Expert: Brenton Hepburn - 3/10/2007

Question
You like to quote WT publications. What is your thoughts to this statement?
Nov 15, 1952 Watchtower pp.703-704 Questions from Readers
(note – this is a paraphrase… not a quote – but the article is on the WT CD-ROM in its entirety.)
We as Jehovah’s Witnesses can’t kill disfellowshipped people in these modern times. If we could we would. If the children are of age, then there can be a departing and breaking of family ties in a physical way, because the spiritual ties have already snapped.
This is the stand our families have taken and most witnesses I know also stand behind this statement.
As for dissassociating ourselves, our families pushed us to do this. We had no choice or they would have disfellowshipped us. On what grounds? I have absolutely no idea, but I'm sure they would have come up with something, even if they had to make it up.We felt by taking this step, we had control in our futures, not Jehovahs witnesses taking control.
I appreciate your views, and only wish the ones I know would have an open mind like yours.
Regards,
Janelle

-------------------------------------------
The text above is a follow-up to ...

-----Question-----
No I was not disfellowshipped. I choose to voluntarily dissassociate myself because that was the only option I had left. However, I HAVE NOT DONE ANYTHING WRONG. I just don't agree with some of the JW teachings. I never openly voiced these, and went along for a number of years with things I felt were wrong. Because of this, I gradually 'faded' out. And the changing of 1914 teaching confirmed that I will never again join a religion that is so consistantly wrong, and continues to change teachings and explain them away by saying 'new light'. My family has shunned us for the past 5 years now, and they will not even extend the courtesy of a simple hello if we bump into each other in the street.
My mother in law told us in front of my father in law who is local p/o, that we should all die in a car accident, as at least then, we would have a chance of a ressurrection!!!! Included in this was their 5 grandchildren.
How can you possibly say that you promote happy families when your persons in charge think this way???
-------------------------------------------
The text above is a follow-up to ...

-----Question-----
JW's preach and promote happy families. Yet when one family member may get disfellowshipped for a so-called wrongdoing, or dissasociates themselves because they no longer agree with thw wt teachings, their families are told to shun them. Having been through this situation, and seen many others go through it, how can you say that this is helping them? In many cases this destroys people. Isn't it very arrogant of jw's to say that unless you comply with our teachings, we will have no contact with you? You don't mind teaching your views, but don't extend the same courtesy to 'outsiders' who may have some thoughts of their own. Why would you break up families in this way?
-----Answer-----
Hello Janelle

Sorry for the delay, I have not received any notification of any questions and when I finally logged onto the site i see I have 6 questions waiting for me. Usually "experts" get an e-mail saying that there is a question waiting and I have not received any.

I understand your concern over this matter.  I am assuming that at some time in the past you were dissfellowshiped.

However I have to disagree with you that this action breaks up families. Why do I say that because families are NOT to to shun them all together.  The Bibles direction is that we should not associate with such ones that have been dissfellowshiped of disassociated then selves form the congregation. This is aimed at the general population of JWs.

Families are different. There are many occasions when family members can and are allowed to have contact with dissfelowshiped immediate family members.

I have had my 2 brothers dissfelowshiped in the past. One has just cut himself of from all contact with every one he knew. The other was dissfellowsiped 2 times. He lives in a different state to me but when he was in need of someone to talk to because of the situation he was in we would talk on the phone for many hours.

For families, social contact is limited. We do not condone the wrong doing of the the dissfellowshiped person, but if they were in some need of assistance (what ever it was) we have a Christian obligation to look after our own families.

We do not comply with the teachings of the WTS but with the teachings of Jesus and the Bible. We are told in the Bible to obey the words of Jesus and his father. SO there are some actions that go against the Bible that we take action against, eg, murder, stealing, sex outside of the marriage bonds, deliberate tax evasion, etc

You would be surprised at how many JWs do not agree with ALL that is taught, because no one is perfect and no one has a perfect understanding of the Bible. The difference is we just wait on Jehovah to sort things out.  His time table is quite different to ours and what might seem as a long time to us is only a short time for him.

The problem starts when some one starts to TEACH or spread their own ideas in opposition to what is the general thought at the time. This happened in the 1st century. Some spread their own ideas and were put out of the congregation.

Others did not understand some ideas. For example the circumcision debate lasted many years before all could agree with the decision that was taken.

JWs are not disfellowshiped for "so called wrong doing". They are dissfellowshiped for their attitude toward correction or readjustment. Disfellowshipping is to be seen as the last resort not the first as elders are told to make all effort to help erring ones and only put them out if they are not repentant of the wrong course of action.  In this regard we follow the example as set out in the Bible.

Being dissfellowshiped does not mean that the person is left out.  If they decide to repent (and demonstrate by their actions) of their wrong way of life, they are welcomed back.

-----Answer-----
I understand your confusion and at times even feelings of anger aver this.  You are missing out on your family and your families are missing out on you.

I am sorry you felt that the only option you had was to disassociate yourself. Unfortunately I do not understand why you feel it was your only option. My father in law stopped going to meetings before I met my wife and he never disassociated himself, he just drifted away, and we had him at our wedding and visit each other often.

As I said in the first answer you would possible be surprised that many JWs do not see eye to eye on all that the WTS prints.

For example you pointed something about 1914.  The WTS has not changed their mind on 1914.  Their understanding of the word generation and the way Jesus used it has changed.  For many years I did not think their view of “generation” was correct. That is one example of things I have not fully followed. (there are others) but I will not say that my thoughts are any more correct then theirs.

The response of your mother in law is just cruel and I find my self getting annoyed when JWs speak like that.  What she said is not, I repeat, is not the official JW response.  Unfortunately too MANY JWs SEE THIS MATTER ONLY IN BLACK AND WHITE which is a shame.  They seem to chose to hear only the negatives.  I hope I can show that   there is nothing stopping her from acknowledging you and your family when you met on the stree or out shopping. However for non family members this would (in most instances, be the case).  As  Public Tax Accountant I have had disfellowshiped clients.

It is true that we take “ disfellowshipping” and “disassociation” serious as from the accounts in the Bible, that is important for Christians to do.

As I said in the first reply the WTS realizes that family ties still exist and that there is a need to be civil to each other.  Where grand children are involved, JWs are told that is appropriate for JW grandparents to visit with children of EX JWs

I have done a search and found some articles that address this

*** w83 1/1 p. 31 Questions From Readers ***
Another sort of loss may be felt by loyal Christian grandparents whose children have been disfellowshipped. They may have been accustomed to visiting regularly with their children, giving them occasion to enjoy their grandchildren. Now the parents are disfellowshipped because of rejecting Jehovah’s standards and ways. So things are not the same in the family. Of course, the grandparents have to determine if some necessary family matters require limited contact with the disfellowshipped children. AND THEY MIGHT SOMETIMES HAVE THE GRANDCHILDREN VISIT THEm. How sad, though, that by their unchristian course the children interfere with the normal pleasure that such grandparents enjoyed  (capitals mine)


In the above, the JW and the EX JW family members must have some sort of conversation when grand children are dropped of and or picked up.



*** w74 8/1 p. 471 par. 21 Maintaining a Balanced Viewpoint Toward Disfellowshiped Ones ***
21 As to disfellowshiped family members (not minor sons or daughters) living outside the home, EACH FAMILY MUST DECIDE TO WHAT EXTENT THEY WILL HAVE ASSOCIATION WITH SUCH ONES. THIS IS NOT SOMETHING THAT THE CONGREGATIONAL ELDERS CAN DECIDE FOR THEM. What the elders are concerned with is that “leaven” is not reintroduced into the congregation through spiritual fellowshiping with those who had to be removed as such “leaven.” THUS, IF A DISFELLOWSHIPED PARENT GOES TO VISIT A SON OR DAUGHTER OR TO SEE GRANDCHILDREN AND IS ALLOWED TO ENTER THE CHRISTIAN HOME, THIS IS NOT THE CONCERN OF THE ELDERS. Such a one has a natural right to visit his blood relatives and his offspring. Similarly, when sons or daughters render honor to a parent, though disfellowshiped, by calling to see how such a one’s physical health is or what needs he or she may have, this act in itself is not a spiritual fellowshiping. (capitals mine)

What JW relatives (parents) would not do is be involved in bedating spiritual things ir ideas with their son/ daughter that has been disfellowshiped/ dissacociated.

In the next article both sides of the situation are discussed, that is no setting of rules for family association but at the same time trying to maintain  a scriptural balance.

*** w81 9/15 pp. 29-31 If a Relative Is Disfellowshiped . . . ***
DISFELLOWSHIPED RELATIVES NOT LIVING AT HOME
18 The second situation that we need to consider is that involving a disfellowshiped or disassociated relative who is not in the immediate family circle or living at one’s home. Such a person is still related by blood or marriage, and so there may be some limited need to care for necessary family matters. Nonetheless, it is not as if he were living in the same home where contact and conversation could not be avoided. We should keep clearly in mind the Bible’s inspired direction: “Quit mixing in company with anyone called a brother that is a fornicator or a greedy person . . . , not even eating with such a man.”—1 Cor. 5:11.
19 Consequently, Christians related to such a disfellowshiped person living outside the home should strive to avoid needless association, even keeping business dealings to a minimum.
SOCIAL GATHERINGS AND DISFELLOWSHIPED RELATIVES
22 Normally, relatives are often together at meals, picnics, family reunions or other social gatherings. But when someone has unrepentantly pursued sin and has had to be disfellowshiped, he may cause difficulties for his Christian relatives in regard to such gatherings. While they realize that they are still related to him, they do not want to ignore Paul’s advice that faithful Christians should “quit mixing in company” with an expelled sinner.
23 THERE IS NO POINT IN LOOKING FOR SOME RULE AS TO FAMILY MEMBERS BEING AT GATHERINGS WHERE A DISFELLOWSHIPED RELATIVE MIGHT BE PRESENT. THIS WOULD BE SOMETHING FOR THOSE CONCERNED TO RESOLVE, IN KEEPING WITH PAUL’S COUNSEL. (1 Cor. 5:11) And yet it should be appreciated that if a disfellowshiped person is going to be at a gathering to which nonrelative Witnesses are invited, that may well affect what others do. For example, a Christian couple might be getting married at a Kingdom Hall. If a disfellowshiped relative comes to the Kingdom Hall for the wedding, obviously he could not be in the bridal party there or “give away” the bride. What, though, if there is a wedding feast or reception? This can be a happy social occasion, as it was in Cana when Jesus attended. (John 2:1, 2) But will the disfellowshiped relative be allowed to come or even be invited? If he was going to attend, many Christians, relatives or not, might conclude that they should not be there, to eat and associate with him, in view of Paul’s directions at 1 Corinthians 5:11.
24 Thus, sometimes Christians may not feel able to have a disfellowshiped or disassociated relative present for a gathering that normally would include family members. Still, the Christians can enjoy the association of the loyal members of the congregation, having in mind Jesus’ words: “Whoever does the will of God, this one is my brother and sister and mother.”—Mark 3:35.
25 The fact is that when a Christian gives himself over to sin and has to be disfellowshiped, he forfeits much: his approved standing with God; membership in the happy congregation of Christians; sweet fellowship with the brothers, including much of the association he had with Christian relatives. (1 Pet. 2:17) The pain he has caused may even survive him.

26 Should he die while disfellowshiped, arrangements for his funeral may be a problem. His Christian relatives may like to have had a talk at the Kingdom Hall, if that is the local custom. But that would not be fitting for a person expelled from the congregation. If he had been giving evidence of repentance and wanting God’s forgiveness, such as by ceasing to practice sin and by attending Christian meetings, some brother’s conscience might allow him to give a Bible talk at the funeral home or grave site. Such Biblical comments about the condition of the dead provide a witness to unbelievers or comfort to the relatives. HOWEVER, IF THE DISFELLOWSHIPED PERSON HAD STILL BEEN ADVOCATING FALSE TEACHINGS OR UNGODLY CONDUCT, EVEN SUCH A TALK WOULD NOT BE APPROPRIATE.—2 JOHN 9-11.

I hope I have been able to give you a more balanced view of the situation and to demonstrate that it is THE PERSONAL CHOICE OF YOUR FAMILIES and not JWs as a whole.


Answer
Hello Janelle

The earliest mention in Watchtower literature of disfellowshiping that I found goes back to 1944.  I am trying to find a copy of the article from the 1940s

Any JW that goes beyond the information that I have already posted are going beyond Bible principles.  As you have seen from what I wrote, even from the information to follow family ties should not be completely dissolved.

You haven't told me much from what you did say your families were acting outside scriptural guidelines and the guidelines of the WTS.   In any case of "disfellowshipping" there has to be 2 accusers that accuse the individual face to face, and the accused is / should be allowed their own witnesses.  There are also 2 avenues of appeal. So I am very distraught at what you said concerning your families.

The below article is the one you mention.  It males the point that in the pre Christian Bible times, those that willfully disobeyed Gods laws were put to death.  It makes it clear that we are no longer under such laws (thank goodness) so individuals that are disfellowshiped or disassociated are to be treated differently.  There are some portions in capitals.  These are mine to highlight that the article was not saying "If we could we would'± kill such ones."

*** w52 11/15 pp. 703-704 Questions From Readers ***
Questions From Readers

¡ñ In the case of where a father or mother or son or daughter is disfellowshiped, how should such person be treated by members of the family in their family relationship?

We are not living today among theocratic nations where such members of our fleshly family relationship could be exterminated for apostasy from God and his theocratic organization, as was possible and was ordered in the nation of Israel in the wilderness of Sinai and in the land of Palestine. "Thou shalt surely kill him; thy hand shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterwards the hand of all the people. And thou shalt stone him to death with stones, because he hath sought to draw thee away from Jehovah thy God, . . . And all Israel shall hear, and fear, and shall do no more any such wickedness as this is in the midst of thee.¡" Deut. 13:6-11, ASV.

Being limited by the laws of the worldly nation in which we live and also by the laws of God through Jesus Christ, WE CAN TAKE ACTION AGAINST APOSTATES ONLY TO A CERTAIN EXTENT, THAT IS, CONSISTENT WITH BOTH SETS OF LAWS. The law of the land and GOD'S LAW THROUGH CHRIST FORBID US TO KILL apostates, even though they be members of our own flesh-and-blood family relationship. However, God's law requires us to recognize their being disfellowshiped from his congregation, and this despite the fact that the law of the land in which we live requires us under some natural obligation to live with and have dealings with such apostates under the same roof.

GOD'S LAW DOES NOT ALLOW A MARRIAGE PARTNER TO DISMISS HIS MATE BECAUSE HIS MATE BECOMES DISFELLOWSHIPED OR APOSTATIZES. Neither will the law of the land in most cases allow a divorce to be granted on such grounds. The faithful believer and the apostate or disfellowshiped mate must legally continue to live together and render proper marriage dues one to the other. A father may not legally dismiss his minor child from his household because of apostasy or disfellowshiping, and a minor child or children may not abandon their father or their mother just because he becomes unfaithful to God and his theocratic organization. The parent must by laws of God and of man fulfill his parental obligations to the child or children as long as they are dependent minors, and the child or children must render filial submission to the parent as long as legally underage or as long as being without parental consent to depart from the home. Of course, if the children are of age, then there can be a departing and breaking of family ties in a physical way, because the spiritual ties have already snapped.

If children are of age and continue to associate with a disfellowshiped parent because of receiving material support from him or her, then they must consider how far their spiritual interests are being endangered by continuing under this unequal arrangement, and whether they can arrange to support themselves, living apart from the fallen-away parent. Their continuing to receive material support should not make them compromise so as to ignore the disfellowshiped state of the parent. If, because of acting according to the disfellowship order of the company of God¡¯s people, they become threatened with a withdrawal of the parental support, then they must be willing to take such consequences.

Satan's influence through the disfellowshiped member of the family will be to cause the other member or members of the family who are in the truth to join the disfellowshiped member in his course or in his position toward God's organization. To do this would be disastrous, and so the faithful family member must recognize and conform to the disfellowship order. How would or could this be done while living under the same roof or in personal, physical contact daily with the disfellowshiped? In this way: By refusing to have religious relationship with the disfellowshiped.

The marriage partner would render the marriage dues according to the law of the land and in due payment for all material benefits bestowed and accepted. But to have religious communion with the disfellowshiped person¡ªno, there would be none of that! The faithful marriage partner would not discuss religion with the apostate or disfellowshiped and would not accompany that one to his (or her) place of religious association and participate in the meetings with that one. As Jesus said: "If he does not listen even to the congregation [which was obliged to disfellowship him], let him be to you just as a man of the nations and as a tax collector [to Jehovah¡¯s sanctified nation]." (Matt. 18:17, NW) Hurt to such one would not be authorized, but there would be no spiritual or religious fellowshiping.

The same rule would apply to those who are in the relation of parent and child or of child and parent. WHAT NATURAL OBLIGATION FALLS UPON THEM ACCORDING TO MAN'S LAW AND GOD'S LAW THE FAITHFUL PARENT OR THE FAITHFUL CHILD WILL COMPLY WITH. But as for rendering more than that and having religious fellowship with such one in violation of the congregation's disfellowship order, none of that for the faithful one! If the faithful suffers in some material or other way for the faithful adherence to theocratic law, then he must accept this as suffering for righteousness sake.

The purpose of observing the disfellowship order is to make the disfellowshiped one realize the error of his way and to shame him, if possible, so that he may be recovered, and also to safeguard your own salvation to life in the new world in vindication of God. (2 Thess. 3:14, 15; Titus 2:8) Because of being in close, indissoluble natural family ties and being of the same household under the one roof you may have to eat material food and live physically with that one at home, in which case 1 Corinthians 5:9-11 and 2 John 10 could not apply; but do not defeat the purpose of the congregation's disfellowship order BY EATING SPIRITUAL OR RELIGIOUS FOOD WITH SUCH ONE OR RECEIVING SUCH ONE FAVORABLY IN A RELIGIOUS WAY AND BIDDING HIM FAREWELL WITH A WISH FOR HIS PROSPERITY IN HIS APOSTATE COURSE.