quote:"Twi is no more the haven for sexual predators than any other organization"
I disagree. Sexual predators are known for looking for situations where they can most easily perpetrate their offenses. They look for places where they can be among children long enough to select their victims and be alone with them, and where the safeguards for those children are low. They look for positions of power over those children, so the children will not be believed.
Had TWI had a system of supervision and accountability in place, the epidemic of sexual predation would never have happened. If TWI had the level of "spiritual in-depth perception and awareness" that it claims its leadership has, it never would have happened.
And had TWI leaders cared more about the lives of innocent children than about their own bellies, it would never have been allowed to continue.
LLP, please trust your gut when you say you felt betrayed. You were.
I met Ma*k, and knew of his situation when his wife died and he moved to NJ. Everyone was very supportive, and of course, very compassionate to this man with a newborn baby who just lost his wife.
I remember everyone being excited when he met a single believer who apparantly connected with Ma*k and would become the mother to that baby. It seemed so perfect for all concerned, and they were genuinely wished well.
I remember hearing later that they divorced, and again I felt bad for them, especially since bonds had to have been made between the new wife and the baby.
I agree with LLP, though. The Catholic Church believes and teaches that they are the only true church (I was told this by more than one Catholic) and they were very obviously a haven for child molesters.
The school system, as well as daycare systems, are also places to have very intimate dealings with children daily.
TWI to me offers no greater opportunity than these two places for child molesters to "hunt". It provides an opportunity that a child molester can utilize, no different than those that priests have used for centuries.
I agree that M.N. should get everything that he deserves legally, as every child molester should. I think the only way TWI will be held responsible, however, is if someone can prove that they were aware of his problem when they allowed him to serve in a leadership capacity (Ma*k was not ordained. He was a "minister"as all Way Corps are called "ministers"). That is what made the RC Church responsible...they knew of problems and simply relocated priests.
It is incredible that Ma*k actually told a judge that garbage about being monitored! He didn't surrender, he was caught. And like any common criminal, is only concerned about his own hyde! Not a moment's concern about the child(ren) he has helped to ruin! The childhoods he has ripped off...the emotional problems he is responsible for setting in motion.
I don't think six years is enough. The biblical ramification was death. That should be his sentence...then let him worry about being considered a child molester!
I agree with LLP, though. The Catholic Church believes and teaches that they are the only true church (I was told this by more than one Catholic) and they were very obviously a haven for child molesters.
Hindsight is 20/20. The Catholic Church was not "obviously" a haven for child molesters. If they were, then "obviously" the police and the courts would have been having a field day with them for years. Most people were surprised and shocked when the news of the scandals in the RCC broke. Most people didn't say "I knew it all along."
The school system, as well as daycare systems, are also places to have very intimate dealings with children daily.
Schools offer precious few opportunities, unless they are boarding schools, to take a student privately and molest them. Living on grounds for twi is a different story. Plus, not every staff member is a parishioner, so they have no motivation not to blow the whistle if they see something. Further, the average daycare offers the same numbers. If a staff member wanted to molest a child, they'd have to very visibly separate a single child from a class of children and several staff members. That's NOT an easy way to keep a secret. Now, on grounds, it was comparatively easier to separate a child from "the herd".
TWI to me offers no greater opportunity than these two places for child molesters to "hunt". It provides an opportunity that a child molester can utilize, no different than those that priests have used for centuries.
Presuming equal numbers of both, would you then seek to excuse the organizations that harbored these perversions just because they might have been widespread? Do you forgive them for covering up their evil deeds because they werent the only ones?
I agree that M.N. should get everything that he deserves legally, as every child molester should. I think the only way TWI will be held responsible, however, is if someone can prove that they were aware of his problem when they allowed him to serve in a leadership capacity (Ma*k was not ordained. He was a "minister"as all Way Corps are called "ministers"). That is what made the RC Church responsible...they knew of problems and simply relocated priests.
twi also did that a number of times. Going to say they had a good reason to do so? They moved molesters around rather than firing them, as the direct result of complaints. You cant say they didnt know what happened.
"Twi is no more the haven for sexual predators than any other organization – all the more reason that one should trust God to keep one on guard, no matter what vehicle is the means by which one seeks his or her walk."
Do you think the victims in this case weren't trusting God? Personally, I don't know if they were or not, but my guess is they believed they were. Though you can bet TWI would teach otherwise, cause bad things simply do not happen to good wayfers who are trusting God.
When you think about all the revelation the leadership of TWI claim to get, don't you wonder why none of them received revalation about this? What about discerning of spirits?
To me, that is the difference between TWI and the average. I once witnessed a very ugly reproof session because someone was rearended while sitting at a stop sign. See, it wasn't the fault of the person who hit them, it was the believer's lack of spiritual awareness that caused it to happen. But someone molests children and not a word is said. Makes me go hmmmmm.......
Well, Shaz, I respect your view, but we will have to agree to disagree over our respective positions on this issue. I agree with your characterization of sexual predators – and most manage to seek out the child-compromising environments you describe, no matter what the organization. Pick up a paper and you will see that TWI has no monopoly on child molestation. You’ll find cases in the boyscouts, soccer clubs, summer camps, churches, schools, you name it. All those organizations assume that they have safeguards in place until some molester exposes the system weaknesses.
I cannot comment on your description of a TWI epidemic in this area, since I have not been witness to it. If there is/was an epidemic, then, I would expect that it would be exposed at some point – time will tell.
All the money and power in the Catholic Church could not hide their problem forever. The number of Catholic cases probably far outweighs what went on in TWI, but, then, on the other hand, the Catholic Church is far larger than TWI has ever been.
I think, no matter how strongly you may disagree with me concerning TWI’s culpability as an organization, that we obviously agree that this problem (sexual abuse of children) is devastating to all it touches.
‘wannabe’, thanks for an objective post (well, it is objective to me).
Wordwolf – your attempt to partially exonerate the Catholic Church represents to me a certain double standard. Clearly, there were Catholic officials who covered up the abuse in their system – and, as you seem to assert that similar cover-ups occurred in TWI, it follows, then, that you can no more exonerate the Catholics than condemn TWI, since those in both “systems†who might have been repulsed by these evil acts obviously were not aware, or they would have taken some action. When informed, government entities apparently took appropriate action on both fronts.
If TWI is what it represents itself to be (to me), then, it has no need of my defense. I’m sure many, viewing the Catholic Church from a perspective similar to mine would say the same of that organization. I say, let both organization live (or die) according to what they do moving forward. We can take legal action against actions in the past, but an organizations life blood moves in real time.
Also, Wordwolf, your assertion that schools offer few opportunities to such predators only indicates that you are unfamiliar with that environment and what it offers to one who has this disease. There are plenty of opportunities and excuses available to a predator to keep a student after school, or meet him/her before school. In such situations, parents will be glassy-eyed with the “extra†attention being afforded the unfortunate victim, while the “teacher†will find him/herself alone to abuse the victim. It happens more often than you could imagine.
I know of one instance where the perpetrator was caught because he videotaped his crimes, then showed the videos to acquaintances who turned him into the authorities.
I know full well that this is an anti-twi board, and expect some push-back when posting what must appear as some sort of TWI-defensive post. Whether you believe me or not, I do not post here in defense of TWI, but, rather, in defense of some balance with regard to this very important issue.
Child abusers can be very patient in making their choice of victims/situations. That’s why this crime can occur anywhere, usually in situations where it is least expected.
I do feel betrayed by MN . . . so far, however, I am not ready to enjoin all of TWI in that betrayal. My view, of course, is not 20/20, but I take some solace in the fact that I at least try to keep my eyes open all the time. That’s one of the reasons I continue to visit this forum. Y’all ain’t perfect, but I don’t at all discount that which I read here.
Let us all, no matter our convictions, unite for wholesomeness.
The thing I can't understand- most of us have experienced rather close "supervision" in this organization. Even as just a regular lowly follower, they know almost everything about you. Finances, health, what kind of books you have in your library, details about your sex life, your daily and weekly calender of activities, and on and on.
How in the world did they miss this? This guy was not just the lowly follower. From what I understand, the corpses and staff were required to live up to an even higher standard. Cripe, they could not even go to the bathroom without having to sign some kind of waver.. and this guy was not just a "regular" staff or corpse, he
was CLERGY.
Add to this that in the ministry we were supposed to find world-class experts that can spot a devil spirit under rock at midnight, even blindfolded, able to "confront the world with the logic of da verd". I think that kind of arrogance is a real problem.
I can only think of two logical conclusions:
1. Since they were supposedly God's best, they had to have known about it and just turned their heads and let it happen. I do not subscribe to this, I cannot think that they are THAT evil.
2. The organization is a scam. What they teach and practice does not work. In other words, they are snake oil sellers that somehow convinced themselves that their unique brand of oil actually works. Obviously, it does not. At the very least, it is not quite as reliable and infallible as believed. This is pretty apparent to me. When things go really wrong, a logical person may wonder if perhaps he or she is really doing the right thing. Not "them". In the "good old days" (and probably even now) the answer was to sweep this kind of stuff under the rug, protect or "move" the perpetrator, almost anything, "that the ministry be not blamed".
It seems to me that the product has more value than the customer, and must be protected at all costs. Even here, some are willing to seemingly fight to the death to defend it, despite its obvious flaws.
Personally, I hold them accountable, at least in part. I am not just ranting about it. I would be willing to honestly consider a logical presentation indicating otherwise. I have yet to hear one.
The same thing goes for other organizations that claim infallibility. The claim places the burden of proof on them. Must not be very comfortable.
I should be more mathematically correct. Assume that it is true that they are "the one true household", and "have the accuracy of the word unlike it was known since the first century". All it takes is ONE fact otherwise, and the assumption is proven false. One error and they're toast.
Also, in the early 1990s and on, we were taught that the leader is THE man or woman of God for this day and time and hour for the area where s/he has been assigned. His/her word is to be obeyed.
"It is impossible to obey God without first obeying your leadership." LCM
Do you think the victims in this case weren't trusting God?â€
I did not mean to imply that the victims were not trusting God. My point is that one needs to trust God rather than rely on some organization or institution. No matter how much I value what I get out of TWI, I will not blindly rely solely upon TWI instead of looking to my own personal relationship with God as the ultimate measure of good and evil in every situation. Could this have happened to one of my children? I would like to think not, but remain meekly thankful that, but by the grace of God, it has not.
I know a believer who is pregnant and unmarried. I know she was counseled that abortion was one option available to her, but that option simply didn’t feel right to her, so she chose not to follow that advice and will carry the child to term. I don’t want to derail the thread by debating the abortion issue. My point is that she listened (to God, I believe) and was able to determine what course to take.
The issue of sexual child abuse and the conditions that allow it to occur are both far too complex to simply blame the victim’s family for not having trusted God or for not being attentive or watchful enough over their children. Frankly, I think it too complex an issue for most of us to give more than our opinion. I’m certainly no expert on the subject . . . but as certainly as I know that God exists, I know that the issue is greater than, and in no way exclusive to TWI. I can’t prove this, it’s just one of those things I just “know.†Does that make any sense?
"I know that the issue is greater than, and in no way exclusive to TWI. "
Agreed. It can occur within any organization, it can happy to anyone's child. There simply are no guarantees. All we can do is our best to prevent it and/or to help our loved ones through it if they have experienced it. I have two sons who I watch over very carefully, but still I am aware that something could happen. I hope we have talked openly and honestly enough that they feel they can talk to me if it ever does.
Most of us here are ex-wayfers, and because a number of us were abused, verbally, sexually, emotionally, and/or physically by someone within TWI, it catches our attention when someone from TWI is actually succesfully prosecuted for such an act. We can celebrate together that at least there is one less predator within that particular organization.
"it’s just one of those things I just “know.†Does that make any sense?"
I'm not exactly sure on what you are saying here. It seems like you are saying God can let you know it is not safe to leave your child with a particular person. I agree, at times it seems to work that way - though my experience was that the leadership in TWI would not necessarily agree that you were getting information from God if the person was another "believer".
Here's an incident I remembered this morning while getting ready for work. It happend pretty early on in my TWI days and rang a lot of alarms that for some stupid reason I didn't listen to. Actually, I know the reason, I loved and respected the branch coordinators at the time.
Two "believers", both have children. Believer A's three year old daughter comes home from a visit with believer B. She has bruises and some bleeding from her vaginal area. When questioned about it she says believer B's daughter (who was about 8 or 9) was putting things inside of her. Believer A takes the issue up with B and with branch coordinators. Branch coordinators insist such a thing could never have taken place because the daughter of B would have to have been possessed to do such a thing. She could not have been possessed because God would have given them revelation via discerning of spirits if she were.
Mom A, a wise woman in my opinion, left TWI. Mom B never sought help for you daughter and a few years later sent her daughter to live with another relative, again on the advice of TWI.
p.s. I say this cause I care . . .
"No matter how much I value what I get out of TWI, I will not blindly rely solely upon TWI instead of looking to my own personal relationship with God as the ultimate measure of good and evil in every situation."
Remember this and hang on to it. When dealing with people, especially those you may someday leave your children with, think back to your first impressions and "gut reactions". Sometimes those are right, sometimes not.
Over time and repeated exposure, we become comfortable with things and/or people which in different circumstances we might never have associated with past an initial introduction. Sort of a numbing of the instincts, if you will.
This is not necessarily a bad thing, but it is important to spend some time figuring out what set off those alarms in the first place, to decide if they were justified or not.
Branch coordinators insist such a thing could never have taken place because the daughter of B would have to have been possessed to do such a thing. She could not have been possessed because God would have given them revelation via discerning of spirits if she were.
Holy carp! How many times have we heard things like that? TWI leaders made (and still make) a lot of assumptions based on the TWI world-view that they have absorbed.
"Surely God would have told me if so-and-so was a child molester" they tell themselves, "God would not let evil like this flourish...he would give me revelation to smoke him out"
So, is TWI a haven for child molesters? If the so-called leaders who "stand in the gap" for God's people think like this, then the answer is "hell yeah".
It's almost as if religious hierarchies, inevitably produce a variety of sexual abuses (amoung other corrupt and evil practices), simply because of their very nature.
As soon as an individual's personal faith becomes a matter of organizational dogma, the abuses ensue. Spirituality was never meant to be institutionalized and marketed as a product. Those at the top of the pecking order become drunk with power that they never should have had in the first place and the sincere follower ends up on their knees, snorkling the philosophical sausage of some guy in a silk suit.
Wordwolf – your attempt to partially exonerate the Catholic Church represents to me a certain double standard.
[ When was this? I said 2 things about the Catholic Church.
I said "The Catholic Church was not 'obviously' a haven for child molesters. If they were, then 'obviously' the police and the courts would have been having a field day with them for years. Most people were surprised and shocked when the news of the scandals in the RCC broke. Most people didn't say 'I knew it all along.' "
and
"Presuming equal numbers of both, would you then seek to excuse the organizations that harbored these perversions just because they might have been widespread? Do you forgive them for covering up their evil deeds because they werent the only ones?"
The first refuting the claim that it was obvious to everyone that the RCC was loaded with child molesters before the scandal broke. If it was 'obvious', people would NOT have left their children alone with them, ever. Duh. That was in no way an attempt to excuse the organization or its members of their actions.
In the second example, I said both organizations "harbored perversions" and "covered up evil deeds". Does THAT sound like I'm trying to let them off the hook? Only someone trying to find ways to get twi off the hook would even suspect I was trying to let the RCC off the hook. You might actually try reading my posts for content sometime. ]
Clearly, there were Catholic officials who covered up the abuse in their system
[ I mentioned that.... ]
– and, as you seem to assert that similar cover-ups occurred in TWI,
[ I'm agreeing with a number of eyewitness accounts in concluding this, in case you're wondering... ]
it follows, then, that you can no more exonerate the Catholics than condemn TWI, since those in both “systems†who might have been repulsed by these evil acts obviously were not aware, or they would have taken some action. When informed, government entities apparently took appropriate action on both fronts.
[ Actually, the first part IS what I said. I disagree with you as to what constitutes "appropriate action". In BOTH cases, I think the response to the organizations was FAR too lenient. ]
If TWI is what it represents itself to be (to me), then, it has no need of my defense.
[ If twi was what it presented itself to be, then there would be no Greasespot Cafe, there would be no ruined lives, no court cases, no criminal proceedings. ]
I’m sure many, viewing the Catholic Church from a perspective similar to mine would say the same of that organization. I say, let both organization live (or die) according to what they do moving forward. We can take legal action against actions in the past, but an organizations life blood moves in real time.
[ So, you'd prefer to wait until there's another scandal before seeking reforms? How about adding some oversight and safeguards, how about decrypting some of the secrecy and codes of silence instead? ]
Also, Wordwolf, your assertion that schools offer few opportunities to such predators only indicates that you are unfamiliar with that environment and what it offers to one who has this disease.
[ Convenience is relative. A pervert will go out of their way, and invest time and effort, to indulge their perversion. That's no reason to make things easy for them. Compare the 2 systems in question. I say you have no comprehension of what it was like for children on-campus if you think it was just as difficult for them to be molested or abused there as at a public school. ]
There are plenty of opportunities and excuses available to a predator to keep a student after school, or meet him/her before school. In such situations, parents will be glassy-eyed with the “extra†attention being afforded the unfortunate victim, while the “teacher†will find him/herself alone to abuse the victim. It happens more often than you could imagine.
[ While it happens, that takes effort and DOES leave a "trail". Parents are aware that SOMETHING is happening, whether or not they comprehend the details. They're aware their child is being cut off from the herd. Compare that to children on-grounds-where you have no idea what happens when your child is out of your sight. ]
I know of one instance where the perpetrator was caught because he videotaped his crimes, then showed the videos to acquaintances who turned him into the authorities.
[ Few things should surprise me about such people. ]
I know full well that this is an anti-twi board, and expect some push-back when posting what must appear as some sort of TWI-defensive post. Whether you believe me or not, I do not post here in defense of TWI, but, rather, in defense of some balance with regard to this very important issue.
[ Fine. I dont believe you, since it seems clear to me that you can't view this subject with "balance". I called all the perpetrators evil, and you threw up this smokescreen in response, claiming I excused the perverts in the RCC. That was blatant MISrepresentation of what I said. Therefore, I don't believe you're here to provide fairness OR balance. ]
Child abusers can be very patient in making their choice of victims/situations. That’s why this crime can occur anywhere, usually in situations where it is least expected.
I do feel betrayed by MN . . . so far, however, I am not ready to enjoin all of TWI in that betrayal.
[ Strawman. I want the perverts in both organizations locked up, and the organizations fined AND investigated for aiding and abetting. I want this because what I REALLY want done to child molesters is not allowed under the US Penal Code. I do NOT blame "all" of either organization for what SOME people should have prevented or not done. Makes you seem reasonable by contrast to pretend that's what I said, though, doesn't it? ]
My view, of course, is not 20/20, but I take some solace in the fact that I at least try to keep my eyes open all the time. That’s one of the reasons I continue to visit this forum. Y’all ain’t perfect, but I don’t at all discount that which I read here.
Let us all, no matter our convictions, unite for wholesomeness.
Branch coordinators insist such a thing could never have taken place because the daughter of B would have to have been possessed to do such a thing. She could not have been possessed because God would have given them revelation via discerning of spirits if she were.
Holy carp! How many times have we heard things like _that_? TWI leaders made (and still make) a lot of assumptions based on the TWI world-view that they have absorbed.
"Surely God would have told me if so-and-so was a child molester" they tell themselves, "God would not let evil like this flourish...he would give me revelation to _smoke him out_"
So, is TWI a haven for child molesters? If the so-called leaders who "stand in the gap" for God's people think like this, then the answer is "hell yeah".
Wordwolf: You wrote: “Hindsight is 20/20. The Catholic Church was not "obviously" a haven for child molesters. If they were, then "obviously" the police and the courts would have been having a field day with them for years. Most people were surprised and shocked when the news of the scandals in the RCC broke. Most people didn't say "I knew it all along."â€
So, how does what you wrote about the RCC not apply to TWI? Was TWI so obviously a haven for child molesters, and, if so, why were not the police and courts equally having a field day with TWI over the years? I can only assume that, in the absence of such “field days†that there was no such obvious knowledge of TWI as a haven for child molesters. My use of the term exoneration is probably inappropriate in characterizing your statement quoted above, but it is that statement to which I referred. You did make a distinction between the propensity of TWI to harbor molesters that, to me, in a way favors the RCC. I question why? That’s all.
“Presuming equal numbers of both, would you then seek to excuse the organizations that harbored these perversions just because they might have been widespread? Do you forgive them for covering up their evil deeds because they werent the only ones?â€
I didn’t presume equal numbers of both – I stated clearly that, owing to the shear size of the RCC, that there were probably many more cases there. With respect to forgiveness, Christians everywhere are charged to forgive as we are forgiven. With respect to accountability, however, I would hold the perpetrators accountable, and am no more inclined to blame the RCC than I am to blame TWI. Let’s blame the perpetrators and hold them accountable. Those who are shown to have shirked their leadership responsibilities should also be held accountable, personally. To the extent that they were acting as agents of their respective organization, then, the organization should also bear responsibility. IMO, that’s how it should work. I’m not excusing anyone or any organization. But, I’m not condemning any organization either. I find unrealistic the notion that the RCC should somehow be disbanded by some government enforcement agency over this issue. Disbandment of TWI over the same issues seems equally unrealistic to me.
“Only someone trying to find ways to get twi off the hook would even suspect I was trying to let the RCC off the hookâ€
I only responded to what I read in your post. I don’t suspect you of anything, and, as I mentioned in an earlier post, neither organization needs my defense. I’m not trying to get anyone or any organization “off the hook.â€
“I'm agreeing with a number of eyewitness accounts in concluding this, in case you're wondering...â€
Translation: you are relying upon hearsay, plain and simple. Cite one instance where you have first person, direct eyewitness evidence of the accounts upon which you base your argument.
“I disagree with you as to what constitutes "appropriate action". In BOTH cases, I think the response to the organizations was FAR too lenient.â€
Please see my statement above concerning accountability. What, exactly, would you have proposed as appropriate legal action (official, government legal action, if you will) against the RCC and TWI?
“If twi was what it presented itself to be, then there would be no Greasespot Cafe, there would be no ruined lives, no court cases, no criminal proceedingsâ€
Show me any large organization that doesn’t suffer from these problems. These are people problems, and will be inherent in any organization that consists of people. That, in this particular case, TWI fell short of what it presents itself to be goes without saying. Taken in context, my statement refers to how TWI (or any organization, for that matter) will respond in correcting discovered weaknesses moving forward.
“So, you'd prefer to wait until there's another scandal before seeking reforms? How about adding some oversight and safeguards, how about decrypting some of the secrecy and codes of silence instead?â€
How do you read that into my post? I said that they (TWI, RCC, you name it) should live or die (as in cease to exist) in measure to what they do (as in reforms, corrections, call it what you will) moving forward. Nothing in my post suggested that I would prefer to wait until there is another scandal. Point out to me what you read that caused you to draw that conclusion.
†I say you have no comprehension of what it was like for children on-campus if you think it was just as difficult for them to be molested or abused there as at a public schoolâ€
And before you said the above, I said:
“I cannot comment on your description of a TWI epidemic in this area, since I have not been witness to itâ€
I’m trying to be open and honest, WW, can you not see that?
“Compare that to children on-grounds-where you have no idea what happens when your child is out of your sightâ€
Not unlike daycare, boyscouts, choir/band camps, before/after school tutoring, you name it. It’s a challenge all parents face to balance opportunity against retrospection in the interest of their children. But by the grace of God, my children have not been victims. I stay vigilant, I trust God, but, in the end, the credit for my success thus far should be credited not to my competence, but to the grace of God. You state that I have no idea what happens “on-grounds†and I say you and many other have no idea what happens wherever it happens. That’s the big problem with child molestation.
“Fine. I dont believe you, since it seems clear to me that you can't view this subject with "balance". I called all the perpetrators evil, and you threw up this smokescreen in response, claiming I excused the perverts in the RCC. That was blatant MISrepresentation of what I said. Therefore, I don't believe you're here to provide fairness OR balance.â€
I characterized your statement (accurately or not) as an attempt to partially exonerate the RCC in contrast to your characterization of TWI as an organizational sanctuary for perpetrators of this crime. I didn’t accuse you of excusing or attempting to excuse perverts of any persuasion. The only blatancy involved is your failure to comprehend what I wrote. Go back and reread for further edification. One of the criticisms I have always held of this board and Waydale before is that open debate tends to get stifled by claims that anyone who is not openly anti-TWI gets “shouted†off the board by those claiming that there must be some ulterior motive for any statement posted by believers. If the majority of anti/ex-TWI posters here would simply prefer to bask in their anti-TWI views in absence of comments from current believers, just say so, and we believers who care to stay balanced will retreat to our lurking holes and refrain from further contribution.
No matter how strongly I disagree with your point of view, WordWolf, I do not read into your statements what isn’t there, and I do not accuse you of duplicity in your posts. I take you at your word that you post what you believe because you honestly believe it. Why do you accuse me otherwise?
Abigail: You state: “Mom A, a wise woman in my opinion, left TWI†From the information you provided, I would agree that Mom A was quite wise. As a child, I, too, was the victim of some “experimentation†by some of my older cousins. We weren’t part of TWI or any big organization, just simple country folk. The conditions in our extended family put me at risk (parents worked during the day, leaving me and my cousins under the supervision of a grandparent who’s attention was less than adequate). My parents don’t know to this day about these episodes. Fortunately, I wasn’t left with bruises (physical or otherwise) and am all the wiser to what can happen when kids (of any but especially of unequal ages) are left unsupervised. My cousins ran roughshod over me and my sister, and, if presented with undisputable evidence, their parents always managed to invent some justification for their wicked actions. In the case you cite, I suspect that Mother B’s motives were two-fold, 1) to protect the standing of her family within TWI, and 2) to protect her child. The tougher decision on her part would have probably born healthier long-term fruit. Been there (as a victim though not as part of TWI).
"Not unlike daycare, boyscouts, choir/band camps, before/after school tutoring, you name it. It’s a challenge all parents face to balance opportunity against retrospection in the interest of their children"
and
"I say you and many other have no idea what happens wherever it happens. That’s the big problem with child molestation."
These staements are very true. But I still maintain there is a difference. If I am uncomfortable with a teacher, a boyscout leader, etc., I have the option of removing my child from the situation without fear of reproof, retribution, being marked and avoided, etc. The same is not always true in TWI. Should a parent allow such a fear to supercede their need to protect their child? Nope, but it happens. Especially if the parent is afraid of losing God's protection and/or trusts their leadership more than they trust themselves.
Do those same fears exist within other religious organizations? I don't know, I've never belonged to any. But I do know they are very real within TWI.
"My parents don’t know to this day about these episodes. Fortunately, I wasn’t left with bruises (physical or otherwise) and am all the wiser to what can happen when kids (of any but especially of unequal ages) are left unsupervised."
Yup, LLP, me too, and likewise in my case it had nothing to do with TWI. However, I was never left with bruises and I think that is a tremendous difference. Kids who are simply experimenting (which I think is fairly normal) do not generally leave each other bruised and bleeding. Kids who leave another bruised and bleeding are in need of help.
Obviously you get something positive out of your experience with TWI or you wouldn't stay. I can't argue against that as I too once felt the same way. I am only concerned that you don't ever allow those positives to blind you to potential harms. Don't ever allow yourself to become comfortable with things that should make you uncomfortable. When something sets off your internal alarm system, pay attention to it.
[bTW, LLP, please make it easy visually to tell when you're quoting me and when you're speaking for yourself, for the benefit of those playing along at home. Also, please try not to trim RELEVANT parts of my comments out-you seem to have done that somewhat.]
quote:Originally posted by LowlyLollyPoppy:
Wordwolf: You wrote: “Hindsight is 20/20. The Catholic Church was not "obviously" a haven for child molesters. If they were, then "obviously" the police and the courts would have been having a field day with them for years. Most people were surprised and shocked when the news of the scandals in the RCC broke. Most people didn't say "I knew it all along."â€
So, how does what you wrote about the RCC not apply to TWI? Was TWI so obviously a haven for child molesters, and, if so, why were not the police and courts equally having a field day with TWI over the years? I can only assume that, in the absence of such “field days†that there was no such obvious knowledge of TWI as a haven for child molesters. My use of the term exoneration is probably inappropriate in characterizing your statement quoted above, but it is that statement to which I referred. You did make a distinction between the propensity of TWI to harbor molesters that, to me, in a way favors the RCC. I question why? That’s all.
[My original comment, and this clarification, made NO distinction between evils done in the RCC and evils done in twi. Please cite EXACTLY what caused the impression I was making a double-standard...or admit it was simply the way you read the posts. (Could easily be an honest mistake.) ]
“Presuming equal numbers of both, would you then seek to excuse the organizations that harbored these perversions just because they might have been widespread? Do you forgive them for covering up their evil deeds because they werent the only ones?â€
[Here I hammered my position that they should be treated equally, and both equally severely.]
I didn’t presume equal numbers of both – I stated clearly that, owing to the shear size of the RCC, that there were probably many more cases there. With respect to forgiveness, Christians everywhere are charged to forgive as we are forgiven.
[ I'll light them a candle after they're executed. If it makes me "spiritually-immature" to want child molesters executed so that they can molest no more children, then I'll proudly bear the "stigma". ]
With respect to accountability, however, I would hold the perpetrators accountable, and am no more inclined to blame the RCC than I am to blame TWI. Let’s blame the perpetrators and hold them accountable. Those who are shown to have shirked their leadership responsibilities should also be held accountable, personally. To the extent that they were acting as agents of their respective organization, then, the organization should also bear responsibility.
[Other than a nebulous statement that "the organization should bear responsibility", what SPECIFIC measures do you think should be done with the RCC and twi? I already gave my general guidelines for action, let's hear yours-or do both organizations go on their merry ways?]
IMO, that’s how it should work. I’m not excusing anyone or any organization. But, I’m not condemning any organization either. I find unrealistic the notion that the RCC should somehow be disbanded by some government enforcement agency over this issue. Disbandment of TWI over the same issues seems equally unrealistic to me.
[strawman again. I mentioned opening up the veil of secrecy in the organization, and changes made to increase accountability, and you're suggesting I said to close them down. Nobody mentioned closing them down. But making it sound like I recommended closing them down sure makes me look like an extremist, doesn't it?]
“Only someone trying to find ways to get twi off the hook would even suspect I was trying to let the RCC off the hookâ€
I only responded to what I read in your post. I don’t suspect you of anything, and, as I mentioned in an earlier post, neither organization needs my defense. I’m not trying to get anyone or any organization “off the hook.â€
“I'm agreeing with a number of eyewitness accounts in concluding this, in case you're wondering...â€
Translation: you are relying upon hearsay, plain and simple. Cite one instance where you have first person, direct eyewitness evidence of the accounts upon which you base your argument.
[if you mean "tell what you've seen", then, no I haven't seen anyone molested in the group. (I never went to jail for assaulting a twi official, which is a sure sign I didn't catch anyone.) However, there are a number of posters here who HAVE first-hand testimony of such things. They're the ones commonly called "liars" by a tiny handful of posters. Just confining myself to this particular thread, are you prepared to call Abigail a liar? If so, please state so outright so she and I can see it. Otherwise, are you prepared to admit "her testimony into the record"? Some posters have given statements to the police and so on. If that's "hearsay", then understand some people are sitting in jail now over "hearsay" while they await their day in court, and that same "hearsay" gets many of them convicted and sent to prison.]
“I disagree with you as to what constitutes "appropriate action". In BOTH cases, I think the response to the organizations was FAR too lenient.â€
Please see my statement above concerning accountability. What, exactly, would you have proposed as appropriate legal action (official, government legal action, if you will) against the RCC and TWI?
[Actually, I've started mentioning what I'd advocate. Let's hear YOU share as well. What happens to both organizations, if LLP's plan is put into effect?]
“If twi was what it presented itself to be, then there would be no Greasespot Cafe, there would be no ruined lives, no court cases, no criminal proceedingsâ€
Show me any large organization that doesn’t suffer from these problems. These are people problems, and will be inherent in any organization that consists of people. That, in this particular case, TWI fell short of what it presents itself to be goes without saying. Taken in context, my statement refers to how TWI (or any organization, for that matter) will respond in correcting discovered weaknesses moving forward.
[Most organizations face the molestations, rapes, coverups, ruined lives and suicides?]
“So, you'd prefer to wait until there's another scandal before seeking reforms? How about adding some oversight and safeguards, how about decrypting some of the secrecy and codes of silence instead?â€
How do you read that into my post? I said that they (TWI, RCC, you name it) should live or die (as in cease to exist) in measure to what they do (as in reforms, corrections, call it what you will) moving forward. Nothing in my post suggested that I would prefer to wait until there is another scandal. Point out to me what you read that caused you to draw that conclusion.
[simply that. You said to address the exact perpetrators, and those directly involved, which can mean a number of things. You then said nothing about the structures of the organizations except that they move forward. If no change is done to the organization whatsoever, then you ARE presuming there's no culpability to the group, and advocate NO action against it...until the next incident comes.]
[Hey-I'm direct in answering where I get my conclusions of you-let's see you return the favour.]
†I say you have no comprehension of what it was like for children on-campus if you think it was just as difficult for them to be molested or abused there as at a public schoolâ€
And before you said the above, I said:
“I cannot comment on your description of a TWI epidemic in this area, since I have not been witness to itâ€
I’m trying to be open and honest, WW, can you not see that?
“Compare that to children on-grounds-where you have no idea what happens when your child is out of your sightâ€
Not unlike daycare, boyscouts, choir/band camps, before/after school tutoring, you name it.
[A pervert can attempt to act in any setting, and potentially can succeed in any setting. However, the other settings you've mentioned can easily minimize risks that are/were maximized on-grounds. If you feel this is NOT the case, cite which type of organization you wish to discuss, and I'll be happy to discuss it. I've experience with most of what you cited, and I'm still free of molestation to this day. In case you missed it, it's my continuing assertion that the situation on-grounds at twi was more conducive to perverts molesting children than it is in "normal" societal structures like we are discussing. You're making it sound like there's an equal likelihood of being molested on-grounds as involved in anything else we discussed, and I'm claiming it's NOT so.]
It’s a challenge all parents face to balance opportunity against retrospection in the interest of their children. But by the grace of God, my children have not been victims. I stay vigilant, I trust God, but, in the end, the credit for my success thus far should be credited not to my competence, but to the grace of God. You state that I have no idea what happens “on-grounds†and I say you and many other have no idea what happens wherever it happens. That’s the big problem with child molestation.
[Lacking 24-hour satellite systems monitoring a child, that's true anywhere. However, there's a question of relative risk. If I have the choice of my son, say, spending the day in public school for a 'normal' schoolday, and my son on-grounds being 'overseen' by the adults on campus, Id pick the public school. Everything THERE happens in full view, and anyone taking someone AWAY from full view is seen to do so. Is that a guarantee he won't be molested at school? No, but I prefer to take the best odds I can, and to minimize risk. I say it is NOT honest to compare a child on-grounds and a child in school and claim the risks are identical, because I say the risks are NOT identical.]
“Fine. I dont believe you, since it seems clear to me that you can't view this subject with "balance". I called all the perpetrators evil, and you threw up this smokescreen in response, claiming I excused the perverts in the RCC. That was blatant MISrepresentation of what I said. Therefore, I don't believe you're here to provide fairness OR balance.â€
I characterized your statement (accurately or not) as an attempt to partially exonerate the RCC in contrast to your characterization of TWI as an organizational sanctuary for perpetrators of this crime. I didn’t accuse you of excusing or attempting to excuse perverts of any persuasion. The only blatancy involved is your failure to comprehend what I wrote.
Go back and reread for further edification. One of the criticisms I have always held of this board and Waydale before is that open debate tends to get stifled by claims that anyone who is not openly anti-TWI gets “shouted†off the board by those claiming that there must be some ulterior motive for any statement posted by believers. If the majority of anti/ex-TWI posters here would simply prefer to bask in their anti-TWI views in absence of comments from current believers, just say so, and we believers who care to stay balanced will retreat to our lurking holes and refrain from further contribution.
[Oooo, nasty WordWolf doesn't want to hear points of view other than his own-he eschews "balanced" discussion. Slapping that label on my comments in no way alters their substance, and claiming yours are "balanced" AGAIN STILL doesn't make them so. ]
No matter how strongly I disagree with your point of view, WordWolf, I do not read into your statements what isn’t there, and I do not accuse you of duplicity in your posts. I take you at your word that you post what you believe because you honestly believe it. Why do you accuse me otherwise?
[Actually, I believe that you believe what you've posted. My comments were about your position being incorrect. You are interpreting the situation incorrectly because you find the alternative distasteful. Now, as to accusing me of duplicity, you just did above, with your "hearsay" charge. Please review your own posts if you missed it.]
[i'll give you this-you have added more style to your posts. You're also refraining from making baldly false statements. That is also an improvement. However, you're still interpreting events so as to re-cast twi in the best possible light, and its dissenters in the worst possible light. That's not intellectually honest. If I wanted to, I could do the same, but I prefer to take a certain pride in the integrity of my posts. ]
Abigail: You state: “Mom A, a wise woman in my opinion, left TWI†From the information you provided, I would agree that Mom A was quite wise. As a child, I, too, was the victim of some “experimentation†by some of my older cousins. We weren’t part of TWI or any big organization, just simple country folk. The conditions in our extended family put me at risk (parents worked during the day, leaving me and my cousins under the supervision of a grandparent who’s attention was less than adequate). My parents don’t know to this day about these episodes. Fortunately, I wasn’t left with bruises (physical or otherwise) and am all the wiser to what can happen when kids (of any but especially of unequal ages) are left unsupervised. My cousins ran roughshod over me and my sister, and, if presented with undisputable evidence, their parents always managed to invent some justification for their wicked actions. In the case you cite, I suspect that Mother B’s motives were two-fold, 1) to protect the standing of her family within TWI, and 2) to protect her child. The tougher decision on her part would have probably born healthier long-term fruit. Been there (as a victim though not as part of TWI).
[Lest we forget, LLP, I posed a question earlier in this post. Do you accept the substance of Abigail's posts as accurate and truthful, or do you consider it "UNtruthful", or, as you put it, "hearsay, plain and simple?" ]
With all due respect, I don't think engaging in a line by line argument is very constructive. It will only require LLP to reinforce her(?) position.
You cannot change someone's mind for them by shear force of an argument. The most you can do is give them information they do not already have to make a more informed decision.
I would like to see this thread continue on the informative path.
Also, the way you are formatting your quote/replies makes it appear you are yelling, which I doubt you are. Might I suggest using the quote tags around each individual quote to separate your comments.
"Branch coordinators insist such a thing could never have taken place because the daughter of B would have to have been possessed to do such a thing. She could not have been possessed because God would have given them revelation via discerning of spirits if she were."
Abigail, I think this little "account" really says it all. If there is any weakness in the organization to be exploited by anybody, this has got to be it. What arrogance! I cannot logically see why anybody in their RIGHT mind still puts up with it.
If all the "training" and classes really did what they claimed, they really would have known.
This is just one more example showing how spiritually blind and inept they have really become. The overseers have proven themselves to be experts in meddling, even in every insignificant little area of the followers lives, and they miss this one.
Like days of old, they strain at the gnat, and swallow the camel. Blind leaders of the blind.
I would like to see what they say if innies had the audacity to call them on this. I would bet the farm that the answer would not include, "we were wrong".
I have heard the kind of answers given to similar questions. "Why are you asking?" "What is the motivation behind this question?" No straight answers.
If things go real bad, they would rather publically defame and/or mark and avoid the poor stooge that "missed it". The product must be preserved, AT ALL COSTS.
Source of my information: I was not a "first hand" witness to the incident I mentioned earlier. It was not my child and I never examined the child who was hurt. I would never have known anything about what happened, except: a) I walked in on a conversation and overheard enough that the branch coordinator seemed to feel obligated to explain what I heard and b) I was friends with the mother of the child who was hurt.
"What arrogance! I cannot logically see why anybody in their RIGHT mind still puts up with it."
and
"The overseers have proven themselves to be experts in meddling, even in every insignificant little area of the followers lives, and they miss this one."
In all honesty, the overseers in this situation genuinely wanted to do what was right. It is my guess, based on what I know of TWI, they sought counsel from THEIR leadership and did as advised.
Knowing them the way I did, I do not think they intentionally turned a blind eye to the situation any more than I did. And I did turn a blind eye to it at the time. It's called denial. (In fact, I pushed the entire incident out of my mind until this thread brought it back to memory.)
I deserately wanted and needed to believe in what TWI was teaching and the people who were teaching it to me. I was young, frightened, and mixed up, my mother was dying. Denial is a powerful thing and we have all been susceptible to it at one time or another.
With all due respect, I don't think engaging in a line by line argument is very constructive. It will only require LLP to reinforce her(?) position.
You cannot change someone's mind for them by shear force of an argument. The most you can do is give them information they do not already have to make a more informed decision.
I would like to see this thread continue on the informative path.
Also, the way you are formatting your quote/replies makes it appear you are yelling, which I doubt you are. Might I suggest using the quote tags around each individual quote to separate your comments.
My apologies if I'm misreading your posts.
[i'll keep that in mind, but it's been my custom to place my comments, especially when alternating with another person's, both in boldface and brackets. The boldface makes it easy to spot when the speaker changes, and the brackets stay there if they quote back, allowing them to remain offset somewhat while allowing them to boldface THEIR comments. I've been doing that for a few years, now. ]
[ JWBM made several comments that I thought should not go unchallenged, drawing attention away from twi's complicity in the criminal actions of its "employees". I refuted them, then LLP tried to make it sound like I was saying the RCC deserved a light hand, and twi a heavy hand, in response to the criminal behaviour they were complicit in. I challenged that as well. Perhaps this will not change LLP's mind. LLP claims to be giving things an honest look. If that is so, then LLP will slowly increase in learning as a result. If that is not true, refusing to allow misdirections and mischaracterizations of my positions at least benefits the other readers. Frankly, once LLP and JWBM entered this thread, and posted to the effect that twi as a corporate entity is innocent of wrongdoing, this thread no longer reflected an intellectual exchange of ideas in the truest sense. Perhaps LLP will demonstrate otherwise in his next post. (Perhaps not.)
Abigail, I really do agree with you. I also feel that a lot of good, well meaning people were set up for failure. They were expected to see devil spirits through 10 feet of lead. After all, they were taught "how". I think the well meaning folks who seemingly "missed it" really paid the price, often publically.
Like what I heard in a couple of "counciling" sessions. "If you will do EXACTLY what we tell you, you WILL get the situation resolved." When failure ensues, somebody has to be tagged with the blame. Sometimes life just kind of does not work that way. And the corps that I knew. Some were pretty sharp. Others though.. pretty damn arrogant.
Somehow the "one size fits all" walk by the spirit is not at all what it is cracked up to be.. at least in my opinion. What I think I really object to is the claim that somehow this is the ultimate in "Christian Living"; it can't be- at least in my opinion- if somebody that is doing all of the supposed right things misses something like this.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
20
14
21
21
Popular Days
Aug 8
24
Dec 19
20
Jan 4
19
Jan 7
18
Top Posters In This Topic
excathedra 20 posts
Belle 14 posts
Bob 21 posts
Ham 21 posts
Popular Days
Aug 8 2005
24 posts
Dec 19 2004
20 posts
Jan 4 2005
19 posts
Jan 7 2005
18 posts
Popular Posts
pjroberge
I think a minister should be allowed to go back to being a minister if: 1) They have child molester branded in their forehead 2) They are castrated 3) They are un-paid as part of their making amend
shazdancer
Dear LLP,
You said...
I disagree. Sexual predators are known for looking for situations where they can most easily perpetrate their offenses. They look for places where they can be among children long enough to select their victims and be alone with them, and where the safeguards for those children are low. They look for positions of power over those children, so the children will not be believed.Had TWI had a system of supervision and accountability in place, the epidemic of sexual predation would never have happened. If TWI had the level of "spiritual in-depth perception and awareness" that it claims its leadership has, it never would have happened.
And had TWI leaders cared more about the lives of innocent children than about their own bellies, it would never have been allowed to continue.
LLP, please trust your gut when you say you felt betrayed. You were.
Regards,
Shaz
Link to comment
Share on other sites
justwannabeme
I met Ma*k, and knew of his situation when his wife died and he moved to NJ. Everyone was very supportive, and of course, very compassionate to this man with a newborn baby who just lost his wife.
I remember everyone being excited when he met a single believer who apparantly connected with Ma*k and would become the mother to that baby. It seemed so perfect for all concerned, and they were genuinely wished well.
I remember hearing later that they divorced, and again I felt bad for them, especially since bonds had to have been made between the new wife and the baby.
I agree with LLP, though. The Catholic Church believes and teaches that they are the only true church (I was told this by more than one Catholic) and they were very obviously a haven for child molesters.
The school system, as well as daycare systems, are also places to have very intimate dealings with children daily.
TWI to me offers no greater opportunity than these two places for child molesters to "hunt". It provides an opportunity that a child molester can utilize, no different than those that priests have used for centuries.
I agree that M.N. should get everything that he deserves legally, as every child molester should. I think the only way TWI will be held responsible, however, is if someone can prove that they were aware of his problem when they allowed him to serve in a leadership capacity (Ma*k was not ordained. He was a "minister"as all Way Corps are called "ministers"). That is what made the RC Church responsible...they knew of problems and simply relocated priests.
It is incredible that Ma*k actually told a judge that garbage about being monitored! He didn't surrender, he was caught. And like any common criminal, is only concerned about his own hyde! Not a moment's concern about the child(ren) he has helped to ruin! The childhoods he has ripped off...the emotional problems he is responsible for setting in motion.
I don't think six years is enough. The biblical ramification was death. That should be his sentence...then let him worry about being considered a child molester!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Abigail
"Twi is no more the haven for sexual predators than any other organization – all the more reason that one should trust God to keep one on guard, no matter what vehicle is the means by which one seeks his or her walk."
Do you think the victims in this case weren't trusting God? Personally, I don't know if they were or not, but my guess is they believed they were. Though you can bet TWI would teach otherwise, cause bad things simply do not happen to good wayfers who are trusting God.
When you think about all the revelation the leadership of TWI claim to get, don't you wonder why none of them received revalation about this? What about discerning of spirits?
To me, that is the difference between TWI and the average. I once witnessed a very ugly reproof session because someone was rearended while sitting at a stop sign. See, it wasn't the fault of the person who hit them, it was the believer's lack of spiritual awareness that caused it to happen. But someone molests children and not a word is said. Makes me go hmmmmm.......
Link to comment
Share on other sites
LowlyLollyPoppy
Well, Shaz, I respect your view, but we will have to agree to disagree over our respective positions on this issue. I agree with your characterization of sexual predators – and most manage to seek out the child-compromising environments you describe, no matter what the organization. Pick up a paper and you will see that TWI has no monopoly on child molestation. You’ll find cases in the boyscouts, soccer clubs, summer camps, churches, schools, you name it. All those organizations assume that they have safeguards in place until some molester exposes the system weaknesses.
I cannot comment on your description of a TWI epidemic in this area, since I have not been witness to it. If there is/was an epidemic, then, I would expect that it would be exposed at some point – time will tell.
All the money and power in the Catholic Church could not hide their problem forever. The number of Catholic cases probably far outweighs what went on in TWI, but, then, on the other hand, the Catholic Church is far larger than TWI has ever been.
I think, no matter how strongly you may disagree with me concerning TWI’s culpability as an organization, that we obviously agree that this problem (sexual abuse of children) is devastating to all it touches.
‘wannabe’, thanks for an objective post (well, it is objective to me).
Wordwolf – your attempt to partially exonerate the Catholic Church represents to me a certain double standard. Clearly, there were Catholic officials who covered up the abuse in their system – and, as you seem to assert that similar cover-ups occurred in TWI, it follows, then, that you can no more exonerate the Catholics than condemn TWI, since those in both “systems†who might have been repulsed by these evil acts obviously were not aware, or they would have taken some action. When informed, government entities apparently took appropriate action on both fronts.
If TWI is what it represents itself to be (to me), then, it has no need of my defense. I’m sure many, viewing the Catholic Church from a perspective similar to mine would say the same of that organization. I say, let both organization live (or die) according to what they do moving forward. We can take legal action against actions in the past, but an organizations life blood moves in real time.
Also, Wordwolf, your assertion that schools offer few opportunities to such predators only indicates that you are unfamiliar with that environment and what it offers to one who has this disease. There are plenty of opportunities and excuses available to a predator to keep a student after school, or meet him/her before school. In such situations, parents will be glassy-eyed with the “extra†attention being afforded the unfortunate victim, while the “teacher†will find him/herself alone to abuse the victim. It happens more often than you could imagine.
I know of one instance where the perpetrator was caught because he videotaped his crimes, then showed the videos to acquaintances who turned him into the authorities.
I know full well that this is an anti-twi board, and expect some push-back when posting what must appear as some sort of TWI-defensive post. Whether you believe me or not, I do not post here in defense of TWI, but, rather, in defense of some balance with regard to this very important issue.
Child abusers can be very patient in making their choice of victims/situations. That’s why this crime can occur anywhere, usually in situations where it is least expected.
I do feel betrayed by MN . . . so far, however, I am not ready to enjoin all of TWI in that betrayal. My view, of course, is not 20/20, but I take some solace in the fact that I at least try to keep my eyes open all the time. That’s one of the reasons I continue to visit this forum. Y’all ain’t perfect, but I don’t at all discount that which I read here.
Let us all, no matter our convictions, unite for wholesomeness.
Respectfully,
LLP
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
The thing I can't understand- most of us have experienced rather close "supervision" in this organization. Even as just a regular lowly follower, they know almost everything about you. Finances, health, what kind of books you have in your library, details about your sex life, your daily and weekly calender of activities, and on and on.
How in the world did they miss this? This guy was not just the lowly follower. From what I understand, the corpses and staff were required to live up to an even higher standard. Cripe, they could not even go to the bathroom without having to sign some kind of waver.. and this guy was not just a "regular" staff or corpse, he
was CLERGY.
Add to this that in the ministry we were supposed to find world-class experts that can spot a devil spirit under rock at midnight, even blindfolded, able to "confront the world with the logic of da verd". I think that kind of arrogance is a real problem.
I can only think of two logical conclusions:
1. Since they were supposedly God's best, they had to have known about it and just turned their heads and let it happen. I do not subscribe to this, I cannot think that they are THAT evil.
2. The organization is a scam. What they teach and practice does not work. In other words, they are snake oil sellers that somehow convinced themselves that their unique brand of oil actually works. Obviously, it does not. At the very least, it is not quite as reliable and infallible as believed. This is pretty apparent to me. When things go really wrong, a logical person may wonder if perhaps he or she is really doing the right thing. Not "them". In the "good old days" (and probably even now) the answer was to sweep this kind of stuff under the rug, protect or "move" the perpetrator, almost anything, "that the ministry be not blamed".
It seems to me that the product has more value than the customer, and must be protected at all costs. Even here, some are willing to seemingly fight to the death to defend it, despite its obvious flaws.
Personally, I hold them accountable, at least in part. I am not just ranting about it. I would be willing to honestly consider a logical presentation indicating otherwise. I have yet to hear one.
The same thing goes for other organizations that claim infallibility. The claim places the burden of proof on them. Must not be very comfortable.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
I should be more mathematically correct. Assume that it is true that they are "the one true household", and "have the accuracy of the word unlike it was known since the first century". All it takes is ONE fact otherwise, and the assumption is proven false. One error and they're toast.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Watered Garden
Also, in the early 1990s and on, we were taught that the leader is THE man or woman of God for this day and time and hour for the area where s/he has been assigned. His/her word is to be obeyed.
"It is impossible to obey God without first obeying your leadership." LCM
Link to comment
Share on other sites
mzimagine
It is never true,
Until it happens to you.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
LowlyLollyPoppy
Posted by Abigail: “
Do you think the victims in this case weren't trusting God?â€
I did not mean to imply that the victims were not trusting God. My point is that one needs to trust God rather than rely on some organization or institution. No matter how much I value what I get out of TWI, I will not blindly rely solely upon TWI instead of looking to my own personal relationship with God as the ultimate measure of good and evil in every situation. Could this have happened to one of my children? I would like to think not, but remain meekly thankful that, but by the grace of God, it has not.
I know a believer who is pregnant and unmarried. I know she was counseled that abortion was one option available to her, but that option simply didn’t feel right to her, so she chose not to follow that advice and will carry the child to term. I don’t want to derail the thread by debating the abortion issue. My point is that she listened (to God, I believe) and was able to determine what course to take.
The issue of sexual child abuse and the conditions that allow it to occur are both far too complex to simply blame the victim’s family for not having trusted God or for not being attentive or watchful enough over their children. Frankly, I think it too complex an issue for most of us to give more than our opinion. I’m certainly no expert on the subject . . . but as certainly as I know that God exists, I know that the issue is greater than, and in no way exclusive to TWI. I can’t prove this, it’s just one of those things I just “know.†Does that make any sense?
Respectfully,
LLP
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Abigail
LLP,
"I know that the issue is greater than, and in no way exclusive to TWI. "
Agreed. It can occur within any organization, it can happy to anyone's child. There simply are no guarantees. All we can do is our best to prevent it and/or to help our loved ones through it if they have experienced it. I have two sons who I watch over very carefully, but still I am aware that something could happen. I hope we have talked openly and honestly enough that they feel they can talk to me if it ever does.
Most of us here are ex-wayfers, and because a number of us were abused, verbally, sexually, emotionally, and/or physically by someone within TWI, it catches our attention when someone from TWI is actually succesfully prosecuted for such an act. We can celebrate together that at least there is one less predator within that particular organization.
"it’s just one of those things I just “know.†Does that make any sense?"
I'm not exactly sure on what you are saying here. It seems like you are saying God can let you know it is not safe to leave your child with a particular person. I agree, at times it seems to work that way - though my experience was that the leadership in TWI would not necessarily agree that you were getting information from God if the person was another "believer".
Here's an incident I remembered this morning while getting ready for work. It happend pretty early on in my TWI days and rang a lot of alarms that for some stupid reason I didn't listen to. Actually, I know the reason, I loved and respected the branch coordinators at the time.
Two "believers", both have children. Believer A's three year old daughter comes home from a visit with believer B. She has bruises and some bleeding from her vaginal area. When questioned about it she says believer B's daughter (who was about 8 or 9) was putting things inside of her. Believer A takes the issue up with B and with branch coordinators. Branch coordinators insist such a thing could never have taken place because the daughter of B would have to have been possessed to do such a thing. She could not have been possessed because God would have given them revelation via discerning of spirits if she were.
Mom A, a wise woman in my opinion, left TWI. Mom B never sought help for you daughter and a few years later sent her daughter to live with another relative, again on the advice of TWI.
p.s. I say this cause I care . . .
"No matter how much I value what I get out of TWI, I will not blindly rely solely upon TWI instead of looking to my own personal relationship with God as the ultimate measure of good and evil in every situation."
Remember this and hang on to it. When dealing with people, especially those you may someday leave your children with, think back to your first impressions and "gut reactions". Sometimes those are right, sometimes not.
Over time and repeated exposure, we become comfortable with things and/or people which in different circumstances we might never have associated with past an initial introduction. Sort of a numbing of the instincts, if you will.
This is not necessarily a bad thing, but it is important to spend some time figuring out what set off those alarms in the first place, to decide if they were justified or not.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
A telling remark, no matter what the context:
Holy carp! How many times have we heard things like that? TWI leaders made (and still make) a lot of assumptions based on the TWI world-view that they have absorbed."Surely God would have told me if so-and-so was a child molester" they tell themselves, "God would not let evil like this flourish...he would give me revelation to smoke him out"
So, is TWI a haven for child molesters? If the so-called leaders who "stand in the gap" for God's people think like this, then the answer is "hell yeah".
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GrouchoMarxJr
It's almost as if religious hierarchies, inevitably produce a variety of sexual abuses (amoung other corrupt and evil practices), simply because of their very nature.
As soon as an individual's personal faith becomes a matter of organizational dogma, the abuses ensue. Spirituality was never meant to be institutionalized and marketed as a product. Those at the top of the pecking order become drunk with power that they never should have had in the first place and the sincere follower ends up on their knees, snorkling the philosophical sausage of some guy in a silk suit.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
LLP in normal.
[WordWolf in boldface.]
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
I thought this bore repeating.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
LowlyLollyPoppy
Wordwolf: You wrote: “Hindsight is 20/20. The Catholic Church was not "obviously" a haven for child molesters. If they were, then "obviously" the police and the courts would have been having a field day with them for years. Most people were surprised and shocked when the news of the scandals in the RCC broke. Most people didn't say "I knew it all along."â€
So, how does what you wrote about the RCC not apply to TWI? Was TWI so obviously a haven for child molesters, and, if so, why were not the police and courts equally having a field day with TWI over the years? I can only assume that, in the absence of such “field days†that there was no such obvious knowledge of TWI as a haven for child molesters. My use of the term exoneration is probably inappropriate in characterizing your statement quoted above, but it is that statement to which I referred. You did make a distinction between the propensity of TWI to harbor molesters that, to me, in a way favors the RCC. I question why? That’s all.
“Presuming equal numbers of both, would you then seek to excuse the organizations that harbored these perversions just because they might have been widespread? Do you forgive them for covering up their evil deeds because they werent the only ones?â€
I didn’t presume equal numbers of both – I stated clearly that, owing to the shear size of the RCC, that there were probably many more cases there. With respect to forgiveness, Christians everywhere are charged to forgive as we are forgiven. With respect to accountability, however, I would hold the perpetrators accountable, and am no more inclined to blame the RCC than I am to blame TWI. Let’s blame the perpetrators and hold them accountable. Those who are shown to have shirked their leadership responsibilities should also be held accountable, personally. To the extent that they were acting as agents of their respective organization, then, the organization should also bear responsibility. IMO, that’s how it should work. I’m not excusing anyone or any organization. But, I’m not condemning any organization either. I find unrealistic the notion that the RCC should somehow be disbanded by some government enforcement agency over this issue. Disbandment of TWI over the same issues seems equally unrealistic to me.
“Only someone trying to find ways to get twi off the hook would even suspect I was trying to let the RCC off the hookâ€
I only responded to what I read in your post. I don’t suspect you of anything, and, as I mentioned in an earlier post, neither organization needs my defense. I’m not trying to get anyone or any organization “off the hook.â€
“I'm agreeing with a number of eyewitness accounts in concluding this, in case you're wondering...â€
Translation: you are relying upon hearsay, plain and simple. Cite one instance where you have first person, direct eyewitness evidence of the accounts upon which you base your argument.
“I disagree with you as to what constitutes "appropriate action". In BOTH cases, I think the response to the organizations was FAR too lenient.â€
Please see my statement above concerning accountability. What, exactly, would you have proposed as appropriate legal action (official, government legal action, if you will) against the RCC and TWI?
“If twi was what it presented itself to be, then there would be no Greasespot Cafe, there would be no ruined lives, no court cases, no criminal proceedingsâ€
Show me any large organization that doesn’t suffer from these problems. These are people problems, and will be inherent in any organization that consists of people. That, in this particular case, TWI fell short of what it presents itself to be goes without saying. Taken in context, my statement refers to how TWI (or any organization, for that matter) will respond in correcting discovered weaknesses moving forward.
“So, you'd prefer to wait until there's another scandal before seeking reforms? How about adding some oversight and safeguards, how about decrypting some of the secrecy and codes of silence instead?â€
How do you read that into my post? I said that they (TWI, RCC, you name it) should live or die (as in cease to exist) in measure to what they do (as in reforms, corrections, call it what you will) moving forward. Nothing in my post suggested that I would prefer to wait until there is another scandal. Point out to me what you read that caused you to draw that conclusion.
†I say you have no comprehension of what it was like for children on-campus if you think it was just as difficult for them to be molested or abused there as at a public schoolâ€
And before you said the above, I said:
“I cannot comment on your description of a TWI epidemic in this area, since I have not been witness to itâ€
I’m trying to be open and honest, WW, can you not see that?
“Compare that to children on-grounds-where you have no idea what happens when your child is out of your sightâ€
Not unlike daycare, boyscouts, choir/band camps, before/after school tutoring, you name it. It’s a challenge all parents face to balance opportunity against retrospection in the interest of their children. But by the grace of God, my children have not been victims. I stay vigilant, I trust God, but, in the end, the credit for my success thus far should be credited not to my competence, but to the grace of God. You state that I have no idea what happens “on-grounds†and I say you and many other have no idea what happens wherever it happens. That’s the big problem with child molestation.
“Fine. I dont believe you, since it seems clear to me that you can't view this subject with "balance". I called all the perpetrators evil, and you threw up this smokescreen in response, claiming I excused the perverts in the RCC. That was blatant MISrepresentation of what I said. Therefore, I don't believe you're here to provide fairness OR balance.â€
I characterized your statement (accurately or not) as an attempt to partially exonerate the RCC in contrast to your characterization of TWI as an organizational sanctuary for perpetrators of this crime. I didn’t accuse you of excusing or attempting to excuse perverts of any persuasion. The only blatancy involved is your failure to comprehend what I wrote. Go back and reread for further edification. One of the criticisms I have always held of this board and Waydale before is that open debate tends to get stifled by claims that anyone who is not openly anti-TWI gets “shouted†off the board by those claiming that there must be some ulterior motive for any statement posted by believers. If the majority of anti/ex-TWI posters here would simply prefer to bask in their anti-TWI views in absence of comments from current believers, just say so, and we believers who care to stay balanced will retreat to our lurking holes and refrain from further contribution.
No matter how strongly I disagree with your point of view, WordWolf, I do not read into your statements what isn’t there, and I do not accuse you of duplicity in your posts. I take you at your word that you post what you believe because you honestly believe it. Why do you accuse me otherwise?
Abigail: You state: “Mom A, a wise woman in my opinion, left TWI†From the information you provided, I would agree that Mom A was quite wise. As a child, I, too, was the victim of some “experimentation†by some of my older cousins. We weren’t part of TWI or any big organization, just simple country folk. The conditions in our extended family put me at risk (parents worked during the day, leaving me and my cousins under the supervision of a grandparent who’s attention was less than adequate). My parents don’t know to this day about these episodes. Fortunately, I wasn’t left with bruises (physical or otherwise) and am all the wiser to what can happen when kids (of any but especially of unequal ages) are left unsupervised. My cousins ran roughshod over me and my sister, and, if presented with undisputable evidence, their parents always managed to invent some justification for their wicked actions. In the case you cite, I suspect that Mother B’s motives were two-fold, 1) to protect the standing of her family within TWI, and 2) to protect her child. The tougher decision on her part would have probably born healthier long-term fruit. Been there (as a victim though not as part of TWI).
Thanks for your post.
Respectfully,
LLP
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Abigail
"Not unlike daycare, boyscouts, choir/band camps, before/after school tutoring, you name it. It’s a challenge all parents face to balance opportunity against retrospection in the interest of their children"
and
"I say you and many other have no idea what happens wherever it happens. That’s the big problem with child molestation."
These staements are very true. But I still maintain there is a difference. If I am uncomfortable with a teacher, a boyscout leader, etc., I have the option of removing my child from the situation without fear of reproof, retribution, being marked and avoided, etc. The same is not always true in TWI. Should a parent allow such a fear to supercede their need to protect their child? Nope, but it happens. Especially if the parent is afraid of losing God's protection and/or trusts their leadership more than they trust themselves.
Do those same fears exist within other religious organizations? I don't know, I've never belonged to any. But I do know they are very real within TWI.
"My parents don’t know to this day about these episodes. Fortunately, I wasn’t left with bruises (physical or otherwise) and am all the wiser to what can happen when kids (of any but especially of unequal ages) are left unsupervised."
Yup, LLP, me too, and likewise in my case it had nothing to do with TWI. However, I was never left with bruises and I think that is a tremendous difference. Kids who are simply experimenting (which I think is fairly normal) do not generally leave each other bruised and bleeding. Kids who leave another bruised and bleeding are in need of help.
Obviously you get something positive out of your experience with TWI or you wouldn't stay. I can't argue against that as I too once felt the same way. I am only concerned that you don't ever allow those positives to blind you to potential harms. Don't ever allow yourself to become comfortable with things that should make you uncomfortable. When something sets off your internal alarm system, pay attention to it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
LLP posted the original.
[WordWolf replies again in boldface.]
[bTW, LLP, please make it easy visually to tell when you're quoting me and when you're speaking for yourself, for the benefit of those playing along at home. Also, please try not to trim RELEVANT parts of my comments out-you seem to have done that somewhat.]
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bob
Wordwolf,
With all due respect, I don't think engaging in a line by line argument is very constructive. It will only require LLP to reinforce her(?) position.
You cannot change someone's mind for them by shear force of an argument. The most you can do is give them information they do not already have to make a more informed decision.
I would like to see this thread continue on the informative path.
Also, the way you are formatting your quote/replies makes it appear you are yelling, which I doubt you are. Might I suggest using the quote tags around each individual quote to separate your comments.
My apologies if I'm misreading your posts.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
"Branch coordinators insist such a thing could never have taken place because the daughter of B would have to have been possessed to do such a thing. She could not have been possessed because God would have given them revelation via discerning of spirits if she were."
Abigail, I think this little "account" really says it all. If there is any weakness in the organization to be exploited by anybody, this has got to be it. What arrogance! I cannot logically see why anybody in their RIGHT mind still puts up with it.
If all the "training" and classes really did what they claimed, they really would have known.
This is just one more example showing how spiritually blind and inept they have really become. The overseers have proven themselves to be experts in meddling, even in every insignificant little area of the followers lives, and they miss this one.
Like days of old, they strain at the gnat, and swallow the camel. Blind leaders of the blind.
I would like to see what they say if innies had the audacity to call them on this. I would bet the farm that the answer would not include, "we were wrong".
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
I have heard the kind of answers given to similar questions. "Why are you asking?" "What is the motivation behind this question?" No straight answers.
If things go real bad, they would rather publically defame and/or mark and avoid the poor stooge that "missed it". The product must be preserved, AT ALL COSTS.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Abigail
Source of my information: I was not a "first hand" witness to the incident I mentioned earlier. It was not my child and I never examined the child who was hurt. I would never have known anything about what happened, except: a) I walked in on a conversation and overheard enough that the branch coordinator seemed to feel obligated to explain what I heard and b) I was friends with the mother of the child who was hurt.
"What arrogance! I cannot logically see why anybody in their RIGHT mind still puts up with it."
and
"The overseers have proven themselves to be experts in meddling, even in every insignificant little area of the followers lives, and they miss this one."
In all honesty, the overseers in this situation genuinely wanted to do what was right. It is my guess, based on what I know of TWI, they sought counsel from THEIR leadership and did as advised.
Knowing them the way I did, I do not think they intentionally turned a blind eye to the situation any more than I did. And I did turn a blind eye to it at the time. It's called denial. (In fact, I pushed the entire incident out of my mind until this thread brought it back to memory.)
I deserately wanted and needed to believe in what TWI was teaching and the people who were teaching it to me. I was young, frightened, and mixed up, my mother was dying. Denial is a powerful thing and we have all been susceptible to it at one time or another.
Edited by abigailLink to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
[i'll keep that in mind, but it's been my custom to place my comments, especially when alternating with another person's, both in boldface and brackets. The boldface makes it easy to spot when the speaker changes, and the brackets stay there if they quote back, allowing them to remain offset somewhat while allowing them to boldface THEIR comments. I've been doing that for a few years, now. ]
[ JWBM made several comments that I thought should not go unchallenged, drawing attention away from twi's complicity in the criminal actions of its "employees". I refuted them, then LLP tried to make it sound like I was saying the RCC deserved a light hand, and twi a heavy hand, in response to the criminal behaviour they were complicit in. I challenged that as well. Perhaps this will not change LLP's mind. LLP claims to be giving things an honest look. If that is so, then LLP will slowly increase in learning as a result. If that is not true, refusing to allow misdirections and mischaracterizations of my positions at least benefits the other readers. Frankly, once LLP and JWBM entered this thread, and posted to the effect that twi as a corporate entity is innocent of wrongdoing, this thread no longer reflected an intellectual exchange of ideas in the truest sense. Perhaps LLP will demonstrate otherwise in his next post. (Perhaps not.)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
Abigail, I really do agree with you. I also feel that a lot of good, well meaning people were set up for failure. They were expected to see devil spirits through 10 feet of lead. After all, they were taught "how". I think the well meaning folks who seemingly "missed it" really paid the price, often publically.
Like what I heard in a couple of "counciling" sessions. "If you will do EXACTLY what we tell you, you WILL get the situation resolved." When failure ensues, somebody has to be tagged with the blame. Sometimes life just kind of does not work that way. And the corps that I knew. Some were pretty sharp. Others though.. pretty damn arrogant.
Somehow the "one size fits all" walk by the spirit is not at all what it is cracked up to be.. at least in my opinion. What I think I really object to is the claim that somehow this is the ultimate in "Christian Living"; it can't be- at least in my opinion- if somebody that is doing all of the supposed right things misses something like this.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.