It was mentioned at the last KM School, and then followed up by BOE letter in 2002 or 2003. I think it was in the same letter discussing how to handle child abuse (call Legal Dept.), but I could be wrong.
At least 3 years...
by Confession 18 Replies latest jw experiences
-
-
Confession
Trust me: this has been around a lot longer than that. I was an elder from '95 to '98, the KM tjkmo referenced was from 1972.
-
tijkmo
confession...the org book was updates about 1983 so the reference is to an earlier edition..ive been looking for one recently to check something about disfellowshipped people getting literature(cos that was changed recently) but no one seems to have the older version and no org book is on the cd...some one here might have one
ive spent much of this aft looking at references for the scriptures that say that nothing will remain secret and all will be revealed...i remember sincerely believing that somehow this would happen as if by magic and so it was pointless not confessing anyway but some references say that the revealing will come at armageddon when it will be punished IF you are still doing the wrong things..
you must have been well liked as chairman of that commitee...an elder that was trying to be understanding to a wrongdoer...a rare occurence indeed,,the irony just knocks me out..tijkmo
-
Confession
Honestly, TJ, I don't think a caring elder is a hard thing to find. The local elders are largely pawns in this game. Just like the rank and file witnesses, they truly believe that the men in Brooklyn are conveying light from God. Theyve just been duped by the WTS. And their fear is so great that theyll do something out of harmony with the WTS that their personal consciences and common sense have been replaced with the Societys legalism. Granted there are a number of (as I call them) Pharisaical elders, but most fit the description Ray Franz refers to in In Search of Christian Freedom, page 122...
Does this imply that the men in positions of authority within the organization are all power-hungry, dictatorial persons? I certainly do not view them that way, and on the basis of personal experience I am satisfied that many are not. In the early centuries, there were men who, like the wolves of whom Paul warned, sought to have people follow them as leaders, and exalted human authority to attain this. However, there were doubtless other professed Christian men who, faced with frustrating situations, seeing people being swayed by what they viewed as erroneous teachings, went along with the buildup of human authority under the false idea that the end justified the means, and thus they gave in to the lure of authority. The same influences operate in our times.
The thing that surprised me was that other elders generally didn't want to talk about this subject. When I brought it up in the Judicial Committee, they acted as if this were a moot point; that the long-standing nature of this policy was proof enough for them, and even if this brother had fallen under a wrong impression, that was neither here nor there. They could only cite scriptures about not covering over ones transgressions. Then they would stare at me, as if they had just proven the point. When I would acknowledge that the scriptures referred to not covering over sins in the sight of God Himself, they would pause with a kind of deer-in-headlights look, and just remind me that you can't fool Jehovah. Any place in which the scriptures spoke of confession to Jehovah, they would simply equate it with confession to elders. It was startlingly zombie-like.
-
stillajwexelder
iT was in a letter to travelling overseers which they discussed with the body on the visit to the congregations and it was about 11 years ago - our CO used the example of a MS who masturbated and asked if he would need to be removed - I said no, not necessarily and the CO said I was correct the MS did not need to be removed and especially if there had been a time lapse - he did not mention 3 years as the exact figure though
-
BluesBrother
this really surprised me, and I thank those who brought it up. I was appointed elder in mid 70's and I never came accross it. I have located my old book "Organization for Kingom preaching & Disciple Making" dated 1972.. Page 170 p 2 says
If the person was serving as an elder or a ministerial servant when he committed a serious wrong even though it was some years ago, he bears a degree of reprehensibility, for he continued to serve in that position though knowing that he had,for the time at least, disqualified himself, not being then, "Free from accusation" ( 1Tim 3.2 & Tit 1.6-7) He should have informed the judicial committee that he did not adhere to the requirements and should have stepped down from his position. In view of his failure to do this at that time , he would now be removed from that position.
Fair enough, one might think , but I quote again what was shown us by tijkmo :
***
km 10/72 p. 8 Question Box ***Question
Box?
What is meant by "some years ago" on page 170, paragraph two, in the "Organization" book?"This indicates more than a year or two. It may be noted that it did not say "many years ago." So it is not an exact number of years, but more like two or three years. It was not intended to have a brother go back into the distant past to bring up wrongs of which he repented years ago and that have evidently been forgiven by Jehovah and are not being practiced now. In many cases the wrongs occurred prior to the time when the "Watchtower" drew attention to what the Scriptures say on such misconduct.
If a brother has been serving faithfully for some years and has seen evidence of Jehovah?s blessings upon him, why should he now step down from office? If he has the right viewpoint now on conduct and will give good counsel he should be able to continue to serve. If the local body of elders see that he has the respect of the congregation and has shown the proper qualifications over the last two or three years, he may remain in his position of service.
Must wrongdoing be brought to public attention after many years? The book (page 168) under "Public Reproof" quotes 1 Timothy 5:20 and mentions reproof of those who confess to committing more than one offense. But it really has to do with recent events. The "Interlinear" refers to those "sinning," something going on at the time. So if repentance occurred some years ago, three years ago or more, and sinning ceased, and he is respected by the congregation, it is not necessary now to publicly reprove one who committed more than one offense "some years ago."
...................................................................................................................................................................................................
But we are talking "Serious wrongs" here, does he get away scot free because it happened more than 36 months ago? Is he reproved and continue to serve? No, surely not.
To be fair I did see this leniency put into practice in my time.
-
Confession
I specifically remember seeing in writing an explanation that used the example of a brother who had...
...lapsed into drunkenness one night.
The explanation they gave for not calling together a Judicial Committee was that 3 years had passed and his life had shown that Jehovah had forgiven him. That was what got me: in taking this position, they admitted that his forgiveness had nothing to do with confessing to elders. He had committed a sin, rejected the course, and been forgiven by God--all before he said anything to a man.
-
hopelesslystained
I was told in 1974 about the 3 yr thing when I finally got up the nerve to try and confess to a elder about something I had been suffering terrible guilt over for 3 yrs! lol, a worldly person I was very much attracted to kissed me, I was married and had a child. OMG! that's how sensitive I was. Interesting thing is, I never did have to confess because I was told it had been 3+ yrs. What a waste of my emotions for 3+years of feeling such intense guilt, responsibility and shame. Never Ever Again!
-
PaulJ
What a great thread. I very rarley held any level of importance in the cong, so im not suprised i hadnt heard of this. Looks like its something the society doesnt exactly want to be given publicity.