Question about disfellowshipping/disassociation

Advertisement

Viewed 1653 times

    F TweetieBird posted Fri, 25 Dec 2009 02:15:00 GMT(12/25/2009)

    Post 987 of 1153
    Joined 7/9/2001

    If someone sends an email or text to an elder telling them that they are involved in a wrongdoing and not planning on stopping and then does not respond to reply emails or text messages from that elder, what will happen? Can the elders announce at a meeting that so and so is no longer a JW or do they have to inform them first? I have a friend that did this and 2 elders came by her work to see her but she wasn't there, then they tried to call her at work but she told her co-workers to tell them that she was in a meeting. She hasn't heard anything since but has been shunned by sisters from the hall so she is wondering if she is df'd.

    F jamiebowers posted Fri, 25 Dec 2009 02:21:00 GMT(12/25/2009)

    Post 2999 of 6387
    Joined 1/27/2007

    They can announce that so and so is no longer one of jws without first informing the person.

    Sapphy posted Fri, 25 Dec 2009 08:57:00 GMT(12/25/2009)

    Post 23 of 943
    Joined 4/17/2009

    I think the elders would decide that person has da'ed theirself. The announcement is the same as d'effing.

    cantleave posted Fri, 25 Dec 2009 10:09:00 GMT(12/25/2009)

    Post 1515 of 13276
    Joined 6/25/2009

    That person would be treated as if they had DA'd.

    F lisavegas420 posted Fri, 25 Dec 2009 11:51:00 GMT(12/25/2009)

    Post 3318 of 3587
    Joined 11/29/2002

    o_O what if someone took her phone and made those message without her knowledge?

    lisa

    F blondie posted Fri, 25 Dec 2009 12:44:00 GMT(12/25/2009)

    Post 28415 of 37654
    Joined 5/28/2001

    As long as the JC are convinced they have enough proof of a df'ing offense, they don't have to meet with the person. In this area they send a certified letter (3 times in case it is refused) which is considered "legal." I don't know if an e-mail is "legal" proof of having tried to contact the person. Is there a certified e-mail that is legal?

    Quillsky posted Fri, 25 Dec 2009 13:54:00 GMT(12/25/2009)

    Post 4 of 844
    Joined 12/22/2009

    "Disfellowshipping" in the Jehovah's Witness sense is not a legal process in any country on earth that I know of.

    So the so-called notification processes Blondie is speaking of are rubbish.

    Heaven posted Fri, 25 Dec 2009 14:05:00 GMT(12/25/2009)

    Post 1348 of 5909
    Joined 4/16/2009

    I believe the JW elders need to tread carefully here if they are to use email as their sole burden of proof. Email 'spoofing' and 'hijacking' (among others) can be done. It would be very bad form to DA/DF someone on completely false information. That would not make them look good to the GB at all. Nor to anyone else for that matter.

    Alco Cop posted Fri, 25 Dec 2009 15:24:00 GMT(12/25/2009)

    Post 17 of 21
    Joined 4/20/2009

    The Lyin Kings at your local Kult Hall can do whatever they want to keep the flock in-line. A local "judicial" circus has absouletely nothing in common with justice, or truth, or common sense. Been there. Done that. Never again!

    F blondie posted Fri, 25 Dec 2009 15:29:00 GMT(12/25/2009)

    Post 28420 of 37654
    Joined 5/28/2001

    Rubbish in the non-jw legal view? Certainly these elders take it seriously. Remember that the Legal Department runs the WTS and they have shown an interest in outwardly adhering to Caesar's laws. In the end the elders can make the rules as long as no one challenges them at the CO, DO, or NY level with any belief by these ones. I have seen elders have to reverse.

    Alco Cop posted Fri, 25 Dec 2009 15:44:00 GMT(12/25/2009)

    Post 18 of 21
    Joined 4/20/2009

    Maybe if they're threatened with a lawsuit. I've seen that work. They run. ... and you're right it's "rubbish"... "seriously".

    F TweetieBird posted Fri, 25 Dec 2009 16:45:00 GMT(12/25/2009)

    Post 989 of 1153
    Joined 7/9/2001

    In this case, she first told an elder of the wrongdoing (sort of) then got texts from him and another elder, also got an email and sent reply texts and emails back so at least 2 different elders got the same information, just at different times. They wanted to meet with her but she didn't want to be submitted to an interrogation since she has no intention of changing courses at this time, probably never. Fortunately she is the only person in her family that was a JW and has only a handful of close friends that are so for her to walk away was not a big deal. I told her that I would never shun her so she is okay with the whole thing. She was just wondering if they announced her and since I haven't been to the KH in months I have no idea.

    WTWizard posted Fri, 25 Dec 2009 18:32:00 GMT(12/25/2009)

    Post 9327 of 15042
    Joined 5/10/2007

    Depending on the hounder, they could take that as a disassociation. They might also send the hounders to make sure the person is in fact not going back, or they can pretend not to notice.

    F TweetieBird posted Sat, 26 Dec 2009 04:06:00 GMT(12/26/2009)

    Post 990 of 1153
    Joined 7/9/2001

    Update- it appears that they have not made any announcements, which is strange because all of the texts and emails were sent over a month ago. Is it possible that they will just leave her alone since she's not going to any meetings and not associating with any JW's?

    notewe posted Sat, 26 Dec 2009 04:09:00 GMT(12/26/2009)

    Post 8 of 25
    Joined 11/22/2009

    If she has already told them of a wrong doing...and has no intention of coming back, most likely after many attempts of trying to contact her...it will be announced that she is no long one of Jehovah's Witnesses. Sounds like what she wants anyways right?

    F TweetieBird posted Sat, 26 Dec 2009 04:10:00 GMT(12/26/2009)

    Post 991 of 1153
    Joined 7/9/2001

    She doesn't care either way, she's done with all of it. Mainly just curious.

    M OnTheWayOut posted Sat, 26 Dec 2009 17:25:00 GMT(12/26/2009)

    Post 9822 of 18436
    Joined 9/8/2006

    and not planning on stopping

    That's all they needed. She DA'ed herself by saying she is not planning on stopping the WT-defined sins.
    They simply announce that she is no longer one of Jehovah's Witnesses and it's up to her to show up and insist that the announcement was improper. They would only withdraw such an announcement if she proved it wasn't her that sent the email or if she totally kisses their asses and says she's sorry for sending it and will do whatever it takes to stay a JW.

    This is not a legally defendable position. She admitted she won't stop the thing she's doing. End of story.

    M Frank75 posted Sat, 26 Dec 2009 18:37:00 GMT(12/26/2009)

    Post 581 of 585
    Joined 7/8/2003

    Anyone who would call Blondie's comments "rubbish" about elders following legal protocols, is either naive or disingenuously apologetic toward JW's.

    The courts (at present) will not interfere in internal organizational affairs (be it soccer leagues or religious tribunals) if the organization follows its own rules through the process. Check any legal reference library for ample case law.(US and Canada)

    This is even true when the organizations practices are unconstitutional ie discriminatory against women etc. However there is a breeze of change about this that may close the gap between how these orgs operate.

    The WT is a legalistic organization built upon a highly developed, "legalistic" approach to the bible and its own belief/conduct system. It is all about following the rule of law (current interpretation of it).

    This is why the Society has established protocols that the majority elders are extremely eager to follow. It is why they study their KS book and letters before JC's. They need to dot i's and cross t's. Not only for the CO and Brooklyn overlords but for the outside chance Caesar wants to take a look.

    Frank75

      Close

      Confirm ...