JW's Legitimizing Adultry?!

by imallgrowedup 5 Replies latest watchtower scandals

  • imallgrowedup
    imallgrowedup

    I don't know if this has been posted before, but a friend of mine sent this to me, and I thought some might be interested. Apparently this is a court case which was heard in the Phillipines in August of this year and printed in the Phillipine Daily Inquirer. The article is in regards to Supreme Court rulings regarding the separation of church and state, and picks up in the middle of the article as copied and pasted below:

    Source: http://www.inq7.net/opi/2003/sep/05/opi_commentary1-1.htm

    Religious freedom By Ismael G. Khan Jr.

    ... For example, the fact that we are a predominantly Catholic nation does not justify applying the moral standards of the Catholic faith in judging the moral norms of other established religions.

    This principle figured prominently in the resolution of the second case, Estrada vs Escritor (A.M. No. P-02-1651, Aug. 4, 2003). Soledad Escritor, a court interpreter in the Las Piñas regional trial court, was accused of cohabiting with a certain Luciano Quilapio, while they were still married to other persons. Their relationship of 23 years had borne a son. The complainant, Alejandro Estrada, alleged that this constituted disgraceful and immoral conduct under existing laws and civil service rules. In her defense, Escritor claimed that as members of the Jehovah's Witnesses, their living together had the approval of their sect as proven by a Declaration of Pledging Faithfulness which they executed in 1991. By virtue of this act, their union was legitimized by the Jehovah's Witnesses and they were, therefore, to be regarded as husband and wife. Ergo, no violation of any law or rule as this would be an unconstitutional violation of their religious freedom.

    Speaking through Justice Reynato S. Puno, eight justices of the Supreme Court, a simple majority, sided with Escritor and remanded the case to the Office of the Court Administrator, and ordered the Solicitor General to examine her claimed religious belief and practice and to present evidence in justifying an exception to prevailing law and jurisprudence governing illicit relations.

    In other words, the decision shows that the Supreme Court is prepared to adopt a policy of benevolent neutrality in its interpretation of the establishment and free exercise of religion clauses of the Constitution, unless it can be demonstrably proven that there is compelling state interest that would negate such an accommodation, such as a clear and present danger to established institutions of society and the law.

    The far-reaching significance of this decision can readily be gleaned from the fact that if Escritor were not a Jehovah's Witness, her actuations and behavior would indeed constitute disgraceful and immoral conduct, as well as adultery and concubinage, under prevailing law and jurisprudence.

    Ismael G. Khan Jr. is assistant court administrator and chief of the Public Information Office of the Supreme Court.

    growedup

  • wednesday
    wednesday

    I have heard that in some countires that do not allow for legal divorce, jws can use this method to remarry. It is along the same lines of getting a scriptual divorce, sometimes jws will put letters in for the elders to see stating they consider themself free to remarry , even if the other mate refuses to ackowlege the adultry.

  • imallgrowedup
    imallgrowedup

    Wednesday -

    Ok. I'm confused. If a government does not allow for a divorce (and therefore does not recognize second marriages), wouldn't this get the undivorced-but-cohabitating people accused of bigamy? If so, how is it that a religion can tell the lawmakers where to stuff it and "over ride" the law with a scribbled note that says "it's okay for this person to remarry 'cuz we say so" - especially when the religion that is doing so as a minority religion in that country?

    Please don't mistake my questions for doubting you - it's just that I can't get over the audacity of these people who claim they get their inspiration from God! Unbelievable!

    growedup

  • Euphemism
    Euphemism

    growedup... IMHO, this is actually one of the more reasonable aspects of JW teaching.

    I knew a couple, for example, who had both been separated from their previous mates for quite some time. (The previous mates, presumably, had since gone on to other relationships.) They had been cohabiting for several years, and had a daughter together.

    When they wanted to become Witnesses, they had to 'make it legal'. The problem is that the woman had dual Spanish-German citizenship. The German courts insisted that the matter should be handled by the Spanish courts, and the Spanish courts said it should be handled by Germany. So she couldn't get a legal divorce, because each country kept shunting her over to the other.

    So rather than force her to leave the man who was the father of her child, and for all practical purposes her husband, the congregation allowed them to sign a "Pledge of Faithfulness" and get baptized.

    This doesn't violate bigamy laws because cohabitation is quite common--especially in countries that don't allow divorce--and the couple made no legal pretense of being married.

    As to the situation in the Phillipines, apparently the government there allows each religion to set its own rules as to what constitutes allowable marriage. So in this case, it is the government's decision to defer to religion.

  • BluesBrother
    BluesBrother

    Sorry for the length of this , but here is what they said in thr Watchtower:_

    *** w77 3/15 pp. 182-185 Maintaining Marriage in Honor Before God and Men ***

    WHERE

    CAESAR?S RECOGNITION IS UNAVAILABLE

    24

    Understanding the relative nature of Caesar?s authority regarding marriage is here helpful. Take, for example, those areas where, either because of the dominance of some religion or for other reasons, the law does not allow for any divorce, not even on the Scriptural grounds of "fornication" (por·nei´a). A man whose wife proved unfaithful to him might have left her and thereafter formed a union with another mate, by whom he may even have a family. He may then learn the truth of God?s Word and, in obedience to that Word, desire to be baptized as a disciple of God?s Son. Because the national law does not agree with God?s law regarding divorce and remarriage, he cannot obtain a divorce and legalize his present union. What can he do?

    25

    If his circumstances permit, he might go to a neighboring land that does grant divorce and obtain such there and then remarry under the laws of that land. This might serve to add some honor to his union, although upon returning to his homeland the marriage might not be recognized by the "Caesar" ruling there. If he cannot reasonably do this, he should get a legal separation from his estranged, legal mate, or whatever the local law makes possible. Thereafter he should make a written statement to the local congregation pledging faithfulness to his present mate and declaring his agreement to obtain a legal marriage certificate if the estranged legal wife should die or if other circumstances should make possible the obtaining of such registration. If his present mate likewise seeks baptism, she would also make such a signed statement.

    26

    In one South American country, although the law provides for annulment of marriage in cases of bigamy, applications for such annulment are often simply ignored by "Caesar." Consider, then, a man who, while already having a legal living wife, separates from her and marries another woman and falsely obtains a legal certification, thereby becoming bigamous. If, upon learning Bible truth, he seeks baptism, he may find that his efforts to straighten out the legal situation regarding his current marriage are frustrated by the lack of interest on the part of the civil authorities. If unable to do anything to elevate in honor his present union through Caesar?s courts or authorities, how could he proceed? He could sign a similar declaration pledging faithfulness and file this with the congregation. Then he could be accepted for baptism, as could his mate by doing the same.

    27

    In a certain west African country, it may take up to ten years to obtain a divorce. Would a person desirous of being baptized, but needing a divorce so as to establish legally his or her present marital union, be obliged to postpone baptism for such a period of years? It does not seem proper that the lack of Caesar?s legal recognition should block him from showing his faith in the sin-atoning power of Christ?s sacrifice by taking the vital step of baptism and thus gaining the privilege of an approved relationship with God. (Compare the apostle?s statement at Acts 11:17 as to humans? inability to "hinder" God in his approving of persons.) Bible examples indicate that unnecessary delay in taking the step of baptism is not advisable. (Acts 2:37-41; 8:34-38; 16:30-34; 22:16) Having initiated the legal process of divorce, such person would then provide the congregation with a statement pledging faithfulness, thereby establishing his determination to maintain his current union in honor while he continues to follow through on his efforts to gain as well the legal recognition that Caesar provides,

    28

    Persons may move to another country and while there they may learn the truth and wish to be baptized. In order to obtain legal recognition of their existing marital relationship, they may need first to obtain a divorce from a previous mate. It may be that the country to which they have moved has provisions for divorce but such provisions may not be available to them as foreigners. For example, many persons from other European countries have moved into Germany seeking employment. While Germany has provisions for divorce, these provisions do not embrace most noncitizens. In such cases, also, the individuals desiring to be baptized and seeking to establish the honorableness and permanence of their existing marital relationship would sign a declaration pledging faithfulness.

    29

    These same principles would apply for a baptized Christian who finds that "Caesar?s" laws would not grant him legal recognition in his exercise of God-given rights regarding divorce and remarriage. For example, in countries that do not recognize the God-given right to divorce an adulterous mate and remarry, an individual whose mate proves unfaithful (and from whom he therefore chooses to separate, not forgiving her) should submit the clear evidence of this infidelity to the elders of the congregation. Then, if at some future time he (or she) were to decide to take another mate, this could be done in an honorable way, the parties to the marriage signing statements pledging faithfulness and the determination to gain legal recognition whenever such should become feasible.

    30

    The signing of such a written statement pledging faithfulness is viewed by the congregation as a putting of oneself on record before God and man that the signer will be just as faithful to his or her existing marital relationship as he or she would be if the union were one validated by civil authorities. Such declaration is viewed as no less binding than one made before a marriage officer representing a "Caesar" government of the world. In reality, it is not the particular kind of document made but the fact that the individual makes the declaration before God that gives it its greatest weight and solemnity.

    31

    How might such a declaration be worded? It could contain a statement such as the following:

    "I, ......., do here declare that I have accepted .......... as my mate in marital relationship; that I have done all within my ability to obtain legal recognition of this relationship by the proper public authorities and that it is because of having been unable to do so that I therefore make this declaration pledging faithfulness in this marital relationship. I recognize this relationship as a binding tie before Jehovah God and before all persons, to be held to and honored in full accord with the principles of God?s Word. I will continue to seek the means to obtain legal recognition of this relationship by the civil authorities and if at any future time a change in circumstances makes this possible I promise to legalize this union.

    "Signed this .......... day of ........., 19..... Witnesses to my signing: ....................................."

    32

    As indicated above, this declaration should be signed by the one making the declaration and also by two others as witnesses, and the date should be noted thereon. It is advisable for copies of the statement pledging faithfulness to be kept by each of the persons involved and by the congregation with which they are associated, and one copy should be sent to the Branch office of the Watch Tower Society in that area. It would also be beneficial for an announcement to be made to the congregation that such a declaration has been made so that all will be aware of the conscientious steps that are being taken to uphold the honorableness of the marriage relationship.

    33

    Where the person is unable to gain "Caesar?s" recognition but takes the proper steps to establish his marriage with the congregation, he must realize that whatever consequences result to him as far as the world outside is concerned are his sole responsibility and must be faced by him. For example, if some legal issue, involving property or inheritance rights, arises due to an earlier marriage union, the individual cannot claim "Caesar?s" judicial protection as regards his new, unrecognized union.

    KEEPING

    BASIC PRINCIPLES CLEAR

    34

    From country to country, marriage and divorce legislation presents a multitude of different angles and aspects. Rather than becoming entangled in a confusion of technicalities, the Christian, or the one desiring to become a disciple of God?s Son, can be guided by basic Scriptural principles that hold true in all cases.

    35

    God?s view is of first concern. So, first of all the person must consider whether that one?s present relationship, or the relationship into which he or she contemplates entering, is one that could meet with God?s approval or whether, in itself, it violates the standards of God?s Word. Take, for example, the situation where a man lives with a wife but also spends time living with another woman as a concubine. As long as such a state of concubinage prevails, the relationship of the second woman can never be harmonized with Christian principles, nor could any declaration on the part of the woman or the man make it do so. The only right course is cessation of the relationship. Similarly with an incestuous relationship with a member of one?s immediate family, or a homosexual relationship or other such situation condemned by God?s Word. (Matt. 19:5, 6; 1 Tim. 3:2; 1 Cor. 5:1) It is not the lack of any legal validation that makes such relationships unacceptable; they are in themselves unscriptural and, hence, immoral. Hence, a person involved in such a situation could not make any kind of ?declaration of faithfulness,? since it would have no merit in God?s eyes.

    36

    If the relationship is such that it can have God?s approval, then a second principle to consider is that one should do all one can to establish the honorableness of one?s marital union in the eyes of all. (Heb. 13:4) A person seeking baptism may be one who, in the past, separated from a legal mate and, without having obtained a divorce, entered into a marital relationship with another person. Considerable time may have passed, and perhaps children have resulted. So, upon learning the truth the person cannot reasonably be expected to go back to his first mate and thus try to refashion his life according to his previous circumstances. But now, in ?desisting from sins,? he must determine that his life henceforth will be lived according to God?s will.?1 Pet. 4:1-3; compare 1 Corinthians 7:17-24.

    37

    What then? If divorce is possible, then such step should now be taken so that, having obtained the divorce (on whatever legal grounds may be available), the present union can receive civil validation as a recognized marriage. These same things would be true of the person who, before learning the truth, has become guilty of bigamy. He should take the necessary steps to have the matter resolved legally (as by annulment and/or divorce) so that he or she may now be recognized as the legal mate of only one person.

    38

    Finally, if the marital relationship is not one out of harmony with the principles of God?s Word, and if one has done all that can reasonably be done to have it recognized by civil authorities and has been blocked in doing so, then a declaration pledging faithfulness can be signed. In some cases, as has been noted, the extreme slowness of official action may make the accomplishing of legal steps a matter of many, many years of effort. Or it may be that the costs represent a crushingly heavy burden that the individual would need years to be able to meet. In such cases the declaration pledging faithfulness will provide the congregation with the basis for viewing the existing marriage as honorable, while the individual continues conscientiously to work out the legal aspects to the best of his ability. A fact worth noting is that in many communities, and even in entire countries, the people themselves give little importance to the legal factors involved in marriage and are far more affected by what they actually see as evidence of a faithful marriage union. Nevertheless, even here the Christian should sincerely endeavor to take whatever steps are available, or that open up for him, to establish the honorableness of his union beyond question.

    39

    By keeping in mind the basic principles presented, the Christian should be able to approach the matter in a balanced way, neither underestimating nor overestimating the validation offered by the political state. He (or she) should always give primary concern to God?s view of the union. Along with this, every effort should be made to set a fine example of faithfulness and devotion to one?s mate, thus keeping the marriage "honorable among all." Such course will bring God?s blessing and result to the honor and praise of the Author of marriage, Jehovah God.?1 Cor. 10:31-33.
  • gumby
    gumby

    This is simply a loophole self made proceedure, the organisation have devised themselves, for a publisher to get rid a shitty situation.

    A woman who suspects her hubby of doing the pokey pokey with another woman because his car is always at her home, and she srtongly suspects him of fooling around.....can also write a letter stating her feelings and absolving her marriage. The society tell those who do this that it is now between them and Jehovah.........so they had better be right about their suspicions.

    Gumby

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit