The Case of Incest⤒🔗

The scenario is as follows. A prominent member in the church had three daughters, around twenty years of age. The eldest daughter is courting a young man. One day his pastor inquired whether the relationship was going well. The young man answered that there were some difficulties in their relationship, although they did love each other. Half a year later he was able to tell his pastor the reason for the difficulties in their relationship. Her father had sexually abused his daughter. She had reluctantly told him. That fact impeded an open and spontaneous relationship.

When she inquired of her younger sister, it turned out that she too had been abused by their father. Together they approached their youngest sister, who, it appeared, also had been abused. The mother knew nothing of it, at least, that remained a question.

They consulted their pastor. He spoke with all three of them, after the eldest daughter and her friend first had come to talk with him. What was he to do? Take up the matter with the district elder, the whole consistory, law enforcement officers, the man's wife, or first with the man himself?

Since the daughters themselves did not dare to take up the matter with their father, the pastor had to do it. It took place in his study, after the daughters had given him some more details. That was the first move the pastor made, although in a sense it was not the first step. His first step was to pray with the daughters and in private for himself, before the visit with the father.

The father attempted to excuse his abuse with extenuating circumstances. The pastor gave him some days to come to his senses and to think about what he had done. He asked him not to talk to his daughters without his presence, but left it up to him to talk about it with his wife. The man chose not to talk to his wife. When he returned for a visit with his pastor, he did admit the facts but he was not under conviction of guilt. A strange coldness characterized him. Was there more fear of the consequences than sorrow for the abuse inflicted upon his daughters and his guilt before God? The pastor did not know.

What were the next steps to take? As long as it was not urgently necessary, he did not want to involve anyone except the district elder. He informed that elder, a wise man, who could keep things confidential. He informed the father that for the time being he would inform only the district elder.

What was the pastor aiming for? For a Christian solution, which would comprise three things: a sincere confession of sin on the part of the father, loving help for the daughters, and restoration of the relationships, to the extent that might be possible. The pastor asked the man to inform his wife himself, in order soon afterwards to have a meeting with both of them and their three daughters in the presence of the district elder. That took place. It turned out that the wife had not known anything of the abuse, although she admitted she had intuitively sensed it. She was devastated and was concerned for her husband and their daughters. She was especially concerned how the daughters would react to their father.

Then came the most difficult meeting: the daughters together with the father and mother in the presence of the pastor and district elder. The pastor chaired the meeting. He had hesitated as to who should be the first one to speak. Should it be the father who knew that everyone had been informed about everything? Or should the daughters be the first to speak? There was something to be said for either. A confession of guilt would clear the air to some extent. Yet the pastor chose for the daughters to be the first ones to speak. There had not yet been an encounter between father and daughters. The father should hear it from their own lips. The eldest daughter's boyfriend was present but had agreed to keep himself completely in the background. The eldest daughter was the first to speak; with trembling voice and at times stumbling over her words, she brought up what she had wanted to say to her father for a long time. She did it differently than had been expected. She emphasized three things: (i) the humiliation inflicted upon her by her father; (ii) the grievous abuse of his position of authority — his superior power over against her powerlessness; (iii) his sexual abuse of her two sisters as well. Was one abuse not enough already? Had he not noticed her revulsion? Was she only an object of lust to him, after which he also abused her two younger sisters? While speaking, she was able to keep herself reasonably in check, but she did castigate her father, who bowed his head. The reproaches she was making went to the core of the crime, so that the father could not say anything back or challenge the accusation. Finally, she mentioned her damaged feelings, the bitter consequences of having been sexually abused for years, which affected her contact with the opposite sex. Everything was right to the point and sharp and that is where she left it.

The second daughter spoke along similar lines, although in her own way. They had talked to each other about it before the meeting, but they had not agreed to what each would say. But it came down to the same thing. The youngest daughter did it typically as the youngest daughter, less deliberately, more emotionally, more fiercely, unloading her recent violation.

Next the mother spoke. No one knew what discussion there had been between her husband and her. She bowed her head and placed herself alongside her daughters. She entered into the feelings of her daughters. She did not excuse her husband's actions. She let them all feel that she tried to place herself in her daughters' situation. She spoke soberly and sharply. She did not excuse herself for not hav­ing noticed what had happened in her own home.

Next the father spoke — a highly respected man in the congregation, whom everyone considered a Christian, an elder, counselor and leader in many areas, what would he say at this point? it came as a complete surprise to the pastor. Would he speak as a broken man or as someone who would still excuse himself or pity himself, hoping for some sympathy?

He managed to do something of all three, which seriously troubled the pastor. He did not openly confess his guilt. Indeed, he admitted to what he had done. Nevertheless, he excused himself with a reference to his high spiritual status, which somehow compensated for his strong sex drive. Thirdly, he did express the desire to mutually resolve this problem as well as possible.

This was not what the pastor had in mind and expected. A glance of mutual understanding with the district elder confirmed that he too was disappointed. The eldest daughter's boyfriend could hardly restrain himself because of the artificial piety.

At this point the pastor stepped in. He briefly summarized what the daughters and the mother had said: "(i) you violated trust; (ii) you continued the abuse; (iii) you did not limit your abuse to one daughter. He added: (iv) look at the bitterness of deceiving your wife and now your cold attitude which does not express any sorrow but rather self-pity over the brokenness that you have brought about. You realize that you hurt and damaged you daughters and also your wife, but you did not even ask for forgiveness."

At this point everything fell apart. If there had been a silent hope for some form of restoration and some willingness to come together, even though everyone feared the ongoing grief of scars — the present attitude made this impossible. The pastor pointed out to the man the bitterness of his self-pity, the absence of genuine concern for his children and the lack of humbling himself before God. How can someone inwardly so harden himself, while the facts speak clearly?

That was the main question of the pastor and the district elder, but no less for the wife and daughters. It was as a chasm which was widening more and more, and which they could not bridge!

The pastor faced a dilemma. He could try to solve the matter within the privacy of the persons involved or he could make it a public matter in view of the fact that the father was hardening himself. To threaten the father with the latter might force a surrogate confession of guilt. But what would be gained by that?

The solution did not need to be pursued any further. It soon became apparent that the daughters needed help. In order to prevent permanent damage to each of them, professionals needed to be involved. Since the father refused to admit to the crime, this was an unavoidable step. Others had to be involved, including law enforcement agencies. The pastor's aim was not to force a confession of guilt. He might have produced it by threatening to go to the police. But he regarded that this would not have any lasting value for the father himself or for restoring relationships. So he let things have their course, as often happens in such situations.

The father's wounded pride and self-righteousness brought him to the court. The rift with his daughters was radical. The result was that at her boyfriend's suggestion, the eldest daughter live common-law with him. He argued that her parents no longer had any right to oppose such a life-style after all that she and her sisters had gone through. The two younger sisters were welcome at their home; they in turn wandered more outside than inside the home. Their mother wanted to hold on to her husband, but she could not bear to lose her daughters. For that reason she broke the relationship with him. The mutual relationship became a complete chaos. Initially, they felt that they needed one another, but in the end they were driven apart.

This is an illustration of a case where the pastor tried his best. He met face to face with the obduracy of self-justification. Consequently, all the relationships suffered shipwreck. The man turned away from the church. The woman stayed with the congregation, but she felt both bitter and inadequate. The children went their own way. How grievous when sins are not confessed! They put up impassable obstacles and lead to estrangement.

Conclusion←⤒🔗

In this series of articles we have traced three illustrations of the helping hand of a pastor (and elder) in difficulties relat­ed to ethical problems. The cases were different and the counsel rendered was different as well. In the first two cases the counsel led to the restoration of tenuous relationships; in the latter case there was no positive result. That is the reality of pastoral work in the church.

A scenario like the last one can lead to a sense of failure and even depression among pastors and office-bearers. Which pastor or elder does not encounter such temptations? The important thing is not to let endurance depend on success, but rather on the commission given by the Lord. The Word of God is our only anchor. It points out the way we must go. That also requires the love of Christ, which is to constrain the pastor (and elder). Without this love and without confidence in the Word, the pastoral ministry is a thankless task! One can only endure the pastoral ministry with all its ethical problems by placing confidence in the Word and being constrained by a love for the sheep entrusted to our pastoral care. That is the only way!