I remember them specifically stating why the person was dfd. Must of been the 70's . Also remember those that were announced as resigning from the religion.
Bro Knorrs Notes RE Disfellowshipping & Two Witness Rule
Hi guys. Only now had the chance to read this properly.
Bro Knorr (or whoever typed this up) has poor grammar for one chosen by Holy Spirit wouldn't you say? JW's always use the example of Korah to justify inflated sense of morality.
Appears legitimate - at least it "feels" that way.
Where on earth, & how, did this guy get this list?
It was sent to me via an exJW on a JW Recovery Facebook Group. It seems very accurate to me.
Actually I was speculating on how your source managed to confiscate Knorr's notes. Now that would be an interesting story!
Presumably these are notes someone typed up from a meeting conducted by Knorr. It's not Knorr's own notes because the notes refer to "Bro Knorr's answers".
And much of it sounds like reported extemporaneous speech.
I can remember we'd have a special needs talk and then they'd immediately announce someone had been df'd ... real subtle.
The worst was when they would do that when it was public reproof, because then those people still had to look everyone in the eye and try and fit in. Had a friend who got reproved one week, and a girl in the hall was reproved the week after. That already got tongues wagging enough. But the week after that? Needlessly detailed Local Needs part on every single act that constitutes "porneia".
It wasn't a "local need". It was a petty attempt to try and embarrass the hell out of them.
Is their a 3rd page of this document from Knorr that could maybe legitamise it as being authentic with the WT`s insignia either at the letter-head or the closing remarks on signing off ?
In this day of technology you can never be too sure.
Bonny_Clyde - "...What happened in 1947?"
Which - let's face it - would explain a lot.
After they stopped announcing the precise reason (say, adultery) when someone was disfellowshipped, they went with "conduct unbecoming a Christian," and years later it changed to simply, "So-and-so is no longer one of Jehovah's Witnesses."
I was at a meeting (long ago) where two people were disfellowshipped on the same night. It happened to be a man and a woman. In that instance, they had the decency to announce from the platform that the two actions were unrelated. I'm sure a lot of tongues wagged anyway...