Thanks Marina.
For the material in this thread, it just made me so furious that Rodney Stinks insisted that they had never, ever, never, never, ever deviated from their two witness rule.
And he was such an idiot to suggest than any elder would remember what was stated by a CO in 1998 about children not having to face their abuser. Elders aren't given a printout of that outline and it isn't kept on file. It's already established that elders can't remember what they had for breakfast yesterday, how are they going to remember that from 1998? What of the elders appointed after that time? They can't reference something they've never seen and heard.
Even a good elder would have written those notes in their elders manual... but that book has been replaced with "new light". And what was the new light? Oh, they certainly include instruction that the victim must face the abuser, but they didn't include instruction on these exemptions from this rule. Wasn't there room in the book to make this instruction very clear to the elders? Evidently, protecting children isn't that important. However, there was plenty of room in the book to give instructions on the exception to the two witness rule so that Elder Horndog could remarry ASAP! And there was even plenty of room in the book to include instruction on the importance of disfellowshipping a brother if he asks too high of a bride price for his daughter!
No, I didn't send any of this to the RC. LOL