new Britian elder letters: molestation (page 2)

chasson

Still translate in french with the original scans:

http://www.chez.com/tjrecherches/june2001.htm

Bye

Charles

uncle_onion

This is geuine. I know the brother personally who acquired the letter.

UO

It's amazing. Out of one mouth they say that those convicted or those members who've had church sactions placed on them for child molestation are never allowed to hold any privledges of responsibilites in the congregation. Liars!!
*****************************************************************
The elders may have written to the branch office and given full details about a former child abuser who is currently serving as an elder or ministerial servant. In such a case, if the branch office has decided that he can be appointed or continue serving in a position of trust because the sin occurred many years ago and because he has lived an exemplary life since then, his name should not appear on the List, nor is it necessary to pass on information about the brother’s past sin if he moves to another congregation unless contrary instructions have been given by the branch. If therefore, such an appointed man moves to another congregation a letter confirming the move should be sent, addressed to the Society’s Legal Department.
********************************************************************
I guess that child molesters still be appointed under the "Holy-Spirit" direction of the WBTS.
Way to go!!

ofcmad

Seeker

It's clear that they need elders desperately, and the last thing they want is to have to remove any. So we have letters such as this one that pay lip service to the problem of child molestation but simultaneously look for any loophole they can find to avoid taking action.

Only one child molested? Sorry, can't remove the elder.
Happened a long time ago and he swears nothing has happened since, cross his heart? Sorry, can't remove the elder.

The WTS needs elders, and keeping the organization going is the top priority, above all else. Even if someone at HQ is sympathetic toward the plight of the children, that sympathy is being pushed behind the organizational imperative. Unless the law really, really makes them act, they would rather keep the elders in place.

And that is where the problems come from.

ISP

Thanks Randy.........I'll add that letter to my collection!

Ever wondered on the WTS's liability for abuse? Well not that easy. The miscreant is always primarily responsible BUT the WTS or at least the British branch have created a most obvious case where they will be responsible.

The elders may have written to the branch office and given full details about a former child abuser who is currently serving as an elder or ministerial servant. In such a case, if the branch office has decided that he can be appointed or continue serving in a position of trust because the sin occurred many years ago and because he has lived an exemplary life since then, his name should not appear on the List, nor is it necessary to pass on information about the brother’s past sin if he moves to another congregation unless contrary instructions have been given by the branch.

Why shouldn't the offender be on the 'List'? Why shouldn't it be passed onto another congregation? Why make the exception? If one of these guys steps out of line......the WTS is liable IMO. It could have taken this opportunity to put matters right or at least afford the congregation with the highest standards of protection. But it didn't.

ISP

Maximus

::Happened a long time ago and he swears nothing has happened since, cross his heart?

And he has friends in high places? Might threaten to make trouble? Not some easily discarded slob?

The one thing Ted Jaracz and Danny Sydlik agree on ...

Maximus
Watching it all unfold

EDIT: Just to be clear: THIS IS POLICY, not a reply to a single body. The blurred desk symbol conceals the origin, not the recipient congregation.

Amazing

Hi ofcmad: You make an important point. If you saw my recent post regarding Elders sins not counting, you will find that "Many Years" in the Watch Tower's mind is two or three years. This is not long at all. And a pedophile can be serving again, or if still and Elder, he can remain such without any congregational action, if he has kept his sin quiet for about three years. In additiona to my post, see the October 1972 KM, Question Box, Page 8 for confirmaiton of this. - Amazing

patio34

Dogpatch,
Thanks for the info.

To all of you who posted on this thread, I appreciate a behind-the-scenes look at "God's organization." I wish everyone would look objectively at this.

Thanks.

Pat

Tina

Hi Randy and all!
Thanks for the info.
I can't help but shake my head here.
It's all about 'politics'.who you know.
And these molesters as such,will keep on offending..
The nature of the pedophile is recidivism. Thus this heinous cycle of soul murder goes on...........
Like seeker stated this is merely lipservice...this isn't going to put any 'brakes' on these predators.
I oftentimes wonder, if this sick behavior is practiced by a few of the GB......that would explain why this issue is treated so 'lightly' and essentially so dismissively.......
Is this a scenario of some minimizing the issue because some 'higher ups' identify ,collaborate or collude with pedophilic behavior? I dunno. Just rambling here......thanks again,regards,Tina

psssssst BETHelMOle's the name

wasasister

The following part of the letter has me especially concerned:

There are, however, many other situations that are connected with the abuse of a child. For example, there may be just one eyewitness, and the brother denies the allegation. (Deuteronomy 19:15; John 8:17) Or, he may be under active investigation by the secular authorities for alleged child abuse though the matter has not yet been established. Then again, a young child might be abused by someone who himself is a minor, perhaps in his pre- or early- teens. In these and similar cases no entry will be made on the Child Protection List. Rather, information should be kept in a sealed envelope in the congregation’s confidential file as described below. When such individuals move, the Congregation Service Committee should write a letter addressed to the Society’s Legal Department seeking advice as to whether to communicate the details to the new congregation.

In other words, without two witnesses, no report is made. As I have said before, I do not see how the “two witness” rule from the Mosaic Law applies to Christians, or to any sex crime, especially where children are involved. Even in the Mosaic Law, there were to be exceptions. Sex crimes are, by nature, secret. The perpetrator of course would deny the crime! How many Israelite men would have voluntarily revealed information which would get them stoned to death, not to mention in trouble with their wives? The Society’s letter quotes two scriptures in support of the “two-witness rule”. First from Deut. 19:15. But just three chapters later, we read this about the crime of rape:

*** Rbi8 Deuteronomy 22:23-27 ***
23 "In case there happened to be a virgin girl engaged to a man, and a man actually found her in the city and lay down with her, 24 YOU must also bring them both out to the gate of that city and pelt them with stones, and they must die, the girl for the reason that she did not scream in the city, and the man for the reason that he humiliated the wife of his fellowman. So you must clear away what is evil from your midst.
25 "If, however, it is in the field that the man found the girl who was engaged, and the man grabbed hold of her and lay down with her, the man who lay down with her must also die by himself, 26 and to the girl you must do nothing. The girl has no sin deserving of death, because just as when a man rises up against his fellowman and indeed murders him, even a soul, so it is with this case. 27 For it was in the field that he found her. The girl who was engaged screamed, but there was no one to rescue her.

OK, so the girl in the field did not have to cry out…why? Because no one would be able to testify as to whether she did or did not scream. Where are the two witnesses? The girl goes back to her family, no doubt an examination is performed by female relatives, she points the guy out, and everyone starts looking for big rocks.

The second scripture is this:

*** Rbi8 John 8:13-18 ***
13 Hence the Pharisees said to him: "You bear witness about yourself; your witness is not true." 14 In answer Jesus said to them: "Even if I do bear witness about myself, my witness is true, because I know where I came from and where I am going. But YOU do not know where I came from and where I am going. 15 YOU judge according to the flesh; I do not judge any man at all. 16 And yet if I do judge, my judgment is truthful, because I am not alone, but the Father who sent me is with me. 17 Also, in YOUR own Law it is written, 'The witness of two men is true.' 18 I am one that bears witness about myself, and the Father who sent me bears witness about me."

Here, Jesus reminds the Pharisees about the “two witness rule” and tells them all the testimony needed to prove he is God’s son is: his father’s and his own. How does this apply at all to having two witnesses to a sex crime? It does not! In fact, Jesus is turning the rule back on them, saying it is not necessary for him to produce other witnesses as to who he is.

Of course, I don’t need to point out that when Jesus was later put to death, the entire Mosaic Law passed away and was replaced with, “Love God and your neighbor..” Even later additions, such as the counsil of elders in Acts 15, did not reinforce this particular part of the law.

If the Society is advocating this policy in writing and trying to use these scriptures to back them up, they are on very shakey ground.

I'm still stunned.....

new Britian elder letters: molestation

Share this