Open Side Menu Search Icon
pdf View PDF
The content displayed below is for educational and archival purposes only.
Unless stated otherwise, content is © Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania

You may be able to find the original on wol.jw.org

Chapter Twelve

Determining Whether a Judicial Committee Should Be Formed

1. Elders should act promptly when they receive a report of serious wrongdoing so as to safeguard the congregation and provide assistance to the wrongdoer. (Jude 4) Neglecting to care for such matters can hinder the flow of Jehovah’s holy spirit to the congregation. Elders must first assess whether the wrongdoing, if established, is serious enough to require a judicial committee.​—See 12:2-39; 15:1.

OFFENSES REQUIRING REVIEW BY THE ELDERS

2. Listed below are offenses that may require review by a judicial committee. Of course, this list is not comprehensive. There may be other matters that would also merit the attention of a judicial committee. The elders must use good judgment and reasonableness when evaluating the seriousness of the alleged wrongdoing. They should consider the extent and nature of the misconduct, intent and motive, frequency or practice, and so forth. If there is a question about whether certain wrongdoing merits judicial action, the body of elders may write to the Service Department requesting further direction concerning the case.

3. Sexual Immorality (Por·neiʹa): (Lev. 20:10, 13, 15, 16; Rom. 1:24, 26, 27, 32; 1 Cor. 6:9, 10) Por·neiʹa involves immoral use of the genitals, whether in a natural or in a perverted way, with lewd intent. There must have been another party to the immorality​—a human of either sex or a beast. Willing participation incurs guilt and requires judicial action. It is not a casual touching of the sex organs but involves the manipulation of the genitals. It includes oral sex, anal sex, and manipulation of the genitals between individuals not married to each other. (w06 7/15 pp. 29-30; w04 2/15 p. 13; w00 11/1 p. 8 par. 6; w83 6/1 pp. 23-26; lvs p. 120) Por·neiʹa does not require skin-to-skin contact, copulation (as in penetration), or sexual climax.

  1. (1) “Immoral use of” conveys the thought not just of touching but of operating, manipulating, or employing something. For example, it is one thing to touch a musical instrument; it is something different to make “use of” a musical instrument.

  2. (2) “Lewd intent” identifies the motive. For example, a doctor may need to manipulate the genitals in examining a patient. A veterinarian, farmer, or rancher may do something similar to an animal. However, the intent is not sexual gratification.

  3. (3) “Manipulation” conveys the idea of operating something, whether by use of the hands or some other means, and does not require skin-to-skin contact. Momentary touching of another’s genitals, even if intentional, would generally not be considered por·neiʹa.

4. Masturbation of oneself is not por·neiʹa.​—lvs p. 250.

5. One who was raped would not be guilty of por·neiʹa. Discernment is needed in considering claims of rape, taking into consideration such factors as the mental disposition of the person, the circumstances that led up to the incident, and any delay in reporting.​—w03 2/1 pp. 30-31; w83 3/15 p. 30, ftn.; it-1 pp. 862-864.

6. When determining if an individual is guilty of por·neiʹa, it is important to establish the facts. This is especially true when Scriptural freedom to remarry is involved. (Mal. 2:16a) In situations in which the elders are uncertain or divided on their conclusions, it is best to write the Service Department.​—See 12:71-76.

7. Strong Circumstantial Evidence of Sexual Immorality (Por·neiʹa): If at least two eyewitnesses report that the accused stayed all night in the same house with a person of the opposite sex (or with a known homosexual) under improper circumstances, judicial action may be warranted. (w18.07 p. 32) The elders cannot apply one rule to every case; each situation has unique circumstances. After two elders have thoroughly investigated, the body of elders must use good judgment in determining whether serious wrongdoing has occurred. If the elders are unsure how to proceed, they should consult with the Service Department.​—If questions are raised regarding Scriptural freedom to remarry, see Chapter 12, paragraphs 71-76.

  1. (1) Have the couple been pursuing a romantic relationship? Have they been previously counseled regarding their conduct with each other? What circumstances led to their spending the night together? Did they plan ahead to do so? Did they have a choice in the matter, or were there extenuating circumstances, perhaps an unforeseen occurrence or genuine emergency that left them with no choice but to spend the night together? (Eccl. 9:11) What were the sleeping arrangements? Since each situation is different, there may be other relevant factors. If there are no extenuating circumstances, a judicial committee would be formed on the basis of strong circumstantial evidence of sexual immorality.

  2. (2) Depending upon the attitude of the accused, there might even be evidence of brazen conduct.

8. Consider an example in which judicial action would be warranted: A married brother spends an inordinate amount of time with his female secretary after work hours but insists there is no romantic interest. His concerned wife informs the elders, who give him strong counsel. Later, when he claims to be leaving overnight for a “business trip,” his suspicious wife and a relative follow him to the secretary’s home. They observe the secretary invite him inside at 10 p.m. and continue watching all night until he leaves the home at 7 a.m. When the elders speak to him, he admits that he spent the night with his secretary, but he denies that he committed adultery. In such a case, the elders have a basis to take judicial action because there is strong circumstantial evidence of por·neiʹa and there may be elements of brazen conduct. The innocent mate’s conscience may allow her to divorce him and remarry; she should not be criticized if that is her decision.

9. Below are examples in which judicial action would likely not be warranted:

  1. (1) An elderly Christian living alone has a member of the opposite sex move into the home to help care for him. There is no evidence of a romantic attachment or reason to suspect sexual immorality.

  2. (2) After attending a social gathering at a single sister’s home, a brother walks to a train station to catch the train home. After waiting for some time, the brother learns that the last train for the day has already left the station. He walks back to the sister’s home, but by the time he arrives, everyone has left and it is quite late. The sister allows him to sleep in the living room while she sleeps in her bedroom.

  3. (3) A single brother visits a married couple for several days. One night after everyone goes to bed, the husband is called to an emergency at his place of work and does not return until morning. The wife and the single brother are alone in the home all night sleeping in separate bedrooms.

10. Adulterous Marriage: If a divorced person remarries and he was not Scripturally free to do so​—in other words, if adultery and rejection by the innocent mate had not occurred—​he has entered into an adulterous marriage. In Jehovah’s eyes, he has married someone while still bound to another. Entering into such a marriage would call for judicial action.​—See 12:76.

11. The elders should be very cautious in extending any special privileges to such an individual, even after judicial restrictions have been lifted. He could share in the cleaning and repair of the local Kingdom Hall. He may eventually present student assignments on the midweek meeting if his doing so would not disturb others. However, he would not be assigned to help with literature, accounts, attendants, sound, video, or similar privileges in the congregation as long as the innocent former mate is alive, unmarried, and has not been guilty of por·neiʹa.

12. Although a Christian’s remarriage may not be adulterous, if he deliberately committed adultery in a scheming way so as to end his previous marriage or he pressured his innocent mate to reject him so that she eventually agreed to a divorce, he has dealt treacherously with her. (Mal. 2:14-16) His conduct is similar to entering into an adulterous marriage, and he would not qualify for special privileges for many years.​—See 22:26-27.

13. Child Abuse: Child abuse includes the sexual or physical abuse of a minor. It would also include the extreme neglect of a minor by her parent. Child sexual abuse is a perversion and generally includes sexual intercourse with a minor; oral or anal sex with a minor; fondling the genitals, breasts, or buttocks of a minor; voyeurism of a minor; indecent exposure to a minor; or soliciting a minor for sexual conduct. Depending on the circumstances of the case, it may include involvement with child pornography or “sexting” with a minor. “Sexting” involves the sending of sexually explicit messages or images electronically.​—See Chapter 14.

14. Gross Uncleanness, Uncleanness With Greediness: (2 Cor. 12:21; Gal. 5:19; Eph. 4:19) Galatians 5:19-21 lists many vices that are not classed as por·neiʹa but that could lead to one’s being disqualified from God’s Kingdom. Among them are uncleanness (Greek, a·ka·thar·siʹa). When one practices uncleanness to a serious degree, it can be grounds for disfellowshipping from the Christian congregation. Elders should use good judgment in discerning whether the conduct is minor uncleanness that can be handled by counsel or is gross uncleanness that requires the formation of a judicial committee.​—w06 7/15 pp. 29-31; w83 3/15 p. 31; lvs p. 249.

15. Though this is not an exhaustive list, gross uncleanness may be involved in the following:

  1. (1) Momentary Touching of Intimate Body Parts or Caressing of Breasts: If such conduct occurred on a few isolated occasions, especially between two persons involved in a courtship with the intent to marry, counsel from two elders may suffice to handle such minor uncleanness. The elders should inform the coordinator of the body of elders of the situation. However, if the conduct occurred on numerous occasions and the actions escalated in gravity and frequency, it may constitute gross uncleanness with greediness, requiring judicial action. Their wrongdoing may constitute brazen conduct if they give evidence of a disrespectful, insolent attitude toward God’s laws. For example, the individuals may have no intentions of pursuing marriage.

  2. (2) Immoral Conversations Over the Telephone or the Internet: A practice of engaging in immoral conversations over the telephone or the Internet, including “sexting,” can involve obscene speech or gross uncleanness, either of which can be a basis for judicial action. If such conduct occurred on a few isolated occasions, judicial action may not be necessary. Counsel from two elders may be sufficient to handle such minor uncleanness. The elders should inform the coordinator of the body of elders of the situation. However, such conduct may escalate in gravity and by frequent repetition become gross uncleanness with greediness requiring judicial action, especially if the individual had been previously counseled. The elders must use good judgment in determining whether the wrongdoing has escalated to a point warranting judicial action.​—w06 7/15 pp. 30-31.

  3. (3) Viewing Abhorrent Forms of Pornography: See 13:2-4.

  4. (4) Misuse of Tobacco or Marijuana and Abuse of Medical, Illicit, or Addictive Drugs: Elders should use good judgment in weighing the circumstances and extent of the wrongdoing so as to determine whether a judicial committee should be formed. For example, one or two elders may handle matters by means of counsel if a Christian abused an addictive drug or smoked cigarettes on one or two occasions and the matter is not widely known. The coordinator of the body of elders should be informed. However, a judicial committee is required for a practice of abusing addictive drugs, including betel nut, marijuana, and tobacco. (2 Cor. 7:1; w06 7/15 pp. 30-31; lvs pp. 110-117) If a medical doctor authorizes and/​or prescribes marijuana for a medical problem, a Christian may choose to make use of this form of treatment. Although no judicial action would be taken, if an issue arises in the congregation, the elders will need to determine whether the individual can be viewed as exemplary. The proper use of addictive drugs under medical supervision, such as for pain management, would not require judicial review. When questions arise, consult with the Service Department.

  5. (5) Extreme Physical Uncleanness: (Deut. 23:12-14; 2 Cor. 7:1; lvs pp. 108-110) Every effort should be made to help the offender see the need to keep his body and place of residence clean. Before judicial action would be considered, the elders would need to be certain that the uncleanness is pronounced and offensive, bringing much reproach upon Jehovah’s good name and his people in the community. Appropriate counsel should be given. If this is not heeded, then a warning talk may be necessary. (See 12:77-80.) If there is blatant, willful disregard of the counsel given and extremely offensive unclean conditions continue, judicial action would be warranted.

16. Brazen Conduct: (2 Cor. 12:21; Gal. 5:19; Eph. 4:19; lvs p. 249) The Greek word translated “brazen conduct” is a·selʹgei·a. Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible uses very forceful terms to define it: “licentiousness . . . filth[iness], lasciviousness, wantonness.” The New Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament adds to the list “unbridled lust, . . . outrageousness, shamelessness, insolence.” Another lexicon defines a·selʹgei·a as conduct that “violates all bounds of what is socially acceptable.” Rather than relating to bad conduct of a somewhat petty or minor nature, “brazen conduct” describes acts that reflect an attitude that betrays disrespect, disregard, or even contempt for divine standards, laws, and authority. Therefore, two elements are involved in brazen conduct: (1) The conduct itself is a serious violation of Jehovah’s laws, and (2) the attitude of the wrongdoer toward God’s laws is disrespectful, insolent.​—w06 7/15 p. 30.

17. Though this is not an exhaustive list, brazen conduct may be involved in the following if the wrongdoer has an insolent, contemptuous attitude made evident by a practice of these things:

  1. (1) Unnecessary Association With Disfellowshipped or Disassociated Individuals: Willful, continued, unnecessary association with disfellowshipped or disassociated nonrelatives despite repeated counsel would warrant judicial action.​—Matt. 18:17b; 1 Cor. 5:11, 13; 2 John 10, 11; lvs pp. 39-40.

    If a member of the congregation is known to have unnecessary association with disfellowshipped or disassociated relatives who are not in the household, elders should use the Scriptures to counsel and reason with him. Review with him information from the Remain in God’s Love book, page 241. If it is clear that a Christian is violating the spirit of the disfellowshipping decree in this regard and does not respond to counsel, he would not qualify for congregation privileges, which require one to be exemplary. He would not be dealt with judicially unless there is persistent spiritual association or he persists in openly criticizing the disfellowshipping decision.

  2. (2) Dating Though Not Scripturally Free to Remarry: Continuing to date or to pursue a romantic relationship with a person though one or both are not legally or Scripturally free to remarry, doing so despite repeated counsel and generally after a warning talk to the congregation, would warrant judicial action.​—Gal. 5:19; 2 Thess. 3:6, 14, 15.

18. Drunkenness: (1 Cor. 5:11; 6:9, 10; it-1 p. 656; lvs pp. 20-21, 83) A judicial committee is required when there is a practice of drunkenness or a single incident of drunkenness that brings notoriety. (w83 5/1 p. 8) A Scriptural description of drunkenness can be found in the following references: Job 12:25; Psalm 107:27; Proverbs 20:1; 23:29-35; Isaiah 24:20.

19. If an individual confesses to an elder that on one occasion he overindulged in alcohol to the point of drunkenness in a private setting, such as in his home, and there is no notoriety, it may suffice for the elder to give strong counsel. In any case, the elder should inform the coordinator of the body of elders of the matter.

20. Gluttony: (Prov. 23:20, 21; w04 11/1 pp. 30-31) A glutton routinely shows a lack of restraint, even gorging himself on food to the point of feeling very uncomfortable or becoming sick. Gluttony is determined, not by someone’s size, but by his attitude toward food.

21. Stealing, Thievery: (1 Cor. 6:9, 10; Eph. 4:28; w86 11/15 p. 14) Though all stealing is wrong, the body of elders should use discernment in weighing the circumstances and the extent of the involvement in wrongdoing to determine whether it is a judicial matter.​—w10 3/1 pp. 12-14; w94 4/15 pp. 19-21; jd pp. 105-106.

22. Deliberate, Malicious Lying; Bearing False Witness: (Prov. 6:16, 19; Col. 3:9; Rev. 22:15; it-2 pp. 244-245) Though all lying is bad, judicial action is taken only if there has been a practice of deliberate, malicious lying. “Malicious” means deliberately harmful, harboring ill will or enmity. Lying that requires judicial action involves more than just exaggerations or petty, misleading statements of relatively minor consequence or lying because of momentary pressure or fear of man.​—Matt. 26:69-75.

23. Generally, elders should not consider administering discipline if a Christian charges another Christian with making false statements in a court dispute. For example, this may involve divorce, child custody and support, and so forth. The Christian making the charge can express his concerns to the court that has the responsibility to determine what is truthful when rendering a judgment.

24. Fraud, Slander: (Lev. 19:16; Matt. 18:15-17; w97 3/15 pp. 17-22; it-1 pp. 870, 989-991; od pp. 136-138 pars. 13-20; lvs p. 163) Fraud is defined as the intentional use of deception, trickery, or perversion of truth for the purpose of inducing another to part with some valuable thing belonging to him or to give up a legal right. Slander is defined as a false report meant to do harm to the good name and reputation of another. Such talk is generally malicious. Slander is not identical to negative gossip. Negative gossip may be true; slander is always false. Negative gossip requires counsel but not judicial action. (w89 10/15 p. 10; it-1 p. 990 par. 2) The congregation would not consider forming a judicial committee unless the offended Christian had taken steps one and two of Matthew 18:15, 16 and had initiated step three as described in Matthew 18:17.​—lvs pp. 253-254.

25. If asked, elders could participate in step two, but they do not represent the body of elders. If the matter proceeds to step three, any elders who were witnesses in step two could serve only as witnesses in step three. They would not be used to serve on the judicial committee.

26. It is not the place of elders to become arbitrators of financial agreements. They are not debt collectors. Nor should they be involved in formulating contracts or written agreements, not even signing as witnesses to such. The same holds true should the matter reach step three.

27. The body of elders may first need to investigate before appointing a judicial committee. If so, the brothers involved in step two would not be used to investigate; they would be interviewed as witnesses.

28. One who reports an accusation to the police, the court, the elders, or others who have authority to look into matters and render a judgment would not be viewed by the congregation as guilty of committing slander. (it-1 p. 990) This is true even if the accusation is not proved.​—w97 8/15 p. 28 par. 1.

29. Reviling: (1 Cor. 6:10; it-2 pp. 801-802; lvs p. 164) Reviling involves subjecting a person to insulting speech, heaping abuse upon him. The body of elders should weigh the circumstances and extent of wrongdoing so as to determine whether a judicial committee should be formed. Elders should not be quick to take judicial action; a judicial committee would be formed only if the reviling is extreme, disrupts the peace of the congregation, and persists despite repeated counsel.

30. Obscene Speech: (Eph. 5:3-5; Col. 3:8; lvs p. 162) Obviously, certain words are more offensive than others. Profanity is any kind of language that profanes. However, obscene speech involves sexually explicit, filthy expressions. (g03 6/8 pp. 19-20) Is the speech sexually explicit? Does it persist despite repeated counsel? This would include obscenities used both in written and in oral communication, such as Internet chat rooms, phone sex, or e-mail.​—See 12:15.2.

31. Greed, Gambling, Extortion: (1 Cor. 5:10, 11; 6:10; 1 Tim. 3:8; it-1 pp. 789, 1005-1006) Elders do not generally involve themselves in what an individual does with regard to petty gambling solely for entertainment. However, if such petty gambling affects his spirituality or becomes a cause of stumbling for others, counsel should be given. If he does not respond favorably to the counsel and his conduct continues to have a negative effect on him or others, he could not be viewed as exemplary in the congregation. (Isa. 65:11; w11 3/1 pp. 12-14; w02 11/1 p. 31; g 3/15 pp. 14-15) If an individual’s gambling reveals a course of greediness, perhaps causing harm to himself or others, and he ignores repeated counsel, judicial action would be appropriate.

32. An individual continuing in employment directly involved with gambling or employment making him a clear accomplice or promoter of gambling would be subject to judicial action, usually after being allowed six months to make the needed adjustments. (lvs pp. 204-209) In questionable cases, consult the Service Department.

33. If a business gives out prizes or prize money to winners of a contest or to potential customers for advertising, accepting the gift is an individual’s decision to make. However, a person needs to be careful that accepting such a prize does not stir up greed.​—Rom. 14:21; 1 Cor. 10:31-33; w73 p. 127; g75 7/8 p. 28.

34. A Christian who greedily and unrepentantly extorts a high bride-price may be dealt with judicially.​—1 Cor. 5:11, 13; 6:9, 10; Heb. 13:5; w98 9/15 pp. 24-25.

35. Refusal to Provide for Family: (1 Tim. 5:8; lvs p. 251) Adamant refusal to provide materially for one’s own family, leaving wife and children destitute when having the means to provide, may warrant judicial action. Some of the factors the body of elders should consider before forming a judicial committee are the following:

  1. (1) Does the husband adamantly refuse to provide for his family or is the failure to provide for them because of other factors, such as health or financial difficulties? Is he doing what he reasonably can do to provide necessities for the family?

  2. (2) Has counsel been previously given, and has there been an opportunity for him to respond?

  3. (3) Does his wife have material resources affording a secure life so that the family is not destitute?

  4. (4) If the family is destitute, is it because they have rejected the family head’s provisions by choosing to live apart from him?

  5. (5) When a separation is involved, to what extent is the wife responsible?

36. Fits of Anger, Violence, Domestic Violence: (Mal. 2:16; Gal. 5:20; Col. 3:19) A Christian who cannot control his anger cannot be viewed as exemplary in the congregation. After his attitude, the pattern of behavior, and the severity of damage to the lives of others have been considered, a person who gives in to uncontrolled fits of anger may need to be dealt with judicially. (g97 6/8 p. 20) In questionable cases, consult the Service Department.

37. If a Christian took up professional boxing and refused to stop despite repeated counsel, judicial action would be appropriate.​—w81 7/1 pp. 30-31.

38. Manslaughter: Aside from deliberate murder, bloodguilt may be incurred if a person causes loss of life through carelessness or because of violating a traffic law or other safety law of Caesar. The elders should investigate and if warranted appoint a judicial committee to hear the matter. The committee should base its decision on clearly established facts, not simply on a decision that may have been made by secular authorities.​—Deut. 22:8; w06 9/15 p. 30.

39. Apostasy: Apostasy is a standing away from true worship, a falling away, defection, rebellion, abandonment. It includes the following:

  1. (1) Celebrating False Religious Holidays: (Ex. 32:4-6; Jer. 7:16-19) Not all holidays directly involve false religion and require judicial action.

  2. (2) Participation in Interfaith Activities: (2 Cor. 6:14, 15, 17, 18) Apostate acts include bowing before altars and images and sharing in false religious songs and prayers.​—Rev. 18:2, 4.

  3. (3) Deliberately Spreading Teachings Contrary to Bible Truth: (2 John 7, 9, 10; lvs p. 245; it-1 pp. 126-127) Any with sincere doubts regarding the Bible truth taught by Jehovah’s Witnesses should be helped. Loving assistance should be provided. (2 Tim. 2:16-19, 23-26; Jude 22, 23) If one obstinately is speaking about or deliberately spreading false teachings, this may be or may lead to apostasy. If there is no response after a first and a second admonition, a judicial committee should be formed.​—Titus 3:10, 11; w86 4/1 pp. 30-31.

  4. (4) Causing Divisions, Promoting Sects: (Rom. 16:17, 18; Titus 3:10, 11) This would be deliberate action disrupting the unity of the congregation or undermining the confidence of the brothers in Jehovah’s arrangement. It may involve or lead to apostasy.​—it-2 p. 886.

  5. (5) Employment Promoting False Religion: Continuing in employment that makes one an accomplice to or a promoter of false worship would subject one to disfellowshipping after being allowed six months to make the needed adjustments.​—w99 4/15 pp. 28-30; lvs pp. 204-206.

  6. (6) Spiritism: (Deut. 18:9-13; 1 Cor. 10:21, 22; Gal. 5:20; lvs pp. 216-217)

  7. (7) Idolatry: (1 Cor. 6:9, 10; 10:14) Idolatry includes the use of images, including pictures, in false religious worship.

EVIDENCE ESTABLISHING WRONGDOING

40. Even though a Christian has been accused of wrongdoing serious enough to require judicial action, a judicial committee should not be formed unless the wrongdoing has been established by sufficient evidence. Please note the following regarding evidence:

  1. (1) Confession: Admission of wrongdoing, either written or oral, may be accepted as conclusive proof without other corroborating evidence. (Josh. 7:19) There must be two witnesses to a confession, and the confession must be clear and unambiguous. For example, a statement from a married Christian that his mate is “Scripturally free” would not by itself be viewed as a clear confession of adultery. A guilty plea entered in court by a Christian as part of a plea bargain, perhaps on the advice of an attorney so as to avoid the possibility of a harsher sentence, would generally not in itself be viewed by the congregation as an admission of guilt.

  2. (2) Eyewitnesses: There must be two or three eyewitnesses, not just people repeating hearsay; no action can be taken if there is only one witness. (Deut. 19:15-17; John 8:17; 1 Tim. 5:19, 24, 25) If there are two or three witnesses to the same kind of wrongdoing but each one is witness to a separate incident, the elders can consider their testimony. While such evidence is acceptable to establish guilt, it is preferable to have two witnesses to the same occurrence of wrongdoing. The testimony of youths may be considered; it is up to the elders to determine whether the testimony has the ring of truth. The testimony of unbelievers and disfellowshipped or disassociated ones may also be considered, but it must be weighed carefully.

41. If wrongdoing has not been established but serious questions have been raised, the body of elders should appoint two elders to investigate the matter promptly. For example, there may be just one witness. In some cases, it may be appropriate for the witness to encourage the accused to approach the elders. (Jas. 5:14) The elders can then allow the accused a few days to approach them. In other cases, it may not be advisable for the witness to confront the accused. For example, the witness may be extremely timid. A victim of rape or of child sexual abuse is never required to confront the accused. (If the accusation involves child sexual abuse, see Chapter 14.) Whether the witness approaches the accused or not, the two elders appointed should speak with the accused regarding the accusation.​—w97 8/15 p. 27.

42. If the accused denies the accusation, the investigating elders should try to arrange a meeting with him and the accuser together. (If the accusation involves child sexual abuse, see Chapter 14.) If the accuser or the accused is unwilling to meet with the elders or if the accused continues to deny the accusation of a single witness and the wrongdoing is not established, the matter cannot be handled judicially. The investigating elders should compose a record, sign it, put it in a sealed envelope, and give it to the secretary to be placed in the congregation’s confidential file. (See 22:21-27.) Additional evidence may later come to light to establish matters.

THOSE HAVING CERTAIN PRIVILEGES OF SERVICE

43. If the elders learn of an accusation of serious wrongdoing against a member of the congregation who serves as a Bethel family member, a construction servant, a full-time or part-time commuter to Bethel, a full-time or part-time construction commuter, a remote servant or volunteer, a Bethel consultant, a field missionary, a special pioneer, an Assembly Hall servant, or a Bible school facility servant, two elders with knowledge of the circumstances should immediately contact the Service Department for direction on handling the matter.

THOSE WHO HAVE NOT ASSOCIATED FOR MANY YEARS

44. In deciding whether or not to handle such a person judicially, the body of elders should consider the following:

  1. (1) Does he still profess to be a Witness?

  2. (2) Is he generally recognized as a Witness in the congregation or the community?

  3. (3) To what degree have lives been affected or damaged by the wrongdoing? For example, does the matter involve child abuse or adultery?

  4. (4) Does the person have a measure of contact or association with the congregation so that a leavening, or corrupting, influence exists?

  5. (5) Is the person willing to meet with a committee, thus admitting accountability to the Christian congregation?

45. Depending upon the length of inactivity and other factors noted above, the elders may determine to hold the matter in abeyance. In such a case, they would make a record of the person’s questionable conduct for the congregation file. (See 22:21-27.) If the individual shows interest in returning to the congregation, the elders can clarify matters at that time.​—w08 11/15 pp. 14-15 pars. 12-13.

46. If the sinful conduct is known only to believing family members and no congregation action has been taken, believing relatives will likely determine to curtail family association severely, viewing the relative as bad association.​—1 Cor. 15:33; w85 7/15 p. 19 par. 14.

UNBAPTIZED PUBLISHERS

47. The elders should promptly handle a case of serious wrongdoing by an unbaptized publisher. While a judicial committee would not be formed, the body of elders should select two elders to meet with him, perhaps the ones who approved him as an unbaptized publisher. (If the unbaptized publisher is a minor, see Chapter 12, paragraph 55.) They should try to readjust him and to determine whether he continues to qualify. (od pp. 144-145 pars. 38-40) The body of elders should be updated on the results, including whether any restrictions will be imposed and whether any announcement will be made to the congregation.

48. If the individual is repentant, the assigned elders may decide to place certain restrictions on the individual for a time, such as not commenting at meetings, not presenting student assignments on the midweek meeting, or not sharing in the field ministry.

49. If the individual is repentant but the assigned elders determine that (1) the wrongdoing is widely known or might become widely known later or (2) the congregation needs to be on guard concerning the individual, the coordinator of the body of elders should arrange for an elder to make the following announcement at the next midweek meeting: “A matter involving [name of person] has been handled, and he [she] continues to serve as an unbaptized publisher with the congregation.”

50. There may be reasons for the body of elders to determine that a Scriptural talk about the sort of wrongdoing involved should be given to the congregation a few weeks after the announcement.

51. If the individual is unrepentant, the two elders should inform him that he no longer qualifies as an unbaptized publisher. Or if he informs the elders that he no longer desires to be a publisher, they will accept his decision. In either case, the coordinator of the body of elders should arrange for an elder to make the following announcement at the next midweek meeting: “[Name of person] is no longer recognized as an unbaptized publisher.” Because of his unrepentant wrongdoing, it would be best for a time not to call on him if he raises his hand to comment at meetings.

52. If the elders see that such a person is a threat to the flock, they can privately warn those endangered. For example, despite the announcement, the wrongdoer might attempt to socialize with youths in the congregation. In that situation, the elders would speak privately to the parents of the endangered ones and perhaps to those youths.

53. There is no specific arrangement for an appeal or a seven-day waiting period before announcing the decision that one is no longer recognized as an unbaptized publisher. If he expresses dissatisfaction with the conclusion, the body of elders should choose two different elders to review the case.

54. If someone who was previously removed as an unbaptized publisher begins to make progress and wishes once again to share in the ministry, two elders (perhaps those who met with him earlier) should meet with him to determine his qualifications. If he qualifies, the coordinator of the body of elders should arrange for an announcement to be made that he is an unbaptized publisher. There is no need to wait until he reports field service again to make the announcement.

55. If the unbaptized publisher is a minor, the two elders should meet with the Christian parents to discern what occurred, the child’s attitude, and the corrective steps that the parents are taking. If the parents have the situation in hand, the two elders may discern that it is not necessary to include the minor in the meeting. The elders will check with the parents from time to time to offer helpful counsel, specific suggestions, and loving encouragement.​—See Chapter 14, paragraphs 29-30, if the minor engaged in sexual misconduct.

56. At the conclusion of the case, the two elders should prepare a written record. The secretary files this record in the congregation’s confidential file.​—See 22:21-27.

SERIOUS WRONGDOING THAT OCCURRED YEARS IN THE PAST

57. Depending upon the circumstances, serious wrongdoing that occurred years in the past may need to be handled by a judicial committee. However, if wrongdoing occurred more than a few years ago and the individual is genuinely repentant and recognizes that he should have come forward immediately when he sinned, counsel by two elders may be sufficient.

58. The body of elders should appoint two elders to gather the facts so that the body can determine whether a judicial committee is needed or not, taking into consideration answers to the following questions:

  1. (1) When did the wrongdoing take place?

  2. (2) How widely known is the matter?

  3. (3) Does the erring one show evidence of spiritual progress as opposed to evidence that progress is being hindered?

  4. (4) Will counsel be sufficient to restore him, or will more be required for him to have a clean conscience?

  5. (5) Are there works befitting repentance?

  6. (6) Did he voluntarily confess, or did the matter come to light by other means?

  7. (7) If the body of elders decides not to form a judicial committee, will the elders continue to have the respect of the congregation?

  8. (8) If por·neiʹa was involved, has a confession been made to the innocent mate?​—See 16:10.5.

  9. (9) To what degree have lives been affected or damaged by the wrongdoing? For example, does the matter involve child abuse or adultery?

59. If the individual is serving in an appointed capacity, such as a ministerial servant, elder, or pioneer, his qualifications should be reviewed.​—See 8:25-27; 9:4.

VALIDITY OF WRONGDOER’S BAPTISM

60. When dealing with a wrongdoer, the elders should not raise questions about the validity of the individual’s baptism. If the individual raises the issue, the elders may refer him to the February 15, 2010, Watchtower, page 22.

61. At times a wrongdoer will claim that his baptism is not valid and that he feels he is not accountable to a judicial committee because he secretly engaged in wrongdoing shortly before he was baptized. If the elders had been aware of his serious wrongdoing committed just before baptism, likely they would not have approved him for baptism. However, this does not necessarily mean that he did not make a valid dedication. Some individuals make a dedication long before their baptism; others have made a dedication shortly before. The elders are not in a position to read the heart and know for a certainty how Jehovah viewed the person at the time he was baptized. If the elders learn that a baptized individual secretly engaged in serious wrongdoing while he was an unbaptized publisher but the wrongdoing ceased before baptism, they should give counsel and encouragement. A judicial committee should not be formed for prebaptism wrongdoing. (1 Cor. 6:9-11) However, if the individual resumed serious wrongdoing after baptism, the elders would generally deal with him on the basis of what he has professed to be, a dedicated and baptized Christian, and would meet with him judicially.

62. There are rare occasions when it is obvious that the baptism was invalid because serious wrongdoing did not cease before baptism, even for a brief period of time. For example, it may be that at the time of baptism, the individual was living immorally with a member of the opposite sex or the same sex, was a member of a nonneutral organization, or something similar. If there are questions, the Service Department should be consulted.

DETERMINING WHICH CONGREGATION SHOULD HANDLE THE MATTER

63. Bodies of elders should cooperate if there is a question regarding which congregation should handle a case of wrongdoing. Which congregation has the facts? Which congregation can handle the case most effectively? Jurisdiction should not become an issue.

64. If a wrongdoer moves before a case has been concluded, it is usually best for the elders of the original congregation to follow through if possible and if distance permits. They are acquainted with the person and his circumstances. If he has moved a great distance away, the elders of the original congregation should not insist on handling matters if the wrongdoer says he is unable to return to the congregation for the meeting. In such a case, it may be advisable to refer matters to the elders of the congregation where he now lives. There should be good communication between the two bodies.

65. If the elders learn that a publisher who is visiting the area for a short period of time is guilty of wrongdoing, they should promptly report the matter to the elders of his congregation.

WRONGDOING INVOLVING INDIVIDUALS FROM DIFFERENT CONGREGATIONS

66. If an individual confesses to wrongdoing that involves a person in another congregation, the elders should promptly pass along what they know to the elders of the other congregation and allow them time to investigate. Does the other individual admit the wrong? Do their accounts match, or are there significant differences? The elders handling the matter should communicate freely and cooperate in obtaining the facts. There are many advantages to interviewing individuals jointly to ascertain what actually occurred and to clarify discrepancies. (Prov. 18:13, 17) If a joint meeting is held, thereafter the elders handling the matter from each congregation will withdraw and handle the case of the person from their own congregation. The elders in one congregation should generally not conclude their case before the elders of the other congregation have fully investigated the situation.

PERMITTING INDIVIDUALS TO COMMIT SEXUAL IMMORALITY IN THE HOME

67. If a publisher were to allow an individual to commit sexual immorality while living in the publisher’s home, he would be giving tacit approval to immoral conduct. This would also be true of allowing an individual to commit sexual immorality while visiting the publisher’s home. Such a publisher would not be exemplary.

68. When congregation elders come to know of such a situation, they should patiently provide Scriptural counsel. The publisher should be helped to see that what he is allowing could stumble others. He may then take action to change the situation so as “not to put a stumbling block or an obstacle before a brother.”​—Rom. 14:13.

69. Perhaps the publisher is genuinely concerned that what he has been allowing may be a cause for stumbling. For certain reasons, however, he may feel that he has no recourse at the present time. For example, elderly Witness parents may need the assistance of an unbelieving son or daughter. Under such circumstances, no judicial action would be taken, but the qualifications of the publisher to serve in an exemplary position would be reviewed by the body of elders.

70. Suppose the publisher, upon being approached by the elders, manifests a brazen attitude, not really caring if others are stumbled. Even if he does not encourage others to do what he is doing, the elders may decide to arrange for a talk to be given that serves as a warning to the congregation. (2 Thess. 3:14, 15; see 12:77-80.) On the other hand, if a baptized publisher actively promotes allowing individuals to commit sexual immorality in the home, then the matter could be handled judicially on the grounds of condoning sexual immorality, causing divisions, and, in effect, speaking against “the teaching of the Christ.”​—2 John 9-11; Gal. 5:19, 20; Rev. 2:20.

SCRIPTURAL FREEDOM TO REMARRY

71. It is the responsibility of the individual desiring to remarry to produce convincing evidence to establish Scriptural freedom to remarry. If an individual’s divorce occurred before baptism, the elders should not assume the individual is Scripturally free, as baptism does not dissolve previous marital ties. Elders should be very careful when it comes to giving direction on whether an individual is Scripturally free and should consult with the Service Department on any questions. This is especially true since the decisions a person makes in such matters will affect not only his relationship with his marriage mate but also his relationship with Jehovah. Elders shoulder a heavy responsibility in such matters and need to be cautious when offering counsel, especially when the answer may not be readily apparent.​—Luke 12:48; Jas. 3:1.

72. Scriptural freedom to remarry requires three conditions: (1) sexual immorality (por·neiʹa); (2) a rejection (refusal to reconcile) by the innocent mate; and (3) a legal, final divorce. (Matt. 5:31, 32; 19:9; Heb. 13:4) For example, if an individual contemplating remarriage confesses that he has been guilty of sexual immorality after his former mate legally divorced him or if his former mate has admitted to committing sexual immorality since the legal divorce, both are Scripturally free to remarry.

73. If a baptized Christian who accuses his believing mate of adultery and wishes to establish freedom to divorce and remarry approaches an elder, the matter should be referred to the body of elders. The accuser is not free unless the evidence establishing wrongdoing is sufficient to warrant the formation of a judicial committee on a charge of por·neiʹa. (Deut. 19:15; John 8:17) If the accused mate is associated with another congregation, the evidence should be presented to the elders of that congregation for review and a determination. The publisher should be advised that he is not to view himself as Scripturally free until the elders have investigated the matter and guilt of por·neiʹa is established.

74. In some cases adultery is not established. However the accused may confess or two eyewitnesses may report that the accused stayed all night in the same house with a person of the opposite sex (or a known homosexual) under improper circumstances. (See 12:7-9.) The elders should carefully consider the situation. (See 12:7.1.) Although the elders cannot tell the innocent mate that he is free to remarry, if the innocent mate is convinced that adultery did occur, the elders may allow him to take responsibility before Jehovah for obtaining a Scriptural divorce; if he remarries, no judicial action will be taken.

75. Even if the accused mate is not one of Jehovah’s Witnesses (disfellowshipped, disassociated, or never baptized), two witnesses are also generally required to establish wrongdoing that would provide a basis for Scriptural freedom. An exception may be made, however, if the unbeliever privately makes an unambiguous confession of adultery to the Christian mate. In such a case, if the innocent Christian mate believes that the confession is true and does not wish to reconcile, he can submit a letter to the elders outlining his situation. The body of elders should then consider the letter. Is there any known reason to conclude other than that the unbelieving mate has been immoral? For example, was the confession worded ambiguously? Did the unbeliever later deny making the confession? If the unbeliever is willing to speak with the elders and matters are unclear, the elders may choose to ask the accused mate directly. If there is no known reason to conclude otherwise, the innocent mate can be allowed to take responsibility before Jehovah for obtaining a Scriptural divorce; if he remarries, no judicial action will be taken.

76. The following constitutes rejection by the innocent mate:

  1. (1) The innocent mate initiates a divorce either before or after learning of the adultery.

  2. (2) The innocent mate signs a divorce decree or in some other way indicates he does not object to a divorce initiated by the guilty mate, either before or after learning of the adultery. In some lands it is possible for the innocent mate to sign legal documents that stipulate custody of the children and financial support without indicating he agrees with the divorce; his signing such papers in itself would not indicate a rejection.​—w00 12/15 pp. 28-29.

  3. (3) Though verbally expressing forgiveness and not seeking a divorce, the innocent mate refuses to resume sexual relations for a very prolonged period of time, a year or even years. Before indicating to the guilty mate that he is free to pursue a Scriptural divorce, the elders should consult with the Service Department. The innocent mate is not required to make a quick decision to forgive or not.

MARKING DISORDERLY ONES

77. At times it may be necessary to mark those who display a flagrant disregard for Jehovah’s standards though not practicing a grave sin that merits judicial action. (2 Thess. 3:6, 14, 15; w99 7/15 pp. 29-31) This could include such things as being grossly lazy or critical or being a profitless talker who is a constant ‘meddler with what does not concern him.’ (2 Thess. 3:11) It may involve one who schemes to take material advantage of others, indulges in entertainment that is clearly improper, dates an unbeliever, or dates when not legally or Scripturally free.​—od pp. 134-136 pars. 9-12.

78. If the disorderly conduct is generally unknown to others and poses no threat to their spiritual well-being, usually it is best to handle things through admonition and counsel. The body of elders should not be hasty in deciding to give a warning talk. However, if the individual does not see the error of his way but continues to be an unwholesome influence, a warning talk may be given to the congregation. Elders must use reasonableness and discernment in determining whether a particular situation is sufficiently serious and disturbing to require a warning talk.

79. For example, if a baptized Christian is dating an ‘unbeliever,’ the elders should first counsel him and try to help him. (2 Cor. 6:14; w04 7/1 pp. 30-31) If he persists in disregarding Bible principles in spite of repeated admonition, the body of elders may decide that a warning talk should be given to the congregation. If an individual is dating an unbaptized publisher, a warning talk may not be needed. Much would depend on the circumstances, on the attitude of the Christian, on the level of disturbance to the congregation, and other factors. Nonetheless, if he is dating with a view to marrying someone who is unbaptized, he is not obeying the Bible’s counsel at 1 Corinthians 7:39 to marry “only in the Lord,” and loving counsel should be given.

80. If the disorderly one is moved to change, the elders can individually decide to resume personally socializing with him. This will indicate to the congregation that they consider that the individual is no longer marked.

ATTEMPTED SUICIDE

81. A suicide attempt may be the result of deep despair or major depression. Elders should deal carefully and compassionately with such a person. In most cases, a judicial hearing is not required.​—Ps. 88:3, 17, 18; Prov. 15:13; Eccl. 7:7; g 4/14 pp. 6-9.