What has to happen? Reforming our culture

[Robert]

Ken asks some salient questions here. This thread is for constructively discussing how we reform our culture to address the scourge of sexual abuse (and cover-up).

I scanned the posts up to now. Some good points, but I would like to share some thoughts about two kingdom theology and the issue with sexual abuse in churches.

First, the concept of two kingdom theology is a real hard issue with a representative government. Of the people, by the people, and for the people means it is not a they and us, but we are the they too. In present day society, most laws are made by the consent of the governed, in a round about way. There are fair laws to deal with sexual abuse perpetrators. I see no reason not to involve the authorities. The reason why we should is my second part.

Our focus should be on the victims more than punishment of the perpetrator. If we know of a perpetrator, it is our responsibility to do everything in our power to help the victim. One aspect is to stop the perpetrator. This stops them from continuing to harm the current victim and stops them from harming others down the road. Being compassionate and supportive of the victim is much more important then punishing the perpetrator. Stopping the action is vital, but punishment is not as important as "shining a light" on the event/s. Once a perpetrator is outed, it really slows the continued actions, yet we need to allow the legal process to work so we do not falsely accuse re give a scarlet letter to someone unjustly.

Current society and culture seems to help breed and foster sexual deviation. While we should not be afraid of talking about the positives and negatives of a openly sexual society, we do have to learn to be open to education and setting healthy boundaries. We can love the perpetrator while also loving the victim or possible victims by acting in ways the make deviant behavior much harder to practice.

Lastly, we need to be honest that closed or separated sub cultures are no less protected or safe from deviant behaviors from developing. It is part of our brokenness and no group is immune. Yes. It is going on in your church, and with some of your friends. They all need your help, not judgementalness. Most the time, the desire can not be unprogrammed, but it can be honestly dealt with and managed with openness and strong boundaries.

Open sexuality and repressed sexuality will both foster and breed deviant behaviors. Understanding that there is a lot of biological triggers at work helps us to understand the actions of a perpetrator and also how to help the victims. Healthy sexual activity is not something to be ashamed of or not taught. It is vital we do so it reduces the deviant behavior that can develop from a taboo subject. It can be a challenge to talk openly about intimate things. Remembering we are biological machines can help while also knowing that we also have a layer of spirituality that comes to play also. Both should be addressed and dealt with in age appropriate places and ways.

Lastly, there is not quick fix. There is nothing we can do that would stop deviant sexual behaviors completely. All we can do is work to make the journey for others as filled with love and healthy relationships.

Okay. Rant is over. Back to hiding in my corner.

[Neto]

This doesn't really fit in any of these existing topics, but I do not wish to start yet another one, so I'm putting it here.

It has been reported that (for what ever reason) the Hatian victims in the current case are receiving threats of violence against them. I have seen what happens to Amish girls who were victimized as children, how they are "marked" as something like "damaged goods". That is terrible, and it is possible to simply say that any young man who would think that way is not someone who would be a good husband anyway, so good riddance. But the young women (singles, especially) do suffer under this stigma. So my legal question for discussion is whether there is a way for a perpetrator to be charged w/o naming the victims. But regardless, we need to teach our sons & daughters not to think like that. That's the part of this that touches on this topic, because even though we would desperately want to go back & change what has happened, we cannot, and no matter how hard we try we also will not prevent all future cases.

[Aurien]

This doesn't really fit in any of these existing topics, but I do not wish to start yet another one, so I'm putting it here.

It has been reported that (for what ever reason) the Hatian victims in the current case are receiving threats of violence against them.

Homosexuality is apparently not well tolerated in Haitian culture and the victim are marked as homosexual because it was a man who abused them. They're called "Madame Jeriah." An American who's lived in Haiti said that the term is the equivalent of a person in prison being called, "someone's b**ch."

I have seen what happens to Amish girls who were victimized as children, how they are "marked" as something like "damaged goods". That is terrible, and it is possible to simply say that any young man who would think that way is not someone who would be a good husband anyway, so good riddance. But the young women (singles, especially) do suffer under this stigma. So my legal question for discussion is whether there is a way for a perpetrator to be charged w/o naming the victims. But regardless, we need to teach our sons & daughters not to think like that. That's the part of this that touches on this topic, because even though we would desperately want to go back & change what has happened, we cannot, and no matter how hard we try we also will not prevent all future cases.

In the United States as far as I know victims of a crimes who are minors are not supposed to be named publicly in a case. But people talk and unless everyone keeps it a closely guarded secret then family and friends of the abuse survivor are going to know about it and maybe spread the names around.
If you're asking if a perpetrator can be charged without anyone at all knowing the victim's name then I don't think that's possible.
I don't know what the laws are in Haiti but it's my understanding that some or all of the survivors who brought the court case against Jeriah are adults. Plus like in the US people are gonna talk and so the names of current minors who were abused are likely going to be spread around as well.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/3509

[Ken]

This doesn't really fit in any of these existing topics, but I do not wish to start yet another one, so I'm putting it here.

It has been reported that (for what ever reason) the Hatian victims in the current case are receiving threats of violence against them. I have seen what happens to Amish girls who were victimized as children, how they are "marked" as something like "damaged goods". That is terrible, and it is possible to simply say that any young man who would think that way is not someone who would be a good husband anyway, so good riddance. But the young women (singles, especially) do suffer under this stigma. So my legal question for discussion is whether there is a way for a perpetrator to be charged w/o naming the victims. But regardless, we need to teach our sons & daughters not to think like that. That's the part of this that touches on this topic, because even though we would desperately want to go back & change what has happened, we cannot, and no matter how hard we try we also will not prevent all future cases.

This is a tough topic. I don't know what is going on in Haiti but here in the US, victims of crimes who are minors are not named. But of course in a small insular community like the Amish it is impossible to keep those sorts of secrets.

Rather than tighten the veil of secrecy around this sort of thing, which will only make the shaming worse in my opinion, I thing the better aproach long-term is to work hard to reduce the stigma of victim-hood. I think that is better accomplished long-term via sunlight rather than secrecy. But I agree, it requires a cultural change. And part of the problem is a culture that values women only for their purity and chastity rather than as individuals.

[mercysfree]

This doesn't really fit in any of these existing topics, but I do not wish to start yet another one, so I'm putting it here.

It has been reported that (for what ever reason) the Hatian victims in the current case are receiving threats of violence against them. I have seen what happens to Amish girls who were victimized as children, how they are "marked" as something like "damaged goods". That is terrible, and it is possible to simply say that any young man who would think that way is not someone who would be a good husband anyway, so good riddance. But the young women (singles, especially) do suffer under this stigma...

Rather than tighten the veil of secrecy around this sort of thing, which will only make the shaming worse in my opinion, I thing the better aproach long-term is to work hard to reduce the stigma of victim-hood. I think that is better accomplished long-term via sunlight rather than secrecy. But I agree, it requires a cultural change. And part of the problem is a culture that values women only for their purity and chastity rather than as individuals.

Thoughts about not naming:
1. Victims cannot be silenced and expect them to thrive. In a Christian community, we *should* be able to live with our brothers and sisters knowing the wrongs done against us without shame on our part.
2. Sexual purity and chastity should be something women and men can recover (to a certain extent) as we heal, either from sin or abuse. This kind of violation should not make me "damaged goods" in the sense of "no one wants damaged goods." But in another sense, yes, survivors are damaged and need the help of the faith community to recover and heal from shame. How can that happen if having been violated is so shameful that victims cannot publicly admit to it?
3. No victim should be named against his or her will. But there do need to be Christian adult survivors willing to bravely help the culture change, even if not perfectly healed yet themselves. Who does that bring to mind?

[Neto]

Thoughts about not naming:
1. Victims cannot be silenced and expect them to thrive. In a Christian community, we *should* be able to live with our brothers and sisters knowing the wrongs done against us without shame on our part.
2. Sexual purity and chastity should be something women and men can recover (to a certain extent) as we heal, either from sin or abuse. This kind of violation should not make me "damaged goods" in the sense of "no one wants damaged goods." But in another sense, yes, survivors are damaged and need the help of the faith community to recover and heal from shame. How can that happen if having been violated is so shameful that victims cannot publicly admit to it?
3. No victim should be named against his or her will. But there do need to be Christian adult survivors willing to bravely help the culture change, even if not perfectly healed yet themselves. Who does that bring to mind?

Your number 2 reminds me of a conversation I had with a girl in Bible college. I called her and asked her if I could talk with her, because I was convicted about greatly exaggerating something in a story I had told her (to impress her). After I confessed this to her she said something too quietly for me to actually hear what she had said for sure, but the part I understood was something to the effect that I was "treating her more like a lady than ..." and I think she said "what I am." to complete the sentence. I asked her what she said, and she wouldn't repeat it. What I wanted to say, if she said what I think she did, was "Don't allow any one to call 'unclean' that which God has declared to be clean". So yes, I definitely agree that God can and DOES cleanse, even in the case of willful sin (if confessed before him). (I don't think that every sin must be publicly confessed, and I sometimes cringe when someone confesses "in too much detail".) In the case of abuse, the abused doesn't need to be cleansed in that same sense, because they are not guilty. They just need to deeply know that they did nothing wrong. In that case it is those who are shying away from them who have done wrong, rubbing salt in the wound caused by the abuser (by treating them as somehow second class). In the case I know the most about, I have never let on to the young woman that I know about it, but have talked long with her father (at his initiation), and I'm thankful that God has done and is doing a work in his heart, as he cares for his wife and family. When I first started doing business with him 11 years ago, I would not have thought he had a spiritual relationship with Jesus at all. But this terrible thing (that is making me cry even now as I write this) has brought him close to God, and he has taken an uncharacteristic path (for Old Order Amish) of showing love for his children. So God has brought good out of this terrible evil. Only He can do that!

[Josh]

Currently, plain culture is producing people who think getting an abortion to cover up sinful acts is something they should do.

Let’s figure out how to change that.

[joshuabgood]

Currently, plain culture is producing people who think getting an abortion to cover up sinful acts is something they should do.

Let’s figure out how to change that.

From my perspective, this is a bit of an oversimplification.

[Josh]

Currently, plain culture is producing people who think getting an abortion to cover up sinful acts is something they should do.

Let’s figure out how to change that.

From my perspective, this is a bit of an oversimplification.

Basically, image / perception seems to have become more important than how things actually are.

[Judas Maccabeus]

Currently, plain culture is producing people who think getting an abortion to cover up sinful acts is something they should do.

Let’s figure out how to change that.

From my perspective, this is a bit of an oversimplification.

Basically, image / perception seems to have become more important than how things actually are.

Which is indicative of a shame based culture

J.M.