All elders know what is going on in the congregation. They are gathered together when there is a problem to discuss who will handle the matter. So it is very easy for anything to get out. I myself rarely told my wife any real confidential matters except for the last couple of years, she knew I was fed up and stressed out and would ask what she could do to help. Now that is not a problem Free at last!
Ron Frye's book on Elder Confidentiality
by Confession 33 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
AK - Jeff
AK Jeff, I agree with your post as far as the whole concept being wrong. But the people who went to the authority figures they accepted had a right to expect their personal matters be kept private.
Granted. Still - is it not the conceptual misapplication of scripture that lies in fault, as opposed to the human frailties of applying such? Just like all the conceptual misapplications within the WTS, this one is no different. When puny men are trusted to do what puny men cannot do well [ keep confidential matters confidential ] it is not the fault of the men as much as the fault of the system. Or perhaps I am wrong-headed here. But that is how I see it. No offense was of course intended toward your opinions. Jeff -
Gregor
AK Jeff - On more than one occasion it struck me as ludicrous for a commitee of janitors, auto mechanics and ditch diggers to be setting on matters of other peoples personal problems, mental illness and of course child abuse cases that should have been handled by the law. I have to include myself as one who thought they were capable of counseling people who I now realize were seriously in need of professional mental health counseling.
-
uninformed
Gregor wrote:
AK Jeff - On more than one occasion it struck me as ludicrous for a commitee of janitors, auto mechanics and ditch diggers to be setting on matters of other peoples personal problems, mental illness and of course child abuse cases that should have been handled by the law. I have to include myself as one who thought they were capable of counseling people who I now realize were seriously in need of professional mental health counseling.
What a great summary! (I am a bricklayer and agree with you, although I may have a little more discernment than a janitor--
I also wanted to comment that all of us, to a man, broke confidentiality at some time or other, though hopefully not over anything that hurt anyone.
I have a problem with the adoration in the WT toward confidentiality anyway. In the Bible I read, it says that serious issues should be taken "to the congregation" and no 'body of janitors or mechanics' was mentioned. Therefore, probably in the early cong. most of the moral issues were probably of general knowledge, such as the issue that was reported on in Corinth. Not a whole lot of "confidentiality" in Pauls letters!
The Trinity in the Org is, the Faithful and discreet slave, the elders and Confidentiality.
Brant
-
restrangled
I think it's just "human" to have to bounce things off of someone else. Look at all the "leaks" in our own government.
My dad as an elder did that with my mom all the time. Especially when it came to marriage probs, women's concerns, or when he felt like the JC was way out of line. He never confided in anyone else, just her. In turn, mom confided to me as I got older.......or I over heard stuff....some things were very disturbing...
Also because she was an elder's wife a lot of the sisters would tell their problems to her anyway, mom was a very understanding person and didn't behave like Mrs. Elder to other individuals.
r.
-
Confession
I think we're talking about at least a couple of things here.
There is the concept of a body of men coming together to judge--not only another person's actions--but also their level of repentance or the quality of their faith. (I have seen no better example of human beings being "masters over your faith.")
But there is also the simple abuse of confidence that comes when a person--whether in a position of authority or not--hears a person's troubles or problems under the assumption of confidentiality--and they can't keep their mouths shut.
My understanding of confidentiality was, in fact, one of the first things that bugged me after being appointed an elder. I really did keep things in confidence. But I kept seeing examples of elders who didn't. I didn't breathe a word of even the broad details of a judicial committee--and certainly of the personal troubles that some publishers would share with me. I didn't yap to other publishers; I didn't yap to fellow elders. But some would.
One good friend was always telling me about the stuff coming out of committees that he was involved in but I wasn't. Now, mind you, I was a young, new elder and didn't want to jump down his throat, but I still finally asked him why he was telling me these things. Is there some new understanding of "confidentiality" that I hadn't comprehended? Wasn't it the WTS' position that we weren't supposed to share personal stuff with anyone--even fellow elders who didn't need to know? When I'd say this (and I did so a number of times) I'd generally get a lame, mumbled response about how, as an elder, I might need to know the foibles of the flock so that I could properly handle matters in the future.
My own father used to do this. I remember he once threw something out while he and Mom were visiting that pertained to the removal of one of his fellow elders. He told me right in front of my mother--in full detail. It was clear my mother already knew. I got very upset with him, asking him if he understood the meaning of "confidentiality." When I'd challenge other elders like this, they'd bring up a point that is worth mentioning.
The truth is that the facts of a publisher's circumstances often come out--not as the result of elders yapping--but when the publisher (or one close to him/her) yaps to others in the congregation. This is true, and it's not fair to blame elders when things come forth in this way. I'd go so far as to say that this is usually how things come out. But I also know that often it IS an elder or elders who blab. True, sometimes a congregation or family member knows a detail of a matter. But when an elder friend sees they have this detail, they think it's all right if they reveal the rest of the details. And sometimes they don't even need this excuse to run their mouths.
When this happens, what we are talking about purely and simply is immaturity. Whether we are in some position of authority or not, it takes a level of maturity and discipline NOT to reveal confidences. And, as we know, this is not something that comes "standard issue" to any of us--including elders. They are not "tested as to fitness" in this area--or in most others. There are elders who take such things very seriously, but too many are nothing but a bunch of blabbing kids.
-
uninformed
cconfession,
Your viewpoint is correct. When a person goes to another person with a private or personal issue, it should stop right there. If it became public it could damage people who put trust in the arrangement.
My comment about the broader application of "taking a person to the Congregation" as a final step in trying to resolve personal problems, certainly took out the need for secretiveness and confidentiality.
In the book of James, in the last chapter, it says something to the effect, "Freely confess your sins to one another". In view of that, I think the judicial nature of the body of elders is wrong and is not supported by the Bible. The judicial process is designed, not to restore sinners, but the first consideration is to keep the congregation clean, therefore the elders are not acting in the same manner of Catholic Priests, but rather as "Judges" and Punishers.
So, since the whole process is screwed up, as I look back on it, I wish that I would never have had that horrible power given me, with one exception. I was happy to disfellowship our pedophile presiding overseer. By the way, I didn't hold with confidentially on that one. Anyone that wanted to know, I either told them or let them guess.
I wouldn't abuse confidentiality to protect a horrible person like he was.
Brant
-
timetochange
Unfortunately, there is no one in the Watchtower who is anointed with God's spirit and therefore, according to scripture, they have no right/ability to judge their brother.
Confidentiality is a hit and miss thing among most religions including the JWs.
Love is the primary thing and without love there is nothing.
Ed.
-
mouthy
Love is the primary thing and without love there is nothing. AMEN TO THAT
-
wednesday
Yes, it is a joke that anything you tell an elder will be kept confidential. In most cases. I was just thinking that, say you were a therapist, and you hear people's problems all day. You have to have an outlet or you'll go nuts. Many therapists do talk to their wives, but many seek a professional type therapy for themselves, esp if dealing with a difficult issues. It's hard to hear about rape, incest, child abuse, etc., for 8 hours a day and not have it affect you. Same thing goes for working in the ER-either you attend some group therapy or you get seared over and begin to lack human feelings.(that is a hard arse job and I did that for years and don't want to do it again)
I think elders could all benefit from a group therapy session once a week where they all got to talk (informally) about how they feel. They would not have to name names, but as therapists do, they discuss "cases" and ask for input and get support. It is very hard to hear things people do, things that before you were an elder you may have been unaware happened in "GOD'S ORG." It can be very scary to hear all this, abuse smut, sex talk and dirt. They know they are not trained for all this, they are just ordinary men, and are being asked to handle in some cases, things the police should be handling or at the very least social serves, ie, CPS, Adult protective serves, shelters for women and so. on. And oh yes, they are called on the diagnose and treat illness and especially mental illness. I can't imagine how that must feel, with no prior education to try and diagnose and treat mental illness. Of course, we all can apply the common sense stuff, no laws against that, but when you start practicing medicine-you have stepped over the line.
I used to despise elders with every fiber in my body. I had many good friends who were elders, and like someone above, they told me stuff. They needed someone to talk to. I listened, offered advice where I could and offered sympathy and empathy as possible. Then I began to see some people that I regarded as good friends step down b/c of pressure, and such things I saw how tired they looked, how sick their wives were. It was too much. too much stress. No one can do what the WTS is asking these men to do. They are asking for blind obedience and the family is taking a hard second or third.(or worse)
So now, I feel pity for the ones who are actually trying to be elders. The good ones, the honest ones, the ones of lowly heart, the ones like Jesus who would wash your feet if that was their job. But we don't have elders like that in the Org. Shoot, even the Mike boy would feel he was above that. These men are pride full. They seek POSITIONS and the older ones, well, just try and wrestle that title away from them. They will not leave the org, or get kicked out. They will rule with and IRON HAND and hurt many. But the younger ones, there is hope. If they have not got jaded yet, they may see how the people are suffering under the oppressive rule. But they have a choice, and a crises of conscience may save them But for now, incur the wrath of "mother" or tow the line, abuse more peons, and save that position.
It is a tough choice, even if it does not look that way on paper. In many cases these elders have family all the org. The A set JWS family, pioneers, elders, MS, etc. IT will be hard from him to tackle "mother" with no back up. But some brave ones are doing it, and most of them end up here.
I used to hate elders, and I still despise the ones that go after it for that position, but for those who have a heart and really wanted to answer the "call" that they thought God' was sending them, I feel very sorry for.