Here is where the WTS will find itself without a leg to stand on in cases involving serious criminal offenses that congregation elders have knowledge of. As long as the elders keep this knowledge to themselves, then they can claim the role of "spiritual adviser" to a wrongdoer or criminal and not be forced to break a confidence, reveal a confession, or otherwise compromise the adviser/penitent privilege. We all know this isn't what happens. The elders very often involve other elders from another congregation when there aren't enough men to serve on a judicial committee or consult with either the branch office of the world headquarters on the disposal of such cases.
All such actions involve a breach of confidence and thus an end to the privilege. Once anyone besides the elders and wrongdoer knows what has happened, then no adviser privilege exists. It has been nullified by any disclosure whatsoever. The case of a child molester/pedophile in a congregation is no different, at least not in the United States. Such people must register as sex offenders and that registration is a matter of public record. Since it is already public record, then the congregation's elders cannot keep it secret and furthermore I believe they are under obligation to inform all members of the congregation about this matter. Then everyone can make up his or her mind about any association they will want for themselves or allow their children to have with this person. I also firmly believe that no convicted pedophile should participate in the door-to-door canvassing work under any circumstances.
Also, there is this to consider. The entire setup the Society uses to "discipline" people is completely unscriptural. Nowhere in Scripture do we find an outline for the star chamber procedures the Society uses. When people were called to account for wrongdoing, the entire congregation--men as well as women--was involved. Jesus in Matthew 18:15-18 stated that recalcitrant wrongdoers should be brought before the congregation to be reproved. The apostle Paul implies likewise, telling the entire Corinthian congregation that it should take back a repentant wrongdoer. This was not an action to be taken only, wholly and solely by the elders, nor were such deliberations to be held in secret but out in the open for all to hear and see.
Naturally, the WTS has rejected all such arguments. It prefers to stand in judgment itself through congregation officers that it alone appoints. The arrangement was flawed from the beginning and has now allowed abuses of the most egregious kind. Is it any wonder that the organization is now finding itself in the crosshairs of so many people determined to end its culture of abuse? This Oakland, California case may spell the end of not just the judicial committee inquiries the WTS has been using for decades, but maybe the WTS itself.
Quendi
