing a Google search but didn’t find anything relevant. Do you have any links?

I can understand that a volunteer church janitor doesn’t need the clearances, but I would be surprised if a childrens Sunday school teacher would be exempt.

It is ambiguous if it is required for adult Sunday school which is what I was referring to. Compliance with this in PA is extremely poor. Nonetheless Keystone requires compliance with this for basically all church jobs last I heard. At least in the districts encompassing Baltimore and York. Judas Maccabaeus could probably comment further.

I think requiring the state to approve someone and be fingerprinted in order to conduct church is absurd, and it does zilch to prevent abuse, particularly in an Anabaptist context. Most abusers don’t have a criminal record.

[Soloist]

I never needed a background check when I worked in Awana's or taught children Sunday school. Working as a youth worker for the youth group required one though. This was a Baptist church.

[Joy]

I had to be palm printed to visit inmates in one state. I had no objections--it was in the interest of witnessing to prisoners, so that was a small price to pay. (I've paid a much, much larger price more than once.)

[Judas Maccabeus]

It was on hold when the background checks were not free, and then got tied up in courts concerning whether or not the state can require fingerprinting and FBI clearances for all volunteers at a church. (This may be hard to imagine, but there are lots of religious people in other denominations who do not want to submit fingerprints to the government just to be the volunteer church janitor.)

I’ve never heard this before. I tried doing a Google search but didn’t find anything relevant. Do you have any links?

I can understand that a volunteer church janitor doesn’t need the clearances, but I would be surprised if a childrens Sunday school teacher would be exempt.

It is ambiguous if it is required for adult Sunday school which is what I was referring to. Compliance with this in PA is extremely poor. Nonetheless Keystone requires compliance with this for basically all church jobs last I heard. At least in the districts encompassing Baltimore and York. Judas Maccabaeus could probably comment further.

I think requiring the state to approve someone and be fingerprinted in order to conduct church is absurd, and it does zilch to prevent abuse, particularly in an Anabaptist context. Most abusers don’t have a criminal record.

We are in Maryland, for church volunteers, no background checks are required. Since KMF does not have a paid ministry, none required there either. There is a requirement for such checks for preschool and elementary teachers in our school.

We try to comply with all relevant Maryland regulations. I don’t really deal with stuff in Pennsylvania, but the general feeling in KMF is that we do our best to comply. We use the guidelines from the EPMC, as do other churches. Obviously, we do not feel the need in Maryland to comply with PA’s regulations. My info was sent into the state, but only because I am teaching middle school half time.

York left KMF last year, so I don’t get up there much.

Judas Maccabeus

[Szdfan]

MCUSA requires background checks (but not fingerprints) as part of its pastoral process — this is handled on the national denominational level rather than the conference or the local church level.

I am aware of cases where the denomination or the conference did not communicate previous complaints that were in a pastor’s file to the local congregation during the pastoral discernment process.

I have been fingerprinted as a high school English teacher.

[Ken]

There are background checks run by various private companies. They are mostly online and don't require fingerprints. I have had to do these sorts of background checks to be a youth soccer coach in both TX and WA. And also to volunteer at my kid's schools in both TX and WA. I don't actually know what they involved. You just go online to the link provided by the organization, answer a bunch of ID-related questions to verify your identity and then the results come back nearly instantly.

There are also FBI background checks that I understand are more thorough and they do require fingerprints. I have had to do these to get teaching licenses in both TX and WA. It is something of a hassle. You normally have to bring the teacher licensing forms into some fingerprinting agency like your local police station and they do a complete set of fingerprints and then they submit the forms to the FBI not you. Perhaps the FBI has more extensive databases than are available to private security screening companies. Also I think the fingerprint aspect is to prevent people from using false identities which the other type of screening would not catch.

My youngest daughter just applied for a summer job as a grocery clerk with the local Kroger chain. She had to do an online background check as part of her employment screening. They checked for criminal record and also verified her social security to make sure she was eligible to work and not undocumented or something.

I expect the need and importance of background checks depends on the extent to which you know or don't know the person being screened. At a church in a small town where everyone knows everyone it probably isn't so important as there probably aren't many secrets. Unless it is a new member who moved in from somewhere else. But in a larger setting like a school or youth sports league where not everyone knows everyone and there are always new people and new families showing up it is probably necessary. And those sorts of institutions just can't afford to take the risk of trusting people.