Jehovah's Witnesses are mentioned in this excellent article that begins by reporting on an especially awful Mormon child sexual abuse case. The article then discusses the issue of the penitent privilege exemption which former JWs working through scaars.org are trying to influence state lawmakers to eliminate.
Arizona Republic: Bisbee man confesses he's molesting his daughter. Church tells bishop not to report abuse to authorities
by AndersonsInfo 9 Replies latest watchtower child-abuse
-
-
ScenicViewer
Regarding Clergy-Penitent Privilege the article says...
Keeping confessions confidential is a key tenet of many faiths. Historians believe it originated with the seal of confession in Roman Catholic canon law, tracing it back centuries, to the origins of the Christian Church.
Nobody claims clergy privilege more vigorously than JWs. They also claim to be no part of Christendom or of Babylon the Great. But when it comes to hiding their own sins they quickly embrace a principal that "...originated with the seal of confession in Roman Catholic canon law..."The Bible says "Get out of her my people," referring to the 'world empire of false religion,' (Babylon the Great). Clearly Jehovah's Witnesses haven't quite made it out yet.
-
lancelink
There was an excellent article several months ago regarding an elder from my old hall who knew about an abuse case for years. Yet he never reported it to the police. He warned the hall about the abuser, nothing else. https://www.nwherald.com/2019/10/23/crystal-lake-man-found-guilty-of-more-than-decade-of-sex-abuse/a4fuium/
-
Vidiot
Despite all the reasons - justifiable or otherwise - that the Org kept wanting to handle this internally, I still occasionally find myself asking, gobsmacked...
..."HOW THE F**K did it never occur to them that this could and would come back and bite them on the ass???"
-
DATA-DOG
Vidiot, they are full-on delusional narcissistic egomaniacal Watchtards. That’s why they truly believe they can handle it internally. It’s the same underlying delusion that makes them believe Jeehibbity-hop has their back in service by having angels protect them, yet J-Dumbs die in field circus, on the way to meetings, on the way to the Memorial, ect.
I see first hand the same delusion from my GF’s Pentecostal family. They are f’ing ate up with delusional thinking.. Coincidentally, Pentacostals also believe they are the one, true religion..
DD
-
Vidiot
Oh yeah, I get that, and over the years I've given a fair bit of thought to the hows, whys, and whens of it all.
It just still manages to stop me up short sometimes in a "WTF-were-they-thinking" moment.
-
careful
I had a discussion with a young Catholic priest not long ago (one I know pretty well and who will open up to me), and I asked him what he does with confessions in which the confessor admits to having done illegal things such as child abuse. He said he goes through the normal ritual of giving the proper penalties to pay (so many Hail Marys or whatever) to get right with the RC God, and then he promptly forgets the content of the confession. That way he and the church are not legally liable. He related one instance where a young Catholic teenager saw him shortly after confession and again brought up the matter of his confession. The priest acted like he didn't know what the teen was talking about. The point was to drive home to the teen the absolute confidentiality of the confession box.
I thought that sounded pretty strange, but it seems to show that the RC church is still more interested in protecting itself from legal actions, maintaining internal secrecy, and keeping up appearances than in protecting kids, in spite of the many public claims to the contrary—not all that different from the WTS, eh?
-
BluesBrother
This was a fair point in that articls.
"And, she asked, why do lawmakers allow religious law to supersede secular law?
"If this was Islamic law, do you think the American courts for one minute would think it's reasonable to cover up sexual abuse?" she said."
-
careful
I've spent more time with both articles, the one Barb posted, and the one lancelnk did. Both contain valuable info.
On the (second) one from North Illinois: yes, it's true, as lancelink states, that the elder did indeed "warn the hall about the abuser," but the accusations were not reported to the government for 12 more years, "when the victim told church leaders the abuse had not stopped" and doubtless when the brainless (organizationally "loyal") elders got the green light from Mommy (the org) to do so.
But far more interesting is the legal maneuvering that his case displays. It shows how this prosecutor, and likely prosecutors in general since they communicate with one another in law journals, at conferences, personally etc., are finding ways around the clergy-penitent privilege. The elder first tried to duck the prosecutor's questions by appealing to that, but the prosecutor found a way around it, a way that worked in the prosecution's favor. There's a lot here. First, that clergy-penitent privilege is being legally undermined in the courtroom. That's huge. Second, the GB and their lackeys in the Legal Department are aware of this. That must be scary for them. Their wall may be crumbling.
On the other, first posted link from Arizona by Barb: this case is not specifically about JWs. Rather it's a Mormon case. That group is very big in Arizona. This reporter Mary Jo Pitzl has really done her research well. She understands the role that clergy-penitent privilege has played in CSA cases, its problems and difficulties, and she provides some up-to-date info on what is happening on the legislative and judicial fronts on the matter. She mentions JWs only in regards to the Montana case where the state supreme court unanimously and "unwillingly" overturned that multi-million-dollar civil judgement against the WTS because they felt the laws, as they stand, need to be amended regarding clergy-penitent privilege. She also shows how this extends to beyond the Witness world. She brings in the Mormons and the Catholics, two groups who, unlike JWs, are heavily involved in the world, in politics, and so on. As Pitzl shows, they are not going to idly sit by and watch this cherished privilege dissolve.
As I've stated in other posts, this matter will eventually have to be decided by SCOTUS, and given the heavy bias toward conservatism that body now has, the outcome may not be what the people in general want to hear (though it would be interesting to see what John Roberts would do).
-
Vidiot
"...why do lawmakers allow religious law to supersede secular law?"
Historically, authority figures who try and enforce or expand "privacy" laws tend to do so because they themselves have ugly secrets they want to keep quiet.