Ray Franz And Things That Are Too Hard To Handle.

by Englishman 107 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  waiting

  Hey Plum,

  So basically IMHO the focus should be on how the congregations are treating victims of abuse and how they are helping them get the proper medical and emotional attention they need, rather then focusing on the 2-witness policy and who wrote it. - plum

  Good point on how to treat the victims of child abuse - and that should surely be a focus. But just as important - the focus should also be on how to prevent child abuse.....and how to deal with abusers for the safety of innocent persons.

  As to the 2-witness policy? It has been proven that the WT (and any other unethical person) can - and usually do - warp most things they touch.

  Thanks for your good post.

  waiting
• 

  plmkrzy

  Good point on how to treat the victims of child abuse - and that should surely be a focus. But just as important - the focus should also be on how to prevent child abuse.....and how to deal with abusers for the safety of innocent persons.

  Hi waiting,

  I agree totally. Prevention is the best solution when ever possible. The biggest problem in the congregations does seem to be "education". There are a lot of educated folks in many congregations but unfortunately not enough where it counts
• 

  waiting

  Welllllll, you and I could disagree about "lots of educated people in the congregations".......but disagreement would be so foreign to this board!

  Enough of the Franz/Bowen saga!

  The WT is just gonna HAVE to get it's ugly head out of the sand if they're gonna cover their swollen asshole. (sorry moderators) The WT is just going to HAVE to put strong measures in place to help with prevention, education on abuse, and help for the abused.

  Or the WT is going to have to be killed.

  Long Live SilentLambs and their supporters. Change can happen.

  waiting
• 

  IslandWoman

  In the interest of keeping this discussion to the two threads it already has I am asking this question here rather than start a new thread.

  Does anyone have any info on what happened at the Judicial meeting that Bill spoke of in his October 4, 2002 letter to the Governing Body, which he posted on his "Governing Body Summoned For Jud Hearing" thread? Did the Judicial committee meet on October 27?

  IW
• 

  SLOAN

  Is it just me or have many of you now decided that this is the Ray Franz Board????

  Can't you people just let this SHIT die!!! Talk about beating a DEAD HORSE!!!!!!!!!! (sheesh) BLAH BLAH BLAH
• 

  fjtoth

  SLOAN,

  If "silentlambs" will let it die, so will we: See http://www.channelc.org/cgi-bin/eboard30/index.cgi.

  fjtoth
• 

  bluesapphire

  larc, he already wrote the book and was updating it anyway. He was already making an effort to include more up to date information. He went to the trouble of gathering info on the UN scandal. He didn't bother to investigate the pedophile problem or mention it in his book. Some people find this curious since the WTS actually broke some laws regarding the pedophile prob, yet no laws were broken w/ regard to UN scandal AND since the pedophile problem has hurt so man children yet no one was hurt by the UN scandal.

  So what is your problem? What do you care if some people find this curious? Or are we all supposed to think and act as you would have us think and act. Get off your high horse already and if you don't like our conversation, then excuse yourself out of it!
• 

  IslandWoman

  Hi Sloan,

  I asked the question because I would like to know if the committee met as planned. That letter was, in my opinion, the catalyst (on the board at least) which led to the current problem on the board. (In that thread is also a comment made by Bill which I believe may help to explain why he acted as he did towards Hillary_Step, Reinhard Lengtat and Ray Franz. This comment helped me to understand Bill a little better so I think it is important since understanding each other better is what makes for peace. I'll post the comment a little later.)

  The day which the committee was supposed to be meeting, the 27th, was also the day that Bill Bowen posted his last post on JWD entitled: "Bill Bowen's Comments on Ray Franz". There is no mention, that I remember, in his post of the meeting scheduled for that day or the results. Therefore my question.

  IW
• 

  SLOAN

  FJ, LOL YEAH RIGHT!!!!!!!

  Bill Bowen doesn't even post here anymore. COC he only came in to defend himself AFTER the issue was raised AGAIN and then was banned before he was allowed to shed light. How Fair is that???

  Island Woman, I was NOT talking to you; NOR do I wish ever to do so!!!!!!!!!
• 

  IslandWoman

  Maybe others remembered this post by Bill Bowen, but I did not. In reading the "Governing Body Summoned For Jud Hearing" hearing today I came across this post and it helped me to understand Bill a little better, I cannot agree with him but still "understanding" is good.

  Bill Bowen posted on October 4, at 13:14

  The letter is not a joke, I do not play games. I have followed theocratic procedure since day one regarding this matter. While theocratic procedure was not followed in dealing with the five of us, it will be applied in dealing with the GB. These are valid charges that any brother or sister would have to answer to, why not the GB? Are they above God?

  As you will note this step was taken only after offering repeated counsel, only after offering conclusive evidence, and only after waiting patiently for almost two years for some form of acknowledgement of wrongdoing. While I am not on the committee, it does not bode well for the GB. They have been given more than enough rope in the form of time and effort helping them see this problem. IF they can show comensurate repentance I am sure the committee will take that into consideration. As mentioned the decision has already been made in heaven and these men will simply confirm Jehovah's decision.

  The GB is not above God's Law the very law they require all elders to uphold in the congregation. Now if any brother or sister wishes to defend the wicked, lying, apostate course the GB has taken in defending their policy on child abuse they will thus prove themselves to be apostates also. The stand for what is right does not change and those who wish to defend wickedness prove they worship men instead of God.

  silentlambs

  If I am understanding correctly, Bill feels that anyone seen as defending the GB's stand on child abuse is an apostate sharing in their wicked works.

  If this by extension also means that anyone who does not support the efforts of the Silentlambs Org. is then a de facto supporter of the GB child abuse policy, then that person is also an apostate sharing in their wicked works.

  If this is how Bill feels then I understand his fervor and determination to expose all those whom he feels are acting as apostates and in effect are acting against God. I do not agree but if this is the correct understanding of his position on the matter than I feel a measure of relief at coming to an understanding of where he is coming from.

  IW