WT Study Article Counsels JW’s To Be Humane Towards Disfellowshiped Ones

by baldeagle 22 Replies latest jw friends

  • baldeagle

    WT August 1, 1974 pp. 467-468 Maintaining a Balanced Viewpoint Toward Disfellowshiped Ones

    5 It is right to hate the wrong committed by the disfellowshiped one, but it is not right to hate the person nor is it right to treat such ones in an inhumane way.Suppose, then, a member of a Christian congregation boating on a lake were to see another boat containing a disfellowshiped person capsize, throwing the disfellowshiped one into the water where he struggled to stay afloat. Could the Christian ignore that one’s peril, row away and feel free from guilt before God—inasmuch as the one in danger of drowning was disfellowshiped, viewed as “a man of the nations”?Certainly not. That would be cruel and inhumane. We cannot imagine Christ Jesus doing so; nor would any other Jew of the first century who had a balanced viewpoint have reacted that way toward a Gentile or a tax collector in such a plight.

    6 But consider a less extreme situation. What if a woman who had been disfellowshiped were to attend a congregational meeting and upon leaving the hall found that her car, parked nearby, had developed a flat tire? Should the male members of the congregation, seeing her plight, refuse to aid her, perhaps leaving it up to some worldly person to come along and do so? This too would be needlessly unkind and inhumane.

    Yet situations just like this have developed, perhaps in all good conscience, yet due to a lack of balance in viewpoint.

    7 If we imitate our heavenly Father we will remember that he even showed certain considerateness toward the first human pair after their disfellowshipping in Eden, providing them with clothing. (Gen. 3:21) This was an undeserved kindness toward them. As Jesus reminded his disciples, Jehovah God “makes his sun rise upon wicked people and good and makes it rain upon righteous people and unrighteous.” (Matt. 5:45) So, not “mixing in company” with a person, or treating such one as “a man of the nations,” does not prevent us from being decent, courteous, considerate and humane.

    I always found this study article to be disturbing and shameful. Things are really bad when the F&DS feel it necessary, to actually have to tell their followers to do the right thing in a life-saving emergency. Also to be a gentleman and help a woman in need!

    Why do we even have to clarify or ask such embarrassing questions in a WT study? Do we really need to obtain permission to save a disfellowshiped human being (either real or hypothetical) from drowning? Can’t a JW decide on their own what is morally and ethically right? This is a symptom of organizational dysfunction, a sign you see whenever people aren't allowed to think for themselves. For that reason no one does anything, since they are so afraid of garnering disapproval and condemnation from others.

    They have become so micromanaged and told what and how to do every little thing. As a result they are now too irresponsible to make a common sense decision.

    On the other hand, if this individual was a Catholic nun drowning, or a Muslim person with a flat tire, they would be tripping all over themselves to help them out. Afterwards, they would commend one another and brag about how they gave such a good witness, showing true Christian love!!


    The organizational position reflected in this 40-year old article has long since been considered "old light" and has been superseded by several ones that harshly overturn and thoroughly abandon the sentiments expressed here. Many have come to believe, myself included, that Raymond Franz was likely instrumental in promoting any uncharacteristically humane and reasonable organizational stances that were briefly encouraged prior to the 1980s.


    Captive 7/1972 - 2/2001

  • frankiespeakin

    Old light of 40 years gone by. New light is hate even your children if the Organization has them disfellowshipped and don't even share emails as this is concidered a violation of their disfellowshipped status.

  • blondie

    Even in the 1930 to 1985 Index references, 1974 references disappear or are hidden away.

  • flipper

    Exactly, this is the " old view " - WT Society no longer views DFed ones in this way. As others said they are much more hardcore and aggressive in their totally ignoring DFed ones now

  • FlyingHighNow

    My sister told me that even if she, her husband, my brother or his wife are dying or dead, she will not be contacting me or my children, nor will contact her sons.



    ...................................................................We`re Trying It At a Few Kingdom Halls..

    ......................................................................The WBT$ GB Is Hoping It Catches On..


    ........................................................... photo mutley-ani1.gif ...OUTLAW

  • BluePill2

    Outlaw, that GB member is totally smug in that image. He totally should be dragged to Guantanamo and learn to count under water.

  • Violia

    it may be an old view, but that article appeared for a reason. Jws were treating df/marked ones cruelly and the wts saw the need to correct that viewpoint. Jws since Rutherford have tended to hate df'd ones . Briefly it was corrected but that did not last long. with the advent of the "great apostasy" that began after the 75 debacle , the Org has gone back to the standard position of hating df ones . After all, if it were in Bible times they could stone a df person to death. Be grateful .

  • Oubliette

    The brief days of a "kinder, gentler JW" are long gone.

Share this