I know that honest-hearted ones here are thoroughly sick of Friend's ill-disguised, legalistic, nitpicking, ground-shifting, form-over-substancing, necrophilia-inducing attempt to deny that the setup and conduct of the Watchtower Society serves excellently to encourage pedophilia... (of course, like all apologetics claim, he is not defending the cult, only attacking the poor argument of the opposer - LOL! LOL! LOL!)
Now, we have seen a lot of what Friend has to say.. But one often learns more by what certain types of people do NOT say!
Singularly, Friend has failed to produce any literature emanating from the Society counselling the victim of child abuse by a JW to whistle blow to the police or other secular authorities. How odd! Think how that would serve to bolster his case, or damage mine (he tries to draw some distinction between these - doubtless he has contempt for the intelligence of his readership)!
Now, Friend was able in
>>> http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/forum/thread.asp?id=3035&page=1&site=3
to produce counsel (g93 3/8 10) to whistle-blow when the perpetrator of the assault was in all likelihood (given context - a JW raped) not a JW!
Strange then that he couldn't produce even one quote that would support his contention when the perp was a JW... if not from an official WTS publication, then from an official "letter to elders" where one might expect to find counsel of this sort that the WTS did not want to make too public (denying as it has been that there is any sort of pedophile trouble here - I have a dozen quotes where it attacks the clergy of Christendom for pedophilia!).
It is, after all and as Friend demonstrated above, the sort of area on which the WTBTS does express opinions! So - why no mention by him? Hmmm... I thought. There's possibly something there.
So I asked Prominent Bethelite to scan documents that he has (and which, given his stated position, Friend certainly has access to).
And now we see why Friend did not produce evidence directly supporting his claim (and instead engaged in all variety of legalese and red-herringDOM) - because there is material out there BUT NOT ON THE OFFICIAL CD utterly damaging to his case.
All dated quotes are from the Society's letters "TO ALL BODIES OF ELDERS IN THE UNITED STATES" (the date is the date on the letter - letters in other countries will differ slightly, even in date) - strictly not for the rank and file!
Firstly - and I quote the PB - "there is nothing at all in any of the letters I read to suggest that the victim of child-abuse by a JW should be counselled to report the incident, except - and this is reading between the lines and giving the WTBTS the benefit of the doubt - if the law compels it".
Seeing justice meted out to the perpetrator is often the first stage of "healing", that is indeed a telling omission!
Now, having seen WHAT IS NOT THERE, let us see what IS THERE:
March 23, 1992
If a current case of child abuse comes to light in your congregation, elders should do what they can to protect children from further abuse. (See 'Pay Attention to Yourselves and to All the Flock' page 93.) How might this be accomplished? In the Addendum presented at the Kingdom Ministry School, direction was given that when elders receive reports of physical or sexual abuse of a child, they should contact the Society immediately for legal advice. Thereafter, if it is established that a member of the congregation is guilty of sexually abusing a child, a judicial committee would meet with this one, following theocratic procedures. If the person is not repentant over the gross sin, disfellowshipping action would be warranted. Additionally, elders can encourage parents to review the January 22, 1985, issue of Awake! which provides suggestions on what they can do to protect their children from sexual abuse by anyone, inside or outside the family . -See also Awake! issues of June 22, 1982, and December 22, 1986
My comment: And none of the voluminous material referred to here contains counsel for the victim to whistle-blow to secular authorities - WHY NOT? The message is clear, except to the Friend Class!]
February 3, 1993
It is also a personal decision if the alleged victim chooses to report such accusations to the secular authorities.
Elders should encourage the sufferer to use discretion if that one chooses to confide in a mature friend. They can help him to see that the matter should not be indiscriminantly discussed in the congregation.
My comment: Sure, we get the message... SSSSSSSHHHHHH And there lies the nub.
August 1, 1995
Many states make it mandatory that elders report an accusation to the proper authorities but other states do not. In those states where such is required, oftentimes the parent, the guardian, or the accused person himself can do the reporting. In this way the confidentiality protected by ecclesiastical privilege is not violated.
My comment: Simply complying with "superior authorities" requirements - no concession at all here. And no counselling to whistle-blow on the part of the victim at all, where the law does not force it! The wording is very telling and bears re-reading. They could have said so much here. THEY DID NOT.
March 14, 1997
What should elders do when a former child molester moves to another congregation? .. The secretary should write on behalf of the elders to the new congregation's body of elders and outline this publisher's background and what the elders in the old congregation have been doing to assist him. Any needed cautions should be provided to the new congregation's body of elders. This letter should not be read to or discussed with the congregation.. It may be possible that some who were guilty of child molestation were or are now serving as elders, ministerial servants, or regular or special pioneers. Others may have been guilty of child molestation before they were baptized. The bodies of elders should not query individuals.. this information [re the abuse] is not to be made available to those not involved.. Elders should not discuss this information [re the letter itself] with others.
My comment: It speaks for itself. SSSSSSSSHHHHHHHHHH is implied.
July 20, 1998
In addition, court officials and lawyers will hold responsible any organization that knowingly appoints former child abusers to positions of trust, if one of these, thereafter, commits a further act of child abuse. This could result in costly lawsuits, involving dedicated funds that should be used to further the Kingdom work. So, legal considerations must also be weighed
My comment: Sure, we now see what is really important - the concluding consideration - $$$$$ to WTBTS!
A most telling omission then... no wonder Friend steered so well clear of this! There simply had to be a reason. Thanks, PB!
In conclusion, and somewhat less significantly, I am reminded of how Friend made his Nuremberg-style apologia for the Society by claiming how he could find no trace of evidence in S-2 forms of congregation-level troubles...
Friend somehow also forgot the Society's track record on these sorts of things (paper-trails):
(1) For example, during the Kingdom Ministry Schools held in Nov/Dec '94 in the U.S., elders were told to handwrite, word for word, the following things relating to the S77/S79 forms (judicial committees use these to report disfellowshipings to Brooklyn) in their 'Pay Attention To Yourselves And To All The Flock' booklets:
Six Expressions That Should Not Be Used on S77 and S79 Forms
1. Anything alluding to or naming one of the Society's attorneys
2. Any mention of the Legal Department
3. Any comments referring to direction from the Society
4. Any comments mentioning anyone other than the committee itself as a possible influence in the decision reached
5. Any comments that might suggest to someone with a critical eye that the committee did not reach its decision on its own but, instead, somehow yielded to the influence of an outside party
6. Any comments indicating that the elders mishandled the case or committed any error in the investigation or the judicial committee process.
(2) These refer to DF'ing matters:
July 1, 1989
Be Extremely Careful with Written Material .. avoid sending .. any kind of correspondence .. Nothing should be put in writing .. without specific direction from the Society. The rules and procedures of Jehovah's Witnesses do not require such written disclosures.. should be informed orally .. inform him orally .. inform him by telephone.. Guard the Use of Your Tongue!
No comment needed: makes Friend's vaunted reliance on lack of written evidence rather revealing of whether the "r" is working reliably on my keyboard, eh, F iend?
And, it is nothing personal. I realize you have your job to do. And so do I. An unimportant difference might be that you (perhaps) get paid to do it, and I definitely do not.
Just so we understand each other. You may have fooled some of them. You haven't fooled all of them. UncleBruce and Jan.H. send their love too from H2O - but what Prominent Bethelite was better still
--
Focus
("Righteous Requirements" Class)