Nothing quite screams cult like secrecy:
Outsider vs. Insider doctrine = WT Public vs. WT Study editions
In JW-land, there are separate teaching for the public and for the members. They often are quite different as has been amply demonstrated time and again on this forum and elsewhere.
It's interesting how the point of this thread shows that this same principle applies to different levels in the organization:
Outsider vs. Insider doctrine = WT Study editions vs. STFOG Elders' Manual
Note this from Steven Hassan's website concerning his BITE model of Mind Control used by destructive cults:
3. Compartmentalization of information; Outsider vs. Insider doctrines
a. Information is not freely accessible
b. Information varies at different levels and missions within
pyramid
c. Leadership decides who “needs to know” what
One of the truly disturbing aspects of the secrecy involving the Judicial process among JWs is that the R&F members are expected to obediently comply with rules and procedures which they could not possibly know.
This is tantamount to signing a blank check. Of course when someone gets baptized they never expect they are going to end up in a Judicial Hearing. But if and when they do, they will have no idea of what to expect nor can they legitimately learn about it without violating published JW rules, something no one under the spell of WT Mind Control would ever do.
Think about this. This gives the elders incredibly power and authority over the lives of the congregation members. They are answerable to no one. The appeal process is a joke; it's a One-Time-Only offer that only covers "mistakes" made in the initial hearing. Even then, a JW only has 7 days to ask for an appeal. If and when someone pleads for reinstatement they have no other recourse than asking a Judicial Committee comprised of members of the original congregation.
I've written extensively about this before. One example is this ironically titled thread:
Essentially a Judicial Hearing conducted according to WTBTS protocol is a Star Chamber.
An accused individual is required to appear before numerous judges against his will. He is not allowed any representation or even anyone to accompany him simply for moral support. He is often not told the charges prior to the hearing, nor is he informed what the evidence is against him or who the witnesses will be. He is outnumbered by both his accusers and the judges. No outside, independent observers are allowed to insure that his civil rights are not violated nor are there any formal, public records kept of the judicial proceedings. All sessions are held in secret , with no indictments , and no witnesses .
He or she stands alone.
The process is in violation the most basic human rights as recognized by enlightened governments around the world. Various rights associated with a fair trial are explicitly proclaimed in Article 10 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which reads:
- Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, in the determination of his rights and obligations and of any criminal charge against him.
