In the paragraphs, there is instruction to be just like Jesus who didn’t revile when reviled, etc. It’s completely in harmony with Jesus.
That’s really the whole point of the article. The paragraph setting out three categories of ‘neighbor’ was sort of an intro, as it then went on to detail in the article how to show love in marriage (with the nearest neighbor) how to show love in the spiritual family, and how to show love to those in the ministry.
It’s not accurate to say they were trying to redefine the term ‘neighbor.’ And nothing in the article after that ‘setting up’ paragraph went on to exclude anyone in the human family as one’s neighbor, nothing at all.
There was nothing but good instruction on how to be loving others as oneself. The article did not discuss what keeps getting brought up, disfellowshipping, but there has already been counsel that if a disfellowshipped person is in need, that his need isn’t to be ignored, so you can’t claim that df persons are being labeled ‘non-neighbor,’ it isn’t true. Not in this article, not anywhere.
And I am a previously disfellowshipped person, and yes, the intention of DF is loving. Not short term, make you comfortable, but long term, save your life loving.