JW Canada: Judge authorizes class action for Jehovah's Witnesses sex abuse victims

[James Thomas Rook Jr.]

33 minutes ago, BillyTheKid46 said:

Sad to say, John, the Elders can say whatever they want, and scream it at the top of their lungs. Unless the clergy privilege is abolished by law, it will remain active wherever it is stated by law, and the Elders are obligated by law to uphold it.

So, merely stating that all crimes will be subject to be turned over to secular authority will, in my opinion, suppress a victim even further from making a legitimate claim of child abuse.

The Clergy Privilege is a PRIVILEGE THAT ONLY EXISTS IF IT IS CLAIMED!!!!

If we RECANT it ... it will INSTANTLY cease to be a factor in any deliberations.

That little piece of fluff is REMOVED from the considerations of any firm, persons', corporations', or religious organizational OTHERWISE legally mandated reporting requirements.

Even though in courts of law the Society now claims the Elders and up  are Clergy, and that the World Headquarters is a "Monastery", for real estate zoning purposes, and we should be treated with the same deference as the Catholic Church, this position is held when it is beneficial, and claimed not to exist when it does NOT serve the Society's financial and political  interests.

The Clergy Privilege is a PRIVILEGE THAT ONLY EXISTS IF IT IS CLAIMED!!!!

And CLAIMING something does NOT make it so.

A sad little Lizard claiming ancestry with a T-REX dinosaur only makes it a sad little lizard ... but since happy lizards are in such short supply, I might have a penchant to humor him.

But NOT when The Society demands they be treated like Clergy .... that is flat out DANGEROUS.

To understand that, which I do, would require an essay of massive proportions.  It's a lot simpler to watch the 1939 movie "The Hunchback of Notre Dame", with Charles Laughton and Maureen O'Hara and understand how important the concept of "Sanctuary" is as it has evolved over the centuries, and also the "Priest/Penitent" religious custom which is embodied like concrete in the societal matrix ... and even extends to lawyers who have inviolate "lawyer/client" privilege.

That is between ONE person and ONE other person.

Although when it is to their advantage, the Society has represented themselves in court many, many times as being a hierarchical organization "exactly like the Catholic Church", in matters of Clergy/Penitent privilege, and also in the ownership of Kingdom Halls and other real estate assets, the fact remains that a Congregational trial is held before three or more people, with full details the Circuit Overseer,  copies to the Society's legal department, prepared by the Congregational Secretary, so all in all,  not to even mention back channel gossip from Elder's wives whose curiosity would put Sherlock Holmes to task, this "confidential matter" might be shared with 8 to 15 people.

These Clergy/Penitent laws have a 1200 and more year history in Roman and British and others' "common law" and it has ALWAYS been between ONLY two people ... at least in Theory.

In actuality, the Priests of the Catholic Church have ALWAYS acted as political intelligence officers for the nations they were prostitutes for, and of course for the Vatican, so while giving absolute lip service to the Priest/Penitent relationship, in order to get the gullible faithful to believe in THEM, as they served as spies with that information, serving their own interests.

People KNOW this, but believe to the very core of their bones it is not the way things really are.  They want to see examples of honorable men, where there are none ....or at the least, very few.  Very VERY few.

The Society is trying to have it BOTH ways ... trying to convince the legal systems that they are due the same respect, deference, and privileges long firmly established by the Catholic Church,, when in fact BOTH are completely disingenuous.

Simpler to watch the movie, than for me to continue for the next 20 pages.

If that does not work, read the 1831 novel by Victor Hugo.

I have an audition to host a local radio talk show next  week, and I did not sleep at all last night, mind racing like a mile wide tornado, so I am completely worn out.

Also, remember Ferengi Rule of Acquisition No. 48:

"The Bigger the Smile ... the sharper the knife".

[TrueTomHarley]

17 minutes ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

I have an audition to host a local radio talk show next  week

Uh oh.

The Rook Factor

[James Thomas Rook Jr.]

They suggested "Rook's World".

[TrueTomHarley]

3 minutes ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

They suggested "Rook's World".

Will this show air in Rio Linda?

[James Thomas Rook Jr.]

I cannot top THAT!

[JOHN BUTLER]

So here we have two opposing views on the Clergy Privilege laws.  

I'm not into laws and I would presume it is different in different countries anyway, but my idera still stands if it would work.

There is one point that as James said and i've always thought it, the Clergy Privilege law applies one on one, and once a group of people know the circumstances then that law no longer applies. But i will admit to being out of my depth on the subject.  

 

[James Thomas Rook Jr.]

1 hour ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

The Clergy Privilege is a PRIVILEGE THAT ONLY EXISTS IF IT IS CLAIMED!!!!

If we RECANT it ... it will INSTANTLY cease to be a factor in any deliberations.

That little piece of fluff is REMOVED from the considerations of any firm, persons', corporations', or religious organizational OTHERWISE legally mandated reporting requirements.

The fluff is removed if the privilege is RECANTED, and no longer claimed.

The OBLIGATION still exists to report to authorities, where required by law, as stated above for all people, and  legal entities,

Removing ONE element from the equation changes the answers, but does not eliminate the other elements.

[James Thomas Rook Jr.]

I can be AFFORDED the opportunity to claim a free Elephant at the Zoo, but unless I invoke that OPPORTUNITY ( NOT a requirement..) the Elephant stays at the Zoo.

If I represent myself as an Elephant handler, and demand the privileges of a trained professional, it complicates my life, and opens me to MANY financial, ethical, moral, and legal considerations I would not otherwise have.

I do not want to be ELEPHANT CLERGY.

The Secular Authorities even have rules for the ethical treatment of Elephants, how they are caged, fed, treated, etc. 

There are different rules for Veternarians, Zoos, Owners ....  and even Restaurants.

Like the WOPR computer said once when playing Global Thermonuclear War Games ...

"The only way to win ... is NOT PLAY"

 

[James Thomas Rook Jr.]

Billy:

You downvoted my last two posts.

Are you mad because you are flat wrong ... or is there something specific about those two posts you can rationally explain where I am wrong?

It's a fair question.

 The key to the whole thing is the WTB&TS claiming the same privileges and titles of the Catholic Church ... which they do in court, time after time, yet claim in the Kingdom Halls that we are NOT clergy.

[James Thomas Rook Jr.]

28 minutes ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

Like the WOPR computer said once when playing Global Thermonuclear War Games ...

"The only way to win ... is NOT PLAY"

 

[Anna]

2 hours ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

yet claim in the Kingdom Halls that we are NOT clergy.

But when we are dealing with secular authorities, we have to speak their language. In their eyes we are clergy.

As per Miriam Webster: : Clergy: a group ordained to perform pastoral or sacerdotal functions in a Christian church.

By the same token we do not call our organization a "church", but in secular speak we are a church.

Miriam Webster: Church: a body or organization of religious believers: such as the whole body of Christians.

(and a Kingdom Hall is a also a church (building) in secular speak)

[James Thomas Rook Jr.]

Following that line of thought ... would a Circuit Overseer and Branch Overseer be labeled as Monsignor and Bishop?