Clergy privilege and JWs (page 2)

Scully

Lee,

In Canada there was a legal precedent set in May 96.... I'll e-mail the details to you.

Love, Scully

A Very Interesting Watchtower Quote related to this Subject:

Quote from The Watchtower, September 1st 1987 Issue, Pages 12-15:

One day Mary faced a dilemma. In processing medical records, she came upon information indicating that a patient, a fellow Christian, had submitted to an abortion.

Did she have a Scriptural responsibility to expose this information to elders in the congregation, even though it might lead to her losing her job, to her being sued, or to her employer's having legal problems?

Or would Proverbs 11:13 justify her keeping the matter concealed? This reads: "The one walking about as a slanderer is uncovering confidential talk, but the one faithful in spirit is covering over a matter."Compare Proverbs 25:9, 10.

...This command from the Highest Level of authority in the universe put the responsibility upon each Israelite to report to the judges any serious wrongdoing that he observed so that the matter might be handled.

While Christians are not strictly under the Mosaic Law, its principles still apply in the Christian congregation.
Hence, there may be times when a Christian is obligated to bring a matter to the attention of the elders.

True, it is illegal in many countries to disclose to unauthorized ones what is found in private records.

But if a Christian feels, after prayerful consideration, that he is facing a situation where the law of God required him to report what he knew despite the demands of lesser authorities, then that is a responsibility he accepts before Jehovah.

There are times when a Christian "must obey God as ruler rather than men."-Acts 5:29.

While oaths or solemn promises should never be taken lightly, there may be times when promises required by men are in conflict with the requirement that we render exclusive devotion to our God.

...Anticipating the problem, some brothers who are lawyers, doctors, accountants, and so forth, have prepared guidelines in writing and have asked brothers who may consult them to read these over before revealing anything confidential.

Thus an understanding is required in advance that if serious wrongdoing comes to light, the wrongdoer would be encouraged to go to the elders in his congregation about the matter. It would be understood that if he did not do so, the counselor would feel an obligation to go to the elders himself.

There may be occasions when a faithful servant of God is motivated by his personal convictions, based on his knowledge of God's Word, to strain or even breach the requirements of confidentiality because of the superior demands of divine law.

Courage and discretion would be needed. The objective would not be to spy on another's freedom but to help erring ones and to keep the Christian congregation clean. Minor transgressions due to sin should be overlooked. Here, "love covers a multitude of sins," and we should forgive "up to seventyseven times." (Matthew 18:21,22) This is the "time to keep quiet."

But when there is an attempt to conceal major sins, this may be the "time to speak."

Lady Lee

You would think that sometimes they would read their own literature and think it might apply to them!

morrisamb

Great thread Lady Lee, and interesting article Disfellowshipped.

It's interesting that in my case, the Elders never brought up CP. When asked why they didn't report to authorities, they said, "We didn't know it was against the law."

I loved your point Lady L about what if someone accuses another, doesn't an Elder go to the accused to see if it's true.

And Disf's article shows how society's rules can be broken to uncover a sinner.

Too bad they don't break a supposed CP to uncover a criminal!

waiting

Hey Yeru,

The privelege applies ONLY when an individual in a formal act of religion, turns to a clergyman seeking forgiveness and absolution. -yeru

What if the molester just wants to talk....and is not seeking forgiveness and absolution. Afterall, an elder - by jw standards - can't give either of those options anyway.

What if the molester comes in any says "Btw, little Mary might come to the elders saying that I fondled/had sex/raped her. It isn't true."

Does the elder investigate? Does the elder tell other elders? Does the elder approach little Mary's parents? Does the elder report the incident to the police?

Not everyone going to a priest is looking for forgiveness. Some are just covering their asses.

And, yes, elders DO claim ecclesiastical priveledge - when it suits their purpose.

Yerusalyim

What if the molester just wants to talk....and is not seeking forgiveness and absolution. Afterall, an elder - by jw standards - can't give either of those options anyway.
What if the molester comes in any says "Btw, little Mary might come to the elders saying that I fondled/had sex/raped her. It isn't true."
Does the elder investigate? Does the elder tell other elders? Does the elder approach little Mary's parents? Does the elder report the incident to the police?
Not everyone going to a priest is looking for forgiveness. Some are just covering their asses.

Like I said, here's the rule as applied in the military, It MUST be a formal act of religion. Therefore, the cases you mention here wouldn't qualify and should, to my mind, be reported.

Clergy privilege and JWs