I have seen this too frequently where a boe in one cong has a certain set of rules that they enforce and another cong doesn't. That is one reason I switched congregations so I could gain more freedom. For example one cong said it was wrong to use a PDA as a songbook if you forgot the songbook at home. Another cong said it was fine.
Ambiguities surrounding the enforcement of Watchtower rules
by drew sagan 18 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
palmtree67
Where I was from, for years it was common to have a party when a young person graduated from high school. Obviously, they weren't allowed to attend their actual school graduation, so their parents would throw a party and dance for the JW's.
Then one day, we got a CO who decided that these graduation parties were WRONG, WRONG, WRONG. Elders who had recently had parties for their kids were forced to apologize from the platform for their "error in judgment".
However, in neighboring cities and towns (under control of a different CO ) graduation parties were still fine. The kids who weren't allowed to have a party when they graduated, were invited to attend their freind's graduation parties in nearby cities.
Big uproar in the city because of all this. Finally a new CO took over and the question was put to him, were these parties wrong?
Well, of course, he can't go against what the previous CO had said, so he agreed they were wrong and even gave a talk at the assembly outlining the wrongness of them. He quoted a speaker from a circuit assembly across the country from us and 15 years previous, where the ruling against them was made.......what the hell????
Nothing made sense AND neighboring cities and towns were still able to have grad parties while we were not allowed.
Men on power trips.....that's all it amounts to.
-
tjlibre
There are so many things to consider. For example, most of the time, the “latest” WT’s “pronouncement” on a subject overrides the oldest. If the “latest” is not in your favor, then the “older” can be used to prove a point to someone not inclined to do research.
imoa…At the end of the, the factor that’ll determined if a rule or set of rules will be enforced is be the clout, pecking-order place, opinion, etc. of the “assigned” decision maker i.e, BOECO, JC- presiding overseer, CO, etc.
-
Palimpsest
Where I was from, for years it was common to have a party when a young person graduated from high school. Obviously, they weren't allowed to attend their actual school graduation, so their parents would throw a party and dance for the JW's.
Wow, they banned the commencement ceremony itself? In my area, it was always just the prom and after-party that were banned. I'm always fascinated by these regional differences.
-
JWoods
The thread on YMCA (OK or not OK) also has a bearing on this subject.
As in almost all local JW committee matters, it all depends on who the local elders are and what their personal feelings are.
-
geevee
Different CO's have their own ideas and they encourage bodies of elders in certain directions. We had one who had a definition of loose conduct. So we noted it, did some "research" and found the wt articles that backed his definition. We then set about using his definition and followed "the steps" closely and d/fed a guy. The branch questioned the decision. We supplied the articles and the action stood.
Interestingly, not long after they came out and said that bodeis of elders have no rights in determining if a couple has the right to seperate or not, that elders weren't to get involved in saying that they had/didn't have grounds to split.
Thereby preventing the kind of action that was taken.
CO's are a big influence, and their particular "bent" determines the application of some of these fluid rules.
-
Palimpsest
CO's are a big influence, and their particular "bent" determines the application of some of these fluid rules.
Which makes it all the more confusing when you get a new one. It's impossible to keep up, so it's easier to just say, "Screw it, nothing's allowed."
-
fokyc
Drew: Many elders use their own opinion, often to the detriment of others.
They then cover up and lie if they are challenged. I have a particular example
where the instructions to elders are on the jw-media website here:
http://www.jw-media.org/aboutjw/article23.htm
I think this is fairly self explanatory;
"...Two elders meet separately with the accused and the accuser to see what each says on the matter..."
When an accusation arose in a local congregation the elders went straight to the police, then when asked about this; the answer given is firstly:
"jw-media.org is an apostate site"!!!
Later they followed this up with:
"Brother fokyc spends a lot of time on the internet and fabricated the page."
They now say:
"This instruction is out of date and no longer applies"
I have asked for the page to be removed as it is wrong,
but during November 2009 they revamped the jw-media site and this instruction is still there.
This surely is an ambiguity, the instructions are on a website for the whole world to see, yet elders can and do ignore it and do their own thing.
I am tired of their lies and this is just one example.
fokyc
-
WTWizard
This is the major reason why rule enforcements cannot be proven. Occasionally, I have seen people asked to verify something that is a rule when it could not be verified. This works that way in court, protecting the organization itself from scrutiny while the hounders are encouraged to be extra strict on enforcing rules.
The new hands-holding directive is going to be in this category. The washtowel itself did not explicitly prohibit it (just embracing), and mentioned that it was "stumbling others". Many hounders are going to take this as meaning that any holdings of hands during the boasting session is prohibited and will result in getting disfellowshipped; others will not. And it is going to be extremely difficult for anyone to verify, since the washtowel just discouraged embracing as a stumbling block.
The ban on entertainment also fits here. They did not come up with anything in writing about it--just part of a long resolution that most witlesses probably forgot. However, many hounders will fit their own bans on entertainment into the picture. Some will be very strict, while others (probably the ones that will be apostate in 10 years time) will simply adopt a "keep it clean" attitude. Hounder-hounders will be instructed to lean toward the strict enforcements of these rules, and you will see a total ban on entertainment slowly phased in. Again, it will be almost impossible for anyone to actually prove that entertainment is banned, since it is not in writing.