I've just read the transcript. Thanks for posting the links. Terrible reading.
Montana Supreme Court will hear the $35M case tomorrow
by Corney 56 Replies latest watchtower child-abuse
-
-
Corney
It's streaming now (video)!
-
The Fall Guy
The JW lawyer is a scumbag weasel who is imitating his charlatan bosses at Warwick.
He kept insisting that "confidentiality" is a core belief for elders to adhere to.
When a JW "confesses" a serious sin to an elder, the elder is obliged by organisational decree to share that "confidentiality" with other elders.
Others who may/will be also be told can include the service department at the Branch office, the Circuit Overseer, and last but not least, elders' wives and their friends.
-
DATA-DOG
It’s not a confession if:
1) You have no Clergy/Laity distinction.
2) An abuser is busted by the victim/ victim’s family and THEN were summoned before the Elders.
DD
-
vienne
I do not see the distinction, except in the minds of Witnesses, between a Watchtower Elder and clergy. Two of my uncles are elders. They're nice men, but they do what clergy do. How is there a difference? Sorry for taking this a bit off topic.
-
sparky1
"I do not see the distinction, except in the minds of Witnesses."
"Do Jehovah's Witnesses Have a Paid Clergy?"
"Following the model of first- century Christianity, Jehovah's Witnesses have no clergy-laity division. All baptized members are ordained ministers and share in the preaching and teaching work. Witnesses are organized into congregations of about 100 members. Spiritually mature men in each congregation serve as "older men' or elders. (Titus 1:5) They do so without being paid for their services." FAQ 2012-06-26 JW (dot) Org
If their is no clergy than Data-Dog is correct. This religion cannot have it both ways. No Clergy, no Clergy confidentiality.
-
JC323
Ok so no clergy then there is no lawsuit. No person can be held liable to protect a third party.
-
Crazyguy2
Kc323 it’s not about protecting a third party it about reporting. The fact is if someone knows a person is abusing a child and does not report that person is a scum bag and should be held accountable period, clergy or not!
-
Diogenesister
Ok so no clergy then there is no lawsuit. No person can be held liable to protect a third party.
JC323 The thing is they are trying to have it both ways. There is a legal term for it that slips my mind. The are now claiming they do have a clergy and therefore clergy-penitent privilege. However in the case of a complaint of child abuse the child is not confessing, no. 1 and no.2 it is far from confidential with many people becoming aware. They are claiming this is part of their normal religious proceeding and therefore they are being unfairly penalised in the way, for example, a catholic confession would not be. However this is all by the by because Montana has a law that clergy must report as indeed everyone must, so whether they have clergy or not is irrelevant.
-
blondie
The key point is that the secular governments are seeing regarding the inner workings and thinking of the WTS, that it does not function like the Catholic Church. More than one individual priest (elder in the case of the WTS) hears the confession and forgives the person, case closed. The WTS shares that info with 2 other elders, the CO, and various flunkeys along the WTS admin route. Then the WTS keeps written records hidden away.
There is nothing confidential in the WTS. There is always someone who wants to seem more important than some other jw because that other jw knows something privileged and thinks that person won't share the info with someone else, their one best friend (who shares it with their one best friend, not that first person). I had elders tell me they can tell a detailed story of an abuse case to other elders on the BOE not on the JC, or elders outside the congregation, as long as they don't name names. Like no one can put 2 and 2 together.