"because the real currency that the WT traffiks in is the familial love bonds among family members. Instead of indulgences, they sell you your own family if you tow the line."
Clarion.
Disfellowshiping: Why the Terror?
by Cold Steel 44 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
Phizzy
When I was in the religion I often heard the thought expressed that if you died in a Disfellowshipped state then there was real doubt you would get a Resurrection. Elders were very wary of conducting funerals for DF'd ones because of this, not knowing exactly what to say.
Maybe Blondie or someone could point us to what is written on this by the WT, but certainly many R&F JW's thought ones eternal life was involved.
As you rightly say Cold, the WT has no authority by their own admission, to DF.
The Congregation has no Scriptural mandate whatsoever to "shun".
-
Jeffro
Phizzy:
Elders were very wary of conducting funerals for DF'd ones because of this, not knowing exactly what to say.
JW elders aren't allowed to give a funeral talk for a 'disfellowshipped person' unless the person was considered to be 'giving evidence of repentance', and even then, the service can't be at a 'Kingdom Hall'.
The Watchtower, 15 September 1981, page 30:
Should he die while disfellowshiped, arrangements for his funeral may be a problem. His Christian relatives may like to have had a talk at the Kingdom Hall, if that is the local custom. But that would not be fitting for a person expelled from the congregation. If he had been giving evidence of repentance and wanting God’s forgiveness, such as by ceasing to practice sin and by attending Christian meetings, some brother’s conscience might allow him to give a Bible talk at the funeral home or grave site. Such Biblical comments about the condition of the dead provide a witness to unbelievers or comfort to the relatives. However, if the disfellowshiped person had still been advocating false teachings or ungodly conduct, even such a talk would not be appropriate.
Our Kingdom Ministry, March 1997, page 7:
What if the deceased was disfellowshipped? The congregation would generally not be involved. The Kingdom Hall would not be used. If the person had been giving evidence of repentance and manifesting a desire to be reinstated, a brother’s conscience might allow him to give a Bible talk at the funeral home or graveside, to give a witness to unbelievers and to comfort the relatives. Before making this decision, however, it would be wise for the brother to consult with the body of elders and give consideration to what they may recommend. In situations where it would not be wise for that brother to be involved, it may be appropriate for a brother who is a member of the deceased person’s family to give a talk to console the relatives.
However, this appears to be a softening of their approach from the 1960s.
The Watchtower, 1 September 1961, page 544:
• Is it proper for one of Jehovah’s witnesses to conduct a funeral for one who dies while disfellowshiped?—E. B., United States.
A congregation of Jehovah’s servants should not hold the funeral service of one who dies while disfellowshiped; nor should a dedicated Christian officiate at such a funeral, regardless of the fact that the rest of the members of the family might be witnesses of Jehovah and in good standing. Neither should any of the congregation attend such a funeral. We never want to give the impression to outsiders that a disfellowshiped person was acceptable in the congregation when in truth and in fact he was not acceptable but had been disfellowshiped from it. -
cantleave
Of course the Mormon cult is just as harsh.
-
steve2
Mormons are fine ones to point the finger at Jehovah's witnesses. I recall accessing a site for ex-Mormons about 2 years ago. The parallels with the Witnesses were very telling, as was the emotional turmoil. I've heard of instances in which, either an ex-JW becomes a Mormon or an ex-Mormon becomes a JW - leaving me wondering, haver these individuals learnt anything? Still, personal choice rules, right?
-
Kojack57
I once served with a elder in dub land, and his biological brother was an elder in the Mormon church. If that aint screwed up what is LOL
-
Cold Steel
Jeffro: Disfellowshipping isn't less drastic. Catholic excommunication means a person doesn't receive communion but the person isn't shunned (many other Christian groups view it in a similar way). Excommunication vitandus (actual 'shunning') was reserved for things like physically attacking the Pope, but excommunication vitandus was abolished in 1983.
The thing that frightened most people (except unbelievers) was, however, being damned to perpetual hell fire. I don’t underestimate the unhappiness that can come from ritualistic shunning, which is a horrible thing, but the Governing Body has the right to banish someone, not to determine their eternal fate.
Christadelphians also use the term disfellowshipping, where it refers to exclusion from membership, but it doesn't require shunning.
Yes, but the Christadelphians may not have believed disfellowshiping was anything other than banishment from the society. Because of the keys of authority which the Catholics believe they hold, when they cut someone off, their threats become more credible.
Jeffro: JW elders aren't allowed to give a funeral talk for a 'disfellowshipped person' unless the person was considered to be 'giving evidence of repentance', and even then, the service can't be at a 'Kingdom Hall'.
Ouch. Somewhat heartless, too. But again, since the leaders of the Jehovah's Witnesses don’t have any heavenly authority except the legal right to “expel” a person from the congregation, they needn’t be feared if you wish to conduct the funeral, say, at the funeral home. Most have small chapels, but of course they aren’t churches. On the other hand, according to the Governing Body, the Society isn’t a church, either.
So funeral home directors or Governing Body members...they both have the same authority from God, which is none at all. Interesting that many people who have had “near death” experiences report that people are most often allowed to attend their own funerals. If true, how do you suppose the deceased would feel if they didn’t have one? Besides, even if they are simply sleeping (another false doctrine), their surviving families aren’t, and Christians would owe it to them. (As one colorful leader of my church said about eulogies back in the late 1800s, “Why I’ve given many a man a ticket to heaven that I knew damn well wouldn’t get them more than about half way!”)
Keep in mind that the leaders in the early church weren’t self appointed, but were appointed by God through his servants who had been called of him and ordained. And the thing that gave these servants power was the keys of the kingdom of heaven. The members also were a church, not a society, so they had ecclesiastical power from God.
The leaders of the Jehovah's Witnesses do not have these keys of authority, which include the calling and ordaining of other church officers. And if I had a friend who died, you can bet I wouldn’t send him off without comforting words for the family. At least not unless and until the Governing Body was able to produce its rightful pedigrees.
CantLeave: Of course the Mormon cult is just as harsh.
Is it? And you would know this...how?
Steve2: The parallels with the Witnesses were very telling, as was the emotional turmoil. I've heard of instances in which, either an ex-JW becomes a Mormon or an ex-Mormon becomes a JW - leaving me wondering, haven’t these individuals learnt anything?
So you were reading this on an anti-Mormon website, eh? Well, then I'm sure it was all very objective and accurate. Don't worry though, mate, you've still got your right to an opinion. It's like the old saying, know how to make someone uninformed? No. Simple, take away their anti-Mormon books. Know how to make them misinformed? You give 'em back!
-
cofty
That's priceless.
All cults dismiss the testimony of their former members. It's one of the hallmarks of a cult.
Personally I'm getting sick of people peddling alternative cults on this forum.
-
Wayward Son
bookmarked
-
Apognophos
according to the Governing Body, the Society isn’t a church
This is just a semantic game that has no bearing on their claimed authority. The Society rejected Catholic terminology for image reasons, but they are still a church and implicitly admit this. That's because "church" means "congregation". When Witnesses make out checks to the Society, they write them to "Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses". Whether the Witnesses call themselves a church, society, fellowship, or a worldwide congregation, they are still an ecclesiastical body that has the power to excommunicate members. Whether they follow in the footsteps of the early Christians is a question of what they preach and practice, not the word they use in English to refer to themselves.
Read this WT article to see how the Society views the word "church" and how they apply it to themselves: http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/102001164?q=church&p=par.