In elder class they explained that the confessor (--ette) either was immoral or is lying, so has to be dealt with, even if repentant as shown by her/his voluntary* confession (if true).
* unlike David who had to be confronted with the facts
Cases of fornication when only one of the involved individuals will confess
by Judge Rochefort 20 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
BluesBrother
At an elders school back in the day the instructor posed us this very "hypothetical" . What would we do?
His answer was to deal with the confessor as a self confessed fornicator , but since "love believes all things" you leave the other one alone. We were assured that Jehovah sees all and will ensure that the truth comes out in good time.
-
Oubliette
Interesting. I never saw it happen, all though I heard of it. (I was an elder for over 20 years).
The Two Witness Rule would absolutely apply. The denier would probably have to offer some explanation as to why the other person would "confess to something that never happened," but they could cite the case of the Amalekite that claimed he killed Saul as Biblical precedent for people lying about things they've done for selfish gain.
The motive in a situation like this would have to be something like some have mentioned above: obsession or insane desire to cause trouble.
If the denier stuck to their guns and there was no other witness, the elders would have no WT sanctioned policy upon which to proceed (notice I did NOT say scriptural).
All that being said, no one should ever admit anything to the elders. They are not your friends and what ever you do in private is none of their business! NONE!
-
Judge Rochefort
Would the husband of the case that redvip2000 explains be "free" (watchtowerly talking) to marry again or not? -
James Mixon
BluesBrother: I remember that "What would you do"? We are not private
detectives, what is done in the dark will come too light.
Oh really, brothers sitting outside of motels waiting to catch someone..
-
_Morpheus
Yep, i will simply echo what others have already said: the confessor gets a JC, the lier gets off. Had it happen our hall. We firmly believed the confessor, didnt douch the lier, trusted the desert god to deal with the person. -
respectful_observer
I've got friend who made the sad mistake of having a private make-out session with this woman who was infatuated with him.
When she found out he was interested in someone else months later, she ran to her elders and "confessed" to sleeping with him. Even claimed she took a pregnancy and STD test afterward.
He got blindsided one day after the meeting with the accusation. He confessed to the make-out session, but insisted it went no further. He asked that she provide proof (e.g., his "identifiable features"). The elders refused and said it didn't matter. "After all, why would she come forward and admit judicial action for something she never did??" Hmmm....maybe because she was CRAZY.
She was privately reproved by her elders, he was publicly reproved for "loose conduct" by his. He's barely been to meetings since.
-
Oubliette
It's sort of a reverse-variation of the Prisoner's Dilemma:
-
redvip2000
Would the husband of the case that redvip2000 explains be "free" (watchtowerly talking) to marry again or not?
No, and this is what is interesting about this. The wife of the brother who cheated would be allowed to divorce him, since he admitted to it, but the husband of the wife who cheated would not be, since she refused to admit.
So from the Watchtower's perspective, the cheating happened, since the husband was punished, but on the other hand pretends there is no evidence of happening by not punishing the cheating sister.
What a screwed up organization.
-
prologos
There is of course the possibility that nothing happened and the confessor lied, and was disfellowshipped for lying, and would not be opening eligibility for a scriptural divorce.