<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: How do we treat a sinner?	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://www.thduggie.com/thduggies_blog/2009/how-do-we-treat-a-sinner/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.thduggie.com/thduggies_blog/2009/how-do-we-treat-a-sinner</link>
	<description>thoughts and family activities in an industrial suburb</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 07 Sep 2009 05:03:20 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.4.7</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: thduggie		</title>
		<link>https://www.thduggie.com/thduggies_blog/2009/how-do-we-treat-a-sinner#comment-8441</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[thduggie]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Sep 2009 05:03:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.morbidcornflakes.ch/thduggies_blog/?p=188#comment-8441</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[It does raise the question if the professional pastorate is a good idea.  The advantage, of course, is that such a pastor is much better trained than your average layperson, but I think it allows for laziness on our part, outsourcing, if you will, the job of understanding the Bible and caring for church members to the pro.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It does raise the question if the professional pastorate is a good idea.  The advantage, of course, is that such a pastor is much better trained than your average layperson, but I think it allows for laziness on our part, outsourcing, if you will, the job of understanding the Bible and caring for church members to the pro.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: SursumCorda		</title>
		<link>https://www.thduggie.com/thduggies_blog/2009/how-do-we-treat-a-sinner#comment-8433</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[SursumCorda]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 06 Sep 2009 21:29:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.morbidcornflakes.ch/thduggies_blog/?p=188#comment-8433</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Oh, such good questions!  Here are some random thoughts in response, though this post deserves better, but I know from experience that if I wait to do it right it will be lost in my very long back-blog.  [Update:  and, in fact, &lt;i&gt;was&lt;/i&gt; lost in the backblog for nearly a month.]

Since I don&#039;t know what/whom you are talking about, I can comment more generally.  Pastors and other public figures do run a higher risk than normal of sins of power, and I include sexual sin among those.  They are in a position to hear confidences -- which intimacy is conducive to further intimacy -- and we so often put them on pedestals, even those who don&#039;t want to be.  I used to think Billy Graham was excessively careful with his rule about never meeting alone with a woman, thus keeping himself safe both from temptation and from false accusation.  But in light of other events, I now think he was wise.  Only I can also now see that even this precaution isn&#039;t sufficient:  perhaps he should have not met men one-on-one, either.  And maybe the limitation should not be just for pastors.

Which, of course, compounds the problem enormously.  What a heavy price to pay for our sexual proclivities!  To limit one&#039;s sexual activities to one&#039;s lawfully married spouse is one thing, but all intimacy?  Don&#039;t we need &quot;best friends&quot; and &quot;confessors&quot; and more close relationships than one?  Can&#039;t same-sex friends understand and help us in ways our spouse can&#039;t?  I believe we so, but agree that it is probably the better part of valor to keep these relationships as much in the sunlight as possible, perhaps in small groups rather than one-on-one.

Which makes the kind of loving confrontation and support you describe even harder to ask for:  to make oneself vulnerable to one person is hard enough, but to a group?  I guess it works for Alcoholics Anonymous, though.  Perhaps in a group one is less likely to pull the wool over everyone&#039;s eyes, too.

As you said, it is especially hard on pastors.  Not only are they especially vulnerable to temptation, but usually they have no pastor themselves.  To whom can they turn?  In a hierarchical church the bishop is the pastor&#039;s pastor -- but since he is also his boss, that is a bit of a problem.  More than a bit.  This is actually a concern not only for pastors but for anyone who works for a church:  when your confessor is your boss, one or more likely both of the relationships is in jeopardy.

No answers, but I appreciate your questions.  And I confess I&#039;m glad you&#039;re not a pastor -- it&#039;s not easy being a pastor&#039;s wife, I hear.  Go ahead and preach, though; I understand you do it rather well.  (As does your sister.  Oops, maybe I shouldn&#039;t have painted the pastor&#039;s lot as so problematic....)]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Oh, such good questions!  Here are some random thoughts in response, though this post deserves better, but I know from experience that if I wait to do it right it will be lost in my very long back-blog.  [Update:  and, in fact, <i>was</i> lost in the backblog for nearly a month.]</p>
<p>Since I don&#8217;t know what/whom you are talking about, I can comment more generally.  Pastors and other public figures do run a higher risk than normal of sins of power, and I include sexual sin among those.  They are in a position to hear confidences &#8212; which intimacy is conducive to further intimacy &#8212; and we so often put them on pedestals, even those who don&#8217;t want to be.  I used to think Billy Graham was excessively careful with his rule about never meeting alone with a woman, thus keeping himself safe both from temptation and from false accusation.  But in light of other events, I now think he was wise.  Only I can also now see that even this precaution isn&#8217;t sufficient:  perhaps he should have not met men one-on-one, either.  And maybe the limitation should not be just for pastors.</p>
<p>Which, of course, compounds the problem enormously.  What a heavy price to pay for our sexual proclivities!  To limit one&#8217;s sexual activities to one&#8217;s lawfully married spouse is one thing, but all intimacy?  Don&#8217;t we need &#8220;best friends&#8221; and &#8220;confessors&#8221; and more close relationships than one?  Can&#8217;t same-sex friends understand and help us in ways our spouse can&#8217;t?  I believe we so, but agree that it is probably the better part of valor to keep these relationships as much in the sunlight as possible, perhaps in small groups rather than one-on-one.</p>
<p>Which makes the kind of loving confrontation and support you describe even harder to ask for:  to make oneself vulnerable to one person is hard enough, but to a group?  I guess it works for Alcoholics Anonymous, though.  Perhaps in a group one is less likely to pull the wool over everyone&#8217;s eyes, too.</p>
<p>As you said, it is especially hard on pastors.  Not only are they especially vulnerable to temptation, but usually they have no pastor themselves.  To whom can they turn?  In a hierarchical church the bishop is the pastor&#8217;s pastor &#8212; but since he is also his boss, that is a bit of a problem.  More than a bit.  This is actually a concern not only for pastors but for anyone who works for a church:  when your confessor is your boss, one or more likely both of the relationships is in jeopardy.</p>
<p>No answers, but I appreciate your questions.  And I confess I&#8217;m glad you&#8217;re not a pastor &#8212; it&#8217;s not easy being a pastor&#8217;s wife, I hear.  Go ahead and preach, though; I understand you do it rather well.  (As does your sister.  Oops, maybe I shouldn&#8217;t have painted the pastor&#8217;s lot as so problematic&#8230;.)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
