by paradisebeauty 15 Replies latest watchtower child-abuse
Watching the royal commission videos from day 6.
The head of the Australian branch is such a liar. He keeps saying they have the right to make decisions and regulations if they are in accordance with the scriptures, but we all know this is such a lie!!!!
He is just trying to protect the GB members from bring forced to testify!!!
They do have that right. And the governments have the right to prosecute them for exercising their right to make decisions which break the government's laws.
JW's just see it as "persecution for righteousness's sake." Whatever.
To any reasonable person, it is clear that WT "policies, practices and procedures" are woefully lacking in righteousness. They protect pedophiles and needlessly cause additional pain and suffering to their victims.
@Oubliette
What paradisebeauty is saying is that Spinks said before the Royal Commission that the Australian Branch can make make decisions and regulations if they are in accordance with the scriptures apart from Bethel and the Gobbering Body.
The Branch doesn't have any right to develop doctrine nor guidelines apart from Brooklyn headquarters. Spinks is using "theocratic warfare" strategy to separate the Branch from the GB in the eyes of the Royal Commission.
There is no way that Bethel would go along with the Australian Branch making decisions independently of their oversight. The man is lying and hiding the real relationship with the JW hierarchy.
To any reasonable person, it is clear that WT "policies, practices and procedures" are woefully lacking in righteousness. They protect pedophiles and needlessly cause additional pain and suffering to their victims.
You're quite right in saying that. And I feel the ultimate responsibility for their error lies with the GB and their helpers who lay out doctrine and guidelines for all JW's to follow uniformly worldwide. They demand the "obedience" they should also obtain the judgement for teaching and demanding others go along with their wrong practices. I think you'll fully agree with this.
However, Stewart has defined the role of the GB in their function is in relation to 'spiritual guidelines.' Then Stewart asks if scriptural interpretations ever change? and what would happen if you had a different interpretation of the scriptural guidelines for procedures other than the GB? would you be free to change them, or would you have to consult the GB?
That is why he asked him to consider, 'which scriptural guidelines could you see never changing?' before lunch...
I haven't watched part 5 yet.....
@oppostate
Yes, this is what I meant.
Their hypocrisy makes me sick.
There is some limited truth in what was said.
Branches are responsible for organising the work in the territory they cover. They will choose RC locations for example and manage the administrative aspects of the work without too much discussion with HQ. Of course there are top down processes and procedures. Larger construction projects are very much managed centrally. However on a day to day level the branch does not have to run every little detail past HQ.
When it comes to more serious issues like this then the branch has the right to change rules to suit local requirements. In the case of child abuse policies this will be limited to ensuring the process conforms to any legal requirements such as mandatory reporting. The hands of HQ in NY are tied in this case.
Does it ave the ability to change doctrinal situations such as two witnesses? Not unilaterally. If the Australian government made a law giving a victim the right to converse only with a woman for example, then the Branch would likely reformulate the policies to make some allowance for that. Any change would be agreed with HQ. It would be the minimum possible to meet the legal requirements.
No branch can make unilateral instructions about anything that has some interpreted scriptural mandate around it, like two witnesses or elders only being male etc. No branch would or could ever come up with changes to fundamentals like this. You would never see some schism opening up between countries where one country allowed female elders, two witnesses, gay marriage or whatever and other countries did not.
To illustrate the relationship with a slightly difference use case, cast your minds back to the Mexico v Malawi situation. If you consider the difference between how these were handled, it was not a branch decision as to how the rank and file were instructed. They did not say "this is what we will do in our country". The differences were from HQ. They decided that it was alright to treat the two situations differently. Neither branch had the power to say what they might have really wanted to do.
The same applies in these cases. Sure, the local branch might implement specific modifications to the core process but ONLY to suit the legal requirements of the state or country. They will never build heir own policy. It's not unknown for large numbers of, even whole, branch committees to be reassigned when they don't play ball with HQ.
The RC needs to be informed ASAP that it is the Governing Body that approve the Two Witness policy (the way they scripturally decide to apply it to child sexual abuse), and that are responsible for the instructional letters, the ones on how to scripturally handle important matters, that are sent to elders.. even if the instructions are passed on via the branch.
All this is from their official site..
"The Governing Body is a small group of mature Christians who provide direction for Jehovah’s Witnesses worldwide.
The Governing Body follows the pattern set by “the apostles and elders in Jerusalem” in the first century, who made important decisions on behalf of the entire Christian congregation.
How is the Governing Body organized?
The Governing Body has established six committees to oversee various aspects of our work, and each member serves on one or more of these committees.
...
Teaching Committee: Directs the preparation of spiritual instruction provided by means of meetings, schools, and audio and video programs.
Writing Committee: Directs the preparation of spiritual instruction provided in printed form and on our website and oversees translation work.
In addition to its work through these committees, the Governing Body meets each week to consider the needs of the organization."
www.jw.org/en/jehovahs-witnesses/faq/governing-body/
" In the first century, a small group, “the apostles and elders in Jerusalem,” served as a governing body to make important decisions on behalf of the entire anointed Christian congregation. (Acts 15:2)
When they made a unanimous decision, it was a result of discussing what the Scriptures say and yielding to the influence of God’s spirit. (Acts 15:25) That pattern is followed today...
It is being used by God to do his will. The anointed brothers who serve on the Governing Body have an intense interest in God’s Word and much experience in handling practical and spiritual matters. They meet each week to consider the needs of the worldwide brotherhood.
As in the first century, Bible-based instructions are provided either through letters or by means of traveling overseers and others. This promotes unity in thought and action among God’s people. (Acts 16:4, 5) The Governing Body oversees the preparation of spiritual food, gives impetus to the Kingdom-preaching work, and supervises the appointment of brothers to positions of responsibility. "
www.jw.org/en/publications/books/jehovahs-will/jehovahs-witnesses-governing-body/
And if anyone has other evidence of the GB approving all scripturally based policies, please put this information together with it ..
And Email it to the Royal Commission.
We could make a difference.
Can someone please email them?
@ defender of truth
Yes, someone who's first language is english should write to them ASAP
Also, can someone please suggest to the RC that they ask the bethel head something along the lines of..
"Did the Governing Body have to approve the material contained in the Shepherd the Flock book (latest elders manual), before it could be distributed to overseers in the various congregations? *Yes*
And do the elders have to follow the instructions contained in this book, including the procedure for dealing with incidents of Child abuse? *Yes*
Does the same apply to confidential letters already submitted, that concern how to deal with those accused of committing child abuse? Did the Governing Body have to read and approve those as well, before they were sent out as instructions to the elders?
Then the Governing Body are responsible for setting the procedure for dealing with child abuse within the organisation.
Bring in Geoffrey Jackson!! "
Seriously, can someone make a suggestion like this?
My emails are monitored by my parents, I don't have the guts to email the RC.
