trauma, just thought you might want to read this for context.....this is what Amazing got after talking to Ray about all this mess....you can see the entire thread here...
Last night, after my post regarding Ray Franz comments of Bill Bowen's posted statements, I received a good number of email and phone calls. One item consistently surfaced regarding Ray's assignment to write the chapter in the book, Organization for Kingdom Preaching and Disciple-Making, by the title of Safeguarding the Cleanness of the Congregation. In the chapter, the "two Witness" rule was outlined. This book was published in the 1970s to replace its predecessor, the "Lamp" book. The subsequent book that replaced what Ray Franz wrote is called Organized to Accomplished Our Ministry, published in 1983 by the Watchtower Society. That specific chapter was changed to "When Difficulties Arise" ... and like the chapter Ray wrote, one or two witnesses are established in cases of Matthew 18. I do not have a copy of the earlier book at the moment, so this aspect might require some correction.
As I promised, I called Ray Franz again today, because my questions to him yesterday did not tie together the older "Organization" book with the One or Two witness rule and its specific application as to how victims of molestation are treated in judicial cases ... it was thought that because he authored that chapter, he may have some responsibility in how it was applied, and he therefore needed to clear this detail as well. (I did not asked the question yesterday because I was only reading to him what Bill Bowen wrote, and the "Organization" book issue was not cited or discussed by Bill. Here are his responses to me:
Ray stated that when he wrote that chapter he was not at all intending a specific application to victims of child molestation, but that it was written only to quote the Apostle Paul and Moses as to the Biblical requirements ... these requirements were important because in ancient Israel the accused could be given the death sentence ... so evidence was a serious matter to consider before convicting one of a capital crime.
Also, Ray stated that the law was not intended to be strictly applied, nor did the Jews in actual practice strictly apply the law, as there were exceptions granted because of higher priorities, reasonableness, etc. And that religions like the Watchtower and some fundamentalists make a serious error in believing that the law was "rigid and inflexible." Likewise, he would never, and has never, and does not now support or condone the "rigid" application made by the Society of demanding "two witnesses" to an act of pedophilia. He recognized that this issue is a serious challenge for civil authorities who have charge to safeguard innocent children, and also the rights of innocent people falsely accused. He noted that if a man is wrongly convicted and sent to prison, then his innocent children become every bit as much victims as those who are molested ... and great care must be taken to consider the effects on all parties.
Ray pointed out that once he completed the chapter in question, it went through editorial review and then ultimately Karl Adams, the chairman would make whatever changes he deemed appropriate, and then the final product was not exactly what he wrote. He never retained any notes on the chapter, and after 30 years cannot recall if it is exactly what he first wrote. Nonetheless, his intentions in writing the chapter was not to cause any harm whatsoever to victims of molesters, nor to be rigidly applied by subsequent policy via BOE letters or oral instructions through Circuit and District Overseers. Child molestation was not an issue on his mind at the time.
I asked Ray about his view of how it has been applied in actual practice in local congregations; that is, the Society via the Service Department oral instructions over the phone or BOE letters or specific correspondence in some cases resulted in a strict application of the "Two Witness" rule in cases of molestation, and how this has caused harm to innocent victims. He again stated that ... he would never, and has never, and does not now support or condone the "rigid" application made by the Society of demanding "two witnesses" to an act of pedophilia. He noted that in these cases it is obviously necessary to consider other factors, and the civil authorities and other experts have to take a different approach, and still take care not to wrongly convict someone ... he noted that the Watchtower policy as applied is wrong and outside the bounds of anything he ever intended. He noted that this is the general problem with the entire religion; the Society rigidly imposes rules and laws, and does not grasp or apply the gentle and good spirit of Christ. He flat out does not agree with the pedophile policies of the Watchtower Society.
During our discussion, Ray brought up his phone call with Bill Bowen last night. He noted that he explained the same issues to Bill in the same way, trying his best to convey his intent on this issue. He sounded like the phone call went well.
Before we ended the call, Ray noted that in his entire 40 years of fulltime service (from age 19 to age 59 when he resigned in 1980 from the Governing Body) he never once dealt with a case of molestation, pedophilia or incest and that such a case was never presented to him at anytime, nor did it ever come up or get discussed.
Again, as yesterday, I asked his permission to publish this follow-up post to clarify this point, and he again readily gave me permission to post it. I also promised to him, as I did yesterday to mail to him all the posted comments by Bill Bowen and myself so that he can see exactly what Bill stated and how I represented his comments.
My thoughts: I discussed this with Ray, and he agreed it to be the case, and that is, the "Organization" book is a guidance manual, and its scope is intended to be very broad, otherwise it would be much larger, whereas the specific application instruction imposed by the Service Dept. via BOE letters or CO and DO instructions are a different matter, and that this is where the problem is, with how such guidance was misused to cause harm in ways that were not intended. To conclude that Ray Franz supports Watchtower policy regarding its dealings with pedophiles because he wrote a biblical quote in a chapter 30 years ago is plainly wrong.
Some have asked why Ray Franz does not post this himself on the Internet rather than letting me post on his behalf. Each time I talk to him, I do not think to ask this of him ... so, if you want to know this or answers to other issues I have not addressed, you can ask him yourself by writing to: Ray Franz, c/o Commentary Press, PO Box 43532, Atlanta, GA 30336
