by RevMalk 23 Replies latest watchtower child-abuse
I've read, and heard that sexual child abuse is not grounds for divorce according to the watchtower. Can anyone help me in finding documented proof to that effect? (or even not so documented is a start)
It's extremely important, if anyone can help, please let me know ASAP.
Thanks :)
Rev
Ray, actually, child sexual abuse is defined as porneia by the WTS so would be grounds for a scriptural divorce by the innocent mate.
I have seen this happen in 2 recent cases. The husband was the abuser and his wife was able to divorce him and re-marry scripturally.
I have searched the WT-CD and the BOE letters I know of and cannot find anything.
10/8/91 Awake footnote
The Secret Wounds of Child AbuseOur discussion focuses on what the Bible calls por·nei´a, or fornication. (1 Corinthians 6:9; compare Leviticus 18:6-22.) This includes all forms of immoral intercourse. Other abusive acts, such as exhibitionism, voyeurism, and exposure to pornography, while not por·nei´a, may also damage a child emotionally.
I'm not saying that a local elder body might not have ruled differently.
Blondie
In my family's case, my mom was told by every elder she spoke to that since I did not have two witnesses to my stepfather's assaults on me, and he was denying it, officially it never happened, so she had no grounds for divorce. I caught hell for running away at 15, while he continued in good standing. This was, however, 19 yrs ago-they may have changed the rules since then.
Just to BTT this, let me say that I would imagine that everything would rest upon whether there were eyewitnesses for the act of abuse. Since the Society requires eyewitness proof, I would think that would be the standard. I don't recall anything ever being said in print, unless it was a BOE letter.
Insomniac, in that case then, he was not found judicially guilty by the elders. It would be the same if he had committed adultery with another woman but the elders felt there was not sufficient evidence to find him guilty.
I think in this case Rev Malk might be asking about situations where the JW abuser was found guilty of child molesting by the elders in a judicial setting and was either reproved or df'd but the innocent spouse was not allowed to get a scriptural divorce.
The cases I cited, the abuser was found guilty by a judicial committee. In one case the abuser was DF'd and in the other reproved privately. The innocent spouses were free to get a scriptural divorce and remarry.
It is such an unfair situation and the elders are woefully untrained and unqualified to handle these situations.
It reminds me of the Talmud of the Jews that invalidated God's word.
Blondie
I'm not saying that a local elder body might not have ruled differently.
Boy, that's really the key isn't it? IF the local elders get it into their thick heads, they could forbid a divorce. Like you, I would think there is no way they would go along with a divorce unless there was a conviction and the offender were disfellowshipped.
As is usual - "sexual child abuse" is being lumped all together.
That's like lumping "loose conduct" all together. From fondling fingers to anal intercourse to oral sex...........big difference.
It's also necessary to define time periods, if there is WTBTS writings.....big difference.
And also - elders' own discretion.
If there was no actually intercourse - I believe a lot of elders would hardline and say no scriptural divorce. If there was intercourse, but couldn't be proven to be the mate, same.
I think in this case Rev Malk might be asking about situations where the JW abuser was found guilty of child molesting by the elders in a judicial setting and was either reproved or df'd but the innocent spouse was not allowed to get a scriptural divorce.
Again, it would depend upon defining exactly what type of "child molesting" the person was guilty of - "fornication", loose conduct, fondling, exposing, voyerism, digitial intercourse, etc. Even though all are harmful to the victim - I'd be willing to bet not all are considered grounds for a jw scriptural divorce. Even if the police/gov prosecuted - different crimes.
waiting
Yet another example of how much damage the WT is doing by the unconscienable policy of requiring two eye witnesses for abuse. How far removed from radical islamist law is this stupid policy??
Actually if the abuse was of a sexual nature then it becomes porneia and is scriptural grounds for divorce, breaking the marriage bond. Any dub who says otherwise is not informed.
If there was no actually intercourse - I believe a lot of elders would hardline and say no scriptural divorce. If there was intercourse, but couldn't be proven to be the mate, same.
This is actually more along the lines of what I was getting at. I should have spent more time to outline my request.
But again, I guess what we're looking at is a vague area, and most likely there is nothing in print.
I've heard and read several accounts where this actually occurred, according to those involved.
This brings up a thought though. If a person committed what they call loose conduct with another willing adult other than their spouse, but it didn't involve intercourse, would the innocent spouse have grounds for divorce? Because if not, then the case would theoretically be the same in a similar child molestation case, would it not?
And if so, does anyone know where I can gather printed info in that case?
Rev
