Personally I do not understand why Amazing had to bring this out again. I was under the impression that it was an issue that was behind us. Nonetheless, I understand where Bill's comments are coming from, and I think a rebuttal was appropriate. Don't get me wrong. I will be the first one to admit that reading Ray Franz's books got me on the road out of the organization and for that I am thankful and grateful, and to this day would recommend reading these books to anyone interested in leaving, which I just did this past week.
What I don't understand and find hard to believe is Ray stating that in his 40 years of Witness membership, not any cases of child molestation ever came to his attention. I must admit that when I served in Bethel in the early 80's I was aware of homosexual/pedophilia situations there, ones that happened way before I arrived at Bethel. In fact, one of the suicides there at Bethel was because the brother was found out to be a homosexual and could not live with the shame, hence felt this was his only way out.
I also find disheartening Ray's slam on Silentlambs organization when he say's after admitting that child molestation is most despicable he goes on to say "Nonetheless, to focus on certain specific policies as if these are the root of the problem (two witness rule policy) is, I believe, to think superficially."
Now I ask you, is it not the two witness rule policy that started this whole mess? Why would Ray say that? How would that be thinking superficially?
Did Dinah need two witnesses to claim that her half-brother raped her? The two witness rule was not required when it came to rape, molestation, and murder. In fact when this policy is used, it is to keep one from saying something hurtful to an older man or being falsely accused of stealing his property. Yet the Watchtower, through rule making of the Society's writers, continues to advocate such a policy at the expense of people's lives and well being.
Ray goes on to say that "Jesus did not seek to achieve their relief by endeavoring to create problems for the Pharisees movement with the Roman officials, so that the government would take punitive actions toward them. Rather, Christ Jesus spoke truths which enabled people in his time to free themselves from domination by the thinking and traditional teachings of the Pharisees".
What!?! We are not talking about doctrine here, but about a man-made policy that hurts people. What are the Truths spoken here? What is Ray thinking??
There are many more points where Ray's letter fails to see the problem with this policy, but suffice to say I will leave it at that.
I could see why Bill felt a need for a rebuttal. I don't always agree with Bill. But I feel Bill was justified in answering to the comments from Ray. How could he not.
In conclusion I feel the need to move on and not forget the big picture here, that this is for abused victims, children or adults. I don't follow a man but I do believe in a cause.
Salud
