JNO: the term "disfellowshipped" isnt even allowed to used from the platform anymore.
What do you mean? It's in current Watchtowers?
Reinstatement via Old Cong.
by startingover13 66 Replies latest jw friends
-
Oubliette
-
Gustv Cintrn
Justnowout,
I only speak my reality, my experience.
Throughout the years, in the many different Spanish congs I've moved in, all the members I've seen be disfellowshipped, they so very well deserved it for the damage they caused to themselves/others/the Org, by acting totally contraryto the way they should've as JWs.
Out with them! When I see some attending meetings and seeking reinstatement I cringe because their reinstatement will bring nothing but problems to the fold.
It's absolutely just when they get held back for however long needed, just to make sure the same crap they got kicked out for is not coming right back to the fold with their reinstatement.
GC
-
Oubliette
Gustv Cintrn, Thank you for reminding us why we think of the WT religion (aka Jehovah's Witnesses) as a destructive cult.
Your closed-minded, black and white, sweeping generalizations perfectly typify the self-righteous attitude, the gross lack of compassion, empathy or even a shred of forgiveness that is the hallmark of a hard-core Jehovah's Witness.
Your rant represents everything bad about Jehovah's Witnesses without a hint of the natural goodness that at least a few members of the Rank & File manage to hang onto in spite of all the social pressure and indoctrination to the contrary. There is nothing good, kind or redeeming in your words.
I suggest you to re-read the last two WT study articles so you can at least pretend to understand the party line about the Prodigal Son. Your behaviour is shameful. Your hate speech, despicable.
I'm sure the elders are all very proud of you.
Don't you know you're not supposed to be posting on an "apostate" website. Maybe YOU should be disfellowshipped for YOUR disobedience to the Faithful and Discreet Slave! Hypocrite. (Matthew 7:3-5)
When exposed to unscriptural teachings, regardless of the source, we must decisively reject them. It would be unwise to engage in debates with apostates, whether in person, by responding to their blogs, or by any other form of communication. Even when the intention is to help the individual, such conversation would be contrary to the Scriptural direction we just consid- ered. Rather, as Jehovah’s people, we completely avoid, yes reject, apostasy. - w2014 7/15, p. 20, para. 10
To those seeking reinstatement for whatever reason, you heartlessly shout, "Out with them!" On the contrary:
Out with you!
-
Justnowout
@oub, yes the term is used in wt articles, however when the actual action is announced the term "disfellowshipped" is forbidden. The announcment, as directed in the OD book, is simply "so and so is no longer a jw".
GC, i find your POV both interesting and reasonable... From a human perspective. Yes bad influances should be kept out of a group... From a human perspective. Lepords dont easily change spots and we shouldnt be quick to believe someone has changed... From a human perspective.
What is most telling is that you didnt cite one single scripture to support your personal POV. Id be curious to know where jesus taught something that backups your view..... Bearing in mind I agree, btw, that bad eggs need to go just from a practicle and safty aspect.
-
Oubliette
Justnowout, OK, thanks for clarifying. It's been that way for a long time, more than a decade. I thought you were referring to some "New Light" bullsh*t.
-
Giordano
It is pretty well understood, at least by ex JW's and those that gain first hand knowledge of the JW's, that the WTBTS has gone well past scripture when it comes to Disfellowshipinig. The reason they have done so is that the NT doesn't go far enough in totally controlling their followers. So they disfellowship.....a term never mentioned in the bible......... by making up shit. Their intent when it comes to their Dogma is to coerce obedience so that the rank and file Marches in step. If one objects to a change in a belief one can be DF but if the society changes back to the old belief the DF person is still not invited back. The greatest sin of all is not obeying the Society.
Their Prohibitions are legendary and ever changing.
http://www.jwfacts.com/watchtower/disfellowship-shunning.php
"It was not until 1952 that the Watchtower introduced disfellowshipping as now practiced and the following review of the Scriptural principles involved shows that there is no Biblical justification for the extent to which the Watchtower practices this unchristian form of manipulation. Though there is Scriptural precedence to limit association with brothers practicing wrongdoing, the Watchtower application of disfellowshipping seriously deviates from Bible guidelines............
The Watchtower disfellowships for practices never discussed in the Bible such as smoking, gambling and having a blood transfusion.
Disfellowshipping is extended to prevent immediate family members associating with their disfellowshipped relatives. "
"Shepherd the Flock of God". The chapter, "Determining Whether a Judicial
Committee Should Be Formed", extends from pages 58 to 79 and lists reasons for
which a person can be disfellowshipped. Page 58 clarifies that "This list is not
comprehensive. There may be other matters that would also merit the attention of
a judicial committee."Brazen conduct, loose conduct: pp.60,61 an insolent, contemptuous
attitude made evident by a practice of these things:
- unnecessary association with disfellowshipped nonrelatives
-
pursue a romantic relationship with a person though not legally or Scripturally free to marry- stayed all night in the same house with a person of the
opposite sex (or in the same house with a known homosexual) under improper circumstances.Attempted Suicide.
Misuse of tobacco
- Extreme physical uncleanness
Misuse of
addictive drugs: p.65
Apostasy: pp.65,66Artificial insemination and surrogate motherhood.
- "True Christians, therefore, avoid surrogate motherhood as well as any procedures that involve the use of donated sperm, eggs, or embryos" g04 9/22;
- "Artificial insemination of a married woman by a donor other than her husband makes her guilty of adultery" g74 8/8 p.28
-
BluesBrother
The above mentioned "Shepherding The Flock " book for elders,chapt 11 ,said this in 2010 (Of course procedure can be changed by a letter to the B o E & we may not know, but this is believed to be current )
7. If the disfellowshipped person has moved, a local judicial committee will hear his request for
reinstatement where he is now attending meetings. If those elders believe he should be reinstated, they will
give the judicial committee of the congregation that disfellowshipped the person their recommendation.
They should not let the disfellowshipped one know their recommendation; if the other committee does
not agree, knowing that would only cause him frustration. The committee should merely tell him that
they must correspond with the elders where he was disfellowshipped and that he will be informed of the
decision in due course.
8. The local judicial committee should not pressure the original committee to reinstate the person.
The elders on the original committee may be aware of important factors not apparent to others, so it
is usually best to respect their judgment. Likewise, the original committee should carefully consider the
recommendation of the other committee. Sufficient time may have passed, and the individual may have
made drastic changes that the elders on the original committee have not observed. They should keep in
mind that the elders making the recommendation have met the individual and have had opportunity to
observe his conduct...........................10. If the elders on the committee of the congregation that took the disfellowshipping action
disagree with the recomendation to reinstate, they should clearly explain their reasons to the
other committee. -
AlwaysBusy
GC ... Your turn will come..... your turn to be in the back room with a JC.
-
Oubliette
BluesBrother, thanks for posting this.
Let's analyze these allegedly "spirit-directed" instructions from the WT leadership in light of the point of my initial response to the OP:
How can Holy Spirit move one body of elders to recommend your reinstatement and another to reject it?
7. If the disfellowshipped person has moved, a local judicial committee will hear his request for
reinstatement where he is now attending meetings. If those elders believe he should be reinstated, they will
give the judicial committee of the congregation that disfellowshipped the person their recommendation.At first blush, this sounds good. But an important question to ask is this, "Upon what do the elders in the congregation where the 'disfellowshipped person' is attending base their belief as to whether or not that individual should or should not be reinstated?" Is in not solely upon whether they are determined to be "repentant" or not? Yes it is!
According to the Shepherding the Flock of God (STFOG) book, in the same chapter as the material quoted by BluesBrother:
The reinstatement committee needs to be balanced. Genuine repentance and a turning away from the wrong course--not the attitude of others or merely the time elapsed--are the chief determining factors in deciding when a person may be reinstated. - (ibid, p. 119, paragraph 4) - Bold Emphasis in origina, red added
And of course, the elders presumably are guided by "Jehovah's Holy Spirit" in these matters. The STFOG book has these somewhat vague instructions regarding the procedures about how to begin a "Judicial Hearing" for a Reinstatement Committee:
After offering prayer without the disfellowshipped person present, the committee will invite him into the room.(ibid, p. 118, para. 2) - Italics in original
Notice also that the the "disfellowshipped person" is referred to only as a "him" even though the person could also be female. A minor point, but it betrays the misogynistic tendencies of the WT leadership, ... but I digress!
Moving on:
They [to committee in the hall where the DF'd person is currently attending] should not let the disfellowshipped one know their recommendation; if the other committee [the one where the person was DF'd] does not agree, knowing that would only cause him frustration.
So first of all, the WT leadership thinks it is wrong for the elders in the congregation where the poor, "disfellowshipped person" is currently attending to let them know their recommendation. Why is that? Isn't "Holy Spirit" directing all this? Why can't I know what you think?
Well, if you don't already know, the answer will become clear momentarily. But before was go there, what about that comment that it would be frustrating to know that the two bodies don't agree? Ya' think!
Seriously! This IS the real issue, this IS the point where a potential crisis of belief could (and often does) happen: How can two elder bodies possibly disagree as to whether or not a person is "repentant"? Again, and I know I'm sounding like a broken record, but this is huge, as in HUGE: If "Holy Spirit" is really, really, really, REALLY,directing this organization, then two elder bodies could never, ever be in disagreement about such an important thing as a person's repentance.
But let's read on ...
The committee should merely tell him that they must correspond with the elders where he was disfellowshipped and that he will be informed of the
decision in due course.This is the stringing along part. Anyone that has ever submitted a request for reinstatement knows how this goes. If only one congregation is involved it could take weeks; if two are involved it could easily be a month or more. Meanwhile the "disfellowshipped person" is psychologically on pins and needles as it were in mental turmoil and emotional anguish.
It is one of the most excrutiating experiences a person could ever have to endure. As Tom Petty sang, "The waiting is the hardest part."
That being said: But wait, there's more!
8. The local judicial committee should not pressure the original committee to reinstate the person.
Of course not, let them lollygag and take their sweet time. They don't even see the person that is going through this humiliating process, swinging in the spiritual wind waiting for these elders to get around to making a decision in keeping with the people that actually know the person and actually see what they are doing.
The elders on the original committee may be aware of important factors not apparent to others, so it is usually best to respect their judgment.
Ok, that sounds good on a superficial read, but again: Isn't "Holy Spirit" supposed to suss these things out? Isn't that the point of praying for it?
And if it's "usually best to respect" the judgment of the original committee, then the implication is that sometimes it is NOT best to respect their judgment. What would be the difference? How would anyone know? And for the billionth time: Where the heck is "Holy Spirit" in all of this? Jehovah's Holy Spirit is theoretically supposed to prevent these kinds of mix-up and lapses in "judgment."
I gotta' tell you, from where I sit, this arrangment is looking more and more like Holy Spirit ain't got nothin' to do with it.
Nevertheless, let's press on ...
Likewise, the original committee should carefully consider the recommendation of the other committee.
Ok, I'm just repeating myself. If Holy Spirit was really involved, none of this back-and-forth, seemingly "balanced" rhetoric would be necessary.
I gotta' ask: Why wouldn't the original committee just accept the recommendation of "the other committee"? I'm mean, where all Christ's brothers are we not? (Ok, I know some are the "other sheep," but supposedly we're all on the same team here. Or are we?)
Sufficient time may have passed, and the individual may havemade drastic changes that the elders on the original committee have not observed. They should keep in mind that the elders making the recommendation have met the individual and have had opportunity to observe his conduct.
Ah, so the WT leadership recognizes that the elders in the congregation where the "disfellowshipped person" is now attending, the ones that are making the recommendation to reinstate, may know something that the elders in the "orginal congregation" don't know. That shouldn't be surprising, they are the ones that "have met the individual and have had opportunity to observe his conduct." So why not just accept their recommendation? Well, because, as we read a few paragraphs before, the elders in the "original committee" might know something these guys don't know.
So again, isn't Holy Spirit supposed to ensure that we (especially the elders) are all "fitly united in the same mind and in the same line of thought ” ? – 1 Corinthians 1:10
I gotta' tell you: It doesn't seem to be working.
By this point, I don't see how anyone can still believe that Holy Spirit has anything to do with it. But I know they do. Confirmation bias is a powerful psychological weakness in humans, and cognitive dissonance is a bitch. Yes she is.
Nevertheless, there is still one last point to address:
10. If the elders on the committee of the congregation that took the disfellowshipping action disagree with the recomendation to reinstate, they should clearly explain their reasons to the other committee.
Notice what it says, and--more importantly--notice what it does NOT say.
If the elders in the orginal committee disagree with the committee that actually knows the person, then they are to "clearly explain their reasons to the other committee."
Sounds nice doesn't it. A little communication to two groups of men that Holy Spirit led to different opinions.
But what it doesn't say, and WHAT WILL NEVER, EVER HAPPEN is this: The "disfellowshipped person" will never know why their request was turned down. And unless they were once an elder and know the rules, or happened upon this website or one similar and got clued in, they would not know that one "Judicial Committee" directed by Holy Spirit concluded they were indeed repentant and could and should be reinstated into the congregation, but for some reason that is hard to understand, another committee also supposedly directed by Holy Spirit concluded they were NOT repentant.
And so we come full circle to my original point:
How can Holy Spirit move one body of elders to recommend your reinstatement and another to reject it? There is only one answer and it does not bode well for WT "theology."
-
Gustv Cintrn
I stand by my comments which are truthful from my standpoint and what my experience has been throughout the decades.
I form part of a large family where there are several members in positions of leadership inside the Org, and believe me, it takes a lot to get kicked out these days. Elders try all kinds of avenues to provide help and avoid disfellowshipping anyone. However, you get these knuckleheads that insist in a blatant behavior in opposition to our beliefs. Well, then....
As much a moderate/ultra-liberal JW as I am and so are the group I roll with, no doubt, some deserve what they get.
Some cannot be helped. Even God knows that, hence all the exterminations the Bible talks about, and the one still looming ahead. Some just cannot be helped.
Hey, listen, we're this little association of people, so small some even call it a 'cult'; it's difficult to conform, I know, but the option of finding some other place is there and abundant places to try.
Based on what I've read from Startingover13, when reinstatement finally happens he/she will still be here talking about being all unhappy, frustrated, disappointment, etc. It'd be best if he/she would take his/her business where happiness is easier found.
GC