you heard me correct, this is not a joke, and it is not april fools day!
the asl portion of the governing body updated #2 (march 2024) has been released a bit early and someone caught it.
summary: .
The changes are so profound that hardly anyone will ever be DFed and shunned for more than 90days ever again.
90 days isn’t too much of a threat now
Unless it’s for apostasy. In that case the 90 day rule doesn’t apply, does it? And the hard shunning continues.
during lett’s announcement that beards are now allowed he elaborated at some length how brothers ought to feel and react to the change in policy.
he warned brothers not to resent not being able to grow beards earlier if they had wished to do so.
he also warned brothers who supported the old policy not to allow themselves to wonder what the point of doing so was now that it has changed.
I think this is spot on given there have been meeting items on shunning and folks were crying in the audience.Have you seen that happen? How did the elder handle it?
during lett’s announcement that beards are now allowed he elaborated at some length how brothers ought to feel and react to the change in policy.
he warned brothers not to resent not being able to grow beards earlier if they had wished to do so.
he also warned brothers who supported the old policy not to allow themselves to wonder what the point of doing so was now that it has changed.
During Lett’s announcement that beards are now allowed he elaborated at some length how brothers ought to feel and react to the change in policy. He warned brothers not to resent not being able to grow beards earlier if they had wished to do so. He also warned brothers who supported the old policy not to allow themselves to wonder what the point of doing so was now that it has changed.
Yet when Sanderson announced the change to how disfellowshipped people are treated he didn’t elaborate on how people might feel about the change and how they should react. Is this because the Governing Body believes people will be more upset and conflicted about the beard change than the change in how disfellowshipped people are treated? This seems unlikely. Maybe they recognise that it such an emotive subject for many Witnesses who have totally shunned relatives for years that they better tread carefully.
is the change in jw dress policy a way to make the changes in df policy easier to accept?.
a way to devide?.
g..
I did notice that in the broadcast Mark Sanderson spent 90% of the time talking about disfellowshipping with a short statement about dress at the end. Yet most of the JWs as far as I can tell are talking about the dress change and not the statement about disfellowshipping.
you heard me correct, this is not a joke, and it is not april fools day!
the asl portion of the governing body updated #2 (march 2024) has been released a bit early and someone caught it.
summary: .
Ironically, since they stopped counting hours, local JWs have been turning out for field service in record numbers. (According to the CO at his visit - I have no direct knowledge as I don’t go to service meetings.) This may be true (others have said similar) but I wonder if it will last. It’s hard to imagine that it will last in the long term. The novelty of the situation is probably still hitting people.
from the update*: "8. when a baptised minor becomes involved in serious wrongdoing, two elders (not a committee) will meet with him along with his christian parent(s) or legal guardian(s)".. "christian" is wt code for jw, i'm guessing, and it's worded this way to sound more ambiguous for the sake of the norwegian and other governments.
so what happens to a minor who doesn't have jw parents?
a young convert (not likely in this day and age, but not impossible) or a born in who was orphaned and adopted by non-jw relatives?
Isn’t it a legal requirement for a minor to have a legal guardian? In the case you mentioned of the orphan the relatives who took him in would be legal guardians, no?
you heard me correct, this is not a joke, and it is not april fools day!
the asl portion of the governing body updated #2 (march 2024) has been released a bit early and someone caught it.
summary: .
Actually, the question was raised if df'd ones could hang out together. They were told yes they could.
Where was it raised? And this response?
I’m pretty sure the elders’ book, and/or letters have said that DFed people should not talk to each other, and that if they did it was evidence of lack of repentance.
you heard me correct, this is not a joke, and it is not april fools day!
the asl portion of the governing body updated #2 (march 2024) has been released a bit early and someone caught it.
summary: .
There is a very real danger that they could start hanging out together and be each other's support group.
Have they officially lifted the ban on DFed people talking to each other? I guess some people may take it as implied, but it’s not explicitly stated. This is the way “reforms” can tend to get out of hand and go beyond what was originally intended.
you heard me correct, this is not a joke, and it is not april fools day!
the asl portion of the governing body updated #2 (march 2024) has been released a bit early and someone caught it.
summary: .
As I read it a JC is not convened at first, but the final paragraph states that if the minor is unrepentant then he must be “removed from the congregation”. Whether that implies a JC at that later stage or not, the outcome is the same.
Arguably no one was already 100% shunned because elders spoke to disfellowshipped people and family were allowed necessary contact. So 100% shunning was never a thing anyway, and the current shift in the policy appears marginal. Maybe it will be further loosened, but as explained in the recent broadcast and letter it only amounts to greetings at the meetings.
you heard me correct, this is not a joke, and it is not april fools day!
the asl portion of the governing body updated #2 (march 2024) has been released a bit early and someone caught it.
summary: .
The sticking point in the Norway case was apparently the shunning of children. The new policy still allows for the shunning of children, albeit after some extra effort to avoid that outcome, and with the concession of greetings at the meetings. If that is the new position and it is properly explained then I doubt that is enough of a change to reverse the decision in Norway.
