The Bible NETWork ~ Impacting the World for Christ one post at a time!

Should a church require background checks on the congregation (or anyone that volunteers) that fulfill ministry needs for example teaching children or leading music ministry?

And by this does the separation of church and state, actually cross the barrier and absorb one another ( what I mean by this, is do we follow the morality of state powers or the church has its own authority in these matters?

I know we live in an age of uncertainty and anything possible can happen (we see this weekly if not daily a chain of events unfolding in church down USA main ST), but is this becoming a norm to check people out in church for duties in the church?

I like some input, not so much a poll, but peoples thoughts both laity & clergy

_________________
Kola,

Jeremiah 29:13 You will seek me and find me, when you seek me with all your heart.

It is my opinion that background checks be done on all ministerial staff including volunteers although the latter may not need as an extensive back ground check as paid staff. It strikes me that the issue of church vs. state leads directly into the same ideological conversations that has been such of big part of "theological" conversations in the Internet universe. The simple reason for background checks IMO is to assure the safety and security of those being served by a professional staff in all aspects of ministry....especially since so many examples of pastoral staff abuse exist across denominational boundaries...its the right thing to do I think. The long term end results of not doing such checks will be practitioner law suits against those in ministry that does not pay attention to well being of those it serves as seen in the recent lawsuits against certain Catholic Dioceses that has bankrupt at least one if I am recalling correctly.

I agree with Rene here.

If parents are trusting their precious children to the care of people while they are being ministered to in some way, then it is the responsibility of that ministry to assure that those caregivers are not dagerous predators.

I was in a Church a few years back where a group of boys were molested. (mostly inappropriate touching). The offender was a young father of kids who joined the church and then later volunteered for the nursery. Had the church run a simple background check they would have easily found him listed as a sex offender in the adjacent county. Another problem was that the rules for the care of children were in place but not really followed. It was not a pretty situation.

In our church, if you wish to work with the youth or children in any way you must submit to a basic background check and sign our documents which make clear the policies of the church which is meant to protect the children from those "alone" encounters while they are in our care.

IMO it is just wise practice and common sense.

BTW, for awhile we had a sex offender attend our church. I had a frank conversation with him about him being welcome and free to participate in our programs except for anything involving our youth. I simply told him that we wouldn't want him tempted beyond his ability to resist and of course we have a responsibility to protect the children and youth of the church. He completely understood and attended for about 6 months. I'm not sure why he does not attend now but I do know our children and youth were kept safe. That's good enough for me.

Blessings,
Randy

When I worked with kids at church a background check was run on me. That is exactly what should happen.

It is especially important for things like summer camp.

_________________
Cobra (the car, not the poisonous reptile)
all scripture is NRSV unless otherwise noted

In Australia it is mandatory for anyone who works with children, even to teach scripture in Schools.

But in this time, it would be foolish not to run a background check.

Randy, you church did the wise thing.

in Christ

Dinah

_________________
Forum Code of Conduct
Forum Statement of Beliefs

Thanks for the response. I agree whole heartly the "little ones" need the security and confidence in the people that put teachers, I think mostly in their way, to teach. I wonder though, do you'll (my southern twang) think it goes beyond that? What I mean is it possible that the same information albeit "a more thourgh investigation, i.e. finanicial, martial, personal medical information, ethicnicity, location etc... can be used in the church environ to know whos who really, that comes in a sits down every Sunday? I know what everyone is saying "trust in the Lord", surly that is so, but I wonder if the human element affects those decesions in such matters as mentioned above, for example a church rift inside, a division or choosing sides. Does this not violate an ethical approach within the church? It is one thing to do a sole background check for sex offenders, child molesters and quite another to look beyond that which not relavent to the church proper. Not to forget that perhaps the are divisions of Christianity, Orthodox & Catholism that do no such thing, with the latter as Rene mentioned we have seen problems, but with the former some of those guys hanging out in the desert well. ok I am pushing the silly button here. But really do they go thru such measures or is it just a western reality.
Really is too much information good or bad?

_________________
Kola,

Jeremiah 29:13 You will seek me and find me, when you seek me with all your heart.

Kola background checks doesn't guarantee that you don't already have multiple abusers (including sexual) in the congregation or will come to a congregation. What it does do is to help reduce the overall chance that such an abuser will have a chance to further victimize those in a local congregation. It is very easy to simply ignore a basic protection of those in the Church in favor of a abstract exegetical exercise in which hypothetical theological conclusions take precedence over harsh reality until someone is abused. At present the price of an abuse case toward a parishioner by someone on the pastoral staff is bigger than any predictable outcomes from abuse of background information by that same staff in a theoretical local congregation IMO. I don't think this is really about too much information on a person, rather it is having the right information to protect those who are in your (or a pastor's) charge in a local church.

Kola,

I'm not really sure what you're asking.

I agree with background checks on anyone who's in ministry to include volunteers.
I agree with a congregation asking for information to include even a credit check on some in salary ministry positions. If you were about to hire a pastor and found his credit history showed quite a few defaulted loans and a history of overextended credit do you think he might have some spiritual issues to deal with first? At the very least, he should be questioned.

I believe our doors should be open and welcoming to all who come. At the same time we should be able to protect our congregants in a reasonable manner and do our best to encourage a safe as well as accepting environment. I don't believe we should run a check on everybody. Neither do I think there should be a really extensive check on every minister or volunteer. For the ministers and volunteers I think it should be taken case by case and the thuroughness of the check reflect the extent of the ministry they do. When these checks are done we should cover them all with proper privacy etiquette and a strong dose of mercy and grace. Sometimes a pastor (or some other individual) will default on a loan because of an honest mistake. To do these things seeking "perfection" is not realistic. But to do due diligence seeking to protect the congregants both physically and spiritually is both realistic and necessary in today's world.

BTW, I read a report awhile back which the author (a prominant behavioral psychologist) noted a trend where the child sexual offenders were "drawn" to religious institutions. There seems to be a rise in the percentage of assaults in churches and church sponsored events. The theory is that they are targeting those places where people are more trusting and lax in the areas of security. I can't remember if it was published in a magazine or I came across it in a seminar. I'll try to figure out where I saw it.

Blessings,
Randy

Herein lays the problem proper privacy due the individual. Human tendency is to babble and the greatest task for anyone is to hold the tongue in cheek. At best I know of no one who can keep his or her thoughts/opinions to themselves with telling so and so and it causes more harm to the whole than to the individual.
I agree with every one's posting, a necessary and often difficult thing to do, but on the one hand the innate ability to keep things confidential is quite another, it is often that of a seasoned individual to keep things to his or her self.

Really the reason asking and I can see it creates obstacles for other conditions, is, the abuse or perhaps the power that one has over another in the house of God. Now I agree whole heartedly we are in a world were such precautions are adequate, but we seem to put more faith in a report than in to gods promise that all will be judged accordingly. This is perhaps the way it has been for almost 2,000 yrs. minus the past several decades. It really comes at no surprise things are not getting better.
By the way I see the power trip unfolding before eyes and unnecessarily to find the one thing vindicated in truth, only to find one obsolete outside of the purpose of the search, to count this unworthy and thus condemn. I find that to be an abuse of the privilege information. If this were the norm half the church would be gone in disbelief.
The only point I make is caution and trust. And that the two are difficult at best to marriage is only an understatement. Be as wise a serpents and harmless as doves, a difficult saying in a difficult world, but if God be for us, who can be against…
Thanks

_________________
Kola,

Jeremiah 29:13 You will seek me and find me, when you seek me with all your heart.

The answer is always yes to protect your church from liability, but it will not stop hidden offenders. New research shows that background checks, screenings, and the two adult rule will not stop an offender. In fact, 90% of all sex offenders have no criminal records and they can use their spotless background checks to gain positions working with kids.

Steve and I are co-founders of an expert-led ministry protecting kids from church sexual abuse. There is a reason for the many children being sexually abused at churches. There are 5-6 million non-convicted sex offenders in the USA and 600,000 registered sex offenders. The question congregations want to know is how many of these offenders attend church?

We invested thousands of hours evaluating church sex offenders and studying church sexual abuse research. There are more sex offenders attending churches than churches. One sixth of the non-convicted and ¼ of the registered sex offenders attend church. Offenders go undetected in churches because they are church members or staff who seem spiritual. Many offenders are desperate and miserable in their sin so churches attract offenders for their redemption and spiritual help.

Thank you for this Forum,

Greg Sporer,
Co-founder, Keeping Kids Safe Ministries

This conversation seems to me to be taking on a whole bunch of issues that is not directly related to the topic proper: a) the notion that blind faith in God to protect oneself and/or a local church seems nice but hasn't stopped abuse and b) background checks are not designed as a fail-safe system to stop abuse in any circumstance that I am aware of. On one hand it seems like we can go off into a sort of happy place where our minds are almost focused in heaven without regards to pragmatic issues of pastoral practice while the other leads into almost a morbid fearfulness that makes a pastoral staff paranoid. It seems to me that in practical terms background checks are simply part of the process of pastoral practice that helps to manage a local congregation on a day-to-day basis with the theological grounding in a notion like stewardship of God's flock. If privacy cannot be held by a pastoral staff or volunteer leaders in a local congregation then there maybe more problems in that congregation than just the possibility of sexual abuse of parishioners or their children.

Again, I agree completely with Rene here!

Blessings,
Randy

Ain't it the truth. The only background check anyone needs to worry about is at the bema seat of Christ
thanks to all good input I am done with the topic, thank you
peace and grace

_________________
Kola,

Jeremiah 29:13 You will seek me and find me, when you seek me with all your heart.

This can be moved to some other area but I thought perhaps sense the theme of checking people out in the church, might have went a long way we these folks. It will be almost 30 years since the jonestown inncedent happened. I thought the story was over but this article shed some light on a church and people not checking each other out,

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081115/ap_on_re_us/30_years_after_jonestown/print;_ylt=AqRHfPN1.kSrRb4Co4xxoNXLLJ94

_________________
Kola,

Jeremiah 29:13 You will seek me and find me, when you seek me with all your heart.

it is a good idea to have background checks on people if they are applying for positions with children or vulnerable adults, here in the uk we have these checks but this doesnt mean things can still happen.
never leave an adult on his or her own with a child never allow an adult to take a child to the toilet keep the adult in full view at all times if they have to take a child to the toilet.
never touch a child even in innocence this may be innocent but you never know.
these are rough ideas that your leadership team and church council need to discuss.