by Englishman 107 Replies latest jw friends
New eyes, why do you say that Ray protects pedophiles? Why do you say he is disgruntled?
Though I find the sexual practices involved to be definitely contrary to my personal standards,I thought that Ray stated it more strongly than that, so I apologise if I over-stated his opinion. He does though, refer to his personal standards in marriage here, so he does appear to be quite an innocent nonetheless.
Englishman.
I have read the latest version of CoC (2002), and I remember the subject regarding the oral sex debate.
I think Ray Franz made it clear that whether he or anyone personally thought oral sex was wrong or immoral, the point that I got after reading through the context was that, during most of the GB meetings or sessions, most of the time was spent debating on issues of disfellowshipping. And he began seeing that decisions would be made without regard to the individuals or the unique situations involved.
For example, at first, Adultery was only considered adultery if it was with another human of the opposite sex, and then later, certain cases started coming in, like one man having sex with an animal, yet the wife could not get a scriptural divorce because it (at that time) did not fall into the category of "Adultery"; or like one man had relations with another man, so they didn't consider this at the time "Adultery"; and like one womans husband was confined to a wheel chair, he wanted to please his wife, etc., so they had to decide on these types of situations (being very private matters).
I think he came across having the feeling that those petty arbitrary decisions that they would make had ruined peoples lives, when later these decisions had been completely changed or reversed because of "New Light". And he began seeing the hypocrisy! He saw decisions being made for one country, where in another country this same decision principle was not upheld and those brothers and sisters went through severe persecution.
And as I also have grown up knowing all these rules for disfellowshipping over the years change and evolve, it made me think too, that those making these decisions really do not take everything into consideration.
And how so many people have followed all these rules over the years, always having to ask the Elder Body/GB for the "right way".
R. Franz also says that the only regret he has in all the years he did spend in Full-Time Service (holding every position from the bottom to the top) was that he did not leave his wife with a Son or Daughter to comfort and to support her when he's gone.
I feel his efforts were not a waist of time, his book was revealing and confirmed a lot of what I have always felt over the years.
in3D
Anyone have the COC in a electronic text format???
Perhaps someday, when ALL books that are 'life-saving' (soul saving), are totally free for the askin', you will WITNESS it in the vast lands of cyberspace. Until then:
http://www.commentarypress.com/orderinfo.html
sKally, free the books klass
Hi E-Man:
I see that Ray Franz is coming in for a fair bit of criticism due to his apparrant unwillingness to accept that JW's had a problem with the existence of child abuse when he was a member of the GB.
Ray never stated that. He only stated that he was not confronted with the issue.
Also, it would appear that Ray is being chided for his belief in the rule of 2 witnesses before action can be taken against an abuser.
Ray never stated that about the two witness rule. he only stated his own motives, which were about showing more justice in reducing the DFings ... during a time when the WTS was softening its DF policies, including allowing JWs to talk to DF persons ... this was influenced by Ray Franz and Ed Dunlap ... the idea of the two witness rule is modeled after modren civil courts to prevent people from false accusations ... Ray stated that he never supoported or intended for the policy to be misused in child abuse cases. If people are still chiding Ray about it, it is that they have not read what he wrote, or they are deliberate liars acting with malice of forethought.
It seems to me that it is quite likely that Ray wasn't aware that there was a serious abuse problem within the society when he was a member of the GB, if only for the reason that Ray would find such an activity so detestable that he would believe it to be a virtually impossible act for anyone to perpetrate.
That is not what Ray Franz stated. He explained that during the era when he was on the GB, child molestation was not talked about as much in society at large ... and he is right on target ... the issue was never a public matter until the early 1980s when the Catholic Church started to get some attention, and civil society started to finally address it ... the Jehovah's Witnesses are 20 years behind the rest of the world ... and this is what Ray was getting at.
When we read COC, Ray states that he finds activities such as oral sex between married couples to be absolutely disgusting, and impies that most moral minded people would feel the same way. If he believes that oral sex is for the depraved only, it's easy to see why he would be unwilling to accept that the far worse offence of child abuse was anything more than the remotest event, as opposed to the rampaging disease that it has turned out to be.
I don't recall this. What page did he discuss this, and in what context?
I personally don't want to devalue one word of what any of them has written just because their ability to adapt to new and changing situations can only reach so far. All of these guys have written according to their strengths and gifts, I say let's not berate them now because some of them find some things just too much too handle. Let's just thank them for the good things that they gave to us and leave them be.
Excellent points ... I totally agree with you ... and politically, it would serve the entire x-JW efforts with the abuse and blood issues and others to not shoot our own team mates ... Ray Franz has proven beyond doubt where he stands ... that is, not for the Watchtower Society ... and in his post here on this forum, he made it clear he finds the goals to fight child abuse in the media to be honorable ... he simply chooses to do battle on other fronts and with the written word ... I believe we shgould respect that ... but unfortunately the militant radical idoits who are of the lynch-mob class want blood, regardless of who they hurt or the fact that they hurt innocent people. Thanks for a good post.
I bet Ray thinks we're all a bunch of psychos and mis-fits. No disrespect to him, I think he's done a grand job. But if you took certain posts on their own merits.
Sorry - I meant to say that I just feel sorry for Ray.
... the idea of the two witness rule is modeled after modren civil courts to prevent people from false accusations ... Ray stated that he never supoported or intended for the policy to be misused in child abuse cases.
Amazing, I know you will correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't there actually two different points here?
1. Ray supports the two witness rule.
2. Ray never meant the two witness rule to be misused as it has in child abuse cases.
Is this correct? I would just like to have it clear in my mind. Thank you.
Edited by - Dutchie on 17 November 2002 17:6:1
