Theocratic Warfare alive and well in the organization
Please click the following link to see a letter dated July 13, 1988 that was sent to an elder in order to offer him guidance on how to answer a sister in the congregation that had questions about "Theocratic Warfare Strategy" as to its use and application in the organization.
In considering the material from the letter you see that the position of the Watchtower (administrative arm of Jehovah's Witnesses) is provide a license to any member or representative to allow any type of devious, deceptive practice or lie in defense of the "cause" or organization. "Theocratic Warfare" was defined extensively in the 1950s and early 1960s Watchtower literature as providing a basis to "withhold the truth from those not entitled to know it."
When Watchtower attorneys and members were recently questioned about this doctrine in depositions on the child abuse issue they pretended to not know or even hear of the terminology. Was this the truth?
The enclosed letter is dated 1988, some years after "Theocratic Warfare Strategy" was first defined, yet you will see in the explanation they refer to the 1960s Watchtower article to show that the information was still consistent with organizational policy. This policy continues to this day and is being practiced when elders and other members testify in the courts, when they speak to the media, as well as when key people in the organization speak to their members about the child abuse problem in the organization.
What is "Theocratic Warfare Strategy?"
Simply stated, the license to tell outright lies and use any deception to protect the money and reputation or the organization of Jehovah's Witnesses. If children's lives are destroyed in the process, if abuse survivors and their families are decimated, then so be it, as long as the organization/God is protected at all costs.
We see evidence of this at a recent convention held in the fall of 2003, in which key leaders of the organization before those in attendance sought to discredit abuse survivors that appeared on one of the most prestigious program in that country. An elder of the group that was in attendance was so outraged by the outright lies and deception that was stated, he wrote to silentlambs. You can read about this at this link,
A couple of weeks later in Sweden the Watchtower attempted to discredit another program on abuse by hiring law firms to go after the program in that country. After spending thousands of member donated funds in their smear campaign against abuse survivors that appeared on the program it was found that they had no basis for litigation.
They were not satisfied but instead chose to spend hundreds of more dollars in donated funds with law firms to file complaint through the "Board of Examination," a monitoring body for media in Sweden . The "Board" completely exonerated the program as far as their presentation of stories of abuse in the organization, they were found in no way biased or unethical in the way the information was presented. The twenty page law firm filed complaint was literally vaporized with the lack of any basis to justify the allegations Watchtower was making toward the television program. With the exception of one minor omission the program that in no way challenged the integrity of the reporter or the material as being fair and unbiased, the television program was completely exonerated.
You can read about this at this link,
In the face of this humiliating defeat what was the action of the Watchtower? They sent a letter to all congregations in Sweden stating that the program was found in error by the "Board of Examination" and thus implying they were unfairly persecuted with an inaccurate presentation of the real truth of the matter. Was this the truth or was it yet another case of "Theocratic Warfare Strategy" being practiced on members to keep them from thinking or questioning what the policies of the organization is doing to children with regard to abuse?
Let the reader use discernment ...
It is also interesting to note similiar actions were taken regarding the "Sunday" program. "Sunday" is one of the most prestigious expose programs in the country of Australia . A key person presented on the program was a young man named Simon Thomas, a Jehovah's Witness in "good standing." Simon came across as very honest and kind when presenting his story of abuse in the organization. You can review the material of the Sunday program at this link,
The man that molested him went on to molest over forty little boys including Simon's own brother. It was Simon that took the courageous effort to finally report the man and see him remanded to prison for his crimes against children. This was after repeated threats from the organization to keep the matter unreported.
It was reported from different Jehovah's Witnesses in Australia as well as many other countries where reports aired in the media, leaders "inferred" those who appeared on the programs were in fact "apostates" and "liars" in talks that were given in congregations and conventions by elders and traveling overseers. Members were assured this was simply an attempt to bring reproach on God and not based on the actual facts.
In each and every case the media was presented to be biased, deceptive, and liars, going one step further, in the March 2003 issue of the Watchtower magazine it was implied that any negative report through media or those that assisted with these reports was the work of "agents of Satan."
So what can we learn from these examples? Is "Theocratic Warfare Strategy" practiced within the organization of Jehovah's Witnesses today? Is it an ongoing organizational policy that is used to discredit and destroy anyone or any child that threatens their reputation and money? Do they call their belief the "truth" and yet sanction the telling of lies as a way to protect God? Is God so small that he needs his followers to lie for him to protect mistakes with regard to children? How could a group that claims to be the most moral people on earth justify using "Theocratic Warfare Strategy" to commit ethical and moral crimes against children?
Let the reader use discernment ...