between an organisation that insists on f**king him in the ass and a wife that won't f**k him at all, I say he has had a narrow escape..
Marriage Consummation - emailed question has me stumped
by jwfacts 62 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
quellycatface
I pretty sure in English law, a marriage can be annulled due to "non-consumation". Watchtower doctrine is NOT law. This is another example of the bloody elders sticking their beaks in to people's private lives. Poor guy getting DF'd. He's best of out of the sodding place, on reflection.
-
jwfacts
WMF - They disfellowship people who HAVEN'T had sex but have stayed under the same roof over night when they see fit,... because of appearances.
I thought of that, which is out of the Shepherd the Flock manual. I think the elders would have used that, or some similar catch all reason to disfellowship him, despite the man doing nothing Scripturally wrong. Wondering though if they thought they had a legitimate reason.
Wozwozza - in confusion of her loyalty to keep quiet for the sake of Jehovahs name she has sex again shortly after finding out what her husband did. She later talks to elders saying she has trouble staying with her husband but they tell her it's too late she has had sex with him so he is forgiven.
I never of a very similar situation. Husband cheats, wife is recommended by the elders to stay with him. She sleeps with him but can't bear it, but the elders say she showed forgiveness by sleeping with him so is no longer free to remarry. As you also mentioned, if sex seals the marriage in this situation, then a person whose wife never had sex with him really is not married in God's eyes.
Besty - thanks for your words of wisdom.
-
AndDontCallMeShirley
what's amazing about the Elders is they've got their noses in relationships from the very start yet take a "we can't do anything for you now" attitude when it suits them.
Even prior to the first date, WT recommends that each person call the Elders in the prospect's congregation to get their opinion on the person they're interested in (i.e., if the brother is an Elder, or at least an MS, then he's survived round one of, "let's make a deal").
.
Then the couple is mercilessly monitored when they are dating- must have chaperones;must date in large groups, etc.
.
The marriage must be in the KH and follow the WT's script.
.
WT has had absurd written rules about what is/is not acceptable sex within a marriage; the same rules still exist, they're just not in writing anymore.
.
As Punky said, each cong. is a law unto itself, and a married couple is subject to whatever level of fanaticism, absurdity, lunacy prevails in their particular congregation.
.
WT and Elders fail to realize that some (many) things are just none of their business and they should mind theirs....
-
konceptual99
I've not had direct experience of this but I have close knowledge of a case where the wife stopped having sex with her husband and he went off.
Basically whatever the law of the land may say about marriage consumation this holds no water in dub land. The Bible speaks about rendering the due but that in itself is not reason to leave a marriage.
The couple got married and the sex side of things basically counts for zilch. He could have seperated, lost any privilages but remained a witness. Going off and sleeping with someone else is adultery in the eyes of the WTS and I would have been amazed if the BoE had behaved any differently.
-
Syme
From what I remember, there's no such concept as 'consummation' of a marriage in WT policy. It is the signing of papers by the 2 spouses in front of 2 witnesses that officially starts a marriage. *That* is the actual 'consummation'. So, whether they have sex after that or not, is irrelevant.
Suppose a spouse has an accident when they drive out of the wedding party and gets incapable of having sexual relations from that point on, before having their first night. What then, is the marriage not legitimate because they didn't sexually consummate it? Can the other spouse cancel the marriage, or have another wife? Obviously not. Technically, this is not really different from the experience you shared (it is ethically different). And as we know, when elders look up a case, their only anxiety is to be *technically* correct, i.e. in order with the various regulations. Hence, the disfellowshipping of the poor guy.
-
jwfacts
At what moment is it the point of no return? The test seems to be whether it is the signing of the wedding documents, or going back to the honeymoon suite? I would imagine a person could pull out of the marriage during the reception, and not get disfellowshipped later for adultery, but once they have spent the first night together that is the point that they are considered married. (If they pulled out of the reception, they would have trouble over breaking a vow instead.) It seems it is not the sex act, but the imagined sex act of the first night that cements it in the eyes of the elders.
There was a couple in Hobart congregation that went for the honeymoon and came back separated. They were told they were not free to remarry, and are both single to this day, well into their 60's. The rumour is he is gay, and realised/admitted that on the honeymoon.
-
Oubliette
jwfacts: I think the elders would have used that, or some similar catch all reason to disfellowship him, despite the man doing nothing Scripturally wrong.
I'm with WMF and Besty on this one. That being said, you're forgetting that JWs only appear to follow the scriptures.
It's really all about their convoluted, inconsistent, incoherent rules meant to do one thing: control.
-
DeWandelaar
It happens quite often I think... I recall a situation here were they never had sex and afterwards SHE left lol
-
XBEHERE
The fact that this thread even exists is a testament to how ridiculous this religion is. I mean seriously?! lol