Ray Franz And Things That Are Too Hard To Handle.

by Englishman 107 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  waiting

  Good grief - why does it have to be either/or? Either Franz or Bowen? And, btw, is either man above speaking about?

  If we must not speak negatively about Franz because of his age.........then By God, lay off the all the old Governing Body members. Again, age has nothing to do with it. Franz is old - but when he dies, his words will still be us for decades. His books are defining books all are encouraged to read upon leaving the WT. That's why his books - and viewpoints - grow in importance.

  If we must not speak - or question - what Franz writes about in his books....then why can Dr. Bergman's writings be dissected, reviewed, argued, etc? Why could Dr. Penton's viewpoints be challenged? Since when is any book - including the Bible - above being discussed?

  lol........and I would be willing to bet Franz IS a lot "more comfortable" writing about the UN. It's clean, decisive, no laws were broken, no nastiness to discuss, all black and white. And most non-jw's (and regular jw's) wouldn't even know what the problem was....just a lot of talk about a non-issue. It is his right to write about the UN. I would assume from his post here, it would fit nicely with his personality.

  And it is his right not to discuss - or even mention - the JW problem of children getting molested and raped - even if it is at the same ratio of other religions raping their children. It is his right to remain silent upon confessed child abusers encouraged to knock on their neighbors doors speaking about the Bible.

  I agree all of that. Perhaps we'd all be better taking a similar stance?

  Yet the likes of JR Brown and Phillip Brumley and Carolyn Wah will still be filing all kinds of legal documents in courts all over the country to have folks child abuse cases thrown out - jt

  But if we all took a similar stance of silence......then the WT wins, child abusers will still "encourage their neighbors" and jw children will still be raped.

  This was a good discussion a couple of pages back. Adios. I personally don't care that much about either man - as with most others, all I can do is form opinions and viewpoints from what they write - or don't write.

  Take care - the middle of the road ain't such a bad place to be. One can at least envision both sides from there.

  waiting

  Edited by - waiting on 19 November 2002 9:43:57
• 

  IslandWoman

  Waiting,

  the middle of the road ain't such a bad place to be. One can at least envision both sides from there.

  If Bill Bowen had gone down "the middle of the road" this whole thing would not have happened.

  Ray Franz has been criticized before, this is not about criticism this is about Bill Bowen slandering Franz. Bowen went into some sort of self-righteous fit slammed HS, Lengtat (someone posted this at the beginning of this thing but I don't remember who it was) and Franz.

  These men aren't some Watchtower drones in the legal department, these men have developed a personal reputation as fine people who are against the Watchtower yet Bill attacked. What sense does that make? None!

  This whole thing is not really about Ray Franz, it is about Bill Bowen being abusive. Yes, abusive. He is an abusive egomaniac operating an organization that supports a good cause.

  The familiarity of that is too great for me to stomach.

  IW
• 

  Englishman

  It just seems to me that it must be almost impossible for someone from Rays background and advanced years to even begin to comprehend the full scale of child abuse in the JW's. There's nothing he can say to make the situation any better. It happened and he missed seeing it, for whatever reason.

  Earlier Dutchie mentioned that she felt that as a GB member he would have had more access to the bad info that would have been around at the time. I personally doubt if the news about child abuse ever reached him, just like customer complaints never seem to reach the chairman of a large company.

  Englishman.
• 

  New Eyes

  Farkel,
  A policy maker is responsible for the policy he makes. You suicidal beggar.

  I hold RF responsible for his actions.

  If RF was never born we would not need to Know BB, but if BB were never born, the WT would still be protecting pedophiles in secret.
• 

  fjtoth

  IslandWoman,

  Thanks for contributing something so reasonable and balanced, just as you often do.

  As I've stated elsewhere in these threads, I wonder if those who stand ready to denounce Franz have any idea what fairness and honesty are. In their minds, he's guilty of doing something wrong simply because he's been ACCUSED. While some are willing to let the subject be dropped, "silentlambs" isn't. As recently as two days ago, in another forum, he went into another tirade against Franz. (http://www.channelc.org/cgi-bin/eboard30/index.cgi) Yet, I don't see Franz doing the same against "silentlambs" anywhere.

  I was at Bethel all the years Franz was there. None of his actual statements quoted in this forum or in any other are contrary to the real situation back then. "Silentlambs" was not at Bethel during that period, yet he puts on the pretense of knowing even what most members of the Governing Body and other leaders didn't know. He now has a large number of enemies among ex-JWs. That is his own doing. Before he started with his accusations, we were probably 99 percent supportive of both men and their unique ministries. It was the ridiculously abusive assertions of "silentlambs" that divided us so sharply into what some now view as two opposing camps.

  fjtoth
• 

  Trauma_Hound

  If RF was never born we would not need to Know BB, but if BB were never born, the WT would still be protecting pedophiles in secret.

  Ok this, is a bit much. I think there would be pedophiles regaurdless if RF was there or not.
• 

  Dutchie

  I personally doubt if the news about child abuse ever reached him, just like customer complaints never seem to reach the chairman of a large company.

  Hi Englishman, I would just like to point out that this is a bad comparison. Information in the watchtower society flows from the top down and not from the down to the top as in the case of a person in the complaint department reporting to their bosses at the top.

  Don't be upset with me because when I'm visiting you in the summer I would like you to speak to me without sneering!
• 

  IslandWoman

  NewEyes,

  If RF was never born we would not need to Know BB, but if BB were never born, the WT would still be protecting pedophiles in secret.

  Not true.

  1. RF did not run the Watchtower and decide its policies all by himself. In fact his efforts toward a more Christlike and moderate org. were hampered by a system set in stone.

  2. Hate to burst your bubble but there were others who had been working on exposing that problem before Bill Bowen came along. It would have gotten out with or without Bill Bowen.

  The difference would have been that we would not be here discussing this mess because BB would not have been around to make it.

  IW

  Edited by - IslandWoman on 19 November 2002 11:39:43
• 

  plmkrzy

  Well this is a long thread. I'll appoligize if I'm repeating someone, I didn't read every post. Maybe when I have more time. I just wanted to comment and I'll finish the pages later.

  The bottom line is that Ray Franz supports the two witness rule.

  I just want to respond to Duchies comment, I guess because she has a legal background.

  I gotta disagree that this is the bottom line for the simple reason even in court the 2 witness policy concerning allegations against "brothers and sisters" in the congregation of "conduct unbecoming that of a Christian" with in the guidelines of the WTS, has absolutely no baring on what is against the law and what is not. The fact that there are congregations abusing that policy by including it in any JC meetings where criminal behavior is taking place IS the issue. It is also an issue that has absolutely no baring on Ray Franz what so ever unless someone can produce evidence that Ray Franz put in writing a policy stating that the 2 witness policy INCLUDES not reporting child molesters to the proper authorities AND that in fact became WT policy.

  There is no such policy but there is abuse of existing policies. The 2-witness policy being used to justify not reporting child abuse is the responsibility of the individual who failed to report it. That is what the law is. An elder may be able to hide behind the confidentiality clause of a clergy member however in many states, if not all by now, not even a medical doctor has the right to not report child abuse even if there is only a suspicion based on an examination where bruises appear suspicious.

  In addition to that even if a member of the congregation went to the elders and reported, they are aware of abuse of a child in that congregation, it is still that persons responsibility to report it to the proper authorizes as well, regardless of how the elders decide to handle it with the accused. What the elders do regarding the accused has absolutely nothing to do with anything else other then how things are handled inside the congregation among the brothers and sisters. The policies have no bearing on anyone reporting a crime to police.

  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. It's apples and bananas. Because, even if the 2-witness policy was removed from the books that would not automatically change the attitudes of elders nor would it change the way abuse survivors are treated. Nor would it educate them and make them professionals in the field of theropy for abused children. If anything a new policy should be adopted that requires elders to have at least a degree in order to serve as a counselor and mediator with respect to families.

  plum
• 

  Englishman

  Dutchie,

  No no, I am not at all upset with you and would never sneer at you. I agree that info DOES flow down from the top and it is precisely for that reason that I believe that Ray Franz is telling the truth when he says that he wasn't aware of a problem with child abuse.

  I can only go back to my own time as an elderish servant when anything remotely of a sexual abuse nature, was regarded as just attention seeking from neurotic individuals and summarily dismissed. Regretfully, if a brother accused a sister of hounding him, this was given far more attention and treated with seriousness.

  So much for a patriarchal society, eh?

  Regards,

  Englishman.