Disassociation and Ray Franz (page 4)

simplesally

Sns, I have the book C of C if you want to read it. The man with the miles on his boots gave it to me when I decided I was not going back to the KH.

You know, I had been doing some reseach on the CD rom a while back, scanning the indexes to no avail. My ex-husband was df'd, we were married. Elders said we could not talk about Jehovah, talk about anything spiritual. He was attending meetings and assemblies. I would cry when we left because it was so hard to not talk about anything. Sometimes I would 'sin' and discuss a good point and we would be normal for a time.

Then one day, I was praying so hard and (I know many don't believe this stuff) but I grabbed an old bound volume from the 60's I think, around '67??? and in it there was an article that talked about the one flesh and how mates of df'd ones still had that bond. Mates could do what they could to "provoke the df'd person to repentance." One could read aloud from the Bible to the df'd mate if the scriptures were relevant to the situation. One could read articles from the WT together if they pertained to the situation.

I was so happy to find this in print. I took it to the couple that studied with me. The elder refused to read the information, instead relying on the WT article from 1981 that dealt with df'd relatives and not the mate specifically. I was so mad at him for not seeing the HUGE difference. I took it to my body of elders. They read the article. We had a little meeting. They agreed with me and said that the 1981 did not overturn that information and neither did anything in their reference material. My ex-father-in-law marked down that article for future reference. They told me to just ignore the other elder and that Jehovah's commands were not burdensome and that in their eyes, the one flesh thing took precedence, you have to be able to discuss things with your mate: it'd be like not talking or reasoning with oneself!!!!

This information though was not able to be found on the cd-rom or the index. I do believe they change articles on the CD. I should have saved the bound volumes but I had no clue they'd "update" old articles to hide their hypocrisy.

xandra360

Correct if I'm wrong, but I'm quite sure Ray Franz himself indicated in Crisis of Conscience that he certainly felt it was his situation that prompted the WBTS/GB to change their stance regarding the treatment of disassociated people - ie. that they should be shunned in the same way as disfellowshipped ones.

xandra360

Phantom Stranger

You might also remember his work on the Aid to Bible Understanding book...

garybuss

*** w74 8/1 pp. 466-473 Maintaining a Balanced Viewpoint Toward Disfellowshiped Ones ***

Maintaining

a Balanced Viewpoint Toward Disfellowshiped Ones

http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/6/59948/901433/post.ashx#901433

ros

Prior to the time of Ray Franz's DFing, people could leave the Watchtower religion by "disassociating" themselves and avoid the ramifications of shunning. That is what Peter Gregerson did. When Ray had lunch with him (he was Ray's employer), it was not a DFing offense to associated with a DA'd person. That was the appeal of DAing in those days if one found they could no longer support JW doctrine.

Word is that the decision to DF Ray Franz had already been made prior to Ray's departure from Bethel (according to Schroeder). But the Watchtower's attorneys advised the Governing Body committee that because of Ray's status in the organization, if they booted him out at retirement age after his years of service in the organization headquarters, he might have monetary legal recourse against them. However, they advised, if they allowed him to resign, and they offered him a sum of money to re-settle, and he accepted it, he would have no further legal recourse for litigation against them. It was shortly after Ray accepted their separation "gift" that the policy toward disassociated Witnesses was changed to treat such ones the same as disfellowshipped. That is also when the word "apostate" began coming to the fore like storm into JW-speak.

Coincidence? I doubt it.
For example, prior to Ray Franz's DFing, the WTS was not paranoid about members reading literature published by former JWs. Most Witnesses I knew when I first came in had read the book "Thirty Years a Slave to the Watchtower" and other literature against their religion. In those days, they were referred to as "evil slaves," not "apostates". I remember when some of them were distributing little pamphlets around assemblies, we would take them and read them. No one was particularly worried. We knew we could refute their stuff. But when Ray Franz was DF'd, the WTS entered a new era. Now there was someone out there who could really blow the whistle on them--and they knew it.

If you'll notice, particularly in Ray's book about the upheaval against him at Brooklyn, his uncle Fred was conspicuously absent from apparent proceedings in the actions against Ray. It was almost immediately after Knorr died and Uncle Fred became president of the Society that the actions against Ray and Ed Dunlap and others emerged in full force.

Personally, I think Uncle Fred was behind most of it, staying in the background but pulling the strings, letting the other members of the GB do the dirty work. Motive? I think his uncle never forgave Ray for siding with and leading the faction of Governing Body members who wrested the organizational power from its two leaders, Nathan Knorr and himself. I also think that Fred, having long been esteemed as the Society's "scholar" extraordinaire felt this image becoming threatened by his nephew's evident emerging scholarship after Ray lead the accomplishment of the organization's central reference work, "Aid to Bible Understanding."

~Ros

greatteacher

That was exactly what I was thinking. Thank you for the info Ros.

BluesBrother

Quoted from the Watchtower 1974, Aug 1st p471, thanks to Garybus

Thus, if a disfellowshiped parent goes to visit a son or daughter or to see grandchildren and is allowed to enter the Christian home, this is not the concern of the elders. Such a one has a natural right to visit his blood relatives and his offspring.

Do not times change? The pendulum has swung back and forth on the matter of associating with the d/f . Now it is forbidden . But that article shows that "Holy Spirit" once led them in a differnt direction, and that is being polite

The rumour mill over here led us to believe that Ray Franz had set up a rival Church with himself at the head. I now know that to be totally false . I was amazed when I discovered the real circumstances of his d/f.

if anyone has not yet read his book. May I add a firm reccomendation

mizpah

When asked about the disfellowshipping policy of shunning family members, elders will often say that this is a "personal decision." This is a sly way of trying to mislead the inquirer to thinking that it is not a policy of the Watchtower Society...but rather a decision made by individual members.

It is true that some JWs have ignored the counsel and continue to see their df'd family members. But those who are knowledgeable of the Society's rules and regulations and the "spirit" in which they are written have no doubt that the Society and Jehovah's Witnesses in general teach and practice shunning. Just ask all XJWs who have been shunned by their family members.

Mr. Kim

The disassociation rule is ~~stupid, dog sh*t~~ has been and continues to be abused by everyone!

nuff said!

Disassociation and Ray Franz

Share this