You mean no one has done this yet?
What if you simply IGNORED being disfellowshipped and continued as before?
by Terry 72 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
Terry
What did Jesus say about false teachers in his day? “Let them be. Blind guides are what they are. If, then, a blind man guides a blind man, both will fall into the pit.” There is no useful purpose in what is proposed in this thread other than to gratify one’s ego. It certainly isn’t kind and it isn’t Christian, either.
Point 1: There is no useful purpose other than to gratify one's ego. ????
Rebuttal: There are a great many instances where elders will DF a member simply because that member is asking questions, doubting GB teachings or wanting the elders to call in the police on rape, child abuse, etc. Threatening DFing to silence and suppress is rampant in the organization. The elders are like Nazi SS wielding power with summary authority. It is not gratifying one's EGO to deflate these Elders and expose them as dictatorial and arbitrary.
If you are innocent and wrongly accused it is your HUMAN RIGHT to behave innocently!
Point 2: It certainly isn’t kind and it isn’t Christian, either. ?????
Confession is a protected right by law inside a religion. The Elders violate the privacy of JW members constantly by allowing, without permission, the reading of confidential files which contain sensitive information of a personal nature. By refusing to acknowledge the power of such elders and going about innocently EVEN IF DF'd--you force the elders into coming to terms with actual nature of their vindictive and illegal power play.
Being innocent and having your rights violated is COMMON in Kingdom Halls.
Way too often the DF'd person is either crushed emotionally by elders or driven into a rage. In either case it does not serve the accused to be seen
"guilty" or "rebellious" by the congregation because it adds fuel to speculation that the elders are correct.
Surely you can concede this. To say this "isn't Christian" is to point the finger at the VICTIM instead of the perpetrator of injustice: wilfull Elders!
-
sir82
I cannot see how it is ILLEGAL to attend a religious gathering if you do not actively try to molest, harass or impugn others present and offer only smiles, well-wishes and calm demeanor.
After a meeting or 2, the JWs would almost certainly call the police and report "trespassing" by the DF'ed person.
The Kingdom Hall is not a public building, it is private. No one has a "right", legally, to be there
JWs have the right to determine who they want to be at their worship services, and who they don't want.
I.e., if the JW elders say Person X is "trespassing", it doesn't matter how nice and kind Person X is acting. If the "hosts" of the building say he is trespassing, he is trespassing.
If someone is not welcome in your home, yet he comes anyways and fixes you breakfast, don't you still have the right to have him removed for trespassing if you really don't want him there?
This idea sounds nice in theory but it wouldn't accomplish much practically.
-
Quendi
Terry , I don’t believe you get the real thrust of my position. Disfellowshipping as practiced by the Witness cult is unchristian to begin with! So it doesn’t matter whether the reasons for it are “valid” or not. And seeing that we all knew the rules before we were baptized, we implicitly agreed to abide by them. That’s the bottom line. I don’t know about other countries, but in the United States, courts have consistently refused to intervene in any of these cases because of the First Amendment to the Constitution.
And while there have been some modifications made to the wording of the announcement that a person has been reproved or disfellowshipped (due to lawsuits some brought against the Society), the basic result of the action remains unchallenged and unassailable from a legal standpoint. You are arguing from what you want the law to provide when there is absolutely no recourse.
As for confession being protected by law, that is true if and only if only two parties are involved: the penitent and the spiritual advisor. That is also something the law has consistently upheld. By agreeing to meet with a judicial committee, both sides waive that protection. That is what is being found in the Conti case. The Society’s claim that her conversations with the judicial committee were privileged were found to be invalid because three people were involved as spiritual advisors rather than only the one the law will recognize.
None of us likes the disfellowshipping practice the WTS uses—now. But all of us agreed with it while we were in good standing although some may have had reservations about it. If we have been disfellowshipped, there is no legal recourse to end the shunning. As painful as it is to lose family and friends, that is the new reality, a reality that we must embrace. The proper course of action is to move on and leave this cult and its blind followers behind.
“Fighting fire with fire” won’t work. The cult has conditioned its officers and followers to reject our overtures of outreach and contact. Furthermore, if we are approaching people with the purpose of forcing that contact, we will get nowhere. Some will shrink away from morbid fear of being destroyed at Armageddon. Others will want to avoid Jehovah’s adverse judgment when they die and so be denied a resurrection. There will be those who whole-heartedly agree with the disfellowshipping principle and will support it regardless simply because it is the rule. There will be others who may not like what has happened, but support it nonetheless because they don’t want to be disfellowshipped themselves.
Seeing that is the case, what recourse do we have? The answer is none. I had my judicial committee deny one of my requests for reinstatement because I wouldn’t sit where the attendants wanted me to. If a petty reason like that was used to keep me out, what would the committee have said to me if I were deliberately engaging various members in conversations or attempting to do so inside or outside the kingdom hall? We all know the answer to that question.
As for the mental and emotional damage that comes with being disfellowshipped, in the vast majority of cases that is unavoidable. That doesn’t make it good or right, but that is a fact. Seeing themselves on the outside without friends or family, many do all in their power to get reinstated. I chose otherwise and have been all the better for it; but my circumstances are not everyone else’s. For those seeking reinstatement, the only recourse is to swallow their pride, grovel before the judicial committee, and then serve the term of their sentence (disfellowshipped state) which the committee will deem appropriate.
Why do I say that pushing our presence on reluctant former associates isn’t Christian? The Bible says that we should provide fine things in the sight of all men and to seek peace and pursue it. Knowing the attitude about disfellowshipping and those under its curse in the cult, to violate the imposed rules is ignoring the Bible’s counsel as I see it. Besides, we have an excellent example in Jesus Christ himself.
He did not have to go along with being haled before the wicked men who composed the Jewish Sanhedrin and submit to their farce of a trial. He did not have to endure the physical and emotional mistreatment they meted out to him. As he told his followers, twelve legions of angels stood at the ready to help him at any time and end the whole mess. But he chose to submit in part because he knew it would all work out for the best in the end.
Granted, none of us are in the position Christ was or charged with the great responsibility he had. But he still set an example for us about how to deal with gross injustice. There are times when we should definitely fight for our rights and/or take measures to protect ourselves. Jesus did that as well, even on occasion hiding from those who wished him bodily harm or wanted to murder him outright. But there are also those times when we must recognize that after doing all we can, injustice may well prevail. Then we have to summon the courage to turn away and rebuild our lives. I really believe that doing so is the wiser and Christian course.
Quendi
-
Terry
Sir82: After a meeting or 2, the JWs would almost certainly call the police and report "trespassing" by the DF'ed person.
The Kingdom Hall is not a public building, it is private. No one has a "right", legally, to be there
JWs have the right to determine who they want to be at their worship services, and who they don't want.
Calling the cops and having them remove a person who is not harrassing, interfering, making a rucus or otherwise inhibiting a religious gather suddenly
becomes a PUBLIC SPECTACLE. This will be observed by all eyes present. The Jw's will be intently endeavoring to satisfy their minds that the police arrest is justifiable in any way. That has value. Gandhi knew this as passive resistance. It works.
If someone is not welcome in your home, yet he comes anyways and fixes you breakfast, don't you still have the right to have him removed for trespassing if you really don't want him there?
Is a Kingdom Hall a private home or a country club or is it a public place of worship? Did Jesus kick Judas out of the Last Supper or did he invite him to do "what you must do quickly"? The elders who call the cops aren't acting as Jesus the fine shepherd who LEFT THE 99 and actively sought to hold on to the stray. It is vitally important that this is illustrated before an audience of active JW's.
-
Terry
Quendi: Terry , I don’t believe you get the real thrust of my position. Disfellowshipping as practiced by the Witness cult is unchristian to begin with! So it doesn’t matter whether the reasons for it are “valid” or not. And seeing that we all knew the rules before we were baptized, we implicitly agreed to abide by them.
Me: On the contrary. I don't think you get the real thrust of my position. What a person KNOWS and UNDERSTANDS when he enters the religion is irrelevent.
It is the integrity of his/her worship and conscience ultimately that counts as intellectual honesty.
Quendi: You are arguing from what you want the law to provide when there is absolutely no recourse.
Me: I am not. I am arguing that we go from being one kind of "witness" to creating a different kind of "witness".
We are forcing an issue of whether the elders represent mere arbitrary, capricious and summary gestures of power and authority OR
if they are Jesus-like shepherds who love the sheep and want to care for them by going the extra mile to preserve their welfare.
Quendi: As for confession being protected by law, that is true if and only if only two parties are involved: the penitent and the spiritual advisor. That is also something the law has consistently upheld. By agreeing to meet with a judicial committee, both sides waive that protection.
Me: And my point is the all too often the Elders reveal confidential information that is damaging psychologically, socially and emotionally without permission from parents concerning rape, molestation and other egregious violence to minors FOR THE SOLE PURPOSE of building a case against the victim!!
-
Terry
“Fighting fire with fire” won’t work. The cult has conditioned its officers and followers to reject our overtures of outreach and contact.
How was Martin Luther King to follow your advice? Because this is what he was told repeatedly about the racist and southern mentality.
Guess what? We have civil rights and a black president as a DIRECT RESULT of King's ignoring such advice and the participation of willing people to buck the tide of ignorant compliance with suppressive and malevolent gatekeepers of freedom.
-
sir82
becomes a PUBLIC SPECTACLE. This will be observed by all eyes present. The Jw's will be intently
endeavoring to satisfy their minds that the police arrest is justifiable in any way. That has value.
OR.......
JWs will view the "nice" DFed person as an agent of Satan, and the police arrest as Jehovah's means of clearing out a persecutor.
You've been away from JWs for a while....they can perceive persecution at the drop of a hat!
Is a Kingdom Hall a private home or a country club or is it a public place of worship?
It is neither - it is a private place of worship. JWs have the legal right to determine who they want in the building.
Did Jesus kick Judas out of the Last Supper or did he invite him to do "what you must do quickly"?
Irrelevant to JWs.
The elders who call the cops aren't acting as Jesus the fine shepherd who LEFT THE 99 and actively sought to hold on to the stray.
Correct - to JWs they will be acting like the Jesus who made a whip of ropes and drove the "bad guys" out of the temple.
It is vitally important that this is illustrated before an audience of active JW's.
Sure - and in the minds of JWs, JWs are sheep and DFed people are goats. Goats don't belong in the sheep pen. So, in the minds of JWs, the elders are protecting the sheep by driving the "disruptive" DFed person out.
Elders are told that not only are they to "shepherd" the sheep, but they must also "spiritually protect" them. If a DFed person isn't "behaving correctly" then the majority of JWs will just simpy want him OUT, and will applaud the elders' efforts to do so.
You're welcome to try this plan, and in some cases it might have the desired effect, but in 90+% of congregations, the cops would be called, the DFed person ejected for trespassing, and the audiece would give the elders a standing O.
-
wisdomfrombelow
People are often confused when you attend meetings while disfellowshipped and smile and sing and talk. They are puzzled when your behavior doesn't match what they expect but I don't think it will change how they treat you--at least in public at the Kingdom Hall. Bring some people with you (non-jw) and that causes more confusion for them because it is awkward to talk to them without talking to you.
Even if you are kind and offer a ride to a witness who needs it or shovel their driveway when there is snow, there can be repercussions for the recipient. That creates fear for them and confusion.
As I see it, spending countless hours at the meetings with the hope of helping someone at random realize TTATT is about as effective as spending countless hours in the door-to-door work to convert a complete stranger. -
Terry
Elders are told that not only are they to "shepherd" the sheep, but they must also "spiritually protect" them. If a DFed person isn't "behaving correctly" then the majority of JWs will just simpy want him OUT, and will applaud the elders' efforts to do so.
The boiler plate idea represented by Watchtower policy is one thing and the ACTUAL truth of the matter as demonstrated by elders acting precipitously is another.
Policy schmolicy.
If you've been railroaded you are not de facto guilty in the kangaroo court? Is this to be ignored?
If you give up and tuck tail and run what point has been proven and by who?
Is there another side to the controversy? Can it be told effectively? Can it be demonstrated that honest people can be wrongly branded as evil?
I'd say yes.
But, NOT if you go quietly and with sullen discomfort.