by AlanF 41 Replies latest jw friends
Anyone want to bet that the latest version was written by WT lawyers to ensure that JWs have committed themselves to the ORGANIZATION and all its policies and procedures so they can't successfully sue the organization when they are disciplined by the elders (including shunning for people who DA or are DFd)?
Would that mean anybody baptized before 1985 could attempt to sue and stand a chance of being more successful than later dunkings?
I have read of US court decisions involving other religions where the person resigned from the church while disciplinary proceedings were pending against them.
Some of those cases held that their resignations removed the church's jurisdiction over them unless they had agreed beforehand to church rules that allowed the disciplinary authority to continue proceed even after the person quit.
Those cases didn't involve shunning, but they did involve the church announcing a disciplinary decision against such an individual.
A few individuals won substantial verdicts against their church where they had not been shown to have consented to the church following such procedures.
A number of people in the Ray Franz purge had said, "I wasn't baptized into an organization."
I think the change was made to correct that "oversight."
I think it would be an interesting case if a JW could show that they were never told that a DAd or DFd person would be shunned.
I think it also explains why the WTS claims that the shunning is voluntary.
It's their way of relieving the organization of liability if someone challenges the shunning in court.
Just my opinion...
I know that the WTBTS asserts that these baptismal vows constitute implied consent to the ecclesiastical authority of the JW's religion. But other than their strong assertion, I can not see how the words "in association with" can be construed so as to mean "under the authority of".
Also, how can it be legally defensible that a person is bound to compliance with rules and procedures that are secret to all but a select few, in particular those rules and procedures concerning judicial committees.
As a side note, the other day a local elder stopped by. I had never met him before. He was assigned to call on me to see how I am ... (first time in 3 years: way to apply the counsel in the w91 4/15, p. 22!)
At any rate, I referred to something in the "Pay Attention" (previous secret Elders's) book. He informed me they now have a new one. Just for fun I asked him what it was called. Predictably he avoided the question.
So here's my point: R&F JWs are expected to comply with an elaborate set of rules, policies and procedure which there is no possible way they could know unless they are or recently had been an elder (or looked up things on the internet on apostate websites).
What a messed up religion!
00DAD
I would agree that if sued by a DFd person, the WTS would need to show more "informed consent" than just a commitment to be associated with the organization.
That may be why recently they have been claiming that shunning is voluntary.
I don't think that would fly, given all their instructions in the WT on how DFd and DAd people are to be treated.
But I think there's little doubt that would try that defense in order to protect the organization.
wow, little things that people don;t realize!
Four sets of questions in twenety years. Amazing, since baptism has been going on since the beginning of the Christian experience. But we forget: all that was wrong.
Compare with: I baptize you in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. Surely that was written down somewhere...
They've come a long way from the question asked by the Ethopian Eunoch, "There's a body of water, what prevents me from being baptized?"
Well, are you regular in Service? How long have you studied? You need to consider the questions at the end of this book?.... Any more?
Well, God-willing, another former Witness and I will be getting baptized at a Disciples of Christ church on Reformation Sunday. Consider this not only doing my baptism properly, but my unbaptism from the Watchtower.
Thanks to Hurricane Sandy--looks like the East Coast is getting dunked as well.
Some threads just need to be re-surfaced again , and for those who remember Farkel , his comment is classic.
smiddy
Marked and thank you for your post
