Marital Due and the KS

by yknot 96 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  djeggnog

  @metatron:

  Unwritten solution: get your wife really angry at you, then do a prostitute, then immediately tell her and have her explode. Then, quickly confess everything to an elder and cry about how sorry you are and how your wife doesn't forgive you. Result: they reprove you and you are scripturally free to divorce.

  You think? Either party to a marriage is free to divorce their mate. Specifically, Jesus stated that "everyone divorcing his wife, except on account of fornication, makes her a subject for adultery." (Matthew 5:32) IOW, should anyone divorce his or her spouse for any reason that doesn't free him or her to remarry -- adultery -- then remarriage is out of the question. However, only the innocent mate would be free to remarry if one should learn, while divorced, that his or her spouse has become guilty of adultery, for the innocent spouse to forgive the guilty ex-spouse his or her adultery since they are now divorced as would have been possible had they merely separated. (1 Corinthians 7:10, 11) Only then would the guilty spouse become free to remarry.

  Adultery only occurs when someone already married becomes "one flesh" with someone else, whether he or she be single and whether or not that individual be of the same gender as themselves, or when someone that is not scripturally free to divorce, divorces and marries someone else anyway. (Matthew 19:5, 9)

  Lots of elders know about this and will discreetly go along with it.

  Nonsense.

  @djeggnog
• 

  notverylikely

  Wife ha done 4 loads of laundry and chased a couple of kids around all day, cleaned the house and prepared supper so husband can run in the door, scarf down a meal and then they rush to a meeting. When they get home he wants th edue and she is tired. Or has a headache - sometimes we do get them.

  Exactly! The husband worked all day, got yelled at by his boss, had to deal with 10 pissy customers, was late to leave work because he's not got enough help and when when he gets home, his wife had done laundry that could have waited until the weekend when he could help but she decides to do it today and then complain about her decision and then he has to eat an unhbealthy half cold meal she threw together at the last minute so they could all make to to the meeting. Then when the get home late after the elders meeting (because she pushed him to be an elder because she wanted status when all he wanted was to watch the damn game) she complains that she is too tired even though the entire day has been exactly what she always wanted, an elders wife with 4 kids and cooking meals and being a spiritual housewife. Her husband HAD a heachache for the past 5 years listening to her, but still managed to keep a job and pay the bills and she can't be bothered to put out even though this was all her doing.

  Seriously, it's all about perspective...
• 

  miseryloveselders

  I don't have much to add to this thread other than both Eggnogg and Metatron are right to a degree. Chances are if you follow the quick solution Metatron states, she's going to want a divorce. Its pretty much guaranteed that she's going to do it. When it comes to a DFing, its not a given that just because infedility occured and it led to a divorce, that they're going to DF you. However, often enough when a person commits infedility, they're so far gone that when they appear before the Judicial Committee, its unlikely they'll show remorse. Emotions being high they may even make an argument that their actions were wrong but justified. "That bitch made me do it! Right Tom? You were married to her before me! Don't you get all high and mighty on me now just cuz you're an elder!" Correct me if I'm wrong Eggnogg, or Elderelite, but I don't think infedility leading to divorce automatically leads to a DFing. I can see a reproval depending on the extenuating circumstances and the defendant's attitude toward the whole thing.

  At the same time though I agree with Metatron that the punishment in the congregation can come off light at a times. I've seen brothers get DF'd and after coming back a year or so later, you see them having privileges again despite their offense being commone knowledge in the congregation and still fresh in the congregation's memory. I don't believe elders just quietly go along with it all, as much as they recognize their own limitations when it comes to handling the matter. There's only so much they can do.
• 

  djeggnog

  @notverylikely:

  Then when the get home late after the elders meeting (because she pushed him to be an elder because she wanted status when all he wanted was to watch the damn game) she complains that she is too tired even though the entire day has been exactly what she always wanted....

  Seriously, it's all about perspective...

  What you said here I've found to be all too true (and funny). When one's circumstances do not permit one who has reached out to continue doing so, one should step down until one's circumstances should improve, for when a man is appointed to serve as an elder in the local congregation, so does his wife (they are "one flesh"), and she may have to make adjustments (that this to say exercise patience), for an elder will not be as available to his wife as he may have been before becoming such, especially if there are children, and he definitely cannot serve if he is exasperating them by being a "no-show" dad or bitterly criticizes them for things that may have turned out differently if everything affecting the children didn't fall to mom as a stand-in for Daddy the Elder. (Colossians 3:21) It is all about perspective.

  @miseryloveselders:

  I don't have much to add to this thread other than both Eggnogg and Metatron are right to a degree. Chances are if you follow the quick solution Metatron states, she's going to want a divorce. Its pretty much guaranteed that she's going to do it. When it comes to a DFing, its not a given that just because [infidelity occurred] and it led to a divorce, that they're going to DF you.

  No one is disfellowshipped for divorcing their spouse. No body of elders has the authority to tell any sister or brother that he cannot divorce his or her mate. However, the elders are put on notice after a divorce has occurred as to whether the grounds for the divorce was the scriptural one, for a judicial committee is going to be formed if the grounds for the divorce was adultery. If not, then keeping God's congregation spiritual clean requires that both "divorced" persons conduct themselves as if they were married to someone since, in God's view, the divorce itself would not be enough to sever the marital tie, and dating others or even been flirtatious would be inappropriate while both of them are living as divorced persons not scripturally free to marry. (Luke 16:18)

  However, often enough when a person commits [infidelity], they're so far gone that when they appear before the Judicial Committee, its unlikely they'll show remorse.... I don't think [infidelity] leading to divorce automatically leads to a DFing. I can see a [reproof] depending on the extenuating circumstances and the defendant's attitude toward the whole thing.

  There is no due process of law and no defendants in God's organization. There is nothing automatic about disfellowshipping someone, for the purpose of the Judicial Committee is to determine whether there is repentance on the part of the one that has committed this serious offense against God and against his own body (the guilty spouse is guilty because he or she became "one flesh" with a third party when already "one flesh" with his or her mate). There may be extenuating circumstances, but the disposition (or attitude) of the guilty spouse will often dictate what the Committee decides, and it may take time to sort out the matter if the third party should be another brother or another sister and that brother or sister is also "one flesh" with someone else!

  Also, the decision made by one Committee might seem more harsh than a similar decision made by another Committee for the dynamic in one Committee will often be different in another Committee (e.g., one brother of advanced years may seem to take umbrage over the guilty spouse's conduct, while another brother might see the matter differently due to unique insight), and disfellowshipping someone that exhibits a lack of repentance isn't an easy thing to do.

  I'm waiting to read @elderelite's response to my question to him as to whether he had ever given counsel to married couples frustrated over the inability of one or the other of them to produce children where in vitro fertilization or adoption was being considered, and what he advised such couples. If he responds, I suspect his answer to my question would be interesting.

  @djeggnog
• 

  miseryloveselders

  Eggnogg I'm on the same page with you pretty much the your whole post, minus one point.

  There is no due process of law and no defendants in God's organization.

  I don't know if you had a minor lapse of thought LOL, or maybe you view the WT as such a bastion of light that you're blinded to all reasonable criticizm of the WT. Egg, its called a Judicial Committee for crying out loud LOL. Judicial as in Judiciary, or Judicature, as in Justice, as in Jury, as in Jurisdiction, you get the point. The accused are in fact defendants, maybe not in a court of law respected by Caesar, but you ask anybody in here who's ever faced a Judical Committee, they probably felt like a defendant. Most probably felt like they knew they were convicted before even showing up. You being an elder, I'm assuming anyway, you've seen your fair share of imperfect brothers who can be heavy handed during their questioning, or one might call interrogating. Some brothers due to imperfections, and personality conflicts with the accused, have axes to grind. I'm younger, but I've been around long enough to have seen that first hand. As far as due process of law, Egg, there's an appeal process, there's witnesses, according to the new book if my memory serves me correct the witnesses don't even have to be Jehovah's, if you catch my drift. After the defendant has been convicted, its put on his permanent record, and even sent to the brothers in New York. You can liken the private reproval to a misdemeanor, and the DFing to a felony conviction. Since we're discussing marital infedility and grounds for scriptural divorce, there are some choice articles in the WT CD Rom about new evidence coming up after the Judicial committee settled the matter. When that occurs, they sometimes pursue a new judical committee, one might call it a retrial, with new evidence.

  Egg, make no mistake about it, there is due process and defendants, and a whole lot more that resembles Caesar's laws and processes.
• 

  PSacramento

  Why would ANYONE want to have sex with anyone that doesn't want to ???
• 

  Scully

  miseryloveselders

  I don't know if you had a minor lapse of thought LOL, or maybe you view the WT as such a bastion of light that you're blinded to all reasonable criticizm of the WT. Egg, its called a Judicial Committee for crying out loud LOL. Judicial as in Judiciary, or Judicature, as in Justice, as in Jury, as in Jurisdiction, you get the point. The accused are in fact defendants, maybe not in a court of law respected by Caesar, but you ask anybody in here who's ever faced a Judical Committee, they probably felt like a defendant. Most probably felt like they knew they were convicted before even showing up. You being an elder, I'm assuming anyway, you've seen your fair share of imperfect brothers who can be heavy handed during their questioning, or one might call interrogating. Some brothers due to imperfections, and personality conflicts with the accused, have axes to grind. I'm younger, but I've been around long enough to have seen that first hand. As far as due process of law, Egg, there's an appeal process, there's witnesses, according to the new book if my memory serves me correct the witnesses don't even have to be Jehovah's, if you catch my drift. After the defendant has been convicted, its put on his permanent record, and even sent to the brothers in New York. You can liken the private reproval to a misdemeanor, and the DFing to a felony conviction. Since we're discussing marital infedility and grounds for scriptural divorce, there are some choice articles in the WT CD Rom about new evidence coming up after the Judicial committee settled the matter. When that occurs, they sometimes pursue a new judical committee, one might call it a retrial, with new evidence.

  According to Caesar's Laws, there is a principle whereby the punishment should fit the crime. There's no such principle in a JW kangaroo court. You are either Marked™, Reproved™, Disfellowshipped™ or Disassociated™. All three pronouncements (Marking™ is the exception because they don't announce people as being Marked™) are dealt with in the same manner. The individual is treated like $h!t, gossipped about and viewed with suspicion, even if the outcome of the hearing is inconclusive and no decision is reached, the person can be 'convicted by gossip mill' - I've seen it happen. I've been the subject of the JW gossip mill and know the way it can destroy your life.

  According to Caesar's Laws, the defendant (accused) has the right to legal counsel, and the right to establish their defense with witnesses. There are no such rights in a JW kangaroo court.

  According to Caesar's Laws, the defendant (accused) is deemed innocent until proven guilty. There is no such principle in a JW kangaroo court, the accusation is deemed credible and the accused must prove their innocence.

  According to Caesar's Laws, the defendant (accused) is not required to answer questions that could incriminate them. In a JW kangaroo court, the accused has already been incriminated whether they respond to the accusations or not. They can be DFd in absentia without ever appearing before the Judicial Committee™ or offering a defense.

  According to Caesar's Laws, the defendant (accused) has the right to face their accusers. In a JW kangaroo court, no accusers ever have to face the accused. The Elders™ form a committee based on the private statements of others, whose identities are kept confidential.

  edited to add: According to Caesar's Laws, everyone has a right to know the legal system in a theoretical sense, and utilize the legal system with the aid of an attorney. The laws and legal decisions are publicly available to anyone interested in researching them. The JW Legal System™ has confidential memos to Elders™ and a secret Elders' Manual™ detailing the decision-making process, the so-called rationales for such decision making, and the insane requirement of Two Eyewitnesses™ to child sexual abuse. A person accused of an offense in WT land has no access to these dubious legal aids, nor the right to have someone knowledgable of these documents to act on their behalf.

  Don't EVER compare the JW tribunal / kangaroo court / Judicial Committee™ to a real legal system. It's on the same level as Islamic Sharia Law, where there are corruption, collusion and a good-ol-boys network.
• 

  miseryloveselders

  Good points Scully, very good points. I'm saving your post. It never ceases to amaze me how screwed up this religion is.
• 

  Lady Lee

  *** w73 6/1 p. 352 Questions From Readers ***The innocent mate may even have contributed toward the unfaithfulness of his or her marriage partner. If, for example, the wife has deliberately deprived her husband of the marital due, she bears a certain responsibility for what has happened. She is not altogether without blame from God’s standpoint, for the Bible admonishes: "Let the husband render to his wife her due; but let the wife also do likewise to her husband. . . . Do not be depriving each other of it, except by mutual consent for an appointed time, that you may devote time to prayer and may come together again, that Satan may not keep tempting you for your lack of self-regulation."—1 Cor. 7:3-5.

  This is what I had thrown at me all the time. It would be my fault if he committed adultery. And like Scully said he wasn't held responsible for my adultery although that wasn't because I wasn't getting enough. it was to get him to leave me alone.

  "... Thus, wives are afflicted with [their husbands'] rapelike sex, and husbands who are rejected become impotent."

  And yet, in requiring that The Marital Due™ be Rendered™, more or less on demand, the WTS is setting up married JW couples for just such a scenario.

  exactly. The WTS set this rule in motion and my husband took advantage of it fully. When you feel like it is an obligation, a duty to perform there is nothing loving about it. It becomes no different a duty than washing the floors or scrubbing the toilet

  djeggnog

  The ending quote "sex without love is futile but love can stand alone" always seemed like the society's way of saying "suck it the hell up" to me.. again I'm a man so take that for what its worth.

  No, that would be you badly paraphrasing something you were reading in an article based on your own pathological viewpoints with regard to (a) the WTS and (b) sex inside (or outside) of marriage. This "ending quote" is on you and has nothing at all to do with anything that has been or is being taught by Jehovah's Witnesses.

  DJ for a JW man who has unhealthy ideas about sex that is unfortunately exactly the attitude he pushed on me. I had no rights and only obligation to service him when he wanted. I was pregnant with a high risk pregnancy and Doctor's orders of no sex. That didn't stop him. I was in a cervical collar with a pinched nerve in my neck and even had to wear the collar to bed. That didn't stop him. I could watch TV. That didn't stop him. One time to see how far he would taker this I lay there reading a book holding it in the air over our heads. That didn't stop him either. He would pull out the Bible and the literature and wave them in my face demanding his due. And he was an elder!!! I most certainly felt like the attitude of the WTS was "suck it up" I would think many women who had a husband like mine would have felt exactly the same way.
• 

  tec

  You can't make people feel ashamed of sex and sexual desire from youth onward, and then turn around and condemn them for not 'giving it up'.

  If a woman does not want to have sex (no desire), then sex is going to hurt her (physically and emotionally) if she is just letting him do it anyway. In turn, if a man cares anything for his wife, and yet calls her on his marital due, how can he not feel sick and ashamed afterward, knowing that's what SHE felt during the act. Big, terrible cycle.

  (this does not apply to women, or men, who use sex as a punishment/reward system)

  Tammy