Xandit

Joined

• started 7 topics
• posted 178 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by Xandit

• 
  57

  Pedophiles Among Us - (H20 post)

  by waiting in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  posted by silentlambs <mailto: [email protected]> [silentlambs] on december 29, 2000 at 18:32:18 {koz7jvonlur.eq9dlgnykxdsqhckmu}: .

  this policy is unethical and immoral in my opinion.

  however, i can no longer continue to serve the members of my church as i do not agree with a church policy that as a church elder i am required to enforce.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Xandit

  Waiting,

  His statement is not exclusionary it is general. That being the case, reporting these matters to the legal authorities should be sufficient until they have reached a decision. At that point assuming they find the accused guilty then reporting that fact to members of the congregation would certainly not be slander. Speaking to members of the congregation who are not involved investigatively or judicially before there is some resolution does not seem like a good idea. As someone pointed out, and I have seen this happen, these accusations are not always correct. In that case character assassination is what's happening, less serious than molestation perhaps but equally capable of ruining someone's whole life. If that sequence is followed, report to authorities on accusation and then speak to people once the authorities have resolved the matter, then there is no protection of the guilty party by any 'code of silence.'

  I very much regret your personal experience, what happened was wrong. I am much relieved that anything like that today is at least supposed to be handled differently. I would like to see this man's letter published just to continue the process of educating people in the organization.
• 
  39

  2000

  by m2u in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  what do you think was the single most high impact event of 2000?.

  1 choice per person.. m2u

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Xandit

  Hey, it has to be George W. getting elected president, what else?

  If you looked out my window you might not be so certain about this gloabl warming business.
• 
  57

  Pedophiles Among Us - (H20 post)

  by waiting in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  posted by silentlambs <mailto: [email protected]> [silentlambs] on december 29, 2000 at 18:32:18 {koz7jvonlur.eq9dlgnykxdsqhckmu}: .

  this policy is unethical and immoral in my opinion.

  however, i can no longer continue to serve the members of my church as i do not agree with a church policy that as a church elder i am required to enforce.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Xandit

  I hope this gentleman's letter makes it into the media because I believe this is a pot that needs to be stirred.

  Having said that. There is something of a misrepresentation in what he is saying, at least currently. In all cases of alleged abuse, regardless of the number of witnesses even if there is only one, the matter is supposed to be reported immediately to Legal at Patterson. In all cases the congregation is directed to comply fully with state law on the matter and as far as I know in all 50 states that means it has to be reported to the relevant authorities, even if it is an unproved allegation and there is only the one witness, Legal even provides the right phone numbers and they want action taken in 24 hours. The accused party is not part of the discussion and does not have to be investigated before this action is taken, the allegation is enough.

  I know that it hasn't always been this way but that's the way it is now.

  In addition, this idea of people being charged with slander because of reporting to the legal authorities is baseless. There are no such instructions and I certainly don't know of it being done. I don't believe the definition of slander used in the organization would support such a charge.

  The Organization is very, very cautious about getting into legal problems on this issue and they are doing everything possible to make sure there is compliance with the Law. You may question their motives but that's the current state of play. I've had direct experience with this and feel confident in the statements I am making.
• 
  45

  Judicial Committee Meetings

  by Pathofthorns in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i saw this interesting post on h20.

  most publishers are unaware how things really work many times in the back room of a kingdom hall.

  sure there are lenient elders, many do try to show mercy.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Xandit

  larc that is funny. The study of Mariolatry is fascinating and bewildering to me.

  BTW, I wasn't trying to be nasty. It's just that it has always struck me as odd that so many people quote that semi-scripture. I guess they find it comforting, or maybe it just makes a good excuse. In reading the various commentaries most of them seem to say that it's left in because people like the sound of it, and it seems somewhat to coincide with the change Jesus made away from the rigidities of the Law. I believe almost all of them will say that textually there is no reason for it being there.
• 
  116

  Confessing

  by STRUGGLE in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  hello, i was reading judical com.

  was really suprise to find out how some of jw's feel.

  some have, like the single mom, have such a negative experience with them.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Xandit

  brothers helper,

  The simple truth is that things just don't always work the way they are supposed to. On District Overseer told the collective body of elders in my circuit that probably less than 30% of the elders were qualified to handle judicial matters. Unfortunately, congregations do not handle assignments to committees on that basis. One other circuit overseer, vastly experienced, said that 95% of appeals are the result of the subject being badly treated, and that's my own experience as well. It is appropriate to approach these meeting with a certain amount of trepidation.

  I will say that there has been considerable instruction to the elders that they shouldn't not delve into the 'details' of sexual matters more than absolutely necessary. The thing that causes the most problem is dealing with a married individual and trying to determine if there are scriptural grounds for breaking the marriage bond. Having said that, it seems that some brothers have a prurient streak and just won't shut up. They shouldn't be serving on committees.

  If you want to be critical of someone, be critical of those that cause the fear and uncertainty that leads to the kind of discussions we're having here.
• 
  45

  Judicial Committee Meetings

  by Pathofthorns in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i saw this interesting post on h20.

  most publishers are unaware how things really work many times in the back room of a kingdom hall.

  sure there are lenient elders, many do try to show mercy.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Xandit

  To waiting,

  No, I don't believe anyone has ever described me as negative, at least not until now and I think 'totaly negative' is a stretch. I have no particular intent to build up or tear down, just comment when I feel like commenting.

  If you find my comments disagreeable then please don't strain yourself to come up with a reply.
• 
  45

  Judicial Committee Meetings

  by Pathofthorns in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i saw this interesting post on h20.

  most publishers are unaware how things really work many times in the back room of a kingdom hall.

  sure there are lenient elders, many do try to show mercy.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Xandit

  To larc,

  With reference to the story in John 8, The New Jerusalem Bible probably states it most succinctly when referring to this whole account, as follows:

  "The author of this passage is not John; the oldest MSS do not include it or place it elsewhere. The style is that of the Synoptics."

  You can find similar statements in other translations and discussions of the matter in the better commentaries. While almost all translatations (including the NWT) do have the actual text available, most of them, depending on the version, will make similar comments. There is no question that this story was not in the oldest manuscripts and hence has to be considered bogus. Even if you like the way it sounds.

  Edited by - Xandit on 28 December 2000 0:33:3
• 
  45

  Judicial Committee Meetings

  by Pathofthorns in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i saw this interesting post on h20.

  most publishers are unaware how things really work many times in the back room of a kingdom hall.

  sure there are lenient elders, many do try to show mercy.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Xandit

  The never quote it because it's a bogus scripture. Almost any decent translation makes that clear. It always amazes me that's the only thing in the Bible that some people can quote.
• 
  14

  the remnant

  by larc in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i gave stats under jw decline, but i forgot one.

  during the last ten years, the number of the remnant has not changed, which means that as fast they die, they are being replaced with nebies.

  couple possibilities:.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Xandit

  I've heard of this a few times before but not much detail other than the bare statement. I'd like to know how much of this is going on.

  Personally I don't feel any kind of heavenly calling, I'm an earthly kind of person I guess.
• 
  3

  anti-D

  by sadie in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  dear all,.

  i am a final year student midwife, and i would like some information on your views about the administration of anti-d or not in pregnancy and the postnantal period.

  i work in a large hospital and have recently cared for a woman giving birth who was a jehovahs witness.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Xandit

  Sadie,

  The use of anti-D has been a matter of conscious for quite a long time, certainly in excess of 25 years. My personal experience has been that most Witnesses will accept it. The ones that won't probably really don't have much grasp of the organization's position on the matter.