Separation and Dubs
I haven't posted for some time. I've been busy with life in the real world. Some good, some bad.
I don't have all the Dub literature that I used to have, but I had a question about separation. I've been told that current doctrine lists 3 situations in which Dubs can "scripturally" separate.
Is this accurate? If so, what does the GB, err...Jeehoobitty-Doo allow these days?
Thanks for any and all responses. I'll try not to be a stranger, although they don't get much stranger....🙄
From the "God's Love" book (supposed to be studied with new converts,after finishing the "Bible Teach" book), pages 219-221:
In certain extreme situations, some Christians have decided to separate from or divorce a marriage mate even though that one has not committed sexual immorality. In such a case, the Bible stipulates that the departing one “remain unmarried or else be reconciled with” the mate. (1 Corinthians 7:11) Such a Christian is not free to pursue a third party with a view to remarriage. (Matthew 5:32) Consider here a few exceptional situations that some have viewed as a basis for separation.
Willful nonsupport. A family may become destitute, lacking the basic essentials of life, because the husband fails to provide for them, although being able to do so. The Bible states: “If anyone does not provide for . . . members of his household, he has disowned the faith and is worse than a person without faith.” (1 Timothy 5:8) If such a man refuses to change his ways, the wife would have to decide whether she needs to protect her welfare and that of her children by obtaining a legal separation. Of course, Christian elders should give careful consideration to an accusation that a Christian refuses to support his family. Refusal to care for one’s family may result in disfellowshipping.
Extreme physical abuse. An abusive spouse may act so violently that the abused mate’s health and even life are in danger. If the abusive spouse is a Christian, congregation elders should investigate the charges. Fits of anger and a practice of violent behavior are grounds for disfellowshipping.—Galatians 5:19-21.
Absolute endangerment of spiritual life. A spouse may constantly try to make it impossible for the mate to pursue true worship or may even try to force that mate to break God’s commands in some way. In such a case, the threatened mate would have to decide whether the only way to “obey God as ruler rather than men” is to obtain a legal separation.—Acts 5:29.
In all cases involving such extreme situations as those just discussed, no one should put pressure on the innocent mate either to separate or to stay with the other. While spiritually mature friends and elders may offer support and Bible-based counsel, they cannot know all the details of what goes on between a husband and a wife. Only Jehovah can see that. Of course, a Christian wife would not be honoring God or the marriage arrangement if she exaggerated the seriousness of her domestic problems just to live separately from her husband, or vice versa. Jehovah is aware of any scheming behind a separation, no matter how one may try to hide it. Indeed, “all things are naked and openly exposed to the eyes of the one to whom we must give an account.” (Hebrews 4:13) But if an extremely dangerous situation persists, no one should criticize a Christian who, as a last resort, chooses to separate. In the final analysis, “we will all stand before the judgment seat of God.”—Romans 14:10-12.
Extreme physical abuse. An abusive spouse may act so violently that the abused mate’s health and even life are in danger. If the abusive spouse is a Christian, congregation elders should investigate the charges. Fits of anger and a practice of violent behavior are grounds for disfellowshipping.—
Clearly written by a man and endorsed by men - although I acknowledge in some cases, it is the woman who engages in physical violence and intimidation towards the man.
In essence, in JWland the spouse has to be virtually beaten to a pulp before she/he can have justifiable grounds for leaving. Strange to say that secular laws offer the beaten spouse far more protection than they'd get in JWland. Imagine meeting with three men (elders) in a closed room and having to justify whey you've left your husband and needing to prove the physical abuse has been "extreme". What does that look like? Two black eyes instead of one? Several broken bones instead of one or two? Black and blue all over your torso, buttocks and arms rather than "just" your torso? This is mad and really bad stuff.
The “Spiritual endangerment” endangerment card is sometimes played when one mate wakes up to TTATT, often at the suggestion of the elders. This goes beyond what is in writing, but for an indoctrinated JW, nothing screamed danger louder than someone labeled an “apostate”.
They added apostasy in this year's April study edition in the following article "What You Vow, Pay” para. 16. They stated "However, some married Christians have viewed certain situations as a reason for separation, such as the extreme endangerment of one’s life or spirituality by an abusive or apostate spouse." So obviously apostasy must be affecting greatly for it to be included in the list of reasons for separation. I don't remember it being included as a reason before this article came out.
However, some married Christians have viewed certain situations as a reason for separation, such as the extreme endangerment of one’s life or spirituality by an abusive or apostate spouse."
So much for the propaganda of how JWs don't break up families - or - How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love Not Having Freedom of Religion
Disgusting how an extremely violent abusive spouse ( as opposed to what...a bit violent?) is seen in the same category as a mate who doesn't believe their doctrines ( apostate).
I think that a pussy cat will take off if no tuna fish after a month. Who can blame him?