This week’s Watchtower study from the November 15, 2012 issue is “Forgive One Another Freely”. The final sentence in paragraph 16 reads: “Hence, what [the judicial committee] decide in such matters after seeking Jehovah’s help in prayer will reflect his point of view.”
This is a disquieting assertion to make in a publication.
Elders always pray for Jehovah’s guidance when serving in a judicial committee. Jehovah’s point of view is infallible and unerring. We are now being told that the committee’s decision will reflect that point of view. This is implying that the judicial committee’s decision cannot be questioned because it reflects Jehovah’s viewpoint. Why then do we have an appeal committee provision? What value to appeal a decision that reflects the point of view of God.
Of course, there is ample evidence that elders sometimes disfellowship when they should merely reprove. There are also times when someone is excused who should have been thrown out of the Christian Congregation. In such instances, they did not decide in accordance with Jehovah’s point of view, despite their prayers. So why are we making such an obviously fallacious statement?
The implication is that if we suggest that the decision of a judicial committee is wrong, we are not questioning men, but God.
[…] comment got me thinking about the pain that elders can cause when they abuse their power. I don’t […]
My brother has been disfellowshiped, and it will be anounce tomorrow at the meeting. He appealed to the decision because one of the elders were obviously able to disfellowship him since the begining, even without listen to him. My brother ask not to be in his judicial cometee a specific brother, and the elders called that same very elder. This elder (the one who my brother ask not to be in the cometee) was screaming and making an special effort to disfellowship him (my dad was an elder a few years ago, before his resignation. By some reasons brothers in… Read more »
I’m so sorry to hear this. It’s bizarre that they wouldn’t give him a reason. The branch won’t accept a disfellowshipping if no valid, scriptural basis exists. He has the option of appealing to the branch. The issue of a minimum one-year term is not to be found in the ks book, but sadly, this does seem to be a de facto standard. The fact is that when elders reinstate in less than a year, the branch will question the reinstatement based solely on the shortened time period. I know this to be the case in at least two countries,… Read more »
Thanks for answering and clarifying the idea of the “one year” period. One of the elders of the appeal comitee said that he, personally, will talk with the Circuit Overseer to explain how the case was. This brother told my brother: “I know that one of the elders wants to harm you”, so, the other comitee is aware of the real situation. He told my brother that he will help him to return to the congregation before one year, but, of course, my brother need to strengthen his spiritual condition. Let’s see what will happen in this case. We’re not… Read more »
Thanks very much Meleti for this article. I have to agree with all the comments here. We cannot read hearts, so at best we do our level best with the written instruction and Bible direction. No doubt the vast majority of elders do a fine job of this and are aware of the heavy responsilibilty we bear. However, there are mistakes made. I have seen them made. I have made some. We are imperfect. At best, the statement in the WT could have said that “Hence, what [the judicial committee] decide in such matters after seeking Jehovah’s help in prayer… Read more »
I was truly offended by this statement. As someone who at one time served as an elder, I can tell for a certainty that I made mistakes. I also have served on appeal committees where the mistakes or favoritism of other elders was clearly manifest. I think many people would have respected a more honest and noble comment. For example they could have stated that “the elders are not perfect and when judging others they have a disadvantage over Jehovah as they CANNOT read the hearts of their fellow man. They endeavor to reflect Jehovah’s perfect wisdom by referring to… Read more »
Thank you for the article Meleti. I heartily agree with Apollos that it is baseless to say everything the elders decide ‘reflects Jehovah’s point of view’. Urbanus made a very good point when he said Jehovah knows all things as opposed to ‘having a point of view’ on them. An elder once told me that Jehovah may bless even a wrong decision a body of elders make. He was talking about decisions relating to changes that affect the congregation, not about judicial committees to be precise. If this elder was right then that means they are fallible and they may… Read more »
The statement in question concludes a three paragraph discussion in the context of forgiveness, including that mercy extended to a wrong-doer in judicial matters, including re-instatement to the congregation. The in-paragraph context is that the elders have “harmonized” with God’s Word and the guidance of holy spirit. Their decision is made after “seeking Jehovah’s help in prayer” and therefore, their forgiveness by recognition of repentance reflects Jehovah’s point of view. (May it ever be true that it actually happens that way.) Leaving aside whether it is correct to speak or think of Jehovah as having “a point of view” as… Read more »
Yes, it would have been better to acknowledge that this is the scriptural way of dealing with matters and Jehovah therefore approves of decisions made in accord with his Word, which is what the elders endeavour to do. Saying that it reflects his point of view in every case is making an unsupportable claim. Nevertheless I will say that the study article was very good overall. It is articles like this that I see as being a real differentiator between the teaching available to us and to Christendom in general. Like first century Christianity it reflects that we belong to… Read more »