Are baptized Witnesses that are no longer in the "truth", but were NEVER DF'D, now to be shunned and treated like disfellowshipped ones? (page 5)

pale.emperor

I wish there was something in print about this. I watched the Worst Convention Ever series and heard the speaker in America say it. But my family here in the UK are denying it. And even if they do hear it get announced there'd be A LOT of family members being shunned. It'd cause a big shake up i think.

Vidiot

pale.emperor - "...my family here in the UK are denying it. And even if they do hear it get announced there'd be A LOT of family members being shunned..."

...which is probably why they're denying it.

blondie

As far as I know except for the current elder's manual not officially available to jws other than elders (COs, DOs, etc, are elders), no rank and file jw has anything officially in writing available to them saying that if a baptized jw takes a blood transfusion, that the WTS considers that DISASSOCIATING yourself, like joining the military or another religion; no longer a DISFELLOWSHIPPING offense.

It has served the WTS in the past to have policies not available to jws in writing unless they call headquarters, such as certain "approved" medical procedures.

As I said in my comment, this pressure from the WTS on its members not to associate socially with people deemed bad association by other individual jws who are just inactive and/or being negative about the organization directly or indirectly, has been in place for a long time, used against me in the 1970's.

The WTS is strongly reminding older jws and telling new jws for the first time that nothing has changed. I don't see inactive jws being df'd or considered da'd for not attending meetings or turning in time, in the near future. That would cause too many problems for the WTS if they made it so official. But pressuring other jws to do the dirty work themselves...........

Vidiot

blondie - "...The WTS is strongly reminding older JWs and telling new JWs for the first time that nothing has changed..."

Probably.

Same dogma, different medium.

blondie - "...I don't see inactive JWs being DFd or considered DAd for not attending meetings or turning in time..."

Oh, I can.

I've been half-expecting it for a while now, in fact.

blondie - "...That would cause too many problems for the WTS if they made it so official..."

Pssh.

Since when has that ever stopped 'em?

tepidpoultry

Regardless of when it it was implemented I see this as Old West style

justice where in many cases there was no Sheriff, so the people took the

law into their own hands,

This is common still in Moslem countries where if you want someone's

house you will cry "He has blasphemed the Prophet" and "the people" will

kill the man,

Now to the less lethal type,

When I was a kid in the 1960s I knew about disfellowshipping

I didn't completely understand the details but I knew

We didn't talk to THAT person

What's going on now is a lot less clear as

In addition to JCs

Everybody's taking their own individual Judicial Actions

Now the inmates are running the asylum

What should you do?

"Run fast run clear" was my solution

Others don't have that option

So maybe it's like visiting a friend in a Psychiatric ward

Be nice to everybody

Play along when people aren't being coherent

Then go home

Take a sigh of relief

And be happy you're not there anymore

:0)

tepidpoultry

MrMonroe

Blondie's comment re the non-availability of the elders' handbook is spot-on. I have often thought about how this adds to the unfairness of the judicial committee process: rank and file JWs are judged in accordance with a set of rules to which they have no access. What word would you use to describe a national or state judicial system that could summon defendants into court without advising them first of the charge they face and the wording of the actual statutes so they could prepare a proper defence; without allowing them access to a list of evidence and witness statements; without allowing them legal representation; without the right to record proceedings or later obtain a transcript; and without the right to challenge conflicts of interest of members of the JC?

Vidiot

tepidpoultry - "...Now, the inmates are running the asylum..."

Let's be honest.

The inmates were always running the asylum.

:smirk:

Vidiot

MrMonroe - "What word would you use to describe a national or state judicial system that could summon defendants into court without advising them first of the charge they face and the wording of the actual statutes so they could prepare a proper defense; without allowing them access to a list of evidence and witness statements; without allowing them legal representation; without the right to record proceedings or later obtain a transcript; and without the right to challenge conflicts of interest of members of the JC?"

"Fascist".

Are baptized Witnesses that are no longer in the "truth", but were NEVER DF'D, now to be shunned and treated like disfellowshipped ones?

Share this