as disfellowshipped

by peacefulpete 9 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  peacefulpete

  Does anyone remember the program in the late 70's early 80s that called for children of JWs who tho unbaptised did things they felt merited Dfing to be treated "as Disfellowshipped"? Perhaps some with the references could post material. A lot of Elders including my father had a problem with it but enforced it nontheless. One of my best friends growing up was dragged before a judicial committee at 12-13 y.o. and found to be 'unrepentant'. The result was an announcment that he was to be treated "as disfellowshipped". This meant exactly the same treatment as if he was a member of the congregation. I don't know what the issue was but his parents claim he was very contrite and confused. I can only imagine the trauma to this and hundreds of other children this heinous policy caused. I have just found out where he is living and that he is out for good. I'm going to try to apologize for my part in ruining his youth.

  The policy was eventually scrapped as a result of so much dissent from the local elders, but think of the Orwellian minds that dreamt it up to begin with.
• 

  simplesally

  The term was "unapproved associate" and yes, they dropped that term.
• 

  gumby

  Hi Pete.

  The info. you are looking for was in the old "Organized to Accomplish Our Ministry" book"

  The term that was used was an unbaptized publisher. For awhile an unbaptized publisher could be acted against judicially and have restrictions imposed upon them, until they changed policy in which only a baptized publisher could be dealth with judicially. I'll see if I can find it.

  I remember at an elders meeting with the CO in which they had us cross out certain sections of the book and added some words we had to pen in when the adjustment was made before the new book came out.

  Gumby
• 

  peacefulpete

  I'd appreciate that Gumby. I remember that it had to be an unbaptised publisher (which meant any JW child over say 6) And yes the term "approved or unapproved associate" were used as the label, but the announcement directed the person be treated "as disfellowshipped" I'm certain.
• 

  wednesday

  yes they did do that, they announce it from the meetings, just like a DF.(until a lawyer told them it was not legal) It was wrong and they had to back track. However, the 'real Jws" still view those people as not approved associates.
• 

  NeonMadman

  I believe the announcement used to be something like, "so-and-so has engaged in conduct unbecoming a Christian, and association with him/her would not be in harmony with 1 Corinthians 15:33."
• 

  Elsewhere

  "so-and-so has engaged in conduct unbecoming a Christian, and association with him/her would not be in harmony with 1 Corinthians 15:33."

  I never understood why they would even mention a "sin" scripture when they always said that a person is only DFed for not being repentant... not the sin itself.
• 

  gitasatsangha

  I knew a girl this happened to. I remember it pretty well because I was about to go out with her (on one of those things that IS A date but you don't dare call it a date, and anyway, someone else has to come along so what the hell kind of date can it be, anyway). She was 16 I was, I think, about 15. I think it was about Wednesday,an elder who was closley related to me and who knew I was going to a movie with her on Friday, just mentioned it wouldn't be such a good idea to go out with her. I was a bit puzzled.

  Then on friday there was an announcement made that she wasn't an approved associate. At the same time a guy that was in his early twenties (and who I liked up to that point), was put on public reproof. Wierd world. She was a nice girl (apart from making out with grown men and still offering boys her age little crumbs like a nite at the movies.. heh heh). The whole "Unapproved associate" thing pretty much marked her as "a bad girl" in the hall. She never got baptized as far as I understand it, and it was a shame that SHE ended up having the tarnished reputation while the adult man was viewed as "weak for a moment" and eventually got his status back. She never did.
• 

  New Castles

  I do remember this....The policy no longer exists. I do remember an elder who had resign because his daughter even though not baptized and no longer living with him was living "in sin" That announcement was made about her...
• 

  cyber-sista

  Yes, It is still practiced to one degree or another and on many levels--I have seen it now even more so than before. When my adult daughter (not baptized nor had ever been a publisher) was getting married to a non-witness guy (my hubby has never been a witness either) I was told that because she had attended meetings throughout her childhood she was therefore accountable because she knew what the "truth" was. She had commited no biblical sin, but to marry someone who was not a witness (the catch 22 was she was qualified to marry a witness either). Anyway, the elders made it a point to let me know that after she left my home she would then be concidered worldly association, therefore my association would need to be limited with her. I know I have written about this many times before but AAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHH it still bothers me a lot. There were portraying my daughter as being evil and Satanic and she has always been a sweet kid--more loving and kindly than many of those baptized and dedicated to the Org, but I was to view her as dead to me. The CO just shook his head in disgust and told me I could pretty much wash my hands of her now. Others in the congo began to treat her as if she was wicked too and then shunning me to some degree for continuing to love her as my daughter--bunch of wackos.