Posts by konceptual99

jw.org has been blocked in Russia for some time. They have recently announced further crackdowns on various publications and not letting material into the country.

9

Feedback on RC from JW Friendly Site

by konceptual99 in

there has been some comment on the latest rc proceedings on that well know jw friendly site.. one set of posts has been particularly interesting as the poster related their own experience as an abuse victim when they were a child in the congregation.

this of course took courage and the poster deserves no criticism at all for this.

he is, however, still very supportive of the organisation.. this is his latest post:.

konceptual99

There has been some comment on the latest RC proceedings on that well know JW friendly site.

One set of posts has been particularly interesting as the poster related their own experience as an abuse victim when they were a child in the congregation. This of course took courage and the poster deserves no criticism at all for this. He is, however, still very supportive of the organisation.

This is his latest post:

Okay, I've now read the transcript of today's hearing, and I have to say I am so monumentally frustrated by this enquiry!

I'm glad to see them finally interviewing someone from the branch office, but they keep repeating their questions, and in my opinion not listening to his answers.

For example they repeatedly refuse to accept that abuse survivors are not expected to confront their abuser. There is a 1995 WT article and advice in the elder's manual that says that they can write a letter.

They also say it's unwise for the judicial committee to be led by elders who know the accused, but again the guidance is that the CO will nominate an experienced other elder from another congregation to chair the committee.

I suspect that there will be more information given on the 1,006 cases issue when they interview the brother form the legal department, but from what we've seen so far, many of those cases were reported to the authorities, just not by the Society, but by the victims or someone else. And in confirmation of what I was also told by a CO, the list includes people who never were JWs but included interested persons and children of baptised witnesses etc.
In fact if I remember correctly the CO said that even if an 18-year-old brother has consensual extra-marital sex with a 17-year-old sister, as it's technically a crime that would go on the list, but it would not be reported to the police for obvious reasons.
The number of times when reading this transcript I have wanted to shout at the commissioners and say "he's already answered that!" or "read the material!"

Whilst I have nothing but sympathy for his experiences I can't help wondering how someone who was abused and whose abuser was not sanctioned can have this much support for the organisation still.

15

Shameless lies of the head of Australian Betel just to protect the GB

by paradisebeauty in

watching the royal commission videos from day 6.. the head of the australian branch is such a liar.

he keeps saying they have the right to make decisions and regulations if they are in accordance with the scriptures, but we all know this is such a lie!!!!.

he is just trying to protect the gb members from bring forced to testify!!

konceptual99

There is some limited truth in what was said.

Branches are responsible for organising the work in the territory they cover. They will choose RC locations for example and manage the administrative aspects of the work without too much discussion with HQ. Of course there are top down processes and procedures. Larger construction projects are very much managed centrally. However on a day to day level the branch does not have to run every little detail past HQ.

When it comes to more serious issues like this then the branch has the right to change rules to suit local requirements. In the case of child abuse policies this will be limited to ensuring the process conforms to any legal requirements such as mandatory reporting. The hands of HQ in NY are tied in this case.

Does it ave the ability to change doctrinal situations such as two witnesses? Not unilaterally. If the Australian government made a law giving a victim the right to converse only with a woman for example, then the Branch would likely reformulate the policies to make some allowance for that. Any change would be agreed with HQ. It would be the minimum possible to meet the legal requirements.

No branch can make unilateral instructions about anything that has some interpreted scriptural mandate around it, like two witnesses or elders only being male etc. No branch would or could ever come up with changes to fundamentals like this. You would never see some schism opening up between countries where one country allowed female elders, two witnesses, gay marriage or whatever and other countries did not.

To illustrate the relationship with a slightly difference use case, cast your minds back to the Mexico v Malawi situation. If you consider the difference between how these were handled, it was not a branch decision as to how the rank and file were instructed. They did not say "this is what we will do in our country". The differences were from HQ. They decided that it was alright to treat the two situations differently. Neither branch had the power to say what they might have really wanted to do.

The same applies in these cases. Sure, the local branch might implement specific modifications to the core process but ONLY to suit the legal requirements of the state or country. They will never build heir own policy. It's not unknown for large numbers of, even whole, branch committees to be reassigned when they don't play ball with HQ.

24

AUSTRALIA - All large JW Regional Conventions cancelled for 2015

by jwleaks in

now we know why the governing body of jehovah's witnesses cancelled all the major regional conventions of jehovah's witnesses for 2015 and are only holding smaller conventions at the jw assembly halls.

"imitate jesus" convention series australia schedule .

interestingly the first round of regional conventions are due this weekend in the jw assembly halls in sydney (new south wales), melbourne (victoria), and brisbane (queensland).

konceptual99

RCs in assembly halls has been predicted by many on here, especially once the move to 2 x 1 day CA events took place. Large RCs might be money spinners but they also cost big. Assembly halls are often debt free and overheads fairly minimal. I bet they have done the calcs and worked out they stand to make more through higher occupancy at the assembly halls.

The move in Australia may have additional side benefits with respect to the timing of the current enquiry but I think the primary cause is cash and not the Royal Commission. Don't forget as well that the trek to the international convention last year was not well received if my information from friends down under is correct.

18

Horley Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses UK (disbanded)

by konceptual99 in

does anyone in the uk know any details about the above congregation?

it seems it was disbanded by the co specifically because of "lack of love" and members reassigned to other congregations in the reigate and crawley areas.. i've checked the charities commission web site and the charity was removed in may 2012.. http://apps.charitycommission.gov.uk/showcharity/registerofcharities/removedcharitymain.aspx?registeredcharitynumber=1066699&subsidiarynumber=0.

the cobe was a guy called rossiter (sp?

konceptual99

That would be Chris Jones. He still lives there and has done since day one. Shortish, round face... Rossiter is tall and slim with thin features.

18

Horley Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses UK (disbanded)

by konceptual99 in

does anyone in the uk know any details about the above congregation?

it seems it was disbanded by the co specifically because of "lack of love" and members reassigned to other congregations in the reigate and crawley areas.. i've checked the charities commission web site and the charity was removed in may 2012.. http://apps.charitycommission.gov.uk/showcharity/registerofcharities/removedcharitymain.aspx?registeredcharitynumber=1066699&subsidiarynumber=0.

the cobe was a guy called rossiter (sp?

konceptual99

Nothing. It's being used. I did hear a very unsubstantiated rumour that the WTS was looking to sell it but I have taken that one with a massive pinch of salt and dismissed it for the time being.

18

Horley Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses UK (disbanded)

by konceptual99 in

does anyone in the uk know any details about the above congregation?

it seems it was disbanded by the co specifically because of "lack of love" and members reassigned to other congregations in the reigate and crawley areas.. i've checked the charities commission web site and the charity was removed in may 2012.. http://apps.charitycommission.gov.uk/showcharity/registerofcharities/removedcharitymain.aspx?registeredcharitynumber=1066699&subsidiarynumber=0.

the cobe was a guy called rossiter (sp?

konceptual99

Hey WMF - of course, Rossiter was the co-manager of Haysbridge along with Chris Jones. I'd completely forgotten that. Were they both in Horley cong? I know Chris and Judy Jones lived on site in the cottage attached to the hall but I am not sure about Rossiter (what's his first name btw). I know people related to Chris Jones so I might be able to dig around a bit over the next few weeks.

18

Horley Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses UK (disbanded)

by konceptual99 in

does anyone in the uk know any details about the above congregation?

it seems it was disbanded by the co specifically because of "lack of love" and members reassigned to other congregations in the reigate and crawley areas.. i've checked the charities commission web site and the charity was removed in may 2012.. http://apps.charitycommission.gov.uk/showcharity/registerofcharities/removedcharitymain.aspx?registeredcharitynumber=1066699&subsidiarynumber=0.

the cobe was a guy called rossiter (sp?

konceptual99

Neither have I but I found out about this from ones in a neighbouring congregation and apparently the reasons given by the CO were crystal clear.

I am still interested to know if this is correct as it is a very unusual situation hence why I would like it clarified if possible.