Florida Baptist Convention found liable for pastor who molested boy

Douglas Myers
(Florida Dept. of Corrections)

As reported by the Orlando Sentinel …

Yesterday, a Florida jury “found the Florida Baptist Convention liable for a former pastor who sexually abused a 13-year-old boy.”

“Jurors decided that the convention didn’t do enough to investigate the background of Douglas W. Myers, who started two churches… after receiving funds and training from the convention.”

“The convention had argued that it is more of a support organization for Baptist churches and that it didn’t have any control or responsibility for him.” [But the jury didn’t buy that phony-baloney argument. Hallelujah.]

“The verdict … clearly shows the Florida Baptist Convention failed to follow a basic standard of care,” said Ronald Weil, attorney for the victim.

“The victim and his mother had filed suit against the convention, arguing that it failed to uncover past allegations of sexual abuse at churches in Maryland and Alabama …. “

“This is the first such liability case against the convention, which comprises nearly 3,000 congregations and 1 million members in Florida.” [Nationwide, the Southern Baptist Convention claims about 100,000 congregations and 16 million members. Let’s hope that, state by state, this Florida precedent advances forward so as to prod Southern Baptists into implementing denominational accountability and tracking systems for their clergy.)

“Though Myers had never faced prior criminal charges for sex abuse, members of his Maryland and Alabama churches knew about questionable behavior, including inappropriate contact with young boys....”

The Florida Baptist Convention’s attorney argued that the convention “had no right to control anything” Myers did. But Myers “was included in church directories and Baptist publications as being affiliated,” said Weil. “He wasn’t a rogue. He wasn’t on his own. He was part of an affiliated church.”

Jurors decided that at least part of the blame also rested with the Lake County Baptist Association. However, “the trial focused on the responsibility of the statewide organization.”
____________________

Read here for more info on the prior history of this case. 

SBC keeps special no-accountability status under pre-Civil War law

After convening a task force and debating the issue at length, Southern Baptist officials have taken the bold step of recommending that the Southern Baptist Convention remain the Southern Baptist Convention.

Big whoop, eh?

If that’s what you’re thinking, you’re right. This is a “been there done that” several times over situation. The only thing that makes it interesting this time is the glimpse we get as to the reasons.

Since as far back as 1958, the largest Protestant denomination in the land has repeatedly considered changing its name, and every single time, it has arrived at the same status-quo conclusion: The Southern Baptist Convention will remain the Southern Baptist Convention. Despite the inherent incongruity in the pairing of a regional “Southern” identity with a global evangelistic mission, and despite the negative connotations that the “Southern” identity carries for many, the Southern Baptist Convention will not change its name.

Reason Number 1

“We are intertwined in our cooperation and any change in the SBC format affects every entity in Southern Baptist life,” explained former Southern Baptist president and task force chairman Jimmy Draper. “There is no way to unwind our cooperation with other Baptist entities that work alongside the Convention.”

So . . . even though Southern Baptist officials have repeatedly rejected the notion of denominational cooperation for keeping track of church-hopping preacher-predators, insisting instead that the denomination has no oversight obligation for clergy because each church is so utterly autonomous, Southern Baptist officials now acknowledge the reality that “every entity in Southern Baptist life” is so intertwined in the Southern Baptist Convention’s denominational web that even a simple name change is not feasible.

Reason Number 2

As Draper explained, a name change would yield “uncertainty about whether or not [the Southern Baptist Convention] would be able to retain our ‘grandfather’ position gained from the Act of the Georgia Legislature in 1845, which exempts us from some of the requirements of modern non-profit legislation.”

Whoa. If you think about it, this one’s a “real kicker.”

Under a pre-Civil War Georgia law, the Southern Baptist Convention receives special status that gives it free-rein to avoid what are now commonly-accepted accountability mechanisms for other sorts of non-profit entities. As an SBCattorney explained: “The Southern Baptist Convention” is a Georgia corporation by virtue of a legislative act granting the Convention a charter on a hand-written document enacted in Augusta, Georgia, in 1845. As long as the Southern Baptist Convention does not amend this charter, “the Convention is not regulated by the present Georgia Nonprofit Corporation Code.”

Thus, if the Southern Baptist Convention were to change its name, it would no longer be a special-status entity under a “no-strings-attached” 1845 Georgia charter. Instead, with a new name, it would become “a newly organized non-profit organization accountable to and in compliance with the Georgia Nonprofit Corporation Code.”

So that’s why the Southern Baptist Convention doesn’t change its name. It wants to keep its special 1845 status as a free-wheeling entity with no accountability requirements.

Talk about the preservation of status-quo structures! This is a status-quo that dates all the way back to 1845. It is a status-quo that dates to a slave-holding culture that birthed the Confederacy, and that also birthed the Southern Baptist Convention, which had its very origins in its 1845 split from other Baptists over the issue of slavery. The Southern Baptist Convention biblically rationalized slavery and cast its loyalty in conformity with Southern culture.

And now, to this day, the Southern Baptist Convention still operates under the free-wheeling special status that it gained in those pre-Civil War days with its support for slavery.

Other institutions and organizations are typically proud of their advancements in assuring accountability and safety. But not Southern Baptists. They’re clinging to a pre-Civil War Georgia law that helps to keep them unaccountable.

Can you imagine what would happen if a hospital bragged that its accountability for infection rates was in conformity with the standards of 1845? I suspect such a hospital would soon find its beds empty.

And what if a car manufacturer bragged that it would be accountable for safety standards in conformity with the horse and buggy era? Would you buy such a car?

Perhaps the Southern Baptist Convention’s unaccountability under an archaic special privilege law could be ameliorated if the Southern Baptist Convention would step up to the plate and implement effective denominational mechanisms for policing itself. It could choose on its own to institute accountability structures and quality control mechanisms for Southern Baptist clergy. Certainly, the 1845 law would not preclude the Southern Baptist Convention from making such a choice, and such a choice would not entail rocket science. Most of the other major Protestant groups in this country have already implemented various forms of clergy accountability and oversight mechanisms, including those northern Baptists (aka American Baptist Churches USA) from whom Southern Baptists split but who retain a similar congregationalist polity.

But, of course, that brings us back to Reason Number 1. Though every entity in Southern Baptist life is intertwined, and though Southern Baptists cooperate on all manner of endeavors, Southern Baptist officials remain entrenched in their refusal to implement any sort of denominational oversight for Southern Baptist clergy. For that refusal – a refusal that is of their own making and that places Southern Baptist kids and congregants at greater risk – there is no excuse.

Not even an archaic special-status law can excuse the SBC’s own failure.

Twenty years later and at least twenty more kids

Daniel M. Acker Jr.

Daniel Acker Jr. was a Southern Baptist youth minister at Westwood Baptist Church in Shelby County, Alabama, when he was accused of molesting a fourth-grade girl in 1992. “Churches, teachers, schools and parents rallied to his aid.”

“They held pancake dinners to raise money for his defense, proclaimed his innocence on marquees, demonized the fourth-grader who accused” him. (In light of all that, I suspect if there were any other kids who even thought of speaking up, they surely squelched such thoughts and politely ate their pancakes instead.) 

Another Southern Baptist church, First Baptist of Pelham held a spaghetti supper as a fund-raiser for Acker Jr.

“Shelby County circled the wagons to fight for its own. And it won.”

Now, twenty years later, police say Acker Jr. has “admitted to groping little girls on at least 20 occasions, including the child involved in the 1992 allegations.”

The preacher at Acker Jr’s current church, Rev. Mark Liddle of Dominion Baptist Church stated: “I have nothing to say.” (Very pastoral of him, don’t ya think?)

Acker Jr’s resume also includes stints as a music and youth minister at Mayberry Baptist Church in Montevallo and as a camp counselor at the Alabama Baptist Boys Camp. He also worked as an elementary teacher in Shelby County schools, and he did volunteer work with mission projects and the Special Olympics.

When Acker Jr. was accused in 1992, the school board initially suspended him with pay. However, a grand jury declined to indict, and after a day of hearings, the school board decided to reinstate Acker Jr.

The former school superintendent, Norma Rogers, said she had talked at length with the accusing child and her mother “and found the story credible.” “She also noted that a state investigator had reported reason to believe the allegation.” Rogers recommended that the school board fire Acker Jr., but public sentiment was in favor of Acker Jr., and the school board voted to reinstate him.

“Testimony at the school board meeting came mostly from church members,” Rogers said. “’Their testimonies went a long way’ in swaying the decision to Acker Jr.’s favor.” And that fourth-grader watched while church members chose to protect their pastor rather than protecting kids.

“Acker Jr.’s job was saved by the outpouring of support, despite a note he had written to the mother of the girl who first accused him.” The note was his attempted explanation for why he had included a question about the color of the girl’s underwear on a quiz he gave to the fourth-grader.

“While supporters rallied around Acker Jr. … the girl’s mother said at the time that her daughter was being harassed constantly….” “The harassment eventually led the mother to transfer her daughter to another school.”

Twenty years later, in January 2012, Acker Jr. was arrested on two charges of child sex abuse involving allegations of molesting a 12-year-old. Since then, more counts of child sex abuse have been filed, and there is now an 8-count indictment involving 6 different victims.

But that’s not all. Police say that Acker Jr. has “confessed to molesting more than 20 other female children," including the child involved in the 1992 alegations.
________________________

3/7/12 ABP: "The school board ... planned to fire him, until members of the church where he was serving as youth minister showed up at a meeting and convinced the school district to let him keep his job."

Church boots children so preacher-predator can take pulpit

Darrell Gilyard

“Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these.” Matthew 19:14

• Darrell Gilyard is a convicted sex offender who was released from prison just a couple months ago.
• Darrell Gilyard is preaching from the pulpit at Christ Tabernacle Missionary Baptist Church in Jacksonville, Florida.
• The law precludes Darrell Gilyard from being around kids, and so the church banned kids from attending Sunday services. “No children are allowed.”

Do you get the picture? The church chose to boot the children out the door so that it could put a convicted predator in the pulpit.

And there is no one in Baptist denominational leadership who will do anything about it.

Christ Tabernacle Missionary Baptist Church is shown as being affiliated with the Southern Baptist Convention. (www.sbc.net/churchsearch)

Roger Oldham

A spokesman for the Southern Baptist Convention’s executive committee, Roger Oldham, told The Guardian that the SBC was “not empowered” to take action. “We…have no authority,” he said.

Oldham also claimed that the Southern Baptist Convention “has taken a strong position on the protection of children.”

But for a denomination whose leaders claim to be powerless in the face of preacher-predators, what in the world does “strong position” actually mean?

Without a willingness to take action, the words of Southern Baptist leaders are wholly hollow. There is nothing “strong” about them.

The Southern Baptist Convention is the largest Protestant denomination in the country, and it wields a strong arm in many other ways. Yet, to this day, officials of the Southern Baptist Convention claim to be powerless when one of its affiliated churches puts a sex offender in the pulpit.

Denominational officials have taken action against churches based on their “perceived toleration” of gay people in membership.

Denominational officials have taken action against churches when they put a woman in the pulpit.

But let a church put a sex offender in the pulpit, and Southern Baptist officials claim they are powerless.

This is why Baptistland has become a near-perfect paradise for predatory preachers. The Southern Baptist Convention refuses to even attempt the sort of denominational oversight systems that have become common in other major faith groups, and this lack of institutional safeguards makes it far too easy for preacher-predators to church-hop.

Long before his conviction on child sex crimes in Florida, Darrell Gilyard had left behind a string of several dozen abuse, assault and rape accusations in Texas and Oklahoma Baptist churches. But of course, that’s just the ones we know about.

With so many accusations, and if there had been responsible denominational action, Gilyard could likely have been stopped much sooner, but instead, Gilyard was supported and “mentored by some of the biggest names in the Southern Baptist Convention.”

For example, rather than protecting the people under his care, including many who were young college girls, Southern Baptist seminary president Paige Patterson continued to promote Gilyard, and suggested that Gilyard’s accusers were motivated by “jealousy, frustration and racism.” And after Gilyard went through 4 churches in 4 years and then moved to Florida, former Southern Baptist president Jerry Vines “agreed to forgive” Gilyard for his “out-of-state troubles.” So with the blind-eyed leniency of other Baptist leaders, Gilyard was repeatedly allowed to seek new prey from a vantage of spiritual trust in the pulpit.

Because Darrell Gilyard’s conduct is so deplorable, it Is easy to focus our attention there. But it should not be forgotten that many other religious leaders played a role in furthering this travesty. Literally dozens of young women, college girls and teens were wounded while high Southern Baptist leaders stayed mired in their own complicity.

Worst of all, with Gilyard back in a Baptist pulpit again, we can readily see that nothing has changed.

A church goes so far as to boot the children for the sake of keeping a silver-tongued sex offender in the pulpit. And Southern Baptist leaders do nothing.
______________________________

The 1991 Dallas Morning News series on Darrell Gilyard and the failure of Baptist leadership:
The downfall of a pastor, 7/14/1991
Richardson minister quits amid sex charges, 7/12/1991
Pastor who quit in sex case speaks at new church, 7/22/1991

Update March 5, 2012: "Baptist association asks church with sex-offender preacher to leave."

MLK Day and the failure of moderate Baptists on clergy sex abuse

From a Birmingham jail cell, Martin Luther King Jr. wrote a letter to the “moderate” religious leaders of his day. He told of how “gravely disappointed” he was in them.

Of course, King had always known better than to expect support from men such as Bull Connor, but for a time, King apparently held some hope that “moderates” would stand with him and other black Americans in their struggle for justice. However, in his letter from the Birmingham jail, King said that he had almost reached the conclusion that the greatest stumbling block was “not the Ku Klux Klanner but the white moderate who is more devoted to ‘order’ than to justice.”

“Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will,” wrote King.

As we have struggled to bring to light the injustice in how clergy abuse survivors are treated in Baptistland, I have often pondered the words of King’s letter. I too have grown to the conclusion that the “moderates” may be the most frustrating of all.

Any fool will know that people who denounce clergy molestation survivors as “evil-doers” and "opportunists" aren't likely to be people who will extend much help. Of course, that’s “any fool” except countless other Baptist leaders who remain content to keep men of such hateful words in high leadership. Nevertheless, for us mere mortals, the heartless cruelty of men such as this -- and there are many of them -- is at least transparent. So we don’t get our hopes up.

But it has taken me much longer to understand the reality of what King wrote about in his letter -- the reality that, with only rare exceptions, “moderates” are equally unhelpful. They are “more cautious than courageous,” and they remain “silent behind the anesthetizing security” of their status-quo do-nothingness.

In fact, most “moderate” Baptists maintain the same status-quo as the other Baptists.

In his letter, King complained of those “moderate” leaders who constantly said: “I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods….”

I have often heard virtually identical words from “moderate” Baptist leaders.

But as with King, I have seen that, though “moderates” may say they agree, they will not take steps toward actually implementing change because to do so would upset their status-quo power structures.

And the “moderates” put forward the exact same excuse as those other Baptists who call us ugly names. It’s the “because we have no bishops” excuse. It’s the “all Baptist churches are autonomous” excuse.

Then they say that I’m too impatient and that, with time, change will come.

Martin Luther King called this a “mythical concept of time.” It’s a concept that imagines the flow of time alone will somehow change things. But of course, it won’t. Advancing the good requires action. But when it comes to clergy sex abuse, action is exactly what “moderates” reject.

Sometimes I really wonder about some of these “moderate” Baptist leaders. Do you think they actually believe the words they speak?

Do they actually believe that “because there are no bishops,” Baptist leaders are powerless to do anything about clergy who are credibly accused of molesting kids? Or do they simply spout the Baptist party-line to avoid rocking the boat, to protect their own careers, or to preserve the false-peace of the status-quo?

Do they really believe that the New Testament prescribes the parameters of “local church autonomy” so precisely that it allows churches to cooperate for funding ministers’ retirements, for international missions, for keeping historical records, and even for investigating churches with gays in their membership . . . but NOT for responsibly assessing reports about clergy who molest kids?

How do intelligent “moderate” people arrive at actually believing such a thing?

If they can come up with such a contrived “autonomy” definition as that, why do they not go ahead and come up with a definition that will serve for the protection of kids and for ministry to the wounded? It’s obvious they’re defining it how they themselves choose, and so why don’t they choose a definition more functional for the welfare of others?

How do intelligent “moderate” people convince themselves that providing critical information to churches -- information about ministers credibly accused of sexual abuse -- will somehow take away the autonomy of churches to decide what to do with that information?

How do they not see the self-serving hypocrisy in such a radicalized view of “local church autonomy”?

And how can they possibly imagine that this abstraction of “autonomy” -- an abstraction that they themselves have defined for their own ends -- could possibly be more important than protecting real kids against clergy who molest and rape them?

I’ll never understand it.

Weighed against the reality of predatory clergy who church-hop through the porous network of Baptistland, the excuse-making of “moderate” Baptist leaders sounds hollow indeed.

In the words of Martin Luther King, moderate Baptist leaders “stand on the sideline” mouthing “pious irrelevancies and sanctimonious trivialities.”
_______________________________

This column was previously published on Martin Luther King day in 2011.

Dear Al

Al Mohler

An open letter to Al Mohler, president
of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary

Dear Al:

You got a lot of press for all your talk about the Penn State sex abuse scandal. It was good talk. But was it just talk?

When I look at your actual deeds lately, I wind up thinking that talk is all it was. That grieves me, because it will take a lot more than talk to protect kids against clergy predators. Words aren't enough.

You’re right, of course, that churches and Christian organizations should “contact law enforcement” with any information about child sex abuse. But that’s true for everyone, and it’s been true for a long time. So the mere fact that you say it doesn’t make it some bold new initiative of Southern Baptist leadership. To the contrary, so long as there are no institutional consequences for Southern Baptist leaders who don’t contact law enforcement, your talk is toothless, and nothing in Baptist life has changed.

Not only is your talk toothless, but your own deeds send a message that flat-out contradicts your words.

There you are, telling seminary employees that they should contact law enforcement with any information about child sex abuse. But what about seminary trustees, Al?

If you expect seminary employees to contact law enforcement, shouldn’t you expect the same measure of conduct from seminary trustees? Shouldn’t leaders lead by example?

So why aren’t you calling for the resignation of seminary trustee Philip Gunn? As a church elder and an attorney, Gunn has urged that church officials should not cooperate with the police, but should instead keep secret the information they have about child sex abuse allegations against a trusted minister at Morrison Heights Baptist Church in Mississippi.

SNAP spokesperson Amy Smith summed up the scenario quite succinctly: “Mr. Gunn has some explaining to do about why he, as an elder and attorney, participated in an internal church investigation into child sex crimes without going to the police.”

But Al, here’s the thing. You should be the person insisting on accountability for Mr. Gunn. If you remain silent when your own Southern Baptist seminary trustee does exactly what you say shouldn’t be done, then all you’re doing is preaching platitudes and talking easy generalities.

Furthermore, I really gotta wonder why in the world you chose to invite Morrison Heights' senior pastor Greg Belser to speak at seminary chapel in the midst of such an egregious child sex abuse cover-up scandal? Why did you lend the seminary’s institutional credibility to Greg Belser at the very time when Belser was refusing to cooperate with prosecutors in the pursuit of child sex charges against one of Morrison Heights' former ministers?

Morrison Heights did what you’re critiquing in others. It failed to prioritize the protection of kids, and instead looked out for the institution first and foremost. Yet, rather than calling this Southern Baptist church to task for such keep-it-quiet conduct, you effectively held it up as an example.

Talk the talk, but don’t worry about walking the walk. That’s the message your deeds bespeak.

And sadly, this isn’t the first time your deeds have sent a “no big deal” message about a clergy sex abuse cover-up. For example, just last June, you yourself spoke from the pulpit at Bellevue Baptist Church in Memphis. (Thanks to New BBC for this video of you at Bellevue.) As I’m sure you know, Bellevue is a Southern Baptist church whose senior pastor, Steve Gaines, kept quiet for at least six months about an admitted clergy child molester. Yet, I haven’t heard you call this prominent pastor to task for it.

So this is the reality of what I see in your deeds. When Southern Baptist church leaders keep quiet about clergy sex abuse, you speak at their churches and you invite them to speak at your seminary. You are not part of any system by which Southern Baptist clergy colleagues will hold one another accountable. To the contrary, you’re part of a consequence-free system of cronies promoting cronies.

"Any failure to report and to stop the sexual abuse of children must be made inconceivable,” you said. But here’s the thing, Al. If there are no institutional consequences for failure to report, then failure to report will not be made inconceivable within the institution.

Without institutional consequences, we will continue to see the pattern of Southern Baptist leaders  –  leaders such as Philip Gunn, Jack Graham, Greg Belser, Steve Gaines and many more  –  who weigh each scenario for themselves and conclude (for whatever rationalized mess of a reason) that their particular scenario is somehow exceptional and that reporting isn’t necessary.

And without institutional consequences, this pattern will continue to allow accused clergy predators to church-hop through the Southern Baptist Convention, just as John Langworthy did from Prestonwood to Morrison Heights.

When I see you publicly addressing that case, and calling your own fellow Southern Baptist colleagues to account, then maybe I’ll begin to believe your words mean something.

But until then, Al, your words are nothing but talk. And that’s a crying shame. Because this isn't about the mere hypocrisy of your words. It's about the safety of kids.
_______________________________

Update from Civil Commotion 12/24/11: "Christa Brown gives that smiling serpent what-for ..."

Update 1/4/2012: Al Mohler tweets his pride on the selection of Southern Seminary trustee Philip Gunn as Speaker of the Mississippi House of Representatives. So not only does Mohler fail to criticize Gunn, but he sings Gunn's praises and speaks of his pride for him. Bob Felton says that, with events such as this, Southern Baptists may eventually "begin to recognize what a cesspool their denomination has become."

Update 1/18/2012: In a letter to the trustee board, Al Mohler wrote: "This is a tribute to the leadership of Speaker Gunn, and his election brings honor to the people of Mississippi and to the board of trustees of Southern Seminary."
Related posts:
Penn State lesson for Baptists: Outsiders needed for oversight, 11/25/11
Penn State and Prestonwood: Consequences are necessary, 11/10/11
Mississippi rep seeks secrecy for church, 9/8/11
Where’s the discipline? 10/13/2010

Denominational double-talk, 9/29/10

Penn State lesson for Baptists: Outsiders needed for oversight

Last week, Penn State announced its hiring of former FBI director and federal judge Louis Freeh to investigate the gaps in how the university handled allegations of child sex crimes involving former football coach Jerry Sandusky. To assist him in the task, Freeh has assembled a team of former FBI investigators and federal prosecutors, many of whom have expertise in child predator cases.

This internal investigation is in addition to the criminal investigation that was conducted by a grand jury.

“No one – no one – is above scrutiny,” said Kenneth Frazier, a member of the university’s Board of Trustees who hired Freeh. “That includes university trustees, employees and ‘every member of our board of trustees’,” he added.

Freeh, who has no connections to the university or to the state of Pennsylvania, said that assurances of independence were a condition for his acceptance of the position.

Though Freeh will have “complete reign” in the probe, and will recommend changes based on his findings, it will ultimately be up to the university’s Board of Trustees to implement the recommended changes.

Southern Baptists should heed this lesson from the Penn State scandal. Effective accountability systems require the involvement of outsiders for the sake of objectivity.

This is the essence of what we have been asking the Southern Baptist Convention to provide as a resource to local churches: an independent outside review board that could receive and assess reports about clergy sex abuse and that could provide information to people in the pews.

So far, Southern Baptist leaders have refused, and their refusal is irresponsible.

If this denomination wants to rid its ranks of clergy predators, it must find a way to institutionally listen to the people who are trying to tell about clergy abuse, and particularly to those whose claims cannot be criminally prosecuted, which is most. The denomination must provide a safe place where clergy abuse survivors can make a report with a reasonable expectation of being objectively and compassionately heard. That “safe place” will almost never be the church of the accused minister, but an independent review board could be.

In the same week that Penn State hired outsider Louis Freeh to assure oversight of its own systems, the Southern Baptist Convention’s Richard Land talked about Penn State on his radio show. The scandal, said Land, “shows that internal reporting is not enough.” He urged people to report suspected child abuse to the police.

So far, so good. Land is right: Internal reporting is not enough and people should report suspected child abuse to the police.

However, Land stops short. Just as internal reporting is not enough, so too, it is not enough for denominational authorities to simply preach to local churches about reporting to the police. To pretend that this is enough is an abdication of institutional responsibility and an abandonment of moral responsibility.

In the real world, “Southern Baptist churches are rarely the first party to report child sex abuse by clergy to the police.” This reality -– the fact that churches typically don’t report their pastors -- is what often allows the limitations period to run so that criminal prosecution becomes impossible.

This reality must be dealt with, and preaching about it isn’t enough. There must be institutional consequences for church leaders who don’t report child sex abuse and for churches that engage in keep-it-quiet cover-ups.

And no one – no one – should be above scrutiny.

This means that even high-honchos such as former Southern Baptist president Jack Graham should be subjected to scrutiny. With Graham at the helm, leaders of the 27,000 member Prestonwood Baptist Church failed to report child sex abuse allegations against one of its ministers, allowing the man to move on to other churches and placing other kids at risk. That minister now faces child sex charges in Mississippi.

The Southern Baptist Convention should follow the example of Penn State and engage a team of independent outside professionals to conduct an internal investigation of how and why allegations of child sex crimes were kept quiet at one of its most prominent and powerful churches. How did the system allow for such an abysmal failure, and how should the system be restructured to make such failures less likely?

Then, after dealing with Prestonwood, the SBC should keep the team and use it to establish an independent denominational review board with the power to receive, assess, and track clergy abuse allegations, and to investigate other accounts of church cover-ups.

Accountability systems are essential for child safety, and accountability systems require outsiders.
_____________________________

Thanks to the Associated Baptist Press for publishing this column!
And thanks also to the Louisville Courier-Journal for picking up on it!
And also thanks to Real Clear Religion.

Related posts:
Penn State and Prestonwood: Consequences are necessary, 11/10/11
Jack Graham: Deceiver, believer, or in-betweener? 10/1/11
GRACE report vindicates missionary kids, 9/4/10 (another example of the use of independent outsiders for accountability)
More talk from Mr. So-called Ethics, 3/18/08

Easy to say, harder to do

After my prior column, and after several other commentators called him on the carpet, Jim Denison has admitted he “made a mistake.”

Denison, the “theologian-in-residence” for the Baptist General Convention of Texas, had previously written that “it would have been best” for the Penn State abuse victims “to go directly to those who wronged them.” This was a terribly wrong statement, and I’m glad Denison has acknowledged it.

Personally, I don’t think his explanation for the mistake holds much water. Most other journalists would get royally skewered if they tried to explain away such a bad mistake by saying “I was writing on deadline.” Nevertheless, Denison has at least acknowledged his mistake, and that’s more than many other Baptist leaders do.

In connection with clergy sex abuse, the admission of mistakes is something you don’t see from very many leaders in Baptist life. Have you heard former Southern Baptist president Jack Graham admit to his mistakes in the handling of clergy molestation allegations at Prestonwood? Have you heard Rick Grant admit to his mistakes in the handling of clergy molestation allegations at First Baptist of Benton? Have you heard former Arkansas Baptist Convention president Greg Kirksey apologize for writing a letter in which he urged no prison time for an admitted minister-molester? Have you heard former California Southern Baptist Convention president Wayne Stockstill apologize for keeping quiet about molestation allegations against a church deacon? Have you heard former South Carolina Baptist Convention president Wendell Estep apologize for his miserably poor handling of clergy sex abuse allegations at his church? Have you heard former SBC president and current seminary president Paige Patterson apologize for calling clergy rape victims “evil-doers”? Have you heard SBC Executive Committee president Frank Page apologize for writing that those who speak out about clergy child molestation are “nothing more than opportunistic persons”?

Nope. Baptist leaders don’t have a good track record on apologizing for their mishandling of clergy sex abuse. They just tend to move on and hope it gets swept under the rug . . . which it usually does.

And that brings me back to Jim Denison. Apologies are important. Words are nice. But deeds are what’s needed.

In today’s column, Denison says this: "Anytime a school, church, or other organization learns that a child entrusted to its care has been harmed, it must take immediate, proactive steps."

Again, these are nice words, but I say to Jim Denison: "Go tell it to the Baptist General Convention of Texas. You're their 'theologian-in-residence.' It's your organization. Push them to take proactive steps and put words into deeds."

After all, the BGCT keeps a confidential file of ministers reported by churches for sexual abuse. It’s a rare scenario when a church reports a minister for sexual abuse, and yet even in this rare scenario -- when the church itself reports a minister to denominational leaders -- the BGCT doesn't warn parents in the pews about who those ministers are. The information simply sits in a file at headquarters in Dallas.

And the BGCT doesn't even have any system for receiving abuse reports from the victims themselves, which is something that is much needed.

How can the BGCT react proactively to a report that a child in an affiliated Texas Baptist church was abused when the BGCT doesn’t even have any system for receiving victims’ reports, for assessing such reports, or for responsibly acting on them? Try addressing that one, Jim Denison.

My own perpetrator -- i.e., the minister who molested and raped me as a kid -- had his name sitting there in a closed file at the BGCT even while he continued to work in children's ministry in Florida, and even as I tried desperately to get something done about it.

And what did the BGCT do? It sent out its own long-time attorney to "help" the church of my childhood in dealing with my report of abuse. How did he "help"? By threatening to sue me if I continued to talk about it.

Get busy, Jim Denison. Clean up your own organization. But that will take deeds, not mere words. As David Clohessy of SNAP says: "It's easy to say stuff, harder to do stuff."

Penn State: Baptist theologian puts ignorance on display

Jim Denison

“It would have been best for the alleged abuse victims at Penn State  . . . to go directly to those who wronged them.”

So says Jim Denison, whose job title is “theologian-in-residence” for the Baptist General Convention of Texas.

You might imagine that someone with a title as lofty as “theologian-in-residence” would be better educated. You would be wrong.

Denison’s statement reveals a dangerous ignorance about the dynamics of child sex abuse.

It is the sort of ignorance that Baptist clergy abuse survivors have encountered in case after case, as church and denominational leaders have blinded themselves to abuse reports, seeing only the facts that suit them, minimizing the reality of clergy child molestations, and citing Matthew 18 as support for their own keep-it-quiet do-nothingness.

Jim Denison also cites Matthew 18 to support his ignorant view of what abuse victims should do.

The destructive power of this style of ignorance is that it effectively uses Scripture to revictimize those who have already been greatly wounded – wounded by so-called “men of God,” who probably also cited Scripture even as they desecrated their young victims’ bodies and spirits.

Rather than seeking as a faith community to assure accountability for such dreadful wrongs, and rather than seeking to provide compassionate care for those who have been so terribly wounded, the typical “Matthew 18” response is one that puts an additional and near-impossible burden on the victims to “go directly to those who wronged them.”

It’s wrong.

But though it’s wrong, Denison’s style of ignorance is common in Baptistland.

It is a style of ignorance that helps to explain why Baptist leaders who keep quiet about clergy sex abuse don’t reap the same sort of consequence as what Penn State’s Joe Paterno reaped.

For example, the leadership of Dallas’ Prestonwood Baptist megachurch saw fit to allow a credibly accused minister-molester to simply move on to a new church, without reporting him to the police, without taking responsible action for the protection of kids, and without compassionate and competent care for the wounded. That minister was recently indicted on multiple child sex abuse charges in Mississippi. But Prestonwood’s senior pastor, Jack Graham, has faced no consequence similar to what Penn State’s Joe Paterno faced. He should.

As Denison states: “In October, Joe Paterno was the most revered coach in college football. In November, he is unemployed.”

But Jack Graham, a former Southern Baptist Convention president, is the revered senior pastor of one of the most prominent churches in the largest Protestant denomination in the land. Graham remains employed in that position even after conduct quite similar to what got Joe Paterno fired from Penn State.

Prestonwood Baptist Church is located in Texas, and Jim Denison is Texas Baptists’ “theologian-in-residence.” So why doesn’t Jim Denison address this scandal that is on his own turf and within his own faith community?

Why doesn’t Jim Denison publicly tell Baptist pastor Jack Graham what he should have done instead of publicly, and erroneously, telling the Penn State abuse victims what they should have done?

My best guess is that it’s because Denison knows he won’t offend any of the Baptist powers-that-be if he talks about Penn State. In effect, he’s just piling on. But if Denison were to talk about Prestonwood, he would surely step on some powerful Baptist toes. So he keeps quiet.

It’s plenty easy for a “theologian-in-residence” to spoon out Scripture as pabulum and to pontificate on what others should do  –  including others who were powerless child rape victims. But it’s a heckuva lot harder to speak out against those who hold power.

That’s something Denison might begin to understand if he were to actually listen to child rape victims instead of criticizing them.
_____________________

Update 11/23/11: Jim Denison has admitted he "made a mistake" with the quoted sentence. Nice, but not enough. Denison also says this: "Anytime a school, church, or other organization learns that a child entrusted to its care has been harmed, it must take immediate, proactive steps." Again, nice words, but I say to Jim Denison: "Go tell it to the Baptist General Convention of Texas. You're their 'theologian-in-residence.' It's your organization. Push them to take proactive steps and put words into deeds." After all, the BGCT, keeps a confidential file of ministers reported by churches, and yet even when a church reports a minister, the BGCT doesn't warn parents in the pews about who those ministers are. The information simply sits in a file. And the BGCT doesn't even have any system for receiving abuse reports from the victims themselves. My own perpetrator -- i.e., the minister who molested and raped me as a kid -- had his name sitting there in a closed file at the BGCT even while he continued to work in children's ministry in Florida, and even as I tried desperately to get something done about it. And what did the BGCT do? It sent out its own long-time attorney to "help" the church of my childhood in dealing with my report of abuse. How did he "help"? By threatening to sue me if I continued to talk about it. 

Get busy, Jim Denison. Clean up your own organization. That will take deeds, not mere words. As David Clohessy of SNAP says: "It's easy to say stuff, harder to do stuff."  

Related posts:
Penn State and Prestonwood: Consequences are necessary, 11/10/11
Jack Graham: Deceiver, believer, or in-betweener? 10/1/11  
Irish Catholics and Texas Baptists, 3/23/10

Related column:
Prestonwood saga shows clergy abuse database is overdue, ABP, 8/19/11

Penn State and Prestonwood: Consequences are necessary

Penn State has now fired football coach Joe Paterno because of his failure to respond appropriately in the face of child sex abuse allegations. Southern Baptist seminary president Al Mohler described this firing as a “necessary action.”

But if that’s what Mohler really believes – that Paterno’s firing was “necessary” – will Mohler also urge the firing of former Southern Baptist president Jack Graham from his leadership position at the Prestonwood Baptist megachurch in Dallas? If Paterno’s firing was “necessary,” shouldn’t Graham’s firing also be “necessary”?

Graham too failed to go to police with information about a person in high trust who was accused of child sex abuse. Instead, Graham allowed the accused staff minister to simply move on and thereby unleashed him into the broader denominational body, placing many more kids at risk.

Graham’s failure is all too common in Baptistland. We have seen this keep-it-quiet pattern in megachurches and mini-churches, in city churches and rural churches. It is a pattern that allows accused clergy child molesters to church hop with ease, and that places kids in the Southern Baptist Convention at greater risk.

Mohler talks about the lessons of the Penn State scandal and rightly points out that making a report to law enforcement should be the first step in confronting a suspicion of child sex abuse. But what happens when the first step fails? What happens when a church leader like Jack Graham fails to go to the police and a couple decades pass before someone speaks up again? By then, it is often too late for criminal prosecution.

Experts say that less than ten percent of child sex abuse allegations are criminally prosecuted. Part of the reason for the low rate of prosecution is precisely because far too many adults keep quiet about information that should be reported. And it is the very nature of the harm that the child-victim is typically silenced. By the time the victim grows up and becomes capable of speaking about it, the limitations period for criminal prosecution has typically passed.

Other major faith groups have denominational processes for assessing clergy abuse allegations that cannot be criminally prosecuted. Such processes at least allow for the possibility that a minister who is credibly accused of sexual abuse will not be able to remain in a position of trust. Moreover, they allow accusations to be heard by people who are outside the accused minister’s circle of trust and influence. But Southern Baptists do not have such processes. This is a huge safety gap.

Many Baptist clergy abuse survivors have tried in adulthood to report their perpetrators to denominational officials in local, state and national offices. Often, they start out with the assumption that, surely, denominational officials will want to take steps for the protection of others. Invariably, their assumption is rent asunder. The reality of what they encounter is a Baptistland in which no one will hear them. There is no system by which any denominational official will do diddly-squat to help a clergy abuse survivor in seeking to protect others or in seeking accountability for minister-molesters.

Mohler is right: reporting to law enforcement is essential. But child sex abuse is a massive and time-weighted problem, and the criminal justice system cannot handle the entirety of the task on its own. There must also be institutional systems for assuring that people in positions of high trust are held accountable. In this respect, Southern Baptists have failed abysmally. Southern Baptists have abdicated responsibility and betrayed the safety of children in refusing to implement the sort of basic accountability systems that are becoming the bare-bones standard of care in other faith groups.

Mohler seems to want to address this. “Every church and Christian institution needs a full set of policies, procedures, and accountability structures,” he says.

But where exactly are the “accountability structures” for Southern Baptists? If there is one thing the Prestonwood saga has shown us, it is that local churches cannot  –  cannot  –  responsibly address clergy abuse allegations against their own ministers. They lack the objectivity. Trained outsiders must be brought to the task.

The lessons of Penn State need heeding, and it is not enough for Baptist leaders like Al Mohler to simply talk about those lessons. Words must be put into deeds. Southern Baptists must actually implement effective accountability systems and they must begin to hold their own leaders accountable.

When Southern Baptist leaders such as Al Mohler begin to publicly address the failures of Southern Baptist leaders such as Jack Graham, then perhaps more people will begin to think that Southern Baptists take this problem seriously.

This too is a lesson from Penn State that Southern Baptists should heed. If an organization does not impose consequences for leaders who turn a blind eye, then blind-eyed behavior will occur more frequently and children will remain at greater risk.
_________________________

Related post: "Jack Graham: Deceiver, believer or in-betweener?"