Pope meets victims of child sexual abuse in Chile and cries with them. WHAT ABOUT THE GB, WHEN WILL THEY FOLLOW RCC???

by redpilltwice 40 Replies latest watchtower child-abuse

  • redpilltwice

    Hanged Man, I have been both baptised Catholic and baptised JW, now agnost, never to join a manmade religion again, but... the corruption of the RCC is not the issue. That is a proven fact. It is the comparison between the so called one and only true religion on earth, JW and the ones they have always condemned, the RCC, being the most prominent part of false religion, Babylon The Great. Like diogenester said...the pope at least has the humility to face the public and personally apologise on behalf of the church... the least a christian could do in order to show some humanity. They have lost members because of abuse and finally they acknowledge this, no more beating around the bush. Even if it's just symbolic, not sincere and much too late, an apology is already MORE than what the WT has done. WT promises to look at things and even to study the RCC (satan's pride!) but in reality they don't give a shit, continue to deceive their own members and remain arrogant. What does this tell you about the true face and morality of the WT? Spirit directed by Jah? Hell no... so it''s all about perspective here. WE see it, but it's time the PUBLIC sees it too and how this is more than just human imperfection. Let common sense be the judge of this organisation.

  • Hanged Man
    Hanged Man

    What else could papa do....facing the onslaught......if the watchtower starts to feel the "pinch" the concessions will begin also......there will be tears and snot on JW broadcasting.

  • hildebrando

    Pope Francis.... in Chile defended to Juan Barros, bishop of Osorno, for allegations of sex abuse:


    For more details see movie "El Bosque de Karadima" with subtitles in English:


  • Bobby2446

    I just wanted to chime in on this: you don’t have to apologize for something you are not guilty of. The pope is apologizing because the RCC time and time again, admitted that it’s leaders hide abuse and shifted pedophile priests. To date, they do not deny that they are responsible for it. Secondly, the vast majority of abusers on the RCC were priests, and their abuse was done during their duties as priests (meaning, in the church).

    This is really in stark contrast with JW’s, where the vast majority of child abuse is done by non-elder family members, in the home. Why should the gb apologize for the crimes members commit outside of the Hall?

    Should an employer “apologize” to a bank because one of its employees decided to rob it?

    So trying to compare an institution that admits it fostered an environment that permitted child abuse to one that didn’t foster such an environment is really asinine.

  • LisaRose
    JW’s, where the vast majority of child abuse is done by non-elder family members, in the home

    I would love to see proof of this, I am sure you wouldn't make such a definitive statement without any proof, right?

    o trying to compare an institution that admits it fostered an environment that permitted child abuse to one that didn’t refuses to admit that they foster such an environment or even have such an issue in the first place is really asinine

    There, fixed that for you, my comments in bold.

  • Bobby2446

    Lol the fact that you had to edit my comment means you simply want to remain ignorant.

    But I will provide my source, which is independent:

    “But the shape of the scandal is far different than in the Catholic church, where most of the people accused of abuse are priests and a vast majority of the victims were boys and young men. In the Jehovah's Witnesses, where congregations are often collections of extended families and church elders are chosen from among the laypeople, some of those accused are elders, but most are congregation members. The victims who have stepped forward are mostly girls and young women, and many accusations involve incest.”


  • John Davis
    John Davis

    Also, the ARC own spreadsheet indicates that most of those cases involved those of a family relationship and did not involve those that were in an appointed position.

  • Bobby2446

    I was just going to cite that.

  • LisaRose

    Well, there is a big difference between "most" and "the vast majority". Statistically most men are not elders, so it's not surprising most accused are not as well. I have read hundreds of accounts of Jehovah's Witnesses sex abuse, elders are involved in many cases.

    I won't deny that the shape of the issue is different in the Jehovah's Witnesses than the Catholic church, but that doesn't mean that there isnt an issue. One of the problems is this idea that the organization is somehow immune from these problems, the so called "spiritual paradise" the religion claims to enjoy, it creates a culture where people are more trusting and less likely to report problems.

    Another issue is that the elders are the ones who investigate, and in too many cases they don't do a good enough job. Lack of any formal training in recognizing signs of abuse or in how to deal with it, a culture of "it doesn't happen here", as you have demonstrated, powerlessness among women, a leadership that steadfastly refuses to change the "two witness rule" are all a factor. This kind of thing was common among organizations in the fifties, there is no excuse for it now.

    And if elders do abuse children, who investigate them? Their fellow elders. Do you honestly think that there is no conflict of interest here? It's just human nature to believe someone you know and like and work with. All the factors that make it unlikely anyone will be disciplined for child abuse goes double when an elder is accused. They are just not going to do anything to "bring reproach" on the organization, and an elder convicted of sex abuse would be a major scandal.

  • Bobby2446

    You won’t deny the difference because evidence doesn’t allow it. Just before I posted the link, you were no doubt more than happy to make an equal comparison.

    Secondly, elders don’t investigate abuse. All they are doing is attempting to corroborate an accusation (dealing with sin — the police deal crime). Straw man.

    Thirdly, you are lying. Where in print, or implication, is an attitude that abuse “doesn’t happen here”? Please prove that.

    Foruthly, you are ignorant of the two-witness rule (or playing ignorant). It’s an allegation, with corroborating evidence, including BUT NOT LIMITED TO, a physical eye witness. This is the base standard of all civilized justice systems.

    Fifthly, you are just speculating about an alleged “conflict of interest”. The fact that very few elders are accused of child abuse means that there is no incentive for them to cover for each other.

Share this