Does anyone have a scan of the handwritten page from the Elders book?

jwfacts

I think it is page 143. I am particularly interested in copies that have notes on how to deal with pedophilia

betweenworlds

Here's the correct page..I think it was 93

jwfacts

Thanks BW. That does not have the part added that I am looking for, apparently in some elders books there is also something added about child abuse.

betweenworlds

Page 93 which I scanned above (but may have to do again as you can't read the scrawl so well) says in the margin

'Call society legal dept. immediately when child abuse (sexual, physical of severe neglect)

Thanks inkling! Doing page 74 now

jwfacts

I thought the comment was on the blank p143, but it is elsewhere in the margin. Thank you for the help.

betweenworlds

here we go! Page 74..scanned it at a tad higher res so hopefully it'll be a tad more legible:

fresia

Found this on a forum, not saying I agree with it though you may find it interesting..

1) Those guilty of an act of child abuse in the distant past under the letter of the law, and
2) "known child molesters"

Do you remember the example the WT gives:

“In a few instances, individuals guilty of an act of child abuse have been appointed to positions within the congregation if their conduct has been otherwise exemplary for decades. All of the factors are considered carefully. Suppose, for example, that a long time ago a 16-year-old boy had sexual relations with a consenting 15-year-old girl. Depending upon the U.S. jurisdiction where he lived when this happened, elders may have been required to report this as an incident of child abuse. Let us say that 20 years have passed. The child abuse reporting law may have changed; the man may have even married the girl! Both have been living exemplary lives and they are respected. In such a rare case, the man could possibly be appointed to a responsible position within the congregation.”

Bowen stupidly misunderstands and thinks this is talking about "The example given is of two “consenting minors”" Uh... no it's not.

The example ACTUALLY is assuming that the State age of consent is age 16, and the boy has sex with a 15 year old girl. Hence "elders may have been required to report this as an incident of child abuse". It is not an example of two consenting minors!

So, building upon this misunderstanding, he goes on to claim that the WT is lying in its example, saying that such "abusers" would NOT have to wait 20 years to be appointed.

He takes the letter to the BOE stating that a known child molester is NOT "a situation wherein a consenting minor, who is approaching adulthood, has sexual relations with an adult who is a few years older". To prove that the WT does not regard such people as known child molesters, hence they would never have to wait 20 years, and the WT 's example is a pack of lies!

Thus he claims "by their definition this individual would have no need to wait twenty years to be appointed but instead be treated as any other typical transgression of sin."

But he misses the point. The 20 year example was of someone who may have been reported as a perpetrator of "child abuse" (NOT a "known child molester"). Just because they are legally defined as that under the letter of the law, does not mean they should be regarded as a "known child molester" by the congregation. How stupid and unfair that would be.

So he believes - as stupid as this sounds - that this is proof that the WT is being deceptive and that by giving the "20 years" example, they were actually using a type of secret code to convey a secret policy to the elders that they can appoint all kinds of molesters after 20 years! How funny is that?

So based upon this crazy idea he continues:

The facts show they indirectly wanted to show the twenty year policy in writing as a long standing policy on child abusers.

See, he really thinks it was a kind of secret message to the elders! OOoooo!! Its all spies and intrigues!

To argue his case for it being all a cloak-and-dagger secret message to tell the elders that it's OK to appoint any kind of child abuser as an elder or MS, he says:

Do you really believe that consenting minors that have sex would not be appointed for twenty years? It would certainly be a very cruel rule to follow and one that has never been followed by the organization to date. If it were applied as a hard fast rule most current elders would not qualify for appointment as a result.

But he has it all wrong. As I said, it was NEVER an example of "two consenting minors". The 16 year old is over the age of consent, the 15 year old ISN'T. Hence it is technically an act of child abuse under the law.

So from now on he assumes that his stupid misunderstanding is completely true (it really was a secret code!), and asks if the 20 years "really [is] a full twenty years?"

He then tries to present evidence that his imaginary policy of reappointing known child molesters after 20 years may actually be 15 years. Even though this 20 years EXAMPLE is only talking about those who were guilty of child abuse acts under the letter of the law due to bad timing (aka the 16 y/o having sex with 15 y/o in state where age of consent is 16) - NOT known child abusers!

So, he then presents evidence of a case where the WT says a known child abuser could be give "privileges of a minor nature in the congregation" after 15 years if the victim has forgiven him. Obviously this is NOT evidence that known child abusers are appointed as elders or MSs after some time has passed - no, not at all! They can NEVER be appointed.

"Known Child Molesters" are NOT the same as those to whom the 20 year example applies. Those to whom it does apply, in fact, could perhaps be appointed as an elder or MS eventually. (remember, he misunderstands the 20 year example by stupidly thinking its talking about "two consenting minors", arguing its secret code to say any molester can be appointed after 15 or 20 years!)

As the final bit of 'proof', he presents this extract from a WT letter:

“There is one exception to the above direction: The elders may have written to the branch office and given full details about a former child abuser who is currently serving as an elder or ministerial servant. In such a case, if the branch office has decided that he can be appointed or continue serving in a position of trust because the sin occurred many years ago and because he has lived an exemplary life since then, his name should not appear on the List, nor is it necessary to pass on information about the brother’s past sin if he moves to another congregation unless contrary instructions have been given by the branch. If therefore, such an appointed man moves to another congregation a letter confirming the move should be sent, addressed to the Society’s Legal Department.”

Notice that this letter is talking about a "former child abuser", i.e. someone who we could apply the 20-year example to. NOT a "known child molester".

The WT gives its definition of "Known Child Molesters" quite plainly in the 1997 letter to the body of elders, it says:

WHO IS A 'KNOWN CHILD MOLESTER'? ... we are herein discussing sexual perversion in which children are the object of sexual abuse, including fondling by an adult. We are not discussing a situation wherein a consenting minor, who is approaching adulthood, has sexual relations with an adult who is a few years older than the minor. Rather, we are referring, for example, to situations in which it is established by a congregation judicial committee that an adult brother or sister has been guilty of sexually abusing a young child”

So his final bit of 'proof' we mentioned above talking about elders and MSs who are appointed, is talking of men to whom the 20 years example applies. NOT people who are 'known child molesters' as the above letter describes. They can ONLY hope to get "minor privileges" after 15 years, and they can NEVER be MSs or elders! There is no secret policy saying otherwise conveyed in secret code!

The WTS does NOT appoint "known child molesters" to be elders or MSs. The only persons classed as those who committed "child abuse" are those to whom the 20 year example applies, and these are the only persons who will NOT have a letter follow them around for the rest of their lives.

On the other hand, "Known child molesters" WILL have a letter follow them around for all their lives, they can NEVER be MSs or elders, and they MAY be given "minor" responsibilities in the congregation if many years have passed, they are repentant, if its OK with the WT service dept, and most importantly, if the victims/families have forgiven them.

That's it!

gerry

will scan it tomorrow and send

gerry

I have scanned page 143

now how do post it here?

be gentle with me!!!!!!!

Does anyone have a scan of the handwritten page from the Elders book?

Share this