Forced "new light", but only slightly

[Witness]

1 hour ago, Anna said:

Yes, historical according to time. Doesn't matter that the court case happened "today" because it was discussing a historical case that happened:

Thank you; yet the outcome is still relevant today.

1 hour ago, Anna said:

Does anyone need it clearer than that???

 Hypocrisy is the contrivance of a false appearance of virtue or goodness, while concealing real character or inclinations, especially with respect to religious and moral beliefs; hence, in a general sense, hypocrisy may involve dissimulation, pretense, or a sham. Hypocrisy is the practice of engaging in the same behavior or activity for which one criticizes another. In moral psychology, it is the failure to follow one's own expressed moral rules and principles.

Hypocrisy is never clear.  

[Anna]

10 hours ago, Witness said:

12 hours ago, Anna said:

Does anyone need it clearer than that???

 Hypocrisy is the contrivance of a false appearance of virtue or goodness, while concealing real character or inclinations, especially with respect to religious and moral beliefs; hence, in a general sense, hypocrisy may involve dissimulation, pretense, or a sham. Hypocrisy is the practice of engaging in the same behavior or activity for which one criticizes another. In moral psychology, it is the failure to follow one's own expressed moral rules and principles.

Hypocrisy is never clear.  

Regardless of your accusation of hypocrisy  on the part of the elders or the organization, it is clear to the victims, parents of the victims and others who wish to report the allegation to the police isn't it?  So even if rogue hypocritical elders claimed otherwise, it is clear to everyone else right? And it stands to reason then, when those victims/parents/others are confronted by rogue hypocritical elders who try to silence them,  those victims/parents/others will be able to point to paragraphs  *14 and 15 of the May 2019 Study WT. No questions asked.  And also the elders will read in their shepherding book that ....."One who reports an accusation to the police, the court, the elders, or others who have authority to look into matters and render a judgment would not be viewed by the congregation as guilty of committing slander. (it-1 p. 990) This is true even if the accusation is not proved".

It seems like it's only you, and a few others on here has a problem with it. It's a little worrying because it almost seems like you are wishing the elders will act against these clearly stated instructions  in the wt, and shepherding book like you are not happy that the victims and others are assured that they are entitled to report even if they cannot prove it (two witnesses).

 * Par.14......Does this mean that before an allegation of abuse can be reported to the authorities, two witnesses are required? No. This requirement does not apply to whether elders or others report allegations of a crime.

Par 15: Elders assure victims and their parents and others with knowledge of the  matter that they are free to report an allegation of abuse to the secular authorities. But what if the report is about someone who is a part of the congregation and the matter then becomes known in the community? Should the Christian who reported it feel that he has brought reproach on God’s name? No. The abuser is the one who brings reproach on God’s name".

[JOHN BUTLER]

13 hours ago, Anna said:

 

Yes, historical according to time. Doesn't matter that the court case happened "today" because it was discussing a historical case that happened:

 

Well, then those elders  don't have a leg to stand on do they?

paragraph 14:  https://www.jw.org/en/publications/magazines/watchtower-study-may-2019/love-justice-face-of-wickedness/

" Elders assure victims and their parents and others with knowledge of the  matter that they are free to report an allegation of abuse to the secular authorities. But what if the report is about someone who is a part of the congregation and the matter then becomes known in the community? Should the Christian who reported it feel that he has brought reproach on God’s name? No. The abuser is the one who brings reproach on God’s name".

Does anyone need it clearer than that???

Also:

@JOHN BUTLER

In chapter 12 of the 2019 shepherding the flock book is this statement:

"One who reports an accusation to the police, the court, the elders,

or others who have authority to look into matters and render

a judgment would not be viewed by the congregation as guilty

of committing slander. (it-1 p. 990) This is true even if the accusation is not proved".

 

Wow it seems that everyone has got a copy of the 2019 Shepherding the Flock book. 

Can i have one please ? 

[TrueTomHarley]

24 minutes ago, Anna said:

It almost seems like you are wishing the elders will act against these clearly stated instructions  in the wt, and shepherding book like you are not happy that the victims and others are assured

I swear that that the fate of Roger Chillingsworth looms ahead for some of the most virulent haters, and it must make some of them very uncomfortable:

Chillingworth cries out, “Thou hast escaped me!”

Left with no object for his malice, Chillingworth wastes away and dies within a year of the minister’s passing, 

It is no surprise that Chillingworth dies, because the “leech’s” source of vitality has been removed. 

https://www.sparknotes.com/lit/scarlet/section13/

[Witness]

1 hour ago, Anna said:

It seems like it's only you, and a few others on here has a problem with it. It's a little worrying because it almost seems like you are wishing the elders will act against these clearly stated instructions  in the wt, and shepherding book like you are not happy that the victims and others are assured that they are entitled to report even if they cannot prove it (two witnesses).

 

13 hours ago, Witness said:

Hypocrisy is never clear.  

I should have added, to the one who doesn't recognize it.   You appear to be very hopeful that these "clearly stated instructions" will be followed.  How many such instructions have been changed or completely ignored by elders?  My husband was an elder in a congregation where instructions were generally ignored until a "circuit brother" would be ready to call. They would scramble to "prepare" as a good elder body should.  There was no real concern for the sheep.  Shepherding calls infringed on the personal time of elders.  My husband took the bulk of them and was serious at visiting every person in need that he could.   But, not only did he realize that the instructions outlined in the Shepherd the Flock book were hypocritical, but also were the brothers who were suppose to carry them out.  He eventually dropped the Shepherd the Flock book on the table and walked out on the very night that elders were up until all hours making themselves look good for circuit overseer.   He left the organization on account of its hypocrisy.

A false priesthood of men not anointed who do not carry God's laws written on their heart as an anointed Body has been given, cannot and will not be equipped to shepherd the flock in righteousness.  Mal 2:7; Heb 8:10-11

Therefore, whatever you want others to do for you, do also the same for them, for this is the Law and the Prophets.  Matt 7:12

How long has the organization been up and running?  What avenue has been used to force the changes that you now see concerning the major problem of child abuse and the safety of the victim?  It wasn't the teachings of Christ that caused the revision, but the law enforcement of men.  

[Srecko Sostar]

1 hour ago, Witness said:

Shepherding calls

I am very sure how this "duty" for elders are viewed as burden in their eyes.

"Flock" are often confused about purpose for such meetings, perhaps they are "guilty" for something :)))))) and that is why some or many of them feels it how such "shepherding" is mainly for "spiritually weak" members ,or just "must be done duty/visit". 

Visiting brothers at least once a year, or twice....before CO visit congregation is hard and forced task for elders and i do not think how they are very happy with this WT "arrangement". 

I can not recall they have visiting me in that way. Maybe once in a life time. :)))

[JOHN BUTLER]

Quote TTH ".. haters.. "  Please elaborate.  Who are these so called 'haters' ?  

What do they hate, in you opinion ?