|
JW
DOCTRINE ON BLOOD
(Investigator 10, 1990
January)
In Acts chapter 15 of the Bible the Apostles listed four "necessary things" that Gentile (non-Jewish) Christians had to abstain from:–
Christian
commentaries
show that abstaining
from these "necessary things" was necessary to maintain peace between
Jewish
Christians and Gentile Christians. If Gentile Christians were to eat
blood
with their food it would offend Jewish Christians.
In 1892 the
first
president of the JWs, C
T Russell, agreed with this Christian interpretation. (Zion's Watch
Tower
1892, November 15)
In 1909 Russell
showed
that the four prohibitions
were part of the Law of Moses, didn't really apply to Gentiles, but
were
necessary for peace. He wrote:
observe this matter also." (The Watch Tower 1909 April 15 pp. 116-117) [A photo-copy of this page was reproduced in Investigator but is here omitted.]
Russell's
view of Acts
15 was unaffected
by the discovery in 1901 of the ABO blood groups. Nor did Russell's
followers
object when transfusions saved soldiers' lives in World War I or when
in
the 1920s U.S. hospitals compiled lists of blood donors.
The first hint against blood came in The Watchtower of 1927, December 15 when a 7-page article about killing and murder included this brief comment: "God told Noah
that
every living creature
should be meat unto him; but that he must not eat the blood, because
the
life is
in the blood." (p. 371) In 1939 the
2nd
president of the JWs,
J F Rutherford, wrote:
"… the life is
in the
blood and that blood
must not be eaten. That would be true of a clean animal or an unclean
one
just
the same. …and if an animal is killed and the blood is not poured out, but eaten, then the man who does it is guilty of death, for the reason that no man shall drink blood without dying." (The Watchtower 1939 February 15 p. 62) At this time, around 1940, JWs still accepted blood transfusions. They saw no connection between "eating" and transfusion. The Watchtower statements concerned animal blood anyway and not human blood.
In 1943 December
22, an
article in Consolation
(forerunner to
Awake!) discussed an experiment using horse blood.
The article also attacked vaccination. Then page 23 says: "The divine
prohibition
as to eating or
partaking of blood does not appear to trouble the 'scientists'."
The
Watchtower
1944 December 1
stated:
"Not only as a
descendant of Noah, but
now also as one bound by God's law to Israel which incorporated the
everlasting covenant regarding the sanctity of life sustaining blood, the stranger was forbidden to eat or drink blood, whether by transfusion or by mouth." (Gen. 9:4; Lev. 17:10-14) In the article "Immovable For The Right Worship" The Watchtower (1945 July) again connected transfusion with eating blood and linked avoidance of both with "right worship". There was, however, still no outright prohibition on blood transfusions for JWs. Things became more definite in 1948: "According to
God's law,
humans are not
to take into their system the blood of others. In addition to the
danger
of disobeying God's law, blood transfusion involves health hazards."
(Awake! 1948
October
22 p.12)
By this time
JWs were
starting to avoid
transfusions. The mention of "health hazards" revealed that the JW
leaders
were going to use similar arguments to what they had used against
vaccinations:
"Thinking
people would
rather have smallpox
than vaccination, because the latter sows the seed of syphilis,
cancers,
eczema, erysipelas, scrofula, consumption, even leprosy and many other loathsome afflictions. Hence the practice of vaccination is a crime, an outrage and a delusion." (The Golden Age 1929 May 1 p.502) In 1951 the JW parents of a 6-year old girl refused a blood transfusion for her. The girl had a rare condition in which her red blood cells were being destroyed. The court in Chicago charged the parents with neglect, took the child from their custody, and ordered a transfusion which saved her life.
The JW
leadership reacted:
"Any saving of
life
accomplished by transfusions
is short-lived. And doing it in disobedience of God's commands could
cost
one eternal life. No temporary good done could justify this permanent great loss… Those who die faithful to God will be resurrected to live eternally in that new earth arrangement, whereas those who break His laws will perish and never be resurrected." (Awake! 1951 May 22 p. 5) JWs who
broke this
"command" were ostracised
but not disfellowshipped (excommunicated). A letter from the Watchtower
Bible And Tract Society Of New York, dated October 10, 1957, to a Mrs.
William Eason of Lexington, Kentucky, said in part:
"This is in
answer to
your recent letter,
asking, about treatment of some brother who has given in and accepted a
blood transfusion.
There is no provision in the New World society for disfellowshiping such person and therefore there is no reason for treating such person as a disfellowshiped one. Giving in to a blood transfusion while in a weakened state is not to be compared with such sins as thievery, adultery and murder, which would justify disfellowshiping the guilty one and cutting him off from our association." Disfellowshipping - total shunning and rejection - for taking a transfusion began in 1961.
Blood
transfusion,
the injection
of blood or certain parts of the blood into a vein. Transfusions may be
given to increase the liquid volume of blood, as in cases of shock
caused
by severe loss of blood. They may also be given to supply substances
that
are lacking in the blood as a result of a disease such as anemia.
Kinds of
Transfusions.
Whole-blood
transfusions are administered primarily to supply red blood cells and
to
restore the volume of blood. When whole blood is not required, plasma
or
plasma substitutes, synthetic substances usually composed of proteins
or
other large organic molecules in a saline solution, are administered.
Plasma
or plasma substitutes may also be given when whole blood is not
immediately
available. Many blood transfusions consist of only specific components,
or parts, of the blood, such as red blood cells, platelets, or certain
portions of the plasma. In this way, each patient receives only the
blood
components he needs, and the blood obtained from one donor can be used
to help several patients.
"Is it wrong
to sustain
life by infusions
of blood or plasma or red cells or the various fractions? Yes. The law
that God gave
to Noah and which applies to all his descendants makes it wrong for anyone to eat blood, that is, to use the blood of another creature to nourish or sustain one's life." (September 15 p. 558) God's law
against
blood "fractions" was
amended in 1978:
viral hepatitis, rabies, hemophilia and Rh incomtibility? This seems to fall into a 'gray area.'" (The Watchtower 1978 June 15 pp.30-31) This change was a blessing to JW hemophiliacs who may require up to 40 infusions of Factor VIII per year. A single infusion of Factor VIII may contain proteins from several thousand donors – a case of JWs accepting a gift that they say it's wrong to give! Awake! 1987 (June 22) had an article by a JW hemophiliac who survived since 1970 without transfusion. Since all articles must be approved by the JW leaders in Brooklyn before publication this article by the hemophiliac was doubtless a strong hint that blood fractions might be against God's law again. Autologous transfusions - removing some of the patient's own blood, storing it, and transfusing it back into him when needed - is supposedly against the Bible also. (The Watchtower 1978 June 15 pp.29-30) Blood
transfusions to pets
is also "a violation
of the Scriptures". (The Watchtower 1964 February 15 p.127) So is
giving
of pet food to pets when the pet food includes blood products. (Ibid)
The following
letter was
published in QUESTIONS
FOR JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES (1983 B & J Cetnar);
WATCHTOWER
BIBLE AND
TRACT SOCIETY
April 6, 1963 Mrs. Anthony
Huczko
Dear Sister
Huczko:
B & J Cetnar
claim that a
further query
to JW headquarters about pet cats eating mice without draining the
blood
first got the reply: "You must keep your animals under control." The
Bible
however shows that certain animals by nature eat blood. (Numbers 23:24)
Nor does the Bible command such animals to stop.
What about using
animal
blood as fertilizer
on soil?
"Such
commercialization
of blood would
not be in accord with deep respect for the life representing value of
blood."
(The Watchtower 1981 Oct. 15 p.31) Haemorrhoids respond to treatment with leeches. The leech used is called Hirudo medicinalis. It has three small jaws that cut into the skin. This leech has been used in tens of thousands of cases to treat swelling after plastic surgery and graft operations. Until 1985 microsurgeons often failed when sewing severed ears, fingers and other body parts back on. Leeches are now regularly used in such cases to keep the blood oozing into the sewn-on tissue until the blood vessels can heal.
Jehovah's
Witness leaders
require that their
followers avoid treatment with leeches because it would: "conflict with
what the Bible says." Also:
"…it would not
be proper
for a Christian
to permit leeches to draw his blood. Proverbs 30:15" (The Watchtower
1982
June 15 p.31) For the present a Jehovah's Witness who requires treatment with leeches would just have to lose his finger, or foot, or ear, or whatever.
INVESTIGATOR
Magazine
(1989 September)
had an article that suggested that the JW anti-blood doctrine is a
spin-off
from their anti-vaccination doctrine:
"As
vaccination is a
direct injection of
animal matter in the blood stream vaccination is a direct violation of
the law of Jehovah God."
(The Golden
Age 1935
April 24 p.471)
Vaccines are
often
prepared from blood
serum and in that way they are "animal matter". Obviously if a
vaccination,
prepared from blood, is an "injection of animal matter" then a blood
transfusion
can also be viewed as an "injection of animal matter". This may have
been
the original link in the minds of the JW leaders leading to their
prejudice
against blood. The link was then ignored and Bible passages against
eating
blood employed instead. When "the law of Jehovah God" against
vaccination
was cancelled in 1952 the "law" against blood transfusion remained.
The objection to
"animal
matter" may also
be the origin of the JW leaders' ban on tissue transplants. They
compared
transplants to cannibalism and called it the "Scriptural Aspect".
(Awake! 1968
June 8
p.21; The Watchtower
1967 Nov. 15 p.702)
This applied to
cornea
transplants too. David
Reed claims:
"A former
elder in
England once wrote telling
me that he resigned after seeing a woman in, his congregation, go blind
in obedience to this command."
(How to
Rescue Your
Loved One From the Watch
Tower 1989 p.105)
In 1980 the
"scriptural aspect" was changed
and transplants became a matter for individual conscience. (The
Watchtower
1980 March 15) (BS)
|