There is a difference between a Christian falling to weakness of fleshly sin "(i.e: fornication~ in a manner that doesn't affect the congregation directly) versus child molesters. The latter being repugnant, wicked and evil. Do you know how many witnesses are callously disfellowshipped due to committing immorality with another adult and/or had concealed a sin from time ago yet had striven to alter such course yet are still disfellowshipped based on such? I'm in no way attempting to water down God's holiness and I fully understand the ramifications of not controlling one's body members as scripture states and Paul relates the body is not meant for fornication.
However, Paul's first letter to the Corinthians exhorted the congregation to expel the "wicked" man whom was committing acts "worse than the nations". Meaning, he was committing immorality with his father’s wife. Something even to today's standards would be deemed "shocking". Yet, even though the man was labeled "wicked" by Paul, in his 2nd letter to the Corinthians (written within the same year), he told the congregation to reinstate him for he obviously repented and he did not want him to become overly saddened.
So two points to take away from that, though I recognize "fornicators" will not inherit God's kingdom (particularly the Chosen Ones held to a higher standard), there seems to be a more egregious form of sin that can be deemed "wicked" like that of child molesters, sleeping with step mothers, certain adulterers etc.). I have first-hand heard elders very often and even very recent disfellowshipping ones due to fleshly weakness that may seem "not necessarily wicked " even though the person seemed suffering with remorse and just fell to weakness. I've heard "the time has to fit the crime". Meaning, "you'll need to be disfellowshipped at least a year plus", etc. Paul sought to reinstate the repentant "wicked" man within the span of both letters...less than a year. So, it highlights that expulsion was not done to make penance for a sin, but rather to readjust the person. Humans seem to enjoy “punishing for bad deeds”.
How do you identify repentance? It’s not as easy as just quoting scripture regarding "works befitting repentance". And therein lies the "Catch22". If an elder "doesn't like you", or enjoys retribution for one concealing a sin, even though the person has finally confessed and/or declares repentance, the person can be judged harshly and thrown out. Then, as punishment the elder(s) keep the person locked out until they grovel their way back. Spanish congregations can be particularly ruthless. Whatever the case, the entire disfellowshipping arrangement is absolutely abused/misused. I realize Paul was inspired to write his letters, but I also think there are times he is taken out of context in some cases and he would be concerned with his words being used in a way he necessarily wouldn't have enacted in his time.
The disfellowshipping arrangement and committees should be overhauled and re-examined. The "Flock" book has become way too intrusive into people’s personal affairs w/the knowing all the nitty, gritty details of human’s failings. In some cases, it acts like a confessional in the catholic church. Confession begins first with Jehovah, then find your way to the elders to be greased with oil since so many can’t find the ability to pray to God after sin. But elders seem to view the confession to them primarily. As an elder, the first thing I would ask someone confessing a sin is "Have you first confessed your transgressions to Jehovah from your knees privately?" (The Commentary of James book is an incredible book regarding confession and the purpose of elders. They all should be instructed to read the book.)
Also, the extreme way witnesses are admonished to not even acknowledge a disfellowshipped person at the meeting and/or in public and also towards family members has gotten overtly extreme and too generalized. (Yes, its true Pauls' words quote "don't even greet such a man". Once again, I digress as per above, I believe there are extenuating circumstances for everyone and that there are sins deemed "wicked" and others less egregious due to fleshly weakness.
But if one has never been disfellowshipped, reproved and/or shunned and is one who "enjoys" punishing others for bad deeds, then I guess the arrangement is like a box of chocolates. I really hope the verse @ John 8:11 conveniently removed from NWT Scripture where Jesus supposedly said to the woman, "Go and sin no more", actually occurred. It highlights Jesus’ practicality and immense tender love...
