[Calgaryborn]

Originally Posted by photon

I'm not clear, was the the guy the actual abuser of the abused? Or the people had been abused by someone else and just felt because this guy was also a pedophile that somehow that threatened them?

He abused his stepdaughter while a member of the church. His stepdaughter told her mother about it when she was about twenty and living out of the house. The fellow was promptly kicked out of their home. Both him and his wife continued to attend church albeit separately. The matter was brought before the church in a meeting with him seeking forgiveness from the church. He was forgiven by mostly everybody there but, made to understand that trust had been broken and would take time to mend. His wife said she could never forgive him. She was asked if she could cope with him attending the same services. She said she could. Before this was public knowledge he had been instructed to attend only evening services so she wouldn't have to see him in the morning services. He also said he was in counseling with the Pastor and would continue. This situation continued for about 8 months. That's where I got a first hand view of the difficulty of such a situation for those who had suffered abuse. No one left over it but, you could see that they didn't feel comfortable in a place that had always been comfortable for them. I'm sure some stayed only because of their desire to support his ex wife in this difficult situation. After about 8 months the Pastor brought him before the church again. During counseling it was revealed that he recognized he had sinned by committing adultery. But he doesn't see himself as a pedophile. He believes the affair was mutually consented to even though the girl was only 13. He also maintains that she was 15 when the affair started. We then voted to "cast him out" of the church. It means he isn't permitted to attend any services and the church membership shouldn't maintain any contact with him unless it is counseling leading towards repentance.

Originally Posted by photon

You're saying this guy shouldn't be allowed to go to church at all? What if he's in church to try and get help, isn't church where he should be going?

The censorship is to try to help him. He needs to understand the seriousness of his sin. Churches are not mandated to punish sinners. Punishment is the responsibility of the state and of course God.

The reason I brought up the church incident was because through it I seen first hand the pain this fellow's presence brought to those who were at one time abused. In retrospect I can see validity in having just asked him to go. This would have caused him the pain rather than these women.

Originally Posted by photon

What if it's not a pedophile, but a rapist who served his time and is out now?

See you use a scenario where a fellow has hypothetically paid his debt and then you go on to say you don't believe in punishment:

Originally Posted by photon

I'm not a big proponent of punishment, it doesn't really accomplish anything, I could see where it is a deterrent and that works for things like running a red light or drinking and driving, but for the really extreme stuff it doesn't really mean anything.. how many pedophiles are there that sit in their basement and say "man, if only it wasn't illegal, oh well, I guess I'll play some golf." or how many sociopaths think "gee, that guy got a lot of prison time, maybe I shouldn't kill and eat this person"? In those cases punishment doesn't mean anything, and until we can actually know how to fix those people no solution is satisfying.

The whole idea of the biblical concept of an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, a life for a life was that one had to pay for their crimes. This command predates Moses and the law and you won't find a lot of eyes being plucked out or teeth being knocked in because of it. The principle God introduced was that a crime should be punished and that punishment should equal the seriousness of the crime. That was the basis of most law until modern times and unfortunately our government has moved away from it. Now there has to be a proven deterrence or a therapeutic value to punish. This does not facilitate justice.

The idea of someone paying their debt to society; doing their time; taking their lumps; meeting justice; making it right, is still a value most Canadians hold. It is a good value.

When someone escapes justice in our failing legal system he has in fact not paid his debt. In that scenario I won't take justice into my own hands but, I also won't pretend he is debt free and welcome him back into my community.