It’s interesting how to read the evidence from the elders manual. It states, “at no time should the elders ask the accused if he wishes to disassociate himself”. On the one hand this is a simple statement what elders should not do. On the other hand it does raise some questions. First of all, the instruction does seem to imply that elders have been known to suggest disassociation in this situation, as an easy way out for everyone concerned, hence the “clarification” that this should not be done.
Plus the paragraph does seem to have a particular situation in mind, where someone is being investigated, and to avoid embarrasssment (discussing sex usually) or process individuals may seek an easy way out for themselves and disassociate to halt the proceeedings. The paragraph acknowledges this as a loophole in the investigation process but instructs elders not to inform the publisher of the loophole in order to abbreviate the process.
What the paragraph doesn’t seem to have in mind is the kind of situation we are discussing here, where elders may suspect a publisher of apostasy or other “wrongdoing” which they cannot prove. It’s entirely plausible, in those particular circumstances, that elders will pressure the individual to “out” themselves, disassociate, and clean them off the books. Many on the forum have experienced exactly that.
In other words disassociation is not to be recommended to publishers when it makes the life of the publisher easier. (To avoid an embarrassing judicial committee) But it seems that elders would and do recommend disassociation when it makes their own life easier. (To “clean out” apostates or gay people or the like)
