"The apologies that are offered must sound hollow to the families who bear the scars of this tragedy."

What happened to Jim O’Neill? Why is Alan Cockrell back in charge? I can find nothing about a transition on the ABWE website. Was he dismissed after less than 2 years or did he simply decide he did not want to preside over this chaos?

The letter our church received about Jim O’Neill simply stated that his service was ending by mutual agreement and that it had nothing to do with moral or financial impropriety. I read in between the lines that the board must have not thought that he was up to the task of being an administrator. Who knows.

On another note, sadly in the past child sexual abuse was a matter that was often swept under the rug. I doubt there was always a single reason, maybe at times one or more of the following:

1. Leaders didn’t want to damage the ministry.

2. Parents didn’t want children who had already been harmed to suffer more harm and humiliation by making the matter public. I have in mind here occasions I know of when parents were complicit with dealing with abuse by not reporting it to police and by wanting to deal with the matter privately.

3. People didn’t view such behavior as criminal. From the present perspective it is hard to understand why some didn’t.

4. Christian leaders confused their spiritual duty to help the fallen with their legal duty to report crimes. Showing a man grace, getting him counseling is all good and well, but at the same time CALL THE POLICE.

5. The damage abuse did to children was underestimated. Perhaps parents and leaders felt it is something a child would get over, forget about.

6. Children were sometimes held mutually accountable for the abuse as the 14 year old girl in ABWE’s story was made to sign a confession or the way Tina Anderson was dealt with by Trinity Baptist in NH.

One element I have often complained about is the power a mission board has, the lack of oversight and the lack of accountability with the local church. Churches give up their God given mandate, and hand it over to a mission board that operates as a parachurch organization and in many ways even operates as a church.

Early in the ministry I was told that the mission board existed to serve the churches, but I have been often disappointed with the lack of communication mission boards have had with our church concerning missionaries who have made big changes in their ministries. When I have had to call the board about a missionary who overstayed his year-long furlough by many months asking “What’s up with so-and-so?” something is wrong. I get the feeling that there is a corporate head quarters mentality in some agencies and the local church is looked upon as a passive donor.

First of all, agreed that there are times when parachurch ministries in general use their physical distance from sponsors and workers/missionaries to avoid accountability.

That said, we need to remember that we all have a tendency to circle the wagons when we’re not convinced that a certain behavior is a big deal. Maybe ABWE is reminding us here through their tragedy that we need to keep our eyes on the big stuff?

This from page 79 of the report:

03/01/2013, E. Alan Cockrell, another ABWE member, and Robert Showers stated to the Pii investigative team that Donn Ketcham’s father had “long-time sexual addictions.”

[Donn R Arms]

This from page 79 of the report:

03/01/2013, E. Alan Cockrell, another ABWE member, and Robert Showers stated to the Pii investigative team that Donn Ketcham’s father had “long-time sexual addictions.”

Here is the entire quote:

There may be potential corporate ramifications from revelations from E. Alan Cockrell, Robert Showers and an ABWE Administrator stating to the Pii investigative team that Donn Ketcham’s father Robert T. Ketcham, a significant leader of GARBC, allegedly had “long-time sexual addictions.” The investigation did not address this allegation as it was outside of the scope of work nor was any corroborative evidence peripherally discovered. The statement brings to light the following possibilities: 1) This statement may reflect an ABWE cultural awareness of Robert T. Ketcham’s life choices, 2) This awareness may parallel the lengthy time period in which GARBC was the primary funding source for ABWE, and 3) It is possible, therefore, that ABWE leadership was motivated to disregard Robert T. Ketcham’s behaviors for their own motives, as they would later do with Donn Ketcham. This information should have also provided ABWE with additional context and motivation to investigate Donn Ketcham’s behavior.

[Donn R Arms]

This from page 79 of the report:

03/01/2013, E. Alan Cockrell, another ABWE member, and Robert Showers stated to the Pii investigative team that Donn Ketcham’s father had “long-time sexual addictions.”

The Sr Ketcham died in ‘78 … And Robert Showers Jr graduated from college in 1977 . One wonders how he would know these things about Ketcham!?

I would like to see GARBC leadership address the allegations

Not having had the time to read the report, thanks to those who did. Regarding the allegations, it strikes me that they are vague enough to encompass three rough categories: truly criminal activity, activity that is not criminal but is Biblically proscribed, and even activity that is not Biblically proscribed, but most Americans have traditionally eschewed—e.g. “oral sex” was generally banned by most states until the 1950s or so.

So I think ABWE/GARBC owes us an explanation of what is meant by that—granted, most of the witnesses are long dead, but if we’re going to understand what kind of things to watch out for in terms of “circling the wagons” and “closing ranks”, we really need to have some answers here. Or alternatively, we might find out that there was a gossip mill that was pretty unfair to Mr. Ketcham.

[Bert Perry]

Not having had the time to read the report, thanks to those who did. Regarding the allegations, it strikes me that they are vague enough to encompass three rough categories: truly criminal activity, activity that is not criminal but is Biblically proscribed, and even activity that is not Biblically proscribed, but most Americans have traditionally eschewed—e.g. “oral sex” was generally banned by most states until the 1950s or so.

So I think ABWE/GARBC owes us an explanation of what is meant by that—granted, most of the witnesses are long dead, but if we’re going to understand what kind of things to watch out for in terms of “circling the wagons” and “closing ranks”, we really need to have some answers here. Or alternatively, we might find out that there was a gossip mill that was pretty unfair to Mr. Ketcham.

Now the quote about Robert T. Ketcham was only one paragraph out of 280 pages. Whereas there are 280 pages in the report about ABWE’s oleration and coverup of Donn Ketcham’s immorality along with pedaphilic activities in a span of 25 or so years.

Here is John Greening’s response from the GARBC

http://www.garbc.org/commentary/a-response-to-the-abwe-report/

My past history in the GARBC and my personal contact with Dr. Ketchum via his son in law Don Moffat and daughter Lois demands that I at least address this accusation. I think it “slimy” to use the word already used, to try and slander Dr. R.T Ketchum because of the sins of his son. If you knew anything about this you would know that Dr. Ketchum and the family never ever covered for Donn. They were as heartbroken over his sins as all of us. The fault and it is a fault is that ABWE and the powers that be overlooked these things and let them slide. It does no good to try and justify ABWE’s lack of doing right by slandering another. I never knew Dr. R.T. Ketchum personally. I heard him preach many times and was aware of his stand on separation and we admired him as “Fighting Bob Ketchum” for his stand against the Northern Baptist Convention. His pastorate in Iowa and in other areas was well known to me as a young preacher, and I can say there was never ever an accusation against him. I tried to help the GARB but to no avail and in 1976 had enough and departed, taking the church I was pastoring at the time out of the fellowship. I can say they were weak in the so called “approval system” they had for the affiliated mission agencies and schools. This finally, in my opinion, became one of their downfalls. Harvey Seidel, Thermopolis, WY

Will missionaries be leaving ABWE?

Will churches continue to support ABWE and its missionaries?

Will people just say, “I’m glad that’s over. Let’s forget about the past and keep on keeping on?”

Will anything be done for the victims?

Personally, I bailed on ABWE many years ago over their questionable handling of financial support that was sent to missionaries. I had heard rumors back then but was told that they were false and to “trust us”.

“We’re sorry” ain’t gonna feed the chickens!

The troubling part of Cockrell’s sliming of R.T. Ketcham is the terminology he used. No one is “addicted” to sex any more than one is addicted to pride, stealing, gossip, or any other sin. The only reason to bring it up to the investigators would be to justify Donn Ketcham—claiming he was somehow genetically predispositoned toward immorality in the same way one can be at risk genetically for cancer or diabetes. He had a sickness, an addiction for which one should have compassion rather than sin for which he should be disciplined.

The bottom line is that even after all had come to light, through its Interim President, ABWE was still covering, dodging, blame-shifting, and excusing. It matters not who is slimed as long as the institution is defended. And now the same man is back in charge. It is the logical conclusion of an organization that requires that candidates be tested and evaluated by a psychologist before being approved for missionary service.

I read the document—thanks for the nudge, Joel—and it strikes me that ABWE’s efforts to hide what went on involved HR, legal, and a lot more—look at the obstruction around page 140. Suffice it to say that if ABWE wants to be trusted and serve Christ, they have some work to do.

One big thing that I can think of is that we’ve got to get over saying things in vague terms, e.g. using terms like “moral failure” when what we really mean is “had sex with a young single missionary” or “performed a pelvic exam on a prepubescent girl.” And it’s not “sexual addiction”, but rather “compulsive sexual behavior.”

I don’t mean that we should be needlessly crude or coarse, but reports like this indicate that we may be aiding and abetting sin with our use of euphemisms/pious-sounding nonsense, to put it very politely.