DA used to be used for unbaptized DFing

by rebel8 31 Replies latest jw experiences

• 

  rebel8

  Does anyone remember this, or was it just a local thing? All the time I've spent on these boards, I've never heard anyone mention it. Just curious.

  When an unbaptized publisher was in a situation "warranting" DFing, they would announce from the platform that the person had been DAd. It was an action the cong took against the person, not something the person did for themself.

  Apparently "new light" changed DAing to be a voluntary action a person takes. What do they do to an unbaptized publisher who supposedly commits a serious sin and supposedly isn't repentant? Public reproof? Isn't that a slap on the hand in their view?
• 

  LittleToe

  Sounds plausible, after all, who in their right mind would want to leave the troof, right?

  If it's not the case, then you may have it mixed up with "marking", which was definitely used.

  They also played around with terminology concerning "approved associates", latterly restricting that title to those baptised, rather than those who just attend meetings or go on FS.
• 

  blondie

  No, rebel8, you are correct, around the mid-80's, unbaptized publishers were announced as being disassociated and to be treated as if they were DF'd. They changed that because legally the person was not a member since they had not yet been baptized. Certain court cases forced the WTS to make that change.

  The info is in the Organized book. Unless some else posts it, I will put that info up later tonight.

  Blondie
• 

  Scully

  You're right.

  In fact there were a few announcements made in the KH where I grew up that unbaptized children of JWs were DAd "for conduct unbecoming a Christian".
• 

  NeonMadman

  I don't believe that the term, "disassociated," was ever used of unbaptized persons in an official way. It was common in the congregations for the word to be applied to such people informally, though. The old OR book simply says that the announcement would be made that "their conduct is 'unbecoming a Christian' and that associateion with them would not be in harmony with the counsel at 1 Corinthians 15:33".

  Later, the term "approved associate" was invented, and when an unbaptized person who had been accepted as one of those fell afoul of the elders, it was announced that he or she was "no longer an approved associate." A person in that situation was actually shunned, as a disfellowshipped person would be, until 1988, when the policy was changed. The term, "approved associate" was abandoned in favor of "unbaptized publisher," and the 11/15/88 Watchtower stated that it was not necessary to shun such persons.

  "Disassociation" has been applied pretty consistently since the inception of the term to mean baptized individuals who have either resigned from the organization or have indicated by their actions (e.g., joining the military) that they no longer wanted to be JWs. Of course, the application of the term has been expanded as necessary to include whatever the GB wanted to clamp down on this week without legal repercussions.
• 

  Scully

  Organized to Accomplish Our Ministry is not available on the WT CD Library.

  However, if anyone has a copy of this "instruction manual", the rules on disassociation are covered on pages 150-151.
• 

  MelbaToast

  In my hall, they also used this, it was still closer to 1990-91....I thought it was strange, but they wanted to make sure that the hall was aware that he was considered "no longer a member of the congregation". It was weird because I knew they couldn't disfellowship him, but had previously been really animate about getting baptized and even worked on a couple of quick builds..

  my .02
• 

  blondie

  I will say this,unofficial or not, unbaptized people who were going in field service who were announced, were not to be associated with just like DF'd people were to be shunned.

  That definitely has changed.

  JWs of that time did refer to people as "disassociated" although it did not appear in the official publications in that way. JWs did not talk to them at the KH.

  I had 2 family members that this was done to. When they changed the policy, my family started talking to them again. (I had already been talking to them, shame on me)
• 

  NeonMadman

  
  Just a note: the OR book that I quoted in my comment above was Organization for Kingdom-Preaching and Disciple-Making, which was issued in 1972, and was the precursor to Organized to Accomplish Our Ministry

  From Organized to Accomplish Our Ministry:

  DISASSOCIATION

  The term

  disassociation applies to the action takenen by a person who, although being a baptized member of the congregation, deliberately repudiates Christian standing, rejecting the congregation and stating that he no longer wants to be recognized or known as one of Jehovah's Witnesses. As a disassociated person, his situation before Jehovah is far different from that of an inactive Christian having grown weak spiritually, no longer shares the field ministry. Such an inactive person may have failed to study God's Word regularly, or his zeal serving for Jehovah may have cooled off due to experiencing personal problems or persection (1 Cor. 11:30; Rom. 14:1) The elders, as well as other concerned members of the congregation will continue rendering appropriate spiritual assistance to the inactive brother. (I Thess. 5:14; Rom. 15:1; Heb. 12:12) However, the person who has disassociated himself by repudiating the faith and deliberately abandoning Jehovah's worship is viewed in the same way as one who has been disfellowshipped. A brief announcement would be made to inform the congregation that the person has voluntarily disassociated himself from the congregation. Concerning those who renounced their Christian faith in his day, the apostle John wrote: "They went out from us, but they were not of our sort; for if they had been of our sort, they would have remained with us." (1 John 2:19) Also, a person might renounce his place in the Christian congregation by his actions, such as by becoming part of a secular organization the objective of which is contrary to the Bible and, hence, is under judgment by Jehovah God. (Compare Revelation 19:17-21; Isaiah 2:4.) So if a person who is a Christian chooses to join those who are disapproved by God, it would be fitting for the congregation to acknowledge by a brief announcement that he has disassociated himself and is no longer one of Jehovah's Witnesses. Such a person would be viewed in the same way as a disfellowshipped person.
• 

  NeonMadman

  From the 1989 revision of the book Organized to Accomplish Our Ministry:

  UNBAPTIZED PUBLISHERS WHO ARE WRONGDOERS

  What of individuals who, as unbaptized publishers, have shared in the field service with the congregation and perhaps have enrolled in the Theocratic Ministry School, but who have now become involved in serious wrongdoing? Since they are not recognized members of the congregation, they could not be formally be expelled therefrom. However, it may be that they do not fully understand the Bible's standards, and kind counsel may help them to make straight paths for their feet. If an unbaptized wrongdoer is still unrepentant after two elders have met with him and tried to help him, then it becomes necessary to inform the congregation. A brief announcement is made that the person is no longer recognized as an unbaptisedublisher. (1 Cor. 15:33) *The congregation then to view the wrongdoer as a person of the world.* No field service reports would be accepted from such a person.

  Wording was similar in the 1983 version, the most notable difference being the statement, "The congregation will then view the wrongdoer as they would view one who has been disfellowshipped," which was replaced by the sentence inside the asterisks above.