ORG. BOOK CANCELLED TWO WITNESS RULE!

by IslandWoman 24 Replies latest jw friends

  • dungbeetle
    dungbeetle

    the two editions say the same thing with respect to pages 142-144.

    I was referring, Island Women, to the title of your post. What exactly is 'changed' or 'cancelled'? It's a nice catchy title, but is it accurate?

    Here is something more to add to the mix:

    "Your Word is a Lamp to my Foot" 1967:

    'For a matter to be established as true, there must be two or three witness....These cannot be persons who are simply repeating what they have heard from someone else; they must be witnesses of the things concerning which they testify. No action is taken if there is just one witness; it is not the the brothers discredit the testimony, but the Bible requires that, unless the wrongdoer himself confesses his sin, the facts must be substantiated by two ro three witnesses in these serious matters.'

    So, :

    1967: 'two witness' rule

    1983: 'two witness two act' rule

    1989 'two witness two act' rule

    1995 'two witness one act' rule for child abuse ONLY

    2002: 'two witness two act' rule.

    new light, old light, STROBE LIGHT...

    BEFORE YOU TRY AND REMOVE THE STICK FROM MY ARSE, REMOVE THE TELEPHONE POLE FROM YOUR OWN ARSE.

  • IslandWoman
    IslandWoman

    Dungbeetle,

    You brought up the two editions not me, you challenged the date I gave, I responded.

    As for the title of the thread it refers to this quote from the Society's book, which by the way is in the original post of this thread!

    "Preferably they should be witnesses of the alleged wrongdoing, BUT IF THERE ARE NO EYEWITNESSES, YOU MAY CHOOSE TO TAKE ALONG RESPONSIBLE BROTHERS WHO BECOME WITNESSES TO THE EVIDENCE PRESENTED IN THE DISCUSSION......."

    While referring to Matthew 18:15-17 as a support for their 2 eyewitness rule, they at the same time "cancel" that requirement by stating the above.

    Any other problem?

    IW

  • morrisamb
    morrisamb

    I knew there was a reason why I haven't read Witness literature in 17 years!

    These quotes show an unbelievable lack of insight into the nature of the crime of sexual abuse. You'd think this was some sin of stealing a kid's ice cream and promising not to do it again:

    "What if the sufferer decides that he wants to make an accusation? Then the two elders can advise him ..[that]..he should personally approach the accused about the matter."

    Say what? Would someone who survived a murder attempt be expected to personally approach the accused to lay the accusation. Unbelievable. Psych 101: even an adult survivor often displays the fear and trauma of their childhood experience when in the presense of ANYONE who REMINDS them of their perpetrator.

    "Or perhaps the one accused will confess, and a reconciliation may be achieved. What a blessing that would be!"

    Holy pollyanna! A molester needs to face up to his actions. I don't think disclosure is the proper time for a group hug!

    "If the accusation is denied, the elders should explain to the accuser that nothing more can be done in a judicial way. And the congregation will continue to view the one accused as an innocent person."

    Okay, then suggest to the victim possibilities. ie. here are some agencies that could help you: the police, social services, crisis hotline, and so on.

    "Even if more than one person "remembers" abuse by the same individual, the nature of these recalls is just too uncertain to base judicial decisions on them without other supporting evidence."

    Lordy, lord. What is the chances that two victims "recalled" an incident of abuse about the same person? Once again, if you want to wash your hands of this, why not suggest calling the police?

  • deddaisy
    deddaisy

    "As a Bible-based organization, we must adhere to what the scriptures say, 'No single witness should rise up against a man respecting any error or sin...At the mouth of two witnesses or at the mouth of three the matter should stand good.' Deut. 19:15
    Jesus reaffirmed this principle as recorded at Matthew 18:15-17."
    WTS

    I agree with blues, Matt 18:15-17 is not addressing witnesses to the "wrongdoing" and is NOT "reaffirming this principle" as the WTS claims...in actuality, it's somewhat contradictory to Deut. 19:15.....

    anyway, when I recently mentioned the somewhat harsh laws of Deuteronomy, i.e. 23:2, which states that "no bastard shall enter the assembly of the Lord..." I was told that Deuteronomy was "old" law that was void and replaced by new law when Jesus died for our sin.

    edited to clarify and add: very interesting Island!

  • nancee park
    nancee park

    Looking at the Catholicism parallel, the Watchtower Society heads do not want to make it easier to dump pedophiles because lots of them are local elders, circuit overseers, district overseers and governing body members, even as Catholics have priests, bishops, archbishops who are pedophiles. You know about Leo Greenlees and Ewart Chitty, don't you? Did you think those two were the entire story??

    I say it's a criminal conspiracy. The FBI needs to seize all their records on all 20,000 plus pedophiles! Get Jeff Anderson to have the FBI do its duty!!

  • IslandWoman
    IslandWoman

    The point is, the Society seems to have a dual policy for a disfellowshipping offense!

    Relatively minor offenses: with or without eyewitnesses can result in disfellowshipping.

    Major offenses: No disfellowshipping without two eyewitnesses!

    The result is: Brothers who commit minor offenses are more likely to be disfellowshipped than those who commit major offenses; that is if the elders adhere to the Org. book.

    This is a major policy mistake!

    IW

  • Had Enough
    Had Enough

    Well according to the WTS own website, Mr. Brumley (General Councel for the JWs) says that the assertion that JWs take no action unless the accusation is verified by 2 witnesses is "just simply not true".

    He explains:
    "Now in addition to seeing to it that the victim is protected, the elders will meet with the accused and find out what he or she has to say about the situation. In those cases, they also contact our headquarters to receive any recommendations or advice that we may have. Where even one allegation is made of child molestation, steps are taken to see to it that the authorities are also involved."

    He says that perhaps our accusation comes from what they do interally or judicially.

    "If an allegation is raised against a certain individual, elders will meet with that individual to see if he wishes to confess or see if he wishes to seek the help of the elders in any way. If two separate witnesses raise an accusation against an individual, and if it is
    found that the practice is going on and he is unrepentant, then the individual is dismissed, or disfellowshipped, excommunicated, from the congregation."

    Ahhh...so in order to df someone, the elders need 2 witnesses. So here's what Brumley says is the difference for what requires 1 witness or 2.

    "The difference then lies in what we do with regard to legal requirements and protecting the victim. Those steps are taken even if only one individual raises an allegation of child molestation. On a separate matter, disciplinary steps are taken if two witnesses raise an accusation against an individual suspected of being a child abuser."

    I would like to know where in there publications and instructions to the elders in the previous years up to now, did it say that "Where even one allegation is made of child molestation, steps are taken to see to it that the authorities are also involved" and that the 2 witness requirement is only for internal needs for disfellowshipping to take place.

    No wonder so many elders have not handled these matters right...yes..its ALL their fault for not reading between the lines and for not seeing what wasn't written there.

    And what about the poor elders who were told by the Legal dept. to "not get yourself in a jam" and "leave it in J's hands" as we all heard being told to Bill Bowen.

    A non-JW very close to me said several years ago, that the JW org is all based on grey areas and vagueness. Hmmmm...howcome it took me so long to see it?

    Had Enough

    "Never doubt that a small group of citizens can change the world.
    Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has."
    ...Margaret Mead

  • dungbeetle
    dungbeetle

    He explains:
    "Now in addition to seeing to it that the victim is protected, the elders will meet with the accused and find out what he or she has to say about the situation. In those cases, they also contact our headquarters to receive any recommendations or advice that we may have. Where even one allegation is made of child molestation, steps are taken to see to it that the authorities are also involved."

    He says that perhaps our accusation comes from what they do interally or judicially.

    <"If an allegation is raised against a certain individual, elders will meet with that individual to see if he wishes to confess or see if he wishes to seek the help of the elders in any way. If two separate witnesses raise an accusation against an individual, and if it is found that the practice is going on and he is unrepentant, then the individual is dismissed, or disfellowshipped,
    excommunicated, from the congregation.">

    MY GOD HOW CAN YOU NOT SEE THE HOLES IN THIS STATEMENT....

    <and if it is found that the practice is going on and he is unrepentant,>

    What did you see in that video?

    "Is there anything to this?"

    "No"

    "Okay then...sorry we bothered you."

    The practice is not going on.

    HOW ABOUT HIS:

    "17 people have accused you of molesting them. Is there anything to this?"

    "Yes, but I am sorry and not doing it anymore."

    "Okay then, ...sorry we bothered you."

    <gag> <choke> <splutter>

    BEFORE YOU TRY AND REMOVE THE STICK FROM MY ARSE, REMOVE THE TELEPHONE POLE FROM YOUR OWN ARSE.

  • Grout
    Grout

    IslandWoman, I think you misunderstood the book.

    They're saying that if you take somebody along on a Matt18-style confrontation, that you should choose eyewitnesses of the "sin" as your companions. But if there are no eyewitnesses, then somebody else will do.

    None of that has any relevance to judicial proceedings, AFAICS.

    --
    Chip Salzenberg: Free-Floating Agent of Chaos

  • IslandWoman
    IslandWoman

    Grout,

    None of that has any relevance to judicial proceedings,
    It does have relevance to judicial proceedings, that's why the last step in the process is to go before the elders who then, if the evidence warrants, can disfellowship the accused. This with no eyewitnesses!

    IW

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit