Baptism Question question

by mindmelda 4 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  mindmelda

  I was baptized at age 16 in 1976. I was baptized "old style" meaning before the 1985 change where one dedicates oneself to the organization in the baptism questions. I was baptized "in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit".

  I have some questions:

  Can a minor (under age 18 in America) be held legally responsible for a public statement like answering the baptismal questions? In that case, would the WTS really be able to ask others to shun them upon DF or DA and it not be a form of discrimination or slander to even announce it publicly?

  Could this be why the elder's simply allow some people to "fade" out of the organization rather than DF them as apostate as it would involve certain legal complications, particularly in some countries? Has this point or one similar ever been contested in court?

  Also, since no one baptized as a Witness prior to 1985 was asked to dedicate themselves to "God's visible organization" are they indeed held as having made that vow?

  Probably been asked before, but I can't find anything in particular.
• 

  awildflower

  great questions.........wf
• 

  blondie

  I would think if you stayed in after the questions were altered, you would have been considered accepting the change. I can tell you I didn't notice the change until someone pointed it out to me on JWD when I first started posting; I tended to tune out the baptism talks.

  I don't think this is viewed as a legal matter except in that religions are allowed to set their out rules and standards as long as they don't violate Caesar's laws. Freedom of religion is a strong tenet in the Constitution, stronger than many of the others. Remember people came to the Americas to escape religious persecution.

  To date, I don't think the WTS has lost a legal case in regard to shunning.
• 

  mindmelda

  I feel that constitutional emphasis on freedom of religion in America is probably the only reason JWs flourished here. Same with any of the other non-mainstream sects that have gained a large following here. I notice that they don't travel quite as well to other countries.

  I know the Boy Scouts, who are not a religion but a club that invokes some Christian principles in their rules and charter, are allowed to practice exclusion of homosexuals, in spite of the fact that they are in part supported by federal funding. The government has been called to task on the fact that they help support a discriminatory organization.

  With that being said, I can well believe that shunning can't be legally challenged with much success. I wonder if that will change with the growing antipathy towards religion in America? Will the gov't be continually willing to put up with some of the more "out there" religions like JWs and Scientology?

  I was around (spotty meeting attendance and field service since the 90s) after 1985, but attended very few conventions after the early 90s. Only a few circuit assemblies. I haven't been to a district convention in over 15 years.

  But, I too never noticed the change in the baptismal question after 1985. Just slid that one right under our noses, I guess.

  I did read that the Netherlands disallow the keeping of publisher records as a violation of personal privacy. I would hope that personal privacy could one day trump "freedom of religion" enough in America to prevent strangers from knowing about my personal business.

  I do like think that there might be some basis to prevent the shunning of minors who are baptized then DF'd, though. It could come under the province of emotional abuse and brought to the attention of Child Protective Services in America or equivalent elsewhere.

  Out of posts, so if I comment again, it will have to be on this post in the form of an edit or as a PM.
• 

  BluesBrother

  "Can a minor (under age 18 in America) be held legally responsible for a public statement like answering the baptismal questions? In that case, would the WTS really be able to ask others to shun them upon DF or DA and it not be a form of discrimination or slander to even announce it publicly?"

  It is not a question of legality in Courts . The WTS will hold you to your dedication, even if as in many peoples cases, it was made decades ago when they were adolescent. They say that courts have upheld the right of religious groups to expel members. I do not suppose the "minor argument has been tried at law. Given the might of their legal department, I doubt that it would be successful.

  "Could this be why the elder's simply allow some people to "fade" out of the organization rather than DF them as apostate as it would involve certain legal complications, particularly in some countries? Has this point or one similar ever been contested in court?"

  I doubt that very much . They think they are above the law on things like that. They do not expect to get sued. If some are allowed to fade away it is because their local elders are less hawkish.

  "Also, since no one baptized as a Witness prior to 1985 was asked to dedicate themselves to "God's visible organization" are they indeed held as having made that vow"

  Yes. they are ...