BishopAccountability.org
	Southern Baptists Facing Their Own Molestation Issues Southern Baptists Facing Their Own Molestation Issues By Stan Nelson Pueblo Chieftain [United States] March 3, 2007 http://www.chieftain.com/life/1172913635/5 The Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests has not stopped at rooting out sexual predators from the Roman Catholic church. It now sets its sights to do the same for a more difficult denomination in the Southern Baptists. The difficulty is not in finding examples of the same condemnable acts among the pastors and officials of Southern Baptist churches. The denomination's leaders have admitted as much. SNAP, for its part, has documented about 40 cases of sexual misconduct by ministers. The challenge will be to deal successfully with a denomination that, in structure, is nothing like the Catholic Church. How SNAP handles that may mean the difference between success and a lost opportunity. SNAP has issued a call for the formation of an independent review board to investigate reports of molestation within churches that are members of the Southern Baptist Convention. According to a letter delivered last September to the convention's officers and committee leaders, the board "should be composed of independent professionals, including non-Baptists, who have extensive experience in dealing with the dynamics of clergy sex abuse and whose careers will not be vulnerable to any sort of political considerations within the denomination." SNAP helpfully offers to submit names for consideration for placement on the board. Beyond that, it recommends a "zero-tolerance" policy and recommends certain measures be taken for any church "that chooses or retains a minister or deacon for whom there has been a credible report of having sexually abused a minor." It also recommends the denomination not allow attorneys who represent abusive clergy to bind churches to agreements of secrecy, usually offered to mitigate costs for counseling. These are good points with which to begin negotiations. However, even given the examples of denominational cooperation indicated by SNAP in its letter to the Southern Baptist Convention, it is naive to think the SBC can do anything by decree. The SBC operates by consensus. It is very important to understand that. Its churches do cooperate for missions work, investments and to build historical archives, as SNAP duly notes, but those are matters of general consent, and the risks associated are either small or, in the case of missions work, considered acceptable. There can be no argument that no principle deserves consensus more than the resolve to uncover, cast out and prosecute any molesters who seek to hide behind status as pastoral officials. But the differences between the structure of the Roman Catholic Church and the Southern Baptists cannot be dismissed. Among the Baptists, churches are not usually assigned clergy. In the event of a vacancy or the addition of a ministry, the members of the church take upon themselves the task to evaluate each candidate and vote, as a body, on acceptance. So as deep as the emotional investment in a priest may be among the Catholics, it can be deeper still among Baptists. It is one thing to say the church was wrong; quite another to say, "We chose blindly and wrongly." That poses a difficulty that can be successfully negotiated. Churches may split or crumble after abusers are discovered and dealt with, but no biblical injunction dictates that a church must be preserved while a child is sacrificed to the lust of a predatory lowlife. But any perception of a threat to the autonomy of local churches is not to be lightly regarded, and SNAP may have committed an error by its rather sweeping generalizations about the SBC's cooperative efforts. The SBC is not an overseer of its autonomous churches. It is a meeting point, a support network and a tool for consensus. Yes, it can seat a board much like SNAP recommends - exactly like it, in the sense that things can be done. But it cannot require that churches who belong to the SBC submit to investigation by the board, or use it at all. So the SBC does not authoritatively dictate policy to its member churches. If any church, for any reason, decides to disassociate itself from the SBC, it can do so and possibly suffer few penalties. Convention officials can reasonably fear a mass exodus of churches from their network if SNAP's recommendations are fully adopted. It is not that SNAP is trying to do the wrong thing. It is on the side of the angels. It must succeed, not only for the sake of the abused, but for the sake of those who are blind to the abuse. A look at SNAP's Web site reveals an organization that has not vacated a single Christian principle in its pursuit of those who have done what absolutely deserves exposure and stern punishment. The network doesn't merely pursue abusers, it reaches out to the abused and to the churches in which abusers have committed their crimes. SNAP has every tool it needs to work with Baptist churches, and other churches who belong to similar, nonhierarchical denominations, at the grass-roots level. The work has to start there because that's where those churches start. Stan Nelson is a news editor at The Pueblo Chieftain. He may be reached via e-mail at snelson@chieftain.com.
Any original material on these pages is copyright © BishopAccountability.org 2004. Reproduce freely with attribution.