You Are NOT Disfellowedshipped! Yet.
Hi GARYBUSS,RADGER,IS THAT YOU? Gary I'm not radger.However you was the first one to help me and my family see what the Society was all about,when we read your post The Way I See it! Thanks.
How many times has an appeals committee overturned a disfellowshipping decision of the original committee? If an alleged wrongdoer cannot convince 3 men, how will he convince another 3 to listen?
In my experience, a couple of times the d/fd one successfully appealled. Much to the chagrin of the original committee. If you really want to p..... off your cong elders , make a successful apeal against their decision . It makes them look stupid and they hate it . Sadly the repreived one is often the subject of elders dislike and suspicion from then on.
I was also aware of the provision to make a final appeal to the Society, but it was never told to the erring one. I guess it would only be offered if he/she railed against the second comittee that they were wrong on a point of order. But how many do that? They are usually too upset at the time to express themselves so forcefully.
So correct, BluesBrother! "Someone" made an appeal, and the appeal committee, consisting of COs and so-called "heavyweights" overturned the original decision, pointing out that the original committee had made mistakes, changed the charges between the hearings in order to still reach their aim, then again changed them a second time and brought in new charges before the appeal committee meeting; and the outcome was not only that the original decision was overturned, but that the original committee was reprimanded and told to cooperate in stead of harrassing.
But, as you say, BluesBrother, dislike and suspicion followed, and a year and a half later they tried again. This time the branch itself ordered it, after hearsay, and so this "someone" was in the strange position that the local ones and the branch were in unison, whereas the "men in the middle" were not. "Someone's" case was dealt with by 1 - one - man, whom he never met, never spoke to or heard from, never wrote to or received message from. He only by a slip of the tongue by another committee member found out his name later. So a hidden man decides over the life and death of another one, a supposed-to-be brother, and lets his face or voice not be seen or heard, and most certainly not the reasons for his decision. He knew nothing about "someone's" background or motives, he only responded to written and oral hearsay by other men, likewise unknown to the "someone" and appointed by the branch.
Result? Somewhere in the middle. Stay but shut up.
Is it not strange, too, that an elder who is up for df'ing may deliver his talk and give his congregational prayer Tuesday night, but Wednesday the final hearing is and he is informed he is out? From rspected elder, since no information has been given, to an invisible in 24 hours ..... Weird.
Blueblades, you wrote:
Gary I'm not radger.However you was the first one to help me and my family see what the Society was all about,when we read your post The Way I See it! Thanks.
Sorry It took me so long to see your reply. Hope everything is working out okay. I first titled that article "The Truth Simplified". Randy gave it the name that so many now remember. My thanks to Randy Watters for reading my writing and putting it on his site.
So much has changed since I first wrote that. I have often wondered if it was worth the cost to me to go public with my dissent. Then someone like you posts a thanks. Thanks for your thanks. Gary