Maximus

Joined

• started 32 topics
• posted 674 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by Maximus

• 
  42

  How Do You Feel It Should Be Handled?

  by Kismet in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  let's discuss solutions for a second regarding the pedophile issues.. how do you feel the society should handle things?.

  should the society be entitled to 'ecclesiatic privilege' as are other religions?.

  should such a loophole be allowed when it involves protecting children?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Maximus

  OzziePost's comments are outstanding in their very keen insight, concisely expressed.

  Let me stimulate thinking a bit further. It is these issues that will be discussed and carefully illustrated by NBC Dateline. I assure you the program will be aired in its due time, and no outside influence will stop that, or shape the program in any way other than those responsible for its production.

  The organization links the child abuse issue with the "purity of the congregation." This forces the wheels of its judicial process to start turning. The system gets up to speed and starts its investigative, fact-finding procedures, and then ...

  That very machinery is part of the problem because it can do irreparable harm in the process. A religious organization has the right to impose its own standards and to make its own rules and procedures.

  The question is, Is it right to do so?

  Where is its moral or Scriptural imperative to impose this ponderous judicial system on such situations which touch on the most sensitive issues of humankind?

  Many individual priests/pastors/educators and religious groups view anything to do with child molestation as above any issue of clergy-penitent or ecclesiastical privilege. You saw that in the USA Today story. According to one general manual on sexual harassment and misconduct:

  "The Christian community must provide clear boundaries and enforce them. ('We are going to notify and cooperate fully with the authorities and seek professional guidance in the matter.')"

  "Most sexual misconduct becomes seriously harmful when the person receiving unwanted attention or abuse is ignored and when the behavior is kept secret. It is important for us, as Christians, to find ways to confront sexual misconduct and abuse in ways that quickly and firmly say, 'No, this behavior is not acceptable and will not be tolerated.'

  "These situations are not opportunities to become moralistic .... Excessive moralistic 'preaching' often drives the perpetrator into deeper denial, away from accepting responsibility for his or her action and even away from the community in which they can be held accountable."

  Just wanted to share a few thoughts. Thanks for the thread, Kismet.

  Maximus
• 
  42

  How Do You Feel It Should Be Handled?

  by Kismet in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  let's discuss solutions for a second regarding the pedophile issues.. how do you feel the society should handle things?.

  should the society be entitled to 'ecclesiatic privilege' as are other religions?.

  should such a loophole be allowed when it involves protecting children?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Maximus

  From the 1997 Watchtower quotation above, significant material that was not put in bold text. Not a criticism, just wanted its import not to be lost. This is about someone who may even have served a prison sentence for his crime:

  <If he seems to be repentant, he will be encouraged to make spiritual progress, share in the field service, even have parts in the Theocratic Ministry School and nonteaching parts in the Service Meeting.>

  SEEMS to be repentant ... he can go in field service! From door to door?

  Make anyone go hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm?

  Isn't this the point Silentlambs has been making over and over?

  COULD a pedophile be at your door? Under Society blessing?

  Max
  *** w97 1/1 27-9 Let Us Abhor What Is Wicked ***
• 
  31

  Flowers For Erica

  by silentlambs in

  1. watchtower
  2. scandals

  i received the suggestion below in an email and thought it might be a nice gesture.

  if you would like to send flowers or cards of support to the courthouse the address is:.

  adams county courthouse.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Maximus

  None is necessary; but I appreciate your kind remarks. What I again learn is that words separated from human expression can so easily be misread in this disintermediated cyberworld. Look at the volatility here.

  "Sounds great" can be inferred as laudatory or condescendingly sneering.

  My post was in a moment of deep emotion, hazardous. There are some who precede Bill in the specific child abuse battle, which takes away nothing from his own laudable acts. My point was indeed, not to take away from a living, breathing human who is hurting, or gracious acts of support, but to underscore there is another insidious form of abuse so easily overlooked; it's real, and it's deadly. You've picked that up. I deal with the broad spectrum of abuse every day. Perhaps only Hawk knows of this little Indian girl.

  If I have the choice to be a wooden Watchtower robot, or a sensitive human who can be wounded, I'll be the latter in what Kent refers to as "war."

  Warmly,
  Max
• 
  31

  Flowers For Erica

  by silentlambs in

  1. watchtower
  2. scandals

  i received the suggestion below in an email and thought it might be a nice gesture.

  if you would like to send flowers or cards of support to the courthouse the address is:.

  adams county courthouse.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Maximus

  :: Forgive me for thinking that your comments are out of line.

  Forgive me for thinking you have read into my heart-felt post; there were no emoticons for posting with tears in one's eyes.

  I've been involved with the CHILD ABUSE battle for a very, very long time. How would you know?

  Max
  Sorry for intruding ...
• 
  31

  Flowers For Erica

  by silentlambs in

  1. watchtower
  2. scandals

  i received the suggestion below in an email and thought it might be a nice gesture.

  if you would like to send flowers or cards of support to the courthouse the address is:.

  adams county courthouse.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Maximus

  Sounds great.

  What I'd like to know is this:

  Who will send flowers to the little girl who just died on an operating table in India, her death due to inadvertent air embolism produced by the surgeon's attempts to keep her blood "in circuit" per Society instructions?

  Kids DIE all the time because of this evil blood policy. This does not lessen the anguish of the silent lambs, but let us never forget an even greater evil.

  Maximus
• 
  37

  Blood and RANK dishonesty!

  by Marvin Shilmer in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  the thread started by maximus named gb admits it has no answers, blood ( http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/forum/thread.asp?id=9056&site=3 ) is chock full of good information and is what this thread stems from.

  if you have not already read maximus thread, you should.

  i felt like adding my two cents about one aspect of that discussion.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Maximus

  I can eat ham.

  I can eat bread.

  I can eat Swiss cheese.

  I can eat mayonnaise.
  ..............................................>

  If blood is like a ham and Swiss sandwich, then I can take all the components but I just can't take them in the FORM of a sandwich?

  They publish pictures of kids who have been killed in the name of this insane policy??

  Damned if this doesn't put to shame all the rabbinical stuff I've ever read.

  As to who defines all this, let's be specific. What do you mean when you say the Society or WTS?

  Is it the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania, the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York, Inc., the Christian Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses, the Watch Tower Society of Great Britain? All the guys who will meet in October?

  The remnant of the anointed you say? All of them? Faithful and discreet slave? Just a few? On the governing body? How many votes does it take to make a policy God's official truth, disobedience to which is punishable by enforced shunning?

  CAN ANYBODY WHO IS CURRENTLY ONE OF JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES, INCLUDING YOU READERS IN THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT, HELP ME MAKE SENSE OF THIS MESS?

  Maximus
  Who like Marvin, is waiting for takers
• 
  8

  Clerical Privilege: Finished in Massachusetts?

  by Maximus in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  panel oks bill requiring clergy to report abuse.

  by john mcelhenny, the associated press.

  boston priests and other clergy have been havens for secrets, virtually beyond the reach of civilian authority or law for thousands of years.. but after widespread reports of sexual abuse of children by priests and a middleton church worker, lawmakers are moving to get rid of a long-held clerical privilege in the name of protecting children.. on tuesday, lawmakers gave initial approval to a bill that would require priests and other clergy to report sexual abuse of children to law enforcement if they learn about it outside of the confessional.. we need to make the hierarchy of whatever religion understand that they cant allow the people under them to get away with the things theyve gotten away with, said rep. patricia haddad, d-somerset.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Maximus

  Panel OK’s bill requiring clergy to report abuse
  By JOHN McELHENNY, The Associated Press

  BOSTON – Priests and other clergy have been havens for secrets, virtually beyond the reach of civilian authority or law for thousands of years.

  But after widespread reports of sexual abuse of children by priests and a Middleton church worker, lawmakers are moving to get rid of a long-held clerical privilege in the name of protecting children.

  On Tuesday, lawmakers gave initial approval to a bill that would require priests and other clergy to report sexual abuse of children to law enforcement if they learn about it outside of the confessional.

  “We need to make the hierarchy of whatever religion understand that they can’t allow the people under them to get away with the things they’ve gotten away with,” said Rep. Patricia Haddad, D-Somerset. “If it means going against the hierarchy of the church, then OK.”

  The vote by the Joint Committee on Human Services and Elderly Affairs comes days after Cardinal Bernard Law publicly defended his handling of clergy sex abuse allegations for the first time.

  But church officials, while recognizing the need to protect children, say requiring priests to report conversations in the rectory or anywhere else would violate the trust people have in them – a trust that civil authorities have recognized for thousands of years.

  “This goes to the foundation of our faith, of a priest’s role as a confessor,” said Gerald D’Avolio, executive director of the Massachusetts Catholic Conference, the church’s public policy arm.

  Confidential conversations with clergy, such as those inside a confessional, would not have to be reported, according to the proposal.

  But D’Avolio said the priest’s role as spiritual advisor would be damaged nevertheless because people would divulge much less to their priest if they knew any of it could be passed along to authorities.

  Reports of sexual abuse of children have rocked the Catholic church in Massachusetts, fueling calls to do more to protect the state’s children.

  Former priest John Geoghan, who is accused of molesting at least 70 children while a priest at six parishes, goes on trial in September.

  Former North Attleboro priest James Porter is now serving an 18- to 20-year sentence after pleading guilty to 41 counts of raping and molesting 28 children.

  On July 9, Christopher Reardon, a former youth worker at a church in Middleton, pleaded guilty to 75 of 130 counts of child rape and other charges in the biggest child sex-abuse case in state history.

  Supporters said the bill would not infringe on the traditional sanctity of the confessional. Clergy would not be required to divulge child sex abuse or any other crime if shared in confidence, according to the proposal.

  “We’re not saying, ‘Run out of the confession and start dropping dimes on people,’ ” said Haddad.

  But state Sen. David P. Magnani, D-Framingham, said priests and other clergy serve as counselors even outside confidential settings such as the confessional, so the issue isn’t so black and white.

  “There isn’t any question that this has happened, that folks have hidden behind the cloth, and we can’t tolerate that,” Magnani said.

  “But the fundamental function of the clergy is to be an ear for people who are in personal crisis. If you don’t protect that, you’ve undercut a fundamental part of this country, which is the protection of religious freedom,” he said.

  In order to become law, the proposal must pass the full House and Senate before being approved by the governor.

  http://www.nashuatelegraph.com/Main.asp?SectionID=25&SubSectionID=354&ArticleID=37293
• 
  37

  Blood and RANK dishonesty!

  by Marvin Shilmer in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  the thread started by maximus named gb admits it has no answers, blood ( http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/forum/thread.asp?id=9056&site=3 ) is chock full of good information and is what this thread stems from.

  if you have not already read maximus thread, you should.

  i felt like adding my two cents about one aspect of that discussion.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Maximus

  Oh, I get it.

  So I did miss a little something; need to review my rabbinical literature. You know, you can eat an egg on the sabbath if you view it as part of the chicken that fell off. The chicken did no work from that standpoint. Here goes:

  I can take an orange slice; okay so far, but I can't eat it.

  Then I can take the juice out of it and take it in; that's okay.
  I can eat the rest of the slice; that's okay.

  I just can't eat it in the package form.

  Have I got it right?

  I can take all parts of blood but not in their package.

  Who defines what the package is?

  Help me out.

  Maximus
• 
  37

  Blood and RANK dishonesty!

  by Marvin Shilmer in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  the thread started by maximus named gb admits it has no answers, blood ( http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/forum/thread.asp?id=9056&site=3 ) is chock full of good information and is what this thread stems from.

  if you have not already read maximus thread, you should.

  i felt like adding my two cents about one aspect of that discussion.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Maximus

  This issue really isn't that complicated.

  The red cell is a package to carry hemoglobin.
  The Society says that I can take hemoglobin but not in its red cell package.

  An orange slice is a package of orange juice.
  The Society says that I can take the orange juice, but not eat the slice or the package.

  Have I missed something?

  Hemoglobin from cow's blood is just that. There is no alchemist in a pristine laboratory performing scientific hocus pocus that transmutates "hemoglobin from blood" to "artificial non-blood."

  The Society gives only the references that they want to, and then they can distort even those. Both medically and scripturally, as was recently shown in the Gorman quotation distortion--he actually holds that pouring out the blood was a hunting ritual!

  Here's the kicker: There really is no disagreement or argument ANYWHERE in the field of medicine or science as to what blood components or fractions are and how they function "naturally" in the body, including in a pregnant mother--EXCEPT among the GB and top decision-makers! It is these who are in disagreement, with the policy determined by majority vote and thus controlled by hardliners.

  Is it now clear to you that there is a schism at the top? That's the biggest non-secret of all today.

  Forget fractions and blood products: How can we symbolically show respect for life by literally letting a child bleed to death?

  How can elaborately keeping the blood in circuit but killing a child in the process possibly show respect for the sanctity of life and for its Creator?

  If on earth, would Christ Jesus be making up arcane Pharisaical rules about which fractions can be accepted and which eschewed?

  ......

  Child Blood Molestation. Has a certain ring to it, doesn't it, Marvin. The American public may just start hearing that expression regularly.

  Maximus
• 
  17

  TO ALL BODIES 0F ELDERS - July 1, 1989

  by Kent in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  just a reminder to those who never did read this: .

  ps: hello watchtower legal dep!

  i guess you love this:.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Maximus

  Hmmmmm. 1989. Interesting year.

  Does anyone remember the elders' meeting with the district overseer who read a MS in which they were told to respond to subpoenas? Nothing would be found in the files, however! Wink, wink, nudge, nudge.

  One DO tells me he read it loyally, asked to make sure everyone got it, but he saw the stricken faces of some who realized that moral fiber had just weakened. Others were caught up in war strategy. He has been troubled since that day onward.

  Wonder how the public will feel about this attitude? And the courts?

  Maybe not all copies were destroyed ...

  Maximus