Disassociate or no longer actively associate?

by Mickey mouse 10 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  Mickey mouse

  Is there a difference? Page 111 of the new elder's manual:

  Making known a firm decision to be known no longer as one of Jehovah's Witnesses.

  If the individual is agreeable, the committee should first try to speak with him and provide spiritual assistance. (Gal. 6:1) Does he really desire to disassociate himself, or does he simply no longer want to associate actively with the congregation? Is the desire to disassociate prompted by doubts or discouragement? If he is adamant in his position, he should be encouraged to put his request in writing and sign it. If he does not, then the witnesses to his request should prepare a statement for the confidential files and sign it.
• 

  brotherdan

  Can I disassociate by proxy (via JWN)?

  Let it be known by all on this site that I am making a firm decision to be known NO LONGER as one of Jehovah's Witnesses.
• 

  dssynergy

  I read this passage too and wondered about it. Can we get away with just saying "i don't want to disassociate, but I don't want to be actively associated with the congregation?"
• 

  baltar447

  Interesting wording. The question is does this result in an announcement either way?

  Sounds like it does to me.
• 

  Broken Promises

  The key is the request to no longer associate with the JWs.

  If you don't make such a request, or say anything that would be deemed "apostate talk", then you won't be da'd.

  How do you avoid being da'd? Don't meet with the elders. Make excuses (work, illness, kids etc). The elders only have power over you if you give it to them.
• 

  factfinder

  Why do you have to make a statement if you do not want to D/A yourself? I just stopped going altogether, did'nt say anything. it's been 5 years now. I just don't do anything with the witnesses at all.
• 

  Simon Morley

  It is a loaded statement for sure. I believe there is a typo. Should it not read: "the witness to this request..." Whose request is to be filed? the provoker? or the provoked? How can he witness his request if he does not make one? Why do they say the "witness" is this "Witness™" or "a witness?"

  If one is simply not wanting to associate with the congregation, I sure as hell would not put that in writing. I would have had fun with this one at the next CO Suck Up Week if I was still an elder....
• 

  Elder-Patrol

  The expressions "no longer actively associating" and "disassociated" have always had totally different connotations.

  The first just means the person doesn't attend meetings anymore. The second means they're no longer a Witness, and will be treated like a disfellowshipped person unless and until reinstatement. In fact, JW announcements now only use the expression "is no longer one of Jehovah's Witnesses" for those who formally disassociate, so there is no ambiguity about what "disassociation" means. No announcement is made for a person who just stops actively associating.

  The passage doesn't have a typo of "his" for "this". The word "this" might mean either the elders' request for a written statement or the person's request for disassociation. No one cares if the elders' request is witnessed, but they do want more than one witness (ergo "witnesses") of an adamant person's request for disassociation (and/or refusal to submit a written statement).
• 

  Mad Sweeney

  Elder-Patrol pretty much explains it.

  The key word in that question is "actively". They should have phrased it: "Does he really desire to disassociate himself, or does he simply no longer want to associate actively with the congregation? prefer to remain inactive?" if they wanted it to make any kind of sense to non-Dubs.
• 

  GrandmaJones

  Is that just telling the elders not to look too closely at "faders"?