When I was in, I was really in. I believed it all, with all of my heart. Like a lot of JWs, I married young. I'd been married for almost two years when I strayed a bit, due to an odd set of work-related circumstances, and got intimate with another woman.
My wife was quite pregnant at the time, and there was practically no sex between us, so I, like any healthy, handsome, red-blooded, male in his early 20s, was particularly vulnerable (which is to say "horny") to the advances of an attractive young woman.
No, I did not do "the bad thing" with her. I fondled her privates and she fondled mine and, knowing where we were heading and not wanting to go there, I somehow mustered the strength to extricate myself from the situation just in time. So, there was kissing and petting and fondling, but there was no penetration or copulation of any kind, nor was there any orgasm.
Nevertheless, I felt guilty about what I had done. I wrestled with the guilt for a few months and finally couldn't take it anymore. I confessed to my wife, and then, good little well-indoctrinated JW that I was, met with the elders and confessed to them, as well.
It was an acutely uncomfortable meeting, and there were a lot of questions. One of the elders actually went so far as to ask whether or not I had inserted my finger into the woman's vagina. Huh? How bizarre is that?
Anyway, just when it looked like the meeting was about to be wrapped up, questions about sexual practices between my wife and I were raised, specifically about oral and anal sex. We'd never engaged in anal sex, nor wanted to, but we had on a few occasions engaged in oral sex, mostly before the landmark Questions From Readers of December 15, 1972.
At this point, I need to explain some background for the benefit of younger readers who might be unfamiliar with WTS's evolution of thought on this matter. As far as I know, the first time the question arose of allowable sexual activities between spouses, it was the Questions From Readers of December 15, 1969.
In that ruling, the WTS gave what I think most people would regard as a sensible answer based on scripture. In a nutshell, with all of the usual and predictable caveats, they left it up to the individual conscience of husband and wife, saying, "However, beyond the above observations about conjugal acts we cannot go. With love, respect and unselfishness, marriage mates themselves must decide what they will do."
But alas, three years later, the WTS flipflopped on the matter and, with the judicious use of some genuinely creative scripture-twisting, managed to redefine fornication and adultery to include "immoral use of the genital organs in some form of intercourse." They extended the "unnatural sex" from the biblical context of homosexuality to apply to oral and anal sex between spouses. The Questions From Readers of December 15, 1972 gave married JWs the okay for a divorce if the other spouse was into "unnatural sex," and obviously, made "unnatural sex" a disfellowshipping offense, and they had the gall to conclude this gem saying, "This clearly marks a correction in the view expressed on previous occasions in the columns of this magazine, but faithful adherence to what the Scriptures actually say requires it."
They reinforced this position in the Questions From Readers of Febrary 15, 1976, saying, "Unnatural practices in connection with sex in marriage, such as oral and anal copulation, have caused some of God's people to become impure in his eyes. But The Watchtower kept above this morass of filth by alerting married couples to God's thinking on the matter." Well, where would we be without that?
Anyway, now that you have the background, let's get back to our story. So, there I was, facing the elders with my wife at my side, and admitting that we had engaged in oral sex, both before it became a disfellowshipping offense, as well as after. They grilled me hard about my attitude toward oral sex. And the truth finally came out, i.e., that my personal opinion was that the WTS had it right in 1969 and got it wrong in 1972.
Honest and sincere bloke that I am, I guess I was finding it very difficult to be truly remorseful and repentant about something that I did not honestly and sincerely believe to be wrong. I knew the Bible well enough to know that their 1972 twist was just plain wrong. And I couldn't fake it, even though I had been mostly obedient to it. One of the elders told me that I was very conceited and had an overblown opinion of own intelligence.
They decided to disfellowship me. It rocked my world. It was the most horrible feeling I'd ever had. I felt like the lowest of the low. I had no friends outside of the organization. And it came at a very bad time in my life, when I was a new father and was unemployed and struggling financially. I tried to get reinstated six months later, but they found some excuse to deny me that. I guess they needed to see me doing more groveling.
I was very discouraged by that, and stopped going to meetings at that point. My wife, for a set of reasons mostly separate from my ordeal, began having her own doubts about the WTS, and she stopped going to the meetings, too. We moved to a different city, and I no longer had any contact with any JWs. But, for some reason, I was afraid to be without the Watchtower and Awake, so I continued my subscriptions for some years, out of fear. That is in spite of the fact that I never read them. I would open the brown wrapper and unfold the magazine and place it in the stack of the other unread magazines.
Like most JWs who "fall away," I languished in limbo for a long while, and tried to avoid thinking about God and religion as much as possible. It was just too painful and disturbing. I also started attending college while working part-time, so I was keeping pretty busy.
One night I had trouble sleeping, and I started thinking about how I was disfellowshipped and the injustice of it and feeling with certainty that I did not deserve to be disfellowshipped. I decided to attack my big stack of unread Watchtowers and see if perhaps any "new light" had come out. I went through them one by one and, sure enough, there was "new light." (Otherwise known as damage control.)
It was the Questions From Readers of February 15, 1978. It was one of those very rare instances when the WTS actually admitted that it had used scriptures out of context and that it was mistaken. It went like this:
Question: "Does the Bible set forth any specific definitions as to what is moral or immoral as regards the sexual relationship between husband and wife? Is it the responsibility of congregational elders to endeavor to exercise control among congregation members in these intimate marital matters?"
"...the conclusion was reached that those engaging in such sex practices were subject to disfellowshiping if unrepentant. The view was taken that it was within the authority of congregational elders to investigate and act in a judicial capacity regarding such practices in the conjugal relationship."
"A careful further weighing of this matter, however, convinces us that, in view of the absence of clear Scriptural instruction, these are matters for which the married couple themselves must bear the responsibility before God and that these marital intimacies do not come within the province of the congregational elders to attempt to control nor to take disfellowshipping action with such matter as the sole basis."
So, I was disfellowshipped for an offense that was later determined not to be an offense. At first, I felt vindicated and joyful. After thinking about it longer, I began to feel more anger and resentment. They cut me off from my friends and family and my whole world and made me suffer. And they were wrong. And now they know that they were wrong. And I was right. Those elders are still around. They've never tried to contact me and reconcile this.
To me, this was proof enough that this organization could not possibly be "The Truth." I've been tempted at different times to contact them and request that they acknowledge the error. I think they should read a letter to the congregation saying that I was disfellowshipped in error. I've even toyed with the idea of bringing a lawsuit against them.
But then I think, what's the point? Those elders who wrongfully disfellowshipped me actually did me a huge favor. Without them, it would have been far more difficult for me to have learned the truth about "The Truth."
Those bastards only have power of you when you give them power over you. I'm not giving them power over me ever again. To hell with them.