Fading becomes ground for disassociation

by passwordprotected 26 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • passwordprotected

    Here's what I think will happen as I continue to develop my WT sleight of hand thought...

    Faders are a problem. They want their cake and they want to eat it too. They want the fellowship with friends and family, invitations to gatherings, or the chance to play a game of football with the 'brothers' on a Sunday evening.

    However, they don't put in the hours and they're hardly at any meetings. This starts to look like an option for other fatigued or disaffected JWs. These faders set a terrible example!

    I reckon it won't be long before the WTS tightens the fist once again. Faders will get a friendly visit from two friendly, neighbourhood elders. The faders will be asked about their meeting attendance and, more importantly, their FS. They'll be asked if they realise that meeting attendance and FS are key identifiers of JWs, and that by regularly attending meetings and participating this important life saving work a person identifies themselves as a JW. So, they'll be asked, do you still want to be known as a JW?

    If the answer is in the affirmative, the fader will be encourage to once again resume their efforts in this fine Christian service. However, if it becomes clear that they aren't going to pick up the pace and get involved in meetings and ministry again, they'll be DAd due to their actions, or lack thereof. And of course, if they reply in the negative, g they'll be DAing themselves on the spot.

    It's all about the sifting. It's all about the love of the greater number cooling off. It's all about clearing out the dead wood.

    "See?", they'll say, "Look at how many have left the love they had at first. Firm evidence, brothers, that we are closer than ever to the time of the end."

  • yadda yadda 2
    yadda yadda 2

    I respect your opinion but I don't see it going that way. What could happen is JW's who are regular and active (sounds like those who take laxatives) in the JW works programme will begin to receive stronger and stronger counsel to 'exclude' those who are 'walking disorderly' (ie, inactive ones, faders). The weak, inactive and faders will not be disfellowshipped because it will just be too much of a stretch to apply scriptures to such an action. They will simply get marginalised more and more...

    Actually, after Jaracza and Barrs deaths I think it could in fact swing the other way. The disfellowshipping policy may just as easily be changed so that JW's no longer have to shun family members and close friends who are simply leading sinful lives. Only those who are 'apostates' and speak against the organisation will be shunned. That is in fact a lot closer to what the scriptures actually teach on the subject, so would be easy to justify to the congregations scripturally.

    I suspect there are some on the GB and the strata of heirarchy just below who are already of a mind to relax the policy along those lines. No doubt they are the younger GB members, some of whom have children, who have been pushing through recent changes to 'lighten the load' on the rank and file.

    If they don't do something the youth will continue to leave in droves.

  • quietlyleaving


    If they do go down the route suggested then I wonder if a HUGE campaign(or threat thereof) by those of us affected,perhaps even going legal,would cause a reverse of policy?

    For the above reason I'm fairly certain the WTS will not take the route of d'ing faders. There are now too many faders. Also taking that sort of action against them is something the old school would do. Fortunately they are elderly and dying out.

    Keep reminding them you will sue though even if suing isn't a possibility. Who knows, it may become possible.

  • quietlyleaving

    that's good news wobble.


  • passwordprotected

    The supposition that the WTS would need scriptural basis to implement a DA rule for faders is a bit shaky! After all, they binned meeting in private homes by citing gas prices...not to mention the 1935 sealing of the kingdom of the heavens, the 1925 teaching, the 1914 doctrine, the great crowd being on earth teaching, the blood policy, the organ transplant policy...the list could go on. All of these rules/policies/doctrines affect/affected lives. And not in a good way. And there's little in scripture to support any of them.

  • AK - Jeff
    AK - Jeff

    It is already pretty much 'unofficial' policy that faders or weak members are avoided. This is all that is needed. They need to prevent association that can spoil those wonderful 'usefull habits', and they already get it done by private gossip against those who leave.

    At the start of my eye opening, I never revealed a single thought to any of the elders about what I found out. We quit attending and never even got a shepherding visit to restore us. But within weeks I was being labeled " borderline apostate", and being fully shunned by the entire congregation.

    They likely do not need to implement a written policy on this matter. Jw's already are scared to death of anyone the elders call 'worldly'.


  • Gregor

    Since I have not seen the new publication being referred to I may have misunderstood. From the thread title I got the impression it was more than just the usual "bad associations spoil..." etc. but that it was now grounds for official discipline if one was associating with a fader.

  • yknot

    Interesting......but not likely

    The WTS is personality driven. While Teddie might still hold enough sway to start and maintain the clampdown, he is losing on other mainstreaming fronts.

    I think we see a compromise happening now. Ted gets his 80's revival, the lawyers and liberals get their paving to future changes.

  • passwordprotected

    The reason I'm coming to this conclusion is that I have evidence that elders are already asking faders this very question: "Do you still wish to be known as a JW?"

    It's a loaded Q, as we all know. Answer incorrectly and you are DAing yourself in front of 2 witnesses.

    Now, where is the scriptural basis for asking that question?

  • blondie

    By providence (divine guidance), Jesus followers were known as Christians. That is good enough for me.

    (Acts 11:25-26) 25 So he went off to Tarsus to make a thorough search for Saul 26 and, after he found him, he brought him to Antioch. It thus came about that for a whole year they gathered together with them in the congregation and taught quite a crowd, and it was first in Antioch that the disciples were by divine providence called Christians.
    *** it-1 p. 440 Christian ***Some think the heathen population may have nicknamed them Christians out of jest or scorn, but the Bible shows that it was a God-given name; they "were bydivineprovidence called Christians."—Ac 11:26.

    Even Jesus himself says:

    (Acts 1:8) 8 but YOU will receive power when the holy spirit arrives upon YOU, and YOU will be witnesses of me both in Jerusalem and in all Ju·de´a and Sa·mar´i·a and to the most distant part of the earth."

    And John says many years later:

    (Revelation 17:6) 6 And I saw that the woman was drunk with the blood of the holy ones and with the blood of the witnesses of Jesus.. . .

    I would just not put myself in the position of answering any questions by elders or any jws.


Share this