The Georgia congregation I was in during the early 1970s had a wonderful brother that grew a beard. The elders told him he had to shave it off and he refused. They either DF or DAed him (don't remember now) for not obeying them. I really thought a lot of that brother; he was such a likeable person. And a good husband and good father from what I saw. I think that may have been one of the first things to begin to open my eyes. I remember being very angry about the whole situation.
Beards, when were they banned?
by GramblingMan 42 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
Seeker4
MeneMene,
No one would ever have been disfellowshipped for not shaving his (or her!) beard. There must have been something else going on there. Beards have NEVER been a judicial matter.
They might never have been given any responsibilities or used for parts, etc., but not disfellowshipped.
S4
-
blondie
Until 1968 even Jesus was banned from wearing a beard in the WTS publications. The last brother post-Russell I remember seeing with a beard was William E. Van Amburgh. It would be interesting if he was an exception to the rule.
Blondie
-
blondie
*** g00 1/22 p. 24 A Close Shave ***
The clean-shaven look continued through the 18th century. But then, by the mid-to-late 19th century, the pendulum began to swing the other way. Hence, photographs of C. T. Russell, the first president of the Watch Tower Society, and fellow Christian W. E. Van Amburgh show both men wearing stylish, well-trimmed beards that were dignified and appropriate for their time. In the early part of the 20th century, however, shaving enjoyed a resurgence of popularity that has endured in most countries to our day.
-
skyking
I knew an ELder in Seattle that wore a beard it became a controversy a few years back he shaved it so as not to stumble others. One of my best friends an Elder in a Death congregation from the big city's PO sported a beard.
Beards are more comman were I live and not so frowned on.
-
Frank75
No one would ever have been disfellowshipped for not shaving his (or her!) beard. There must have been something else going on there. Beards have NEVER been a judicial matter.
They might never have been given any responsibilities or used for parts, etc., but not disfellowshipped.
S4
I know you are one of the good guys and your posts are very helpful and informative. However, after everything posted here on this forum, how could you make such a statement?
You can be DF'd for absolutely anything if the ones doing it have their justification. If the man was thought to harbor apostate views or simply threaten the status quo, they would use anything and everything in their power to throw him out.
Since they do not have to answer to anyone for the decision (even appeal committee has a mandate that extends to procedural errors only) and even other elders in the same body are not allowed to poke their noses in to the JC process, just what would stop them?
People have been df'd for "outrageous conduct" or "running with world" as a letter to elders that I have from the 70's states on the subject of what constitutes a DF'ing offense.
Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. With no checks and balances these buffoons can do just about whatever they want.
I admit that in rare cases rulings have been overturned and even public apologies have been made from the platform. Those are extremely rare and require someone high up on the totem pole to get it done. The widow and fatherless boy/girl haven't a chance of catching those blue moon breaks!
Frank75
-
jwfacts
William Schnell in 30 Years a Watchtower Slave writes what happened in the German branch in 1925:
"An amusing incident took place at the time of the Judge's visit. The Director of our German Branch, as had many before him, had grown a large beard, patterned after Charles T. Russell's beard. The Judge did not want anything at all to remain whcih might remind him of Russell - not even the cultivation of a beard.... Suddenly he looked up, his eyes pinned severely on the Director's huge beard and said, "I will buy you the press if you take that thing off," pointing to the beard."
Beards have never been specifically condemned in the Watchtower, but rather indicated as wrong in experiences of people that shaved off their beard when being baptised. It is one of the unwritten rules.
I have known of brothers that were refused privileges based on having a beard.
-
blondie
That's true, Frank75, elders in cahoots can df anyone for anything.....but what they put on that form to the WTS as to the reason for df'ing will probably read differently that what unofficially the person is df'd for. For example, not "wears a beard" but "causes divisions in the congregation" because he advocates wearing a beard.
My husband was an elder and he said that catch all phrase "causes divisions in the congregation" could be anything the elders said a person in the congregation is required to do and the person refuses to do.
Beards in my area are ostensibly the decision of the your local elder body. But if that brother wants to give talks in other congregations or convention/assembly it is at the discretion of the congregation being visited or the CO/DO. In 40 years in this area, I have never seen an elder allowed to have a beard. Brothers could choose to have beards but they would not be given any "privileges." Even if they had a skin condition that causes a terrible type of acne when they shaved.
Blondie
-
Sam87
i might be wrong but one of my old JW friends from Canada said that alot of his uncles had beards, and were elders, it seems to be a bit more accepted over there and in America than it is in Australia, over here i dont think ive seen anyone with a beard that is a JW, does this sound right?
Sam87.
-
skyking
It is one of the unwritten rules. I have known of brothers that were refused privileges based on having a beard
Very true, I was one of those ones that would not give privileges to those with a beard I thought it shown a lack of Theocratic loyalty.