Call for Judicial Hearing by signed letter

by sp74bb 46 Replies latest jw friends

  • sp74bb
    sp74bb

    ZAPPA-ESQUE

    So true.... well noted....

  • sir82
    sir82

    Please accept, Sir, our warmest greetings.

    This strikes me as funny, even if a mere formality.

    I can just picture a medieval executioner saying to the convicted, "Please accept my warmest greetings, and I hope you have a pleasant day."

  • sp74bb
    sp74bb

    😂😂😂 sir82

  • berrygerry
    berrygerry

    I can just picture a medieval executioner saying to the convicted, "Please accept my warmest greetings, and I hope you have a pleasant day."

    Why execution is a loving provision from Jehovah!

  • opusdei1972
    opusdei1972

    My sister was accused of apostasy by the elders and they asked her to attend a judicial hearing, however, she asked them a formal letter specifying the charge so as to attend the judicial hearing with her attorney. Nevertheless, the elders did not want to do anything in writing. After some years, they disfellowshipped her by phone, but they always avoided to put something in writing.

  • sp74bb
    sp74bb

    opusdei1972, this why I tried to manage to stay away of any JW even through phone...

  • SAHS
    SAHS

    I don’t see anything illegal or wrong in itself with the letter from the congregation elders in the original post. The letter stated: “We tried to call you several ways but we were unable.” So, to me it appears that, in all fairness, the elders were just trying to do what they thought was their due diligence in informing Mr. López in writing of the letter they received from someone making an accusation, and formally requesting him to attend a judicial meeting to hopefully ascertain and clarify the facts of the matter to come to some kind of resolution. The purpose of the letter from the elders was to just to confirm whether or not Mr. López would be attending the proposed judicial meeting, and to provide the opportunity for him to let them know in writing whether or not he still wishes to be considered a member of the Jehovah’s Witnesses.

    That’s really all the elders were trying to do by sending the letter. There was no mention of any kind of threat or judgment. The letter was simply to confirm whether or not Mr. López was going to attend the judicial meeting and to ask if he still wants to be a Jehovah’s Witness. They just wanted to confirm the situation and where things stand so they can tie up the loose ends in their written records.

    Now, the nature and disposition of any actual judicial meetings with the elder committee would be a different matter completely. Don’t get me wrong – I don’t believe it’s proper, fair, or even legal in any general, “natural” law sense the way these kangaroo court judicial meetings are run, which tend to be very authoritarian, arbitrary, and high-handed. That part, if it should come to that, deserves some outside scrutiny, as well as media involvement, to be sure.

    But as for the elders’ letter itself in the original post, I think it was basically just requesting clarification of the status of Mr. López’s attendance at the meeting. While the elders, as well as the Watch Tower corporation, would certainly have some sort of accountability in their actions at any judicial hearing, it’s nevertheless only fair and reasonable for the elders to at least be able to know whether or not to expect him to attend.

  • Hecce
    Hecce
    SAHS

    Your post is very well reasoned based in the information at hand, I am aware of more because of the Spanish Forum and I can tell you that Mr. Lopez is "a pain" for the elders and that they just want to get rid of him. If he wants to expand on details he can do it, but the elders are not following procedure by inviting him to a JC without going thru the previous step of the conversation with two elders.

    Like I said I am pretty sure that he will explain their intent in more details.

  • cofty
    cofty

    SAHS - There is no judicial unless there is a confession or two witnesses.

    They have made the mystery sister open to a legal charge if libel if the adultery did not happen.

  • SAHS
    SAHS

    “Hecce”: “. . . but the elders are not following procedure by inviting him to a JC without going thru the previous step of the conversation with two elders.

    “cofty”: There is no judicial unless there is a confession or two witnesses.

    Those are both certainly valid points, which should be acknowledged. In fact, at least according to the details provided by the original poster (Mr. López / “sp74bb”), the standard procedure of the Watch Tower organization for initiating a judicial proceeding and forming a committee seems to have not been followed by this evidently errant local body of elders.

    This consideration of the validity of the manner in which the judicial process was initiated is a separate issue from the propriety of sending a request to attend (like an amateur “summons”) in the mail, as well as the part in the letter asking whether Mr. López wishes to basically disassociate himself from being one of Jehovah’s Winesses, which is also contrary to the direction in the elders’ Shepherd the Flock manual.

    If the legitimately-established protocols from Watch Tower had been followed before the elders’ letter was sent, then that letter would have been fine – except, of course, for the part asking if Mr. López wished to disassociate at that time. But, as it is, the timing of such a letter advising of a specific date for a judicial trial was inappropriate due to the lack of the steps required beforehand, as noted by “Hecce” and “cofty” above.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit