Do we give sexual abuse more attention than other forms of misconduct, such as embezzlement?
That might be true, but embezzlement of church funds is a very close second. I think it is because sexual misconduct is salacious, sensational, and touches lives in a very dramatic way. It touches not only spouses and children, but the extended family and community as well.

Then, too, you don't stand before a church full of people and promise never to embezzle, but you do make public promise to fidelity. The very nature of the institution of marriage guarantees that there will be more of a splash when missteps occur in this regard.

Will these problems ever go away?
I do not think so. The reason is these are human beings involved in ministry. We do not have a perfect product here. Again, referencing Bible days, there was Lot, who got drunk and slept with his own flesh and blood; Hophni and Phineas, the promiscuous sons of Eli; David, the adulterer/murderer, etc.

The lust of the flesh like the other two temptations (the lust of the eye and the pride of life) do not vanish upon one's taking clergy vows. None of one's internal bodily appetites are excised by this act. The Lord doesn't castrate clergy psychologically or physically-one is not "eunuchanized," if I may coin a word.

Then again the church must create an atmosphere for ministry that will provide the best possible protection against inducements to fall. That should include programs of education and encouragement to adequate physical exercise. Most of the time when a moral fall occurs, it happens when one is tired or overworked, and has not kept a good balance between sedentary and physical activity. The church should go the extra mile in nurturing its clergy, e.g., encouraging the maintaining of a healthy mind and body, and of course a wholesome relationship with one's spouse if married.

Why do some organizations seem to protect the perpetrators of sexual abuse at the expense of the victims?
I think it is an attempt to avoid scandal and of course to protect the parties involved.

But isn't it the cover-up that usually creates a larger scandal and if so, what effect does this have on the laity?
Well, I might differ with you there. I think that while the unveiling going on in the Catholic Church is producing a seismic reaction in the public, had these cases been trumpeted as they occurred through the decades the consequences would have been just as tragic in terms of public relations. But even as I say that, I realize that public knowledge earlier on may have discouraged subsequent breaches.

What we can blame is the decision not to discipline and appropriately counsel the perpetrators, and where possible, counsel their victims. Whether discipline could have been applied without public knowledge is, I'm sure, the dilemma. But if discipline had been promptly affected, the current explosion would probably not have occurred.
There is another side to that coin, however. The Bible states that when Saul fell, David pleaded, "Tell it not in Gath" (2 Samuel 1:20)-one of the chief cities of Philistia. He was saying Don't let God's enemies rejoice that our leader has fallen. So there is the principle of corporate protection involved here. We can't blame the church for trying to protect its name. We can blame it for failing to properly discipline and counsel.

Did you ever face this dilemma during your years of pastoring and church administration?
Yes, there were many times when situations arose that called for careful disposition. If I thought the problem could be solved quietly I tried to do so. I am happy to say that there are many individuals and families whose relationships and standing have been preserved because of this.

However, when it was obvious that an issue could not be contained I took it to the church board and/or appropriate body. There were times when I had to recommend dismissal or firing, etc. That's always sad and unfortunate, but it is better to proceed in a formal manner if the behavior is public knowledge or certain to become so. If not, you have not only the sadness of the incident, but also public reaction to a perceived or even real "cover-up."

But then in the case of abuse of minors, there is the legal requirement of reporting to the police. Ecclesiastical superiors do not always have a choice.

But I do hear you saying there is a place for mercy.
Yes, that is the case not only with clergy, but with others as well. One Sabbath afternoon many years ago at the conclusion of a week of prayer at a high school boarding academy, the principal gave me a tour of the facilities including the boys dorm. He took me into one room where there were two or three fellows who greeted me and with whom I chatted briefly. As I was about to leave, I noticed a pair of women's shoes protruding from under the curtain that served as a door entry to their closet.

While the principal was talking to some other people in the hallway, I went over to the curtains and parted them and there she stood petrified with fear and shame. I never said a word, but I shook my head and pulled the curtains back together. The young men saw what happened and got very quiet.

I left the room determined to go back later and speak to the fellows about this, but I never said anything to the principal. About 25 years later I was on that same campus as guest for Sabbath worship when a middle-aged woman walked up to me with a baby in her arms and asked, "Do you remember me?" I recognized her face, as she is a member of a rather visible family in the area, but I did not know her name.

She said, "I am the girl behind the curtain." Then it hit me who she was and I stood there, riveted as with tearful eyes she thanked me profusely.

"I appreciate your not blowing me away," she said. "I don't know what would have happened to my family or me if you had not had mercy. I just want to thank you-you gave me a chance. I want you to know that I am faithful to the church, and so are my children and family. As long as I live I will be grateful for the fact that you handled that incident like you did."

Dr. Rock, thank you for speaking with us.
It was my pleasure.