Private prosecution gets thrown out of court
"in an audio recording of a letter from the Watchtower Society, read to a local congregation in late 2011 and heard by The Express, it was stated door-to-door activities were part of a member's "personal ministry", and 'publishers' were not representatives or volunteers of the Watchtower Society."
The situation that arose in Australia is a perfect example of why the WT recently spun off into a million pieces... from the Christian Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses on Fiji Island to the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylnavia...
they simply want to keep the government authorities guessing which targets need to be struck 1st, 2nd, 3rd, etc.. if/when the sh*t hits the fan...
bob1999 i remember many many years ago that we were told we did not represent the WTBS or any of its subs.
so they must be reiterting this to ensure that if publishers say or do anything they can't hold the society responsible for it.
which begs the baptism question, why are we in 'association' with the organization which in itself means we meet the criteria to be seen as members representing the organization and qualified to do so.
truthseeker, you found a good loophole
---to the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylnavia..
I think that should be the WT Bible and Tract Society of Transylvania--
I don't think an individual Catholic, Baptist, Methodist, whatever can bind the church. This a legalistic definition. Jehovah's Witnesses are slightly different b/c they are so evangelical and so top-down. I wonder what those members of JW cards mean legally. Probably not much. I can understand large religions not wanting to be bound by lay people. I doubt if normal clergy could bind the church.
What does it mean to be a Jehovah's Witness or part of a community of Jehovah's Witnesses. The statements made in court in Australia were intended for a lawyer/judge. I wonder if they wanted a narrow application or a broad application. Certainly, most Witnesses will want to know that they are in no way Jehovah's Witnesses. Does anyone besides the GB represent Jehovah's Witnesses? Do legal counsel bind the sect? I have no clue.
My family suffered imprisonment and school expulsion b/c of being JWs. The statement irked me. People are purposefully dying b/c of the blood doctrine and yet they may not count. If the GB is the only group that can acts as Witnesses, how many people active in the sect voted for them to represent them. My present church has two representative bodies: The House of Bishops and The House of Lay People. I could vote for fellow parishioners as delegates to the policy setting body in every parish I've attended.
Rather than lamely studying the WT, why can't this be discussed in the KH? I would have plenty to say. They overreach, asking for too much sacrifice, time, detriment to income, and overall devotion for such a limited view. If it was a technical legal definition, why did they not throw in some language about how important the role of individuals JW is. A sentence or two. It was a very curious statement. Evidently, they are certain the rank and file will not read about the statement. They are correct in that calculation.