All over America, people
are suing organizations over sexual harassment or illegal sexual
aggression of various types. In order to better protect itself from
litigation and expenses, our leaders thought it best to try to fend off
such problems before they ended up in court. You may immediately
perceive an underlying difficulty here: The brethren are concerned with
avoiding legal problems in courts of law, not in purifying the church or
getting rid of adulterers. From March 1993. onward, the Sexual Ethics
Commission has met several times. Rosa Taylor Banks, director of the
NAIYs Office of Human Relations. has been the general supervisor of
the commission.
But, from information
provided by one of the members of that commission to a mutual friend, we
have learned that the commission encountered serious roadblocks from the
very beginning. There are those in our denomination who are more
concerned with protecting adulterous ministers, than protecting church
members and fellow workers that they prey upon. Fortunately, there are
those in our church who faithfully keep striving to cast out the evil (1
Corinthians 5; read it). By the fall of 1993. the commission's report
was thought to be complete; and. in November, it was presented to the
officers attending the Year end Executive Committee meetings of the
North American Division who approved it. Since then, the commission
work. along this line, was indeed completed.
When the editors of our
church paper heard about it. they published the report in the Adventist
Review of January 27, 1994 (pages 17 21). An attempt had been made
to include, not only legal requirements for lawsuits, but also basic
morality. On page 18, was this statement: "In this document, sexual
misconduct is a comprehensive term that includes child sexual abuse and
sexual harassment as earlier defined, rape or sexual contact by force,
threat, intimidation and sexual malfeasance."
The two paragraphs,
after the above quotation, appeared to include any and every form of
adultery or fornication as proscribed behaviors which the church could
not tolerate among its workers. We will reprint those three paragraphs
at the bottom of this page (page two). Both the commission and the NAD
were shocked when they learned that the report had been printed in the
Review, for they had not released the completed report for publication.
The scheduled plan was, next, to send the report to each union office,
which was to send it on to local conferences and institutions.
This was done, but a
reaction set in. There were those who did not want to abide by such
restrictions. The document included too much wrong doing! So the
commission was called back to revise it. Pressure on the commission
intensified, In the fall of 1994. the commission's revised report was
presented at the NAD Year end Meetings. Church leaders from the U.S.
and Canada were in attendance. On October 17. 1994. the revised report
was accepted and approved by NAD leaders at their Year end Meetings,
and sent on to every entity in their divisions' territories.
But this revised
document had deftly changed the definition of what constituted "sexual
misconduct." This is important, for if an improper activity is
excluded, then not the slightest reprimand will be given by supervisory
church officers. We will reprint that crucial definition at the bottom
of the next page (page three). Examining it closely, we find that only
illegal actions are included! Sexual misconduct, which is not illegal in
the courts of the land is not.
Sexual
Harassment. The use of this term refers to the most common
behavioral definition, which is deliberate and or repeated sexual or sex
based behavior that is not welcome, not asked for, and not returned.
Sexual harassment by the employer, supervisor, coworker, and in some
instances, nonemployees and approved volunteers is not condoned in the
Seventh day Adventist Church.
Sexual Abuse.
Sexual abuse is generally understood as "caused or allowed sexual
contact within the professional relationship," and it can involve
adults as well as children. Sexual abuse of adults or children
represents the most severe level of spiritual and self alienation.
Child sexual abuse
includes, but is not limited to, any contact or interaction between a
child and an adult when the child is being used for the sexual
stimulation of the adult person or of a third person. The behavior may
or may not involve touching. Sexual behavior between a child and an
adult is always considered forced, whether or not consented to by the
child. Because it is considered to be a crime, it must be promptly
reported to the appropriate authorities.
Sexual
Misconduct. By definition, sexual misconduct is a misuse of
authority and power which breaches Christian ethical principles by
misusing a trust relation to gain advantage over another for personal
pleasure in an abusive, exploitative, and unjust manner. In this
document sexual misconduct is a comprehensive term that includes child
sexual abuse and sexual harassment as earlier defined; rape or sexual
contact by force, threat, or intimidation; and sexual malfeasance.
Sexual malfeasance is the broken trust resulting from genital contact
(contact with the breasts, buttocks, or pubic area) within a ministerial
(e.g., clergy with a member of his/her congregation) or professional
relationship (e.g., counselor with a client, employee with his/her
approved volunteer, a church leader with a committee member, etc.). This
definition is not meant to cover relationships between spouses, nor is
it meant to restrict church professionals from having normal mutual,
social, intimate, or marital relationships. Adultery and fornication are
never appropriate behaviors, and as such, are considered sins by the
church.
Pastoral Sexual
Misconduct A range of behaviors which includes sexual
harassment (verbal and/or physical), sexual advances, and/or sexual
contact between an ordained, licensed, or commissioned minister and
his/her congregation or counselees constitutes pastoral sexual
misconduct. Pastoral sexual misconduct occurs when any person with
pastoral responsibilities engages in sexual contact or sexualized
behavior with a congregant, client, employee, or approved volunteer,
staff member, etc., whether adult, adolescent, or child. When a person,
in a position of religious leadership, takes advantage of a vulnerable
person, the ministerial relationship is violated.
Victim.
Victim is the term used to identify the person alleged to
have been sexually abused by an employee or approved volunteer. Always
considered wrong when done by Seventh day Adventist Church workers
to one another or to church members!
Illegal sexual
misconduct. Includes: (1) sexual harassment; (2) actual or
attempted sexual contact with a minor; (3) actual or attempted rape or
sexual contact by force, threat, or intimidation; and (4) criminal
behavior of a sexual nature.
Legal sexual
misconduct, which will not be punished or even inquired into when
done by church workers, would include sexual activity of any type
or degree by two people, as long as it could be proven in
a court of law that there was "mutual consent." Legal
sexual immorality, included in the January27, 1994, printed statement,
was omitted from the revised October 27. 1994 printed statement. Note
that the very next paragraph (paragraph 14), in the October revision.
makes an important pronouncement:
"Victim
An accuser becomes a victim when the accused is determined, by
the Sexual Ethics Committee, to have committed sexual misconduct or
sexual harassment" (see reprinted statement in box on this page).
The God of heaven gave us the Seventh Commandment; the North
American Division has declared part of it null and void. Only that part
is retained. which the civil authorities would frown upon. Adultery. by
mutual consent, is no longer a sin in the ministry of our church.
Women in the church,
beware. Pastors can lead souls into sin, and then, if the beguiled
victims cannot prove that the secret act involved force, she has no
recourse under church law. The church will not hear her, and the pastor
is free to attempt it again. 'Malfeasance" was included in the
January statement, but omitted from the October statement "Mal
fea sance (mal fe'zens).
Law.
The performance of some act which is unlawful or wrongful or which one
has specifically contracted not to perform: said usually of official
misconduct." Funk and Wagnalls' New Comprehensive International
Dictionary of the English Language. Thus we find that
"malfeasance" includes both illegal actions, as well as those
which violate written or unwritten contractual employment obligations
and duties.
We would expect that
a Seventh day Adventist minister would not have sex with any women,
other than his wife! It is an unwritten contractual obligation of
his employment We are supposed to be the People upholding the Ten
Commandments! "Malfeasance" would be the violation of that
obligation. But "sexual malfeasance" has been removed from the
revised statement of wrongdoing. Once again, carefully read the box on
the bottom of page two of this sheet. It lists far more than is in the
reprint box on the bottom of page three! A variety of sexual wrongdoings
were omitted from the revised statement. Our church is really changing
fast.
That which church
leaders once did secretly. they now bravely place in writing! But the
written statement is only made to meet legal responsibilities and
insurance requirements in case of litigation. We appeal to you to do
some writing also. WRITE church leaders on all levels, and demand that
pastors who engage In any kind of adultery or per version be held
accountable! In those letter, also demand that all allegations be
heard.and not ignored if they cannot prove a criminal or civil court
case against the man. At this point, someone will say, "vf. you
are making an issue about a matter which never occurs." Read this
and think what it means: "In questionnaires distributed by Len
McMillan, director of church ministries for the Potomac Conference, 12.5
percent of the 586 respondents, consisting primarily of Adventist
pastors, indicated that they had had an affair."Adventist
Review. September 2. 1993. p. 14.
Adultery does indeed
occur in our church,and often enough that this October 1994 revision was
considered necessary in order to better protect the wrongdoer.! As I
write, I have before me a one inch thick stack of legal papers, It
begins with a lawsuit filed on November 18, 1988. by a woman in
California. She was suing a Seventh day Adventist pastor. He had led
her into sin and, in order to hold onto her church Job. she went along
with it for a time. Then she confessed to her husband, and they sued the
pastor. For doing so. she was fired. Her husband, also a church worker,
was also fired. And what happened to the pastor? Nothing. absolutely
nothing. Church leadership resolutely worked to protect him.
The problem was that the
woman. had tried to get several other women whom the pastor had also led
into sin. to come forward. But they refused to speak up. The attorneys
for the conference office, which defended the pastor, contended that no
criminal conduct had occurred since mutual consent occurred, in spite of
the fact that she only did it to protect her job. So the lawsuit, which
resulted in that one inch stack of legal papers. was finally settled
with an undisclosed payment to the woman, and a gag order that it not be
discussed. Then the pastor was transferred to an adjacent conference,
and placed as associate pastor of one of the largest churches in the
state. He is still there, now the senior pastor of that church.
Why was he retained in
the ministry? The case had been settled because the Judge agreed with
the defense that he had not done anything legally wrong. since mutual
consent was involved. So he had not done wrong. had he? Not by the laws
of the land, but by the law of God he stands as an adulterer. Keep in
mind that the conference lawyers successfully used, in his defense, the
fact that the adultery had been done with the woman's consent. But it
was still adultery, in the Bible sense! That was part of their defense!
Mutual consent or no. he had committed adultery. He was the active agent
bringing it about. He had done it several times, and probably would
continue looking for opportunities to do so in the future. And the
conference protected him. Instead of firing him, he was retained in the
ministry and quietly transferred to another conference, where he was
given an important ministerial assignment. That is new theology in
action. It is evil, and the evil should be put away.
Before concluding this
study. we should mention two points: 1 The NAD only
wanted the commission's report for insurance purposes; it was never to
be published for the church to read. The January 1994 release through
the Review was a mistake, and the NAD does not intend to let the revised
statement be printed unless enough write in demanding it. The reason is
simple enough: Leadership does not want to let the membership know there
is a means by which errant ministers can be brought into a hearing or
expelled from the ministry. 2 Why did the commission
make that 1994 revision, which so greatly reduced the scope of what is
"sexual misconduct"? This is what happened: An attorney was
sent in to instruct them that they must make the change in order to
protect the church from litigation.But you can see that such reasoning
is transparently wrong.
Here is a statement by
Elizabeth Iskander, M.D., discussing the entire problem. "The
revised. October 27, 1994. statement, #543 94N Sexual Misconduct
and Sexual Harassment in Church Relationships Involving Denominational
Employees and Volunteers Guidelines Policy Revision, presents
a radical change from the policy published in the Adventist Review, its
revised definition of what is 'sexual misconduct, 'the conduct
about which church leaders will hear complaints and punish offending
ministers has been greatly altered. Sexual malfeasance has been
dropped from the policy. The North American Division has decided not to
offer the victims of mutually consensual sexual misconduct any method or
means of being heard by an official church body.
I sense that your
Journal is the only avenue left. If you can get your readership to do
so, please urge them to phone. write, or speak to leadership on
various levels. Insist that they develop a policy that addresses
pastoral sexual malfeasance. If enough of our people are aroused to the
urgency and importance of this matter, changes can be made! God has said
He will purify His people at the end of time. Purified lives must
inevitably result in purified policies. How can God accept our church
when it has sin written into its policy books? A properly worded policy
on sexual misconduct should clearly state the problem. Women, when in a
state of crisis, seek counseling and spiritual leadership from pastors.
When the church entrusts a man with a pulpit. the church also gives him
an aura of power and prestige which emotionally attracts many women.
The stamp of approval
the church places on him gives women a feeling of safety, causing them
to lower their guard. Women may become involved in prolonged affairs
with such pastors. Eventually they are cast aside for multiple reasons.
Currently the church offers such a woman nothing but disbelief and
ridicule if she comes forward. If she is a church employee, raising such
allegations will cost her her Job. "Many church administrators feel
that airing such cases causes great harm. If such a woman is given a
hearing, the bottom line is that it is her word against his word. The
case must be dropped.
"(1) What is
needed, first, is a definition of sexual misconduct that does not omit
or ignore fornication or adultery. (2) Next, a policy needs to be put in
place which offers a hearing to such women. (3) If for lack of enough
evidence. the case has insufficient evidence for conviction yet she
appears to be a credible witness the church should create a permanent,
confidential file of the proceedings. (4) If this pastor moves to
another locality, and another woman comes forward with a tale of sexual
malfeasance, the church should reinvestigate both witnesses, even though
separated by time and location. (5) As a result, pastors will soon learn
that a string of credible witnesses can lead to the end of their
ministry. (6) Victims would soon learn that they and their story will be
treated with respect and confidentiality. and can at least contribute to
the end result of Justice. (7) The creation of such policies tells
victims that the church acknowledges that such crimes occur and has
prepared a procedure for handling the victims' allegations. (8) Such
policies encourage victims to come forward, because the church is
clearly serious about removing fornicators and adulterers from the
ministry. (9) When they see such a policy in place, the church, at
large. will see that the Adventist Church is serious about cleansing the
ministry from impurity. (10) Such a policy, consistently carried out,
would restore confidence in the church and the integrity of church
administrators.
You will recall the case
of ____. He Initially had only one accuser. Many said he was innocent.
Then the story got into the local press. Because of this exposure, two
other very credible women who saw the first woman was disbelieved came
forward with similar testimony to the court. This was also publicized.
The church could be spared such public humiliation if procedures, on the
order of the above suggested ones, were adhered to."Elizabeth
Iskander, M.D., letter dated February 7. 1995.
OUR HISTORIC STANDARDS
ON ADULTERY, DIVORCE. AND REMARRIAGE [WM 589 5911] A
brief, three part collection of quotations from the Bible, Spirit of
Prophecy, and other sources. The important changes in the Church Manual
are carefully explained.
VIOLATION OF THE SEVENTH
COMMANDMENT AND CHURCH RELATIONSHIP [WM 602] How should we relate
our selves to adulterous church members and pastors? There are answers
here.
KEEPING ADULTEROUS
PASTORS [WM 587 588] A two part report on a proposed change
in the North American Division Working Policy, to be presented for
approval to the 1995 General Conference Session. It would officially
permit adulterous ministers to be placed back in the ministry after a
two year waiting period.
PERMITTING ADULTERY IN
THE MINISTRY [WM 601] How should we relate our selves to adulterous
church members and pastors? There are answers here.