Governing Body member is in Australia right now!

by Anonymous1 118 Replies latest watchtower child-abuse

  • defender of truth
    defender of truth
    That last question should be 'letters to elders, not elders manuals'..
  • punkofnice

    Steve2 - Yes, I totally agree with you.

    Splosh - What kind of a leader is G Jackson, that he won't come and defend his faith?

    He is filth. The WBT$ is the opposite to what you quote here...

    (Luke 12:11, 12) "When they bring you in before public assemblies, government officials, and authorities, do not become anxious about how or what you will speak in defense or what you will say, for the holy spirit will teach you in that very hour the things you should say.”

    The holy spirit has gone to the privvy.

    (2 Timothy 4:1, 2) "I solemnly charge you before God and Christ Jesus, who is to judge the living and the dead, and by his manifestation and his Kingdom: Preach the word; be at it urgently in favorable times and difficult times"

    I submit to you the Apathy trolley!!

  • Dismissing servant
    Dismissing servant

    Good questions, Defender.

    Anonymous....try not to be emotional and upset in your questions....don't make them to loaded........, but I understand if you are very upset.

    But now is the time for being rational and cool....and let the WT people making fools of themselves in media

  • bradford

    Possible question?

    The RC should read James 1:27:

    The form of worship that is clean and undefiled from the standpoint of our God and Father is this: to look after orphans and widows in their tribulation, and to keep oneself without spot from the world.

    Do you accept that the bible places a high importance upon looking after those in vulnerable positions, such as children, and women?

    Does the Watchtower policy place more importance on the reputation of its older men or the looking after these children and women?

    I'm sure the RC can produce some questions that highlight the fact that they are clearly coming up short in this area. The bible clearly did not prepare anyone for sexual abuse cases, did it? Why would a loving God allow for the mishandling of something so important as this, one of the worst crimes a human can commit against another?

  • defender of truth
    defender of truth

    Hello Allison. If I may add another question to the 2 I posted on the previous page?

    ''If a child molester in your congregation confessed what he had done (confessed to you), would you report him to the police, or warn others in the congregation to watch their children around him?

    If it was a man, and he had a position of responsibility in the congregation, would he be permanently removed from any such position?

    If he was removed from a position of trust and responsibility, could he be reappointed to that position at a later time?

    Would this policy (of reappointing former child molesters) be a fine way to protect children in the organisation, with nobody in the congregation knowing about the offenders past behaviour.. as he likely had told nobody except you or another elder?''

    Focus on policies, not scripture.

    Thanks for considering these..

  • defender of truth
    defender of truth

    Okay, that was several questions, I got carried away..


  • Vidiot

    Awesome questions, though.

  • Mickey mouse
    Mickey mouse

    I get the impression from this that if they don't get satisfactory answers from other witnesses they may yet subpoena Jackson.

  • Room 215
    Room 215
    I suspect one reason their priorities are so skewed toward protection of the accused, is that most of these are appointed elders and/or ministerial servants, not generally of the peripheral rank-and-rile members or "hangers on".... it's an indictment of their "appointment by holy spirit" fantasy.
  • Tornintwo

    Sorry if this is a repeat but I would like to see focus on the October 2012 letter of the governing body to the elders:

    " Not every individual who has sexually abused a child in the past is considered a ‘predator.’ The branch office, not the local body of elders, determines whether an individual who has sexually abused children in the past will be considered a ‘predator.’ If the branch office determines that an individual will be considered a ‘predator,’ parents with minor children will need to be warned of the danger that exists so that they can protect their children.

    So the elders get to decide who is a predator?

    Do they not accept that pedophiles generally appear as wolves in sheeps clothing, i.e. appear meak mild and innocent on the outside but are predatory and that this may not easily be detected by the elders? Not exactly going to hold a sign saying ' I AM A PREDATOR' are they?

    Do the elders/branch agree to be liable if they get this wrong and don't identify a predator correctly?

    Does the organisation accept the professional view of the high propensity to reoffend amongst pedophiles?

    Also in this letter is the paragraph on privileges:

    It cannot be said in every case that one who has sexually abused a child could never qualify for privileges of service in the congregation."

    Why not? Why shouldn't a pedophile a criminal of the sort with a notoriously high propensity to reoffend be completed excluded from privileges for the rest of their life - small punishment.

    Finally - what will they say to the universal right to preach which allows known pedophiles to call on homes of the unsuspecting public, including places where there are young children, and conduct bible studies.

Share this