Is membership of professional bodies forbidden by Christianity?
January 6, 2010 3:32 AM Subscribe
Is membership of professional bodies forbidden by Christianity?
I work for a large accountancy firm. Someone has applied for a job on the firm's graduate scheme which would involve them training for three years towards a professional accountancy qualification. At the end of those three years in order to seal the qualification the employee has to join the professional accountancy body (paying a joining fee and a yearly subscription).
The candidate in question has said that they are not allowed to do this for religious reasons. He/she has indicated that he/she is a Christian but I have no more detail than that.
I have never heard of this before and Google is also turning up a blank. Does anyone know what part of the Christian Bible and/or which flavour of Christianity would prevent such membership?
This is purely for my own personal interest - I have no influence over the recruitment or non-recruitment of this person.
I work for a large accountancy firm. Someone has applied for a job on the firm's graduate scheme which would involve them training for three years towards a professional accountancy qualification. At the end of those three years in order to seal the qualification the employee has to join the professional accountancy body (paying a joining fee and a yearly subscription).
The candidate in question has said that they are not allowed to do this for religious reasons. He/she has indicated that he/she is a Christian but I have no more detail than that.
I have never heard of this before and Google is also turning up a blank. Does anyone know what part of the Christian Bible and/or which flavour of Christianity would prevent such membership?
This is purely for my own personal interest - I have no influence over the recruitment or non-recruitment of this person.
This post was deleted for the following reason: poster's request -- cortex
Response by poster: Thanks b33j. However, the site you link to is appears to be an anti-JW site (or at least doesn't reference any JW sources). I work with a JW who does not have any issue with joining the professional accountancy body and therefore my experience does not tally with the website's claim.
My understanding of JW doctrine is there is no wriggle room at all when it comes to what JW's are allowed and not allowed to do. Is my colleague breaking the rules? Does anyone have any first hand experience of this? Wikipedia's entry (though obviously not the ideal source) on JW's does not mention anything about membership of professional bodies or even 'clubs' as forbidden unless they are affiliated to another church. As far as I can see, a JW could become a member of an accountancy institute and still maintain their 'separateness'. Am I wrong in that interpretation?
posted by jonnyploy at 4:20 AM on January 6, 2010
My understanding of JW doctrine is there is no wriggle room at all when it comes to what JW's are allowed and not allowed to do. Is my colleague breaking the rules? Does anyone have any first hand experience of this? Wikipedia's entry (though obviously not the ideal source) on JW's does not mention anything about membership of professional bodies or even 'clubs' as forbidden unless they are affiliated to another church. As far as I can see, a JW could become a member of an accountancy institute and still maintain their 'separateness'. Am I wrong in that interpretation?
posted by jonnyploy at 4:20 AM on January 6, 2010
This isn't a part of mainstream Christianity.
In fact the guilds, the medieval ancestor of professional bodies, were very closely tied to the church. If it were a widely-held belief, it would prevent Christians from becoming doctors, nurses, social workers, teachers, etc. So it’s definitely non-standard.
A church which does teach this is probably going down the route of ‘you shouldn’t give your loyalty to anything that is not God’.
For your interest, there's no mention of professional bodies in the Bible as such. To my mind, the closest comparable ideas would be:
• Soldiers – who would have sworn a loyalty oath
• Purple cloth traders – would have been a highly regulated industry. Lydia was one while being a highly significant Christian leader and bankrolling St Paul & co.
• The silverworkers of Ephesus – who caused a riot when St Paul’s preaching threatened their lucrative trade in statues of the goddess Artemis.
posted by sleepy boy at 4:25 AM on January 6, 2010
In fact the guilds, the medieval ancestor of professional bodies, were very closely tied to the church. If it were a widely-held belief, it would prevent Christians from becoming doctors, nurses, social workers, teachers, etc. So it’s definitely non-standard.
A church which does teach this is probably going down the route of ‘you shouldn’t give your loyalty to anything that is not God’.
For your interest, there's no mention of professional bodies in the Bible as such. To my mind, the closest comparable ideas would be:
• Soldiers – who would have sworn a loyalty oath
• Purple cloth traders – would have been a highly regulated industry. Lydia was one while being a highly significant Christian leader and bankrolling St Paul & co.
• The silverworkers of Ephesus – who caused a riot when St Paul’s preaching threatened their lucrative trade in statues of the goddess Artemis.
posted by sleepy boy at 4:25 AM on January 6, 2010
You're right, jonnyploy. I didn't critically examine the site before posting it, and while I won't ask the mods to remove my comment because yours follows it, I do agree that that it appears to be very biased. I did then go to the Watchtower site to see if I could verify the position there, and while there were some biblical passages that could be interpreted that way (by anyone), I found no official notification that the membership of other organizations was inappropriate.
posted by b33j at 4:42 AM on January 6, 2010
posted by b33j at 4:42 AM on January 6, 2010
This wikipedia article, Beliefs and Practices of Jehovah's Witnesses, says:
Witnesses are urged to restrict to the minimum their social contact with non-members because of perceived dangers of worldly association.
and
Association with those outside the organization, commonly referred to by Witnesses as "worldly" and "not in the Truth", is acceptable only when it is viewed as an opportunity to preach
posted by marsha56 at 4:56 AM on January 6, 2010
Witnesses are urged to restrict to the minimum their social contact with non-members because of perceived dangers of worldly association.
and
Association with those outside the organization, commonly referred to by Witnesses as "worldly" and "not in the Truth", is acceptable only when it is viewed as an opportunity to preach
posted by marsha56 at 4:56 AM on January 6, 2010
The only thing I know of that's at all similar is that Catholics are prohibited from joining secret societies, mainly the Freemasons.
Also, it appears that Seventh Day Adventists may have some objection to labor unions and secular progressive institutions in general, but I can't say I'm really familiar with the subject.
posted by electroboy at 5:23 AM on January 6, 2010
Also, it appears that Seventh Day Adventists may have some objection to labor unions and secular progressive institutions in general, but I can't say I'm really familiar with the subject.
posted by electroboy at 5:23 AM on January 6, 2010
There are no prohibitions against things like professional associations in any of the mainstream orthodox traditions, i.e. Catholicism, Protestantism, Orthodoxy. Historically, quite a number of professional societies have been formed by Christians. Take a look at this Google search for "worshipful company" and you'll see what I mean. That was a traditional name for any number of "professional" groups, dating back to the age of guilds. That list includes: liveriers, musicians, fletchers, knitters, glovers, architects, broiderers, and farriers. On the first page. These groups are centuries old, and would have included explicit Christian references in their original makeup.
That being said, it would not be at all surprising for some random American sect ("denomination" suggests something more organized than what we're going for here) to come up with an ahistorical quirk of its own. It's happened before. Some of these you know about, e.g. teetotalism, Mormonism, etc., but others are downright idiosyncratic and strange. So while there is no historical prohibition in Christianity per se, there is nothing to say that some strange but recognizably Christian community up in Them Thar HillsTM hasn't come up with this on its own.
posted by valkyryn at 5:42 AM on January 6, 2010
That being said, it would not be at all surprising for some random American sect ("denomination" suggests something more organized than what we're going for here) to come up with an ahistorical quirk of its own. It's happened before. Some of these you know about, e.g. teetotalism, Mormonism, etc., but others are downright idiosyncratic and strange. So while there is no historical prohibition in Christianity per se, there is nothing to say that some strange but recognizably Christian community up in Them Thar HillsTM hasn't come up with this on its own.
posted by valkyryn at 5:42 AM on January 6, 2010
The sect I grew up with (literalist/fundamentalist, but of the sort that has gotten more and more common, and "non-denominational") forbade membership in "societies," as such. I remember a lot of references to it, but can't remember the exact reasoning. I'm pretty sure it had something to do with Jesus's commandment to never take an oath during the sermon on the mount.
Now, I don't think professional societies would have been covered even by that blanket ban (I think it was mostly to keep away from freemasons and labor unions — you know, the satanist groups), and, of course, there's a chance your candidate has misinterpreted their pastor. Now, is this common in other mainstream Christian sects? I haven't witnessed this ban or belief anywhere else. (I've been a mainstream protestant with catholic tendencies now all my adult life.)
posted by General Malaise at 5:53 AM on January 6, 2010
Now, I don't think professional societies would have been covered even by that blanket ban (I think it was mostly to keep away from freemasons and labor unions — you know, the satanist groups), and, of course, there's a chance your candidate has misinterpreted their pastor. Now, is this common in other mainstream Christian sects? I haven't witnessed this ban or belief anywhere else. (I've been a mainstream protestant with catholic tendencies now all my adult life.)
posted by General Malaise at 5:53 AM on January 6, 2010
I am not questioning anyone's honesty, but could it just be an excuse or a cop-out because they would rather not reveal (in depth) why they really don't want to join this outfit? "I can't _____ because of Religious Reasons" might allow them to scrape by and get recruited without having to commit to joining the professional accountancy body, because the firm might be afraid of probing and opening themselves up to accusations of religious discrimination.
...although that seems like a stretch.
posted by ostranenie at 6:04 AM on January 6, 2010
...although that seems like a stretch.
posted by ostranenie at 6:04 AM on January 6, 2010
I grew up Seventh-day Adventist and there is no formal or informal disavowal of membership of professional bodies, at least not one that is preached from the pulpit or discussed in any large degree (and I worked for the church for a while). Indeed, many people (my devout parents included) participated in professional and social clubs publicly, and the church-run universities encouarge participation in many student and professional organizations.
The article electroboy linked to is mostly a historical examination of why Adventists are so "meh" about anything secular, since they believe it's all going to be imminently destroyed anyway. Of particular concern in any of the labor union disagreements are the lack of a "conscience clause" which might violate other facets of Adventist belief, including working on the seventh-day sabbath. Adventists feel strongly that at any moment they as a group will begin being persecuted and labor/commerce is a big part of that. Since labor unions demand strict loyalty, this would be problematic without a conscience clause that would allow them to decline certain activities. So I don't think it's a blanket refusal to participate in clubs/groups/unions, but a demand for recognition that their religious beliefs must come first, which the labor unions don't take kindly to.
If this person feels so staunchly about their decision, do you think you could approach them from a curiosity angle and ask them more about their beliefs? Any Christian I know who breaks out the "religious reason" card is more than willing to talk about why they set themselves apart. Some of them are very preachy about it but not all of them.
posted by peanut_mcgillicuty at 6:21 AM on January 6, 2010
The article electroboy linked to is mostly a historical examination of why Adventists are so "meh" about anything secular, since they believe it's all going to be imminently destroyed anyway. Of particular concern in any of the labor union disagreements are the lack of a "conscience clause" which might violate other facets of Adventist belief, including working on the seventh-day sabbath. Adventists feel strongly that at any moment they as a group will begin being persecuted and labor/commerce is a big part of that. Since labor unions demand strict loyalty, this would be problematic without a conscience clause that would allow them to decline certain activities. So I don't think it's a blanket refusal to participate in clubs/groups/unions, but a demand for recognition that their religious beliefs must come first, which the labor unions don't take kindly to.
If this person feels so staunchly about their decision, do you think you could approach them from a curiosity angle and ask them more about their beliefs? Any Christian I know who breaks out the "religious reason" card is more than willing to talk about why they set themselves apart. Some of them are very preachy about it but not all of them.
posted by peanut_mcgillicuty at 6:21 AM on January 6, 2010
Also, in some large urban areas there can be small sects (see storefront churches) that have some unusual beliefs, but those are certainly not mainstream.
posted by electroboy at 6:26 AM on January 6, 2010
posted by electroboy at 6:26 AM on January 6, 2010
> forbidden by Christianity?
>
The problem is that this bit here is meaningless. Christianity is too broad and varied for this to be answerable. The Amish (actually, only some Amish, and some other non-Amish hyper-conservative Christian denominations) don't use zippers. So if your applicant was of that particular flavor of Christianity, he would have a problem with zippers.
Some protestant denominations forbid the swearing of oaths, which can cause problems in joining some organizations or holding some offices (might not be possible for a Mennonite to be president?).
So yes, your applicant could have a religious problem with joining a formal organization. Or, of course, he might just not want to.
posted by madmethods at 6:40 AM on January 6, 2010
>
The problem is that this bit here is meaningless. Christianity is too broad and varied for this to be answerable. The Amish (actually, only some Amish, and some other non-Amish hyper-conservative Christian denominations) don't use zippers. So if your applicant was of that particular flavor of Christianity, he would have a problem with zippers.
Some protestant denominations forbid the swearing of oaths, which can cause problems in joining some organizations or holding some offices (might not be possible for a Mennonite to be president?).
So yes, your applicant could have a religious problem with joining a formal organization. Or, of course, he might just not want to.
posted by madmethods at 6:40 AM on January 6, 2010
If this person feels so staunchly about their decision, do you think you could approach them from a curiosity angle and ask them more about their beliefs? Any Christian I know who breaks out the "religious reason" card is more than willing to talk about why they set themselves apart. Some of them are very preachy about it but not all of them.
IANAL, but in an employment context I would suggest that probing an employment candidate's religious beliefs is a no-go without talking to your company's lawyers (and probably having them do the asking if it goes that far, which I suspect it would not).
posted by onshi at 6:42 AM on January 6, 2010
IANAL, but in an employment context I would suggest that probing an employment candidate's religious beliefs is a no-go without talking to your company's lawyers (and probably having them do the asking if it goes that far, which I suspect it would not).
posted by onshi at 6:42 AM on January 6, 2010
I was a member of the Curch of God (based out of Cleveland, Tennesee) years ago, and they had rules against swearing oaths (you could say "I affirm" instead of "I swear") and rules against belonging to organizations. I thing the "organizations" they were concerned about were more along the lines of fraternal organization such as the Masons. The reasoning seemed to be that membership in such an organization conflicted with church membership due to divided allegience.
I can see how someone could take such a rule to the extreme and exclude membership in any organization besides the church.
posted by The Deej at 6:56 AM on January 6, 2010
I can see how someone could take such a rule to the extreme and exclude membership in any organization besides the church.
posted by The Deej at 6:56 AM on January 6, 2010
You can't ask them specifically about religious restrictions, but you can still tell them that the training and fee is a requirement. It's not discrimination if it's a clearly known job requirement.
FWIW, as a Christian (protestant, non-JW) I have never been aware of any restrictions on belonging to professional clubs.
posted by carlh at 7:00 AM on January 6, 2010
FWIW, as a Christian (protestant, non-JW) I have never been aware of any restrictions on belonging to professional clubs.
posted by carlh at 7:00 AM on January 6, 2010
IANAL, but in an employment context I would suggest that probing an employment candidate's religious beliefs is a no-go without talking to your company's lawyers (and probably having them do the asking if it goes that far, which I suspect it would not).
The OP clearly states that he is asking out of curiosity and has no influence on the recruitment process. Workplace religious protection covers harrassment and employment-related issues; a coworker politely asking about another's beliefs out of interest or curiosity isn't out of line. If the religious dissenter doesn't want to talk about it, that's certainly his right as well, but I very much doubt that a simple question would be a problem.
Full disclosure: I work in a huge multi-national corporation with people of varying beliefs and we have these types of conversations at times. We're all adults about it, and it's very interesting to learn what other people believe and why. Approached the right way, this is an opportunity to learn about someone else, and doesn't infringe upon anyone's rights or privacy.
posted by peanut_mcgillicuty at 7:34 AM on January 6, 2010
The OP clearly states that he is asking out of curiosity and has no influence on the recruitment process. Workplace religious protection covers harrassment and employment-related issues; a coworker politely asking about another's beliefs out of interest or curiosity isn't out of line. If the religious dissenter doesn't want to talk about it, that's certainly his right as well, but I very much doubt that a simple question would be a problem.
Full disclosure: I work in a huge multi-national corporation with people of varying beliefs and we have these types of conversations at times. We're all adults about it, and it's very interesting to learn what other people believe and why. Approached the right way, this is an opportunity to learn about someone else, and doesn't infringe upon anyone's rights or privacy.
posted by peanut_mcgillicuty at 7:34 AM on January 6, 2010
Peanut_mcgillicuty: I do agree with you that "a coworker politely asking about another's beliefs out of interest or curiosity isn't out of line", but I trying to highlight that in this case the religious dissenting is not a "coworker" but a job applicant. I do not think that the difference is insignificant, given that as an applicant he/she is about to be granted or denied employment at least in part on the basis of the interaction between his/her religious beliefs and the requirements of the position. I think those circumstances do call for more discretion.
The OP does state that he has no influence over the recruitment, and I have no reason do doubt this, but to an outside observer a specific request for detailed information about an applicant's religious beliefs from someone inside the potential employer strikes me as imprudent in these circumstances. Seeking out potential answers as to the source of the religious objection from sources other than the application (like AskMe), on the other hand, is a great idea.
posted by onshi at 7:57 AM on January 6, 2010 [1 favorite]
The OP does state that he has no influence over the recruitment, and I have no reason do doubt this, but to an outside observer a specific request for detailed information about an applicant's religious beliefs from someone inside the potential employer strikes me as imprudent in these circumstances. Seeking out potential answers as to the source of the religious objection from sources other than the application (like AskMe), on the other hand, is a great idea.
posted by onshi at 7:57 AM on January 6, 2010 [1 favorite]
Bah, apologies for all of the typos in my previous post :(
posted by onshi at 8:23 AM on January 6, 2010
posted by onshi at 8:23 AM on January 6, 2010
Best answer: As others have said, don't ask the job applicant to elucidate, because it would be inappropriate.
So what have we established?
A) Obviously, joining professional associations is not a problem for most sects of Christianity.
B) One MeFite who was a member of the Church of God (Cleveland, Tennessee) reports that some members of that denomination might have interpreted restrictions on fraternal organizations (Masons, etc.) to encompass all voluntary organizations.
I have known someone who was a member of a Protestant Reformed Churches in America congregation whose interpretation of the bit in 1 Corinthians about not "yoking with unbelievers" included not joining any organization that involved swearing an oath or subscribing to a professional code. This pamphlet from the PRCA website outlines similar points in regard to joining labor unions.
Personally, as an Episcopalian, I find it the height of arrogance when someone says "I don't do X because I am a Christian" when the vast majority of Christians do X all the time. But that's me.
posted by Sidhedevil at 8:34 AM on January 6, 2010 [2 favorites]
So what have we established?
A) Obviously, joining professional associations is not a problem for most sects of Christianity.
B) One MeFite who was a member of the Church of God (Cleveland, Tennessee) reports that some members of that denomination might have interpreted restrictions on fraternal organizations (Masons, etc.) to encompass all voluntary organizations.
I have known someone who was a member of a Protestant Reformed Churches in America congregation whose interpretation of the bit in 1 Corinthians about not "yoking with unbelievers" included not joining any organization that involved swearing an oath or subscribing to a professional code. This pamphlet from the PRCA website outlines similar points in regard to joining labor unions.
Personally, as an Episcopalian, I find it the height of arrogance when someone says "I don't do X because I am a Christian" when the vast majority of Christians do X all the time. But that's me.
posted by Sidhedevil at 8:34 AM on January 6, 2010 [2 favorites]
Response by poster: Thanks very much for all the great replies so far everyone!
I'll just clear up a few things first:
1) I couldn't ask this person even if I wanted to as I have no contact details (not even a name). I was told about this by someone who is indirectly involved in the recruitment process and wanted to know if I had heard of anything like this before.
2) I'm from the UK (my impression is that we have fewer 'out there' sects here than in the US, although that view is not based on anything and I'll be happy to be shown to be wrong).
3) The professional body concerned is the Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales (ICAEW) and the letters that you get to put after your name once qualified are ACA. There is no ceremony/oath/hand-on-bible or anything like that involved in joining. Once you've completed all your exams, you fill out a form online, send the institute a cheque for the joining fee. Then once a year you fill out a very simple tick-box form to say that you have met the criteria required to remain a member and send them another cheque for that year's subscription fee. What's even more puzzling is that the candidate would be 'student member' of the institute during the training phase. Student membership also involves a fee, but in this case it is paid for by my employer.
So far it remains an intriguing mystery. At the moment I'm leaning towards the possibility that the person in question misunderstands something about the nature of the membership, although I'd love to know what that misunderstanding is if that's the case. That's certainly a less upsetting explanation than dishonesty on the candidate's part, although I agree that can't be ruled out either.
posted by jonnyploy at 9:21 AM on January 6, 2010
I'll just clear up a few things first:
1) I couldn't ask this person even if I wanted to as I have no contact details (not even a name). I was told about this by someone who is indirectly involved in the recruitment process and wanted to know if I had heard of anything like this before.
2) I'm from the UK (my impression is that we have fewer 'out there' sects here than in the US, although that view is not based on anything and I'll be happy to be shown to be wrong).
3) The professional body concerned is the Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales (ICAEW) and the letters that you get to put after your name once qualified are ACA. There is no ceremony/oath/hand-on-bible or anything like that involved in joining. Once you've completed all your exams, you fill out a form online, send the institute a cheque for the joining fee. Then once a year you fill out a very simple tick-box form to say that you have met the criteria required to remain a member and send them another cheque for that year's subscription fee. What's even more puzzling is that the candidate would be 'student member' of the institute during the training phase. Student membership also involves a fee, but in this case it is paid for by my employer.
So far it remains an intriguing mystery. At the moment I'm leaning towards the possibility that the person in question misunderstands something about the nature of the membership, although I'd love to know what that misunderstanding is if that's the case. That's certainly a less upsetting explanation than dishonesty on the candidate's part, although I agree that can't be ruled out either.
posted by jonnyploy at 9:21 AM on January 6, 2010
At the moment I'm leaning towards the possibility that the person in question misunderstands something about the nature of the membership
Or possibly, they misunderstand something about the nature of their church rules?
posted by ian1977 at 9:36 AM on January 6, 2010
Or possibly, they misunderstand something about the nature of their church rules?
posted by ian1977 at 9:36 AM on January 6, 2010
It is not true that "Jehovah's Witnesses can't belong to a club." I was a member of the French and debate clubs in high school. There are Jehovah's Witnesses who are college and professional athletes, just as many Jehovah's Witnesses are in unions. I'm embarrassed to admit that I don't know any Jehovah's Witnesses who are members of professional organizations...because I am something of a recluse and all the friends I do have are poor or working class. I know for a fact that there is no prohibition against joining professional organizations, however..
Jehovah's Witnesses, like many religions, leave many matters to the individual's conscience guided by the principles found in our holy text, the Bible. The honing and development of a spiritual conscience is very important to us. Therefore, each of us strives to examine our choices in light of scriptural principles, and pay particular attention to the "unintended consequences" that may arise as a result of the decisions we make. So we ask questions, make decisions according to our understanding of Bible principles, pray, and live as best we can.
Here is an example of how someone might reach a decision, from a publication entitled "School and Jehovah's Witnesses:
*** sj pp. 24-25 Extracurricular Activities ***
Important questions that Witness youths and their parents would consider are these: Are the club’s activities limited to school hours? Do they come under close school supervision? Will belonging to the club require time after school that would be better spent in family or congregational activities?
Thus, a Witness child might decide not to join a particular club, and it's simpler to say "for religious reasons" if you don't feel like going into a long explanation. Whereas another might decide that it's fine to join this particular club and do so.
posted by Danila at 9:42 AM on January 6, 2010
Jehovah's Witnesses, like many religions, leave many matters to the individual's conscience guided by the principles found in our holy text, the Bible. The honing and development of a spiritual conscience is very important to us. Therefore, each of us strives to examine our choices in light of scriptural principles, and pay particular attention to the "unintended consequences" that may arise as a result of the decisions we make. So we ask questions, make decisions according to our understanding of Bible principles, pray, and live as best we can.
Here is an example of how someone might reach a decision, from a publication entitled "School and Jehovah's Witnesses:
*** sj pp. 24-25 Extracurricular Activities ***
Important questions that Witness youths and their parents would consider are these: Are the club’s activities limited to school hours? Do they come under close school supervision? Will belonging to the club require time after school that would be better spent in family or congregational activities?
Thus, a Witness child might decide not to join a particular club, and it's simpler to say "for religious reasons" if you don't feel like going into a long explanation. Whereas another might decide that it's fine to join this particular club and do so.
posted by Danila at 9:42 AM on January 6, 2010
should have previewed
It's a stretch for me to believe that this person is a JW because they won't join this organization. I personally can't think of why it would be a problem. However, I think the gist of my comment would still apply regardless of the religion. I think my main point is that even if one member of a religion won't do something, that doesn't mean there is necessarily a conflict.
posted by Danila at 9:45 AM on January 6, 2010
It's a stretch for me to believe that this person is a JW because they won't join this organization. I personally can't think of why it would be a problem. However, I think the gist of my comment would still apply regardless of the religion. I think my main point is that even if one member of a religion won't do something, that doesn't mean there is necessarily a conflict.
posted by Danila at 9:45 AM on January 6, 2010
I'm from the UK (my impression is that we have fewer 'out there' sects here than in the US, although that view is not based on anything and I'll be happy to be shown to be wrong).
Probably fewer, but most of the "out there" sects in the US are descendants of "out there" sects from the UK, and of course there are "missionaries" from US sects in the UK these days.
I'm going to make an armchair guess and say that if this person self-describes simply as "Christian" he is a member of a group related in some way to the Plymouth Brethren. I have heard of groups affiliated with this tradition who teach that members should not vote or belong to a political party, so perhaps this person comes from a group that extends that teaching to professional organizations as well?
posted by Sidhedevil at 9:48 AM on January 6, 2010
Probably fewer, but most of the "out there" sects in the US are descendants of "out there" sects from the UK, and of course there are "missionaries" from US sects in the UK these days.
I'm going to make an armchair guess and say that if this person self-describes simply as "Christian" he is a member of a group related in some way to the Plymouth Brethren. I have heard of groups affiliated with this tradition who teach that members should not vote or belong to a political party, so perhaps this person comes from a group that extends that teaching to professional organizations as well?
posted by Sidhedevil at 9:48 AM on January 6, 2010
Also, I would reiterate that the "things Jehovah's Witnesses Can't Do" site is factually wrong, starting with the very first item on the list, which is of course relevant to this thread. But a lot of the items are flat-out wrong, not even matters of opinion.
posted by Danila at 9:55 AM on January 6, 2010
posted by Danila at 9:55 AM on January 6, 2010
I wonder why this person got into a profession that was going to require him/her to join something his/her religion forbids. Seems pretty shortsighted unless person is a recent convert.
posted by mareli at 10:38 AM on January 6, 2010
posted by mareli at 10:38 AM on January 6, 2010
Response by poster: Further details have now emerged and the passage involved is 2 Corinthians 6 verse 14 which the person in question interprets as preventing him from joining the institute which has a code of ethics. As far as I can see this raises more questions than it answers, but then I'm generally of the opinion that living your life by the Bible creates more problems than solutions, so I would say that.
Thanks very much to all who replied, it's been very interesting and I've learnt plenty from it. In particular, I think my previous knowledge of Jehovah's Witnesses was, to put it kindly, one-dimensional.
posted by jonnyploy at 4:53 AM on January 7, 2010
Thanks very much to all who replied, it's been very interesting and I've learnt plenty from it. In particular, I think my previous knowledge of Jehovah's Witnesses was, to put it kindly, one-dimensional.
posted by jonnyploy at 4:53 AM on January 7, 2010
« Older Help me find the stuff I wrote way back when. | Facing naysayers of my work decision Newer »
This thread is closed to new comments.
posted by b33j at 3:40 AM on January 6, 2010