by minimus 52 Replies latest jw friends
Hey Minimus,
That is truly despicable. Your friend made a grave error by neglecting to utter this mantra: BEEP! I WILL LISTEN TO THE WATCHTOWER. BEEP! I WILL LISTEN TO THE WATCHTOWER. Silly fellow, he decided to use his own brain and not that of the collective.
Mr. Shakita
based on what I heard before I left, the rule being applied here--that anyone who attends the wedding of a witness to a non-witness will lose their 'privileges'--came directly from the Society.
Can anyone find a quote from one of the publications(even the elders handbook) that would back that up? Or is this a spoken only rule?
(turning on the Blondie beacon)
I think this is one of those behind the scenes directives through a letter to the BOE. Supposedly the letter to the elders from the WTS says that it is up to the BOE to make the call, depending on how it is perceived in the congregation, would some of the rank and file be "stumbled" by it. Elders and regular pioneers are held up to a higher standard (supposedly) than the rest of the congregation. But then through the CO and/or DO this can be verbally strengthened. If you write the WTS, they might just put it back on the BOE as being responsible for the decision.
Did you know that the elders have an index to help them locate BOE letters? That they are not all supposed to have an individual copy of each letter but a central locked file in the KH is supposed to be maintained? (Yes, some POs keep them in their home...naughty, naughty...and some do make personal copies, double naughty naughty). I wonder how many there are now on file? That is why the Elders Handbook is good to a point but it is references to those letters and verbal directives from the COs that get penciled in that can change the policy behind the scenes.
The WTS is trying to tighten down on the congregations and if the elders and pioneers don't obey, do you think the rank and file will? "Why can't I do it, Brother Secretary does, and he's an elder."
Yes, there is a real life WTS Talmud out there, folks, hidden from the rank and file. But that is how a cult operates with unwritten rules.
Thanks, Blondie...
Boy, that was fast...did you come by BlondieMobile or BlondiePlane?
Did you know that the elders have an index to help them locate BOE letters? That they are not all supposed to have an individual copy of each letter but a central locked file in the KH is supposed to be maintained? (Yes, some POs keep them in their home...naughty, naughty...and some do make personal copies, double naughty naughty).I didn't know that. Sneaky bastards.
The letter actually was a Society letter given to Traveling Overseers which was supposed to have been read to the elders by the CO. And yes, Euphemism is right. I read my friend's deletion letter from the Society. They tell him stay busy in the work, take the counsel and perhaps at another time he may "qualify" again for "privileges".
min, that must mean the elders aren't being hard-nosed enough and the WTS has to assert their dominance over the elders. But still it is not information made available to the rank and file in writing, only verbally through the elders.
I still remember the non-letter the CO read to the BOEs that when a JW takes a blood transfusion they are DAing themselves rather than it being a DFing offense. I don't think there is anything in the publications on that either, is there?
Even if you scoured all the publications and asked the elders what to do on a procedural/doctrinal point, you can still get in trouble when the CO comes through. That is why so many JWs just call NY to start with...that is where the "direction" is coming.
Blondie
The kicker is---my friend asked 2 members of the Service Commitee---including the PO BEFORE he went and they said it was a personal decision. They believed it was never a reason for removal.
All this begs the question: what scriptural reason is there for not going to a wedding of a non-JW? If it is such a wrongful thing to do, why isn't it spelled out more in the publications? Why hide it in inner-office memos?
Jesus went to a wedding. The bible doesn't say if it was a marriage of one of his followers or not, and since no other mention of not attending weddings of non followers of Jehovah is made in the scriptures, one can assume that attending weddings of non-believers in general is up to each individual Christian. (hows that for WTspeak)
yeah, I keep forgetting about the special letters with the secret directives.... I KNOW there is nothing in the rank and file pubs that indicates this is anything other than a conscience matter.
Well, at the very least, it's offensive that Minimom got tanked for going to her own granddaughter's wedding. I think they'd at least have difficulty with that one.
For Joe Publisher it is a so called conscience matter (only if you want to be marked), but not for elders and ministerial servants.
The directive for elders and ministerial servants not attending weddings was given in 2003 during the 6-month CO meeting w/Elders. Actually the direction was twofold:
1) an Elder can not conduct the wedding talk if a JW is marrying a non-JW, and
2) any appointed brother that attends can be deleted.
Of course I don't have that letter since it was read by the CO. Many of the CO letters have been stricter over the past 3 or 4 years. At the last CO & DO meeting w/Elders at the Circuit Assembly Elders were told we have been mistakenly shown mercy on judicial committees and not to be quick to reinstate someone DF.
