Would a church let a pastor and his son cut off their own family? And would a church use its money to pay for the deal? A few months ago, I would have told you it was impossible.
I stand corrected. My former church signed that very contract.
In the settlement between the Brooks, the Prewitts and the First Baptist Church of Raytown, Mark Brooks avoids all financial responsibility for his daughter. He gives up parental rights, and Shauna drops claims against any party. The church uses its insurance to secure Mark and Paul’s easy abandonment. Granted, it took two parents and a half-dozen lawyers to reach such a convoluted compromise, but the most obvious result is that Mark Brooks walks away from his daughter.
This, of course, doesn’t change some things. For example, the settlement does not change our duty to forgive past wrongs. Mark Brooks used his position as minister to get sex. Is that forgivable? You bet. Paul Brooks used his position as minister to help Mark get a severance package and flee from the daughter. Is that forgivable? You bet. Many members of the church chose to ignore obvious evil. Is that forgivable? You bet.
But next week, Paul Brooks will offer moral advice, take a collection, and return home to a son who has not, in that week, seen his daughter. Who, in that week, has not offered a dime for his daughter’s benefit. Who has not, in that week, made any attempt to communicate with her. And, on Paul’s advice, and the church’s consent, the next week will be no different. Or any week after that.
The writer of Hebrews tells us that the church is supposed to encourage its members to do the right thing, because the Lord will judge His people’s actions. Heb. 10:25, 30. The settlement seems dangerously close to official church encouragement for the Pastor (and his son) to publicly and defiantly do the wrong thing. Will God continue to bless a church that adopts, approves, and pays for a leader’s abandonment of his God-ordained responsibility toward a child? I wouldn’t take those odds.
