by silentlambs 43 Replies latest jw friends
Thus, although they investigate every allegation, the elders in not authorized by the Scriptures to take congregational action unless there is a confession or there are two credible witnesses, However, if two persons are witnesses to separate incidents of the same kind of wrongdoing, their testimony eon be deemed sufficient to take action:--l Timothy 5:19, 24, 25.
What about DNA? DNA is inarguably the best evidence out there. What if there are no witnesses but a positive DNA test?
Devon
Your points are taken SYN.
I was stating that the policy as written is fairly good. I realize in actual practice, it might not be followed and I realize the judicial process absolutely stinks. I also believe that in the case of minors making an allegation, the authorities should be contacted by the elders and that convicted pedophiles should not be allowed to go door to door.
It is IMO a good thing that the policy has been read to the congregations. This makes it more difficult for elders to act contrary to well-known and well-publicized instructions from the Society. I would find it increasingly difficult to believe in the PRESENT ENVIRONMENT that exists where the Society has come under close scrutiny in this matter that they continue to not take this matter seriously.
The present and the future will hopefully be an improvement than the past with regard to this matter. Hopefully more and more people will start taking responsibility for themselves and will stop letting elders do their thinking for them. I see this more and more in Witnesses and I am optimistic in this regard.
Any parent who after hearing such a clear letter from the Society and allows a local elder to influence them to the contrary with regard to getting help and protection for his/her child has IMO failed as a parent. All are aware that direction from the Society supercedes that of a local elder and can appeal to their CO's.
Of course, even if the policy was perfect, in any organization there will always be some that disregard it and there need to be stronger measures in place for those that do. State laws seem particularly vague or weak on these matters, because the WT continues to make their policies within the framework of the Law. If the law becomes stricter, so must the WT to comply.
Personally, if Silentlambs was seeking reform in these matters, I consider these changes and the openess in which they have been discussed as a great victory. Sure, there are more refinements to be made, but those that have been made and/or clearly stated to the members should go a long way to empower victims of molestation.
Path
In recent weeks, the press in this country has focused attention on the way accusations of child abuse are handled by various religious organizations. Such reports may cause some sincere individuals to ask about the procedures followed by Jehovah's Witnesses. Therefore, we believe that it will be beneficial to review with you our Bible-based position, so that you will "know how you ought to give an answer" to any who may inquire.-Colossians 4:6.
I love it how "Herr Goebels" words this paragraph such that there is absolutely zero acknowledgment of the Dateline Program, the numerous Newspaper articles over the past month, or any other ACTUAL inquiry directly relating to the WTS/JW's own policies. The wording is as if "sincere persons" might inquire re JW's Policies ONLY because it is a "religious organization", and any "religious organization" may possibly come under scrutiny.
Even given all the KNOWN publicity that the WTS/JW's has received from television and newspapers, the WTS remains extremely careful not to give the slightest acknowledgment that "God's holyspirit-directed earthly organization" would ever yield to public pressure, much less reevaluate organization policy due to outside influences.
SURELY, there are SOME JDubs who still have a sufficient number of active braincells left who can see through this BS.
The Watchtower Society has acheived a level of propaganda acceptance by its brainwashed membership which Hitler, Stalin, and Mao only dreamed about.
Guest 77,
I agree they should apologize for the past. This is one of the areas where they have always been horribly lacking. I hope that those who were victims of bad policy in the past and can prove this will hold the Society accountable. But this is a separate matter than evaluating their PRESENT policy.
Path
While this is not all bad, we had many victims at the KH disturbed by this letter. One brother said it was the last time he would be seen at the KH. At least some issues are out in the open.
In recent weeks, the press in this country has focused attention on the way accusations of child abuse are handled by various religious organizations. Such reports may cause some sincere individuals to ask about the procedures followed by Jehovah's WitnessesAs if the problem in 'recent weeks' was the focus on 'various religious organizations'. Not that the Dateline program focusing on Jehovah's Witnesses just days before had anything to do with the timing of this letter.
if two persons are witnesses to separate incidents of the same kind of wrongdoing, their testimony can be deemed sufficient to take actionThis has for some time been true of smoking and fornication but somehow was not applied in practice to many cases of pedophilia. If this has always been the policy, how could a CO alert the service department of 17 victims known to be molested by Fitzwater and yet still no action has been taken.
We have long instructed elders to report allegations of child abuse to the authorities where required by Law to do so, even where there is only one witnessThis one bothers me, "report....where required by Law to do so". The implication is that elders will not be expected to report to authorities in states where it is not required. With the overiding mind set of elders that we handle problems internally and must protect the reputation of the congregation I believe most will not report unless the Law requires it. The result is that until several more children's lives are ruined so as to have 'two witnesses' this pervert will be sitting next to your child at the Kingdom Hall.
the elders know that if the victim wishes to make a report, it is his or her absolute right to do so
Over the years, as we have noted areas where our policy could be strengthened, we have not hesitated to follow throughIn other words, 'we have really screwed up but make whatever changes we have to to cover our buts". As for "we have not hesitated to follow through", I believe soon that statement will be exposed as a lie.
While this official statement did not go far enough, it has set the issue clearly in front of the elders who will be left on their own if they do not comply. This letter is going the right direction but does not go far enough. If it results in better handling of this problem then the JWs have Bill Bowen and Barbara Anderson to thank.
Jst2
After all this publicity and they are still sticking to their guns...LOL
"No single witness should rise up against a man respecting any error or any sin .... At the mouth of two witnesses or at the mouth of three witnesses the matter should stand good." (Deuteronomy 19:15) Later, this requirement to consider testimony of two or three witnesses was confirmed by Jesus. (Matthew 18:16) Thus, although they investigate every allegation, the elders in not authorized by the Scriptures to take congregational action unless there is a confession or there are two credible witnesses, However, if two persons are witnesses to separate incidents of the same kind of wrongdoing, their testimony eon be deemed sufficient to take action:--l Timothy 5:19, 24, 25.
I'll ask the question again...."When is there ever 1 or 2 witnesses to a molestation?"
I'll ask the question again...."When is there ever 1 or 2 witnesses to a molestation?"
I agree with Lizardsnot.
So in actuality, nothing's changed.
BTW, Bill, Thank you for posting this.
-You can lead a fool to wisdom, but you can't make him think.
It's all about damage control
Never Squat With Yer Spurs On
This is just more double-talk from the WTB&TS trying to duck and cover.
I actually got into an argument yesterday with JW family members who absolutely insisted that this letter tells them that you are not required to have two witnesses to the incident. I'm sure they reached this conclusion upon hearing it read at the service meeting and then quickly glossed over. I'm quite sure this letter from the society won't be posted on the bulletin board at the back of the Kingdom Hall for all to read thorougly.
Argh!!
Brian
Bill, thanks for posting this; it made for interesting reading.
Path,
Hi again and thank you for the kind words you said in another thread. I agree that this is a step in the right direction and I also agree that we have to evaluate policy based on "then" vs "now". This doesn't go far enough, though, as others have said. What really gets me is that, yet again, they are trying to paint a better picture of themselves than what the reality is.
What if someone is a proven child molester? The article "Let Us Abhor What is Wicked!" published in the January 1, 1997, issue of The Watchtower had this to say on page 29: "For the protection of our children, a man known to have been a child molester does not qualify for a responsible position in the congregation. Moreover, lie cannot be a pioneer or serve in any other special, full-time service." We take such decisive action because we are concerned with maintaining Bible standards and protecting our childrenThis is utter BS. My abuser had two other victims present at a meeting with the elders, and because of their testimony, he finally admitted to what he had done. The result? Because he cried and was regular in meeting attendance and field service, they decided that he was repentant. Within a week, they had sent off his application to regular pioneer to the Society for approval, which he got. He was also given some privileges in the congregation. There were no limits placed on him, to my knowledge, about being alone with children in the cong or about going door-to-door without another dub.
While I am thrilled at any measure taken that will protect children in the congregations, I am also disgusted with their hypocrisy and lies.
Was it just me, or did they try to make it seem as though this exception to the 2 witness rule has been in place, but possibly that elders have just misunderstood it? That was how it struck me, anyway.
Dana
