First, a disclaimer. I am not going to excuse what Josh Duggar did when he was a 14. He engaged in sexual conduct that, even if consensual, was wrong by any Biblical standard. Moreover, he violated the bodies of multiple people, including at least four of his sisters. Actions have consequences, and what he did was a very big deal. While he faced the music and paid his debt to society, he has learned the same lesson that King David learned: sexual sin is the gift that keeps on giving. We would all do well to remember the “my sin is ever before me” clause in Psalm 51.
Having said that, knowing only what we know, would it be reasonable to classify Josh Dugger as a threat to society? Not from what we know.
It would be fair, in his circle of accountability, to question him significantly about who he is today. Has he cheated on his wife? Does he use pornography? What changed in his conduct after his scrapes at age 14? Has he learned to control his passions in a way befitting a Christian gentleman?
About ten years ago, I worked in an Awana chapter at a very large church in Louisville. Before I was cleared to work in Awana, I was subjected to a substantial questionnaire about a plethora of moral, ethical, theological issues, as well as sexual conduct past and present. (On top of that, they ran a background check on me.) Even in that interrogatory they delineated between sexual experience prior to age 15 and after.
Fact is, teenagers–including teenage girls–are known to experiment with themselves (and others) at that stage in their lives.
No, there is no defending that conduct.
Yes, parents need to communicate with their kids from an early age, admonishing them succinctly–both the what and the why–about respecting other peoples’ bodies. It is best to communicate such matters before the hormones of adolescence go into full afterburner. Teaching them that they must learn to master their passions–while pointing out that there are some places you must never, ever go–is a parental imperative.
Still, what do we do about Josh Duggar?
First of all, if we rake him over the coals, then we must do the same to roughly half the males in his age cohort. Most guys I know have been on the giving–or receiving end–of someone else’s sexual experimentation. From what I know of the ladies, there are more dark secrets among them–and yes, they have their share of both victims and culprits, too–than anyone wants to admit.
I guess we need to resolve what constitutes a sexual predator.
Today, we are tagging, as a felony sex offender, a 16-year-old boy who has otherwise consensual sex with his 14-year-old girlfriend. Yes, I understand the legal rationale around “consent”, but let’s be honest here: however wrong the boy is–and he is wrong–tagging him as a felon is excessive.
But that’s not the case with Josh Duggar: what Duggar did at age 14 is very problematic in that he was touching his sisters inappropriately. If he were ten years old, that would have been one thing, but he was 14. By that point, he should have known better. That he had not learned proper boundaries at that point is problematic.
At the same time, he faced the music and had his “come to Jesus” moment with appropriate authorities. It is my hope that he learned his valuable lessons and has, as far as it depends on him, made amends with those whom he harmed.
Conservatives would be quick to point out that the leak of this story came from elements that appear to be aimed at smearing the Family Research Council–which has been a stalwart defender of historical marriage, opposing its redefinition–and that, had Duggar not been on staff at the FRC that this story would never have seen the light of day. There is probably some truth to that argument.
Even then, the lesson is poignant here: as far as this earth is concerned, the effect of sexual sin never really goes away.
This is not to shame anyone, as most of us–even those who were virgins on their wedding nights–have some baggage in that department. Still, even as God forgives our sins and removes them “as far as the east is from the west”, the baggage remains.
I hope the Josh Duggar fracas is a teachable moment in Christian households.
which is why trust within christian communities is so difficult and often elusive.
That’s the thing. You have two camps: one camp wants to burn Duggar at the stake, and the other camp wants to give Duggar a pass.
Neither camp is correct here.
I don’t think you can just dismiss this as a case of a 14-year-old letting adolescent hormones and curiosity run wild. What he did was and is a very big honkin’ deal.
Still, I’ll credit the Duggars where credit is due: they did not handle this perfectly, but they did better than most families–secular or Christian–would have done. And Josh, to his credit, has tried to do right.
i absolutely agree with you.
sexual sin carries consequences no other sin does. “While he faced the music and paid his debt to society, he has learned the same lesson that King David learned: sexual sin is the gift that keeps on giving. We would all do well to remember the “my sin is ever before me” clause in Psalm 51.”
i would guess those who want to give a free pass have never been sexually abused in any form … or are perps themselves … or don’t want any of their own sins made public (who does?!). those who want to burn at the stake have just had it with this stuff coming up over and over again.
we (general) want someone we can look up to … a way of life that ‘works’ … a way we can raise our kids (whether we choose it or not) that guarantees this stuff doesn’t happen.
i think it’s telling that even a secular network draws the line with child/under-age sexual abuse. i remember my therapist telling me that even convicts have some set of morals and values and draw lines.
this raises too many questions on so many levels … and regardless of the answers, trust is gone.
where does a 14 yo learn this from? what made him think his siblings were acceptable marks? most kids who sexually abuse other kids have themselves been sexually abused … was he? did his wife know before they married?
and now … his poor kids. it’s not like this can be kept from them … info is too public.
no bueno from any angle.
i think it will be interesting if any preachers address this from the pulpit and how.
There’s at least one large church in Texas which needs to clean up its own act before it even thinks about addressing the Josh Duggar situation.
http://thewartburgwatch.com/2015/05/21/the-village-church-child-pornography-and-a-hero-makes-a-statement/
Matt Chandler has now proven himself to be a wolf in sheep’s clothing.
Did I miss anything? I saw nothing in the account about anyone reporting Jordan to authorities, as his use of child porn violated any number of federal laws.
The missionary agency reported Jordan Root’s conduct to the authorities; they also terminated his employment. The Village Church (TVC) placed restrictions on his access to children upon his return from the mission field.
One of the most outrageous aspects of this case is that while Jordan Root is under restriction and pastoral care, he is not under formal church discipline. Meanwhile, his ex-wife is under discipline for seeking an annulment without notifying the elders and resigning her membership, apparently in violation of TVC’s membership covenant.
In Charles Dickens’ novel Oliver Twist, Mr. Bumble said “If the law supposes that, the law is a ass – a idiot.” The same can easily be said for TVC’s membership covenant.
That is what pissed me off. I realize that divorce is a messy issue where there are hard Biblical imperatives that cause all kinds of debate.
For the record: I would support her seeking a divorce. If infidelity is an acceptable reason for divorce–and there is a strong Biblical case on that–then a spouse seeking sexual thrills from child porn would seem to qualify by any reasonable standard.
Why TVC places her under discipline for this is unconscionable.
Why TVC has NOT put HIM under discipline is beyond reprehensible.
And yes, this is on Matt Chandler.
(1) HE’s the captain of that ship;
(2) This happened on HIS watch;
(3) HE has fostered a church culture that has embraced what Wartburg folks call the “Hotel California” membership model–you can check out, but you can never leave;
(4) HE has yet to take action to right the ship.
In my book, Matt Chandler is every bit as bad as Mark Driscoll and C.J. Mahaney.
In contrast, at MrsLarijani’s former church, one of the men–who had a longstanding issue with porn–started fondling his older daughter.
When he confessed the matter to the pastor, the pastor told him, “You have two choices. You can call the cops right now and turn yourself in, or I am going to start excommunication proceedings right now.”
(Excommunication would also have resulted in authorities being notified.)
The man turned himself in, and ended up serving time in prison. He would tell you that it is what saved his butt.
The wife–and much of the church at the time–OTOH, was/is pissed at the pastor for bringing the authorities into this. They wanted it handled “in-house”.
There was actually a split, and many of those who left were the folks who opposed the pastor on that matter (in addition to other things.)
I say good riddance.
”In contrast, at MrsLarijani’s former church, one of the men–who had a longstanding issue with porn–started fondling his older daughter.”
Do you think that men who have a life-long issue with porn may be too damaged to have a family?
To Chandler’s credit, they seem to have noticed the error of their ways and have backtracked, even apologizing to Karen Hinkley.
And they seem to have noticed the root problem: counseling turned into control.
wow.
one cannot ask for more than that. even pastoral leadership is not above depravity … but when they are able to ask for forgiveness, recognize their sin, and repent … priceless. truly priceless.
i have hope.
This is not something you typically see in large churches. Hopefully, this will set a standard for Acts 29 and other quasi-Calvinist “covenantal-membership” churches and networks.
9Marks and SGM need to be taking notes here.
it’s rare, i think, anywhere.
i want to visit with him to know if he’s truly sincere or if he’s just saving face. i hope he’s truly sincere.
This can go either way. Perhaps he was trying to keep TVC from detonating the way that SGM and Mars Hill have.
Either that, or maybe he took a step back and asked the critical question, “Why are we getting our panties in a twist over a wife who leaves her child porn-perusing husband???”
It could also be that others in his circle called him to let him know that he is stepping in it.
We’ll see…
*dropped head in hands in exasperated frustration and disgust*
*heartbroken*
*again*
*another one*
Singleman – i can only speak from my own personal experience … but once our divorce was filed, my girls and i became outcasts in church – even though they knew what he did … even though they knew i’d been through extensive counseling.
he moved to another location, changed churches, and was adored in his church.
his parents, retired missionaries, still blame me. his brother, a former pastor, still blames me.
i have been longing lately to get back into church, and then i hear these things and wonder how i can trust. my sped daughter is so trusting; i must be so careful.
“The wife–and much of the church at the time–OTOH, was/is pissed at the pastor for bringing the authorities into this. They wanted it handled “in-house”.
There was actually a split, and many of those who left were the folks who opposed the pastor on that matter (in addition to other things.)”
this is what continuously shocks me … Christians who do not stand up for the weak, for those who cannot defend or protect themselves. makes me wanna SCREAM!!!
so … what are they protecting? how many more pervs and perps are there hiding out in the christian community?
when i was going through my sexual abuse recovery group course, i talked to a woman i knew casually. in a weak moment she shared an isolated incident that happened to her when she was younger. though she wasn’t ready to deal with it, she expressed how angry she was that one incident would affect her whole entire life.
i guess the church thinks one little incident is okay. people will ‘grow up’ and ‘get over it.’ but we don’t.
The problem is, when these kinds of things happen, it’s never really “one little incident.”
no, i’m sure she was not the perps first … but it was her own personal ‘one little incident’ in her life … which sculpted and molded her in ways that she could not have imagined.
In the case of Josh Duggar, it appears that they addressed his issues early enough in his life that they could nip the problems in the bud.
Then again, time will tell.
Still, by the time it becomes a visible problem, it’s never “one little incident”. And left unaddressed, that will grow into the mother of all disasters.
A church whose leadership takes a soft approach on this is venturing into “better a millstone…” territory.
On second thought, maybe the Duggars have a real problem, and Josh may be far from the worst offender.
And now they are crucifying the whole religion of Christianity for its teachings:
http://mic.com/articles/119098/inside-the-christian-cult-that-told-the-duggars-to-blame-their-daughters-for-their-abuse
@Amir
Some guy had a take on this:
http://academywatch.blogspot.com.au/2015/05/into-meat-grinder.html
Interested in your opinion.
I wondered the same thing myself: if this was a matter that occurred when Josh was 14, these kinds of things are supposed to remain sealed. Whoever leaked this did so illegally.
At the same time, illegally or not, it does reveal some serious problems in the Duggar family, particularly Jim Bob Duggar.
On Facebook, I did point out the double-standard in this: the visceral reaction against the Duggars, contrasted with the free pass that Lena Dunham has received.
While I agree with the author that Josh Duggar’s offenses–which are serious–do not necessarily brand him a pedophile (ditto for Dunham), the difference is this: Dunham hasn’t exactly been apologetic about her experimentation with her sister, whereas Josh has expressed contrition and acted like a grownup.
My real issue here is more with Jim Bob Duggar than with Josh Duggar.
What’s the problem with Jim bob?
The problem with Jim Bob? Well
(1) He was pursing the television show, and political office, all while he had this scandal going on under his roof.
(2) He’s in (proverbial) bed with Bill Gothard, Quiverfull, and Michael and Debi Pearl.
In summation, he’s not promoting Christianity, but rather a profoundly disturbing appearance of Christianity.
Perhaps the coming persecution will put an end to such perversions of the faith
Jay –
you asked: “Do you think that men who have a life-long issue with porn may be too damaged to have a family?”
my first husband was a sex addict. (was … because he is now deceased, although his death happened quite a few years following our divorce.) i spent 2.5 years in intensive therapy concurrent with support groups, one of which was a sexual abuse recovery group thanks to what my dad did to me. my counselor was well experienced in dealing with these issues biblically. i learned many, many things which i never needed to know (and spent quite a bit of time looking at the carpet and walls rather than him – quite frankly, a lot of that stuff is just embarrassing.)
first, i totally believe that with God anything is possible. yet, since we are not puppets being controlled by Him, we must face our humanity.
sex addiction has been said to be the most difficult addiction to overcome. having had a front-row seat to it for many years, i believe it to be true. i do not think my first husband wanted to be addicted to porn/sex. i firmly believe he wanted to overcome it. however, what it would have taken to overcome such an addiction was so severe he could not do it, imho (obviously, this is an extremely simplistic answer, and i won’t go into the ‘why’s’ for this statement).
i have heard of men who have been able to overcome such an addiction … but, and this totally breaks my heart, they are very, very few.
the Recovery one must go through is so extreme and extensive and life-gut-wrenching … and then to continuously maintain that recovery is almost equally so, that the dedication it takes weeds out many.
porn/sex addiction is a progressive addiction if allowed to continue. i have been told, though, that there are ‘levels’ that, once reached, are extremely difficult to return from. the first one being the ‘flesh.’ once it goes from pictures/video to engaging with an actual person, flesh, that is an extremely difficult place to return from. being an addiction, it continues to take more and more and more to satisfy the addict.
btw – this is for both men and women. i have female friends who were sexually abused by adult females when they were under-age.
Amir can address specific check-points to expect one to have mastered before considered a candidate for becoming a family man/woman – his brain works better that way than mine.
how deep is the issue?
how old is the man … life-long for a 23 year old is different than a 43 year old.
what steps has he taken?
accountability?
relationship with God?
willingly exercise self-discipline?
how are triggers dealt with?
also … as with any addiction, addicts have addiction cycles. what does their addiction cycle look like?
”porn/sex addiction is a progressive addiction if allowed to continue. i have been told, though, that there are ‘levels’ that, once reached, are extremely difficult to return from. the first one being the ‘flesh.’ once it goes from pictures/video to engaging with an actual person, flesh, that is an extremely difficult place to return from. being an addiction, it continues to take more and more and more to satisfy the addict.”
Maybe in the proper context of marriage this was meant to ensue that the man is able to cleave to his wife ensuing this one flesh union of marriage.
It is through sin that this powerful gift from God is perverted by modern pornography
No question about it. Sin corrupts everything, and takes that which God made good–including marital sex–and perverts it beyond all recognition
absolutely.
i also learned that sex addicts will often marry to try to ‘cure’ their addiction … when they discover (too late) that marriage does not cure their addiction, it (usually) turns them into very angry and destructive people … continuously trying to find a ‘cure’ in the wrong places.
contrast that with one who marries to love and cherish and desire to become one with their spouse not just physically but also mentally, emotionally, and spiritually.
the difference is stark.
I would second what Ame said about “levels”. Porn is a very big tent and includes a whole plethora of media. It can be anything from the Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Edition and many romance novels to pornographic robots to child porn. The acts portrayed can include anything from normal intercourse to the most perverted, demented acts imaginable.
Back in the day, there was always someone who snuck his father’s Playboy into school. Sadly, Playboy is very mild compared to what is mainstream today.
At what point does porn involvement make someone unmarriageable? I don’t know the answer to that.
On one hand, if we said that any porn use is a disqualifier, then almost every man born after 1960 would be screwed.
OTOH, I think we could all agree that a man (or woman) who uses child porn is probably well over that line.
Not sure where that threshold is, but I’d say there is probably a point of no return out there somewhere.
a sex addict lives in a parallel fantasy world to the real world, and the two do not ever intersect. they try to meld the two, but those two worlds can never come together … one is real; one is not.
my now-husband and i will smile sometimes as we remember first being introduced online. one of the very first questions i asked him was about his involvement with porn. he says he was stunned at my directness but also found it refreshing. he answered honestly. i didn’t assume a man had no exposure to porn … i assumed he did … and i wanted to know what that was and how it affected him.
the difference btw his response and my first husband was night and day. my first husband kept saying (after i discovered his addiction many years into our marriage), “It’s no big deal; I only did it once.” (he minimalized everything he did and never gave the whole truth). my now-husband said, “Yeah, I looked at ____, but it was wrong.” even before he became a christian as an adult, he knew that was wrong.
Michael Reagan, eldest son of former President Ronald Reagan and a child sex abuse survivor, had plenty to say about Josh Duggar and Mike Huckabee in his column a few days ago. Unlike his younger half-brother, Michael Reagan’s conservative credentials can’t be disputed. I hope the rest of the 2016 GOP presidential field took notice.
http://www.albanyherald.com/news/2015/may/28/conservative-christians-miscount/
excellent.
I would second what Reagan said here. From what has come down, it seems that Josh is the only one acting like a Christian grownup in this matter.
Meanwhile, a lot of folks are flocking to the defense of Jim Bob and calling Josh Duggar’s offenses “mistakes”.
Reagan is correct: Josh’s offenses aren’t “mistakes”, and are in fact a very serious matter.
OTOH, they do present a dilemma, given that Josh was 14 at the time. It’s not nearly as cut and dry as the case of an adult molester. At the same time, you can’t just sweep it under the rug as a set of “mistakes”.
”It’s not nearly as cut and dry as the case of an adult molester. At the same time, you can’t just sweep it under the rug as a set of “mistakes”.”
I think there is this temptation to circle the wagons especially when there is a witchhunt ongoing especially with the now prepared grounds that Biblical Christianity(Which they call fundamentalism) enables child molestation because of the nature of its family structure.
But that misses the nuance of the actual situation.
Yep. And in fact one’s kids are far safer in a Christian home than they are in a public school.