ClaimShunning and familyverified1980sExplicit statement

Gemeinschaftsentzug und Familie · Claim record

Im Artikel von 1981 hieß es, ein Mitglied, das 'nicht aufhört, mit der ausgeschlossenen Person Gemeinschaft zu pflegen', habe sich zum 'Mitteilhaber' an bösen Werken gemacht und 'muss aus der Versammlung entfernt, ausgeschlossen werden'; im Ältestenhandbuch vom April 2021 (in der Fassung, die einer öffentlichen Untersuchung vorgelegt wurde) wird vorsätzlicher Umgang mit ausgeschlossenen oder distanzierten Nichtverwandten weiterhin als Verhalten aufgeführt, das 'rechtliche Maßnahmen rechtfertigen würde', während Umgang mit nicht im Haushalt lebenden Verwandten zum Verlust von Vorrechten führt und rechtliche Maßnahmen nur dann nach sich zieht, wenn es 'anhaltende geistige Gemeinschaft' oder offene Kritik an der Entscheidung gibt.

Claim ID claim-shunning-1981-member-who-associates-may-be-expelledConcerns 15. September 1981Ausdrückliche Aussage

Die Aussage und ihre Belege

Ausdrückliche Aussage · 15. September 1981 Geprüft

Im Artikel von 1981 hieß es, ein Mitglied, das 'nicht aufhört, mit der ausgeschlossenen Person Gemeinschaft zu pflegen', habe sich zum 'Mitteilhaber' an bösen Werken gemacht und 'muss aus der Versammlung entfernt, ausgeschlossen werden'; im Ältestenhandbuch vom April 2021 (in der Fassung, die einer öffentlichen Untersuchung vorgelegt wurde) wird vorsätzlicher Umgang mit ausgeschlossenen oder distanzierten Nichtverwandten weiterhin als Verhalten aufgeführt, das 'rechtliche Maßnahmen rechtfertigen würde', während Umgang mit nicht im Haushalt lebenden Verwandten zum Verlust von Vorrechten führt und rechtliche Maßnahmen nur dann nach sich zieht, wenn es 'anhaltende geistige Gemeinschaft' oder offene Kritik an der Entscheidung gibt. Source: The Watchtower, 15. September 1981Source: “Shepherd the Flock of God”—1 Peter 5:2 (ks), April 2021 revision, chapters 12, 14, 16 and 22, as produced to the New Zealand Royal Commission of Inquiry into Abuse in Care (document JHV0000012), April 2021Source: Supreme Court of Norway (Høyesterett), judgment HR-2026-1009-A (case no. 25-089326SIV-HRET), official English translation published 16 July 2026, 29. April 2026

Belege anzeigen (3 Quellen)
Primärveröffentlichung von Jehovas Zeugen Geprüft

The Watchtower, “Disfellowshiping—How to View It”

15. September 1981 · pp.20-26 · par. 12-16, 21-27 · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania

“And we all know from our experience over the years that a simple “Hello” to someone can be the first step that develops into a conversation and maybe even a friendship. Would we want to take that first step with a disfellowshiped person?”

Par. 21-23 (pp. 24-25) apply 2 John 9-11 to expelled persons; par. 13-16 create the category of disassociation (by statement or by joining an organisation contrary to the Bible) and direct that such persons be 'viewed and treated as are those who have been disfellowshiped'; par. 27 says a member who will not cease fellowship with an expelled person 'must be removed from the congregation'.

Hinweis zu Herkunft und Überprüfung for The Watchtower, Disfellowshiping—How to View It

Hinweis zur Vertrauensangabe. Raw WOL HTML fetched; wording and page markers 20-26 confirmed.

Untermauert durch. src-lv-2008-gods-love-appendix, src-court-us-1987-0610-paul-v-watchtower

Abgerufen. 19. September 2026 · Quellenkennung. src-w-1981-0915-disfellowshiping-how-to-view-it

Amtliches öffentliches Dokument Geprüft

“Shepherd the Flock of God”—1 Peter 5:2 (ks), April 2021 revision, chapters 12, 14, 16 and 22, as produced to the New Zealand Royal Commission of Inquiry into Abuse in Care (document JHV0000012), “Chapter 12 par. 17(1) and 44-46; Chapter 16 par. 27-31”

April 2021 · ch. 12 par. 17, 44-46; ch. 16 par. 27-31 · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania (published as inquiry evidence by the Royal Commission of Inquiry into Abuse in Care, New Zealand)

“If a publisher in 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. ... He would not be dealt with judicially unless there is persistent spiritual association or he persists in openly criticizing the disfellowshipping decision.”

Par. 17(1): wilful association with disfellowshipped or disassociated non-relatives 'would warrant judicial action'; par. 44-46 on persons inactive for many years; ch. 16 par. 29-31: announcement 'It should read as follows: "[Name of person] is no longer one of Jehovah’s Witnesses."', takes effect at the announcement, S-77 form sent to the Service Department.

Hinweis zu Herkunft und Überprüfung for “Shepherd the Flock of God”—1 Peter 5:2 (ks), April 2021 revision, chapters 12, 14, 16 and 22, as produced to the New Zealand Royal Commission of Inquiry into Abuse in Care (document JHV0000012), Chapter 12 par. 17(1) and 44-46; Chapter 16 par. 27-31

Hinweis zur Vertrauensangabe. PDF (35 pages) downloaded from the inquiry's evidence library and text-extracted; wording confirmed. Cited as a public-inquiry exhibit, not from any leaked copy. The Norwegian Supreme Court quotes the identical par. 17 text from the 2019 edition (para 127).

Herkunft des Scans. Royal Commission of Inquiry into Abuse in Care (New Zealand) evidence library; copyright Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania.

Untermauert durch. src-court-no-2026-0429-supreme-court

Notes. The NZ Royal Commission host opens in a browser but refuses automated fetches (HTTP 403), so the link is marked blocked rather than broken.

Abgerufen. 19. September 2026 · Quellenkennung. src-ks-2021-0400-shepherd-the-flock-nz-inquiry

Amtliches öffentliches Dokument Geprüft

Supreme Court of Norway (Høyesterett), judgment HR-2026-1009-A (case no. 25-089326SIV-HRET), official English translation published 16 July 2026, “The State (Ministry of Children and Families) v. Jehovah’s Witnesses; European Association of Jehovah’s Witnesses (intervener)”

29. April 2026 · paras 4, 39-45, 94-102, 110-127, 149-152, 227-230 · Norges Høyesterett

“Members of the religious community are thus not to associate with former members, whether disfellowshipped or withdrawn. This also applies to close relatives, unless they belong to the same household. Family ties are not severed, but with regard to family members other than those with whom one lives, contact is permitted only in necessary family matters. It is undisputed that the threshold for such contact is relatively high.”

3-2 majority (Steen, Arntzen, Hellerslia; Poulsen and Falkanger dissenting) dismissed the State's appeal and declared the refusals of registration and grants invalid; unanimous that infringement of children's rights was not proved; majority: practice 'may entail a clear psychological pressure not to withdraw' (para 123) but not 'improper pressure' under Art. 9 ECHR; dissent: right to withdraw infringed. Costs NOK 2,165,461. Quotes od 2019 p. 148, lvs pp. 39-40, ks 2019 ch. 12 par. 17, w24 Aug p. 24 par. 18, the 2022 jw.org FAQ and a JW brochure 'Jehovah’s Witnesses and Disfellowshipping'.

Hinweis zu Herkunft und Überprüfung for Supreme Court of Norway (Høyesterett), judgment HR-2026-1009-A (case no. 25-089326SIV-HRET), official English translation published 16 July 2026, The State (Ministry of Children and Families) v. Jehovah’s Witnesses; European Association of Jehovah’s Witnesses (intervener)

Hinweis zur Vertrauensangabe. Official English translation PDF (https://www.domstol.no/globalassets/upload/hret/translated-rulings/2026/hr-2026-1009-a.pdf) downloaded and read; all quoted paragraphs confirmed. Norwegian original: https://www.domstol.no/globalassets/upload/hret/avgjorelser/2026/april/hr-2026-1009-a.pdf

Herkunft des Scans. Supreme Court of Norway, Communication Department translation (legal authenticity remains with the Norwegian text).

Abgerufen. 19. September 2026 · Quellenkennung. src-court-no-2026-0429-supreme-court

A direct link to this claim is https://jwtruth.org/de/evidence/claim-shunning-1981-member-who-associates-may-be-expelled/. Every source above opens the original document or the best available copy. If you believe the wording, date or context is wrong, report an error.