A divorced single sistet (page 2)

TonusOH

Yes, I think it is much more an issue if the sister initiates the divorce, because the organization places a very high importance on keeping marriages together. It can work both ways, though.

A friend of mine was married to a sister who cheated on him and had a daughter with another man. She went to the elders and confessed, and my friend agreed to forgive her and even raise the daughter as his own (her biological dad showed -and continues to show- little interest in her). A couple of years later, his wife again went to the elders to confess... to several more affairs.

Officially, the elders took no action and advised him to forgive her. Privately, one of them told my friend that he stood behind the advice they gave him, to try to salvage the marriage. Yet, he admitted that he would likely not do so himself, under the circumstances. My friend filed for divorce and I don't think he was ostracized at all. Then again, he is a nice person and very helpful to everyone, and the circumstances (repeated infidelity with multiple partners and no corrective action taken) make him a sympathetic figure.

The desire to avoid bringing reproach on Jehovah's name can cause elders to be rigid and unbending, even when they are confronted with a unique situation. Which can end up bringing the reproach that they were hoping to avoid. His ex-wife is out for many years now, though she hung on for some time. It's not a good look for the congregation.

Lee Marsh

I have to wonder what was so wrong in the marriage that she had to go somewhere else.

Studies show women don't have extra-marital affairs for the sex. They want the emotional closeness and intimacy.

But a rigid system will only see the sex part and not the underlying issues. Many JW women feel alone in their marriages. Many get married for the wrong reasons and are not compatible. And if the husband has any position in the congregation then she is an emotional widow in the congregation

But always blame the woman

enoughisenough

"emotional widow in the congregation"...I noticed this in particular at conventions...the women are in the audiance with their families ( if they have any other then the man there ) He is off doing what ever duty he was assigned to. For all practical purposes, she just as well had no husband...

in a judicial matter concerning divorce based upon a cheating husband, there is always the question as to whether the woman was "putting out".... let's say she wasn't for whatever reason...how does that justify adultery? Does that change the marriage vow? ( that could work for both goose and gander ) They look for an escape clause for the guilty. IMHO

PetrW

@LeeMarsh

Very accurate. I have defined the formation of marriage for JWs as: Lord and sex. JWs are forced by a misunderstood command" "only in the Lord "* to seek their mate, only within the ranks of JWs. And especially at a younger age where erotic desires are very strong, this leads to marriages being formed between people who 1. should never have formed a marriage or 2. "in the world" would have divorced relatively painlessly and no third party i.e. JWs would have entered into it. The guarantee of a quality partner is not created just by nominal affiliation with a church.

The other thing, which you also capture well, is that there is always more fault to be found with women, especially when they are the initiators of divorce proceedings. In a curious sort of way, I know of a case of a marriage that originated within the ex-JWs-group**, but because the husband stopped providing emotional as well as material support (inadequately) to his wife and their two children together, the wife, after repeated complaints over several years, found another partner. I know from the narrative that she continued to accuse herself for a long time whether she had violated Christ's requirement about marriage and adultery...

My answer was that a marriage is only unlawful i.e. against Christ's requirements if it exists. And mere formal existence, does not prove actual existence. We know a lot about birthright from the Bible, and whether the firstborn is by birth or by fact is determined by circumstances that can change...

Back to the ex-JWs group: it too, with the "righteous anger" of a few members, got angry at the woman, and basically ended any contact...it was only after a few years, when it became really apparent that the ex-husband, was indeed neglecting his wife and children, and then continued to do so (not paying child support, although he could have), that some members of the ex-JWs turned around, and accepted the ex-ex-JWs back into their midst...

* The phrase "in the Lord" is associated with "thinking like the Lord", which does not necessarily lead to the life partner having to be a Christian. The NT uses the same phrase in the case of children, that they are to obey their parents "in the Lord". If the parents are not "in the Lord", do they not have to obey them?

** The debacle of the false prophecy of "1975" was the motive for the formation of this group that still exists today. I am not a member, but I know sporadically of their activities and views...

TonusOH

Lee Marsh: I have to wonder what was so wrong in the marriage that she had to go somewhere else.

You don't want to know. Suffice it to say, some of us could tell what was wrong with it before they were married. I was just astounded at how the elders seemed to follow a script, even when they appeared to think it was wrong. The oddity being that they seemed to side with her disproportionately when they were meeting with the couple, while also privately telling her husband that they sympathized with him.

I think about it sometimes, because if I had been made an elder I might also have had the opportunity to judge people's marriages and relationships, even though I was utterly unqualified to do so.

PetrW

@TonusOH

You mentioned one more important thing: whether the local congregation and its leadership have the right to interfere in marriage and solve its problems. Of course, we know the NT case where Paul writes about someone living with his father's wife and Paul's solution is very harsh...

But I want to make another point: should a Christian congregation be put in the position of having to resolve marital disputes? I don't think a Christian congregation should (ideally) have to deal with this, and other things, at all. But many will say that this is impossible. Yes, I affirm that. Sociology clearly demonstrates the patterns that arise in a formal group (starting with the "iron law of oligarchy" to the next...).

But if I stay on the plane of the Bible, I, for one, take my cue from this: Paul says the church is to care for widows over 60. What if - because of the war - many widows will be as young as 55? Are they to be told that they have to wait 5 more years? Or will there be no widows in that congregation - are they to "manufacture" a widow to fulfill the Bible's command at any cost? Probably not either. I understand the commands in the sense that Christians are to do so if such a situation arises - but if it doesn't, then they don't have to address it or even create such a situation.

The main way out of this, I see, is what the Lord said: if two or three come together in my name, I will be among them.

Two or three does not solve the lists of widows, it does not solve the question of whether a woman teaches or does not teach, whether she is veiled or shorn. They don't address the funding of the congregation - if they meet once a month, everyone can handle the fact that the two or three, go to the bathroom and flush. It's not 20 or 50 or 100 people and twice a week.

My "ecclesiology" is not against large churches. They have their place and their importance. But my point is that until the Lord, and he alone, begins to form a true church (note: many will come in my name...), then a "congregation" of two or three, will more easily avoid interfering with the marriage, of those two or three, in some quasi-judicial process. And again: not idealizing "two or three", just as destructive processes can occur there, as between 50...but between 50, it's only a matter of time before it starts.

NotFormer

Paul was harsh concerning the bloke who was sleeping with his father's wife. And the congregation took his words to heart. In 2 Corinthians, Paul seems to revisit the situation and suggests that the congregation are overdoing the church discipline. That the subjects of that discipline are showing signs of repentance and yet the congregation are still treating them badly instead of showing forgiveness and acceptance.

Unfortunately, the WT is only aware of the first point, and not the counterpoint, in their application of church discipline.

BluesBrother

In answer to a comment above, the congregation has no place in trying to solve marital disputes. I remember as an Elder being taught that we should never give advice or tell people what to do. “ Would you like to be responsible if it goes wrong?” They should just point out the scriptural principals.

Another situation for a woman is if her husband leaves the faith.. She becomes a “ spiritual widow “. My wife has said how the various congregations have treated her totally different to when she was an elders wife.

FedUpJW

I have to wonder what was so wrong in the marriage that she had to go somewhere else.

I have to wonder what was so wrong in the marriage that HE had to go somewhere else? That works BOTH ways. I personally knew a couple in my younger JW days where the oh so spiritual wife would use the silent treatment and ask the witness husband how long he could go without in each and every case where he wished to do something or go somewhere she did not approve of (camping, hunting, fishing etc).

And lumping men into the "they marry only for sex" pigeon hole is IMO an incorrect female excuse for their actions. Men desire closeness and emotional support from their partner pretty much at the same level as a woman.

A divorced single sistet

Share this