Why No Disfellowshipping Before 1952?

by blondie 72 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  Christ Alone

  I was recently talking to someone about disfellowshiping, and we discussed the changes in policies. It seems like each time the df'ing policy was changed, there was an actual event that it followed. I'm not sure about 52, but in 74, it was Ray Franz that wrote the article and it seems like his tolerant views crept into the larger GB collective conscience. But they changed it again in 81. What happened then? It was Ray leaving.

  It almost seems like the df'ing policy has it's basis in hatred. "We're gonna get you for leaving, sucker!" They needed to show Ray and the others that left Bethel how they felt. Cris Sanchez (a former spanish translator) said that he felt like the GB that were on his judical committee would have killed him if they had the chance. He even told his wife, "If they tell you that I killed myself, don't believe it." I don't think they ever would do that, but it shows the fear that they instill in others.

  So yeah, I think the df'ing policy is based on FEAR and HATE.
• 

  ScenicViewer

  Christ Alone said,

  Cris Sanchez said that he felt like the GB...would have killed him if they had the chance.

  That reminds me of a Watchtower remark regarding the extermination of apostates. If not for Bible laws and the laws of the land, they seem to suggest that even family relations should be executed.

  (W 11-15-1952 p703-704, QFR)

  "We are not living today among theocratic nations where such members of our fleshly family relationship could be exterminated for apostasy from God and his theocratic organization, as was possible and was ordered in the nation of Israel...

  "Being limited by the laws of the worldly nation in which we live and also by the laws of God through Jesus Christ, we can take action against apostates only to a certain extent, that is, consistent with both sets of laws. The law of the land and God’s law through Christ forbid us to kill apostates, even though they be members of our own flesh-and-blood family relationship."

  So, in today's world, Watchtower can take action against apostates only so far, and it sounds like they would actually prefer executing family members, per this remark,

  "...forbid us to kill apostates, even though they be members of our own flesh-and-blood family relationship".

  As though everybody should have the right to execute their own family? Am I missing something here? What do you readers make of that remark?

  How sad for them.
• 

  Vidiot

  From what I've read over the years, I've gotten the distinct impression that in its infancy, the WTS actually started out fairly liberal. Common-law marriages were accepted, Christmas and burthdays were celebrated, and the democratic process was used freely, but Rutherford's reign and heavy-handed influence began to turn it the other way.

  After he died, some wanted to foster a "kinder, gentler" WTS, but Knorr wanted to make the Org look more publicly respectable, and in the 50s that meant conservative. Growth, albeit through agressive prosyletizing, nevertheless let the higher-ups convince themselves that that was the direction God wanted them to take, so with Fred Franz, this tendency was increasingly entrenched. The post-1975 freak-out, followed by Ray Franz's exit didn't help, either; and they began putting up the storm windows.

  Under Jaracz's iron fist, virtually all the remaining intellectuals, artistic types, and outside-the-box thinkers got purged out one way or another, and the WTS had become a full-on "authoritarian high-control group" (an admittedly wordy term that I, nevertheless, personally prefer to "cult" for a couple of reasons.)
• 

  Vidiot

  Christ Alone: "Cris Sanchez said that he felt like the GB...would have killed him if they had the chance."

  Nixon loyalists acted the same way towards the Watergate whistleblowers for years afterward.
• 

  mamochan13

  Clarity, I'm pretty sure that back in the 60s and 70s the policy was a minimum of a year. But that changed, later, and it became "many months, even a year or more" or something like that. In fact, I challenged the elders on my committee because they kept saying that the "organization" book said it had to be a year, when it said nothing of the sort. During the 80s and 90s I remember many young people (i.e. 14, 15, 16) being DFd and reinstated within a few months.

  Interesting that they announced actual reasons. I don't recall that ever happening in my cong. it was always "conduct unbecoming a Christian". But they have certainly altered the practice over the years. CA - I agree that the motivation is highly punitive, based in hatred and revenge. I think some elders feel like they are figuratively stoning the individual to death as punishment, getting great satisfaction from it. Scenic - I'm reading that excerpt the same way you are. It does souind like they are in favour of exterminating apostates.

  I wonder if they argue away "excommunicate" as different from "disfellowshipping".
• 

  mind blown

  THANK YOU ScenicViewer as well as others who contribute WTS qoutes!! It is soooo much more vital as well as effective!!

  Even though the WTS will use the BS excuse the light gets briter, their doctrine FLIP FLOPS is not only criminal, but a disgraceful shame. Many years have been lost and many families lives have been "completely shattered to bits"
• 

  00DAD

  1947 Awake Says Excommunication is Unbiblical and Pagan

  
• 

  JW GoneBad

  So thanks to Blondie and others, we know the beginning of the WTBTS’ false religious practice of disfellowshipping and shunning……

  Jehovah God please help us, we pray to put an end to it! Please no more needless premature deaths like our friend…..OOMPA! Amen.
• 

  mind blown

  Great info......
• 

  Theocratic Sedition

  good thread.