Disfellowshipping of relatives and space travels

[TrueTomHarley]

You know, I begin to think that I would like JTR in person now that I have learned he is part of a congregation. True, he is a hothead, but he is our hothead. I can work with that. Though I have a great many faults, an inability to get along with people is not one of them. Everybody likes me in the circuit. True, there are some who think I am too much 'out there,' but that does not translate into dislike. Everybody agrees that I am neither judgmental nor harsh, nor do I take offense. Everybody agrees that I do what I can to build up. (((Yeah, that's what you think, Truetom. We just don't tell you that you are a jerk!)))

In the congregation, I think I would like JTR, for he is a straight-shooter, and that is a good thing. Like everyone else, I would run for cover when he explodes, but I would return when the coast is clear. If he has remained faithful despite ill treatment by ones in position of authority, that is a good thing and it earns my respect. Does he go in service? Possibly, maybe probably, for he does not forget his vow. I'd like to work with him. We would get along fine.

However, if he conducts himself outrageously online, I will blast him out of the water to the full extent of my limited power. Imagine - slapping before me a cartoon specifically designed to malign God's organization - how could anyone not conclude he hates God's people, if not God himself? When the Orlando shooter is blowing them away at the gay nightclub, you don't rush in with balm for his spiritual pain. When JTR goes in service, he does not say "Good morning! I'm here to tell you what SOBs some of our elders have been." No. He starts a discussion. He shows a video. He places literature. He starts a Bible study. But when he returns he finds the householder has had a change of heart, because he has discovered JTR's words online.

He is right when he is primarily concerned with what Jehovah (and his wife) thinks of him. He is right when he recognizes a moral obligation to tell the truth. But there is a time and a place. And abundant Bible counsel that some things ought to be covered over and, if possible, forgiven. He is wrong when he says that, since he learned the hard way over his lifetime, they can learn the hard way over their lifetime. Part of him knows he is wrong on this. If your old man treated you horribly, do you get back by treating your kids the same way? Unfortunately, some people do, and a family cycle of abuse never ends.

As CMP pointed out, the current crop of elders benefits from ever more intensive courses on how to treat the flock. When the high-ranking brothers design these courses, they put themselves through it first, for the saying "half of those at Bethel are there to test the other half" is not lost on them. They don't just design the courses for the peons. They put themselves through it first. The poor elders of JTR's congregation don't know what to make of him, perhaps. He so plainly carries volatile anger, and they, being of a different generation and just trying to do the best they can, don't know where it comes from from

I'm not aghast at giving away a fault. As I get older, i get to indulge some wants and I have written two books about the only thing I know - theocracy. There, I give away many faults. Especially in the second book, where one (real) character (a fellow like Diotrophes) is a "dirty rotten lowlife." Believe me when I tell you that he was. But the two books are both playful in overall tone and they have the greater context of the good guys winning. Some comments here would suggest that the good guys don't have a prayer, or even that there are no good guys.

Maybe I don't understand this forum and don't belong here. Maybe I should retire to my own blog. All the players here were entrenched long before I came along, and maybe I don't understand how things work. Maybe this forum is more private than I imagine and not freely viewable by anyone in the whole wide world that knows how to do an internet search. Although we are advised from Jesus to forgive whenever possible, sometimes there is occasion to tell something dark and nasty. Is it here? Maybe it is, though I will still blast away at whatever seems designed to tear down until someone shows me the door. If they don't 'play fair' with Jehovah's reputation, I see no obligation to play fair with them.

Melinda has her letters that she doesn't send. I have my books. We're all encouraged to have our say in our heart to Jehovah and leave it at that, wherever possible. Reveal stuff in the context of where it may help, and there are such times, but don't put it on the clothesline in the front yard where the whole world sees the shit on your underwear.

 

 

[James Thomas Rook Jr.]

.

I have the advantage ... I am 70 years old and, to the best of my knowledge ... cannot be insulted (If it's True, it's true ..if it's not I really don't care .  It the reality based TRUTH reputations can be forever destroyed in SECONDS!).

it's a waste of my painfully few hours left on this Earth to educate the deliberately clueless  .

Civil debate among men of good character can ONLY result in GOOD things.

Civil debate among men of bad character is always malignant, even if spoken in soft tomes, and typed with velvet gloves, and supported by many scriptural buzz words.

Please know that you cannot hurt my feelings, insult me, or make me angry ...

To paraphrase David Banner, "The Incredible Hulk",

"People in a 60 foot radius would not like me if I was angry.!"

We are both rational adults ... gimme yer best shots ... The TRUTH WILL WIN OUT in the Arena of Ideas ... though the sands figuratively run with rivers of blood, and there be mountains of stinking bodies in the hot mid-day sun for all to see.

REAL TRUTH is worth the sacrifice, be it instant death, or enduring a lifetime of isolation and never ending hardship.

You also have a VERY distinct advantage ... you can follow my 6,400 or so Archive postings back  for five years, and get my opinions on every imaginable subject, simply by typing my full name into Google.

Please feel free to challenge me on any subject, anytime. I may ignore it.

James Thomas Rook, Jr.

On IRC I also go by the nickname "Greylenseman"

.

 

.

 

.

 

[ComfortMyPeople]

20 hours ago, JW Insider said:

 At Bethel, many of the long-term elders are completely divorced from the reality of living in the real world. There was often little room for justice to be tempered with mercy inside Bethel. Every week, we had to listen to Brother Knorr and and others make loud and angry tirades about who was being kicked out of Bethel for this or that. We sometimes had to sit through the shame and embarrassing details of their sins. I heard it was much, much worse under Rutherford where he was able to dress down someone until he got them to cry in front of hundreds of people. I don't think some of these brothers were trained to think of real-world consequences to the person being judged, or the subsequent consequences to their own reputation for acting harshly.

Can we function without the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society?

• ·        *** w71 12/15 p. 762 A Governing Body as Different from a Legal Corporation ***

• ·        AN INTERESTING PROBLEM

• ·        At the close of discussing matters such as the above at the annual chartered meeting of the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania at Buckingham, Pa., on October 1, 1971, an interesting problem was posed for the audience, especially for the voting members present of the said Society. It was this: Nineteen hundred years ago, the “faithful and discreet slave” class with its governing body functioned without a legal corporation chartered by Caesar, and it did so—successfully, magnificently. What about the governing body of the “faithful and discreet slave” class of the present time? Can it also function without the legal nonprofit corporation known as Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania? and succeed? In the light of the precedent established by the apostles and fellow elders of the Jerusalem congregation in the first century C.E., we leave you to answer the question for yourself.

I must confess that when I first read this question in the article quoted (I was very young then) I couldn’t answer confidently, I thought: “how can we get our wonderful books and magazines, our big rotary presses…” So, in spite the article implicitly was indicating a positive answer. For me the “Society” was so linked to our spiritual prosperity, so evident of being a tool in Jehovah’s hand that I hardly could understand the reason for the “interesting problem posed for the audience.”

I’m in no way insinuating the Society has not been or is not useful, wonderful useful to accomplish Jehovah’s will in this period of history. What I wish is to bring up the side-effects of this situation. What situation I am talking about?

The fact that one corporation, with his offices, his personnel, his factories, his timetables, his economic needs, the skills needed. Promotions and dismissals, bowing and scrapping, and many other factors would have affected our entire organization.

Even more, the fact that, unlike what happened in any other organization, the staff and the majority of persons directly working for this Society, are living under the same roof in Bethel houses, as an enormous family, under a lot or rules and regulations needed to accomplish the day by day duties.

And still more, the fact that persons with spiritual responsibilities, as teaching, writing or the service, are immersed at some extend under this system of things.

The effect that, quite a few of these persons, for decades and decades, some of them never, have had any secular job, no pressure from bosses, no teasing from coworkers.

All of this, and more I could have mention, comes into play in our particular issue about the disfellowshiping. JWI raises the possibility that some prominent brothers are divorced from reality. I confirm this. I’ve seen this by myself. I’ve talked about this situation with a lot of friends, many elders, some of them C.O. I have evidence of this.

I’m not saying these brothers are bad people. To the contrary. Many of them are wonderful people and fine Christians. I’ve learnt a lot from them. I’m talking that the infrastructure, the framework we’ve develop to accomplish the work carries this negative result: some inflexible people, lovers of rules, lovers of reports, detached from normal life.

I could say some flagrant examples. But I prefer don’t speak too much, because I must respect persons with authority.

What wonderful buildings!

(Mark 13:1) “As he was going out of the temple, one of his disciples said to him: “Teacher, see! what wonderful stones and buildings.”

Many brothers don’t appreciate Bethel, nor respect the “Organization”, they almost worship these tools. When they visit Bethel talk about these facilities with its gardens and arrangements as a sort of advanced paradise. But the courageous commentary in the 1971 Annual Meeting putted the finger on the sore spot. Does Jehovah need factories, legal corporations? He can make the stones speak!

My “happy world”, before paradise, would be with the Watch Tower Society, factories, Bethel Houses and similar to a minimal extent. Commercial companies printing our literature. Translators not living in mini-bethel (Remote Translation Offices) but in their own houses, software developers collaborating using remote tools without the necessity to live in a given building, and so forth.

And mainly, and above all. Persons on charge of teaching, taking decisions over the life of others, especially these persons, should work with their owns hands, living in the real work. And after their secular work, as we do many of us every day, work for Jehovah’s worship.

By the way, I think this have Scriptural basis:

• ·        *** w92 12/1 pp. 28-29 Not Peddlers of God’s Word *** Paul was not dependent on hospitality. He had learned a trade that required hard work and long hours but resulted in low wages. When the apostle arrived in Corinth as a missionary, “he found a certain Jew named Aquila . . . and Priscilla his wife. . . . So he went to them and on account of being of the same trade he stayed at their home, and they worked, for they were tentmakers.”—Acts 18:1-3.

• ·        Later, in Ephesus, Paul was still hard at work. (Compare Acts 20:34; 1 Corinthians 4:11, 12.) He may have specialized in working with cilicium, the rough, goat-hair tent material from his hometown area. We can imagine Paul sitting on a stool, bent over his workbench, cutting and sewing until late into the night. Since shop noise was likely minimal, making it easy to talk while toiling, Paul may have had opportunity to witness to the shop owner, his employees, slaves, customers, and friends.—Compare 1 Thessalonians 2:9.

• ·        The missionary Paul refused to commercialize his ministry or in any way give the impression that he was living off the Word of God. He told the Thessalonians: “You yourselves know the way you ought to imitate us, because we did not behave disorderly among you nor did we eat food from anyone free. To the contrary, by labor and toil night and day we were working so as not to impose an expensive burden upon any one of you. Not that we do not have authority, but in order that we might offer ourselves as an example to you to imitate us.”—2 Thessalonians 3:7-9.

[Evacuated]

5 hours ago, ComfortMyPeople said:

JWI raises the possibility that some prominent brothers are divorced from reality.

Although, of course, reality is a bit of a subjective term. I suppose we could ask who's reality?

Anyway, I suspect you (and @JWInsider) mean that "the real world" that "some prominent brothers" are divorced from has reference to the set of circumstances experienced by non-SPOOFT Jehovah's Witnesses in their day to day interface with:

• JWs, (congregational, social, and family life).
• non-JWs (relatives, interested ones, neighbors, peers in education and the workplace, the non-JW community at large).
• others (marked, inactive, disfellowshipped).

If that is the "reality" to which you are referring, then I would say that, in some cases, rather than a possibility, divorce from this "reality" is a certainty. And is likely a condition experienced by more than "some prominent brothers".

I would suggest that other such "la-la Land" inhabitants might include some brought up as Jehovah's Witnesses by Jehovah's Witnesses.

[Melinda Mills]

"Melinda has her letters that she doesn't send. I have my books. We're all encouraged to have our say in our heart to Jehovah and leave it at that, wherever possible. Reveal stuff in the context of where it may help, and there are such times, but don't put it on the clothesline in the front yard where the whole world sees......"  ---TrueTom

 

Never wrote any letters; never sent any.  

Think Anna said she did that as a coping mechanism. Read again.

[JW Insider]

On 2/22/2017 at 10:44 AM, Anna said:

Thank you JWI for sharing another, albeit sad, story. I gather this happened around the time of trouble when quite a few were disfellowshipped including one of the GB members, resulting in paranoia and the "witch hunt" where even private thoughts were questioned and became a disfellowshipping offense.....

Yes. This started late in 1981, a little before the GB member was disfellowshipped, but after he had been asked to resign from the Governing Body. These kinds of things were not typical, as far as I could tell, except around the epicenter of Brooklyn Bethel.

On 2/22/2017 at 9:43 AM, ComfortMyPeople said:

Above all, many thanks JWI for sharing so sensitive subjects.

You're welcome. As I mentioned to Anna, I thought that this kind of thing was much more rare outside of the headquarters area. I appreciate getting a better picture from some of the anecdotes you have included on the topic.

Percy's case was the most extreme that I took personally, and which made my blood boil. There was another, but I won't tell it again now in any detail (about my sister being asked to put up with her violently abusive husband and to try more meekness, field service and prayer, because they didn't want to remove his privileges as a ministerial servant).

But please remember that these are told in the context of the time that they happened. We are nowhere near perfect, and we don't really claim to be, but we have all seen many improvements, especially in the last decade or two. And I think that all of us continue to expect more big improvements, some of which are likely to surprise us.

In fact, I was pleased that @Eoin Joyce didn't think this was the whole story (about Percy) and that @TrueTomimplied that such stories might be only partially true. When something that happened is extremely difficult to believe, then it should be that much less likely to ever happen again.

I notice that the question of dirty laundry and motive also comes up, which shouldn't be surprising. The question should be welcomed. If we are concerned about truth and justice and improvements and error and tradition and 'strongly entrenched things' then the common "refrain" will be the request to refrain. Accusations of pride and apostasy are expected too. Love for the brotherhood should override these minor obstacles, however, and we should do our best to imitate Biblical examples of faith and courage.

I appreciate the discussion. If we see error we should spotlight it. In the long run, this makes the light of truth shine more brightly.

(Mark 4:21, 22) 21 He also said to them: “A lamp is not brought out to be put under a basket or under a bed, is it? Is it not brought out to be put on a lampstand? 22 For there is nothing hidden that will not be exposed; nothing is carefully concealed that will not come out in the open.

 

[TrueTomHarley]

11 hours ago, Melinda Mills said:

"Melinda has her letters that she doesn't send. I have my books. We're all encouraged to have our say in our heart to Jehovah and leave it at that, wherever possible. Reveal stuff in the context of where it may help, and there are such times, but don't put it on the clothesline in the front yard where the whole world sees......"  ---TrueTom

 

Never wrote any letters; never sent any.  

Think Anna said she did that as a coping mechanism. Read again.

If Melinda Mills  wanted to save me from looking like an ass before the entire forum, she would write some letters to the GB and then tear them up.

Sorry, Melinda. It was Anna. My apologies.

[Melinda Mills]

Too funny!  If you are not going to be accurate, sign as Tom, not True Tom.

[Anna]

 

13 hours ago, Melinda Mills said:

Too funny!  If you are not going to be accurate, sign as Tom, not True Tom.