Pregnancy costs teacher her job. How would a Pastor be treated?

[Neil D]

Ah, if real life were as easy [!] as this...

Quote:

---

Susan has been a local church treasurer for many years. A Conference audit determines that Susan has been embezzeling church funds for the past ten years. Where does grace fit in:

---

Gregory,

You show a penchant for the punitive model that Ed has described.

Quote:

---

My responses:

a) No, [snip]

Absolutely not. [snip]

c) No. See above, [snip]

---

If Susan were to repent, say she's sorry, and was willing to pay it back, would you be willing to restore to her the trust she once had?

Biblically speaking, the OT allows for restoration/rehabilitation by payment plus [i believe in this case] 1/5 additional sum. The goal of restoration is to restore the trust between the parties invovled. Restoration involves repentance, pentance and payback.

Susan would have to start by saying that she is sorry, and she would have to be willing to pay back the money that she stole. And there are consequences that need to happen when a trust is violated. Temporary removal from her position is a good one. Surely during her probation period, she needs to NOT be in that position. But she does have expertise in accounting and the church will lose her expertise if she were sacked. So, give her a different job that is not using the accounting skills, say secretary to the Treasurer. Then give her time to build up her trustworthyness with other, say 24 months. During this time, she is on probation. She has no say in what goes where, and she does what she is told to do...At the end of that period, if things go well, she can have the Treasure's job back, or another accounting position that utilizes her full skills. This is one idea of restoration. Maybe you can think of another way to restore trust among her peers.

So, if Susan were to have embesseled say 25,000 over a ten year period, [realistically, large sums of money withdrawn tend to alert others to a problem/discrepancy, so logically, it should be small amounts over time that was taken], then Susan could repay this amount pluss the 1/5 more, ie 5000 + 25000= $30000 payback over time.

Quote:

---

Does grace mean that:

a) The civil authorities are not notified for prosecution?

---

I agree that civil authorities should be notified. I also agree that during the time that authorities determine as to whether a crime has been committed, is a time for the church, in this case, to determine if the restoration prinicples should be instituted.

Quote:

---

Does grace mean that Susan is retained as treasurer?

---

Again, the church has a valuable employee who has valuabble experience in accounting. If the church is a model for mercy, then restoration should be an option that the church should explore. Does this mean that during the 'restoration of trust' period, Susan should be tempted to use her accounting skills to embezzel some more? I agree, that no , she should not be placed in that position.

Quote:

---

c) Does grace mean that after she get out of prison, if she goes, that she is given a job as a treasurer?

---

I think that the church should make every attempt to get Susan to opt for the 'restoration of trust' instead of prison. If she chooses prison, then I think she has choosen the path that she desires to take and the church is obsolved of any consequence...

[Bravus]

I guess the other point here is that church treasurer in a local congregation is often a voluntary position, and not always one that requires a high level of education. In the case of a teacher or pastor who is branded as no longer suitable to hold their role in any place, ever as a result of sin, the penalty also includes the loss of tens of thousands of dollars and several years involved in the initial training for that career, and possibly in retraining for a new one. As has been noted here, that's appropriate for a teacher who molests or otherwise abuses a student, but for another offence, whether it be stealing, lying or sex in the worng context, I believe there needs to definitely be repentance and consequences, but that the consequence of losing a job for life is disproportionate to the 'crime'.

[cricket]

Absolutely. Being victimized by rape it not a sin. I thought we were talking about morally wrong relationships. I'm sorry if I misunderstood this topic of conversation.

My apologies.

I will stand in my opinion, however, that a sexually immoral relationship requires active participation from two parties.

Assuming these parties are of average or above-average intellect, then they are equally guilty of the sin of sexual immorality.

[there buster]

General points, not just for Bravus

1) I have not described any model, let alone a punitive one. I have simply addressed specific cases.

The workshops that I have done on this issue come under the title "Filling Your Cup," and I would describe as the nurturing model. This material has been presented and tested on three continents. It is not at all "punitive." The problem is that most people take one extreme or the other, when both are essential. There is no nurture without firm boundaries.

As C. S. Lewis wrote, "Mercy, when separated from justice, grows unmerciful."

2) No one should think I'm advocating that the school teacher in Berrien Springs should lose her teaching job for life. That would be absurd, and anyone who read that into my position is suffering a severe case of hardening of the categories.

If I were the principal there, I could even see her returning to teach at the same school, under certain circumstances.What happens for the rest of her life was not the problem I addressed. I only spoke to her current situation.