Judicial Defense ?

by thinker 18 Replies latest jw friends

thinker

It occurs to me that this forum has a vast resource of knowledge and experience. I'd like to suggest we put our heads together and find possible defenses for active witnesses facing a judicial committee. With Frenchy's intimate knowledge of committee rules and RR's huge library, along with everyone's individual experience; we we should be able to build a logical defense (assuming logic is a useful tool to JW's).
From my own research, I have put together a logical defense for an active JW who wishes to associate with a DA'd friend. I don't hold much hope that logic would help during a JC meeting, but here it is...
1) The Governing Body gives counsel and suggestions.
"The faithful and discreet slave" is used by Jehovah to
give us good counsel. (Matt. 24:45)
This slave class not only helps us to understand the
meaning of Scripture texts but also gives us valuable
counsel and suggestions, indicating how to apply Bible
principles so as to remain spiritually strong.
Counsel from the faithful slave comes to us through
Bible-based literature published by the Watch Tower Soci-
ety and through congregation meetings. (PAY ATTENTION
TO YOURSELVES
AND TO
ALL THE FLOCK)
2) “Jehovah’s perfect Organization is administered by imperfect men.” This has at times caused us to abandon or modify past practices. The abandonment of past practices indicates that today’s practices are subject to scrutiny.
“ *** jv 200 14 "They Are No Part of the World" ***
Practices That Have Been Abandoned
This Christmas celebration at Brooklyn Bethel in 1926 was their last. The Bible Students gradually came to appreciate that neither the origin of this holiday nor the practices associated with it honored God
For years, Bible Students wore a cross and crown as a badge of identification, and this symbol was on the front cover of the “Watch Tower” from 1891 to 1931. But in 1928 it was emphasized that not a decorative symbol but one’s activity as a witness showed he was a Christian. In 1936 it was pointed out that the evidence indicates that Christ died on a stake, not a two-beamed cross
In their “Daily Manna” book, Bible Students kept a list of birthdays. But after they quit celebrating Christmas and when they realized that birthday celebrations were giving undue honor to creatures (one reason that early Christians never celebrated birthdays), the Bible Students quit this practice too
For some 35 years, Pastor Russell thought that the Great Pyramid of Gizeh was God’s stone witness, corroborating Biblical time periods. (Isa. 19:19) But Jehovah’s Witnesses have abandoned the idea that an Egyptian pyramid has anything to do with true worship. (See “Watchtower” issues of November 15 and December 1, 1928)” (proclaimers book)
3) Laws, judicial decisions, and instructions from Jehovah can be transmitted
to ...Husbands, fathers, and mothers.
Laws, judicial decisions, and instructions from Jehovah
are transmitted through various levels of household (or-
ganizational ) management. (Eph. 1: l0, Ref. Bi., ftn. )
Jesus Christ, the King and High Priest. (Heb. 3 :1,6)
"The faithful and discreet slave" and its Governing Body
and traveling representatives. (Matt. 24:45-47; Acts 15:
23, 28, 29; 16:4)
Congregation elders. (Heb. 13 :17 )
Husbands, fathers, and mothers. (Prov. 1:8; Eph. 5:22,
23; 6:1, 4) (PAY ATTENTION
TO YOURSELVES
AND TO
ALL THE FLOCK)
4) After considerable prayer, Jehovah has transmitted the information that the following quotes are correct and should be my guiding principle when addressing my disassociated friends:
“We would not refuse to treat one as a brother because he did not believe the Society is the Lord's channel.
If others see it in a different way, that is their privilege. There should be full liberty of conscience. WT April 1, 1920, p. 100, 101. “
5) I have abandoned no principle in my decision.
“Principles are eternal, whereas rules may apply to limit-
ed times or conditions.”(PAY ATTENTION
TO YOURSELVES
AND TO
ALL THE FLOCK)
6) By ignoring a man-made rule, I am following Jehovah’s principles.
“Principles are settled guidelines based on fundamental
truths. (w57 9/1 p. 524; w52 7/1 p. 407)
Example of principles based on a fundamental truth:
Fundamental truth: Jehovah God is the Sovereign Lord
of heaven and earth. (Acts 4:24)
Principles based on this fundamental truth:
We owe Jehovah total obedience in everything.
(1 Sam. 15:22; Jer. 7:23)
When there is a conflict, we must obey God as
Ruler rather than men. (Acts 5:29)”(PAY ATTENTION
TO YOURSELVES
AND TO
ALL THE FLOCK)
Comments?
Pathofthorns

LOL. Do you really believe your JC will let you say all that? Maybe they will then they will disfellowship you for sure.
If you're called to a JC for reasons you present above, my advice is to run
Path
TMS

Without consideration to the merits of your reasoning, a frontal approach such as this would not be successful. It is not a matter of presenting your case and the Judicial Committee presenting theirs and an impartial jury ruling on the matter.
You would be asking a Judical Committee to overturn the policies, teaching, guidelines of the WTBS and, in effect, create new teaching.
A more subtle, yet much more effective approach would be to look for a loophole. Such exceptions are known to most veteran Witnesses.
Most of these involve necessary family dealings or contractual business arrangements. Relatives, either elderly or youthful, having severe financial, psychological or physical needs may be cared for and thus kept in contact, as long as there is no "spiritual" association.
Existing contractual arrangements for which there is no "out", must be honored.
Most elders are aware of these principles, and if it is tactfully explained that you are walking a tight line between respect for the judicial decision and shouldering other scriptural obligations, your low-profile contact may not be scrutinized.
TMS
thinker

TMS,
You said:"You would be asking a Judical Committee to overturn the policies, teaching, guidelines of the WTBS and, in effect, create new teaching."
I disagree. The message I get from the quotes listed is this:
1) The Governing Body gives COUNSEL and SUGGESTIONS.
2) Principles are more important than rules. “Principles are eternal, whereas rules may apply to limited times or conditions.”
3) The rules of the past have been abandoned, bringing into question the rules of the present.
4) In questioning these rules the final authority should be Jehovah, not the GB."When there is a conflict, we must obey God as Ruler rather than men.
5) Can Jehovah "talk" to a lowly publisher? Yes. "Laws, judicial decisions, and instructions from Jehovah can be transmitted to ...Husbands, fathers, and mothers."
I know this is just a mental exercise and the reality is very different. But maybe the WTBTS should write what they really mean:
1)The GB gives commands from God, not "counsel and suggestions".
2)Rules are just as important as principles.
3)The Governing Body is infallible, ignore our mistakes in the past. We have the TRUTH now (but we reserve the right to change it in the future).
4)We are not mere men, we are God's voice!
5)There is no way in hell Jehovah would talk to anyone not on the Governing Body.
Edited by - thinker on 20 December 2000 12:48:18
Simon

I agree...it's a good idea but being right does not neccessarily mean that you won't be DF'd. I've had this argument with a couple of elders - I say that the WotchTower org. has lied about their past and it is indesputable because it's in black and white, printed in their books and mags but they see this as irrelevant and the only thing that matters is that I am rejecting 'Jehovahs Organisation'. They do not play be fair rules and you are put in a no-win situation. The fact that you defend your beliefs automatically puts you in the wrong for just disagreeing with them.
I think the best defense is not to co-operate. Refuse to go to their JC meeting UNLESS you can take a legal representative (this sort of stuff is in Human Rights regulations here) and do not, however tempting, try to express your views unless you are confident that they will listen properly to them and consider them.
I have met both types of elders - some who dont listen and the reasonable ones who will.
Simon

I think if anyone wanted advice though who was going through this then we should be able to offer some help.
ZazuWitts

Hello to All. I've been skulking around this site for a couple of weeks and have decided to join in the conversation.
Thinker - I have found your postings to be most intriguing. I think you are a rare man to take such an interest in your spouses' religious background and how this has affected her and others.
I have known others in this situation and their former witness spouse responded by saying such as: "Get over it; "Stop whining about it."
And, to 'wife' I'm am so happy that you had enough of a spark left that after the mental abuse you endured you could reach out and seek a better life.
Good - no, GREAT for both of you.
Unfortunately, Thinker, I must agree with Path, TMS, and Simon that such an approach is very unlikely to work. At a judicial committee you are there to answer their questions, they are not their to answer yours. In fact such an approach would only confirm to them that you have rejected "Mother's milk"
and render them more righteous in their decision to disfellowship.

I've have listened to a dozen secretly recorded tapes of judicial committee meetings - all sad and bleak!...and
predictable.
However,some discussion of the points you raised might be of benefit to those contemplating leaving or help them to clarify their doubts.

Actually, we took Simon's path - avoid them at all costs. (I acknowledge that this is not always possible.) At any rate, it gave us many years of contact with those we loved as well as time to renew ourselves and clarify what we felt and believed. (I will post more details in "Hello, Hello...." shortly.)
The mandates of the TOWER did eventually catch up with us, and it looks as if this might be happening again in lieu of the recent 'oral'
utterances at the district assemblies.
But, I'm grateful we had some hiatus -
and Simon it's probably a good thing you are literally distancing yourself!
I've always thought that the following quote from Winston Churchill is most apt for the WTBS:
"Success is going from failure
to failure without losing
enthusiam."
larc

Thinker,
I have really enjoyed your imput and the thoughfulness of your posts. However, on this issue, please take into account the real experiences from real people. As Emerson said, "What you do speaks so loudly, that I can not hear what you say" This applies to how actual people are treated by actual elders.
For many of us, the leaving is as difficult as it would be for an Indian to leave the reservation. You might read books about what that it is like, but the person who left can tell you what it is really like. However, one testimonial does not mean much, but you have read many stories here, and all of us could recount many more, as is attested to by Zazu.
We are not trying to be discouraging, rather we are trying to be realisticaly optimistic regarding what will most likely work.
TMS

Mr. Thinker:
Having served on Judicial Committees since 1965 and used in Appeal Committees since 1974, I have some feel for how your arguments would be received.
A person summoned to a judicial hearing has already been visited by an exploratory committee (usually two brothers) to determine if there is evidence that a disfellowshipping offence has occurred.
In the judicial hearing the committee will try to guage the wrongdoer's ATTITUDE toward the offence to determine if their is genuine repentance and thus a basis for mercy.
Anyone coming into a judicial hearing with an attempt to prove that the alleged offence is not really wrong is not showing genuine contrition.
The outcome is utterly predictable.
TMS
waiting

Hello TMS,
Nice to meet you. After reading all the responses on this thread - I'll stay with my conclusions - only reached from personal experience of myself and my family.
Be very careful going into the backroom with any elders. The cards are not in your favor from the start. The situation can work out for your benefit - but the burden is on the person. Attitude is paramount. Imo, justice is not. Many politics come into play - and aren't necessary understood or even seen by the publisher/child.
Btw, I wouldn't want to serve on a committee either. Don't think I would be any better at judging/counseling people than the average elder. Don't think I could sleep at night either.
If you haven't done so, please click on the intro-type thread "Hello? Hello? Hello?" Lots of new/old ones of us have posted there a little about ourselves. Would enjoy knowing a little about you also?
The court-appointed psychiatrist is not your friend.
waiting
Edited by - waiting on 20 December 2000 21:58:41

Judicial Defense ?

Share this