Devil's Advocate , A QUESTION FOR RECOVERY AND OTHERS.

by DATA-DOG 23 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  DATA-DOG

  I noticed Recovery's post is on lock-down. I have never seen that happen. I want to play Devils Advocate and Recovery can answer honestly. If Recovery gets out of hand the powers that be can lock it down again.

  Recovery, let's say that Candice Conti is lying about the whole thing. That doesn't explain why the Elders in general ( there are some exceptions) will not inform parent's when a convicted or accused child molester is in the Christian Congregation. If there is an unbaptized publisher in the congregation who is an unwholesome influence, or could be, on other youth, the Elders standard protocol is to warn parents. The reason being that the parents need to protect their children from danger. I am a parent, and I feel that a child who listens to questionable music or watches questionable movies, or may have some behavioral issues is much less of a threat to my child than a child molester. I know you do not approve of child molestation as you have said, and I believe you.

  What reasonable explanation is there for not informing parents of a possible danger from a predator, or suspected predator in thier midst? As a parent I cannot protect my child from an unknown danger. So I am essentially robbed of the opportunity to protect my child when this information is kept from me. All it takes is a 5 min conversation with parents to inform them and give them a choice in the matter. How hard would it be to say, " brother or sister so and so is a convicted child molester, or they were accused. The Elders have went over this extensively and we believe it's not true and there is no danger, ( or it is true so watch out ) but we wanted to let you know as a parent and as a member of the Congregation. Even though we have told you this information please to not repeat it. We will be meeting with all the parents in the congregation.". It is really that simple. I currently know some who have records or are at least accused of child molestation. I have known them for years and personally doubt that they are danger to anyone. I do not know all the details so I do not judge them, that is not my place. I believe many parents would feel just like I do, and they would not judge either. I believe it cause a bigger problem and more trust issues when parent learn of something from another source besides the Elders. True brothers and sisters don't keep secrets from each other. In the long run it is damaging to relationships. Trust and transparency should be the rule in the Christian Congregation, not the exception. It simply is not loving or reasonable to keep parents in the dark about such a matter. Doing so under the pretense of protecting the Society from potential litigation is not a just, ethical, or moral reason. It is an Organizational, Corporate decision which has brought more reproach on God's name than being honest ever could have.
• 

  slimboyfat

  The febrile rantings of a tortured mind. Not worth bothering with.
• 

  rip van winkle

  Febrile. I enjoyed that word SBF! Just added it to my vocabulary.
• 

  Phizzy

  Recovery's mind is definately tortured, and may be not worth bothering with, but the debate around the issues raised is worth having for JW's perhaps possesed of the same thinking to read and ponder on.
• 

  The Searcher

  Just one teensy-weensy little question that I'd like answered, to satisfy my curiosity - prefererably from someone who knows;

  Apart from child sex-abuse, are our shepherds in the congregation directed to contact their Branch Office about anyother criminal act before they contact the police? Or is just pedophilia they need expert advice on?
• 

  breakfast of champions

  Even if I had the grandiose idea that I was some sort of apostate slayer, I would have never gone where RECOVERY did.

  DATA DOG - you bring out a great point that I have thought over myself. If you look through the evidence on the Alameda County court site, you see there was correspondence between the local body of elders and headquarters. Headquarters could have done the right thing, but they didn't. Basically, they just wanted to bury it and make it go away (Kendrick's initial abuse of his stepdaughter).

  The plaintiff also argues that witnesses have the PERFECT tool to protect their congregations from child molesters: disfellowshipping. They refused to use it.

  So, right there, suppose Conti just pulled this accusation out of thin air. Still, the evidence shows the elders and watchtower DID NOTHING to protect their congregation and the public.

  Also consider the grounds for watchtower's appeal. They did not appeal the GUILTY VERDICT, they appealed the PUNITIVE DAMAGES. If they had such a stellar defense, they would have appealed everything.

  And in the end, here's the thing: I'm not speaking as an apostate. I PERSONALLY know more than one instance of this shit going on in the congregation, and even while still in, it was appalling and actually quite scary. I could not justify this type of behavior then, even though I thought I had the truth.

  So for all future apologists/apostate-slayers or whatever the hell you are, just don't go there. You ruin any credibility you could possibly have.
• 

  Recovery

  Recovery, let's say that Candice Conti is lying about the whole thing. That doesn't explain why the Elders in general ( there are some exceptions) will not inform parent's when a convicted or accused child molester is in the Christian Congregation.

  A letter dated March 14, 1997 gives us a clear answer: "What should elders do when a former child molester moves to another congregation? As outlined in the February 1991 Our Kingdom Ministry "Question Box" and the August 1, 1995, letter to all Bodies of Elders, our policy is always to send a letter of introduction when a publisher moves to another congregation. It is imperative that this be done when one who is known to have been a child molester moves. The secretary should write on behalf of the elders to the new congregation's body of elders and outline this publisher's background and what the elders in the old congregation have been doing to assist him. Any needed cautions should be provided to the new congregation's body of elders. The elders should send a copy of this letter to the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society in one of the "Special Blue" envelopes."

  As we see, a letter is sent out each time a former molester moves for the rest of his life. They keep an eye out. As shown previously in a 1997 letter to the BOE, rules and restrictions to be enforced upon former molesters for the protection of children. The elders upon being informed can make sure these rules are carried out. They make sure, for example, that he does not work in field service with a child, have children spend the night, hold children, cultivate friendship with children, receive privileges, caution others if there is a cause for concern, etc. Now ask yourself: how could any of these cautionary actions be made if people are not informed of a child molestor in the congregation? This is the beauty of Jehovah's Witnesses congregation sizes being restricted to about 120 publishers. It is a tight-knit, relatively small group of publishers. Everybody knows everybody. People are definitely made aware of the child abuser's status.
• 

  Recovery

  If there is an unbaptized publisher in the congregation who is an unwholesome influence, or could be, on other youth, the Elders standard protocol is to warn parents. The reason being that the parents need to protect their children from danger. I am a parent, and I feel that a child who listens to questionable music or watches questionable movies, or may have some behavioral issues is much less of a threat to my child than a child molester.

  There is standard protocol also enforced for child molestors. If the elders will follow standard protocol in warning you about unwholesome influences do you think they will not warn the parents of the congregation of a convicted sex offender? You see, the protocol for elders regarding molestors is much much more serious and encompassing than a simple warning to not associate with a certain individual. They are not allowed to work alone with children in service. They are not allowed to touch or fondle or cultivate friendships with children. They are not allowed to invite children over their house. They are not allowed to have any congregational privileges or to be alone with children at any time. If all of this is to be enforced, don't you think more than 7 (likely busy and full-time working) men would have to know about the abuser's status?
• 

  james_woods

  Recovery, that is INCREDIBLY naive.

  I personally knew of a Circuit Overseer who was a serial molester and finally was removed after repeated complaints.

  Everybody here knows of a GB member who was sent out to be a special pioneer (!?!) after such allegations against him.

  The long-term evidence shows that they suppress knowledge of molesters in their midst.
• 

  Recovery

  Please offer proof for your allegations. There is nothing naive about what I said. Any reasonable person can conclude that people would have to know a certain individual is a child molestor for those rules to be inforced.