What has to happen? Reforming our culture

[Ken]

I would propose that step# one needs to be that ALL crimes are reported to law enforcement.

I'm not against reporting crimes, especially crimes of (sexual) violence against others, but a reporting partnership with law enforcement authorities seems to encroach a bit on my understanding of two-kingdom theology. Caesar is not always to be trusted. For example, should the Chinese Christians turn each other in for violating prohibitions on religion? Should the Christians of WWII Germany have turned in those who harbored Jews?

Seriously? You are equating protecting child molestors from justice with protecting jews from the Nazis?

If anabaptist churches and culture can't make this distinction then they don't deserve to survive.

[Aurien]

I would propose that step# one needs to be that ALL crimes are reported to law enforcement.

You'll make sure you take the lead on that by self-reporting every time you speed, right????

There's no need to swing the pendulum that far in the other direction. I'm sure that most people know the difference between a crime that's causing major damage to people (sexual abuse, physical abuse, murder, robbery) and a crime that you should stop doing but that doesn't necessarily need reported (speeding, littering, public intoxication). Though if anyone feels God calling them to turn themselves in for any "minor" crime then please feel free to do so. And it should go without saying that if a person is purposely breaking any law of the land that is not in conflict with the Bible then they should confess their sin to God and stop breaking that law.

[Aurien]

Are people in this thread deliberately being obtuse, trying to provoke thoughtful discussion, or do y'all just sincerely not know which crimes should be reported to law enforcement?

[Dan Z]

Seriously? You are equating protecting child molestors from justice with protecting jews from the Nazis?

Are people in this thread deliberately being obtuse, trying to provoke thoughtful discussion, or do y'all just sincerely not know which crimes should be reported to law enforcement?

Not being deliberately obtuse, just reminding us that history and our Anabaptist two-kingdom theology should teach us that our relationship with government needs to be thoughtfully considered. I read statements like "ALL crimes should be reported to law-enforcement" as a loaded idea in its assumptions about government and its assumptions about our relationship with each other.

I'd be more comfortable with "ALL crimes of a sexual and violent nature should be reported to law enforcement." I suspect that's what Paul Yoder meant, and as I said in my post (you all must have skimmed over this part) "I'm not against reporting crimes, especially crimes of (sexual) violence against others."

In times of crisis the pendulum does tend to swing - yes, violence and sexual abuse have no place in our community, and perpetrators in our midst should not be protected - but this is just a gentle reminder that the pendulum ought not to swing in a way the undercuts our core two-kingdom theology.

Example: I was in a Mennonite congregation when 9/11 happened. All of a sudden folks in my Mennonite church started flying American flags and posting "God bless America" signs, initially as a gesture of solidarity with victims and fellow Americans. But these symbols soon became nationalistic symbols of a country bent on destroying its enemies - and unfortunately some of my fellow Mennonites got unwittingly caught up in the fervor. For some in my church, their commitment to non-resistance was tested and weakened as they got swept up in a wave of post 9/11 nationalism.

Crises can bring about needed and welcomed change, but crises can also bring about knee-jerk reactions that might ultimately lead to conflict with core convictions - anyway, my radar is up.

[ken_sylvania]

Are people in this thread deliberately being obtuse, trying to provoke thoughtful discussion, or do y'all just sincerely not know which crimes should be reported to law enforcement?

I'm trying to tease out an articulable rationale for which crimes should actually be reported. I really don't think paulyoder really believes that ALL crimes should be reported.
It is very easy for us to say "JMast's crime horrible, it hurt other people, and it was disgusting, so any decent Christian should have reported him to law enforcement." What is difficult is knowing where the line is between a crime that need not be reported(public intoxication, for instance) and one that should be reported (child abuse). I think you made a good start in laying out your basic rationale - a crime that is actively causing major hurt to others.

To further complicate matters, some of us sincerely believe that it is God's will for his children to not be involved in policing the world about us. In the first World War, there were many well meaning people who believed that Christians needed to support the war 100% in order to bring peace to the world. I believe these people were misguided, and that the correct Biblical response was to refuse to participate in the armed forces in any way. To many, such a position made no logical sense, but we are called to live by faith, not by sight.

Similarly, as a part of the two-kingdom concept, we are not comfortable being co-opted to serve as investigative officers for the state. We have a history of refusing to serve as police, refusing to serve in government offices, and refuse to serve as jurors. While we have perhaps grudgingly accepted that some particularly serious crimes may require reporting, we have difficulty squaring that with the aloofness from government that is a part of our faith. Most of the arguments in favor of reporting do not, in my opinion, provide any rational guidance for why some crimes should be reported but other should not. Maybe I am stupid or dense, but calling me that to my face isn't likely to help me change my opinion. If I hold a position on a topic, I want to be able to explain why.

[QuietObserver]

Ken_sylvania,

1. Does the law require reporting this crime? If yes, then proceed to 2.
2. Does reporting this crime violate Gods higher laws? If no, then report. If yes, then do not report.

Does mandated reporting of sex crimes conflict with Gods laws? If yes, please explain.

[mercysfree]

Changes can begin right on your family pew!

I started coming to Mennonite VBS over 30 years ago, then slowly made changes till I joined a congregation 19 years ago. Before I was ever a member, sexual abuse was disclosed to my young daughter (by girls from more than one family, more than one congregation). I think that was *because* we were not Mennonite, and those poor girls hoped we would break ranks. I'm thankful my daughter came to me. Would yours? But I did what I thought one of the Mennonites would do...very similar to what Josh has said. Went to bishop, kept quiet otherwise.

I never personally talked to the families involved, never checked up again. I SO regret that. I feel like the Lord would be honored by me going back and making it right with as many of those people as I can.

Now I do not have children at home, so I am less likely to be the first one who finds out. My advice: Couples should *make a plan* and *talk to your children.* Examples: Accept the disclosure on its face and never say anything to a victim that they might construe as blame, as in "why did you let..."; teach children what body parts must not be shown/touched casually; develop a relationship that children will come to you when they are in over their heads; specifically say what to do if their friend tells them such a secret; if you hear rumors/gossip, check it out.

As far as I can see, the secrecy started out as trying not to spread gossip about confidences in many situations, not just abuse (good), and also to handle wrongs in-church (also good) but now has grown to this smothering lack of transparency that people take wrong advantage of. This situation has been watershed for me. I am still very committed to the Mennonites as my people, but unless someone can convince me otherwise...if abuse disclosure were made to me today, after all I have seen, I would go to police first, then families/bishop.

I don't think 1 Cor. 6 is covering violent crimes--that is what God ordained government (the sword) for. The church should handle religious, moral, and property violation/disagreements with *only* church discipline. What do you report to whom? I doubt I will have much trouble deciding. If it is a serious, violent sin AND there is a law against it requiring prison time, then police. If it is he/she lied, stomped on somebody's rights, hasn't paid taxes, etc. OR it is a sin but not a crime in our society, set Matthew 18 in action. If in doubt, I would begin with Matt. 18 and see if it got dealt with adequately.

I am done drinking the secrecy Kool-Aid, though. I have been so careful to do things your way. Now my little corner is going to get a lot more light, as someone else here has said, the best disinfectant.

[Aurien]

Are people in this thread deliberately being obtuse, trying to provoke thoughtful discussion, or do y'all just sincerely not know which crimes should be reported to law enforcement?

Maybe I am stupid or dense, but calling me that to my face isn't likely to help me change my opinion. If I hold a position on a topic, I want to be able to explain why.

I asked a question. I did not call you or anyone else stupid or dense. I'm sorry it came across that way.

[Aurien]

Changes can begin right on your family pew!

I started coming to Mennonite VBS over 30 years ago, then slowly made changes till I joined a congregation 19 years ago. Before I was ever a member, sexual abuse was disclosed to my young daughter (by girls from more than one family, more than one congregation). I think that was *because* we were not Mennonite, and those poor girls hoped we would break ranks. I'm thankful my daughter came to me. Would yours? But I did what I thought one of the Mennonites would do...very similar to what Josh has said. Went to bishop, kept quiet otherwise.

I never personally talked to the families involved, never checked up again. I SO regret that. I feel like the Lord would be honored by me going back and making it right with as many of those people as I can.

Now I do not have children at home, so I am less likely to be the first one who finds out. My advice: Couples should *make a plan* and *talk to your children.* Examples: Accept the disclosure on its face and never say anything to a victim that they might construe as blame, as in "why did you let..."; teach children what body parts must not be shown/touched casually; develop a relationship that children will come to you when they are in over their heads; specifically say what to do if their friend tells them such a secret; if you hear rumors/gossip, check it out.

As far as I can see, the secrecy started out as trying not to spread gossip about confidences in many situations, not just abuse (good), and also to handle wrongs in-church (also good) but now has grown to this smothering lack of transparency that people take wrong advantage of. This situation has been watershed for me. I am still very committed to the Mennonites as my people, but unless someone can convince me otherwise...if abuse disclosure were made to me today, after all I have seen, I would go to police first, then families/bishop.

I don't think 1 Cor. 6 is covering violent crimes--that is what God ordained government (the sword) for. The church should handle religious, moral, and property violation/disagreements with *only* church discipline. What do you report to whom? I doubt I will have much trouble deciding. If it is a serious, violent sin AND there is a law against it requiring prison time, then police. If it is he/she lied, stomped on somebody's rights, hasn't paid taxes, etc. OR it is a sin but not a crime in our society, set Matthew 18 in action. If in doubt, I would begin with Matt. 18 and see if it got dealt with adequately.

I am done drinking the secrecy Kool-Aid, though. I have been so careful to do things your way. Now my little corner is going to get a lot more light, as someone else here has said, the best disinfectant.

Yes! Thank you for sharing this.

[Ken]

These questions are answerable. No, you don't have to report speeders. Yes, you might have to report child abuse:

https://www.lawyers.com/legal-info/crim ... lying.html

Most of the time, ordinary citizens are not legally required to report a crime or to do anything to stop it. In other words, there is no general duty to be a “good Samaritan.” But the exceptions are surprisingly widespread.

A few states, for example, require witnesses at the scene of a violent crime to make reports to law enforcement when they can safely do so. Many states require all persons to report suspected child abuse. Further, depending on your job, you may, as an employee, have an obligation to report certain work-related suspicious activity to a government agency or the police. These duties are commonly called “mandatory reporting requirements.”

Mandatory reporting requirements are frequently accompanied by provisions that make failing to file a report a crime itself. That failure is usually a misdemeanor, but it can be a felony. Prosecutions for failure to report are very rare, and usually involve strong evidence of a serious harm that could have been prevented if a person with a duty to make a report had done so.

If you make a report, whether mandatory or not, what are your responsibilities? Let’s first look more closely at the times when you have no duty, and then at the times when you might.

And further into the article

Work-related Obligations to Report
When you are at work, you may be subject to state and federal laws that impose certain reporting obligations that do not apply to the general public. If you work in a field covered by extensive government regulation, such as health care and education, it’s highly likely that you have some mandatory reporting duties. Governments typically enact such laws to protect persons who may be particularly vulnerable, such as children, the disabled, and the elderly. And some professionals have mandatory reporting requirements even where no vulnerable victims are involved. For example, environmental crimes like mishandling hazardous waste and financial crimes like money-laundering typically require witnesses to report what they know.

Non-Obvious Reporters
Some categories of mandatory reporters are less obvious. To detect child pornography and abuse, many states require photo and video processors and computer technicians to report suspected cases. In some states, veterinarians have a duty to report instances of animal cruelty.

Each state, and the federal government, has its own definitions of who is a protected person, which events trigger a duty to report, and who is a mandatory reporter. If you think you might be covered, it is important to understand the details in the applicable regulations

Child Abuse
Every state requires certain groups of professionals to report child abuse. Most commonly, people who work in health care, education, and child care are among those required to make a report of suspected child abuse to local authorities. Some states require all citizens to report cases of suspected child abuse.

Vulnerable Adults
As with child abuse, many laws impose mandatory duties to report abuse of the elderly and persons unable to care for themselves because of illness or disability. Nursing home employees, mental health and health care workers, and other professionals responsible for the care and oversight of such vulnerable adults have mandatory reporting requirements in a majority of states.

And from another article of particular relevance for those who may be involved in covering up crimes of abuse

https://www.wklaw.com/knowing-about-a-c ... -anything/

In California, you can be charged with the crime that was committed if you aided or abetted in its commission, but did not actually commit the crime yourself. Penal Code section 31 describes the phrase “aiding and abetting” as meaning that you assisted another person to commit a crime. Prosecutors can charge you as an aider and abettor whenever you:

• Know the perpetrator’s illegal plan,
  Intentionally encourage and/or facilitate that plan, and
  Aid, promote, or instigate in the crime’s commission.
  You don’t have to be actually present at the scene of the crime to be charged under what is known as “accomplice liability.” If you willfully participated in the planning of a crime prior to its commission, you can be held criminally liable as an “accessory before the fact.”

If you take a passive role during a crime in progress, such as acting as a lookout or disabling a security device, you can be prosecuted as a perpetrator in the second degree (an accomplice).

Finally, if you help to conceal a crime already committed (hiding stolen money or weapons used in the crime’s commission, for example), or give assistance to perpetrators of crime to help them avoid detection, arrest or prosecution, you can be charged as an “accessory after the fact.”

In these situations, you are culpable under the accomplice liability theory because you knew of the illegal plan and willfully did something to cause it to be carried out or concealed.