Last fall, Houston Chronicle came out with a damning six part investigative series on abuse cover-ups in the Southern Baptist church. Over 700 victims were discovered as a result. Additionally, over 35 Southern Baptist ministers and volunteers were accused of abuse but were still permitted to keep working, and more than 100 Southern Baptist youth ministers are currently in prison, are registered sex offenders, or are charged with sex crimes. People are rightfully losing trust in church leadership.
The Southern Baptist church hyped up the Caring Well Challenge, by stating that “The Caring Well Challenge is a unified call to action on the sexual abuse crisis in the Southern Baptist Convention. It provides churches with an adaptable and attainable pathway to immediately enhance their efforts to prevent abuse and care for abuse survivors.” This challenge has its critics, myself included, because actions always speak louder than words. In a highly controversial move, J.D. Greear defended the hiring of Bryan Loritts this summer, even though Loritts is accused of covering up sex crimes of his brother-in-law over a decade ago.
Numbers don’t lie. They are not emotional; they just are. Megan and Dominique Benninger launched a database, BaptistAccountability.org, in February of this year to identify convicted and credibly accused abusers and churches that cover-up their abuse. As of this writing, there are already 534 entries, with 404 who’ve been convicted, 82 with credible allegations, and 48 that were covered up/enabled. We interviewed the Benningers on The Speaking Out On Sex Abuse Podcast, and they both acknowledge that the numbers are far, far greater than what is reported.
Clearly there is a major problem across all denominations with either knowingly hiring and hiding abusers, or not doing a good enough job screening them in the first place. Each time I was interviewed to work with a church, I was thrown softball questions that were, in my opinion, shallow, and the questions I was asked told them nothing about who I really am. This is common. To be fair, many churches don’t have any training in abuse and sadly abuse isn’t even on their radar. We recently recorded an episode about interview questions we recommend asking preaching candidates and people who are being considered for other leadership positions (both paid and unpaid). I’ll provide those questions in this post, in hopes that it will help churches to think about the importance of asking better questions.
Until churches ask better questions, we will continue getting more of the same disastrous results. The church is inundated with cases of abuse. With the exception of 2016, for the past quarter of a century the number one reason for church litigation has been (and continues to be) sexual abuse. The very least we can do is do a better job of interviewing and screening candidates. I list the questions below without comment. To hear us unpack each of these questions, listen to the episode above.
What is God’s foundation?
What was Jesus’ mission?
If an adult in the church came to you and told you that a current member sexually abused her when she was a child, how would you respond?
Several people have privately complained that long-time member and one of the church elders is “too close” to children. A Sunday school teacher comes to you privately to say that one of her small children said that he cries when he sees this elder because “I saw his pee pee.” How do you respond?
A new visitor has been attending for several months. He was a former pastor and has a vast knowledge of the scriptures. Everyone really enjoys him and he hasn’t caused any problems. He shares, privately, that he was falsely accused of sexual abuse and is now on the registry. The church is unaware that he is on the registry and he would like to keep it that way due to the embarrassment this would bring to his family. His former church leaders vouch for his character and ability to teach and lead well. They don’t think he was falsely accused, but they think he learned his lesson in prison and that God’s mercy is for all, regardless of what they have done. How will you respond?
How will you make church a safe place for the oppressed, poor, and the sick?
In a podcast this week, our topic was Diagnosing Your Church’s Health when abuse allegations come to light. One of our points was that unhealthy churches reframe firings as “resignations” so it appears that the guilty person is quitting. “Resignation” firings allow abusers to receive the blessing of the same leaders who fired them, leading to a very confusing environment. Information about abuse allegations are intentionally withheld from the congregation, so leaders give the false appearance that their preacher willingly resigned. I wish I could say that this dishonest tactic is rare. My experience is that it is incredibly common. Just this week, I have been made aware of two instances of preachers being fired “resigned.” That’s two too many.
Healthy churches don’t lie. They don’t need to. If there are allegations of abuse, leaders need to stand on truth and justice. If a charge is serious enough that a church will fire a leader, what does it say about the church that reframes the firing as a “resignation?” The leader who was fired is then able to scurry off to a new unsuspecting church, where they rinse, reinvent, and repeat. Oftentimes, the leaders who allowed (or forced) a “resignation” will even send off the fired pastor with a letter of recommendation, so long as he or she remains silent about the circumstances surrounding the firing.
This is known in secular circles as “passing the trash.” In 2014, Pennsylvania, where I live, unanimously passed a bill in the House that would ban schools from withholding information about problematic teachers. A Penn Live article says it very clearly: “The bill would bar schools from entering into contracts that suppress information about investigations of abuse and sexual misconduct, as well as prevent schools from transferring problem teachers from school district to school district, a practice called “pass the trash.”
If lawmakers are unanimously making it illegal for schools to pass the trash, isn’t it high time the church realizes just how unethical and immoral it is for them to do it? It’s past time that we have a system in place in the church that also bars churches from passing the trash. When someone is credibly accused of any kind of abuse, churches should report all reportable instances to law enforcement, fire the abusive leader, and communicate clearly with their church why they fired the leader. Church leaders should be concise in their communication. They need to inform the church that they have a zero tolerance policy on abuse.
If you are reading this and you know of a leader who suddenly resigns, know that it’s OK to ask questions. Ask the person if they actually resigned on their own free will or if it was a forced resignation. Ask what circumstances led to the resignation. It’s impossible to know the difference between a legitimate resignation and a firing that is framed as a resignation unless we ask the right questions.
If you are a leader who “resigned” a church leader in the past, repent and make it right. Accept the consequences for allowing an abuser to move on. This may mean stepping down from your role as a leader in the church. It takes humility and courage to admit your mistakes. We advocates see the trail of damage that is created by abusers who are given a free pass to roam from church to church. The church shouldn’t be an abuser’s playground. Leaders, I beg: stop “resigning” abusers and passing the trash.
Advocates and abuse survivors are not quite convinced that the SBC is really working to protect victims. Neither am I, especially after going through the Caring Well curriculum. To be fair, most of the content is decent. I found myself audibly Amen-ing Diane Langberg and Rachael Denhollander throughout. Those two understand abusers and what it takes to keep people safe from them. Then I came to Lesson Ten–Pastoral Care and Correction For an Abuser. The problem with this dangerous lesson is the same problem I encounter with the vast majority of churches–the theology doesn’t allow them to name people as wolves and to keep them at bay. Worse, it actually protects the wolf while leaving the sheep vulnerable.
As best I can tell, over past dozen years, what has changed institutionally in the #SBC at state & national levels re clergy sex abuse is primarily that leaders have gotten a lot more sophisticated & cunning in their PR tactics. But #CaringWell? No. Not even close. #SBCtoohttps://t.co/rWbx4YXQgO
This false theology of protecting abusers assumes that all people are capable of repenting and that the church should be a place where all are welcome, regardless of what they’ve done (or are doing). It’s driven by authoritarian leadership structures that give leaders all the power to make decisions regarding abusers, regardless of what church members or abuse survivors think. It allows leaders to keep the church in the dark about the presence of abusers and anyone who questions the leaders’ decisions are labeled as divisive trouble makers.
Foundations are vital. Get the foundation wrong and everything else we build on it will eventually crumble. When I speak places, I often ask what God’s foundation is. This is the most basic question that we all should be able to answer. Yet not one person has ever answered it correctly. The right answer is righteousness and justice: “Righteousness and justice are the foundation of your throne; steadfast love and faithfulness go before you” (Psalm 89:14 ESV).
Righteousness–doing what is right, just, and fair (a term used for balancing scales)–and justice–the act of deciding a case and executing a sentence with righteousness as the standard of judgement–are the foundation of God. Everything-literally everything-is built on doing what is fair, just, and balanced, and meeting out justice according to one’s actions. Only in this context can Jesus make sense when John introduced him as someone whose axe is already laid at the root of the tree. John said that every tree that does not bear good fruit “is cut down and thrown into the fire” by Jesus (Matthew 3:10). John continued his introduction of Jesus: “His winnowing fork is in his hand, and he will clear his threshing floor and gather his wheat into the barn, but the chaff he will burn with unquenchable fire” (Matthew 10:12).
Righteousness and justice are married throughout the Bible. They cannot be separated. Isaiah 59 gives a thorough description of what happens when Israel turns a blind eye to oppression. Evil increases and chaos ensues. Isaiah 59:9 sums it up perfectly:
“Therefore justice is far from us, and righteousness does not overtake us; we hope for light, and behold, darkness, and for brightness, but we walk in gloom. “
The foundation of righteousness and justice requires an account for people who refuse to repent. If we don’t know what righteous behavior is, the scales automatically tip in one direction or the other based on what we feel about a person and justice becomes impossible. Jesus echoed John’s words in Matthew 7:19 when he said, “Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire.” Over and over again Jesus named wolves and kept them away from his sheep. He overturned tables and chased oppressors out of the Temple with whips. He gave a lengthy “woe to you” sermon without ending with, “But all are welcome here.” He said that it would be better for the one who causes a little one of his to stumble to have a millstone tied around his neck and to be drowned in the depth of the sea. He said he was sending his disciples out like sheep among the wolves. Therefore, they were to be wise as serpents and innocent as doves. He said that the hired hand runs away when the wolf comes because he cares not for the sheep: “He sees the wolf coming and leaves the sheep and flees, and the wolf snatches them and scatters them” (John 10: 12).
Over and over and over again, the scriptures are clear that wolves pretend to be sheep, sneak in, and destroy. It’s not just what wolves do, it’s who they are. Never is the plea to give them community, more love, empathy, understanding, etc. Why? Because of righteousness and justice. Paul says to avoid such people. He goes on to say that evil people and impostors go on from bad to worse, deceiving and being deceived (2 Tim. 3:13). Peter gives a gut wrenching description of false prophets who were sexual predators in 2 Peter 2. There is zero hint of empathy, restoration, or redemption. Why? Because of God’s foundation. Jesus doesn’t say that wolves can be saved. He says they produce thistles and are incapable of producing good fruit. Therefore they are cut down and thrown out. To be clear, those are Jesus’ words and not mine.
Consistently wolves are identified and told to get out. Make no mistake that people who pretend to be righteous in order to steal away the innocence of children and violate them in the worst possible ways are not sheep. They are not people who “mess up, slip up, or fall into temptation.” I’ve been around abusers and have been studying them for a long time. They know exactly what they are doing. They are meticulous in their planning, scheming, and execution of their plans. Very rarely do sexual predators repent, even when the words are there. This is not because they are “struggling” with sin. It is because they are deceptive wolves. They thrive on deceit and stealing that which does not belong to them.
Regardless of what one’s theology is on sheep versus wolves, what concerns me the most is that the Caring Well curriculum coddles predators, welcomes them into the church, and gives them all the secrecy and anonymity they need in order to keep abusing. As if the Lesson Ten on pastoral care for the abuser wasn’t alarming enough, the final lesson, Lesson Twelve, gives a list of follow up resources. The third resource is an article by Brad Hambrick called, “Registered Sex Offender. A Sample Church Membership and Attendance Policy.” This is the exact policy that advocates and survivors work so hard to fight against. This policy is written as a letter to the abuser and it begins with the word, “Friend.” These “friends” are given anonymity and, like usual, the only people “in the know” about the registered sex offender status are a select group of leaders.
I’ve highlighted the sections within this sample policy that are most alarming and dangerous.
First, Summit Church is touted as “a safe place for everyone.” What that means is that abusers are also kept safe within the church. If you don’t believe me, there are three priorities and the third priority is “opportunities to worship and fellowship for everyone, including those under RSO (registered sex offender) status.“ Very ironically, the protection and safety of abuse survivors is not mentioned in the top three priorities.
The next highlighted section assumes the abusers are “wrestling with the consequences of past actions” and that doing so “can be emotionally difficult.” The policy also rushes to offer unconditional forgiveness: “We want to reiterate throughout this process that you are offered full forgiveness because of Christ’s death, burial, and resurrection. We do not want you to live with a sense of shame.” Oh. My. Goodness. Can you imagine Jesus talking to the money exchangers like this? Remember, these are not people who went out drinking on a Friday night and got themselves into trouble. They are child rapists. They are predators. They are people who have many victims. They are people who deceived, tested, and groomed everyone around them in order to steal the innocence away from little boys and girls. They lived, and continue to live a double life. It’s not just what they do, it’s who they are.
It gets worse. It clearly states, “You can attend services where children are present.” Confusingly, they can attend services where children are present but then page 3 lists conditions that the abuser has to agree to. #9 says, “I acknowledge and agree that all children and student areas are off limits at all times, even if my children are attending Summit Church.” #10 says, “I will not attend a Summit Church small group or visit the home of a Summit Church family where children are present, without the parent knowing my history and giving permission for my entry into their home.” If this isn’t confusing, I don’t know what is. They can attend services where children are present without church members being aware of their presence, but not in a small group, the children’s wing, or in someone’s home.
It can’t be overstated that this policy intentionally keeps the lay church members in the dark. On page 2, under FAQ, it reads, “Who would know about this arrangement and agreement? Those who would know about this arrangement are: the pastors of the Summit Church, the lay elders at your campus, campus security teams, and the point person(s) over student and children’s ministries at your campus.” Really? So the church remains unaware of the agreement between the leadership and the person who is on the public sex offender registry? The church should always have a copy of the agreement unless there is something to hide.
This is not an exaggeration. According to the policy, the elders work with the abuser to pick his own team of individuals to “care” for him. They “do want them to be people you know, trust, and like.” Then what happens when the abuser shows up at church? Page 1 says, “This person would great (sic) you when you arrived at a Summit service or event, at a discrete location, and have you check-in via an app on their phone. . . In function, these individuals should be viewed as a supportive friend. We want you to identify people you would be ‘doing life’ with at Summit anyway and make that more intentional. Socially, there would be nothing to draw attention to this shepherding arrangement.“ Isn’t that cute? You can’t make this stuff up! The abuser is checked in at a discrete location by the supportive friend, and the abuser is reassured that nothing will be done to draw attention to this agreement.
So let’s recap. Abusers are our friends, we will reiterate that they are forgiven, they get to hand select who their accountability friend is that they will be “doing life” with, they can attend services where children are present, they can check into church at a discrete location, there will be nothing to draw attention to this agreement, and the only ones who know about this agreement are pastors, lay elders, campus security teams, and only the point person(s) over children’s ministries.
Did I miss anything? Oh yeah, on page 2 they state the purpose for having this secret agreement with the sex offender: “Why is this needed? How is this loving? This is a form of protection for you and provides peace of mind to the families in our church.” By now, readers may wonder how families will get peace of mind about this secret agreement if they are not even aware of it. Strangely, the policy reassures the sex offender that they will be the ones protected and that this secret policy “provides peace of mind to the families in our church.” Yet confusingly, the next paragraph states that leaders are “asking” families to sacrifice peace of mind: “We are asking families to sacrifice peace of mind that would be present if we did not allow anyone under RSO status to attend.“ In other words, they acknowledge that there is a peace of mind that comes with knowing that registered sex offenders are not permitted to attend church. However, the leaders are “asking” families to sacrifice that peace of mind by inviting sex offenders to attend. My jaw is literally on the floor in disbelief! I wonder how many family members have ever been approached by leaders who ask them if they are willing to sacrifice their peace of mind by having sex offenders attend.
The final page has interview questions to ask the sex offender. This is where the real coddling comes into play. They give the sex offender plenty of wiggle room to not answer questions, to only answer when they are ready, and they’re even instructed to ask the abuser permission to talk to a former church that they attended. At least they are sensitive to the abuser’s feelings and, as part of protection for the abuser, they protect their emotions too: “Do they become emotionally overwhelmed as they tell their story? Assessment: Is this person going to be able to withstand the process of joining a small group which will entail the members of the group knowing his/her RSO status?”
Gee whiz. This policy is an abuser’s paradise. It gives them everything they need to be empowered: choice, secrecy, anonymity, access to children, a “sacrifice” on the part of families by allowing the sex offender to be there, and a way to crank up their emotions in the interview process. Advocates know that written policy is very important. The policy endorsed by Caring Well as a top resource, and one that is used at JD Greear’s Summit Church, is reckless, in my opinion.
A couple of years ago I interviewed someone who works with the parole board and has worked in the prison for over 22 years. He told me that sex offenders always change character when before the board. They know the right things to say and when and how to cry. It is all faked. He described one inmate who was a serial child rapist who propped his feet on my friend’s desk. He was cocky and arrogant. A few days later he was before the parole board and was sobbing, saying he’s learned from his mistakes and promised to never hurt anyone again. He was so “ashamed” of what he had done. Here is an excerpt from my interview:
Unless someone is an abuse survivor, most Christians I interact with assume that child predators are remorseful and ashamed when they go to prison and that they pose little risk when they get out of prison. Does this perception match the reality you see with incarcerated sex offenders?
“Absolutely not. We obviously see that remorse about every time I interview a sex offender in my room or any time a parole agent does. I don’t interview as many as I used to but when I do remorse is always the first thing we see. They are crying and say they are so sorry for what they have done. When they get to my department they want to sit on the tack because that’s how they’re getting out the door. In Pennsylvania, we have the Act 98 law. The law says that if you are not admitting to your crime and you are not in treatment, you are not even considered for parole. So remorse is their ticket to get a green light to the parole board.“
In my opinion, Caring Well’s Lesson Ten and this policy as a top resource undoes everything that the other survivors and advocates accomplished in the previous nine lessons. Even more important, it demonstrates that the SBC proves itself to be full of empty words when their actions and policies reflect a culture of secrecy, welcoming abusers into the church against the will of its members, and protecting those same abusers. Until the SBC develops policies that are transparent, it will be known as the organization that hides and protects abusers.
This post is not meant to criticize and wish any ill towards the SBC. Quite the opposite. I want the SBC to get it right. But remaining silent when such dangerous policies are being implemented is not an option. The SBC cannot claim it is caring well when secret agreements hide convicted sex offenders in the church against the knowledge or will of its church members. I pray that more people shine a light on these injustices. I pray that the SBC leaders who think it’s OK to embrace predators and maintain secrecy are either broken or removed. It is my plea to see the Body built upon a foundation of righteousness and justice.
“Look around the courtroom. Remember what you have witnessed these past seven days. This is what it looks like when institutions create a culture where a predator can flourish unafraid and unabated. And this is what it looks like when people in authority refuse to listen; put friendships in front of truth, fail to create or enforce proper policy, and fail to hold enablers accountable” – Rachael Denhollander speaking of the hundreds of Larry Nassar’s victims who should have been spared.
Rachael Denhollander statement at Nassar Sentencing January 24, 2018
The sad reality is that many people, myself included, see what it looks like when abusers are hidden within churches and institutions in the name of “grace.” I thought back to Rachael’s words when I spoke over the phone with Kyle Cowden a few days ago. He reached out to me after listening to one of my podcasts and wanted to share his frustration with our nation’s broken sex offender registry and the church’s covering up of abuse. He has officially lost track of the serial abuser who molested his daughter. We connected and he told me about his daughter Rena’s abuse that happened in 1995 at Webb Chapel Church of Christ in Farmer’s Branch, TX. Rena was thirteen. James Apple, her abuser, was fifteen.
When Kyle found out his young daughter was abused, he approached the elders, one of whom was the father of the perpetrator. Kyle’s family was gossiped about and Rena and other victims of James were ostracized by the congregation. Kyle only became more emboldened to fight for his little girl. The elders, despite being mandated reporters, never went to the police. It was Rena’s mom and dad who reported to police. James Apple served two years probation for Rena’s case. Kyle’s gut feeling would prove to be right. More victims were discovered and, in 2000 James was given a six year prison sentence. He is listed as a high risk offender in Texas and is a lifetime registrant-a registration that is only reserved for those deemed to be unsafe for the rest of their lives.
I used to wonder if church leaders who give abusers free reign simply don’t know how dangerous they really are. Perhaps it’s a matter of ignorance, I thought. Sadly, this isn’t the case with Rena’s abuse. She lamented, “When the elders found out, they requested that I write a letter describing what happened. It took three pages and when it wasn’t reported, I felt so betrayed.”
Of course she did. They got to read the most humiliating details of what happened to her, only to turn around and accuse her of making up allegations that weren’t true. This wasn’t the only time she had to tell humiliating details of how her abuser had forced himself onto her. The police report is only one paragraph containing details that Rena shared. After rumors kept circulating, Rena and the other girls were asked by the elders to write letters. Rena’s was three pages long. And they still didn’t report, despite being required to do so by law.
Neither did they tell the church. According to Kyle, the elders were divided. Some thought the congregation should know. Others were adamant that the leaders handle it internally. According to Kyle, “We were chastised for pressing charges even after the DA had told us we could be charged for not reporting to them as soon as we knew and reporting to the elders instead. Hubert Smith was the most vocal and had called my wife when he knew I was on shift and chastised her for trying to “ruin James’ life. We also had our advocates, Bill Keith, Dan Camp and Don Petty (eventually).”
Rena recalled, “After charges were filed, it went to court pretty quickly. His attorney asked me what I was wearing and how far my legs were spread when he was abusing me.” As is common, Rena remembers the courtroom being pretty full. When I asked if the spectators were there to support her, she said, “I don’t remember anyone besides by family coming to support me. They were either there to support James or were just curious.”
Kyle pushed and pushed, and eventually was permitted to read a letter to the church that he had written about their ordeal. James Apple’s victims and their mothers who went forward as Kyle read the letter filled two pews. When James Apple was arrested, angry church members continued pointing the finger at Rena’s family for “making up false allegations.”
Webb Chapel wasn’t the only church organization to cover up James Apple’s abusive behavior. Kyle described an event when he was at a Christian camp at about the same time his daughter was abused:
“I was the camp medic assigned my own cabin as I would be seeing campers in a medical setting. James and another boy (who were like “junior counselors” to younger boys) were suddenly moved into my cabin for “inappropriate” conversations. It was later, maybe a year, that we held camp in Cisco, TX. James’ father was there and I was told that he had reassigned James because “something had occurred”. It was years later that the youth minister intern, now a pulpit minister, was tearfully telling me how awful James had been and how mad he was because he wasn’t allowed to have him removed and how his dad had intimidated him and anyone else that knew about it.“
After Kyle’s letter was read to the church the Apples quit attending church. A simple announcement was made from the pulpit that “the Apples will no longer be attending Webb Chapel.” The Apples moved to Prestoncrest Church of Christ in Dallas. Much to Kyle’s surprise, “My wife saw something showing James was involved in the youth ministry and called them. She was chastised for gossiping. I read where Ron was up for an eldership there and called. Their pulpit minister and one of their elders asked me to come in. They then told me they were well aware of the “persecution” James and the Apples were receiving and I should repent of gossiping and pursuing my agenda.“
Kyle and Rena have attempted to know where James is, because they feel it is their duty to warn other parents. Rena tells me that Apple had several aliases on Facebook and even attempted to friend her. A few years ago, Rena was shocked when her mom discovered a picture of her abuser at a Chuck E Cheese in Washington state. Apple, a lifetime registrant, is not on Washinton’s sex offender registry, despite being a resident there. Rena went so far as to call Washington state police and send police reports and records of her abuse. They finally told her, “Sorry, there’s nothing we can do.” Kyle also notified the local sheriff. He seemed sympathetic and asked for more information. Kyle sent James’ records along with a brief description of what happened to his daughter Rena. Nothing was ever done to put James on Washington’s sex offender registry. Rena and her father both told me that they are sick not knowing where he is or what church he may have been able to reinvent himself inside of.
If this were the only case I had come across, I’d be mortified enough. It is not. Last year I received an anonymous message from an abuse survivor who attended Downtown Church of Christ in Searcy, AR-a church that I attended for several years while in college and seminary. The survivor told me that a man had really set off all her alarms and that he stuck out like a sore thumb, in a church of well over 1,000 people. She looked up the Arkansas sex offender registry only to be mortified that he was listed as a tier 3 offender. According to the Rogers, AR government website, tier three offenders “have a history of repeat sexual offending, and/or strong antisocial, violent, or predatory personality characteristics,” and require notification throughout the community.
Mr. Smith was a minister and doubled as a youth leader when he abused multiple little girls, including his own daughter Leachelle. Leachelle bravely wrote about her story in June. Last year, as soon as I was notified anonymously, I contacted the church’s minister, a former Bible professor of mine. I informed him that a church member found out about this dangerous predator who was actively involved in the life of the church, and that she was aware that at least some of the elders knew of this sex offender but had not informed the church. I’ve been down this road many times with churches and suspected what kind of response I’d receive. An elder from that church returned an email to me informing me that they take the protection of all seriously and that they “do not require our members wear their past sin on a label or announce it to the world unless they choose to do so.” I’m going to go out on a limb here and suggest people not hold their breath waiting for a high risk serial offender to voluntarily inform a church with hundreds of minor children that he is on the sex offender registry.
The line that jumped off the page was, “If you know of some specific current activity or behavior of the person named in your e-mail to _____, please respond directly to _____ and _____.” If I know of some specific current activity!? I live 1,000 miles away! I never met this offender, though his family members inform me that he did premarital counseling for a couple at Downtown–a direct violation of probation. He and his wife also baby sit some children who are family members. And trust that if I hear of any “current activity,” the church will be very far down my list of people I will be contacting about it. Tier 3 offenders must remain on the registry forever because of violent, predatory behavior.
Notification must be made to any member of the community whom the offender is likely to encounter, based on the offender’s prior history, recreational or religious interests, employment, or the characteristics of the offender’s victims.
The problem is that the website doesn’t spell out exactly who is supposed to do the notifying, when they do it, or how often. State police are supposed to, but this often does not happen. For example, we had a Tier 3 sexually violent predator move in just a few feet from my church office window. Pennsylvania law requires everyone within a one mile radius to receive a flyer from police. We were never informed. I only found out by checking the registry, which I do every few months. Another problem in Arkansas is that individuals and agencies who are notified by law are not authorized to notify people within and apparently can use their own judgment as to who “has a need to know” within the agency. This is ambiguous. Who are the ones who “have a need to know” within any agency? In most cases, this is interpreted as the leadership only.
Notification given to any individual or agency does not authorize that individual or agency to disseminate information beyond those residing with the individual, or beyond those who have a need to know within the agency.
I believe that parents of minor children within an agency have a need to know, and should always be notified when a high risk predator is a member of a church. What those parents do with that information is entirely up to them, but shouldn’t they have a right to know? Furthermore, a repentant serial offender would be completely transparent and would ask that his information be shared so that there is never a chance he or she could gain access to children again. I am not alone in this thinking. Nor am I the only one who notified Downtown with concerns. Christine Fox Parker is a survivor advocate, has 27 years ministry experience, spent several years as a therapist at a private practice where she developed a specialty in trauma stemming from abuse at the hands of church leaders, and is the founder, president and executive director of PorchSwing Ministries. She and her son, a former member at Downtown, met with an elder in person to express the urgency for parents at the congregation to be notified. Christine told me that the response was similar to what I received–the elders take the protection of everyone seriously and are monitoring the abuser.
Leachelle (the abuser’s own daughter) has sent multiple emails to the elders begging them to notify unsuspecting parents about her father and was assured that, though they empathize with her as a survivor, they will not notify the congregation.
What purpose does a public registry serve if church leaders are able to and choose to ignore it? None of us suggested that the elders remove Mr. Smith from church (though it is my stance that he shouldn’t be at a church with hundreds of minors). We simply were asking them to inform parents of young children that a high risk sex offender is among them. So how did the church respond after repeated emails from Leachelle, describing her abuse and begging elders to inform parents that they have a serial offender in their midst? They read a letter to the church about “some blogs” that created “this situation” and that, though they have a sex offender in the church, they won’t be naming him:
The major problem I have with this (and there are many) is that they continue to circumvent the sex offender registry by hiding a high risk offender’s identity. The only biblical reason they can find for publicly stating the name of a church member “caught up in sinful behavior is for continuing, deliberate sin.” Even still, naming such a person “would only be for the purpose of winning the sinner back to Christ.” I’m dumbfounded. What about protecting innocents? Is that not a biblical reason to name a serial, high risk criminal who is already on the public registry? Ezekiel 33 and John 10 come to mind as biblical reasons to speak up and warn. Parents of children often befriend abusers, not knowing they are abusers, and will spend time in their homes and vice versa. In my opinion, when leaders fail to inform churches of high risk serial predators, they are wielding a moral superiority to the rest of the church by intentionally keeping them blind. The leaders, in effect, are the ones who have the benefit of remaining in the know and they have the power to keep the rest of the congregation in the dark.
And if these two cases aren’t enough, I reported a serial predator in 2013 who was a missionary in Haiti a few years prior. Bob Valerius, who had a clean Facebook profile as a missionary, had an alias on Facebook as “Milton Hargrave” and was asking a mess of young boys to show their penises to him. I saw with my own eyes the disgusting things he was saying to these little boys. I gathered a file folder full of evidence and spoke with state police, the US Marshall Service, and eventually the Department of Homeland Security. I found out through an investigation that Cyrus Sibert conducted in Haiti, that the Southwest Church of Christ in Ada, Oklahoma–the church that funded the orphanage where Bob worked–black listed and disciplined a Haitian preacher, Pierre Ludovic, who reported that “Bob is in relationship with the little boys he help (sic).” Valerius was reported by Mr. Ludovic in 2010. Mr. Ludovic was banned from the orphanage and the Southwest church, to my knowledge, never reported it. They did, however, blacklist the preacher who did. Southwest eventually removed Valarius from his post as director of the orphanage. Three years later, I personally witnessed Valerius asking multiple minor children for pictures of their penises while saying, “You should know that makes my cock hard.”
Unlike the Southwest church, I reported immediately and fully cooperated with this investigation only to find out that Bob Valerius, who fled Haiti and is currently wanted by the Haitian justice department, was spotted by one of his victims in August while roaming the streets of Cap Haitien.
Translation: Saturday, August 24, 2019 Mandate to bring against the American Robert (Bob) Valerius accused of pedophilia in Haiti.- The American citizen Robert (Bob) Valerius is wanted by the Haitian justice for sexual abuse on children. Mr. Valerius picture taken by one of his victims, was noticed Saturday, August 10 in the city of Cap-Haitien, a few years after he fled Haiti. #LeReCit
What’s incredibly frustrating about all of these cases is that our governments do all they can to track serial abusers because they have a pattern of being dangerous. The church, on the other hand, works very hard to keep abusers’ identities hidden and to allow them unfettered access to children. Churches think that by putting a few restrictions on where an abuser can be inside the church building, they are keeping children safe. This simply is not true. James Apple produced several more victims after Rena was abused because the church failed to report. Bob Valerius produced many more victims after he was quietly removed from the orphanage he was employed at. He still defiantly visits a country where he violated many young boys and is wanted by the justice department. The Southwest Church of Christ failed to protect more innocent children and even blacklisted a preacher who warned them about the predator. And Chuck Smith continues to enjoy anonymity as he worships at a church with hundreds of minor children. I have to wonder, at a church that size, how many other dangerous predators are being kept hidden within the pews.
Rachael is right. This is what it looks like when institutions create a culture where a predator can flourish unafraid and unabated. And this is what it looks like when people in authority refuse to listen; put friendships in front of truth, fail to create or enforce proper policy, and fail to hold enablers accountable”
“One of the things I’ve learned from Rachael (Denhollander), as well as other survivors, is that the strongest words, without actions that follow up those words, are worse than not saying words at all.”
—J.D. Greear, President of SBC, at the ERLC Sex Abuse Panel at SBC June 10, 2019.
Cheryl Summers, founder of For Such a Time As This Rally, and Rev. Ashley Easter, sat with their husbands just four rows from the front listening to the panel Monday night. The For Such a Time As This Rally had survivors and advocates travel from across the country to join in prayer and protest the thousands of victims who could have been spared. They all share a common bond and similar goal–to stop the SBC from hiding abusers in the church and to begin protecting the innocent.
Just moments before J.D. Greear gave the above response, Rachael Denhollander mentioned For Such a Time As This Rally: “When you see the survivor community–many of them even outside the SBC tomorrow–these men and women have been pleading with the church to hear their voices for decades and they have been shut out over and over and over again in the name of Christ. That’s what the SBC has done to these survivors. You need to feel the grief and the betrayal and the harm and the hurt that they have felt.”
It would have been difficult to miss the group of peaceful protesters on Tuesday with their red shirts and large millstone on display that Ashley’s husband Will made. It was intended to be a reminder of Jesus’ words in Matthew 18:6–“. . . but whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to stumble, it would be better for him to have a great millstone fastened around his neck and to be drowned in the depth of the sea.” There has been extensive national media coverage of the For Such a Time As This Rally leading up to, and following the Southern Baptist Convention.
Rally organizers Rev. Ashley Easter (left) and Cheryl Summers (right) in front of a large millstone
Among people at the rally who attended and/or spoke were Mary DeMuth, Christa Brown, Jules Woodson, Brooks Hansen, Michael Hansen, Kenny Stubblefield, Ashley Easter, Cheryl Summers, Carolyn Deevers, Dee Parsons, Dwight McKissic, Wade Burleson, and SNAP’s David Clohessy. Rachael and Jacob Denhollander sent cupcakes to the group on their way out of town and visited with rally members throughout the day. But eerily absent were the very SBC leaders who, ironically, were inside the convention center saying that survivors need to be listened to. I was not able to make it to Birmingham due to back-to-back trips and limited time off from work, but several of us who couldn’t make it sent videos Tuesday to For Such a Time As This Rally Facebook page to offer encouragement and our words of support.
I woke up today and it struck me that I saw zero pictures, words of support, or even an acknowledgment that the rally survivors were even in Birmingham, by any SBC leaders who took the stage inside. Nothing. Not. A. Word. It’s as if the survivors and advocates didn’t exist. Yet these courageous friends of mine at the rally, despite their abuse and mistreatment by the SBC, are madly in love with God, work tirelessly to save the lives of countless people who were abused, and openly shared their stories of pain, humiliation, and hope.
As survivors shared their stories, several SBC attendees shouted to the press that they should not give the rally any attention. Apparently, some assumed that the rally speakers and attendees were not Christians. One rally attendee told Cheryl Summers that an SBC attendee tried to talk to them about praying the sinner’s prayer to accept Christ.
I couldn’t shake the feeling of not seeing any SBC leaders there so I reached out to Cheryl Summers and asked her if J.D. Greear or anyone else from his office had taken time to walk outside and greet them or thank them or weep with them over the decades of abuse and cover-ups they’ve endured. I post Cheryl’s response with her permission:
“No. He certainly did not. He actually had 2 opportunities. The first was Monday night. A contingent of us from the Rally went to the ERLC’s panel on sexual abuse. Ashley and I were sitting side by side with our husbands four rows from the front in the center. JD was a panelist and we were right in front of him….feet from the stage. He knows what Ashley looks like. They met a few months ago by accident in a coffee shop and he recognized her then. He kept looking at her on Monday night. He could have walked off stage afterward and thanked us for being there. He didn’t. He was gone as soon as the panel ended.
We personally invited JD, Russell Moore, Beth Moore, and other big names. Initially, Russell and JD’s office said they couldn’t be there due to schedule conflicts. We changed the time to accommodate, but they still couldn’t make it.”
To be completely fair, Cheryl told me that Todd Unzicker’s wife, Bruce Ashford’s wife, Megan Lively, and some others from the Summit Church delivered two coolers of water and thanked them for being there. Believe me, that meant the world to the rally group. That was a kind gesture, and it won’t be forgotten.
But I don’t think this was an accidental oversight by Dr. Greear. Dee Parsons wrote a powerful piece recently that shows the rally organizers have been pushed aside for the past several months: [Updated] Why Won’t Southern Baptist Convention Leaders Allow the For Such a Time As This Rally Inside the Convention Doors? Lest people think I’m nitpicking here, I’ve spoken personally with Ashley Easter on several occasions about this. She happens to live in the same city as J.D. Greear and has attempted, on multiple occasions, to have a brief meeting with him. All attempts for the past year have been delayed or rejected.
You know what I find hilarious? @drmoore echoed yesterday what the @ERLC stated as a primary topic coming into this week. And I've heard before: "We are listening to survivors."
To add insult to injury, Matt Chandler was invited, last minute, to speak Tuesday at the SBC about the New York Time’s article about Matt Chandler’s and The Village Church’s alleged mishandling of an abuse case with one of their youth ministers, Matthew Tonne. I couldn’t believe my eyes and my heart sank for my friends who, for months, had gone through every proper channel to be given a small space inside the convention center. Yet they were denied. And ignored. Meanwhile, yet another Southern Baptist pastor at the heart of an allegation of covering up abuse was given a microphone to defend his actions.
Lest my readers think I am being unfair or overly critical, my observation does not come in a vacuum. I personally reported my own father for sex abuse against minors and drove to the house of the parents of his victims immediately after I found out who his victims were. My wife and I wept with parents as I struggled to find the words to tell them over and over how sorry I was that my father had hurt their babies. And I live in Pennsylvania, where the biggest investigation into the Catholic church took place. I serve shoulder-to-shoulder with survivors from that report. I’ve been to Harrisburg on several occasions and have personally witnessed Attorney General Josh Shapiro drop everything and come out to hug survivors when he knows they’re present. AG Shapiro isn’t doing it for show. I’ve watched him greet each survivor by name. He knows who they are. He always thanks them for visiting. He happily gives them the space they need to talk, joins them, and smiles as he says that the capital is “our house.”
Attorney General Josh Shapiro speaks on behalf of abuse survivors. Rachael Denhollander spoke just a few minutes apart from AG Shapiro.
I am appalled that J.D. Greear didn’t take ten minutes to come out and greet these survivors. My heart breaks that these friends were pushed into a corner outside the convention and were ignored. I certainly credit Dr. Greear for all that he and the SBC have done to move this conversation forward. I really am grateful. And I want to see the SBC get this right. Honest to God above I do. I will proudly stand behind and cheer on those who are doing all that they can to right the wrongs of abusers and those who provide cover for them.
At the same time, I cannot ignore the fact that my friends were not given any acknowledgment or even a visit by Dr. Greear himself. The skepticism will continue, and for good reason. I pray that these survivors and advocates are given a voice. But they should be given more than that. The front row at the ERLC should have been reserved for these brave survivors. Dr. Greear should have invited them up, one by one, and said, “I’m sorry you’ve been hurt. Thank you for being here and taking a courageous stand against evil. I stand with you. This is our house.”
I close with the same words of Dr. Greear I began this post with:
“One of the things I’ve learned from Rachael (Denhollander), as well as other survivors, is that the strongest words, without actions that follow up those words, are worse than not saying words at all.”
A few years ago I was home with a bad stomach bug. I was in the middle of a violent vomiting episode when I heard my dogs barking and going nuts. For ten minutes they were barking obsessively. I finally got enough energy to go inspect the issue and there stood a man, hands cupped against his face, peering into my living room window as he called out my name. I knew the guy. And didn’t like him either. He was an abuser who lived across from my church office and regularly stopped cancer patients as they were pulling into the neighboring oncology center to harass and cuss them out. He had the police called on him repeatedly. I called the police on him multiple times. I watched out my church office window one day as a police officer drew his gun on him because he was threatening to kill his girlfriend with a knife. One time he pulled a knife out at a local church and was invoking my name to get off the hook, saying that we were good friends. I had sent multiple email warnings to all the local churches about him and told them about his violence. Yet several churches told me it was their “Christian duty” to invite him in. I disagree.
This man is currently in prison for beating up his girlfriend and leaving her for dead. He routinely harassed and threatened me, sometimes calling me fifteen times a day. There is a difference between someone who has anger issues and someone who is an abuser. This man did not have anger issues. He is an abuser. He will never be invited into my home or church when he is released from prison. My elders at church will not offer a chaperone to “keep an eye on him” when he is released. They won’t do it because he is an abuser. He is violent. He has a long history of harassing, intimidating, and threatening people.
Quite often I’m told of churches who have “covenant agreements” with known serial child predators. They, too, are abusers. Churches have shared covenant agreements with me to show me how wonderful it is that the leadership extends grace while “keeping an eye” on convicted serial abusers. I’m unimpressed. If we don’t trust predators to be in our homes around our own children, why would we invite them into our churches to have access to other people’s children? To make it worse, leaders normally keep the abuse a secret from the church members.
The following is a covenant agreement that was given to me by a church that has a child rapist in the church who doubled as a minister and youth minister when he was raping multiple young girls in his youth group. He is a tier 3 offender and, against the strong recommendation of the Sex Offender Assessment Board, a judge chose not to assign a sexually violent predator status. Only a hand full of church leaders even know he is a sex offender, and the congregation was never informed. This is a large church and parents of kids have no idea that there is a serial child rapist sitting in their pews. Parents, if they knew of the terms of the covenant agreement, should be alarmed. The serial predator has a sponsor who he “may be” asked to check in with. I redacted the church name and highlighted some things that just made me shake my head in disbelief. This covenant agreement is very similar to all the others that I’ve collected over the years.
There are a host of reasons why I think chaperoning known abusers is a bad idea, but I’ll share just a few here. For one, abusers are far more sophisticated than the chaperones who “may” be watching them. They are masters of deception and the average person does not know how sophisticated their techniques are. I know, in the above mentioned case, that the abuser is not confined to areas of the building designated for adults only. I know because he attends worship, where hundreds of children surround him. The notion that there are areas of a church building “designated for adults” is absurd.
Second, churches most often are not informed that such agreements even exist and leaders intentionally keep hidden the fact that sexual predators are in the church. This agreement says, “Information about your background will only be shared with people of the congregation who need to be aware.” In this case, at a church of over 1,000, seven people were counted among those who “need to be aware.” I would like to know who makes the decision for who remains informed and who doesn’t.
Third, abusers are wolves. This particular man was masquerading as a minister of the Gospel while he was raping multiple children. He is not a “lost, injured, or weak” Christian who needs to be prayed over. He is an abuser, an impostor, and a deceiver who needs to be kept at bay.
Fourth, if an abuser can’t be trusted and has all kinds of restrictions, including having a chaperone, he is not repentant. I challenge you to find this twisted theology in the Bible that I hear so often–“He can be forgiven but that doesn’t mean we should trust him.” This statement comes from our desperation to be inclusive of everyone. Can you imagine the church saying this about the apostle Paul? Which leads me to the final point.
Abusers have a pathology. They abuse people, not because they “struggle” with sin, but because they want to abuse people. This is why they can’t ever be trusted. The Bible correctly labels abusive people as deceivers, impostors, white washed tombs, snakes, thorns, thistles, chaff, waterless mists, evil people, wolves, and so on. It’s important to note that this language is not used for sinners like you, me, or even the apostle Paul.
In fact, all of us have a pathology. While we’re talking about Paul, let’s talk about why he went from insolent opponent and persecutor of Christians to an apostle and missionary. Paul’s pathology was always to please God no matter what. Period. Wrong as he was when he persecuted Christians, Paul wasn’t deceptive and dishonest when he did it. Nor was he doing it for personal gain or pleasure. Paul was persecuting Christians for one reason and one reason only: because he thought that’s what God wanted. When Paul had a vision of Jesus on the road to Damascus, his pathology never changed. Paul repented, was baptized, and continued to do what would please God. His pathology never changed. His actions did.
In fact, Paul told Timothy, “I thank him who has given me strength, Christ Jesus our Lord, because he judged me faithful, appointing me to his service, though formerly I was a blasphemer, persecutor, and insolent opponent. But I received mercy because I had acted ignorantly in unbelief. . . ” (1 Timothy 1:12, 13). It was because of Paul’s ignorance and unbelief that he was able to receive mercy. Paul was not intentionally deceptive. In fact, Paul talks very negatively about such wolves: “. . . while evil people and impostors will go on from bad to worse, deceiving and being deceived” (2 Timothy 3:13). Paul’s advice for people who are abusive, treacherous, ungrateful, having the appearance of godliness but denying its power? . . . “Avoid such people” (2 Timothy 3:5). Why? because they have a pathology. And that pathology isn’t to please God. It’s to pretend to be godly so they can abuse, steal, deceive, and get what they came for.
Just imagine if the church in Antioch said, “Paul we’re going to have you sign a covenant saying you won’t go near Christians who are vulnerable. We’ll assign you a chaperone. There are certain areas that you’ll be restricted from going to. If you violate this covenant, you “may be” removed.” The very thought of it is absurd. Paul was trusted because Paul previously sinned in ignorance. Though he once persecuted Christians he was not pretending to be someone he wasn’t. He didn’t deceive, lie, threaten, intimidate, stalk, molest, grope, or rape people while pretending to be a godly man. But Paul sure mentions such people. In fact, he has a lot to say about deception: “Let no one deceive you with empty words, for because of these things the wrath of God comes upon the sons of disobedience. Therefore do not become partners with them. . . and try to discern what is pleasing to the Lord. Take no part in the unfruitful works of darkness, but instead expose them” (Ephesians 5:6-11).
Paul never extended an invitation to deceivers and people who work in secrecy for selfish gain. He consistently said to avoid them, expose them, and keep them out of the church. Why? Because abusers’ pathology is to deceive, steal, and masquerade as someone they are not in order to get what they want.
Ask your leaders if they have a secret covenant agreement to keep wolves secretly hidden within the confines of your church. If they do, ask for a copy. Ask if there are currently any people who have signed such an agreement and who they are. My guess is that they will tell you that you will not be qualified as someone “who needs to be aware,” but ask yourself, is this something Jesus would be OK with? Would Paul be OK with wolves having a secret agreement between just them and the leaders and having a chaperone because they can’t be trusted? If the answer is no, perhaps there needs to be a serious conversation about the validity of these secret covenants.
