The Watchtower Society said the following as part of their media statement concerning the recent multi-million dollar settlement of 16 child abuse court claims:
"As an organization, we will continually strive to educate families and congregations with sound Scriptural teachings that they can use to protect their children from child molesters. And we will continue to do our utmost to protect children from this horrible crime and sin."
Sound scriptural teachings? How commendable for the Society to strive to educate JW's with 'sound scriptural teachings' to 'protect their children from child molestors'. How utterly abysmal is the Society's failure to follow their own advice. The Society's 'two-witness' rule in relaton to allegations of child abuse is the most twisted, pharasaical, legalistic, harsh, UNSOUND scriptural teaching you can get.
Do the GB honestly think Jehovah and Jesus smile at them from heaven when they fanatically follow some ancient, defunct rule in Deuteronomy 19:15 (yes, according to Watchtower interpretation, the entire Mosaic law code ended with Christ's death, which includes Deuteronomy 19:15) in situations involving allegations of serious crimes against a child! Do they think Jehovah is pleased with them when they apply Jesus' admonition at Matthew 18:15-17, admonition that clearly only applies to ADULT DISPUTES in the congregation, to cases involving children molested in secret? Is the GB so spiritually blind and unreasonable that they imagine this is how Jesus would have wanted his words to have been applied?? Don't they understand anything about what Jesus told the Pharisees concerning their nit-picking application of obscure rules, their fanatical, legalistic adherence to the letter of the law while shoving aside love, mercy, justice!
The GB are indeed as spiritually blind and hardhearted as the Pharisees on this matter. They would be prepared to see the sheep that has fallen into the pit die rather than see one scripture broken. They would rather not heal the lepers withered hand than break one petty rule. They would rather stone the adulteress than show mercy. In this matter they have squeezed out the gnat and gulped down the camel, they have perverted love and mercy and justice in favour of adherence to cruel, unreasonable, and flawed interpretations of scripture. Just look at all the damage, hurt and shame that has and is resulting.
Worst of all, the Watchtower Society justifies their absurd application of the 'two witness' evidence rule by claiming that this is what Jehovah demands and so their hands are tied. They thus put the blame squarely on God's shoulders and wash their hands of any responsibility. They have, in effect, made Jehovah responsible for any abuse suffered as the result of their rigid 'two witness' rule. They have brought untold reproach on Jehovah's name with their pharasaical, twisted interpretations of scripture and their gross failure to look after orphans and widows in their time of need. They have dragged Jehovah's name through the mud with their cruel blood policy and two witness rule. How many hundreds of children have died or suffered abuse on the alter of rigid, legalistic Watchtower interpretation and policy.
The Watchtower Society must surely see the need to end this disgraceful folly once and for all. Those of us who still hold out some hope for reform of an organisation we were once proud to belong to now call on the Governing Body to humble itself and correct it's faulty interpretations and policies that are causing untold harm and bringing untold reproach on Jehovah's name. If the Governing Body refuses to take corrective measures to end these unchristian, harmful policies then those individuals responsible for their perpetuation must be removed from their positions and held accountable.
Yaddayadda
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Other cases of serious wrongdoing require special attention by the elders in order to determine what is needed to help the repentant wrongdoer and to preserve the spiritual health of all in the congregation. These include such sins as adultery, fornication, apostasy, and drunkenness. ... Before forming a committee, elders determine if the accusation has substance. It must Scripturally be an offense serious enough to result in disfellowshipping. There must be either two witnesses or a confession of wrongdoing." (Pay Attention To Yourselves and To All the Flock, Confidential Elders-Only Rule Book; 1991, Pages 107-108)
"What kind of evidence is acceptable? There must be two or three eyewitnesses, not just persons repeating what they have heard; no action can be taken if there is only one witness. (Deut. 19:15; Joh. 8:17) Confession (admission of wrongdoing), either written or oral, may be accepted as conclusive proof without other corroborating evidence. (Josh. 7:19) Strong circumstantial evidence, such as pregnancy or evidence (testified to by at least two witnesses) that the accused stayed all night in the same house with a person of the opposite sex (or in the same house with a known homosexual) under improper circumstances, is acceptable. The testimony of youths may be considered; it is up to the elders to determine if the testimony has the ring of truth. The testimony of unbelievers may also be considered, but it must be carefully weighed. If there are two or three witnesses to the same kind of wrongdoing but each one is witness to a separate incident, their testimony can be considered. Such evidence may be used to establish guilt, but it is preferable to have two witnesses to the same occurrence of wrongdoing." (Pay Attention To Yourselves and To All the Flock, Confidential Elders-Only Rule Book; 1991, Page 110)
"Is there sufficient evidence to establish by two witnesses or otherwise that the person is clearly guilty of serious wrongdoing?" (Pay Attention To Yourselves and To All the Flock, Confidential Elders-Only Rule Book; 1991, Page 119)
"At least two witnesses are required to establish a charge of wrongdoing. (John 8:17; Hebrews 10:28) If the person denies the charge and your testimony is the only one, the matter will be left in Jehovah's hands. (1 Timothy 5:19, 24, 25) This is done in the knowledge that all things are openly exposed to Jehovah and that if the person is guilty, eventually his sins will catch up with him. Hebrews; Numbers 32:23. But suppose the person does deny the charge and you are the only witness against him. Could you now be open to a countercharge of slander? No, not unless you have gossiped to those not involved in the matter. It is not slanderous to report conditions affecting a congregation to those having authority and responsibility to oversee and correct matters. It is, in fact, in line with our desire always to do what is correct and loyal.--Compare Luke 1:74, 75" (Quote from The Watchtower, August 15, 1997 Issue, Pages 27-28)
"in following Scriptural procedures, the congregation can only take judicial action on the eyewitness evidence of two or more individuals, or confession. So, while we may have some strong convictions on a certain situation, without this Scriptural evidence the elders are not able to take judicial action. This in no way implies that they do not believe the one bringing them the information, but as you said in your letter it is how Jehovah sees things that is important. Since this is God's direction to those examining cases of wrongdoing, the elders must abide by the Scriptures.--Deuteronomy 17:6; 19:15 ; 1 Timothy 5:19." (Quote from an Official Watchtower Society Letter written from the Watchtower Service Department regarding the molestation of the step-daughter of Daniel Fitzwater.)
"Brown said the faith does require at least two witnesses to prove any kind of wrongdoing -- including child molestation -- because that is what is taught in the Bible. But corroborating evidence can be used instead of a second witness to prove wrongdoing, Brown said." (Associated Press (AP) News, February 11th 2001 )
"The church - which has about 6 million members worldwide, including 1 million in the United States - requires two witnesses because the Bible requires it for establishing a sin, he said." (Associated Press (AP) News, Tuesday, January 22, 2002 )
"Brown said the church, which has about 6 million members worldwide including 1 million in the United States, requires two witnesses because the Bible requires that for establishing a sin." (The Seattle Times Newspaper, January 23rd 2002 )
"The two-witnesses requirement applies to how we handle transgressions or sins as a church," Brown said. "It has nothing to do with how we handle a crime. ( SACRAMENTO BEE, Saturday, January 26, 2002 )
"When any one of Jehovah's Witnesses is accused of an act of child abuse, the local congregation elders are expected to investigate. Two elders meet separately with the accused and the acc user to see what each says on the matter. If the accused denies the charge, the two elders may arrange for him and the victim to restate their position in each other's presence, with elders also there. If during that meeting the accused still denies the charges and there are no others who can substantiate them, the elders cannot take action within the congregation at that time. Why not? As a Bible-based organization, we must adhere to what the Scriptures say, na mel y, "No single witness should rise up against a man respecting any error or any sin . . . At the mouth of two witnesses or at the mouth of three witnesses the matter should stand good." (Deuteronomy 19:15) Jesus reaffirmed this principle as recorded at Matthew 18:15-17. However, if two persons are witnesses to separate incidents of the same kind of wrongdoing, their testimony may be deemed sufficient to take action." (Quotes from the Official Child Abuse Policy Statement on the Official Watchtower Media Website at http://www.JW-Media.org )
"However, we must bear in mind the Bible's clear direction: 'No single witness should rise up against a man respecting any error or any sin. At the mouth of two witnesses or at the mouth of three witnesses the matter should stand good." (The Guardian U.K. Newspaper, June 10th 2002 )
"First, if any allegation is made against someone, that person must confess or there must be two witnesses to the act for it to be proven: "No single witness should rise up against a man respecting any error or any sin... At the mouth of two witnesses or at the mouth of three witnesses the matter should stand good." (Deuteronomy 19:15 )" (BBC Panorama News Story on their Website, Friday, July 12th 2002 )
"In the United States , when any one of Jehovahs Witnesses is accused of an act of child abuse, the local elders are expected to investigate. The procedure is as follows. Two elders meet separately with the accused and the acc user to see what each says on the matter. If the accused denies the charge, the two elders may arrange for him to have the opportunity to confront the acc user in their presence. If during that meeting the accused still denies the charges and there are no others who can substantiate them, the elders cannot take action within the congregation at that time. Why not? As a Bible-based organization, we must adhere to what the Scriptures say, na mel y, "No single witness should rise up against a man respecting any error or any sin . . . at the mouth of two witnesses or at the mouth of three witnesses the matter should stand good." (Deuteronomy 19:15) Jesus reaffirmed this principle as recorded at Matthew 18:15-17." (Quotes from Statement that J.R. Brown Faxed to Betsan Powys (BBC Panorama Reporter) on May 9th 2002 , and was Posted on the Official Watchtower Society Media Website at http://www.jw-media.org right around the same time the BBC Panorama Program aired)
"Brown, the Witnesses' spokesman, would not discuss specific cases, but he scoffed at allegations that Witnesses protect child molesters. Yes, Witnesses believe in the two-witness rule, he said, but that's not the only way wrongdoers can be caught. "It cannot be said that we will do nothing unless there are two witnesses," Brown said. He said Witnesses are not required to report crimes to elders before calling civil authorities. Victims and their families are free to call police at will, he said, although some don't choose to." ( St. Petersburg Times Newspaper, Published August 22nd 2002 )
"If the accused denies the abuse happened, the charge is dropped unless another witness can corroborate the story. That rule is based on the Biblical book of Deuteronomy: "No single witness should rise up against a man respecting any error or any sin." In effect, the child's accusation is dismissed unless another person saw the abuse or another child comes forward with an allegation against the same church member. "We are bound by the scriptures," Thomas said. "But we would still report it to the authorities with only one witness" so the victim gets "the protection of the secular authorities." But abuse is seldom reported in jurisdictions where there is no mandatory reporting requirement, Bowen said. Family members and the victim are also forbidden from talking about abuse to other congregation members. Thomas said elders must protect the privacy of an accused, especially if he has repented, but are instructed to carefully monitor him and prevent him from being alone with kids. Bowen, who was excommunicated last month after being found guilty of "causing divisions," decried the process, noting the cloak of secrecy allows pedophiles to go door to door "witnessing" without anyone but the elders in the know. The requirement of two witnesses is ridiculous in cases of sex abuse, he said. And though elders may be well-meaning, they aren't trained to question or handle victims, he said." (The Toronto Sun Newspaper, September 1st 2002 )
"Brown, the Witness spokesman, said that while the church does require two witnesses or other compelling evidence before meting out any church discipline, that's beside the point because that requirement deals only with internal church procedures. He said the church does not forbid members from reporting crimes to the police." (Mid- Val ley Sunday, October 6th 2002 )
"JOHN BROWN SAYS THE RELIGION FORBIDS PUNISHMENT OF AN ACCUSED MOLESTER WHO DENIES ALLEGATIONS UNLESS THERE IS ANOTHER EYEWITNESS TO THE ABUSE." ( Tucson , Arizona News, September 6, 2002 )
"Brown, the Witness spokesman, said that while the church does require two witnesses or other compelling evidence before meting out any church discipline, that's beside the point because that requirement deals only with internal church procedures. He said the church does not forbid members from reporting crimes to the police. "We're not trying to deal with the penalty of the law," he said. "That's a separate thing from our point of view. Yes, an ab user should pay the penalty, even if he has to sit in jail for 10 or 15 years." " (Mid- Val ley Sunday Oregon News, October 5, 2002 ; Associated Press, October 7, 2002 )
"Church general counsel Philip Brumley said the church's own investigation of previous lawsuits found church elders did nothing wrong as they tried to protect victims, comply with sexual abuse reporting laws and adhere to biblical admonitions against accepting accusations by a single witness. ... Brumley explained the requirement stems from biblical references that no single witness should rise up against any man. But he denied the church discourages victims or their parents from going to police." (CNN.com, "Lawsuits allege cover-up of sexual abuse by Jehovah's Witnesses", Tuesday, July 29, 2003
The Governing Body must stop this wickedness & reproach NOW
by yaddayadda 10 Replies latest watchtower child-abuse
-
yaddayadda
-
WTWizard
I believe that the whole organizational structure is set up in such a way that true reform is impossible. Any member of the Governing Body that tries to put a stop to this bull**** and means it will be dealt with as Raymond Franz was. Lip service will continue to be paid to appease the governments. As it's the government's rightful duty to protect its citizens from initiatory force and fraud from these sources and this constitutes initiatory use of fraud, I believe that the sooner the organization is taxed out of business, the better.
-
ithinkisee
Since the split of the Society in the 90's into two groups, the GB has less power than ever before. They now have to ask their lawyers for permission to publish certain articles and they must ask accountants for money. They are slowly becoming a figurehead to the real people in charge - accountants and lawyers.
The Society is slowly becoming more and more faceless. Fred Franz was the last real face of the Society. Since then there have been a string of "presidents" but they are not touted like messiahs like WT Presidents in the past have been.
And like all cults the Society is making their leadership more and more ambiguous and hard to figure out.
Like most cults, they now have hundreds of registered businesses worldwide and their money trails are kept as secret as possible.
I am with the previous poster who said they have made it so that reform is impossible.
-ithinkisee -
yaddayadda
I agree that reform seems hopeless. The organisation has become a cold, faceless corporation whose highest priority is maintaining its own image. You can't put new wine into old wineskins.
-
Junction-Guy
No this org cant be reformed, and the only place it belongs is in the dung heap.
-
greendawn
It all has to do with money Yada, they wanted to minimise their liabilities as an org by denying cases of child abuse to avoid getting sacked into paying big compensations as for example happened to the Catholic Church. Hence the two witness rule an obviously faulty move but the FDS is expert at taking verses and twisting them in a way that serves their interests while presenting them as the god approved and right way to go. Usually their real motives are not the ones they state.
I doubt whether the lawyers and accountants are ruling the org any more than the GB members. The real authorities of this org remain concealed and unknown and the GB are their puppets.
-
Gayle
The children are suffering the most in so many ways!
-
Arthur
I believe that the whole organizational structure is set up in such a way that true reform is impossible. Any member of the Governing Body that tries to put a stop to this bull**** and means it will be dealt with as Raymond Franz was.
Yeah, I completely agree this as well. This is essentially what Ray Franz himself has stated a number of times - that the whole organizational concept (as developed by Rutheford) is the real chain that shackles the GB.
They can make cosmetic "reforms" such as changes in committees, corporations, and anything else you might see on a flow chart. The only way that true significant reforms could be possible is by dismantling the doctrinal structures (governing body, two classes of Christians) which prevent this from taking place. How many people in the past have willingly relinquished that kind of power?
-
Pahpa
Why is it that the elders seemed reluctant to follow up on reported cases of child abuse but went to extraordinary measures to expose sexual "wrong doing" such as adultery and fornication of suspected members? I can remember cases where elders spied upon and maintained surveillance of these individuals in order to have the "two or three witnesses" for a judicial case. In one case, the elders remained outside a house for a number of hours and decided that this was enough "evidence" to prove adultery. But the reports of the abuse of children were often not taken seriously and any follow up was practically non-existant.
However, with this settlement the Society may now wish to avoid further payments and scandal. Hopefully, the policy will change in the congregations.
-
HeyChap
Why is there hardly any activity on the JW boards? Sometimes there are gaps of several months between posts? They do believe in computers dont they?