EXERCISING BALANCE AND JUDGMENT IN WEIGHING THE NEED

15. What, then determines the direction the elders’ efforts will take?

¹⁵ In any case of serious wrongdoing however, whether the repentant one seeks their help or they, instead, go to him, the congregational elders would want to be satisfied that there is sincere repentance and that he is earnestly endeavoring to hold to a right course. If the person’s own heart has not reproved him and moved him to abandon the wrong, then the elders have the duty to endeavor to help to bring about these needed things.

16. Can one who commits a sin just one time be a ‘practicer’ of that sin? If so, how?

¹⁶ Thus, while the number of times a wrong has been done is certainly a serious factor to be considered and weighed, it is not in every case the determining factor as to a person’s need for Scriptural reproof. A person may have committed fornication just one time. But if he has not sincerely repented of that wrong he is still a ‘practicer’ of fornication. How so? In that he has not rejected or repudiated that wrong way in his heart. Jesus said that a man looking at a woman with passion for her was committing adultery with her in his heart. (Matt. 5:28) So, if an individual still looks back on some sinful act with a measure of pleasure rather than with detestation and deep regret and a determination to avoid repeating it, he still has that sin in his heart. He has not been cleansed from sin by God’s forgiveness through Jesus Christ and so is still unclean. (1 John 1:9; 2:1) He will likely engage in that wrong again if opportunity affords and he feels he can get away with it.

17. Toward whom in particular must elders exercise much caution as to claims of repentance?

¹⁷ There is therefore good reason for elders to weigh claims of repentance carefully where the individual has shown himself to be guilty of hypocrisy, lying and deliberate efforts to deceive, or where it is apparent that the wrong act was preceded by deliberate scheming, perhaps in a coldly calculating way. This is quite different from an individual’s ‘caving in’ due to human weakness under the unexpected pressure of certain tempting circumstances. A case in point is that of Ananias and his wife Sapphira, who schemed together to deceive, ‘purposing the wrong act in their hearts.’​—Acts 5:1-11.

18. (a) Where wrongdoing is carried out in a flagrant, brazen manner, need elders hesitate in taking disfellowshiping action? What shows this? (b) If one who openly flouted righteous standards is later reinstated due to genuine repentance, what great caution should still be exercised?

¹⁸ Thus, if a married man secretly flirts with another woman, all the while putting on a pretense of being clean and perhaps even accepting sacred responsibilities within the congregation, and then actually abandons his wife and elopes with the other woman, should the elders hesitate in disfellowshiping such an individual from the congregation? Obviously not. When the apostle Paul learned of a man who was living with the woman who evidently still was the wife of his father, Paul recommended prompt action on the part of the congregation to “remove the wicked man from among yourselves.” (1 Cor. 5:1-5, 12, 13) Likewise, the elders would exercise real caution in accepting a plea for reinstatement from such an individual, since he has given them little basis for trusting his word as sincere and genuine. If, later, he is reinstated, they certainly should exercise great caution in the future as to giving him any responsibility in the congregation.

19. How could one who has not yet overcome a problem of wrongdoing still show a better heart desire than those described earlier?

¹⁹ By contrast with such ones, a congregation member may go to an elder for help and may inform him that he is still at that time struggling with a problem. Though he has not yet been able to conquer the wrong entirely, he may show a sincere heart desire to do so, and, unless there is other evidence to put this in doubt, the congregation shepherds will aid him accordingly. He is certainly much different from one who schemes to deceive or who tries to justify a wrong course.​—Ps. 51:1-3, 10, 17.

20. What self-deception does the persister in sin engage in, and why is he a danger to the congregation?

²⁰ The person who persists in wrongdoing generally excuses himself in his own mind, even convinces himself that God will condone what he is doing. (Compare Psalm 36:2; 50:17-21.) What is still worse, he may influence others toward such a course. Proverbs 10:17 says: “He that is holding to discipline is a path to life, but he that is leaving reproof is causing to wander.” For his own good and for the good of all, he needs to be brought to account and straightened out.

REPROVING WITH ALL LONG-SUFFERING AND ART OF TEACHING

21. When reproof is needed, what is the Scriptural way for elders to give this?

²¹ Where circumstances show that there is need for reproof, how do the congregational shepherds proceed? If the wrong is not acknowledged, the elders are obliged to present the wrongdoer with the “convincing evidence” of his wrong course. They cannot do this if all they have is mere hearsay. (Compare John 16:8; Isaiah 11:3.) They may find it necessary to ask questions in order to establish vital facts. Reproving, however, especially requires that they use Scriptural evidence and argument to refute any thinking on his part that such a sinful course could be excusable in God’s eyes. They should seek to help him to see the wrong in its true colors and why it merits his hate. (Heb. 1:9) Thereby they correct and help him to get “set straight.” Their aim as shepherds is to bring him to repentance and an abandoning of the wrong course, not only in deed but in mind and heart.​—Titus 1:9; Jas. 1:25; 2:8, 9.

22. How will the ultimate objective of Christian reproof guide the elders in their efforts, and how can they fulfill the instruction to reprove “with all longsuffering and art of teaching”?

²² Keeping in focus the purpose of reproof, the elders will not view themselves merely as a fact-finding or guilt-establishing body. They do not simply rebuke a wrongdoer (though their reproof may include a rebuke). They have the noble and loving goal of ‘turning back a sinner from the error of his ways in order to save a soul from death.’ (Jas. 5:19, 20) Surely they should not feel rushed, as if their efforts to attain that goal must be limited to a single discussion on a certain date. If they feel that more time is needed, they may recommend that the person think and pray about what they have said, and then they could arrange to talk with him again. This may give their words of counsel and reproof opportunity to sink into his mind and heart. And even after they do arrive at some conclusion (after one or several talks with him), they will recognize that bringing him to restored spiritual health may require their further attention and aid for a period of time. But they will have the satisfaction of knowing that, as 2 Timothy 4:2 says, they have reproved and exhorted “with all long-suffering and art of teaching.” The time and effort spent are well worth it.a

23. (a) Will those who repent and turn from wrongdoing necessarily continue to exercise all the congregational functions that they did before? Why? (b) What factors will the elders weigh in all cases?

²³ The fact that a person has reproved himself in his own heart does not necessarily mean that he would continue to exercise all the same functions in the congregation that he had been doing. Just as a person recovering from a physical ailment is not able to carry the same weight as others, so it may be with him. The elders may judge it advisable not to use such a one in matters of responsibility for a time, perhaps feeling that this restriction could contribute to the person’s becoming ‘readjusted.’ (Gal. 6:1) And in the case of one who repents only as a result of being reproved by others, that is, after being convinced of a sinful course in order to bring him to genuine repentance, then the removal of responsibility or privileges could follow as contributing to a “disciplining in righteousness.” (2 Tim. 3:16; Heb. 12:5, 6) In all cases, the elders must weigh such factors as the seriousness of the wrong committed, the length of time that has passed since it occurred, the circumstances that led up to it, and the extent to which a measure of willfulness was shown or there was failure to give heed to earlier warning counsel.

24, 25. (a) What do these Bible principles call on elders to exercise, and how? (b) What now remains to be considered?

²⁴ Truly, all of this calls for balance and judgment, discernment and understanding. Elders must weigh carefully both the interests of the individual and of those of the congregation as a whole. On the one hand, they must feel keenly their obligation before God to prevent wrongdoing from infiltrating and spreading within the congregation. At the same time they must show just as deep concern that their manner of dealing with their brothers always reflects Jehovah God’s own wise and merciful ways.​—Compare Acts 20:28-31; Jude 3, 4, 21-23.