How would witnesses respond to this quote?

by gumby 39 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  gumby

  Blondies quote shows how most dubs veiw a DFed relative. Some may even not be that forgiving to help a close family memeber in need.....especially if that one has "made them trouble" in the past.

  Mary said,

  Most Dubs probably are only vaguely aware of this "rule", which is why so many shun family members who are DF'd. They may not think they have any option and naturally no one in the congregation will be bothered to enlighten them.

  I know my wife was shocked when I showed her the article and she thought the internet version didn't ring true to what she has believed on this. I think many dubs would be shocked to read this at face value as the paragraph was rather vauge in the word "normally" word usage. In a case in which a publisher didn't give a rats ass what the congregation viewed them as, this quote saves their arse just as one poster on another thread said he used this quote as a means to visit his DFed daughter when approached about doing so. He said there was nothing they could do about it and they didn't do anything about it.

  Dan said,

  My interpretation of this characteristically vague, winking, you-understand-what-we-mean-right? counsel is that if the elders get wind of the fact that sister or brother so-and-so is associating with a DF'd relative, that this isn't a straight-to-JC issue, but potentially a future one if the "wrongful course" is continued. To "justify or excuse the wrongful course" implies that the JW in question is going to be confronted and given strong counsel™ about the matter by a single elder, with the unspoken but understood implication of facing three if the counsel™ isn't heeded.

  Id bet even IF one didn't throw in their lot with the DFed one....and even IF they didn't discuss spiritual things, that a person running CLOSELY with a DFed one ....even if they are a close relative, would face "a talking to" by an elder(s).

  This little gem of a quote is good for someone who chose to associate with a DFed close relative in spite of a would be tongue lashing by an elder. I doubt most elders ever remember reading this or even know it's there as was mentioned.

  Gumexcommunicated
• 

  Mary

  Gumby said: I know my wife was shocked when I showed her the article and she thought the internet version didn't ring true to what she has believed on this. I think many dubs would be shocked to read this at face value as the paragraph was rather vauge in the word "normally" word usage. In a case in which a publisher didn't give a rats ass what the congregation viewed them as, this quote saves their arse just as one poster on another thread said he used this quote as a means to visit his DFed daughter when approached about doing so. He said there was nothing they could do about it and they didn't do anything about it.

  Alot of the time, it just depends on how "devoted" someone is to the Borg. For example, a close friend of mine started smoking again, after quitting for 25 years. Yes it was foolish of her to start that up again, but I realize that everyone has a crutch that they lean on during extreme stress and whether it's smoking, drugs, food or booze, it doesn't matter. Anyway, two of her sons are elders and they found out that she was smoking. She hadn't gone to the Hall for 15 years so the elders didn't bother doing anything to her. I think their view was "..she doesn't pretend to be a Witness, she's not causing us any trouble, so we're not going to do anything". So even though she's never been DF'd, publically reproved or anything, her self-righteous sons have decided that she can no longer see the grandchildren because of her evil smoking and also because they found out she celebrates Christmas and birthdays. To me, this is ridiculous and disgusting behaviour on their part and they're no different than the Pharisees who put laws around The Law, yet they feel soooo much better that they've decided to "put Jehovah before family".
• 

  gumby

  Mary said,

  So even though she's never been DF'd, publically reproved or anything, her self-righteous sons have decided that she can no longer see the grandchildren because of her evil smoking and also because they found out she celebrates Christmas and birthdays. To me, this is ridiculous and disgusting behaviour on their part and they're no different than the Pharisees who put laws around The Law, yet they feel soooo much better that they've decided to "put Jehovah before family".

  You'd think the family would use the loophole that since she isn't DFed, they would associate with her. Many dubs use the "law of the society" to their advantage when they can.....so it's sad that this family chooses to use their OWN law in this regard and withhold fellowshipping with her. This example you gave is a common one in which dubs will avoid those who slack off, become inactive, and are spritually weak in their eyes. This is a tool they use to force ones to tow the line as a witness. Guilt, fear, and cutting you off is their motto to make a strong christian witness out of you.

  Gumby.......who wonders how come he only got 12 replies so far
• 

  Mary

  Gumby.......who wonders how come he only got 12 replies so far

  Cause you didn't post it under "Friends" silly. That always gets the most hits as that's where 90% of the people on here spend the majority of the time.
• 

  Gill

  The average JW doesn't have the thinking capacity to understand any contradictions in this quote, relative to practive.

  They would immeadiately doubt that this was a real quote from the 'Beat the Flock' book, and fall back on the automatic standby of, if it's disfellowshiped, ignore it!

  If you could convince them that this really was from the WTBTS they would say how it was a very loving provision from Jehoober!

  Whatever response they made would probably be mortifyingly pukish!
• 

  Finally-Free

  Normally, a close relative would not be disfellowshipped
  
  for associating with a disfellowshipped person unless there
  
  is spiritual association or an effort made to justify or
  
  excuse the wrongful course.

  In an organization that doesn't remotely resemble anything "normal" all it takes is a single word to give them all the leeway they want to do whatever they please at any particular moment.

  W
• 

  Gill

  "Normal' people do not ignore their relatives unless there is a really good reason, and I mean a REALLY good reason to do so, and certainly not on the say so of a book publishing companys rules!
• 

  linabean

  Hi, I knew of this guideline. Maybe my hall is more lenient, but I don't have the attitude that you can't talk at all to df'd ones and especially not if there family. I think some people choose to make there own rules about this subject and push them on others....
• 

  KW13

  Gumby, its summer hols so the most popular people either have exciting things on or they are here more like me.

  i really hate the shunning thing, its just so wrong. it hurts people a lot

  btw i think your thread is great
• 

  juni

  Hi Gumbster!

  See you got your 'puter up and running again. Great Topic. A lot of people are at work right now so you should see more posts as the day goes on. Atleast that's what I notice w/my posts.

  Especially when it comes to the DFing practices most JWs stick to the hard line rules. As others have said here, personal reputation is at stake. And they themselves don't want to be marked. Also, it depends who you are in the cong. If you are one of the pillars, people seem to turn their heads believing you must know what you're doing. I know of ones who brought up different scenarios to the elders to see if perhaps they could "associate" w/ the DFed one to bring something that they or their kids needed. Different answer in each case depending on your relationship.

  As someone else said here - they go beyond what is written. They pile on these extra "rules" - keeps people confused so in the end they abide w/the original hard line rules - "To be safe".

  Makes me sick.

  Juni