OrphanCrow

Joined

• started 195 topics
• posted 4,799 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by OrphanCrow

• 
  13

  The Jehovah's Witnesses, the Royal Commission and the Catholic Church

  by OrphanCrow in

  1. watchtower
  2. child-abuse

  a catholic forum has a discussion thread: "jehovah witness now appear with the royal commission".. i have made the comment before that dr. applewhite's appearance in support of the jws is not surprising if you consider that the royal commissions' findings will impact the structure of the cathoilc church as well.

  the catholic church has a vested interest in the jws' hearing - if the jws are forced to change their organizational structure, so will the catholics.. the following post is an excellent discussion on the similarities and differences between the catholic church and the jws structure.

  http://www.catholica.com.au/forum/index.php?id=174461.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  OrphanCrow

  And a discussion on Dr. Applewhite:

  The evidence of Dr Monica Applewhite - issue for some Australian dioceses ?
• 
  13

  The Jehovah's Witnesses, the Royal Commission and the Catholic Church

  by OrphanCrow in

  1. watchtower
  2. child-abuse

  a catholic forum has a discussion thread: "jehovah witness now appear with the royal commission".. i have made the comment before that dr. applewhite's appearance in support of the jws is not surprising if you consider that the royal commissions' findings will impact the structure of the cathoilc church as well.

  the catholic church has a vested interest in the jws' hearing - if the jws are forced to change their organizational structure, so will the catholics.. the following post is an excellent discussion on the similarities and differences between the catholic church and the jws structure.

  http://www.catholica.com.au/forum/index.php?id=174461.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  OrphanCrow

  BreakfastofChamps, I am really enjoying reading the posts over there.

  Here is another one. http://www.catholica.com.au/forum/index.php?id=174476

  Canon law and the destruction of documents (Main Forum)

  by James, Australia, Tuesday, July 28, 2015, 11:57 (5 days ago) @ Desi

  There is a parallel here in the Catholic Church. In 1941, William Francis Louis wrote a doctoral thesis called: Diocesan Archives: A Historical Synopsis and Commentary, in which he explained why documents produced under penal trials under the 1917 Code of Canon Law were to be systematically destroyed. The reason behind this was said to be:
  

  “…to protect the secrecy of criminal trials in moral matters, protect the reputation of delinquents by destroying artificial memory of the crime, and to ‘prevent scandal and avoid unjust, unnecessary and embarrassing attacks upon the Church, by making it impossible for such documents to fall into the hands of her enemies."

  “There we may need to ask, in an extreme case, should the process even begin. Should the statement be taken? There may be cases that appear to be so sensitive that it is in the best interests of the parties, or one of them, and of the Church, that the documents not be created in the first place.”

  There is one important difference between canon law and civil law. Both civil law and canon law provide for order in the affairs of the State and the Church respectively. But civil law has as its end purpose the good of the community. The end purpose of canon law, according to the New Commentary on the Code of Canon Law is the spiritual good of the members of the Church and ultimately their eternal salvation. The very last canon in the 1983 Code of Canon Law provides that “the salvation of souls…must always be the supreme law of the Church.”

  One result of that is described by James A. Coriden, one of the authors of the New Commentary on the Code of Canon Law,:
  

  “Actions which are taken in contravention of canonical rules still very often achieve their basic religious purposes.”

  Lucas could also justify his advice about not commencing the preliminary inquiry in “an extreme case” on the basis of the canonical doctrine of epikeia, from which the English civil law notion of equity is derived. Epikeia or canonical equity covers a situation where there is a “lacuna” in the law, and is based on the presumed intention of the legislator in a situation where canon law does not adequately achieve its particular purpose. Canon law cannot achieve its particular purpose of avoiding the scandal of child sexual abuse by clergy where the civil laws of a particular country do not recognize any form of privilege for documents created by canonical tribunals. The canonical purpose of avoiding scandal could best be achieved by not having anything in writing.

  Canon law has a much richer intellectual heritage than the rules of the Jehovah's Witnesses, but it is easy to see the connection between them, and how they arrived at the same decisions in terms of keeping allegations of child sexual abuse away from the civil authorities.
• 
  13

  The Jehovah's Witnesses, the Royal Commission and the Catholic Church

  by OrphanCrow in

  1. watchtower
  2. child-abuse

  a catholic forum has a discussion thread: "jehovah witness now appear with the royal commission".. i have made the comment before that dr. applewhite's appearance in support of the jws is not surprising if you consider that the royal commissions' findings will impact the structure of the cathoilc church as well.

  the catholic church has a vested interest in the jws' hearing - if the jws are forced to change their organizational structure, so will the catholics.. the following post is an excellent discussion on the similarities and differences between the catholic church and the jws structure.

  http://www.catholica.com.au/forum/index.php?id=174461.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  OrphanCrow

  A Catholic forum has a discussion thread: "Jehovah Witness now appear with the Royal Commission".

  I have made the comment before that Dr. Applewhite's appearance in support of the JWs is not surprising if you consider that the Royal Commissions' findings will impact the structure of the Cathoilc Church as well. The Catholic Church has a vested interest in the JWs' hearing - if the JWs are forced to change their organizational structure, so will the Catholics.

  The following post is an excellent discussion on the similarities and differences between the Catholic Church and the JWs structure.

  http://www.catholica.com.au/forum/index.php?id=174461
  

  The Jehovah's Witnesses, the Royal Commission and the Catholic Church (Main Forum)

  by James, Australia, Tuesday, July 28, 2015, 08:04 (6 days ago) @ Sandra

  The opening address for Case Study No. 29 on the Jehovah’s Witnesses is a very interesting development in the way that the Commission is dealing with religious organisations, and it is an indication of what is likely to happen to the Catholic Church further down the track.
  The opening address by Angus Stewart SC makes very clear that the Commission considers that the “systemic issues” that it has to address as part of its terms of reference includes not just the practices of the religious organisation, but its structure and theology, and how they impinge on the way child sexual abuse is dealt with.

  In the cases involving the Catholic Church so far dealt with by the Commission, the emphasis has been on what actually happened, and how the Church in practice dealt with those particular complaints. Issues involving the Church structure and canon law have only arisen as part of the description of what occurred. A good example of this is the Nestor case in Wollongong where canon law inevitably had to be dealt with, but it its relevance was really only as to what actually happened. There was no overall critique of how canon law dealt with child sexual abuse matters, and the issue of reporting did not arise because the offenses had been reported to the police.

  In the Case No. 29, the Commission is dealing with two cases of how Jehovah’s Witnesses were dealt with by the Church, but in doing so it has gone well beyond what actually happened to look at the structures, rules and theology in much greater detail than it has before in relation to the Catholic Church.

  If the Commission follows the same practice as it has dealt with in Case No. 29, there is likely to be a much more detailed examination both canon law, the structure of the Church and Catholic theology on the capacity of the Church to deal with child sexual abuse.
  The opening address is worth reading because the similarities between the Jehovah’s Witnesses and the Church stand out more than the differences. In many ways, the difference is one of degree rather than of substance.
  http://www.childabuseroyalcommission.gov.au/case-study/636f01a5-50db-4b59-a35e-a24ae07f...
  

  “As will be seen, the Jehovah’s Witness Church is a tightly controlled, rule bound organisation that seeks to keep its members in relative isolation from the rest of society.”
  

  “The Jehovah’s Witness Church is preoccupied with sin and sinning. If a congregation member becomes aware that another member has committed a serious sin, such as “fornication, adultery, homosexuality, blasphemy, apostasy, idolatry, and similar gross sins”, he or she is obliged to report that to the congregation Elders. In the case of lesser sins as between members, the Church prescribes the steps that must be taken to reach a resolution. The more serious sins must be investigated by the Elders who must pass judgement on the accused and his or her degree of repentance for the sin. It is a system in which a group of men who are appointed from above, not by the congregation, stand in judgement over their fellow men, women and children on every aspect of their lives.”
  

  The opening address then goes into the formation of the Jehovah’s Witness Church and then describes its structure:
  

  12. The primary legal entity used by the Jehovah’s Witness Church today is the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania (Watchtower Pennsylvania). The headquarters of Watchtower Pennsylvania is in Brooklyn, New York and is also known as “Bethel” meaning “House of God”.
  13. The activity of Jehovah’s Witnesses worldwide is overseen by the Governing Body. The Governing Body is a council of eight men based at the headquarters in Brooklyn. It is at the apex of a highly centralised and hierarchical structure.
  14. The Jehovah’s Witnesses believe that the teachings promulgated by the Governing Body are based on God’s Word, and not devised by men. Teachings take the form of the Awake! and Watchtower magazines, letters containing directives to branch officers and Elders, handbooks, and other publications.
  15. The Governing Body supervises more than 90 branches worldwide. A Branch Office is the headquarters for the Jehovah’s Witness Church in a particular country or region and is also referred to as “Bethel”.
  16. Each Branch Office is supervised by a Branch Committee which oversees districts within the branch. The Australia Branch Office is represented around Australia by Circuit Overseers, who have pastoral responsibility for about 20 congregations (that is, a circuit). A circuit overseer travels weekly to different congregations in his circuit and is responsible for, among other things, ensuring that each congregation is complying with all theocratic direction given by the Governing Body. By theocratic I mean a form of government in which God is recognised as the supreme civil ruler.”
  

  And even when canon law is not involved, the Bill Morris case in Toowoomba shows that the control also works in other subtle ways.
  The address points out that there are 68,000 active members in Australia, and the world congregation of the Witnesses is some 8 million. One distinguishing feature between the Witnesses and other Protestant sects is:
  

  “The English High Court has recently recognised that “[t]his distinguishes them from other religious denominations who use the bible to shape thinking, guide behaviour and teach lessons, but do not use it directly to set policy and religious practices”
  

  The Commisson then deals with “male leadership”:
  

  “Documents will be tendered which show that Jehovah’s Witnesses are counselled to demonstrate submission to Christ’s headship by obedience to the Elders who are taken to be controlled by God for the purposes of accomplishing Jehovah’s will. Mr O’Brien will give evidence that Jehovah’s Witnesses accept the divine standard that "the head of every man is the Christ, in turn the head of a woman is the man". The evidence will reveal that this belief is reflected in the patriarchal structure of the institution, where men hold positions of authority within congregations and headship in the family. Women are expected to defer to the authority of their husbands and children are taught to obey their parents.”
  

  In the next section dealing with the development of child sexual abuse policies, the opening address says that the Church has been developing such policies over the last 30 years. The Catholic Church, on the other hand has had policies dealing with such abuse since the Council of Elvira in 306CE, and at least since the time of St. Basil of Caesarea and until the first Code of Canon Law in 1917 has required clergy sexual abusers to be imprisoned either by the Church itself (when there was little difference between Church and State) and between the 12th century and the 1917 Code, to be handed over to the civil authorities.
  
  One of the difficulties in proving an offence under the Witness’s rules was the “two witness” rule which required the evidence of two witnesses if the accused did not confess. This prevented action being taken internally with many complaints. Canon law at one stage had the “two witness” rule as well, but it dropped the requirement in the 19th century in case of soliciting sex in the confessional, because inevitably there would only be two people involved. When child sexual abuse was tacked onto the procedures for dealing with soliciting in the confessional with Crimen Sollicitationis, there was also no requirement for the corroborating witness.

  The Witnesses have a judicial committee consisting of three elders, not unlike a canonical trial. Since 1950, 563 alleged perpetrators of child sexual abuse have been dealt with by the judicial committee in Australia. This is in marked contrast to the situation within the Catholic Church where there had been no canonical trial of any priest accused of child sexual abuse at least until about 2000. The reasons for this are because of the restrictions placed on judicial trials by canon law itself. This will no doubt be a matter to be dealt with by the Commission when the Catholic Church’s turn comes.

  The punishments are somewhat similar if repentance is shown by the perpetrator. The perpetrator is “reproved” or reprimanded, and this can be public or private. The ultimate sanction is “defellowshipping”, or the equivalent of excommunication from the Church. The Witnesses have a better record on this than the Catholic Church:
  

  The Royal Commission will hear that since 1950:
  a. 401 alleged perpetrators of child sexual abuse were disfellowshipped; 78 of whom where disfellowshipped on more than one occasion; and
  b. 190 alleged perpetrators of child sexual abuse were reproved; 11 of whom were reproved on more than one occasion.
  

  There are some similarities with the Catholic Church’s removal of faculties of a priest, and the practice of shifting priests around:
  

  62. A disfellowshipped person may be reinstated into the congregation after the passage of sufficient time if the judicial committee determines that the individual is truly repentant, and the reason(s) for their removal from the congregation have been abandoned. In all cases of reinstatement, documents will be tendered which show that congregational restrictions should be applied.
  63. Since 1950, of 401 disfellowshipped alleged perpetrators of child sexual abuse, 230 were later reinstated; 35 of whom were reinstated on more than one occasion.
  79. Since 1950, 28 alleged perpetrators of child sexual abuse were appointed to positions of authority after having been the subject of allegations of child sexual abuse. Further, of 127 alleged perpetrators of child sexual abuse deleted as Elders or Ministerial Servants as a result of allegations of child sexual abuse, 16 were later reappointed.

  67. Mr O’Brien will give evidence that Elders are directed to report allegations of child abuse to authorities where mandatory reporting laws apply. The Royal Commission will hear evidence from Vincent Toole of the Legal Department of his understanding of the varying mandatory reporting obligations that apply across Australian states. Documents will be tendered which show that if no mandatory reporting obligations apply, Elders are directed that they do not themselves need to report. The evidence will show that where a matter becomes known to the authorities, Elders are directed to disclose information in their possession where legally required to do so unless ecclesiastical privilege applies.

  “68. The Royal Commission will hear evidence that Elders are directed never to discourage or sanction anyone from reporting an allegation of child sexual abuse to the authorities and that, if asked, they must make clear that this is a personal decision and a victim’s absolute right. The Royal Commission will hear evidence from at least one survivor witness who, contrary to this policy, was discouraged from reporting her abuse to secular authorities by Elders in the Jehovah’s Witness Church. Documents will be tendered which show this is consistent with the Jehovah’s Witness’s policy not to resort to secular courts to resolve personal disputes with fellow Christians but to rely the on Elders.”

  “69. Evidence will be put before the Royal Commission that of the 1,006 alleged perpetrators of child sexual abuse identified by the Jehovah’s Witness Church since 1950, not one was reported by the Church to secular authorities.”

  The opening address then dealt with the two cases mentioned and how they were handled. It then deals with the systemic issues which the Commission has to address, and this is likely to be a blueprint for dealing with the Catholic Church.
  

  120. In particular, the systemic issues that are expected to be considered by the Royal Commission arising from this case study are the following:
  a. The influence of theocratic beliefs on the way in which religious institutions handle complaints and manage the risk of child sexual abuse and their interaction with government authorities.
  b. The management of complaints or allegations of child sexual abuse within an institution without reference to external authorities, and the impact that that approach may have on the institution’s capacity to protect children.
  c. The impact of an institution’s internal disciplinary mechanisms on criminal processes.
  d. The impact of the record-keeping practices of institutions on the ability of those institutions to manage the risk of child sexual abuse and to respond to victims of abuse.
  e. The efficacy of mechanisms to prevent child sexual abuse.
  f. The adequacy of systems to support and rehabilitate survivors of child sexual abuse.
• 
  10

  The pedophile is in better position than the apostate

  by opusdei1972 in

  1. watchtower
  2. scandals

  i know that in english there are better pages exposing the organization, but here i updated the page (in spanish) with an article untitled "la organizacion jehovista oculta el abuso sexual" (the jehovist organization hides sexual abuse) based on the last news on "child abuse" in australia, and quoting watchtower's articles in which you can note how in this organization, the penitent pedophiles are in better position than the "apostates" who denounce the organization's absurdities .. http://jehovismo.com/.

  for instance, i quoted the watchtower 1997 jan 1 p.29, where it is said that it is permitted for the penitent pedophile to preach door to door:.

  if he seems to be repentant, he will be encouraged to make spiritual progress, share in the field service, even have parts in the theocratic ministry school (the watchtower, january 1, 1997).

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  OrphanCrow

  John: If we disagree with the WT we are not worthy of paradise earth but someone who molested 10 or 20 children is worthy of everlasting life.

  And don't forget about Peter Sutcliffe. Just the kind of guy you want to spend eternity with.

  http://social.jw-archive.org/forum/the-yorkshire-ripper-is-now-our-brother
• 
  21

  Jehovah's Witnesses "Handling Child Abuse Matters" flowchart

  by jwleaks in

  1. watchtower
  2. child-abuse

  jw leaks courtesy of the australian royal commission.

  .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  OrphanCrow

  And shame on any man who has ever sat in a room with two other 'elders' while listening to a child tell them details about having sex with her/his father or another adult male/female.

  Shame on all you men who ever did that and tried to pretend or justify that it was okay. It wasn't.

  That flow chart is damning. Look how many men have access to child sex details, and how many times those stories of sex with minors are passed around and "investigated". And the information about child sex, complete with details about the minor, is sent up the line. To more men with "authority". And stored. A collection of "confidential" information on child sex that is accessible to only the elders.

  And then, they have the nerve to claim "confidentiality" privilege?? After it has been discussed among so many people?? No wonder the Catholic Church is offering testimony at the hearings - they want to keep their privilege of collecting child sex abuse details as well.

  What other organization does this? Conduct their own 'judical hearings' into matters of child sex? Would people be happy if their school did the same thing? Or their sports teams? How would a parent react if they found out that their child was questioned at school by three male teachers about sex?

  On one hand, the JWs have been trying to make the case that the elders have no special standing, they are of the same class as baptized publishers - "the worker class", yet they have powers that go far beyond what any other 'volunteer' in an organization has. I know of no other volunteer or group that would get away with probing for details from a child about alleged sex crimes the way that the JWs do.

  The judicial powers of the JWs must be stopped. Their judical process is abhorrent.
• 
  21

  Justice in Historic Australian investigation says Jehovah's Witnesses child protection policies WORST

  by Watchtower-Free in

  1. watchtower
  2. child-abuse

  historic investigation of jws latest videos are on youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dtxakzq0ity&feature=youtu.be.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  OrphanCrow

  umber: Any other sites you could recommend dear Orphan?

  Yes. I like Barbara's site for the recorded videos of the sessions.

  It is easy to find the session you want to watch or re-watch.

  http://watchtowerdocuments.org/

  The intro music on each video is great, I love it...good pick.

  
  
  
• 
  33

  Dr Applewhite and Conti's case

  by Viva la Vida in

  1. watchtower
  2. child-abuse

  this is from conti's appeal veredict:.

  monica applewhite, a clinical social worker and an expert on child sexual abuse, testified for defendants that watchtowers policy against disclosing private information .

  very closely mirror[ed] the codes of ethics of the national association of social workers and the american counseling association.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  OrphanCrow

  I think that the WTS soliciting and getting the support of a woman who is of the Catholic faith speaks to larger issues.

  What this Royal Commission is revealing about the JW judical system will have an impact on the Catholic Church and their procedures. there is much overlap between the WTS system and the Catholic heirachal system of governance.. The RC's criticism of the JWs' process is knocking on the door of ecclesiastical privledge. The Catholic Church may be heavily invested in the outcome of these hearings.

  The JWs, and neither the Catholic Church, do not want to let go of their right to hear and collect confidential information on their congregants. Especially the right to collect evidence on, and process, those "oh so sensitive child sex cases" that come across their desks so regularly.

  I view Applewhite's submission in the same light as to what the WTS did for Jimmy Swaggart. She offered supporting testimony for the WTS' position (and, in the same sweep, for her own religion). That is all that Applewhite's testimony was - witness testimony, not 'expert' witness testimony.
• 
  28

  One of the most important questions.

  by Lemonp in

  1. watchtower
  2. scandals

  it is enthralling having everything being dragged kicking and screaming into the light of day.

  however one of the most important things to ask is this:.

  is the rc evidence admissable in other countries and other courts?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  OrphanCrow

  defender: If simply making notes of what has happened in a case of abuse is producing child pornography, how come the JW elders are not right now being charged with producing child pornography? It is now a matter of public record:

  I have been giving some more thought to what you have said, defender, and I think the fact that the process that the elders take in matters dealing with sex with minors is now a matter of public record, could very well be what exposes the pornographic nature of what is happening.

  I am glad it is on public record. What has been described is abhorrent. I would never, never, allow my daughter or son to go through what the victims of the JWs have had to. Never should a child be subjected to that. Or a woman. My gawd - the way that women have been compelled to give sexual details to men is unbelievable.

  This may be a legal way of stopping the barbaric practice of compelling a minor to give sexual details to religious men or anyone who claims religious authority.

  Once all the facts have been gathered and evidence given on the JW judicial process, maybe then the long arm of the law will have some teeth to do things like seize all the child abuse files that are in the WTS' possession on the grounds that it is pornographic material that deals with minor sex. And, the WTS can be stopped from ever collecting those details again.
• 
  21

  Justice in Historic Australian investigation says Jehovah's Witnesses child protection policies WORST

  by Watchtower-Free in

  1. watchtower
  2. child-abuse

  historic investigation of jws latest videos are on youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dtxakzq0ity&feature=youtu.be.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  OrphanCrow

  AudeSapere: We know that JW practices in dealing with child sex abuse victims are horrible, but did Justice McClennan actually say they are the *worst*??
  I am not sure he used that word. I could be wrong but I don't remember him saying 'WORST'.
  He repeatedly stated that the JWs have serious flaws and many of those are unique to JWs (not seen in other institutions), but I am not sure that he said 'worst'. I think it is possible that there are one or two institutions that may actually be worse than JWs.
  Just hoping to clarify and not over-inflate what was said.

  I have been looking for the spot in the testimony that Justice McClelland spoke about "the perfect storm". He read a list of conditions that met the 'red flags' of organizations and groups to identify who are at high risk for child sex abuse.

  McClelland stated that the JWs hit every point on the list. It may have been then that he called the JWs "the worst".

  This is the list (thank you Sailaway who posted this on yuku):

  Testimony on day 4 of the Australian Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse explored how the socio-cultural environment of Jehovah’s Witnesses creates “the perfect storm” for child abuse. Below are listed the conditions that were highlighted in questioning Dr. Monica Applewhite, expert witness for the WTBS of Australia. If you read the source article starting on page 30 and look at Table A4 on page 31, you will likely be able to identify other factors that apply.
  Table A4: Preconditions for sexual abuse and individual and social/cultural factors (excerpts)
  1. Repressive norms about masturbation and extramarital sex
  2. Weak criminal sanctions against offenders
  3. Ideology of patriarchal prerogatives for fathers
  4. Barriers to women’s equality
  5. Erosion of social networks
  6. Social isolation of family
  7. Social powerlessness of children
  Source: Finkelhor (1984), pp. 56–57 Finkelhor’s model demonstrates the importance of looking beyond the individual victim or perpetrator when assessing where primary prevention programs should be introduced and how other seemingly unconnected societal pressures and gaps can lead to an environment where a child can be sexually victimised.
  https://aifs.gov.au/sites/default/files/publication-documents/rr33.pdf
• 
  13

  Is the Holy Spirit directing this testimony?

  by Mad Sweeney in

  1. watchtower
  2. scandals

  if anybody can advise how to get the vid to show here, i'll edit this post.

  thanks.apologies for the inconsistent sound levels.. https://youtu.be/nok514dqlti.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  OrphanCrow

  Madsweeney, if you go directly to the youtube site, and then copy and paste the address bar, it should embed.

  ..trying now...

  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nOK514DQltI

  *yup,...it worked!