Disfellowshipped Children at the Memorial

[Darlene Hamilton]

Last year I was greeting people I had never met before at the memorial . And I introduce my self and ask what is your name? He replied I am disfellowshio. I said would you like total with one of the elders? He said yes I introduce him to an elder and from that day he never missed a meeting and was reinstated. So we have the procedures direct the to an elder right away.

now what about a child that is disfellowship and comes to meeting with their baptized parents can we say hello? To the disfellowship child, Their is an answer but I like to hear what you think.

DARLENE HAMILTON

[Ann O'Maly]

Jesus taught: “All things, therefore, that you want men to do to you, you also must do to them." (Matthew 7:12).

Laying aside for a moment the ethics of cutting off a child from its religious, social and wider family networks in the first place, this is where empathy comes into play. If we were that child (or if we were the parents) and we attended a meeting where, perhaps, everyone knew of our embarrassing family 'scandal,' would we want to be ignored (or our child to be ignored) and not have common courtesies or social graces extended to us?

I think we we have our answer.

[John Houston]

Ann, is that anger I read in your answer? We must follow, not go ahead with how we feel. Too many examples in scripture on the outcome of those who did. Can we speak? Does this include, hugs and kisses? Casual conversation? Plans for dinner?

a child that has been disfellowedshipped,,knows the stigma of what they've done and if repentant want to return to family and friends, and want to do it Jehovah's way, not what they feel,is how it should be done. Can we speak to them? Yes, for as you point out, we empathize with ones, but we do no more than that. Can't act like they are invisible, but they also know what is going on. If their heart is in the right place, as the example given above,,they will return and this exercise of questions will be moot, correct?

[Ann O'Maly]

John, are you saying that a child who has made a mistake or acted out should have expressions of affection, wider familial contact, conversation and all friendship withdrawn from him long term? 

Seeing as we are indeed talking about a minor, do you not think that such actions would be considered abusive and psychologically damaging? 

Is it right to punish a child's misdemeanors in the same way as one might punish an adult's misdemeanors?

 

[djsqueeze]

I think anyone whom does not understand the guidance given by the FDS needs to re-read their OD book and do ALOT of research.

Yes, it is  minor, but that minor should understand the consequences of their actions and that there are consequences for their actions. Everyone else needs to follow the principles as outlined.

[Evacuated]

On 4/11/2016 at 16:54, Ann O'Maly said:

Is it right to punish a child's misdemeanors in the same way as one might punish an adult's misdemeanors?

This is a valid question. However, I do not think dividing cases into child and adult camps of wrongdoers is the answer. Incidents of wrongdoing by dedicated Christians need to be handled individually, according to circumstance.

Remember that serious wrongdoers are disfellowshipped for unrepentance. Also, disfellowshipping does not relieve family members of their obligations to one another. A child should not be treated any differently by their immediate family other than a spiritual disconnect. And even in this matter, 15 years ago the Watchtower (1 Oct 2001) reminded parents in this position: "Since the child lives with his parents, they are still responsible for instructing and disciplining him in harmony with God’s Word" 

It is as easy to get all theoretical on this subject as it is to react to it purely emotionally.

For me, there is a wider issue here around baptism of minors. The Watchtower of 15/6/2011 (attached) has an article addressing this matter.

 

 

WT 15 June 2011 3-6.pdf

[Ann O'Maly]

On 4/28/2016 at 6:51 AM, djsqueeze said:

Yes, it is  minor, but that minor should understand the consequences of their actions and that there are consequences for their actions. Everyone else needs to follow the principles as outlined.

Sure.

If a child has misbehaved, he needs discipline/correction. Sometimes there need to be additional sanctions (e.g. grounding, withdrawal of his money allowance for a set time). That's normal, good parenting.

If a child has committed a misdemeanor or felony offence, the justice system will mete out sanctions appropriate for the age and crime, perhaps restitution, and a program of rehabilitation so he doesn't reoffend.

But in both those instances, extended family and friends can remain in contact with him. They can visit, write, and speak to him. If he's not in juvy, he can even socialize with them. A supportive network of family and friends can be invaluable in turning that kid around.

Not so with a disfellowshipped minor. The 'sin' may not even be some contravention of biblical morality or a crime but only that his beliefs have changed - as they often do as children grow. Whatever the case, he is mixing with all the people he and his family know at the KH but, while they are enjoying free interaction with each other, he is being shunned. If this dynamic is psychologically damaging to an adult,* how much more so for a child? 

----

* https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/beyond-bullying/201309/the-silence-shunning-conversation-kipling-william

[Ann O'Maly]

On 4/28/2016 at 9:50 AM, Eoin Joyce said:

For me, there is a wider issue here around baptism of minors.

Absolutely. Particularly in the JW faith, a baptism is a lifelong contract - not only with God, but with a religious organization. With contract law, generally speaking, a minor can void a contract without legal repercussions.

http://contracts.uslegal.com/contract-by-a-minor/

There are also protections in law to prevent those lacking capacity to enter into long-term binding contracts, e.g. being able to marry. JWs have likened baptism to a kind of marriage and being far more important than the day of one's wedding. If dedication and baptism have this level of gravity, does a 12 year old, say, have the capacity and maturity to make so binding and irrevocable a commitment as this? The minor cannot void this contract without serious and traumatizing repercussions. Is that fair?

Another consideration is that when one is disfellowshipped, the relationship with a religious organization is broken. The relationship with extended family and friends is a separate thing, no? 

To illustrate:

Andre works at his local Walmart. His whole family shop there all the time and have done so for years. One day Sophia, his niece, is caught shoplifting. She's been going through a bad patch but this is her first offence. Nevertheless, Walmart press charges and she gets convicted of a misdemeanor. Walmart also bans her from the store for a year. For Sophia this is a wake-up call. She has grown up a lot and been acting responsibly. She shops at Target now.

Andre and his family stop all contact with Sophia. They don't respond to her emails and texts other than that one time when they reminded her she is banned from Walmart and has a misdemeanor conviction so they are not supposed to communicate with her. When Andre and his wife had their wedding anniversary, they invited the whole family round to celebrate - except Sophia. Andre even invited some of Sophia's long-time friends. When Sophia asked why she wasn't invited, they said that, until the Walmart ban is lifted and she regularly shops there again, they cannot in good conscience associate with her.

Have Sophia's family and friends acted reasonably?

 

 

[Evacuated]

2 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

To illustrate:

 

2 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

Have Sophia's family and friends acted reasonably?

No. Of course they haven't.

BUT the scenario you paint is too trivial to illustrate the point you are hoping to make.

[Evacuated]

2 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

Particularly in the JW faith, a baptism is a lifelong contract - not only with God, but with a religious organization.

This is not an assessment that one of Jehovah's Witnesses would make. Any reasoning based on this view would not reflect matters as Jehovah's Witnesses see things. It may, however, reflect matters as non-Witnesses or ex-Witnesses would see things.

[Ann O'Maly]

1 hour ago, Eoin Joyce said:

No. Of course they haven't.

BUT the scenario you paint is too trivial to illustrate the point you are hoping to make.

 I see my point hit home.

1 hour ago, Eoin Joyce said:

This is not an assessment that one of Jehovah's Witnesses would make.

Really? Doesn't baptism rubber stamp a vow with God to do His will and work along with the JW organization for life?

*** w06 4/1 p. 22 ‘Go and Make Disciples, Baptizing Them’ ***
The Two Baptismal Questions
  On the basis of the sacrifice of Jesus Christ, have you repented of your sins and dedicated yourself to Jehovah to do his will?
  Do you understand that your dedication and baptism identify you as one of Jehovah’s Witnesses in association with God’s spirit-directed organization?
 

*** w68 5/15 p. 307 par. 16 “Fear the True God and Keep His Commandments” ***
No dedication to Jehovah is acceptable with a time stipulation attached. One cannot say he will serve for a certain period of time only. Rather, it is a lifetime promise, and the one coming before Jehovah God is expected to keep that promise.

Has this view about a lifetime commitment changed?

[Evacuated]

2 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

Really? Doesn't baptism rubber stamp a vow with God to do His will and work along with the JW organization for life?

The life of the JW organisation or the life of the  witness?

2 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

 I see my point hit home.

Yes, I see it clearly. Its not right for a family to avoid their daughter because she doesn't shop in Walmart. Mind you, I don't shop in Walmart either, but that's by choice. Where do I stand with that family?

I see you quoted me out of context on the subject of baptism. May I ask are you speaking as an ex-Witness or a non-Witness?