BOE on Disfellowshiped Relatives

Again...please do not request a pdf scan these are interbranch copies not the same ones sent to the congregations

Thanks

JWF.

January 21, 2010

TO ALL BODIES OF ELDERS

Re: Qualifications of appointed persons in conjunction with disfellowshipped relatives

Dear Brothers:

The Bible tells us that we are not to fellowship with a person who has been expelled from
the congregation. (1 Cor. 5:9-13; 2 John 9-11) Elders, ministerial servants, and regular pioneers
should set an example in their dealings with disfellowshipped family members. (lv pp. 207-209)
What responsibility does the body of elders have if a person in such an appointed position allows
a disfellowshipped immediate family member to move into the home?

The body of elders should review the qualifications of any appointed person who permits
such a situation. (w88 3/1 p. 24 par. 5; w81 9/15 p. 29 pars. 16-17) It may be that the disfellow-
shipped relative is physically or emotionally ill and unable to care for himself. Or dire circum-
stances may exist so that a failure to provide assistance might result in disastrous consequences and
even bring reproach on the congregation. In such circumstances, the appointed person may have
felt there was no other recourse than to allow the family member to move into the home. The atti-
tude of the disfellowshipped relative should also be considered. Has he ‘come to his senses’? (Luke
15:17-19) Has he abandoned his sinful course? Or is he still engaged in serious wrongdoing? In
carefully considering these and other relevant factors, the elders may determine that the appointed
person is still exemplary, holds the respect of the congregation, and qualifies to continue serving.

On the other hand, if the circumstances raise serious questions and the appointed person
has lost the respect of the congregation, the elders may determine that it would be best for the
appointed person to relinquish his privilege of service. As long as the unfavorable situation in the
home exists, the person would no longer be used in any exemplary capacity. Since this may be
disheartening to the individual, the elders should confirm their love for him and help him to ap-
preciate that he is needed in the congregation. (w90 9/1 pp. 22-23 pars. 18-20) Of course, if the
situation changes and the reason for the deletion no longer exists, it may be that the person will
once again be able to enjoy privileges of service in the congregation.

Be assured of our prayers for Jehovah’s continued blessing as you extend yourselves in
behalf of the brotherhood. We send our warm Christian love.

Your brothers,

cc: Traveling overseers

PS to secretary:

This letter should be retained in the congregation permanent file of policy letters. You
may wish to update the congregation copy of Index to Letters—For Bodies of Elders (S-22) at
this time as well.

Thank you so much for posting these letters!!

ya just gotta love the presumption!

The attitude of the disfellowshipped relative should also be considered. Has he ‘come to his senses’? (Luke
15:17-19) Has he abandoned his sinful course? Or is he still engaged in serious wrongdoing?

some of us came to our senses, and left!!

the only "sin" i practice is the fabricated one of apostacy!

wankers

Or dire circumstances may exist so that a failure to provide assistance might result in disastrous consequences and
even bring reproach on the congregation

In other words, "Let's not allow things as useless as human kindness, decency, or family relationships cloud our judgment... but if we were to LOOK bad, THAT would truly be a tragedy".

This stuff makes me really angry.

Also hungry. Time for breakfast.

".....and the appointed person has lost the respect of the congregation, the elders may determine that it would be best for the
appointed person to relinquish his privilege of service."

Never underestimate the power of maliscious gossip in the congregation. In other words, the Elders hands may be tied into the feelings of the congregation, even if they are wrong in the assessment.

Mob rule, inspired by gossip.

"Can you believe Br. Elder taking in his destitute child who is DF'd? That's disgusting! How unchristian of him!"

please do not request a pdf scan

In other words - no way to know whether they are real or not ..............

if the situation changes and the reason for the deletion no longer exists, it may be that the person will
once again be able to enjoy privileges of service in the congregation

Disgusting how they de-humanise people with these heartless expressions

it would be best for the appointed person to relinquish his privilege of service. As long as the unfavorable situation in the
home exists, the person would no longer be used in any exemplary capacity.

1. Cannot be pioneer (reg or aux), MS, elder (be city overseer, department head or work at conventions/assemblies, no working on or supervising build projects through RBC or similar)

2.  Cannot handle microphones, take attendance or greet/seat people at meetings, assist literature/magazine/territory/sound & stage servants.

3.  Cannot be in the TMS, be an official reader for any meetings, cannot be used for demos/enactments at the KH, assemblies/conventions

4.  But they can donate as much money as they want (not dirty to them)

Can they go D2D?

Can they turn time in (I have known jws that were restricted from this)?

Can they answer at meetings/read scriptures?

Can they have the CO & wife over for dinner (can they give him the "green handshake")?

If it is the husband's decision to do this, is the wife "punished" too?

What really is a "privilege"?

".....and the appointed person has lost the respect of the congregation, the elders may determine that it would be best for the appointed person to relinquish his privilege of service."

I'm willing to bet........in most cases the appointed person will lose respect for the cong. first.

Think About It

I LOVE this:

Since this may be disheartening to the individual, the elders should confirm their love for him and help him to ap-
preciate that he is needed in the congregation.

We love you but we are going to look down on you anyway!

Thanks again for posting these! I must remember not to read them while eating. I'm so disgusted.

In other words - no way to know whether they are real or not ..............

Yea, without a scan it is hard to prove that these letters are actually written by the Society.

However - there is nothing really new in this letter.  All the guidelines condensed in this letter are already published elsewhere in Society's literature.  This letter, if real, is just making sure the elders are following the already in place guidelines.

But it would give these letters more credibility if some of our 'inside' elder friends could confirm that they've seen these letters show up in the files.

Thanks again for posting these! I must remember not to read them while eating. I'm so disgusted.

Would be great reading for those that purge.

Think About It

Its all about and concerning the organizations outward image within the organization itself and outside of it.

Individuals who have appointed positions in the congregation are seen and are supposedly made exemplary to the rest of the congregation.

For an example if an elder as a teenager whose taken on a drug problem and is incapable of living on their own and has to stay

with their parents, this looks terribly bad within the congregation and presents a bad image to the rest of the flock as it were.

So what they're saying is that that elder should have his appointed privileges yanked and taken out of the spot light.

Mustn't bring reproach on the god's organization you know.    

The Old Hippie, do you doubt these letters as being true? I don't.

JWF - thanks for posting this!

I don't really see in change from the previous policy. The BOE was supposed to "review" the persons qualifications and determine if he still qualified. In other words, if the BOE has been looking for an excuse to whack the guy, this was the perfect chance. On the other hand, if the person is well liked and has influence, then the BOE will say that he still qualifies. I've seen this happen numerous times. I always felt like it would be unchristian to help out your own kid regardless of status in the congregation. I couldn't see how throwing someone out on the street is "loving".

Old Hippie...I am with Minimus, there is no reason to doubt the authenticity of this post. The letter is just reiterating (in an ad nauseum way) the view of DF'ed individuals echoed in the pages of the WT over and over again. The discussion of suitability of "serving" as an appointed man is not a new one when it comes to how they treat their DF'ed children or close relatives. What I wonder is, if they came to their senses and don't "practice" sin any longer, but don't want to go back to the Borg, are they any better than a practicer of sin?

The Old Hippie is still a JW in good standing, as far as I know. He tends to defend the Witnesses.

So OH, without a scan can we know if you are real or not?

With all the bullshit out on the net, you certainly have a right to doubt anything, including this post.

Is it real?  I betcha it is.