IMPORTANT: JWS and the CHARITIES COMMISSION

by Dansk 101 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  Mary

  OK, here's a few comments I've found right from the horses' ass mouth about how they view "charities"

  w50 12/15 p. 507 ReligiousCharityversusGoodWorks ***

  It is no secret, many so-called "charity" organizations operate a fraud and racket. For example, the New York Times, September 6, 1950, carried an account of how certain "religious charitable organizations" operating in Brooklyn, New York, are giving the poor only 15 per cent of the money they beg from the public. The other 85 per cent goes for what they call "overhead" expense. God’s faithful people cannot afford to donate to such organizations. They must use what they have to preach this gospel of the established Kingdom for the benefit of the poor everywhere, as commanded.—Matt. 24:14.

  ***

  w03 6/1 pp. 6-7GivingThatPleasesGod ***

  Jehovah’s Witnesses today are also quick to help when disaster strikes. During the summer of 2001, for instance, torrential storms caused major flooding in Houston, Texas, U.S.A. In all, 723 homes of Witnesses were damaged to some extent, many of them quite badly. A disaster relief committee made up of qualified Christian elders was immediately formed to assess individual needs and to allocate relief funds to help the local Witnesses to cope with the situation and repair their homes. Willing volunteers from neighboring congregations performed all the work. One Witness was so appreciative of the help that when she received payment from her insurance company to cover the repairs to her house, she immediately donated the money to the relief fund so that it could help others in need.

  When it comes to organized charity, though, we need to be cautious as we evaluate the many appeals we receive. Some charities have high administrative or fund-raising costs, leaving only a small portion of the collected money for the intended purpose. Proverbs 14:15 says: "Anyone inexperienced puts faith in every word, but the shrewd one considers his steps." So it is the course of wisdom to examine the facts carefully.

  ***

  km4/94p. 4par. 8 Serve JehovahWithoutDistraction***

  Time-Consuming

  SideIssues:Some have got caught up in efforts to resolve common problems in modern society. Christians need to avoid becoming involved in the world’s endless debates over social issues or its futile struggles to correct injustices. (John 17:16) All of this is part of Satan’s design to divert attention from the Bible’s counsel and the fundamental fact that there is only one long-term solution—the Kingdom of God.

  The one below is the real killer though. In the November 2005 Kingdom Ministry, it strongly recommends that Witnesses do not specify what their contributions should be used for, because in "some lands", they might be legally obligated to use it for those truly in need----and what a waste that would be. No, instead, it recommends that you give a general donation without any attachments so that the goons at the top can use it anyway they see fit. The vague phrase " with all features of the Kingdom work" apparently includes paying off victims of sexual abuse within the religion, because that's where they got the money for it: by unsuspecting donors who think they're dollars are going towards spreading the "good news":

  km11/05 p.3 pars. 1-5 How Can We Help?***

  The question "How can we help?" is often raised by Jehovah’s Witnesses when they hear of a disaster that has occurred in some part of the world. As the account at Acts 11:27-30 shows, Christians in the first century provided a relief ministration to the brothers dwelling in Judea because of a famine that took place.

  2

  In modern times, our organizational charters have permitted money to be used for charitable activity and to provide humanitarian assistance to those suffering from natural or man-made disasters and in other times of need.

  3

  For example, last year many brothers contributed toward helping those affected by the tsunami disaster in South Asia. This heartfelt response in the way of donations to the organization’s relief funds was very much appreciated. However, when donations are earmarked specifically for a certain disaster, it is necessary in some countries to use such funds only for the purpose specified by the donor and within a certain period of time, whether the needs of our brothers have been cared for locally or not.

  4

  Consequently, it is recommended that donations for humanitarian and relief assistance be made to the worldwide work. This fund is used for relief efforts as well as for advancing the spiritual needs of the Christian brotherhood. If, for some reason, a person wishes to make a relief donation separate from contributions to the worldwide work, it will still be accepted and used wherever there is a need for relief assistance. However, it would be appreciated if such donations are made without restrictions as to where and how the funds may be used.

  5 Our directing donations primarily to the worldwide work allows for more funds to be available for use in connection with all features of the Kingdom work rather than being held only for future relief needs. This is in harmony with the spirit of Ephesians 4:16, that we work together to give what is needed "for the growth of the body for the building up of itself in love."

  Since the WTS does not really encourage charitable works, and since it's easy to prove that they do virtually nothing for the communties like set up soup kitchens, provide clothing or shelter to the homeless, or do anything else worthwhile, why on earth should they be entitled to having a tax-free Charity-status?
• 

  Dansk

  Reply from the CC:

  Our Ref.: ND/1077961/G6447 07 /LCD

  Dear Mr Hinze

  Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Britain (1077961)

  Thank you for your e-mail of 5 October 2007 about the above charity. The charity is established with exclusively charitable objects. These are available on the Commission's website under the Register entry for the charity:

  http://www.charitycommission.gov.uk/registeredcharities/showcharity.asp?chyno=1077961

  The Commission has no evidence to suggest that the charity undertakes activities outside these objects and that it is therefore failing to operate as a charity.

  With regards to the issue of disfellowship, this is a doctrinal issue which we have previously considered. Different doctrinal practices are common in religious charities and this is not something which would cause us to consider the charitable status of the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Britain.

  I note also that you have sent an article which alleges a link between the charity and paedophiles. If you have evidence to support this, as with any criminal activity involving charities, you should contact the police in the first instance.

  The CC's regulatory interest only extends to issues pertaining to charity law.

  The Commission's publication, CC47, 'Complaints about Charities' is available on our website at:

  http://www.charitycommission.gov.uk/publications/cc47.asp

  This details our role in considering complaints about charities, as well as providing information about the factors we will consider before deciding whether to take up a complaint against a charity.

  I hope this information is helpful.

  Yours sincerely

  Nick Donaldson

  Senior Liaison Officer
  Large Charities Division

  Charity Commission

  PO Box 1227, Liverpool L69 3UG

  t: 020 7674 2362

  f: 020 7674 2301

  e: [email protected]

  w: www.charitycommission.gov.uk

  General enquiries: 0845 300 0218

  I replied:

  Dear Mr. Donaldson, Thank you for getting back to me re the above subject. I'm sorry but, to be quite frank, the Charities Commission is being completely fooled. According to the link you sent me Watchtower's aims, on the surface, look admirable (I ought to know, I fell for them hook line and sinker - until I discovered the truth). I notice it says area of benefit not defined! I really do feel the commission should thoroughly investigate Watchtower because it is making millions of pounds out of not paying tax, something the French authorities recently discovered and rectified. The religion is also banned in Russia for "It's destruction of and danger to families." I asked that you contact the BBC programme makers 'Panorama' who have evidence of Paedophiles within the Watchtower's ranks and how they are able to get away with it. I also directed you to a web site, Silent Lambs, containing the history of individuals personally injured by paedophiles. You can contact Bill Bowen, an ex Jehovah's Witness elder of over 25 years standing, at the said website. He has all the evidence you'll need. Also, if you contact the Guardian newspaper, religious affairs section, you'll find evidence of how Watchtower lied about its involvement as an NGO with the United Nations (in its publications, The Watchtower and Awake, the organisation expressly forbids involvement with the UN and, indeed, continually speaks of its complete destruction by Jehovah God at Armageddon). Watchtower takes advantage of its charity status and yet tells its members that the very governments who award it that status will be destroyed by God for being evil. It also teaches than anyone who is not a Jehovah's Witness will perish -man, woman and child at the hand of God. You have absolutely no idea what is being taught in its magazines and, especially, at its meetings. I very much hope you will look further into Watchtower's dealings and contact the people and organisations I have indicated above. Thank you. Sincerely, Ian Hinze
• 

  Gill

  Ian - Great Reply!

  It makes you wonder whether the charity commission just cannot be bothered to look deeper into the companies that claim to be a charity.

  How can 'area of benefit' not be 'defined'?

  Perhaps I aught to register myself as a charity! I would no longer have to pay tax and I could give a very good definition of 'area of benefit', at least much better than the WTBTS!
• 

  besty

  IMHO we may be barking up a gum tree with this one Ian - much as it pains me to say it.

  The reply from the CC makes clear that as long as the WTS is fulfilling its obligations to work within its charitable objects, then the CC have no interest (or resources probably) to pursue doctrinal or criminal matters. Or matters otherwise outside its jurisdiction ie France/Russia. So in other words the CC are there to ensure minimum standards are met and to administer the system, not to investigate, redefine and police the charitable objects of each and every charity.

  In this case the stated objects being:

  TO ADVANCE THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION AS PRACTISED BY THE BODY OF CHRISTIAN PERSONS KNOWN AS JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES BY:
  (A) PREACHING THE GOSPEL OF GOD'S KINGDOM UNDER JESUS CHRIST UNTO ALL NATIONS AS A WITNESS TO THE NAME, WORD AND SUPREMACY OF ALMIGHTY GOD, JEHOVAH;
  (B) PRODUCING AND DISTRIBUTING BIBLES AND OTHER RELIGIOUS LITERATURE IN ANY MEDIUM AND EDUCATING THE PUBLIC IN RESPECT THEREOF;
  (C) PROMOTING RELIGIOUS WORSHIP;
  (D) PROMOTING CHRISTIAN MISSIONARY WORK;
  (E) ADVANCING RELIGIOUS EDUCATION;
  (F) MAINTAINING ONE OR MORE RELIGIOUS ORDERS OR COMMUNITIES OF SPECIAL MINISTERS OF JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES.

  Which, again IMHO, they get a tick in all these boxes, whether we like it or not.

  Perhaps another angle might be the 'public benefit' test which is being redefined in the Charities Act 2006.

  http://www.charity-commission.gov.uk/enhancingcharities/pbconsult.asp#F

  which states in part:

  All charities must have charitable purposes which are for the public benefit. (A ‘purpose’ is the overall goal or aim of the charity which is usually set out in its governing document.) This is known as the ‘public benefit requirement’.

  This requirement is reinforced by the Charities Act 2006 (‘the Charities Act’) which:

  * includes a statutory definition that, to be a charity, an organisation must have purposes which:-
  o fall within the descriptions of charitable purposes set out in the Act; and
  o are for the public benefit;
  * removes the presumption that currently exists that charities relieving poverty or advancing education or religion benefit the public;
  * gives the Charity Commission a public benefit objective to promote awareness and understanding of the operation of the public benefit requirement;
  * requires us to publish guidance to help meet our public benefit objective;
  * requires us to carry out what consultation we consider necessary before issuing that guidance; and
  * provides that charity trustees must have regard to guidance we publish on public benefit when they exercise any powers or duties where the guidance is relevant to them doing so.

  The Charities Act does not define what is meant by ‘public benefit’; that remains governed by the existing law, which is based on decisions which have been made by the courts and the Charity Commission over the years. But the Act does remove the presumption that currently exists in charity law that organisations relieving poverty or advancing education or religion benefit the public. This means that, in future, all charities will have to demonstrate that their purposes benefit the public.

  Again from my reading of this it won't be too onerous for the WTS to frame a public benefit statement that will keep the CC happy. For example the guidance on 'who are the public?' can be found further down on the same web page.

  I think the most promising angle is in the anti-discrimination legislation. This would clearly be more persuasive if a case was brought by somebody within the WTS currently in good standing.

  What we need is a sister with lesbian tendencies demanding to be made an elder.

  Any volunteers? It is a charity after all :-)
• 

  James Free

  The Commission has no evidence to suggest that the charity undertakes activities outside these objects and that it is therefore failing to operate as a charity.
  
  With regards to the issue of disfellowship, this is a doctrinal issue which we have previously considered. Different doctrinal practices are common in religious charities and this is not something which would cause us to consider the charitable status of the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Britain.

  So you got told they fall within the parameters of a charity in the UK and that the commission does not consider doctrinal issues. Which, sadly, is what I said would happen. In the UK it is easy for a religion to get charitable status, and in only the rarest cases is it rescinded. You might want to keep at it, but I expect you have received the final answer already. Time to move on to more productive methods?
• 

  Dansk

  James,

  This is the third similar reply I've had from the CC in the past year - could be two, I can't remember because I'd been so ill. The point is, if enough complaints keep reaching the CCs desk sooner or later someone with balls in their office is going to make enquiries and open a can of worms. Now, we could sit around and do nothing or we could try and undermine the organisation from as many angles as possible. I believe charity status is still a weak spot for the org but at the moment no one in the CC has the balls to act. - but I remain optimistic. There's already been one Member of Parliament who has raised the issue.

  You said:

  Time to move on to more productive methods?

  And what might they be?

  Ian
• 

  BluesBrother

  I had a similar reply as well...

  I thought that the link to the Watchtower Society of Brittain register entry was interesting : The gross income declared to the C C fluctuates wildly and is less in 2005 that it was in 1999

  http://www.charitycommission.gov.uk/registeredcharities/showcharity.asp?chyno=1077961

  It seems that to be a charity in the UK an organization only has to show that it is a "advancing religion" Well, that is a pretty broad definition and one that is open to abuse. We can all think of terrible things done in the name of religion - and the rest of us are contributing by a tax rebate on their donations !

  There's already been one Member of Parliament who has raised the issue.

  Perhaps that is a way forward. If we could persuade our M P to take it up as a Private Members Bill , or an Early Day Motion??

  I mean in respect of all religious charities having to show that they shared the same aims and goals as the rest of Society, or somemthing like that?
• 

  Dansk

  I've just sent the following e-mail to the Charities Commission:

  <Dear Mr. Donaldson, No doubt you and your colleagues have read of the poor unfortunate young Jehovah's Witness woman who died as the result of not having a blood transfusion. She has left a young husband and two young children. I believe the Charities Commission should be holding its head in shame because it continues to allow Watchtower to be granted charity status on the grounds that it is "established with exclusively charitable objects" - in other words, helping people - when the above tragedy yet again highlights this is far from the case! The pressure put on that woman to refuse blood because she risked being disfellowshipped and thereafter being shunned by family and friends for life must have been enormous. And now she is DEAD!! How on earth can that be charitable? How on earth is that helping people? Unless you act to do something immediately and FULLY RESEARCH this heinous cult more and more people are at risk of death through refusing blood transfusions. To show you just how ludicrous the whole situation is, did you realise that Jehovah's Witnesses are allowed to take blood fractions, i.e. particles from blood, in situations of illness but they cannot take the whole blood? Where in the Bible does it say they can differentiate? And yet you allow them to push their stupid and dangerous beliefs on to gullible people and ignore their blatant scriptural hypocrisy! Quite frankly I am disgusted that the Watchtower is continually allowed charitable status while it deals with mind control. Mind control which, in this and many other cases, has resulted in death. I believe it is fundamentally and morally wrong that people should be expected to pay taxes for public services while Watchtower exploits such services but pays nothing towards them. Once again this is a sorry day that could have been helped to have been averted if the Charities Commission refused Watchtower charity status by highlighting its danger to the general public. Ian Hinze> I hope others here will e-mail the Commission and express their disgust. Ian
• 

  nicolaou

  In light of the recent articles in the UK press it might be an idea to write letters to editors highlighting the 'Charitable Status' angle while interest is high. I have just sent the following off to The Times and The Independant.

  Sir, I have served as one of Jehovah's Witnesses for more than thirty years. Like thousands of others I have left the faith because of it's strict enforcement of policies that clearly undermine the principle of 'Public Benefit'. Not just the lethal 'no blood transfusions' doctrine but also the cruel punishment of disfellowshipping (excommunication) that severs family relationships in the harshest manner imaginable via shunning. The Charity Commission continues to receive numerous requests to investigate these devastating practices of the Watchtower Society but refuses to do so citing the principle of freedom of worship. The commission governors should be ashamed of their spineless attitude and reflect upon the lives of two newborn twins who find themselves without their Mother in the name of Charity. J Nicolaou [email protected]
• 

  nicolaou

  Well bugger me! The Independent has only gone and published my letter!