To Active COs/DOs

by Maximus 29 Replies latest jw friends

  • Maximus
    Maximus

    A major news organization is in final process of preparing a TV program addressing the issues raised by silentlambs. Its producers and investigator reporters wish to be fair and unbiased, and are seeking broad input and insight.

    Another such organization has been attracted to the child abuse issue but does not wish to duplicate what's covered. They are in the initial stages of examining the blood issue and that of enforced shunning and its consequences, in the light of human rights issues globally. Child abuse will also receive full attention but not be the primary focus.

    Some have written me expressing concern about "balanced presentation." This is your opportunity to input either directly or through me. Your confidentiality is insured; I will protect it fiercely and so will they. My hotmail and system are protected against crackers.

    Two of you have written me, asking that I delete your hotmail or yahoo address each time we correspond, as well as not keeping copies. I have done so, as I have assured you, and will be happy to do it again.

    While you know that the organization is not susceptible to outside "reform" attempts, it has a history of ultimately paying attention to the pressing needs in the field.

    Whatever your viewpoint, you are being offered a unique opportunity.

    To gain insight on me personally, please see the thread "GB Split Over Policy vs. Blood."

    Sincerely,
    Maximus

  • Maximus
    Maximus

    This will serve to unbury the post and add something based on my mail.

    Click on the envelope to the left to see my hotmail address, and feel free to use it; others are. Authentic COs/DOs have no trouble in identifying themselves; it is easy to spot the fakes. A quick response to mail:

    I perhaps did not make it clear that I myself am involved with both presentations. I would not do so unless it were being done thoroughly, with input from Brooklyn as well. A real question is, "Since no one wants to protect pedophiles, why the code of silence?" "Why the appeal to protect the organization, to avoid reproach on Jehovah's name?" That area can still use input and insight. By the way, do remember the offical teaching is that Jehovah's name does not need to be "vindicated."

    The door to your input will close soon, one program is wrapping up.

    I strongly urge you to take a look at the thread "So Confused" by "troubled" this morning. Not exactly unfamiliar to you, is it? You see huge numbers of persons just like that, and this sweet person thinks she is all alone. You know better. If you are reading this, you are not blaming the elders or yourself. You know where the problem lies.

    It is easy to look at other religious organizations and generalize "they have the same problem." Let me tell you that the lowliest janitor in most churches has to take a course in sexual harassment and abuse issues. One major denomination insists that anyone on any committee or who does any kind of teaching also take such enlightened training. The simple rule is: NO SECRETS

    For one inquirer: Yes, I am continuing to supply my own personal information and input; I am no mere vehicle. As to 'you show me yours and I'll show you mine,' that's a done deal.

    I really wish the organization had revisited the issue, got rid of the legalism, and said, 'Our policy has been well meaning in intent but unChristian in point of fact in some egregious cases. We're working at changing that.' Who could argue well with that? Instead they are pulling up the drawbridges over the moat, insulating themselves yet further.

    And they worry about decreases? How many of your wives say to you, "Something is not right in the organization." What is indeed impeding the free flow of holy spirit."

    You are in my prayers,

    Maximus
    Field service not too satisfying today, apparently? Shame on me for the cheap jibe. I'm quite sympathetic, I know how you feel.

  • Maximus
    Maximus

    Okay, okay, I confess my narrow perspective. There are indeed readers in other time zones in off-times ...

    Embarrassed, but still somewhat astonished at this wonderful global village,
    Max

  • Maximus
    Maximus

    From http://www.silentlambs.org

    I have lived as a Jehovah’s Witness for over 43 years and served in an appointed capacity for over 20+ years. I pioneered, served at Bethel, served as a ministerial servant, elder, taught elder schools, served on well over 100 judicial committees, worked in many administrative and managerial positions, given talks at circuit and district conventions. After many years of service, I discovered a problem that would not go away and due to my personal efforts from within I had to make a decision as to whether I could allow it to be hidden by a Watchtower agenda. This problem can be identified as the protection of pedophiles within the Watchtower organization.

    How did I come to this conclusion? In the year 2000 as I was serving in my local congregation I discovered information that proved a fellow elder had molested a child multiple times. The chairman of the committee that heard the matter chose to cover it all up so no one would know. I brought the information to the attention of the Circuit Overseer who also tried to cover it over. I wrote to the Society, they also wanted to cover it over by just removing him as elder but ordering me to not report it to the police. I had a simple choice, report the sex offender to the police and be deleted as an elder for not following theocratic direction or resign as an elder in protest, go public with the matter, tell the police and everyone else. I chose the latter course. I resigned as presiding overseer and elder not only as a protest of what had happened locally but also to make the public aware children were being hurt and Watchtower policy had to change. I wrote a letter to the Governing Body, Watchtower Legal, Service Department, and Writing Department. I identified the problem and requested action be taken to address this problem. If you wish to read my letter you may do so here WT LETTER. [to be attached in a separate post]

    Watchtower response to me personally was a simple, “we accept your resignation,” to the public in the press, the response has been, “there is no problem” and “we do not change for anyone.” What humble men. Read this website and you will see what Watchtower chooses to ignore, the cry of the victims. The lambs have been silent for so long. Afraid to speak because of the threats and intimidation dished out by Watchtower leadership to protect the “image” of the Watchtower organization. I offer this website as a place for the lambs to roar, to speak out and tell of how they have been hurt. I believe to speak out is a part of the healing process for victims of molestation it can also help move them more quickly toward closure.

    The bottom line is after much effort to try and change Watchtower policy from within I found I could no longer “wait on Jehovah”, I do not believe Jehovah wants or would allow one child to be hurt, much less the many that have suffered and been molested as a result of Watchtower policy. There are many good people among Jehovah’s Witnesses who are deeply disturbed by these issues. The sad truth is no Jehovah’s Witness is allowed to challenge any Watchtower policy. If they do so they face severe punishment from the organization.

    By way of example in my personal situation the organization has had all church members refuse to speak to me, when I attend services no one will call on me or my family for a comment, when I see members of my congregation in public they refuse to acknowledge they know me in anyway, when I meet for field service I am put in a car by myself with no territory, my father was coerced to appear on a video release to the press in which he stated I was a liar about this issue, (he knew nothing of the matter) it has been reported to me my brothers and sisters have spread many vicious rumors about myself and family that are totally false, my wife’s mother and my parents refuse to have anything to do with their grandchildren, they have both written letters stating God will kill us for the stand we have taken. All this while I have never sat before a judicial committee in my life. My family and I have broken no biblical law nor have I challenged any church doctrine, all I have tried to do was tell the truth about how children were being hurt. I have not been disfellowshipped or disassociated, yet this how you are punished if you challenge a Watchtower policy.

    Perhaps this can help you the public to understand why Jehovah’s Witnesses are afraid to challenge those who run the organization. I knew I could not get help from within so the only way in my opinion, is to go public and by doing so with public outcry, force the Watchtower to do right by the children. I believe Jehovah’s Witnesses will thank me in the end and realize this effort is truly a gift to all children of Jehovah’s Witnesses to be able to live their young lives with a fair chance of not being molested.

  • Maximus
    Maximus

    Here's the letter:

    2-31-00

    Watchtower
    25 Columbia Heights Brooklyn, NY 11201

    Dear Brothers,

    I am writing to resign as an elder and Presiding Overseer effective the date of this letter. I bear no ill will or malice toward anyone in the congregation or the Body of Elders. In my twenty-plus years of special service I have enjoyed many privileges, of which there have been many fond memories. So, it is with sadness I must make the following statement: I simply cannot agree with an organizational policy that as an elder I am required to enforce. This policy, in my opinion, has harmed thousands, is leaving many unprotected, and provides refuge to outright criminals.

    I am referring to Watchtower policy to keep information about pedophiles confidential. Pedophiles are protected by a code of silence and in many cases remain, Ministerial Servants, Elders, Pioneers, Circuit, District Overseers, members of the Bethel Family, etc., while their victims suffer in silence or face sanctions. This policy is unethical and immoral in my opinion.

    As an elder, I am instructed (1994 Elder School) if it is one person’s word against another and not two witnesses to the wrong, no action would be taken and no authorities would be notified. The victim? Cautioned to keep silent or face discipline within the congregation that could go as far as being disfellowshipped for slander.

    This policy was again stated to the public in The Watchtower 1995, 11/1 pages 28-29 in the Article, ”Comfort for Those With a Stricken Spirit”, under the heading, “What Can Elders Do?” it plainly states:

    “If the accusation is denied, the elders should explain to the accuser that nothing more can be done in a judicial way. And the congregation will continue to view the one accused as an innocent person. The Bible says that there must be two or three witnesses before judicial action can be taken. (2Cor.13:1; 1 Tim. 5:19) Even if more than one person “remembers” abuse by the individual, the nature of these recalls is just too uncertain to base judicial decisions on them without other supporting evidence. This does not mean that such “memories” are viewed as false (or that they are viewed as true). But Bible principles must be followed in establishing a matter judicially.”

    Does this offer comfort to those with a stricken spirit?

    How often are there witnesses with “supporting evidence” to an act of child molestation?

    If two different persons recall abuse by one pedophile, how could he be viewed as “an innocent” man?

    How hard would it be for a person with the disposition to molest children to deny the act when accused?

    The 3-14-97 Letter to Bodies of Elders, page 2, paragraph 5, states:

    “It may be possible that some who were guilty of child molestation were or are now serving as elders, ministerial servants, or regular or special pioneers. Others may have been guilty of child molestation before they were baptized. The bodies of elders should not query individuals. However, the body of elders should discuss this matter and give the Society a report on anyone who is currently serving or who formerly served in a society-appointed position in your congregation who is known to have been guilty of child molestation in the past.” Paragraph 6 continues at the end: “this information is not to be made available to those not involved.”

    The only way a person within the organization can be guilty of child molestation is by confession, conviction by a court of law, or by the mouth of two witnesses who were there for the same event. For the individual who meets this criteria, the above information states the “body of elders should not query individuals” and “this information is not to be made available to those not involved.” For those who do not meet the above criteria, as in the case of a victim who accuses a person of molesting them, the code of silence is even more strictly enforced. What about potential victims, parents of children who do not know of these accusations? They are left in the dark without any knowledge that their children could be exposed to an accused sex offender on a regular basis.

    These directives make the Watchtower organization a pedophile paradise, where children can be freely molested, as long as there is not substantial evidence or two witnesses to the same event, pedophiles are protected by Watchtower policy which is enforced by the Body of Elders.

    How often are there witnesses to an act of child molestation? How can there be evidence of molestation, when 90% of the time the crime is reported weeks or sometimes years later? How many pedophiles will tell the truth, knowing if they do they could go to jail?

    Does the fact that the average pedophile will molest seventy children in his lifetime and is never convicted of a crime mean we should allow them anonymity within our organization?

    Due to this organizational policy, we have become saturated with pedophiles holding positions from top to bottom within our organization, in my opinion. In my forty-plus years in the organization, I have yet to find one congregation that did not have serious problems with children being molested.

    The most incriminating fact lay with it not even being a matter of record, as in many cases when it is one word against another, not one word is recorded within the congregation file. Watchtower policy gives no direction in this regard. When elders call or write the Service Department for home office direction on how to handle matters involving child molestation, they are instructed that they will have to make the decision locally as to whether it should be taken care of judicially. The Service Department in effect lets local elders make the decision and as a result, the locals will take the responsibility if anything goes wrong. Thus protecting the Watchtower legally. How often will local elders in effect, “take care of a fellow accused elder,” protecting him from a judicial meeting using technicalities as an excuse? But when it comes to the victims, they are discredited, humiliated, and told to be silent. There is a silence of the lambs, the little ones, who look to You and Bodies of Elders for protection, but instead are crushed and ostracized by an organizational policy when they needed help the most. The Watchtower is protected; the pedophile is protected, too bad for the silent lamb.

    How bad is it? With this policy you will allow one out of three “witness children” to be molested in their lifetime, in my opinion. I can no longer serve as an elder in an arrangement that promotes unethical and immoral behavior toward children. I refuse to support a pedophile refuge mentality that is promoted among Body of Elders around the world. Criminals should be ousted, identified, and punished to protect the innocent and give closure to the victim.

    Each day that passes, more children are being molested, and victims suffer as abused lambs with a shepherd who seems not to care. For myself, I feel I can trust no one within the Watchtower organization with my children. If my children were to accuse a pedophile of molestation, all he would have to do is deny it and as a father I would be silenced with the threat of disfellowshiping if I were to try to say something (slander of a perceived innocent man) in a way of warning to protect others who may be in harms way. I state for the third time, this is wrong it is unethical and immoral to not protect children.

    It is my sincere hope that this letter will result in an adjustment to completely overhaul Watchtower policy to address this horrific stance of protecting pedophiles and exposing children to danger.

    Sincerely,

    William H. Bowen

  • Maximus
    Maximus

    For the evening laptop gang in other time zones, and, I'm told,
    the Internet cafe guys

    Maximus
    With apologies to those looking for something new on the thread

  • teejay
    teejay

    In 1970, my big brother took me to see the movie Tora! Tora! Tora!. One of the lines that I remember from the movie is a Japanese official's ominous prophecy to his countrymen. He said that the bombing of Pearl Harbor only served to awaken a sleeping giant.

    JW.com has witnessed the same in this thread. Godspeed to you, Max, and men of like conscience. Do some good, and hurry.

  • zev
    zev

    i wish i had something to add or send you. i am however just a publisher, with a sister who was abusedby a jw m.s. pedophile.
    i long to see this exposed. i only wish every t.v. could be tuned into this when it airs. i will have TWO vcr's going when it airs.
    i will not miss it, and niether will anyone i know.

    godspeed to you my friend.

    godspeed.


    __
    Zev
    The greatest consistancy of the WTBTS is their INconsistancy.

  • wasasister
    wasasister

    Got to bring this to the top again, Boss.

    The only way a person within the organization can be guilty of child molestation is by confession, conviction by a court of law, or by the mouth of two witnesses who were there for the same event.

    There is just NO WAY this is justified by Mosaic or any other scriptural law. Sex crimes did NOT have to meet the "two witness test". How can they defend this scripturally...not to mention morally??

    (Isn't it sad, I felt I had to make a distinction between "scripturally" and "morally"?

  • hawkaw
    hawkaw

    bttt

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit