Letter sufficient grounds for DFing?

by dozy 25 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  dozy

  A question here mainly for ex-elders etc , though all input would be helpful.

  A letter that I wrote some time ago confidentially to an elder regarding the usual issues about the GB etc has come into the hands of a couple of members of the congregation who are regarding it a prime facie evidence that I am an apostate. Though the letter isn't especially incriminating as such , it does flag up several mistakes that the WTBTS has made. The brother has described me as "verging on apostate."

  I know it was stupid to put such doubts in writing and to trust an elder to keep it confidential , but I did mistakenly and naively assume that this particular brother , whom I have known and (formerly) respected for years would be discreet. Instead he has told his wife & daughter and virtually everybody else of my "unsound views."

  Anyway - the particular question I am raising is - would the existence of such a letter (which I can't deny that I wrote ,as it has my signature) in itself , be grounds for disfellowshipping? Would the brother's testimony plus the letter be regarded as the required 2 witnesses or would some other witness or evidence be required. I say this because at this stage I don't particularly want to be DFd , for family & other reasons.
• 

  JWoods

  This was exactly how I was able to accomplish my DF, way back in about 1979. It took them until 1981 to work up the guts to act on it.

  Of course, your local congregational politics may vary.
• 

  metatron

  Get proactive about it. Turn in some fake time and give nice comments at the Watchtower Study. Quote that scripture from Job about how your words "have been wild talk" ( cited in an old Watchtower when a depressed person expresses doubts).

  Cover your tracks and never write anything like this again. If you express doubts, make sure it's only to one person at a time, so you can deny it later.

  metatron
• 

  sir82

  Without seeing the actual letter, it's hard to say. What is its tone? Is it accusatory or questioning? Does it encourage the reader to investigate "outside sources" that would be considered "apostate"? Does it try to convince the reader to adopt a non-Watchtower perspective?

  A letter written a certain way, bringing up certain points, might be considered to be "causing divisions" or even "apostasy" (spreading unorthodox views) which are DF offenses. I think anyone who read the letter could serve as a witness, although if you confess to having written the letter, witnesses would not be needed.

  Of course, they shouldn't DF you without a committee meeting first. During that committee meeting, if you want to avoid DF, I would imagine it should be possible to express something like "I had a period of doubt X months ago, but since then these doubts have been resolved."

  If you can stomach lying, that is. If so, by now you should know the requirements for feigning "true repentance" - lots of talk about how you have "hurt your relationship with Jehovah", "brought dishonor to his name", you are "studying more now so as not to fall into the same trap", yadda yadda yadda. Tears, or at least glistening eyes, would help.

  If you refuse to meet with them for the committee meeting, that would 99.999% of the time be viewed as a sign of "no repentance" and you'd be booted.
• 

  JWoods

  When the time passes, and the old cask has time to age - you will view your good honest DF via the "go to hell in your pickup truck, buddy" as probably one of the finest accomplishments of your entire life.

  And that's the truth, Ruth.
• 

  yknot

  Ummmm

  It is sufficient grounds to complain to the CO (and beyond if no relief is found). I mean you seemed to have confided in this Elder (you can argue for guidance or whatnot) and instead of helping or encouraging you he has instead made you the topic of gossip. You now feel violated, skinned and cast about for the what seems to be the entertainment of his family (friends). I would point out that since more is expect of those 'taking the lead' that this man should be deleted as an elder so as to show the congregation the serverity of 'stumbling' those whom they shepherd.

  ***

  w963/15p.18par.12MeetingtheChallengeofLoyalty ***

  12

  Loyalty presents particular challenges to elders. One of these challenges is the matter of confidentiality. A member of a congregation may confide in an elder. Loyalty to that one will keep the elder from violating the principle of confidentiality. He will heed the counsel at Proverbs 25:9: “Do not reveal the confidential talk of another.” That means not even to his own wife

  ***

  w9111/15p.23pars.19-20“AnOverseerMustBe...Self-Controlled” ***

  19

  20

  Without question, self-control is, oh, so important, and especially so for elders! By virtue of their having been entrusted with the privilege of taking the lead among Jehovah’s people, they have greater accountability. Since much has been given to them, much will be required of them. (Luke 12:48; 16:10; compare James 3:1.) It is the privilege and duty of elders to set a fine example for others. More than that, appointed elders are in a position to do more good or more harm than others, often depending on whether they practice self-control or not. No wonder Paul said: “An overseer must be . . . self-controlled.” The obligation to maintain confidentiality also requires that an elder be alert to practice firm self-control. Pertinent here is the counsel: “Do not reveal the confidential talk of another.” (Proverbs 25:9) Experience suggests that this may be one of the most widely violated requirements among elders. If an elder has a wise and loving wife with whom he has good communication, there may be a tendency on his part to discuss or just to mention matters of a confidential nature. But this is improper and most unwise. To begin with, it betrays a trust. Spiritual brothers and sisters come to elders and confide in them because they have confidence that the matter will be held strictly confidential. Imparting confidential matters to one’s wife is wrong, unwise, and unloving also because this places a needless burden upon her.—Proverbs 10:19; 11:13.

  Proverbs 25:9 " Plead you own cause with your fellowman, and do not reveal the confindential talk of another.
• 

  blondie

  w96 3/15 p.18 par. 12 Meeting the Challenge of Loyalty ***

  Loyalty presents particular challenges to elders. One of these challenges is the matter of confidentiality. A member of a congregation may confide in an elder. Loyalty to that one will keep the elder from violating the principle of confidentiality. He will heed the counsel at Proverbs 25:9: “Do not reveal the confidential talk of another.” That means not even to his own wife.

  w91 11/15 p.23 pars.19-20 “An Overseer Must Be...Self-Controlled” ***

  Without question, self-control is, oh, so important, and especially so for elders! By virtue of their having been entrusted with the privilege of taking the lead among Jehovah’s people, they have greater accountability. Since much has been given to them, much will be required of them. (Luke 12:48; 16:10; compare James 3:1.) It is the privilege and duty of elders to set a fine example for others. More than that, appointed elders are in a position to do more good or more harm than others, often depending on whether they practice self-control or not. No wonder Paul said: “An overseer must be . . . self-controlled.” The obligation to maintain confidentiality also requires that an elder be alert to practice firm self-control. Pertinent here is the counsel: “Do not reveal the confidential talk of another.” (Proverbs 25:9) Experience suggests that this may be one of the most widely violated requirements among elders. If an elder has a wise and loving wife with whom he has good communication, there may be a tendency on his part to discuss or just to mention matters of a confidential nature. But this is improper and most unwise. To begin with, it betrays a trust. Spiritual brothers and sisters come to elders and confide in them because they have confidence that the matter will be held strictly confidential. Imparting confidential matters to one’s wife is wrong, unwise, and unloving also because this places a needless burden upon her.—Proverbs 10:19; 11:13.
• 

  lifelong humanist

  dozy

  I'm sorry that you find yourself in this unpleasant situation. Most JW elders don't repect other's privacy, and if they think that there is a serious problem, they'll spill the beans and inform the body - that's what destructive cults do. They feel good about it too!

  As a former elder, I only acted on 1 JC, and it was a nasty experience. Afterwards, I said that I was disgusted with the whole process and refused to sit on any others. I've been JW free for over 6 years, having DAd myself.

  My understanding might not be bang up-to-date, but your letter could be used as the basis to question you, although no JC would be set up unless your answers to their questions show that you are still critical of the WTS. In itself, the letter wouldn't be enough.

  If the heat is turned up, you could of course say that you now wish to retract any of the statements you made in the letter, although, if you still feel the same way now as when you wrote it, that'd probably go against your principles.

  Good luck with what might turn out to be an extremely awkward situation for you.
• 

  JWoods

  Loyalty presents particular challenges to elders. One of these challenges is the matter of confidentiality. A member of a congregation may confide in an elder. Loyalty to that one will keep the elder from violating the principle of confidentiality. He will heed the counsel at Proverbs 25:9: “Do not reveal the confidential talk of another.” That means not even to his own wife.

  Blondie is "legally" correct...but in practice this kind of confidentiality only extends to child molesters and embezzlers of the old and sick.

  Apostates need not expect any quarter of confidentiality.
• 

  undercover

  I would imagine it should be possible to express something like "I had a period of doubt X months ago, but since then these doubts have been resolved."

  If you can stomach lying, that is.

  That part's not really lying though, is it? You had doubts but they've been resolved. Now you no longer doubt the WBTS is full of shit, you know it for a fact.

  ...the requirements for feigning "true repentance" - lots of talk about how you have "hurt your relationship with Jehovah", "brought dishonor to his name", you are "studying more now so as not to fall into the same trap", yadda yadda yadda. Tears, or at least glistening eyes, would help.

  Now we're doing some lying...

  Personally I would refuse to meet with them. Damn their inquisition. If I wanted to avoid a confrontation, I would just say something along the lines of the first quote above. I've resolved my issues and I'm at a good place right now. If I feel the need for help, I'll let you know. If they pursue action, let them do it without my cooperation. I'd use this harrassment to show my JW family the un-christian attitude of these elders in hounding me when I want to leave well enough alone. It might create some doubts of their own, if they were to see a family member treated harshly for just asking a few questions, especially since it was "some time ago" and not ever an issue until other people stuck their nose in where it didn't belong.

  But it's up to you dozy to decide what's best for you. What works for one might not work for another. Good luck, I hope it works out for you.