by darkspilver 90 Replies latest watchtower child-abuse
Two cases in California destroyed the so called clergy privilege of the WT.
No, it does not. As described in your post referenced above, the Court's adverse ruling affecting C/P privilege in the related setting for this particular case does not destroy WT (JW religion) C/P privilege. The ruling only affects the communication setting for this particular case only. The confidentiality of.JW Elders and Penitents going to them for a spiritual purpose continue to be protected under Federal Law..
Fisherman
Thanks for the clarification.
I wonder about this:
The confidentiality of.JW Elders and Penitents going to them for a spiritual purpose continue to be protected under Federal Law..
We know that down the line a confession will be shared with others, this reference seems to indicate that in order to keep the privilege they must remain secret.
3. California law defines a “ ‘penitential communication’ “ as “a communication made in confidence, in the presence of no third person so far as the penitent is aware, to a member of the clergy who, in the course of the discipline or practice of the clergy member's church, denomination, or organization, is authorized or accustomed to hear those communications and, under the discipline or tenets of his or her church, denomination, or organization, has a duty to keep those communications secret.” (Evid.Code, § 1032.)
http://caselaw.findlaw.com/ca-court-of-appeal/1731903.html
Hecce,the only points of contention that the Court looks at and rules on, on a case by case basis is:
1) The setting: Does the communication setting qualify in this particular case for C/P privilege
2) In what capacity was the clergyman acting at the time of the communication.
Fisherman,
Knowing what we know of Watchtower's procedures, elders involved in child abuse cases can't enjoy c/p privilege. Too many are people involved in the " private confession": three elders, the legal department, the victim. They are screwed. I am glad!
We know that down the line a confession will be shared with others, this reference seems to indicate that in order to keep the privilege they must remain secret.
And what is the legal meaning of that? The State Court determines on a case by case basis whether or not any challenged church communication meets the legal standard for confidentiality under the related STATE LAW. The California case that you cite was adjudicated under the laws of California and not under Federal Law.
STATE LAW vs The US Supreme Court however has not decided on Elder/ JW communication confidentiality as not being secret -or more importantly, not protected under the constitution or federal law because of the manner JW handles judicial cases (aka clergy/ penitent) does not comply with a LEGAL standard.
If JW religion confidentiality privilege finds it way up to the SCOUS. JW will win, but what will remain undecided and points of contention are the 2 points I have described.
Fisherman: judicial cases (aka clergy/ penitent)
wow
Gotta love Watchtower Speak and how they have bent word usage to their standards
Isn't that sort of the same as saying...ummm...apples (aka oranges/pears)
Gotta love Watchtower Speak and how they have bent word usage to their standards
Says you.
Read US Legislation and not public opinion.
Isn't that sort of the same as saying...ummm...apples (aka oranges/pear
Not according to US law. But you are entitled to your view. This is not the proper forum to verify whether or not JW religion enjoys clergy/ penitent privilege. But according to US legislation they do! And opinions do not matter. Same as Roe vs Wade and same sex marriages. It is the law of the land..... at least for now.. laws can change you know -but not because someone thinks it is not the law.
And if you can show US law stating that Jehovah's Witnesses do not enjoy clergy/penitent privilege, produce it.
What I find incredible is how people only object to the setting. I suppose it would be ok for some people if a person confessed child abuse to a Catholic priest or a pastor or somebody else other than a jw elder. That is ok as long as that person remains secret about it. Say a couple of hail maries and hush is the word and that is ok vs the same man confessing the sin under a JC setting, that is not ok. Makes a lot of sense.
Feb 15 1994 Watchtower]It is precisely because of this close adherence to Bible teachings that the veneration and idolization of human leaders so characteristic of cults today is not to be found among Jehovah’s Witnesses. They reject the concept of a clergy-laity distinction. The Encyclopedia of Religion aptly states about Jehovah’s Witnesses: “A clergy class and distinctive titles are prohibited.”
From the March 1, 2006 Watchtower magazine on page 5 in the article "Who Are Genuine Christians?" we read:
Jesus expects his followers to remain in his word — that is, to stick to his teachings. Instead, religious teachers claiming to follow Christ have “increasingly adopted Greek concepts,” notes theologian Küng. They have replaced Jesus’ teachings with, among others, ideas like the immortality of the soul, a belief in purgatory, worship of Mary, and a clergy class — ideas borrowed from pagan religions and philosophers. - 1 Corinthians 1:19-21; 3:18-20.[/COLOR]
