There’s a fascinating piece in the NYT this week about a church that is grappling with a tough moral question:
In late January, Mark Pliska, 53, told the congregation here that he had been in prison for molesting children but that he sought a place to worship and liked the atmosphere at Pilgrim.Mr. Pliska’s request has plunged the close-knit congregation into a painful discussion about applying faith in a difficult real-world situation. Congregants now wonder, are all truly welcome? If they are, how do you ensure the safety of children and the healing of adult survivors of sexual abuse? Can an offender who accepts Christ truly change?
I think most of us would agree that the church should be open to most anyone, regardless of their history—especially when they are open about their past and seek help. But that commendable sentiment doesn’t seem quite so simple when this sort of situation arrives at your church’s doorstep. The church in question is trying to find a solution that both welcomes Priska as a fellow believer and makes sure that nobody in the church is endangered by his presence.
A few questions to ponder:
- How would this situation play out in your church if it were to come up right this week? If this situation has come up already in your church community, how was it resolved?
- Pliska has expressed willingness to undergo extra oversight to put fears at ease (and perhaps to keep himself well away from even the slightest hint of temptation): he’d always be accompanied by an adult and would not go near children at church. Is this a reasonable level of oversight? Is it enough? Is it uncharitable to ask a repentant Pliska to put up with this, or does the nature of his crime make it necessary?
- A hypothetical question: if Pliska were 100% “cured” of whatever impulses drove him to molest children, could he be welcomed into the community without concern—or would the horrific nature of past actions still require some form of special oversight?
- If welcoming a former sex offender would cause others—nervous parents, perhaps, or adults who were abused themselves as children—to feel unwelcome or unsafe, should that be a factor in the church’s decision?
- Is your church already doing what it can to prevent any form of sexual abuse from taking place within its walls? Not every sex offender, reformed or otherwise, is likely to step forward publically as Pliska has done. If you haven’t already, see Kim’s recent post about preventing sexual violence in the church.
Loading ...
April 11, 2007 at 18:17
He certainly should be welcomed into the church. No question about it.
Having no supervision would seem a bit reckless, and since Pliska has admitted his status in advance and expressed openness to some level of supervision, it would seem wise to include him in the formation of a plan, including provisions for failure on both sides.
This is an opportunity for this church to become a model in how to treat persons who have been “caught in sin.” Will there be people who feel “unwelcome” as a result? Probably. THat’s their choice and church leadership should invite them to share their concerns but, personally, I wouldn’t run too far after them if they choose to leave.
As to your hypothetical question: Pliska is no more or less sinful than anyone else at that church. And he’s no more cured than any of the other members either. But his criminal record and the nature of his offense(s) does warrant some kind of oversight.
April 11, 2007 at 19:20
Sorry, but the offender must go. He can go get enlightenment and brotherhood at churches that do not have children. More importantly, he should not even be in society with his record, but in a prison or jail, just like half a million other offenders in this country.
April 11, 2007 at 19:43
I think it is fine to welcome a convicted child molester into the church. Just as long as the person is not put into a position of leadership, and if he is then the congregation should know ahead of time.
April 11, 2007 at 20:50
There once was a murderer running around the streets of Jerusalem… he went from church to church, dragging people away to be chained and murdered. Followers of the Way all over were terribly afraid of this wicked, wicked man.
Then this man had an encounter. He met the One whom he sought to destroy. He was given new life—a gracious gift from the most forgiving man who ever lived.
This murderer then sought fellowship with other believers… he needed encouragement, companionship, support along the way. Of course, no one trusted him. But there was one—Barnabas—who extended a chance for fellowship. Barnabas risked his life to give this man a second chance.
The man eventually became one of the most outspoken apostles the world has ever known. For that man, teaching the Word and availing the door to the Kingdom was more important than life itself.
The problem today is that we don’t believe. We don’t believe Jesus has any power to save a sinner. We don’t believe His followers have everything they need for life and godliness. We certainly don’t believe we’re as wicked and horrid as the people we condemn to prisons and cast out of our congregation. We don’t want to take part in forgiving those who sin against us once, let alone seventy times seven every day.
The church is no longer a gathering of people who believe and obey the Lord, it’s a gathering of white-washed tombs with cold hearts, no grace, no forgiveness… it’s a glorified country club, and the thought of someone joining us who isn’t like us is to be avoided at all costs.
Somewhere along the way, we have become the same Pharisees who killed Jesus. Pliska is a very different man than many of us. Pliska is producing fruit through repentance. He will find eternal life. Most who claim belief are merely deceived. No fruit. No attitude that Christ had. No forgiveness. No love. No hope of salvation.
I truly hope Mr. Pliska finds a body of vibrant, living believers who welcome him like Barnabas welcomed Paul. I’m scared, though, that most he’ll run into are like comment #2 and the rest of the Pharisees—always wanting the godly men put in chains and removed from society.
Please, be Barnabases. The world is crawling with self-righteous Pharisees.
April 11, 2007 at 21:19
The Bible tells us to be shrewd as snakes,but innocent as doves (Matt 10:16). A church should welcome a repentant sinner & rehabilitate him, while being mindful that he should not be placed in a situation where he will be tempted to sin again. Otherwise, that will defeat the whole purpose.
April 11, 2007 at 21:30
If we were to look at a church as a shelter or a place to hide, then everyone inside would be as much of a threat as the man/woman next to them. But rather a church acts as a functioning body. If a part is ill – then help it heal. After all, in a sense, a church is a hospital for sinners.
I’ve seen first hand the damages (physically and mentally) a sex offender can do to a person, but I’ve also seen countless times … the change a person’s life goes through in the hands of a magnificent and graceful God.
April 11, 2007 at 22:04
This is a sticky wicket. I agree with Jim above. I have four kids and fully understand the fear of others regarding this man.
But God welcomes all. 1 Corinthians 6:11 says it best, “And that is what some of you were...” Now does this mean that we let him run free? By no means! He seems to understand his sin. He has been open about it with the church. But he needs a place to worship and to grow. I’d bet that without a place to worship, he’d be back in that lifestyle soon.
However, I’m not naive either. Just because he’s in church doesn’t mean he’s OUT of that lifestyle. Obviously, certain restrictions and considerations must be made on his part. He must be accountable for his actions and perceived behavior at all times. Honestly, this is where you would hope one of your church members was a social worker or someone who had worked extensively with sexual offenders to assist in this situation.
But to simply cast him aside as if he’s secondhand clothing is not the answer. Christ taught love – without consideration of position or social standing or past – without reservation.
If we say there is no hope of change for a child molester, why bother with the homosexual or the alcoholic or the drug addict or the murderer? If there is no hope of change for the least of these then there is no hope for anyone. Christ is hope. Thank God for Christ! I think I would have given up on my own sin and given myself over to it if it weren’t for the hope Christ brings.
April 12, 2007 at 01:43
Wow, it was amazing to come in and read this today. I am wondering about all of this as well. My brother-in-law was recently convicted of something along these lines and is now a registered category 2 sex offender. Something happened with my niece, though I am not clear (and don’t really need to know) on all of the details.
Because of all that is going on, I am trying to reach out to him, though, and let him know that there are still people out there that do care about him. God calls us all not to judge one another. After all, we are to love the sinners and not the sin. One thing that I want to make sure he knows is that regardless of what may have taken place, God still loves him and wants him to repent and turn himself completely over to God. But he will need a support structure around him to offer the support (I am across the ocean, so not much help other than the long distance kind) so needed within a mature, loving church body.
I agree that there should be some steps taken to prevent him from coming in contact alone with minors, but there should still be a place in God’s family for him.
Thanks for this article!!!
April 12, 2007 at 06:10
We have a man in our congregation with such a past. His probation officer has okayed his attendance as long as families with children are made aware of his past. Is is allowed to attend all our church functions. It gives him Christian fellowship, a place to learn more about the Lord and a place to receive healing from past issues. He is an accepted member. God can bring change and healing. But people need the opportunity and Christian fellowship to be open to change and yield to healing. He is under our watchful eye. At times we have had to bring correction and he gets upset and does not attend for a while, but keeps coming back because no other church wil accept him. Healing takes time and isn’t always pleasant. But Christian acceptance of the person is necessary before the person can yeild to healing from the sin in their life. We cannot say “love the sinner but hate the sin” if we refuse to accept the sinner because of the sin to start with. He is advancing in his Christian walk, but we also know he has a long way to go yet. We do work with his probation officer in this process. Through this process, he has not made any of our families feel threatened or at risk.
April 12, 2007 at 06:41
Consider the possibility of how many people in our congregations today are guilty of an extreme sin or breakage of law… such as child molestation, theft, murder, abuse, etc… Additionally – consider how many such people are “in the making” (not yet crime committers, but on the path to such things if no intervention would take place). Now – considering the possibility that there are people like this in any given church, wouldn’t you rather know someone is confessing it and trying to get help for it… rather than the quiet brooder who could potentially strike at any given point, yet there’s no (or little) outward signs to clue anyone in and help keep everyone safe? I’d say welcome this confessor with open arms – in fact ask him to lead a class on the topic of sexual addition and child abuse from the lessons he’s invariably learned. Perhaps his teaching will help prevent a criminal-in-the-making from becoming a ACTUAL criminal. And perhaps he’d help others learn how to keep their children (and themselves) safe by detecting signals of potential criminals.
April 12, 2007 at 07:32
We had a fellow show up at church. When I spoke to him he seemed a little “underdeveloped” which was odd becaise he looked very smart, almost like an male “business fashion model”. yet, later, I was told he was a molester. He showed up at a rock concert, at our church, that I was running. My response was “just keep an eye on him”. To be honest, if he tried anything with the kids in the mosh pit, he would have gotten his A** kicked by the guys in the pit (and some of the ladies). I have not seen him since that night. I feel bad for “these people”. My father-in-law was one. he really screwed up, REALLY screwed up the lives of his daughters and sons. Some people say there is no cure, the urge NEVER really goes away. I don’t know but I would take no chances. Tough call.
April 12, 2007 at 12:47
I will NOT welcome the person at all where the church has children in it. No matter how strong my faith is, I rather be weak in dealing with this matter.
I agree with the people saying about the URGE thing. For alcoholic, the person will be OK and can control the URGE as long as the person stays away from it or does not see it. The same true for the smoker or else.
However, the child molestor attends the church where this person sees all variety children in his sights. How can the URGE NOT bother or give this person temptation now or later on?
Let me see this person deeds somewhere else first. Let me see the Lord has tranformed this person through the deeds first. Saul/Paul has the deeds, and Barnabas saw it himself that the Lord is upon Paul. I do not want to play with the fire to let this person near my children. Even if I do not have children, I can not let it be because I have to look from other parent’s shoes …
April 12, 2007 at 15:41
This would be very difficult in my own context. You see, “church” is nothing more that a group of people who gather in homes. It is very sociable and interactive much like an extended family gathering. We are rarely over 25 people, and most often under 20. We get together for a shared meal, and interacted around the meal, and share the Scriptures, and worship and pray, and people of all ages do this together, very much like the Early Church did, fostering a sense of belonging and community. Most of us walk together in relationships that are redemptive, uplifting, and caring. We have a measure of trust and openness that allows each person to speak into each other’s lives. You are pretty well naked, with no place to hide, warts, secret sins or crimes, and all. What you see is what you get. Besides as soon as it gets to be between 20 and 25, we are looking to create another “simple church” or “house church” that will gather in another neighbourhood, in another house.
In my context, Mr. Pliska would have nowhere to hide, and we would do a lot of screening, to even determine whether or not he would be a good fit. Some of us, would walk with him over a protracted amount of time, to see whether or not he would fit in our context of community. We just don’t let anyone into our space, especially our “church body” space. Our homes are sacred, and the relationships being built are sacred, and when we gather, and play and pray together, it is all sacred, and very much the spiritual family of God. We tend to discourage people to become a part of us, if they don’t understand “relational community”.
Mr. Pliska would likely find it to be “too in your face” for what he is looking for. Most Christians find it too in your face too! It is all about being real, transparent, and mutually submissive one to another, where each person, no matter how old or how young can engage and participate in mutually edifying body life.
April 12, 2007 at 15:50
How incredibly sad people in this forum would have a “not in MY church” attitude. Is sexual sin any greater than being a liar, a thief or any of the myriad sins of which we humans are guilty? I admire Mr. Pliska’s openness – he wants to share in the fellowship of the body of Christ. Everyone should be aware of who is with your children and what is going on. All churches should have sexual behavior policy in place (you don’t close doors for private meetings unless you have a witness in the room with you – that kind of protection for everyone involved). At any rate – Mr. Pliska – should you read this – I don’t know if my church would welcome you and it breaks my heart. With all our claims to be Jesus with skin on – we too often are Pharisees with dirty hands.
April 12, 2007 at 20:15
Wow. Excellent post. This is a very relevant issue and one that isn’t talked about in churches much. I’m going to put a link to this post over at my blog soon.
April 12, 2007 at 21:14
jwise,
Pharisees? My jwise…where is your love for commenter #2? Sounds like you are what you seem to hate. “No hope for salvation”? What is that about?
You know who will and won’t saved by someone who stated that the man shouldn’t be in a congragation with children, but should find fellowship with men in the faith? Wew..hope the body doesn’t always see it your way either. I’m a a Pharasee..because I disagree with you?
April 12, 2007 at 21:58
Just found your blog and already felt compelled to comment! While I firmly believe that Christ would welcome anyone regardless of his past sins, I also believe protecting children has to be a priority of our churches. I think, as long as the person is willing to be closely supervised and stay away from children’s ministries, he should be allowed to attend the church. Isn’t one of Christianity’s cornerstones forgiveness? I also think that this man’s honesty is admirable – how many churches have sex offenders attending and just don’t know it? I would guess that is quite a high percentage…
April 13, 2007 at 05:21
I find it strange that some christians are prepared to exclude this ‘sinner’ but have no issue with the rest of us meeting together because our sins must be ‘normal’. I thought Jesus meeting the prositute at the well was evidence that he saw all of our human failing in need of transformation, and that we were all welcome in his kingdom. To exclude a ‘sinner’ is to be like the Pharisees, and place one self above Jesus’s message.
April 13, 2007 at 12:05
This issue is a tough one. Is sexual sin forgiveable? Yes. Should he be welcome as a part of the family of God? Yes. Would I want to take my children to church to fellowship with someone with that type of past? I wish I could answer that question as easily.
I believe that God can change anyone, but I’m not confident in my ability to discern if a particular person has truly changed. Outward appearances can be deceiving. I also don’t know how I would explain to my small children why they should respect the adults at church but avoid that particular one.
I admire this man’s honesty about his past and his church’s willingness to grapple with the issue. I have the feeling that if such a person came to our church, his past would be kept secret (as much as possible) from the congregation, and there would be no opportunity to test our faith or allow Christ to bring healing.
April 13, 2007 at 12:23
This is a major challenge to churches today. You want to love the sinner and not the sin. Yes, we all have sinned and fallen short and we all face the same judgement without Christ, but different sins do result in different consequences. A child who takes a toy that is not theirs is punished differently than a mass murderer.
I think that this church seems to be going down the right road. As a father, it would be hard to know of someone like that and I would not want them near my children. However, I would want to give them a chance to prove that they are seriously repentant and trying.
To some who have said we should just forgive and forget, would you allow this person to babysit your children? That’s harsh, but it really gets into our true feelings.
This man needs fellowship and community, but it can’t be at the risk to others. They could hurt others and themselves. They could come and with restrictions (no contact with children or youth ministries) and serve in other areas. Just like a person convicted of embezzlement should not be counting the tithes and offerings.
There is no easy answer here, but the dialogue is fabulous!
April 13, 2007 at 21:56
John,
I was responding to Peter’s statement:
“More importantly, he should not even be in society with his record, but in a prison or jail, just like half a million other offenders in this country.”
We are all equally deserving of punishment. And not just prison or jail, but hell itself.
But the church seems to have forgotten how powerful grace is. We have a form of godliness, but deny its power.
And no, you’re certainly not a Pharisee if you disagree with me. But if you hold that a religous few deserve heaven while the “real sinners” deserve prison and eventually hell, you’re much, much more like the Pharisees than Jesus.
April 14, 2007 at 11:24
jwise,
CONVICTED, sexual predators do not need to be in open society.
Only the Holy Spirit’s indwelling can forgive and change a person from the willful ‘practice’ of sin.
That man, if he had been contained in prison till the departure of his soul could have had excellent fellowship with fellow beleivers in prison, where there are no children in the congregation to be tempted with. You can never ‘trust’ him again, no matter his testamony. I hope he has had true ‘repentance’ (turning away from and denying himself that sin ) in his heart and true belief in the Lord Jesus for the salvation of his soul…but he won’t be around my children, because God’s word says that many are in sheeps clothing…and that they will come in as hungary wolves, not sparing the flock…that thier eyes are full of adultery.”
Yes I know those passages are about false teachings..but they also make us aware of the pretenders that masqurade as true (not that that man is) but…
If I am a convicted thief, then I don’t get to wonder around in a bank…no matter my testamony of Christ. Just because you forgive me for reaching into your wallet and stealing your money, then asking for true forgivness…doesn’t mean you HAVE TO let me be around your wallet because I say and act like I am a Christian.
No Convicted offenders around Jesus’ lambs, lest we tempt them to get a mills stone hung around their neck.
April 16, 2007 at 13:01
A person who has committed a crime is not “a criminal.” None of us are DEFINED by things we have done. (Likewise, I am not calling someone “a liar” just because I say they have, on some occasion, told a lie.) Many people who come out of prison, if they have come to terms with what they did, are better bets than many who have not yet committed crimes they are capable of. (Yes, that includes people who have dealt drugs and killed people, and yes, I know some personally).
There is a specific legitimate concern with sexual crimes like molesting children. There is some evidence that there is a compulsion, which may not be the individual’s choice, but which they cannot always overcome or control.
But there is no place in our society where we can guarantee the complete absence of children. Either we let people go free once they have served their sentence, OR we create some kind of asylum where they will literally be on the other side of a wall from the rest of us for their entire life—not prison, not as punishment, but because they remain a constant danger.
Since this man is out of prison, the church is one of the best places for him to have fellowship with other people. He should, for reasons eloquently stated by others, not be left in a position of temptation, just as someone convicted of embezzlement would not be given the post of treasurer. And then see what God can do.
April 20, 2007 at 11:34
Let’s assume that this former offender is truly repentant. We can’t see into their heart and know that it is true. Only God can. We can have Faith and hope that a former offender will not act out again, but really we have no way of knowing that their feelings have undergone a transformation.
That said, Forgiveness does not equal Carte Blanche into the Church community. Offering access to children (even just visually) for a previous sex offender is like waving a red flag in front of a bull. This is an impulse the offender will need to fight all their lives.
So the question becomes what can a Forgiving Church Community offer a former Offender? Attendance at a service where there are no children present (6am early service), house visit/prayer from church leaders/clergy, opportunities to serve their community in ways that do not expose them to children such as delivering hot meals to the elderly.
In accepting Forgiveness from others, the former Offender needs to accept the consequences of their actions. To Forgive does not mean to Trust in the former offender’s newly found good judgement, rather to Trust in using the good common sense that God gave to each and every one of us. Don’t give molestors extra ‘chances’ with our most precious and innocent blessings. They lost this privelege forever when they sinned and ruined an innocent life.
Embrace them with true Forgiveness. Let them know of God’s love for each of us. Put them on the path of putting God first in their life. They know God is missing, show them the way to God. Create an alternative place for them in your Church. Don’t give them the access that puts our children in harms way. It is not about what is owed spiritually to this Offender, rather what is owed to our children.
April 20, 2007 at 22:07
This is a tough question. Although I know of a molester (unknown to the congregation) who is fuctioning in the church under the watchfull eye? of his wife. My hope is that his involvment with Christ will show him his sin and cause repentance.
I do think that someone who is comming into the church, honestly and stating his willingness to be monitored is a lot more than most would do. I see this as commendable and should be treated as such.
Let him in, give him acceptance, treat his as you would want to be treated in this situation and keep an eye on him. A close eye. Always. but don’t pretend your not doing this- be as upfront as he has been.
Also I think that we are forgeting the power of God and the power of prayer. We should be praying for God’s protection in this matter. If we are doing as Christ has instructed, then it is reasonable to be requesting God’s protection in this situation and beliving he will provide said proctection. As well as acceptance, repentance and Love.