Dacke,
I understand your deep desire to believe what you see in print from the WT Society. I had that same desire not that long ago, because I did not want to believe that the organization I gave myself and my children over to for 12+ years was anything less than the good, righteous, clean, balanced organization it had always told me it was. Unfortunately it isn't.
You mention the statement posted at watchtower.org and the July 89 letter available at silentlambs.org.
People claim that there is an unofficial world-wide policy that aims to protect the organisations name at the cost of abused children. When I read that letter mentioned above, I don't see that happening.
I should like to ask you if you ALSO read the letters written by the many silent lambs who have testified to the way they were actually treated by the elders (and other Society representatives) on those same websites. They are very telling. There are also good accounts to read here on the Personal Experiences forum.
However, you being a newbie and all, I should like to address the contents of the referenced 7/1/89 BOE letter:
"While we as Christians are ready to forgive others who may wrong us, those in the world are not so inclined. Worldly persons are quick to resort to lawsuits if they feel their "rights" have been violated. Some who oppose the Kingdom preaching work readily take advantage of any legal provisions to interfere with it or impede its progress."
Tell me, please, if the wronged party in a case of adultery is required to forgive the adulterer. Jesus did not say this was so. The Christ said this was a sin where the wronged party could rightly divorce his/her mate. Why do you think this was so? Perhaps because adultery is a singularly devastating betrayal of trust in a union that is meant to be total -- "the two shall become like one." Can you not see where incest or rape or sodomy is a brutalizing betrayal of trust -- especially among those who are "united in worship" -- "brothers and sisters in the faith" (not to mention "parent and child" in some heinous instances)? As Christians, how ready should we be to forgive CRIMES against us?
The Society mentions "rights" of "worldly persons" -- implying that if members of the congregation assert their "rights" they are thus "worldly" and not brethren. Also, can you tell me the difference between "rights" and rights? Do members of the Christian congregation have ANY rights? Or are their rights only imagined, as the Societys letters implies worldly persons are?
Are abused children who come forward to prosecute their molestors really taking "advantage of any legal provisions to interfere with [the Kingdom preaching work]? Or are they just searching for justice? The Society clearly tries to invoke a siege mentality with that last quoted sentence.
"The spirit of the world has sensitized people regarding their legal "rights" and the legal means by which they can exact punishment if such "rights" are violated."
Again with the "rights" and what is inherently wrong with availing oneself of legal remedy? Are not the superior authorities placed there by God?
"Hence, a growing number of vindictive or disgruntled ones, as well as opposers, have initiated lawsuits to inflict financial penalties on the individual, the congregation, or the Society."
Why are the plaintiffs "vindictive, disgruntled or opposers"? Couldnt they possible be victims of a crime or fraud? Do sexually abused children have the right to be "disgruntled" at "the individual" molester, the elders in "the congregation" if they disbelieved the child victim or cov ered over the abuse? Do sexually abused children and their families (assuming no incest) have the right to be "disgruntled" at "the Society" for its inherently dangerous and obviously failed "aggressive child protection policy"?
"The legal consequences of a breach of confidentiality by the elders can be substantial. If the elders fail to follow the Societys direction carefully in handling confidential matters, such mistakes could result in successful litigation by those offended. Substantial monetary damages could be assessed against the elders or congregation. In some cases where the authorities are involved, certain complications could lead to a fine or imprisonment. These possibilities underscore the need for elders to be discerning and to follow carefully directions provided by the Society."[underscore mine]The above quotations from the 7/1/89 BOE letter have so far all had to do with the elders protecting confidentiality and not misusing the tongue. But I wanted to make sure that all reading this were clear that it IS "the Societys direction" that the elders are following in these matters and therefore that NO ELDER SHOULD BE LEFT OUT TO DRY legally BY the Society if taken to court. Also, that it is CORRECT on the part of Jehovahs Witness abuse victims to name "the Society" as a defendant.
Now for the specifics:
"I. WHAT TO DO IN SPECIFIC CASESII. A. Judicial Committee MattersJudicial committees must follow carefully the Societys instructions in carrying out their duties. (Note ks77, pages 66-70; ks81; pages 160-170.) Anything submitted in writing to the committee by the alleged wrongdoer or by witnesses should be kept in strict confidence."Notice it is not the allegations against the wrongdoer or any information from the accuser that is to "be kept in strict confidence." No, it is anything submitted in writing by the alleged wrongdoer or by witnesses (one witness? Two witnesses?) which is to be kept confidential.
"(contd) If it is necessary to continue at a later time a committee hearing, the members of the committee should submit to the chairman any personal notes they have taken. The chairman will keep these notes in a secure place to prevent breaches of confidentiality. These notes may be returned to the individual elders when the hearing resumes. Obviously, no committee will ever allow judicial proceedings to be tape recorded or allow witnesses testifying before the committee to take notes."So, the "judges" may take notes, but the other participants in "the hearing" may not. Why not? And why would it be "obvious" that no notes or tape recordings of the hearing be allowed? Is this not a violation of internationally agreed upon "human rights"?
"B. Child AbuseMany states have child abuse reporting laws. When elders receive reports of physical or sexual abuse of a child, they should contact the Societys Legal Department immediately. Victims of such abuse need to be protected from further danger. -See If the Worst Should Happen Awake! January 22, 1985, page 8."If the Worst Should Happen (excerpt)
However, if molestationand especially incestis discovered to have occurred, two things must be done immediately:
First, the childand other children toomust be protected from any further abuse. (So, Dacke this article is from 1985. Do you think the elders in the Cousins case protected Alison and her friend, let alone her older sister!, from further incest?) This must be done, whatever the cost. [Underscore mine.] (Does this include the cost to the congregations reputation because the perpertrator is supposed to be a godly person? Somehow I feel confident that Jehovah would be HAPPY to see the wicked one removed from the congregations midst.) In many cases the accused molester will have to be confronted. But whatever it takes, it is important that the child should feel confident that the molester will never be able to get at her (or him) again. [Underscore mine.] (Again, does the current "must have 2 credible witnesses to the abuse" policy fit this "whatever it takes" criteria? Is the lack of a second witness a good reason to send a child BACK TO THE INCESTUOUS HOME or even to HAVE TO WORSHIP IN THE SAME KINGDOM HALL as the Accused? Will that allow the child to feel confident that they are now protected from further abuse?)
Second, the child must be given a lot of love and emotional support. Parents must make it very clear that the little victim is not to blame. (Wouldnt it be nice if the elders also assured the victim s/he was not to blame, especially in cases of incest?) The crime and anything that happens as a result of iteven if a close relative goes to prisonis not her (or his) fault. But that reassurance will have to be given many times, so that the victim comes to believe itand to believe that the parents believe it too!(Yes, and the elders, as shepherds to the flock, including these littlest lambs, should be reinforcing that parental message at every possible opportunity during the trying times ahead, dont you agree?)
Now, on to how the Society instructs elders to cooperate with Caesar (Not!!!):
"C. Search Warrants and Subpoenas
- A search warrant is a court order authorizing the police to search premises to locate evidence that may be used in a criminal prosecution. No elder should ever consent to the search of a Kingdom Hall or any other place where confidential records are stored."[Underscore mine]
The Society seems to be distinctly at odds with Gods Word!!!
"C.1 (contd) However, armed with a search warrant the police do not need consent (Imagine that!) and may even use force (that is, are permitted to use force, under law) to accomplish their task.Likely before obtaining a search warrant, the police or governmental officials will make inquiries regarding confidential records, make request to obtain the records, or indicate that they will seek a search warrant if the elder(s) involved does not cooperate. In any such situation, the Society's Legal Department should be called immediately."Can any good, honest, righteous Witness of Jehovah tell me WHY there should be such fear by the Society of elders turning over confidential records NOT to the public, but to duly sworn upholders of the law who are in the midst of a CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION?!!!! One would expect the elders to have a) good, honest records and b) a desire to help "Caesar" in its role as "Gods minister"!"At any time an elder is confronted with a search warrant (whether given advance notice or not) , the elder should first ask to read the warrant. After reading it he should ask if he can call for legal guidance and then call the Society's Legal Department. If for some reason the Legal Department cannot be contacted, the elders involved should make every effort to obtain the assistance of a local attorney for the purpose of protecting the confidentiality of the records. It may be impossible to stop determined officers from conducting the search authorized by the warrant. Conscientious elders will want to do all they reasonably and peaceably can to preserve the confidentiality of the congregation in harmony with the principle set out in Acts 5:29."
This is an obvious misapplication of Scripture to suit the Societys almost fanatical desire for autonomy. As indicated in the quotation from Romans Chapter 13 above, the secular authorities are there to prosecute the bad and protect the innocent as "Gods ministers." Therefore, saying that "the principle set out in Acts 5:29" which concerns obeying Gods command to PREACH in the name of Jesus (context, please) in order to keep congregational records concerning a "criminal investigation"from law enforcement is patently disingenuous."2. Subpoenas are demands for records or for the appearance or for the appearance of an individual at a trial or deposition to give testimony. Subpoenas may be issued by a court or in some cases by a governmental agency or an attorney. If an elder receives a subpoena, he should contact the Society's Legal Department immediately. Never turn over records, notes, documents, or reveal any confidential matter sought by subpoena without receiving direction from the Legal Department".
Please refer to my comments above and, then, please, ask yourself: WHAT DO THE ELDERS AND THE SOCIETY HAVE TO FEAR IF THEIR RECORDS ARE TRUE, HONEST, and LEGAL? Whether or not one can conclusively state that the Society and elders must have at least SOME things to hide, it certainly gives that appearance, doesnt it? And doesnt a shifty appearance on the part of Watchtower representatives bring reproach upon Jehovah? "D. Crimes and Criminal Investigations
In some cases the elders will form judicial committees to handle alleged wrongdoing that also could constitute a violation of Caesar's criminal laws (e.g., theft, assault, etc.). Generally, a secular investigation into a matter that is a concern to the congregation should not delay conducting a judicial hearing."
Apparently, this was the point of view of the British elder (mentioned on Panorama) who went to the father of an alleged sodomy victim during the course of the criminal investigation to tell the man his son was a liar. Remember that the officer was sufficiently miffed to threaten the elder with interfering with the investigation and intimidating a witness!
"To avoid entanglement with the secular authorities who may be investigating the same matter, the strictest confidentiality (even of the fact that there is a committee) must be maintained."Oops! I guess the British elder blew that!
"If the alleged wrongdoer confesses to the sin (crime), no one else should be present besides the members of the committee. When evidence supports the accusation but genuine repentance is not displayed resulting in a decision to disfellowship, this should be handled in the normal course regarding advice of appeal rights and announcements to the congregation."This begs the question: What happens "when evidence supports the accusation [of a sin (crime)] and genuine repentance IS displayed? Do the elders feel a civic duty to report the crime? No, they do not. Because the Society has made it clear that "elders deal with the sin" and that law enforcement should "deal with the crime," yes?
So, then, do the elders encourage the lawbreaker to turn him/herself in? After all, if one of Jehovahs Witnesses has committed a crime which incest and child molestation ARE, by the way then the honest and law abiding and righteous thing to do is to confess not only to the elders and God, but also to the courts. Dont you agree, Dacke?
"In cases of serious criminal wrongdoing (e.g., murder, rape, etc.), or where the criminal conduct is widely known in the community, the body of elders should contact the Society before proceeding with the judicial committee process."Yes. Well, one would hope that this is because the "serious" crime should be heard in a civil court of law and thus the elders would be encouraged by the Society to tell the congregant that s/he MUST turn him/herself into the authorities who will apply Caesars law to the bad that they have done. That the elders should offer to accompany the criminal to the police station (if s/he is not already in custody) and be willing to make a phone call to obtain legal representation for the accused Sister or Brother. And one would hope this would be the case whether or not the "criminal conduct is widely known in the community." It would be the loving, Christian thing to do. ESPECIALLY, if the crime had been perpetrated against another member of the Christian congregation, no matter how young, uninfluential and defenseless, would it be important to encourage the wrongdoer to turn him/herself in. (Again, accompanying him/her to the station would be a Christian act of mercy worthy of the shepherds of Christs flock.)
* * * * * * * *
So, Dacke, do you remained convinced that the Society has sound and effective (and aboveboard) policies in place to protect Jehovahs Witness children from molestation?
Regards,
outnfree