What's remarkable about this statement in the Watchtower magazine is the fact that the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society paid out
Yet very few adherents of the WTBTS, Jehovah's Witnesses, know about these cases and the damages which were paid for by contributions made by Jehovah's Witnesses to the "World Wide Work".
Shocking double-tongued deceit.
* the WTBTS had a published standard for how cases of alleged sexual abuse should be handled, which included allegations of abuse against "appointed men" within the corporation such as "elders", "ministerial servant", "Circuit Overseers", etc. This standard had to be adhered to by all congregations of Jehovah's Witnesses. Firstly, the accuser was asked if there were any witnesses to the sexual molestation. If there were, then a judicial proceedings could be initiated against the accused**. If not, the accuser would find no judicial justice. The Watchtower magazine warned accusers not to speak out against their alleged abuser, otherwise they would be guilty of "slander", an "offense" itself dealt with judicially. There are anecdotal (i.e. not published in any Watch Tower publication) cases of accusers being disfellowshipped for "slander" for refusing to be silent about their alleged abuse.
The WTBTS did not always have an official policy require the elders in congregations where molestation had been alleged to alert the authorities. Nowadays the policy is that the elders should alert the authorities, if it is a requirement of the State or country where they live.
The WTBTS officially published guidelines in the Watchtower magazine stating that a person guilty of child molestation would not ever be allowed to hold a position of authority within the congregation again. However, private letters sent to each congregation's "body of elders" states something different, namely that the person - if a number of years had passed since their molestation of the child/children - may be considered for appointment to a position of authority, but that the elders should contact the local "Branch office" of the corporation for further instructions.
In other words, some men who serve as as "elders", "ministerial servant", "Circuit Overseers", etc, may in fact be convicted pedophiles. Of course, the congregations where they serve will not be informed of their past.
Anecdotal evidence (i.e. not published in any Watch Tower publication) cites examples of "elders" being accused of child molestation, but due to the lack of multiple witnesses to the abuse, being allowed to move to a different congregation, where they are again accused of molestation, again without multiple witnesses. They would then be allowed to move to another congregation and repeat the cycle.
"Appointed men" who move from one congregation to another have a letter sent separately from their old congregation to their new by means of introduction and to recommend their re-appointment. The WTBTS has published written instructions to "bodies of elders" whereby no mention of the alleged sexual abuse of children is to be mention in the letters of introduction. Therefore, it's possible for an "appointed man" to move from congregation to congregation abusing children and as long as there are no witnesses to the abuse, he can remain in a position of trust, authority and respect.
If anyone wishes to see scans of these letters sent to the "bodies of elders" re. how to handle alleged child abuse, please let me know.
"If anyone wishes to see scans of these letters sent to the "bodies of elders" re. how to handle alleged child abuse, please let me know."
ReplyDeletePlease do go ahead and scan all letters you have. It would be a great help to both of us.
Also see thirdwitness.com
@StandFirm - the letters are scanned. Where should I send them? I won't publicly post them due to the litigious nature of the WTBTS.
ReplyDeleteThirdwitness.com? Are you serious?
I will write a longer rebuttal later, but first:
ReplyDeleteJehovah's Witnesses paid out $36,000,000?
I and all thinking persons demand a source for this outrageous statement.
@ Stand Firm, firstly, why not write up the promised evidence of the 1919 appointment?
ReplyDeleteSecondly, you're taking issue with the claim of a $36,000,000 payout rather than the fact that your religious order systematically covers up the abuse of children and allows people to remain in positions of authority and trust who have a background of such abuse?
"@ Stand Firm, firstly, why not write up the promised evidence of the 1919 appointment?"
ReplyDeleteI will write about 1919 when I want.
"Secondly, you're taking issue with the claim of a $36,000,000 payout rather than the fact that your religious order systematically covers up the abuse of children and allows people to remain in positions of authority and trust who have a background of such abuse?"
I take issue with all of it because none of it is true.
1. Why did you dodge my demand for proof? Surely citing a source is not that hard. Frankly, I think you made this one up. Even the lying Silentlambs organizations claims only a third of that number.
2. Since you were supposedly an elder until a few years ago, what did you think of the policy then?
So, I've to provide evidence of the amount paid out by your leaders to the victims of systematic child abuse, but you don't feel the need to provide the much-asked-for evidence that your religious order was chosen by Jesus in 1919?
ReplyDeleteAlso, why is it the amount that you're quibbling about rather than being shocked that your religious order speaks out of both sides of its mouth.
And you claim that "none of it is true". What do you mean, exactly? Is it a big hoax that the Watch Tower Society has a shoddy, double-standard child protection policy? Did they not have to pay out monies to victims of abuse with their corporation?
1. I honestly can't remember where I got that figure from. But as stated above, the amount is less important that the fact that it happened, surely. Also, why are you dodging my demand for proof that your religious order was chosen by Jesus in 1919 to speak for God?
2. There's no supposedly about it, so don't even go there. I can still remember reading through the "permanent file" as a new elder and being unsettled by the child abuse policies (the two witnesses, secret envelopes, undue concern over the reputation of the organisation rather than the welfare of the alleged abused).
However, as you do now, I believed that Jesus had chosen my religion to speak for God. So, if those policies where published by the "faithful and discreet slave" class, then they must be what Jehovah God wants. I'll admit to speaking to two other elders, separately, about the policies and they both admitted they weren't sure about them either. Both are fathers of young children, as am I.
As it gradually became clear to me about 6 months later that the Watch Tower Society no more spoke for God or was the true religion that the Church of Latter Day Saints or Scientology did, and that there was no evidence of selection by Jesus in 1919 (or even evidence that he'd returned, invisibly, in 1914) I started to seriously question the wisdom behind the policies.
Around that time also I was tasked with speaking to a "brother" about his "appointment" as a "Ministerial Servant". The letter from the "Branch" included a footnote about asking said "brother" about abusing children. The footnote included a caveat that it wasn't necessary to ask him said questions if he was already in an "appointed capacity" or had been in an "appointed capacity" previously. I kept a photocopy of the footnote and asked the "Presiding Overseer" about it. He admitted that it didn't make sense to him and that he always asks the child abuse questions* anyway.
Once I read some of Barbara Anderson's concerns about the Watch Tower Society's child abuse policies the penny dropped and I started to see how dangerous and sleazy they really were.
* since when would a child abuser admit to being one when asked by two Jehovah's Witness elders? Nuts. Do proper background checks. Of course, that doesn't address the "two witness" rule and the fact that men who've been accused (without two witnesses) can freely move congregation, be appointed as an elder, being accused of abused again (without two witnesses) and repeat the cycle with the authorities at no point being contacted (unless the law of the land expects is. But event that's a new-ish addendum).
"I honestly can't remember where I got that figure from."
ReplyDeleteSimply click the little pencil on the lower right of your post, and erase the "$36 million". It is not true. If, on the other hand, you leave it up though you know it to be false, that would make you a liar.
And don't try to shift the burden of proof, it is impossible to prove a negative. Even Wikipedia removes unsourced material.
"It is not true. If, on the other hand, you leave it up though you know it to be false, that would make you a liar."
ReplyDeleteThe Watch Tower Society know that 607 is false. Yet they continue to claim that it's true. Does that make them liars?
If I remove the reference to $36 million, will you actually address the point of this article?
"The Watch Tower Society know that 607 is false. Yet they continue to claim that it's true. Does that make them liars?"
ReplyDeleteAnother red herring from the king of red herrings.
How do they "know" it to be "false"? Maybe they believe it.
"If I remove the reference to $36 million, will you actually address the point of this article?"
Yes.
I should have qualified that, will you address it without regurgitating ThirdWitness's rhetoric?
ReplyDelete"Another red herring from the king of red herrings.
How do they "know" it to be "false"? Maybe they believe it."
You've heard of Carl Olof Jonson and you know the research and evidence he systematically and thoroughly sent to the Watch Tower Society. The Governing Body, as revealed in 'Crisis of Conscience' refused to even consider changing 607 to the date that all scholars point to. But you knew that too.
Just because a person (or body of persons) believe something to be true does not make it true.
Thanks for revising the article. Although, you could simply erase it.
ReplyDelete"I should have qualified that, will you address it without regurgitating ThirdWitness's rhetoric?"
Yes, but he gives the same proofs that I would. You really ought to address his proof.
"Just because a person (or body of persons) believe something to be true does not make it true."
Correct. But this also applies to Jonsson. God's Word is truth (John 17:17).
"Yes, but he gives the same proofs that I would. You really ought to address his proof."
ReplyDeleteHold on, you seem to forget that I've read the letters to the BoEs. I still have them. Any "proof" Thirdwitness has is tainted by the fact that he has a prerequisite to defend the organisation he worship.
"Correct. But this also applies to Jonsson. God's Word is truth (John 17:17)."
So why go beyond God's Word by inventing dates like 1914?
Jonsson also bases his research on the available evidence. The Watch Tower Society don't. The Watch Tower Society/Governing Body/7 million Jehovah's Witnesses believe what isn't true, therefore they are delusional.