Is getting married in Church a DA'able offense? Ping anyone with BOE manual

by Abaddon 34 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • gumby

    Too bad the brainy bastard of the bunch ( that would be me) didn't show up earlier to straighten out your spiritually rusty arses.

    If Abbadon was a publisher at the present time and was married in a church of Christendom....his arse would be grass and he'd be booted in an instant.

    What makes his case different is the time element he has been inactive, how many publishers recoginse him as a witness any longer, how many witnesses would become aware of the marriage, and the EFFECT it would have on the congregation. If a sizable number are disturbed by the matter, an announcment would still be made.

    My guess in his case he isn't recognised by the community nor the publishers as a witness any longer and no action would be taken. If you have been 'living in sin' for a number of years and the congregation and the elders have known this and the elders haven't contacted you, why would they take action over marrying in a church?


  • TheOldHippie

    While I was an elder, a brother who was a bit "special", not spending much time with the rest of us, but working all the time on engine inventions etc., half-faded and married a non-JW woman in a church. (She later became a JW, but then they both faded.) We - the elders - treated it as something we smiled a bit at, thought that "OK, he was always a bit strange" etc., and did nothing. The idea of doing anything, never came up, we just stored it in our minds and thought that if he was to come more frequently to the KH, we should have a little chat with him about marrying in a church not being the smartest thing to do. But df? No.


  • LittleToe

    So, if you haven't realised yet that the rules are Phariseical and arbitary, then you never will. Rules will sometimes be applied rigorously, sometimes overstepping what's actually written, and sometimes let slide. This can be the case across nationalities, and even within a Body of Elders, depending on who is approached, who is at the Elders' meeting at the time, who investigates, who's on any committee that's formed, etc.

    If your parents decide to kick up a stink about it, guess which way the swing-o-meter will go?

  • Pubsinger

    The rules are "there are no rules"

    Contradictions and inconsistencies everywhere.

    Beards, suits or jackets, pubs, concerts, skirts shallots(?) or trousers for women, hemlines, haircuts, white or coloured shirts, marrying unbelievers or non baptised, age for elder or mini servs, disfellowshipped relatives in bridal parties . . . . . ./

  • ozziepost

    Ok, I'm joining this late in the day but I feel 'qualified' by my own experience to answer Abaddon's question.

    You will be (or could be) DF. No question. It's not a matter of you DA, they'll take the act as apostasy for which they may DF you.

    As Mrs Ozzie and I have experienced, attending a church service means DF.

    But of course they have to be given notice. So as LT points out, it'll depend on the loacl BOE.

  • Abaddon

    Thank you all very much for your input.

    There actually isn't (unless I am missing something) a quote that says 'inactive JW's who marry in churches will be disassociating themselves'.


    "... clearly established ... joined another religion ... intends to remain with it..."

    As 'marriage is a divinely instituted arrangement' and as the form of words used is the same as JW's use, the marriage is not a false religious act, regardless of celebrant or locale. There is no descrete act of worship.

    Being present when a priest prays is also not a DA/DF offense, I know that a capricious bunch of assholes could do me, but then they could anyway.

    It is in a different country 600 miles away from the last meeting I attended, no local JW's know me, there is no possible stumbling with someone so long inactive.

    If anyone makes a big deal out of this in my family it is not about following the letter of the law. They are making up their own minds as they have the freedom to attend if they so wish - and threatening me over the DAing hindering family relations is sheer poop as they would have to start that themselves. Bunch of superfinefuckingapostlefreaks.

    I've not rattled their little cages of belief, just made it obvious I don't live in them and am willing to talk about things if they so wish provided I am actually free to talk. They learnt rapidly this was a fair arrangement they could live with, but stayed away from questions as it was too uncomfortable getting answeres when they did ask them.

    If they do this that arrangement is off. Whether they will listen to it or not, if this goes through I will rattle the cages of my entire family, all three generations, especially of those most salvagable, my nephews. My dad can kiss his sweet little patriarchy goodbye.

    The shits have not at ONE point even said a thing about how this would make my fiance feel, or her family.

    Well, having been too stunned to react when my dad dumped this in my lap dropping me off for the train am now sitting on the letter I've since written for a few days to see how I feel when I've reflected more. Here's a few extracts;

    The thing I find worst, is I know perfectly well this is not a result of any direct council in the Bible or even in the literature of Jehovah’s Witnesses. Nowhere does it say that a JW cannot attend a church wedding – it is a matter of conscience. Please demonstrate if I am wrong.

    Thus we cannot but take it very personally indeed that your conscience condemns us in this way. There will be no Witness or worldly person stumbled by your attending the church. You do not have to participate in the service, merely attend. There is no risk of you “accidentally” taking part in the service.


    In fact, the only “stumbling” that will occur as a certainty is the one you will cause xxxxxx entire family. Whilst you might feel in your own minds that you can justify such a hostile and alienating action, I can assure you they will be aghast. I take it you intend to speak to xxxx and xxxx yourself and explain the slight you are offering their family? That your scruples will not permit you to celebrate the marriage of their daughter and your son? Or did you expect me to do the dirty work for you?


    Jesus attended weddings of the day despite his standing in opposition to the Jewish ‘church’ of the time. We can infer he didn’t just turn up for the feast (although he certainly contributed to the celebrations) but went to the ceremony as well. He consorted with tax collectors, prostitutes, spoke to Samaritan women when it was almost unthinkable he do so. If being a true Christian entails imitation of Christ, I would ask you to explain how not attending the wedding of your son is Christ-like?


    As regards disassociation; you are more-or-less threatening that if I went ahead I would be formally disassociated (thus forever souring the joy of family association from your perspective) after 13 years of inactivity, an action that could only come about from your pursuing it. The article you gave me makes very specific use of the word “join”, and as such I find your interpretation of this is actually running ahead of what is intended, as the only ‘thing’ I will be joining is xxxxxxx, in matrimony. By all means provide me with other references if you feel they support your stance better.

  • rebel8

    You being shunned for getting married by a priest is just as likely as you being shunned for exchanging Christmas presents. I would think if they were looking to DF you, the obvious choice would have been living together b4 marriage or any number of other "normal" things you've been up to. FYI, I got married by a RC priest not too long ago and I was not DFd for it. I'd been "out" about 15 yrs or so by then. I would think in most cases you're not going to be DFd or DAd if you are not considered a JW any more. Then there's the exceptions.

  • TheOldHippie

    " ....... have not at ONE point even said a thing about how this would make my fiance feel, or her family."

    That is in my eyes perhaps THE thing they totally ignore, and they show no interest or understanding or concern for people's reactions. I was removed as elder, apealled, and was reinstated - or better, the removal was nullified, and the CO criticized by Brooklyn. OK, says to me the CO afterwards: "This happens all the time - I remove someone, and then HQ changes it. That is no big deal, that is just something one has to get accustomed to, it happens all the time." - OK, perhaps so, but for me it was not something which did happen all the time, and neither was it to my family. We were all in a shock because of the behavior of this man, and the mental difficulties, shock, problems, not to speak about the problems it created as to the cooperation within the body of elders from that time on, where I was sort of a "problem elder" etc., problems which made the body of elders stop functioning a year later and resulting in some moving, some stepping down etc. - it all resulted form that man's not having the least clue as to what makes people tick, how people are reacting to stress situations etc.

  • Golf

    Speaking from experience I got married in a Protestant Church in 1962, nothing happened.

    But then again, the org. is known to change doctrines and policies right?


  • LittleToe

    They are only thinking about themselves, and how their mental walls are being shaken. Whether you attack them or not, this will undermine their faith, as it's not the way their perfect little worldview is supposed to work. Cognitive dissonace is a b*tch

    I draw your attention to something similar that happened in my family:

Share this