Having been helping a few DF’d ones [with info and support] in a small town one thing sticks out. These ones are drowning, thrown overboard, with no life jacket [support]. The attitude of the great ‘spiritual shepard’s’ is, swim back over if you can [I am not throwing you a line] climb in if you can [no hand will be offered] now sit in the back and row me back to shore, now clean and put my boat away. Row me out fishing for the next x months, and maybe, just maybe we will talk. “Off course we are being decent, courteous, considerate and humane and showing true Christian love!! FF
WT Study Article Counsels JWs To Be Humane Towards Disfellowshiped Ones
by baldeagle 22 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
losingit
What articles/ "new light" has replaced this line of thinking? I know we've discussed on this forum. WT articles that say not even email communication.... But I'd like to send this snippet to former friends and family, to encourage them to think. Would they even know that "new light" replaces "old light" in this regard? I've found that jws are so dumb with regards to their own theology.... Also, can I get this snippet without any underlining?
Thanks! Losingit
-
Hecce
This articile was part of the GB spring under Raymond Franz, after his demise this position was changed real fast.
-
blondie
One may have hoped that the draconian system of disfellowshipping may have eased over the years, yet the opposite is true. In 1974 there was a softening of the 1952 stance, with release of the following article, but this was short lived;
"Congregational elders, as well as individual members of a congregation, therefore, ought to guard against developing an attitude approaching that which some Jewish rabbinical writers fomented toward Gentiles in viewing them as virtual enemies. It is right to hate the wrong committed by the disfellowshiped one, but it is not right to hate the person nor is it right to treat such ones in an inhumane way. We may note, too, that at 1 Corinthians 5:11 the apostle warns against mixing in company with one who "is" a fornicator or practicer of some other kind of serious wrongdoing. What, however, of the one who has been disfellowshiped for being that kind of person but who thereafter, either at an early point or at a later point in time, gives consistent evidence of discontinuing such wrong practice, stopping it? Can it be said that he or she still "is" a fornicator or whatever type of wrongdoer such a one was that caused him or her to be as "leaven" toward the congregation? For example, a young person disfellowshiped for fornication may thereafter marry, raise a family and live a respectable life. Or one who was disfellowshiped for drunkenness may abandon such practice and, if drinking at all, may do so in moderation only. By such changes these individuals may now regain the respect of the community. Such ones may not yet have come and formally sought reinstatement by the congregation. Is there, however, not an evident difference between these and others who continue right on in the wrongdoing that brought their disfellowshiping? Those giving up the wrong practice may still manifest some appreciation for Christian truth, perhaps even defending the true Christian congregation when someone speaks evil against it. Should not such circumstances be given due weight and have an effect on our attitude as a congregation toward such ones? Surely if the prodigal son of the parable had returned home in a drunken state, perhaps dragging along one of his harlot companions, the father's reaction would not have been the same. But the father had reason to believe that the son was approaching with a right motive and, rather than suspect the worst, the father hoped the best and went out to meet his errant son." Watchtower 1974 Aug 1 pp.467-469
Unfortunately, this more reasonable stance reverted back to strict shunning in 1981, with a comprehensive discussion in the Watchtower Sep 15. The 2008 book Keep Yourself in God's Love continues to refer to the 1981 Watchtower as the standard to be followed.
http://www.jwfacts.com/watchtower/disfellowship-shunning.php
-
steve2
In no way down-playing the lovely, fresh waters of that brief period of kinder, gentler behavior by Witnesses towards disfellowshipped ones, but you will note even in that 40 year old article no explicit examples involving humanity towards apostates. Examples are confined to the (safe to repent from) sins of the flesh like drunkeness and fornication (I.e., premarital sex). Not a doubter of Watchtower's special role of being Jehovah's spirit-appointed channel in sight even then.
Love or hate the reversion to the earlier (I.e., pre-1974) stricter, harsher attitude towards the disfellowshipped, but from the GB's self-serving perspective, a more understanding and compassionate approach to "apostasy" would open the floodgates on the shonky Watchtower dam. To brook even tolerance of doubters would cause others in local congregations to question. No, long gone are the days when Witnesses congratulated one another for 'making sure of all things' and being unlike members of the churches of Christendom who simply took as true what ever their leaders told them. No more: The pride of personal study has been truly replaced by the pride of unadorned group think.
-
Apognophos
Indeed, steve2, the Society knows that if a JW were to haul an apostate out of the water into his own boat, he might catch apostate cooties
-
compound complex
What does it mean to "keep Jehovah's organization clean"?
[...] It means that those men will continue to apply with all due vigor whatever policy may be current and they will disfellowship anyone who does not adhere to that policy ... The main concern is to be obedient to Society policy. The feeling is created that 'if the organization tells us to do it we will not be held responsible by God if it is a mistake.' That same mentality has prevailed among men of many lands and in many periods who have excused themselves of guilt in serious injustice by the claim that "they were simply following orders from their superiors." Even the world's courts have rejected such an excuse. How much more should Christians reject it!The binding, restricting effect that this concern for organizational submission can have on person's minds was illustrated to me by an experience related by Robert Lang, then the assistant Bethel Home Overseer at the international headquarters. He had been transferred to a different congregation in the New York city area and he said that at one of the first meetings he attended there the elders approached him for advice. It seems that a young woman, the sister of one of the ministerial servants, was disfellowshiped and was still attending meetings. She had a small baby and brought it with her to the Kingdom Hall in a baby carriage. The Hall itself was on the second story of a building and the stairs were long and steep. The young woman would back up the stairs, pulling the baby carriage - with the baby in it - up the stairs as she went. The question the elders asked was whether it would be proper for the disfellowshiped woman's brother to assist her in getting up the stairs! Some thought so, others said, no, being disfellowshiped she should be considered as if she were not even there. To his credit, Lang said, "I don't know what the rule is on this, I only know one thing: if I'm around when she starts pulling that carriage up the stairs, I'm going to help her! When I think of what could happen if she were to stumble and lose control of the carriage ...."
The most frightening thing about this is that adult men did not feel they could be guided by their own hearts and minds in a circumstance so obviously calling for human kindness. The pressing concern for them was - not the danger to the infant's life - but WHAT THE ORGANIZATION POLICY ALLOWED in such cases [emphasis: RF]. They gave evidence of having become emasculated men in matters of ethics, of right and wrong.
Franz concludes by stating that Robert Lang was for him "the kind of person he was, not because of the organization, but in spite of the organization."
IN SEARCH OF CHRISTIAN FREEDOM, Ray Franz, pp. 404, 405.
-
steve2
Cc, a powerful example of the institutionalized stunting of acts of normal human kindness. It smacks of the mentality behind the Talmud. BTW, congratulations on your 10,000th post - another fitting entry to mark the occasion, if I may say so!
-
baldeagle
I humbly agree with all the posters comments regarding this much older and obsolete WT study article. It is still available on the 2012 WT library for now anyway.
AMNESIANO, blondie, frankiespeakin, flipper and others all correctly stated we now have a newer meaner, harsher stand on treating disfellowshipped ones. As Oubliette said, “The brief days of a "kinder, gentler JW" are long gone.
steve2 you are bang on, “a more understanding and compassionate approach to "apostasy" would open the floodgates on the shonky Watchtower dam. To brook even tolerance of doubters would cause others in local congregations to question.”
In my personal case as I stated on another post, “I haven’t been to a meeting in four years. During that time I completed a successful fade from the organization after almost 40 years being baptized.” I was a longtime servant (ms/elder) that began having doubts about policies and doctrines. The dam finally burst for me when I finally had enough with the last “overlapping generation” insanity. Enough was enough!! I was never reproved, DA, or DF’ed. But you would think otherwise with the way I’m treated.
I can vouch that the meaner harsher stance and prevailing attitude of congregation members to “shun” has successfully crossed over to include faders as well. Friendships I had spanning several decades have all pretty well dried up. Even though I remained civilized and extended a hand of friendship through emails, phone messages and text messages, it was rarely reciprocated. Many would say they would get back to me later. I was always known for my generous hospitality and loyal friendship. I was outgoing and enjoyed a good time, families appreciated coming over to my home. I was that brother/elder that was not overly prudish or narrow-minded. In the end I was truly “naive” as all of you have so eloquently said; congregation love and relationships are truly “conditional.” The WTS has been successful in training their followers that if someone drops away you isolate them.
The fear factor that our present brotherhood is experiencing is tremendous. They fear their nagging doubts, suspicions, and thoughts, but can never express themselves. A good and upright longtime friend must be discarded simply because he no longer can agree with everything. The Watchtower leadership should be proud of themselves.
-
compound complex
Thank you, steve! I hadn't noticed.
BTW, I attended such a KH with a steeply-inclined, dark stairway in NYC. I knew Brother Lang.
CC