Jehovah's Witnesses and congregational discipline

Discipline involving non-judicial situations

At the elders' discretion, "non-judicial" situations may involve discipline of one or more of several types.

Counsel

Counsel may be given in situations involving actions that are considered inappropriate but are not considered to be of sufficient gravity to necessitate a judicial committee. Counsel may be provided by a mature Witness in addition to self-discipline and family discipline. Elders may also give recommendations or warnings to members in non-judicial situations.

Local needs

At conventions and assemblies, and about once each month at a local midweek meeting, a short talk regarding "local needs" is presented. An elder addresses matters that are relevant to the local congregation, with instructions outlining the course of action considered appropriate. No specific individuals are identified during the talk, but the talk may relate to a matter for which a member has recently been "reproved". At times, some temporary policy may be announced that might be seen as disciplinary; for example, it may be that an additional attendant is assigned outside a Kingdom Hall to discourage children from running on the sidewalk.

Shepherding calls

Personal "shepherding visits" are intended to encourage members of the congregation, though may also include counsel and correction, then or on a subsequent visit. Two elders (or an elder and a ministerial servant) may schedule and perform a particular shepherding visit on their own or at the direction of the body of elders.

Withheld recommendations or assignments

The body of elders may withhold its recommendation for a member to serve in a new position of responsibility, though still permitting existing responsibilities.

For example, a ministerial servant who consistently seems insufficiently prepared for his meeting parts may have such assignments withheld for a time, even though he may continue serving as a ministerial servant or in some other "special privilege of service".

Withheld "privileges"

An active Jehovah's Witness may have their congregational "privileges of service" limited, even without having committed a serious sin. While Witnesses sometimes refer to field ministry, after-meeting cleanup, and other responsibilities as "privileges", the term "privileges of service" often implies a specific range of assignments assisting elders and ministerial servants with meeting demonstrations and other responsibilities. Such limitations are usually temporary.

Elders, ministerial servants, pioneers, or other appointed Witnesses can lose their "special privileges of service". For example, an elder may be removed or choose to step aside voluntarily from his position if members of his household are not in "good standing". After resignation or removal from an appointed position, an announcement is made during the congregation's Service Meeting indicating that the person is "no longer serving", without elaboration.

Marking

Members who persist in a course considered scripturally wrong after repeated counsel by elders, but who are not considered guilty of something for which they could be disfellowshipped, can be "marked", based on Jehovah's Witnesses' interpretation of 2 Thessalonians 3:14. Actions for which an individual may be "marked" include dating a non-member, dating when not "scripturally" or legally free to marry, being lazy, critical, or dirty, meddling, taking material advantage of others or indulging in "improper" entertainment. "Marking" is indicated by means of a warning talk given to the congregation outlining the shameful course, without explicitly naming any particular individual. Members who know whose actions are being discussed may then consider the individual "marked". Though not shunned, "marked" individuals are looked upon as "bad association" and social interaction outside of formal worship settings is generally curtailed. This action is intended to "shame" the person into following a particular course of action.

Discipline involving "serious sin"

If an active baptized Witness is considered to have committed a "serious sin" for which the individual must demonstrate formal repentance, correction (or, "discipline") is administered by the congregation's body of elders. Such situations usually involve a "judicial committee" of three or more elders.

List of "serious sins"

Jehovah's Witnesses consider many actions to be "serious sins", for which baptized Witnesses are subject to a judicial committee hearing. Such actions include:

An individual may also be disfellowshipped for promoting one of the above listed "sins" without actually engaging in the practice, or for accepting employment related to one of them (e.g. selling lottery tickets, firearms or cigarettes; working in an abortion clinic, church or military base).

If a baptized Witness teaches contrary to Witness doctrines, it is considered apostasy and grounds for disfellowshipping. A 1981 letter to overseers—reproduced in a book by former Governing Body member Raymond Franz—directed that a member who "persists in believing other doctrine", even without promoting such beliefs, may also be subject to disfellowshipping. Elders usually try to reason with the individual before such action is taken. If a person believes that a teaching should be adjusted or changed, he is encouraged "to be patient and wait on Jehovah for change".The Watchtower states that "apostates are "mentally diseased," and they seek to infect others with their disloyal teachings. (1 Timothy 6:3, 4 [NWT])."; some have stated that this applies to all individuals who leave the organization.

Procedures

Evidence for actions that can result in congregational discipline is obtained by voluntary confession to the elders or by witnesses of the violation. A minimum of two witnesses is required to establish guilt, based on their understanding of Deuteronomy 17:6 and Matthew 18:16, unless the person confesses voluntarily. Members are instructed to report serious sins committed by others members. Failure to report a serious sin of another member is viewed as sharing in the sins of others, a sin before God. Witnesses are instructed that pledges of confidentiality may be broken to report what they believe to be transgressions.

A congregation's body of elders considers confessions or credible allegations of serious sin, and decides whether a judicial committee will be formed to address the matter. A judicial committee, usually consisting of three elders, investigates the details of the alleged sin further. The committee arranges a formal judicial hearing to determine the circumstances of the sin, whether the accused is repentant, and whether disciplinary actions will be taken.

In certain situations, a body of elders may handle a situation involving "serious sin" by a baptized Witness without a judicial committee:

Judicial committee

A person accused of a serious sin is informed of the allegations and invited to attend a judicial committee meeting. The individual is permitted to bring witnesses who can speak in their defense; observers are not allowed, and the hearing is held privately even if the accused individual requests that it be heard openly so all may witness the evidence. Recording devices are not permitted at the hearing. If the accused repeatedly fails to attend an arranged hearing, the committee will proceed but will not make a decision until evidence and testimony by witnesses are considered.

The committee takes the role of prosecutor, judge and jury when handling its cases. After the hearing is opened with a prayer, the accused is invited to make a personal statement. If there is no admission of guilt, the individual is informed of the source of the charges and witnesses are presented one at a time to give evidence. Witnesses do not remain present for the entire hearing. Once all the evidence is presented, the accused and all witnesses are dismissed and the committee reviews the evidence and the attitude of the accused.

The committee may determine that there was no "serious sin", or that mitigating circumstances absolve the accused individual. The committee may then proceed with discipline such as is described for 'non-judicial' situations. Alternatively, the committee may decide that a serious sin was committed, in which case, the committee gives verbal admonitions and gauges the individual's attitude and repentance. The committee then decides whether discipline will involve formal reproof or disfellowshipping.

Reproof

Reproof involves actions for which a person could be disfellowshipped, and is said to be an effort to 'reach the heart' and convince a person of the need to hate the sanctioned actions and repent. Reproof is considered sufficient if the individual is deemed repentant. Reproof is given before all who are aware of the transgression. If the conduct is known only to the individual and the judicial committee, reproof is given privately. If the sin is known by a small number, they would be invited by the elders, and reproof would be given before the sinner and those with knowledge of the sin. If the action is known generally by the entire congregation or the wider community, an announcement is made that the person "has been reproved". A related local needs talk may be given, separately to the announcement, without naming anyone.

In all cases of reproof, restrictions are imposed, typically prohibiting the individual from sharing in meeting parts, commenting during meetings, and giving group prayers. A reproved Witness cannot enroll as a pioneer or auxiliary pioneer for at least one year after reproof is given.

Disfellowshipping

All members are expected to abide by the beliefs and moral standards of Jehovah's Witnesses. Serious violations of these requirements can result in disfellowshipping (similar to excommunication) and subsequent shunning if not deemed repentant. When a judicial committee decides that a baptized Witness has committed a serious sin and is unrepentant, the person is disfellowshipped. A person who believes that a serious error in judgment has been made may appeal the decision. Requests for appeal must be made in writing and within seven days of the decision of the judicial committee. Their shunning policy is based on their interpretation of scriptures such as 1 Corinthians 5:11–13; Matthew 18:15–17; and 2 John 9–11. Witness literature states that avoiding interaction with disfellowshipped former adherents helps to:

Shunning is also practiced when a member formally resigns membership or is deemed to indicate by their actions—such as accepting a blood transfusion or association with another religion or military organization—that they do not wish to be known as a Witness. Such individuals are said to have disassociated, and are described by the Watch Tower Society as "lawless" in a spiritual sense.

When a person is disfellowshipped or is deemed to have disassociated, an announcement is made at the next midweek meeting that the named individual "is no longer one of Jehovah's Witnesses". Congregation members are not informed whether a person is being shunned due to "disfellowshipping" or "disassociation", or on what grounds. Shunning starts immediately after the announcement is made. A notification form is sent to the local branch office and records of the disfellowshipping are saved in the congregational records. Both are kept until at least five years after reinstatement.

Failure to adhere to the directions on shunning is itself considered a serious offense. Members who continue to speak to or associate with a disfellowshipped or disassociated person are said to be sharing in their "wicked works" and may themselves be disfellowshipped. Exceptions are made in some cases, such as business relations and immediate family household situations. If a disfellowshipped person is living in the same home with other baptized family members, religious matters are not discussed, with the exception of minors, for whose training parents are still responsible. Disfellowshipped family members outside the home are shunned. Disfellowshipped individuals can continue attending public meetings held at the Kingdom Hall, though they are shunned by the congregation.

Reinstatement

Disfellowshipped individuals may be reinstated into the congregation if they are considered repentant of their previous actions and attitude. If a disassociated or disfellowshipped individual requests reinstatement, a judicial committee, (the committee originally involved, if available) seeks to determine whether the person has repented. Such individuals must demonstrate that they no longer practice the conduct for which they were expelled from the congregation, as well as submission to the religion's regulations. Individuals disfellowshipped for actions no longer considered serious sins, such as organ transplants, are not automatically reinstated. Attending meetings while being shunned is a requirement for eventual reinstatement. Once a decision is made to reinstate, a brief announcement is made to the congregation that the individual is once again one of Jehovah's Witnesses.

Elders are instructed to make an attempt each year to remind disfellowshipped individuals of the steps they can take to qualify for reinstatement. No specific period of time is prescribed before this can happen; however, the Watch Tower Society suggests a period of "perhaps many months, a year, or longer." In 1974, the Watch Tower Society stated that about one third of those disfellowshipped eventually return to the group, based on figures gathered from 1963 to 1973.

Congregational restrictions are imposed on reinstated individuals. Participation at religious meetings, including commenting from the audience, is initially not permitted; such "privileges" may be gradually permitted over time if the individual is considered to have "progressed spiritually". Reinstated individuals may be ineligible for many years from serving in positions of responsibility such as an elder, ministerial servant or pioneer.

Legality

In June 1987, the United States Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit upheld the Witnesses' right to shun those who fail to live by the group's standards and doctrines, upholding the ruling of a lower court. The court concluded that, "Shunning is a practice engaged in by Jehovah's Witnesses pursuant to their interpretation of canonical text, and we are not free to reinterpret that text. ... We find the practice of shunning not to constitute a sufficient threat to the peace, safety, or morality of the community as to warrant state intervention. ... the defendants are entitled to the free exercise of their religious beliefs. ... Courts generally do not scrutinize closely the relationship among members (or former members) of a church. Churches are afforded great latitude when they impose discipline on members or former members. ... The members of the Church Paul decided to abandon have concluded that they no longer want to associate with her. We hold that they are free to make that choice. ... Although we recognize that the harms suffered by Janice Paul are real and not insubstantial, permitting her to recover for intangible or emotional injuries would unconstitutionally restrict the Jehovah's Witnesses free exercise of religion. ... The constitutional guarantee of the free exercise of religion requires that society tolerate the type of harms suffered by Paul as a price well worth paying to safeguard the right of religious difference that all citizens enjoy."

In a review of the case, the Washington University Law Quarterly remarked, "The Ninth Circuit's extension of the free exercise clause to include a privilege against tort liability is incorrect. First, by distinguishing emotional harms from physical harms, the court downplayed the significance of an emotional injury, which is often times as great as physical harm. ... In most of the free exercise cases decided by the Supreme Court the government has acted against the religious group, either by imposing criminal sanctions for religious conduct or denying members some benefit because of their religious beliefs. In Paul, however, the religious group acted as the aggressor, violating the plaintiff's right to emotional well-being. By granting defendants an absolute privilege against tort liability, the court has allowed the Church to use the shield of the first amendment as a sword. ... The Paul decision is an unfortunate expansion of a doctrine intended to protect individual rights. To turn the doctrine on its head and use it as a means to thwart another person's rights is an ironic twist that would undoubtedly displease the drafters of the first amendment. ... At best, Paul can be viewed as a slight detour from the correct interpretation of the free exercise clause and the proper balancing of interests performed by the Supreme Court and numerous lower courts."

Unbaptized publishers

An unbaptized individual who has previously been approved to share in Jehovah's Witnesses' formal ministry, but who subsequently behaves in a manner considered inappropriate may lose privileges, such as commenting at meetings, receiving assignments, or even accompanying the congregation in the public ministry.

If an unbaptized individual is deemed unrepentant of actions for which baptized members might be disfellowshipped, an announcement would be made that the person "is no longer a publisher of the good news." Such individuals were previously shunned, but formal restrictions are no longer imposed on unbaptized individuals, though association is generally curtailed. The elders might privately warn individuals in the congregation if the unbaptized person is considered to pose "an unusual threat".

Critical view

The only way to officially leave Jehovah's Witnesses is to disassociate or be disfellowshipped, and both entail the same set of prohibitions and penalties, with no provision for continued normal association. Sociologist Andrew Holden has claimed that fear of family break-up or loss causes people who might otherwise freely leave the religion to remain members. Jehovah's Witnesses state that disfellowshipping is a scripturally documented method to protect the congregation from the influence of those who practice serious wrongdoing. Critics contend that the judicial process itself, due to its private and nearly autonomous nature, directly contradicts the precedent found in the Bible and the organization's own teachings and can be used in an arbitrary manner if there is consensus among just a few to abuse their authority.

According to Raymond Franz, a letter dated September 1, 1980, from the Watch Tower Society to all circuit and district overseers advised that a member who "merely disagrees in thought with any of the Watch Tower Society's teachings is committing apostasy and is liable for disfellowshipping." The letter states that one does not have to "promote" different doctrines to be an apostate, adding that elders need to "discern between one who is a trouble-making apostate and a Christian who becomes weak in the faith and has doubts."