Shunning and family1950s1970s1980s2010s2020sEvidence collection
Dossier de preuves
Shunning, discipline and family separation
Ce que les publications de l’organisation elle-même demandent aux membres de faire lorsqu’une personne est exclue ou s’en va, énoncé précisément catégorie par catégorie, avec les changements de 2024 et ce qu’ils ont laissé intact ; la justification avancée par l’organisation ; et les constatations de tribunaux, d’une commission d’enquête et de chercheurs.
From 1981 to March 2024 the rule was not even to greet such a person. Since 15 March 2024 a ‘simple greeting’ and an invitation to a meeting are conscience matters; socialising, eating together and ‘extended conversation’ remain forbidden.Source: jw.org (Governing Body Update video), 15 mars 2024
Inactive members who simply stop attending are not shunned by published rule; a person who wants to be free of the organisation’s discipline must disassociate, and is then treated as removed.Source: Organized to Do Jehovah’s Will (od), 2019
Les règles publiées, par catégorie, avant et après 2024
Soyez précis sur qui est qui. Les publications de l’organisation traitent ces groupes différemment, et toute description de ces règles devrait faire de même.
Contact rules by category (published wording, paraphrased where marked)
Category
Before March 2024
After March and August 2024
What did not change
Sources
Removed (“disfellowshipped”) adult, not a relative
No spiritual or social fellowship, “not even eating”; no greeting (a “simple ‘Hello’” warned against). Persistent association could itself be a judicial matter.
Conscience may allow “a simple greeting” and a welcome at a congregation meeting, and an invitation to a meeting. Elders follow up after “a few months”.
“Stop keeping company … not even eating”; no socialising; no “extended conversation”; announcement wording unchanged.
1981: “viewed and treated as are those who have been disfellowshiped”; 2019: “treated in the same way as a disfellowshipped person”. The announcement wording is now identical for both.
No published change; 2024 texts use “removed” for both.
Same treatment as removed. Norway’s Supreme Court records shunning of both groups as current practice.
1981: “avoid needless association”. 1988: “almost no contact at all … kept to a minimum”. 2008: “do not look for excuses”. 2013: not by e-mail. 2017: no “telephone, text messages, letters, e-mails, or social media”.
No published revision. The conscience greeting applies to meetings. In 2026 the organisation did not dispute in court that the threshold for contact is “relatively high”.
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?
The situation is different if the disfellowshipped or disassociated one is a relative living outside the immediate family circle and home. It might be possible to have almost no contact at all with the relative. Even if there were some family matters requiring contact, this certainly would be kept to a minimum
Despite our pain of heart, we must avoid normal contact with a disfellowshipped family member by telephone, text messages, letters, e-mails, or social media.
À partir de septembre 1981, La Tour de Garde a appliqué 2 Jean 9-11 à toutes les personnes expulsées et a averti en ces termes : 'un simple "bonjour" adressé à quelqu'un peut être le premier pas vers une conversation, voire une amitié', demandant : 'Voudrions-nous faire ce premier pas avec une personne excommuniée ?' ; elle a également employé le mot 'shunning' (ostracisme) pour désigner cette pratique. Source: The Watchtower, 15 septembre 1981Source: “Keep Yourselves in God’s Love” (lv), 2008Source: The Watchtower, 15 avril 1988
Position de l’organisation ou explication ultérieure : En août 2024, l'organisation a déclaré : 'Par le passé, nous ne saluions pas une telle personne', et a fait d'une simple salutation lors des réunions une affaire de conscience, tout en limitant 2 Jean 9-11 aux apostats.
Afficher les preuves (3 sources)
Publication primaire des Témoins de JéhovahVérifié
15 septembre 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'.
2008 · pp.207-209 · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania
“Although there might be a need for limited contact on some rare occasion to care for a necessary family matter, any such contact should be kept to a minimum. Loyal Christian family members do not look for excuses to have dealings with a disfellowshipped relative not living at home.”
Household: 'normal day-to-day family activities and dealings may continue'; parents may study with a disfellowshipped minor at home. Quotes the 1981 'simple Hello' passage. Footnote a: principles 'apply equally to those who disassociate themselves'. WOL copy is the 2014 printing.
15 avril 1988 · pp.26-31 · par. 3, 13-14, 17, 20, 23; footnote a · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania
“The situation is different if the disfellowshipped or disassociated one is a relative living outside the immediate family circle and home. It might be possible to have almost no contact at all with the relative. Even if there were some family matters requiring contact, this certainly would be kept to a minimum”
Household relatives: 'normal family affections and dealings can continue' (par. 13). Reports the outcome of Paul v. Watchtower and concludes a shunned person 'cannot recover damages ... the person is feeling a loss brought on by his or her own actions' (par. 20). Footnote a: 2 John 11 'could well mean not to say even "hello" to such ones'.
Position de l’organisation ou explication ultérieure : La Tour de Garde de 1988 a déclaré qu'une personne qui se dissocie 'ressent une perte causée par ses propres actions'.
Afficher les preuves (3 sources)
Publication primaire des Témoins de JéhovahVérifié
15 septembre 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'.
10 juin 1987 · pp.819 F.2d 875 · paras 1, 11-12, 23, 36-37 (as numbered in the Public.Resource.Org text) · United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
“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.”
Facts: Paul left in 1975 after her parents were disfellowshipped; after the 1981 change, former friends 'told Paul that she was to be treated as if she had been disfellowshiped and that they could not speak with her'. Holding: 'Because the practice of shunning is a part of the faith of the Jehovah’s Witness, we find that the "free exercise" provision ... precludes the plaintiff from prevailing. The defendants have a constitutionally protected privilege to engage in the practice of shunning.' Argued 7 March 1986. Certiorari denied, 484 U.S. 926 (2 Nov 1987) (CourtListener search record opened).
Note de provenance et de vérification for United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, Paul v. Watchtower Bible & Tract Society of New York, Inc., 819 F.2d 875 (9th Cir. 1987), No. 85-4012, Opinion by Reinhardt, Circuit Judge (Wright, Tang, Reinhardt)
Note sur la fiabilité.Full opinion text opened on law.resource.org (Public.Resource.Org copy of the Federal Reporter); wording confirmed. Justia, FindLaw and CourtListener pages were blocked or empty.
Provenance de la numérisation.Public.Resource.Org (public-domain court opinion).
2019 · pp.141-156 · par. 24-40 · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania
“When it is necessary to disfellowship an unrepentant wrongdoer from the congregation, a brief announcement is made, stating: “[Name of person] is no longer one of Jehovah’s Witnesses.” This will alert faithful ones in the congregation to stop associating with that person.—1 Cor. 5:11.”
Note de provenance et de vérification for Organized to Do Jehovah’s Will (od), Chapter 14, Maintaining the Peace and Cleanness of the Congregation
Note sur la fiabilité.Raw WOL HTML fetched; wording and page markers 141-156 confirmed; publishers' page (doc 1102014949) opened for edition data. Still uses 'disfellowshipped' as at access date.
Date de consultation. 19 septembre 2026 · Identifiant de la source.src-od-2019-organized-ch14
Position de l’organisation ou explication ultérieure : La FAQ actuelle ne décrit que le cas du foyer ('normal family affections and dealings continue') et reste muette sur les proches vivant à l'extérieur.
Afficher les preuves (4 sources)
Publication primaire des Témoins de JéhovahVérifié
15 septembre 1981 · pp.26-31 · par. 11, 13, 18-19, 22-26 · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania
“Consequently, Christians related to such a disfellowshiped person living outside the home should strive to avoid needless association, even keeping business dealings to a minimum.”
Distinguishes relatives in the household (family ties remain, 'spiritual ties have been completely severed'; a disfellowshipped minor is still cared for and disciplined but parents 'would not conduct a Bible study directly with the child') from relatives outside it ('limited need to care for necessary family matters'); discusses weddings, gatherings and funerals.
15 avril 1988 · pp.26-31 · par. 3, 13-14, 17, 20, 23; footnote a · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania
“The situation is different if the disfellowshipped or disassociated one is a relative living outside the immediate family circle and home. It might be possible to have almost no contact at all with the relative. Even if there were some family matters requiring contact, this certainly would be kept to a minimum”
Household relatives: 'normal family affections and dealings can continue' (par. 13). Reports the outcome of Paul v. Watchtower and concludes a shunned person 'cannot recover damages ... the person is feeling a loss brought on by his or her own actions' (par. 20). Footnote a: 2 John 11 'could well mean not to say even "hello" to such ones'.
2008 · pp.207-209 · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania
“Although there might be a need for limited contact on some rare occasion to care for a necessary family matter, any such contact should be kept to a minimum. Loyal Christian family members do not look for excuses to have dealings with a disfellowshipped relative not living at home.”
Household: 'normal day-to-day family activities and dealings may continue'; parents may study with a disfellowshipped minor at home. Quotes the 1981 'simple Hello' passage. Footnote a: principles 'apply equally to those who disassociate themselves'. WOL copy is the 2014 printing.
18 septembre 2026 · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania
“So we do not socialize with someone who has been removed. However, we do not ignore him completely. We treat him with respect. He is welcome to attend our religious services, where he may be greeted by Jehovah’s Witnesses. He may also request spiritual assistance from the elders.”
Current official statement. Also: 'we reach out' to those who 'slowed down or stopped'; 'The elders simply announce to the congregation that the person is no longer one of Jehovah’s Witnesses'; spouse and young children in the same house keep 'normal family affections and dealings'; footnote b on terminology; footnote d applies 2 John 9-11 to those who 'actively try to undermine' the congregation. Says nothing about relatives outside the household. Quotes the High Court of England and Wales (7 June 2019) and former ECtHR judge Pinto de Albuquerque.
Note de provenance et de vérification for jw.org, Frequently Asked Questions, How Do Jehovah’s Witnesses Treat Those Who Used to Belong to Their Religion?
Note sur la fiabilité.Full page opened at both URLs on 2026-09-19. The old URL https://www.jw.org/en/jehovahs-witnesses/faq/shunning/ returns HTTP 301 to this URL (curl -I; server Last-Modified 18 Sep 2026). Earlier titles: 2022 version 'Do Jehovah’s Witnesses Shun Those Who Used to Belong to Their Religion?' is quoted by the Norwegian Supreme Court (para 125); the still-earlier title 'Do You Shun Former Members of Your Religion?' is attested only by discovery sources (unverified).
Notes.Blocked original: https://www.jw.org/en/jehovahs-witnesses/faq/shunning/ (now redirects). web.archive.org and archive.ph blocked in this environment.
Date de consultation. 19 septembre 2026 · Identifiant de la source.src-jworg-2026-faq-removed-from-the-congregation
Entre 2008 et 2017, l'organisation a progressivement précisé la règle relative aux proches vivant hors du foyer : 'Les membres fidèles de la famille chrétienne ne cherchent pas de prétextes pour avoir des contacts avec un parent excommunié qui ne vit pas au foyer' (livre de 2008), 'Ne cherchez pas de prétextes pour fréquenter un membre de la famille excommunié, par exemple par courrier électronique' (janvier 2013), et 'nous devons éviter tout contact normal avec un membre de la famille excommunié, que ce soit par téléphone, SMS, lettres, courriels ou réseaux sociaux' (octobre 2017). Source: “Keep Yourselves in God’s Love” (lv), 2008Source: The Watchtower (Study Edition), 15 janvier 2013Source: The Watchtower (Study Edition), octobre 2017
Position de l’organisation ou explication ultérieure : L'organisation présente cette attitude comme une fidélité qui 'a à cœur les intérêts du pécheur'.
Afficher les preuves (3 sources)
Publication primaire des Témoins de JéhovahVérifié
2008 · pp.207-209 · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania
“Although there might be a need for limited contact on some rare occasion to care for a necessary family matter, any such contact should be kept to a minimum. Loyal Christian family members do not look for excuses to have dealings with a disfellowshipped relative not living at home.”
Household: 'normal day-to-day family activities and dealings may continue'; parents may study with a disfellowshipped minor at home. Quotes the 1981 'simple Hello' passage. Footnote a: principles 'apply equally to those who disassociate themselves'. WOL copy is the 2014 printing.
15 janvier 2013 · pp.12-16 · par. 16-20 (quote at par. 19, p. 16) · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania
“Really, what your beloved family member needs to see is your resolute stance to put Jehovah above everything else—including the family bond. ... Do not look for excuses to associate with a disfellowshipped family member, for example, through e-mail. (1 Cor. 5:11)”
Addressed to parents grieving a disfellowshipped child; the 'e-mail' sentence confirms the outside-household rule extends to electronic contact.
octobre 2017 · pp.12-16 · par. 17-20 (quote at par. 19) · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania
“Despite our pain of heart, we must avoid normal contact with a disfellowshipped family member by telephone, text messages, letters, e-mails, or social media.”
Section 'If a Family Member Leaves Jehovah'; the most explicit published list of communication channels to avoid with a disfellowshipped or disassociated relative.
Note de provenance et de vérification for The Watchtower (Study Edition), The Truth Brings, “Not Peace, But a Sword”
Note sur la fiabilité.Raw WOL HTML fetched; wording and page markers 12-16 confirmed. The phrase suggested in the brief ('loyally supporting the disfellowshipping decision ... even a family member') does not occur in this article.
Date de consultation. 19 septembre 2026 · Identifiant de la source.src-w-2017-1000-not-peace-but-a-sword
Position de l’organisation ou explication ultérieure : La majorité norvégienne s'est appuyée sur ce paragraphe pour conclure que 'ce n'est pas... tout contact avec d'anciens membres qui entraîne un risque d'excommunication'.
avril 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.
Note de provenance et de vérification 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
Note sur la fiabilité.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).
Provenance de la numérisation.Royal Commission of Inquiry into Abuse in Care (New Zealand) evidence library; copyright Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania.
29 avril 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'.
Note de provenance et de vérification 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)
Note sur la fiabilité.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
Provenance de la numérisation.Supreme Court of Norway, Communication Department translation (legal authenticity remains with the Norwegian text).
Date de consultation. 19 septembre 2026 · Identifiant de la source.src-court-no-2026-0429-supreme-court
Position de l’organisation ou explication ultérieure : Août 2024 : 'Cette annonce n'a pas pour but d'humilier le pécheur. Elle est plutôt faite pour que la congrégation puisse suivre l'exhortation scripturaire à "cesser de fréquenter" cette personne'.
Afficher les preuves (4 sources)
Publication primaire des Témoins de JéhovahVérifié
2019 · pp.141-156 · par. 24-40 · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania
“When it is necessary to disfellowship an unrepentant wrongdoer from the congregation, a brief announcement is made, stating: “[Name of person] is no longer one of Jehovah’s Witnesses.” This will alert faithful ones in the congregation to stop associating with that person.—1 Cor. 5:11.”
Note de provenance et de vérification for Organized to Do Jehovah’s Will (od), Chapter 14, Maintaining the Peace and Cleanness of the Congregation
Note sur la fiabilité.Raw WOL HTML fetched; wording and page markers 141-156 confirmed; publishers' page (doc 1102014949) opened for edition data. Still uses 'disfellowshipped' as at access date.
Date de consultation. 19 septembre 2026 · Identifiant de la source.src-od-2019-organized-ch14
avril 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.
Note de provenance et de vérification 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
Note sur la fiabilité.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).
Provenance de la numérisation.Royal Commission of Inquiry into Abuse in Care (New Zealand) evidence library; copyright Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania.
août 2024 · pp.26-31 · par. 3-6, 10-15; footnote b; box · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania
“In the past, we would not greet such a person. Here again, each Christian needs to use his Bible-trained conscience in this matter. Some may feel comfortable with greeting or welcoming the person to the meeting. However, we would not have an extended conversation or socialize with the individual.”
Footnote b retires 'disfellowshipped' for 'removed from the congregation'; par. 4 keeps the announcement 'no longer one of Jehovah’s Witnesses'; par. 13 keeps 'stop keeping company ... not even eating'; par. 15 and the box restrict 2 John 9-11 to 'apostates and others who actively promote wrong conduct'; par. 6, 10-12 on follow-up visits and reinstatement. No revised guidance on relatives outside the household.
18 septembre 2026 · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania
“So we do not socialize with someone who has been removed. However, we do not ignore him completely. We treat him with respect. He is welcome to attend our religious services, where he may be greeted by Jehovah’s Witnesses. He may also request spiritual assistance from the elders.”
Current official statement. Also: 'we reach out' to those who 'slowed down or stopped'; 'The elders simply announce to the congregation that the person is no longer one of Jehovah’s Witnesses'; spouse and young children in the same house keep 'normal family affections and dealings'; footnote b on terminology; footnote d applies 2 John 9-11 to those who 'actively try to undermine' the congregation. Says nothing about relatives outside the household. Quotes the High Court of England and Wales (7 June 2019) and former ECtHR judge Pinto de Albuquerque.
Note de provenance et de vérification for jw.org, Frequently Asked Questions, How Do Jehovah’s Witnesses Treat Those Who Used to Belong to Their Religion?
Note sur la fiabilité.Full page opened at both URLs on 2026-09-19. The old URL https://www.jw.org/en/jehovahs-witnesses/faq/shunning/ returns HTTP 301 to this URL (curl -I; server Last-Modified 18 Sep 2026). Earlier titles: 2022 version 'Do Jehovah’s Witnesses Shun Those Who Used to Belong to Their Religion?' is quoted by the Norwegian Supreme Court (para 125); the still-earlier title 'Do You Shun Former Members of Your Religion?' is attested only by discovery sources (unverified).
Notes.Blocked original: https://www.jw.org/en/jehovahs-witnesses/faq/shunning/ (now redirects). web.archive.org and archive.ph blocked in this environment.
Date de consultation. 19 septembre 2026 · Identifiant de la source.src-jworg-2026-faq-removed-from-the-congregation
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?
2 John 9-11 was applied to every expelled person; in 1985 the organisation said the verse had ‘a wider application’ than to false teachers.Source: The Watchtower, 15 juillet 1985
15 March and August 2024
‘In the past, we would not greet such a person’
In the past, we would not greet such a person. Here again, each Christian needs to use his Bible-trained conscience in this matter. Some may feel comfortable with greeting or welcoming the person to the meeting. However, we would not have an extended conversation or socialize with the individual.
Le 15 mars 2024, Mark Sanderson, membre du Collège central, a annoncé que les proclamateurs peuvent 'faire usage de leur conscience éduquée par la Bible' pour adresser 'une simple salutation' à une personne exclue qui assiste à une réunion, qu'ils peuvent inviter une telle personne à une réunion, que les anciens rendront de nouveau visite aux personnes exclues 'au bout de quelques mois' et iront voir celles qui le sont depuis longtemps, et que deux anciens (plutôt qu'un comité) rencontreront d'abord un mineur baptisé et ses parents ; il a ajouté que 'nous ne fréquentons pas ceux qui sont exclus de la congrégation'. Source: jw.org (Governing Body Update video), 15 mars 2024Source: The Watchtower (Study Edition), août 2024Source: The Watchtower (Study Edition), août 2024
Position de l’organisation ou explication ultérieure : L'organisation présente ces ajustements comme le reflet de 'l'amour et de la miséricorde de Jéhovah' et de 2 Pierre 3:9.
Afficher les preuves (3 sources)
Publication primaire des Témoins de JéhovahVérifié
15 mars 2024 · Mark Sanderson (Governing Body) · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania
“Under our current arrangement, we don’t say a greeting to individuals who’ve been removed from the congregation. However, the Governing Body has decided that publishers can use their Bible-trained conscience to decide whether to give a simple greeting and welcome a disfellowshipped individual who attends a congregation meeting.”
Presented by Governing Body member Mark Sanderson (20 min 02 s; media id docid-1112024005). Also announces: follow-up meeting 'after a few months'; visits to those removed long ago; two elders to meet a baptised minor and parents instead of a committee; members may invite a removed person to a meeting; 'we don’t socialize with those who are removed'; 1 Cor. 5:13 'remove' terminology; sisters may wear slacks.
Note de provenance et de vérification for jw.org (Governing Body Update video), 2024 Governing Body Update #2
Note sur la fiabilité.jw.org page opened (published 15 March 2024) and the organisation's own English subtitle file (https://cfp2.jw-cdn.org/a/ceb7d7/1/o/1112024005_E_cnt_1.vtt, from the jw.org mediator API record docid-1112024005_E_1_VIDEO) read in full; quotations are from that subtitle text.
août 2024 · pp.26-31 · par. 3-6, 10-15; footnote b; box · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania
“In the past, we would not greet such a person. Here again, each Christian needs to use his Bible-trained conscience in this matter. Some may feel comfortable with greeting or welcoming the person to the meeting. However, we would not have an extended conversation or socialize with the individual.”
Footnote b retires 'disfellowshipped' for 'removed from the congregation'; par. 4 keeps the announcement 'no longer one of Jehovah’s Witnesses'; par. 13 keeps 'stop keeping company ... not even eating'; par. 15 and the box restrict 2 John 9-11 to 'apostates and others who actively promote wrong conduct'; par. 6, 10-12 on follow-up visits and reinstatement. No revised guidance on relatives outside the household.
août 2024 · pp.20-25 · par. 17-18 · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania
“What about baptized minors—those under 18 years of age—who engage in serious wrongdoing? The body of elders will arrange for two elders to meet with the minor and his Christian parents. ... However, what if a baptized minor unrepentantly persists in a wrong course? In that case, a committee of elders will meet with him along with his Christian parents.”
The 2024 procedure for baptised minors; par. 17 confirms reproof may still be announced 'as a warning to the rest'. Quoted by the Norwegian Supreme Court at para 94.
Position de l’organisation ou explication ultérieure : FAQ : 'nous ne fréquentons pas une personne qui a été exclue. Cependant, nous ne l'ignorons pas complètement'.
Afficher les preuves (4 sources)
Publication primaire des Témoins de JéhovahVérifié
août 2024 · pp.26-31 · par. 3-6, 10-15; footnote b; box · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania
“In the past, we would not greet such a person. Here again, each Christian needs to use his Bible-trained conscience in this matter. Some may feel comfortable with greeting or welcoming the person to the meeting. However, we would not have an extended conversation or socialize with the individual.”
Footnote b retires 'disfellowshipped' for 'removed from the congregation'; par. 4 keeps the announcement 'no longer one of Jehovah’s Witnesses'; par. 13 keeps 'stop keeping company ... not even eating'; par. 15 and the box restrict 2 John 9-11 to 'apostates and others who actively promote wrong conduct'; par. 6, 10-12 on follow-up visits and reinstatement. No revised guidance on relatives outside the household.
15 mars 2024 · Mark Sanderson (Governing Body) · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania
“Under our current arrangement, we don’t say a greeting to individuals who’ve been removed from the congregation. However, the Governing Body has decided that publishers can use their Bible-trained conscience to decide whether to give a simple greeting and welcome a disfellowshipped individual who attends a congregation meeting.”
Presented by Governing Body member Mark Sanderson (20 min 02 s; media id docid-1112024005). Also announces: follow-up meeting 'after a few months'; visits to those removed long ago; two elders to meet a baptised minor and parents instead of a committee; members may invite a removed person to a meeting; 'we don’t socialize with those who are removed'; 1 Cor. 5:13 'remove' terminology; sisters may wear slacks.
Note de provenance et de vérification for jw.org (Governing Body Update video), 2024 Governing Body Update #2
Note sur la fiabilité.jw.org page opened (published 15 March 2024) and the organisation's own English subtitle file (https://cfp2.jw-cdn.org/a/ceb7d7/1/o/1112024005_E_cnt_1.vtt, from the jw.org mediator API record docid-1112024005_E_1_VIDEO) read in full; quotations are from that subtitle text.
29 avril 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'.
Note de provenance et de vérification 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)
Note sur la fiabilité.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
Provenance de la numérisation.Supreme Court of Norway, Communication Department translation (legal authenticity remains with the Norwegian text).
Date de consultation. 19 septembre 2026 · Identifiant de la source.src-court-no-2026-0429-supreme-court
Publication primaire des Témoins de JéhovahVérifié
18 septembre 2026 · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania
“So we do not socialize with someone who has been removed. However, we do not ignore him completely. We treat him with respect. He is welcome to attend our religious services, where he may be greeted by Jehovah’s Witnesses. He may also request spiritual assistance from the elders.”
Current official statement. Also: 'we reach out' to those who 'slowed down or stopped'; 'The elders simply announce to the congregation that the person is no longer one of Jehovah’s Witnesses'; spouse and young children in the same house keep 'normal family affections and dealings'; footnote b on terminology; footnote d applies 2 John 9-11 to those who 'actively try to undermine' the congregation. Says nothing about relatives outside the household. Quotes the High Court of England and Wales (7 June 2019) and former ECtHR judge Pinto de Albuquerque.
Note de provenance et de vérification for jw.org, Frequently Asked Questions, How Do Jehovah’s Witnesses Treat Those Who Used to Belong to Their Religion?
Note sur la fiabilité.Full page opened at both URLs on 2026-09-19. The old URL https://www.jw.org/en/jehovahs-witnesses/faq/shunning/ returns HTTP 301 to this URL (curl -I; server Last-Modified 18 Sep 2026). Earlier titles: 2022 version 'Do Jehovah’s Witnesses Shun Those Who Used to Belong to Their Religion?' is quoted by the Norwegian Supreme Court (para 125); the still-earlier title 'Do You Shun Former Members of Your Religion?' is attested only by discovery sources (unverified).
Notes.Blocked original: https://www.jw.org/en/jehovahs-witnesses/faq/shunning/ (now redirects). web.archive.org and archive.ph blocked in this environment.
Date de consultation. 19 septembre 2026 · Identifiant de la source.src-jworg-2026-faq-removed-from-the-congregation
août 2024 · pp.26-31 · par. 3-6, 10-15; footnote b; box · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania
“In the past, we would not greet such a person. Here again, each Christian needs to use his Bible-trained conscience in this matter. Some may feel comfortable with greeting or welcoming the person to the meeting. However, we would not have an extended conversation or socialize with the individual.”
Footnote b retires 'disfellowshipped' for 'removed from the congregation'; par. 4 keeps the announcement 'no longer one of Jehovah’s Witnesses'; par. 13 keeps 'stop keeping company ... not even eating'; par. 15 and the box restrict 2 John 9-11 to 'apostates and others who actively promote wrong conduct'; par. 6, 10-12 on follow-up visits and reinstatement. No revised guidance on relatives outside the household.
18 septembre 2026 · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania
“So we do not socialize with someone who has been removed. However, we do not ignore him completely. We treat him with respect. He is welcome to attend our religious services, where he may be greeted by Jehovah’s Witnesses. He may also request spiritual assistance from the elders.”
Current official statement. Also: 'we reach out' to those who 'slowed down or stopped'; 'The elders simply announce to the congregation that the person is no longer one of Jehovah’s Witnesses'; spouse and young children in the same house keep 'normal family affections and dealings'; footnote b on terminology; footnote d applies 2 John 9-11 to those who 'actively try to undermine' the congregation. Says nothing about relatives outside the household. Quotes the High Court of England and Wales (7 June 2019) and former ECtHR judge Pinto de Albuquerque.
Note de provenance et de vérification for jw.org, Frequently Asked Questions, How Do Jehovah’s Witnesses Treat Those Who Used to Belong to Their Religion?
Note sur la fiabilité.Full page opened at both URLs on 2026-09-19. The old URL https://www.jw.org/en/jehovahs-witnesses/faq/shunning/ returns HTTP 301 to this URL (curl -I; server Last-Modified 18 Sep 2026). Earlier titles: 2022 version 'Do Jehovah’s Witnesses Shun Those Who Used to Belong to Their Religion?' is quoted by the Norwegian Supreme Court (para 125); the still-earlier title 'Do You Shun Former Members of Your Religion?' is attested only by discovery sources (unverified).
Notes.Blocked original: https://www.jw.org/en/jehovahs-witnesses/faq/shunning/ (now redirects). web.archive.org and archive.ph blocked in this environment.
Date de consultation. 19 septembre 2026 · Identifiant de la source.src-jworg-2026-faq-removed-from-the-congregation
Publication primaire des Témoins de JéhovahVérifié
15 mars 2024 · Mark Sanderson (Governing Body) · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania
“Under our current arrangement, we don’t say a greeting to individuals who’ve been removed from the congregation. However, the Governing Body has decided that publishers can use their Bible-trained conscience to decide whether to give a simple greeting and welcome a disfellowshipped individual who attends a congregation meeting.”
Presented by Governing Body member Mark Sanderson (20 min 02 s; media id docid-1112024005). Also announces: follow-up meeting 'after a few months'; visits to those removed long ago; two elders to meet a baptised minor and parents instead of a committee; members may invite a removed person to a meeting; 'we don’t socialize with those who are removed'; 1 Cor. 5:13 'remove' terminology; sisters may wear slacks.
Note de provenance et de vérification for jw.org (Governing Body Update video), 2024 Governing Body Update #2
Note sur la fiabilité.jw.org page opened (published 15 March 2024) and the organisation's own English subtitle file (https://cfp2.jw-cdn.org/a/ceb7d7/1/o/1112024005_E_cnt_1.vtt, from the jw.org mediator API record docid-1112024005_E_1_VIDEO) read in full; quotations are from that subtitle text.
Position de l’organisation ou explication ultérieure : La Cour suprême de Norvège a estimé que la procédure de 2024 était 'plus prévenante qu'auparavant', tout en étant 'pénible et humiliante' pour un enfant, et qu'elle ne constituait pas une 'violence mentale'.
Afficher les preuves (5 sources)
Publication primaire des Témoins de JéhovahVérifié
août 2024 · pp.20-25 · par. 17-18 · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania
“What about baptized minors—those under 18 years of age—who engage in serious wrongdoing? The body of elders will arrange for two elders to meet with the minor and his Christian parents. ... However, what if a baptized minor unrepentantly persists in a wrong course? In that case, a committee of elders will meet with him along with his Christian parents.”
The 2024 procedure for baptised minors; par. 17 confirms reproof may still be announced 'as a warning to the rest'. Quoted by the Norwegian Supreme Court at para 94.
15 mars 2024 · Mark Sanderson (Governing Body) · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania
“Under our current arrangement, we don’t say a greeting to individuals who’ve been removed from the congregation. However, the Governing Body has decided that publishers can use their Bible-trained conscience to decide whether to give a simple greeting and welcome a disfellowshipped individual who attends a congregation meeting.”
Presented by Governing Body member Mark Sanderson (20 min 02 s; media id docid-1112024005). Also announces: follow-up meeting 'after a few months'; visits to those removed long ago; two elders to meet a baptised minor and parents instead of a committee; members may invite a removed person to a meeting; 'we don’t socialize with those who are removed'; 1 Cor. 5:13 'remove' terminology; sisters may wear slacks.
Note de provenance et de vérification for jw.org (Governing Body Update video), 2024 Governing Body Update #2
Note sur la fiabilité.jw.org page opened (published 15 March 2024) and the organisation's own English subtitle file (https://cfp2.jw-cdn.org/a/ceb7d7/1/o/1112024005_E_cnt_1.vtt, from the jw.org mediator API record docid-1112024005_E_1_VIDEO) read in full; quotations are from that subtitle text.
29 avril 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'.
Note de provenance et de vérification 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)
Note sur la fiabilité.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
Provenance de la numérisation.Supreme Court of Norway, Communication Department translation (legal authenticity remains with the Norwegian text).
Date de consultation. 19 septembre 2026 · Identifiant de la source.src-court-no-2026-0429-supreme-court
Publication primaire des Témoins de JéhovahVérifié
15 septembre 1981 · pp.26-31 · par. 11, 13, 18-19, 22-26 · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania
“Consequently, Christians related to such a disfellowshiped person living outside the home should strive to avoid needless association, even keeping business dealings to a minimum.”
Distinguishes relatives in the household (family ties remain, 'spiritual ties have been completely severed'; a disfellowshipped minor is still cared for and disciplined but parents 'would not conduct a Bible study directly with the child') from relatives outside it ('limited need to care for necessary family matters'); discusses weddings, gatherings and funerals.
15 août 2013 · p.8 · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania
“parents may even study the Bible with a disfellowshipped minor who continues to live with them ... it would seem reasonable that a disfellowshipped minor could also quietly sit with his parents.”
Confirms that disfellowshipped minors at home may be studied with and may sit with parents; for adult children not at home, sitting beside relatives is 'far different' from relatives who 'needlessly seek out his company'. Cites w81 9/15 pp. 29-30 and w88 11/15 pp. 19-20.
Note de provenance et de vérification for The Watchtower (Study Edition), Questions From Readers: Would it be appropriate for Christian parents to sit with a disfellowshipped child at congregation meetings?
Note sur la fiabilité.Raw WOL HTML fetched; wording and page marker 8 confirmed.
Date de consultation. 19 septembre 2026 · Identifiant de la source.src-w-2013-0815-qfr-seating
La réintégration suppose une demande écrite examinée par un comité de réintégration de la congrégation d'origine, après 'clear evidence of repentance' pendant 'many months, a year, or even longer, depending on the circumstances' (2019) ; depuis mars 2024, les anciens doivent proposer une rencontre de suivi 'after a few months', prendre contact avec les personnes exclues 'perhaps many years ago', peuvent organiser une étude biblique avant la réintégration, et il leur est dit qu'une personne repentante 'can be reinstated without delay', les cas de maltraitance d'enfants, d'apostasie ou de rupture de mariage devant être traités de façon 'especially careful'. Source: Organized to Do Jehovah’s Will (od), 2019Source: jw.org (Governing Body Update video), 15 mars 2024Source: The Watchtower (Study Edition), août 2024Source: The Watchtower, 15 avril 1988
Afficher les preuves (4 sources)
Publication primaire des Témoins de JéhovahVérifié
2019 · pp.141-156 · par. 24-40 · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania
“When it is necessary to disfellowship an unrepentant wrongdoer from the congregation, a brief announcement is made, stating: “[Name of person] is no longer one of Jehovah’s Witnesses.” This will alert faithful ones in the congregation to stop associating with that person.—1 Cor. 5:11.”
Note de provenance et de vérification for Organized to Do Jehovah’s Will (od), Chapter 14, Maintaining the Peace and Cleanness of the Congregation
Note sur la fiabilité.Raw WOL HTML fetched; wording and page markers 141-156 confirmed; publishers' page (doc 1102014949) opened for edition data. Still uses 'disfellowshipped' as at access date.
Date de consultation. 19 septembre 2026 · Identifiant de la source.src-od-2019-organized-ch14
Publication primaire des Témoins de JéhovahVérifié
15 mars 2024 · Mark Sanderson (Governing Body) · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania
“Under our current arrangement, we don’t say a greeting to individuals who’ve been removed from the congregation. However, the Governing Body has decided that publishers can use their Bible-trained conscience to decide whether to give a simple greeting and welcome a disfellowshipped individual who attends a congregation meeting.”
Presented by Governing Body member Mark Sanderson (20 min 02 s; media id docid-1112024005). Also announces: follow-up meeting 'after a few months'; visits to those removed long ago; two elders to meet a baptised minor and parents instead of a committee; members may invite a removed person to a meeting; 'we don’t socialize with those who are removed'; 1 Cor. 5:13 'remove' terminology; sisters may wear slacks.
Note de provenance et de vérification for jw.org (Governing Body Update video), 2024 Governing Body Update #2
Note sur la fiabilité.jw.org page opened (published 15 March 2024) and the organisation's own English subtitle file (https://cfp2.jw-cdn.org/a/ceb7d7/1/o/1112024005_E_cnt_1.vtt, from the jw.org mediator API record docid-1112024005_E_1_VIDEO) read in full; quotations are from that subtitle text.
août 2024 · pp.26-31 · par. 3-6, 10-15; footnote b; box · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania
“In the past, we would not greet such a person. Here again, each Christian needs to use his Bible-trained conscience in this matter. Some may feel comfortable with greeting or welcoming the person to the meeting. However, we would not have an extended conversation or socialize with the individual.”
Footnote b retires 'disfellowshipped' for 'removed from the congregation'; par. 4 keeps the announcement 'no longer one of Jehovah’s Witnesses'; par. 13 keeps 'stop keeping company ... not even eating'; par. 15 and the box restrict 2 John 9-11 to 'apostates and others who actively promote wrong conduct'; par. 6, 10-12 on follow-up visits and reinstatement. No revised guidance on relatives outside the household.
15 avril 1988 · pp.26-31 · par. 3, 13-14, 17, 20, 23; footnote a · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania
“The situation is different if the disfellowshipped or disassociated one is a relative living outside the immediate family circle and home. It might be possible to have almost no contact at all with the relative. Even if there were some family matters requiring contact, this certainly would be kept to a minimum”
Household relatives: 'normal family affections and dealings can continue' (par. 13). Reports the outcome of Paul v. Watchtower and concludes a shunned person 'cannot recover damages ... the person is feeling a loss brought on by his or her own actions' (par. 20). Footnote a: 2 John 11 'could well mean not to say even "hello" to such ones'.
Position de l’organisation ou explication ultérieure : FAQ : 'If one of Jehovah's Witnesses has slowed down or stopped in his worship, we reach out to him'.
Afficher les preuves (4 sources)
Publication primaire des Témoins de JéhovahVérifié
2019 · pp.141-156 · par. 24-40 · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania
“When it is necessary to disfellowship an unrepentant wrongdoer from the congregation, a brief announcement is made, stating: “[Name of person] is no longer one of Jehovah’s Witnesses.” This will alert faithful ones in the congregation to stop associating with that person.—1 Cor. 5:11.”
Note de provenance et de vérification for Organized to Do Jehovah’s Will (od), Chapter 14, Maintaining the Peace and Cleanness of the Congregation
Note sur la fiabilité.Raw WOL HTML fetched; wording and page markers 141-156 confirmed; publishers' page (doc 1102014949) opened for edition data. Still uses 'disfellowshipped' as at access date.
Date de consultation. 19 septembre 2026 · Identifiant de la source.src-od-2019-organized-ch14
Publication primaire des Témoins de JéhovahVérifié
15 septembre 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'.
octobre 2016 · pp.13, 70-72 · section 7.7; endnotes 618-636 · Commonwealth of Australia (ISBN 978-1-925289-89-3, CC BY 3.0 AU)
“The Jehovah’s Witness organisation’s practice of shunning members who disassociate from the organisation has the very real potential of putting a survivor in the untenable position of having to choose between constant re-traumatisation at having to share a community with their abuser and losing that entire community altogether.”
Also: 'Even family members are instructed not to associate with a disfellowshipped or disassociated relative unless the association is unavoidable'; 'the practice of shunning is an inextricable component of the institutional response to child sexual abuse'; the organisation's submission that shunning was outside the terms of reference was rejected; Governing Body member Geoffrey Jackson's evidence (14 Aug 2015) that leaving can be 'personally devastating because [a person] can lose their whole social network and their families'; p. 13 lists 'the organisation has a policy and practice of shunning those who wish to leave the organisation' among problematic policies.
Note de provenance et de vérification for Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse (Australia), Report of Case Study No. 29: The response of the Jehovah’s Witnesses and Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of Australia Ltd to allegations of child sexual abuse, Section 7.7 Shunning; summary of problematic policies (p. 13)
Note sur la fiabilité.Report PDF (110 pp.) downloaded from the New Zealand inquiry's mirror and text-extracted; wording and page numbers confirmed. Official host (childabuseroyalcommission.gov.au) blocked in this environment.
Provenance de la numérisation.Mirror hosted by the Royal Commission of Inquiry into Abuse in Care (New Zealand); Commonwealth of Australia, CC BY 3.0 AU.
Notes.Official PDF (blocked here): https://www.childabuseroyalcommission.gov.au/sites/default/files/file-list/Case%20Study%2029%20-%20Findings%20Report%20-%20Jehovahs%20Witnesses.pdf
Date de consultation. 19 septembre 2026 · Identifiant de la source.src-rc-au-2016-1000-case-study-29-report
avril 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.
Note de provenance et de vérification 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
Note sur la fiabilité.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).
Provenance de la numérisation.Royal Commission of Inquiry into Abuse in Care (New Zealand) evidence library; copyright Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania.
Le livre Organized (2019) définit la dissociation soit comme une déclaration par laquelle une personne ne souhaite plus être connue comme Témoin, soit comme le fait de renoncer à sa place 'by his actions, such as by becoming part of a secular organization that has objectives contrary to Bible teachings' (en citant Isaïe 2:4 et Révélation 19:17-21) ; le livre ne mentionne pas le service militaire, et une rubrique 'Questions des lecteurs' de 1999 traite le vote comme une affaire de conscience personnelle, de sorte que ni le fait de 's'engager dans l'armée' ni celui de 'voter' n'est présenté dans les textes publiés actuels comme un acte entraînant automatiquement la dissociation. Source: Organized to Do Jehovah’s Will (od), 2019Source: The Watchtower, 1 novembre 1999Source: The Watchtower, 15 septembre 1981
Afficher les preuves (3 sources)
Publication primaire des Témoins de JéhovahVérifié
2019 · pp.141-156 · par. 24-40 · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania
“When it is necessary to disfellowship an unrepentant wrongdoer from the congregation, a brief announcement is made, stating: “[Name of person] is no longer one of Jehovah’s Witnesses.” This will alert faithful ones in the congregation to stop associating with that person.—1 Cor. 5:11.”
Note de provenance et de vérification for Organized to Do Jehovah’s Will (od), Chapter 14, Maintaining the Peace and Cleanness of the Congregation
Note sur la fiabilité.Raw WOL HTML fetched; wording and page markers 141-156 confirmed; publishers' page (doc 1102014949) opened for edition data. Still uses 'disfellowshipped' as at access date.
Date de consultation. 19 septembre 2026 · Identifiant de la source.src-od-2019-organized-ch14
Publication primaire des Témoins de JéhovahVérifié
1 novembre 1999 · pp.28-29 · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania
“As to whether they will personally vote for someone running in an election, each one of Jehovah’s Witnesses makes a decision based on his Bible-trained conscience ... What he does in the polling booth is between him and his Creator.”
Current published position: voting is a matter of individual conscience, not a disassociating act. Relevant to the claim sometimes made that voting leads to disassociation.
15 septembre 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'.
15 avril 2015 · pp.29-31 · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania
“All in the congregation can show principled love by avoiding contact and conversation with the disfellowshipped person. (1 Cor. 5:11; 2 John 10, 11)”
Presents disfellowshipping as protection for the congregation and discipline for the wrongdoer; 'Julian' says of his disfellowshipped son, 'his lifestyle had put up a barrier between us'; the son returned 'after some ten years'.
15 juillet 1995 · pp.25-27 · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania
“Ever since the Christian congregation came into existence 19 centuries ago, true Christians have put up a hard fight to protect it from spiritual and moral uncleanness.”
Organisation's rationale article; opened for the 'loving provision' framing used from the 1990s onward.
Note de provenance et de vérification for The Watchtower, Disfellowshipping—A Loving Provision?
Note sur la fiabilité.Re-opened by the independent source auditor on 19 September 2026: the online library's reference for document 1995526 is w95 7/15 pp. 25-27, so the issue is 15 July 1995 (an earlier record inferred 15 August from the document numbering); page markers 25-27 and wording confirmed.
Notes.Issue date corrected from 15 August to 15 July 1995 on 19 September 2026.
Date de consultation. 19 septembre 2026 · Identifiant de la source.src-w-1995-0715-loving-provision
Publication primaire des Témoins de JéhovahVérifié
Note de provenance et de vérification for Awake!, The Bible’s Viewpoint: Why Disfellowshipping Is a Loving Arrangement
Note sur la fiabilité.Re-opened by the independent source auditor on 19 September 2026: the online library's reference g96 9/8 pp. 26-27 confirms the 8 September 1996 issue; page markers and wording confirmed.
Notes.Issue date confirmed 19 September 2026.
Date de consultation. 19 septembre 2026 · Identifiant de la source.src-g-1996-0908-loving-arrangement
Publication primaire des Témoins de JéhovahVérifié
2017 · pp.241 (Endnote 8); ch. 3 pp. 39-40 · Endnote 8; ch. 3 pars. 19-20 · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania
“When someone is disfellowshipped, we have no more dealings with that person and we stop talking to him. (1 Corinthians 5:11; 2 John 9-11)”
Ch. 3 par. 19: 'This can be very difficult if he is a friend of ours or a member of our family. But in a situation like this, our loyalty to Jehovah must be stronger than our loyalty to anyone else.' The Norwegian Supreme Court treated this 2017/2018 book as the current doctrinal statement (para 39-40). Endnotes doc: wol 1102017578.
Note de provenance et de vérification for How to Remain in God’s Love (lvs), Chapter 3, Choose Friends Who Love God (par. 19-20) and Endnote 8, Disfellowshipping
Note sur la fiabilité.The quoted sentence is Endnote 8 of the book (online library document 1102017578, under page marker 241, the page the elders’ handbook tells elders to review); chapter 3 (document 1102017562) pars. 19-20 confirmed separately. Corrected by the independent source auditor on 19 September 2026.
18 septembre 2026 · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania
“So we do not socialize with someone who has been removed. However, we do not ignore him completely. We treat him with respect. He is welcome to attend our religious services, where he may be greeted by Jehovah’s Witnesses. He may also request spiritual assistance from the elders.”
Current official statement. Also: 'we reach out' to those who 'slowed down or stopped'; 'The elders simply announce to the congregation that the person is no longer one of Jehovah’s Witnesses'; spouse and young children in the same house keep 'normal family affections and dealings'; footnote b on terminology; footnote d applies 2 John 9-11 to those who 'actively try to undermine' the congregation. Says nothing about relatives outside the household. Quotes the High Court of England and Wales (7 June 2019) and former ECtHR judge Pinto de Albuquerque.
Note de provenance et de vérification for jw.org, Frequently Asked Questions, How Do Jehovah’s Witnesses Treat Those Who Used to Belong to Their Religion?
Note sur la fiabilité.Full page opened at both URLs on 2026-09-19. The old URL https://www.jw.org/en/jehovahs-witnesses/faq/shunning/ returns HTTP 301 to this URL (curl -I; server Last-Modified 18 Sep 2026). Earlier titles: 2022 version 'Do Jehovah’s Witnesses Shun Those Who Used to Belong to Their Religion?' is quoted by the Norwegian Supreme Court (para 125); the still-earlier title 'Do You Shun Former Members of Your Religion?' is attested only by discovery sources (unverified).
Notes.Blocked original: https://www.jw.org/en/jehovahs-witnesses/faq/shunning/ (now redirects). web.archive.org and archive.ph blocked in this environment.
Date de consultation. 19 septembre 2026 · Identifiant de la source.src-jworg-2026-faq-removed-from-the-congregation
18 septembre 2026 · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania
“So we do not socialize with someone who has been removed. However, we do not ignore him completely. We treat him with respect. He is welcome to attend our religious services, where he may be greeted by Jehovah’s Witnesses. He may also request spiritual assistance from the elders.”
Current official statement. Also: 'we reach out' to those who 'slowed down or stopped'; 'The elders simply announce to the congregation that the person is no longer one of Jehovah’s Witnesses'; spouse and young children in the same house keep 'normal family affections and dealings'; footnote b on terminology; footnote d applies 2 John 9-11 to those who 'actively try to undermine' the congregation. Says nothing about relatives outside the household. Quotes the High Court of England and Wales (7 June 2019) and former ECtHR judge Pinto de Albuquerque.
Note de provenance et de vérification for jw.org, Frequently Asked Questions, How Do Jehovah’s Witnesses Treat Those Who Used to Belong to Their Religion?
Note sur la fiabilité.Full page opened at both URLs on 2026-09-19. The old URL https://www.jw.org/en/jehovahs-witnesses/faq/shunning/ returns HTTP 301 to this URL (curl -I; server Last-Modified 18 Sep 2026). Earlier titles: 2022 version 'Do Jehovah’s Witnesses Shun Those Who Used to Belong to Their Religion?' is quoted by the Norwegian Supreme Court (para 125); the still-earlier title 'Do You Shun Former Members of Your Religion?' is attested only by discovery sources (unverified).
Notes.Blocked original: https://www.jw.org/en/jehovahs-witnesses/faq/shunning/ (now redirects). web.archive.org and archive.ph blocked in this environment.
Date de consultation. 19 septembre 2026 · Identifiant de la source.src-jworg-2026-faq-removed-from-the-congregation
29 avril 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'.
Note de provenance et de vérification 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)
Note sur la fiabilité.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
Provenance de la numérisation.Supreme Court of Norway, Communication Department translation (legal authenticity remains with the Norwegian text).
Date de consultation. 19 septembre 2026 · Identifiant de la source.src-court-no-2026-0429-supreme-court
18 septembre 2026 · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania
“So we do not socialize with someone who has been removed. However, we do not ignore him completely. We treat him with respect. He is welcome to attend our religious services, where he may be greeted by Jehovah’s Witnesses. He may also request spiritual assistance from the elders.”
Current official statement. Also: 'we reach out' to those who 'slowed down or stopped'; 'The elders simply announce to the congregation that the person is no longer one of Jehovah’s Witnesses'; spouse and young children in the same house keep 'normal family affections and dealings'; footnote b on terminology; footnote d applies 2 John 9-11 to those who 'actively try to undermine' the congregation. Says nothing about relatives outside the household. Quotes the High Court of England and Wales (7 June 2019) and former ECtHR judge Pinto de Albuquerque.
Note de provenance et de vérification for jw.org, Frequently Asked Questions, How Do Jehovah’s Witnesses Treat Those Who Used to Belong to Their Religion?
Note sur la fiabilité.Full page opened at both URLs on 2026-09-19. The old URL https://www.jw.org/en/jehovahs-witnesses/faq/shunning/ returns HTTP 301 to this URL (curl -I; server Last-Modified 18 Sep 2026). Earlier titles: 2022 version 'Do Jehovah’s Witnesses Shun Those Who Used to Belong to Their Religion?' is quoted by the Norwegian Supreme Court (para 125); the still-earlier title 'Do You Shun Former Members of Your Religion?' is attested only by discovery sources (unverified).
Notes.Blocked original: https://www.jw.org/en/jehovahs-witnesses/faq/shunning/ (now redirects). web.archive.org and archive.ph blocked in this environment.
Date de consultation. 19 septembre 2026 · Identifiant de la source.src-jworg-2026-faq-removed-from-the-congregation
29 avril 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'.
Note de provenance et de vérification 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)
Note sur la fiabilité.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
Provenance de la numérisation.Supreme Court of Norway, Communication Department translation (legal authenticity remains with the Norwegian text).
Date de consultation. 19 septembre 2026 · Identifiant de la source.src-court-no-2026-0429-supreme-court
22 mars 2014 · watchtowerinvestigated.wordpress.com
“Do You Shun Former Members of Your Religion?”
Attests the earlier title of the jw.org shunning FAQ. Archive hosts (web.archive.org, archive.ph) are blocked in this environment, so the earlier page could not be opened.
10 juin 1987 · pp.819 F.2d 875 · paras 1, 11-12, 23, 36-37 (as numbered in the Public.Resource.Org text) · United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
“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.”
Facts: Paul left in 1975 after her parents were disfellowshipped; after the 1981 change, former friends 'told Paul that she was to be treated as if she had been disfellowshiped and that they could not speak with her'. Holding: 'Because the practice of shunning is a part of the faith of the Jehovah’s Witness, we find that the "free exercise" provision ... precludes the plaintiff from prevailing. The defendants have a constitutionally protected privilege to engage in the practice of shunning.' Argued 7 March 1986. Certiorari denied, 484 U.S. 926 (2 Nov 1987) (CourtListener search record opened).
Note de provenance et de vérification for United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, Paul v. Watchtower Bible & Tract Society of New York, Inc., 819 F.2d 875 (9th Cir. 1987), No. 85-4012, Opinion by Reinhardt, Circuit Judge (Wright, Tang, Reinhardt)
Note sur la fiabilité.Full opinion text opened on law.resource.org (Public.Resource.Org copy of the Federal Reporter); wording confirmed. Justia, FindLaw and CourtListener pages were blocked or empty.
Provenance de la numérisation.Public.Resource.Org (public-domain court opinion).
15 avril 1988 · pp.26-31 · par. 3, 13-14, 17, 20, 23; footnote a · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania
“The situation is different if the disfellowshipped or disassociated one is a relative living outside the immediate family circle and home. It might be possible to have almost no contact at all with the relative. Even if there were some family matters requiring contact, this certainly would be kept to a minimum”
Household relatives: 'normal family affections and dealings can continue' (par. 13). Reports the outcome of Paul v. Watchtower and concludes a shunned person 'cannot recover damages ... the person is feeling a loss brought on by his or her own actions' (par. 20). Footnote a: 2 John 11 'could well mean not to say even "hello" to such ones'.
“courts can only review the decisions of public decision-makers and that private decision-makers don’t have to follow fair procedures unless an enforceable legal right is at stake”
Randy Wall, disfellowshipped in 2014, said the decision harmed his real-estate business because Witness clients avoided him; the Court held there is no free-standing right to judicial review of a religious organisation's membership decision and that disagreements about religious principles are not for the courts.
Note de provenance et de vérification for Supreme Court of Canada, Highwood Congregation of Jehovah’s Witnesses (Judicial Committee) v. Wall, 2018 SCC 26, [2018] 1 S.C.R. 750, Case in Brief (official summary) and judgment (Rowe J. for a unanimous Court)
Note sur la fiabilité.Official SCC 'Case in Brief' page opened; citation, date, facts and holding confirmed. Full reasons (CanLII/Lexum) blocked in this environment, so paragraph numbers are not given.
Position de l’organisation ou explication ultérieure : L'organisation a soutenu que l'évitement était 'en dehors du mandat de la Commission et sans pertinence immédiate', ce que la Commission a rejeté.
octobre 2016 · pp.13, 70-72 · section 7.7; endnotes 618-636 · Commonwealth of Australia (ISBN 978-1-925289-89-3, CC BY 3.0 AU)
“The Jehovah’s Witness organisation’s practice of shunning members who disassociate from the organisation has the very real potential of putting a survivor in the untenable position of having to choose between constant re-traumatisation at having to share a community with their abuser and losing that entire community altogether.”
Also: 'Even family members are instructed not to associate with a disfellowshipped or disassociated relative unless the association is unavoidable'; 'the practice of shunning is an inextricable component of the institutional response to child sexual abuse'; the organisation's submission that shunning was outside the terms of reference was rejected; Governing Body member Geoffrey Jackson's evidence (14 Aug 2015) that leaving can be 'personally devastating because [a person] can lose their whole social network and their families'; p. 13 lists 'the organisation has a policy and practice of shunning those who wish to leave the organisation' among problematic policies.
Note de provenance et de vérification for Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse (Australia), Report of Case Study No. 29: The response of the Jehovah’s Witnesses and Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of Australia Ltd to allegations of child sexual abuse, Section 7.7 Shunning; summary of problematic policies (p. 13)
Note sur la fiabilité.Report PDF (110 pp.) downloaded from the New Zealand inquiry's mirror and text-extracted; wording and page numbers confirmed. Official host (childabuseroyalcommission.gov.au) blocked in this environment.
Provenance de la numérisation.Mirror hosted by the Royal Commission of Inquiry into Abuse in Care (New Zealand); Commonwealth of Australia, CC BY 3.0 AU.
Notes.Official PDF (blocked here): https://www.childabuseroyalcommission.gov.au/sites/default/files/file-list/Case%20Study%2029%20-%20Findings%20Report%20-%20Jehovahs%20Witnesses.pdf
Date de consultation. 19 septembre 2026 · Identifiant de la source.src-rc-au-2016-1000-case-study-29-report
Position de l’organisation ou explication ultérieure : Aucune déclaration de jw.org sur l'affaire belge n'a été trouvée ; la FAQ invoque d'autres décisions de justice à l'appui de sa position.
“De vzw Christelijke Gemeente van Jehovah’s Getuigen werd veroordeeld tot een geldboete van 96.000 euro voor het aanzetten tot discriminatie en haat tegen ex-leden.”
Charges under art. 22, 1°-4° of the 2007 Anti-Discrimination Act (incitement to discrimination and to hatred/violence against individuals and a group); Unia and about fifteen former members were civil parties; complaint lodged 2015 by a former member. Unia's own summary (12 Jan 2024 update, https://www.unia.be/nl/actua/gelovigen-antidiscriminatiewet) also records the 2022 acquittal and the Cassation ruling.
Note de provenance et de vérification for Unia (Belgian Interfederal Centre for Equal Opportunities) case-law database: Correctionele rechtbank Oost-Vlaanderen, afdeling Gent, 16 maart 2021, vzw Christelijke Gemeente van Jehovah’s Getuigen — conviction for incitement to discrimination and hatred
Note sur la fiabilité.Unia case page and Unia news update opened; date, charges, fine and parties confirmed. The judgment text itself was not opened.
“no indication that the avoidance policy leads to generalized social isolation”
The Court of Appeal held that announcing a member's name at meetings 'can on its own not incite discrimination', that the avoidance policy does not 'literally call for discrimination ... nor literally for hate or violence', and that a religion 'may issue guidelines that strongly discourage or deem friendships sinful' provided they do not incite unlawful conduct.
Note de provenance et de vérification for Unia case-law database: Hof van beroep Gent, 7 juni 2022, Acquittal of vzw Christelijke Gemeente van Jehovah’s Getuigen on appeal
Note sur la fiabilité.Unia case page opened (fetch tool rendered the Dutch summary in English); outcome and date confirmed; judgment text not opened. Downgraded to supported after review: the page was opened but the wording or date recorded here was tool-summarised, translated or inferred rather than confirmed by eye; re-read before upgrading.
Date de consultation. 19 septembre 2026 · Identifiant de la source.src-unia-2022-0607-ghent-court-of-appeal
“the exclusion policy does not incite breaking of bonds between parents and children or between spouses”
The Court of Cassation upheld the 2022 acquittal; it found the policy 'strongly discourages and designates as sinful' contact with ex-members but that members 'have free will to leave'.
Note de provenance et de vérification for Unia case-law database: Hof van Cassatie, 19 december 2023, P.22.0971.N, Rejection of Unia's cassation appeal
Note sur la fiabilité.Unia case page opened; case number P.22.0971.N, date and outcome confirmed; judgment text not opened.
16 mars 2021 · Jeroen Desmecht; Hanne Decré · VRT (Belgian public broadcaster)
“De religieuze regels staan in onze maatschappij niet boven de wet.”
Reports the Ghent criminal court conviction; explains that the base fine of €12,000 is multiplied by eight (statutory 'opdeciemen') giving €96,000; names complainant Patrick Haeck (35-year member, expelled 2010) and Unia with fifteen ex-members as civil parties.
“The Jehovah’s Witnesses’ shunning policy cuts to the very core of relationships, and the victims suffer both physical and psychological consequences”
English-language report of the same judgment giving the €12,000 base figure (before the statutory multiplier); quotes civil-party lawyers and Patrick Haeck.
janvier 2024 · pp.79-105 · Massimo Introvigne · CESNUR
““Shunning” does not apply to cohabiting relatives.”
Essay by a sociologist who defends the practice; useful only for its litigation chronology (Ghent 16 March 2021 conviction; 7 June 2022 reversal; Court of Cassation 19 December 2023).
Note de provenance et de vérification for The Journal of CESNUR, 8(1): 79-105 (January-February 2024), Jehovah’s Witnesses and Shunning (Research Note)
Note sur la fiabilité.PDF opened and read; DOI 10.26338/tjoc.2024.8.1.4. Treat as a partisan secondary source, not as an independent finding.
Notes.Author publicly advocates for the organisation's legal position; it is cited here as a statement of that position, not as neutral scholarship.
Date de consultation. 19 septembre 2026 · Identifiant de la source.src-introvigne-2024-cesnur-shunning
4 mars 2024 · sections 3.1, 3.3 (as extracted) · Oslo tingrett (published on Lovdata)
“For døpte mindreårige i den alderen vil det være tilnærmet umulig å utøve retten til fri utmelding”
Judge Ole Kristen Øverberg acquitted the State and ordered the organisation to pay costs of NOK 1,140,505, holding that the exclusion practice infringed baptised minors' right of free withdrawal and amounted to 'psykisk vold' (psychological violence); the judgment quoted the lv appendix ('Lojale kristne familiemedlemmer leter ikke etter unnskyldninger for å ha kontakt ...').
Note de provenance et de vérification for Oslo tingrett (Oslo District Court), judgment TOSL-2022-186588 / TOSL-2023-23178, Jehovas vitner v. Staten v/Barne- og familiedepartementet
Note sur la fiabilité.Lovdata page opened via the fetch tool, which returned the case numbers, date, judge, outcome, costs and extracted Norwegian passages; the full judgment text was not read line by line, so the extracted quotations are reported as the summary gives them, and the claim they support is labelled supported. Downgraded to supported after review: the page was opened but the wording or date recorded here was tool-summarised, translated or inferred rather than confirmed by eye; re-read before upgrading.
28 mars 2024 · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania
“The position of the State now remains that it will continue to deny legal recognition to Jehovah’s Witnesses in the country of Norway unless we change our practices regarding the removal of unrepentant wrongdoers from the congregation.”
Organisation's response to the Oslo District Court judgment of 4 March 2024; notes loss of grants and of authority to officiate weddings.
29 avril 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'.
Note de provenance et de vérification 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)
Note sur la fiabilité.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
Provenance de la numérisation.Supreme Court of Norway, Communication Department translation (legal authenticity remains with the Norwegian text).
Date de consultation. 19 septembre 2026 · Identifiant de la source.src-court-no-2026-0429-supreme-court
“The State has not demonstrated in concrete terms whether, and to what extent, baptised minor members of Jehovah’s Witnesses actually experience pressure not to commit norm violations or not to withdraw, out of fear of being subjected to a disfellowshipping process ... and of losing relationships with family and friends within the religious community.”
Unanimous reversal of the District Court; findings of fact quoted in the Supreme Court judgment (para 102). The organisation was awarded costs (NOK 8.5 million per jw.org).
No online copy located.
Note de provenance et de vérification for Borgarting lagmannsrett (Borgarting Court of Appeal), judgment of 14 March 2025, Jehovas vitner v. Staten v/Barne- og familiedepartementet
Note sur la fiabilité.Judgment not opened and case number not obtained; outcome and date confirmed by the Supreme Court judgment (HR-2026-1009-A, opened), jw.org release (opened) and rett24 (opened). Quotation is the Supreme Court's English rendering of the Court of Appeal's finding.
29 avril 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'.
Note de provenance et de vérification 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)
Note sur la fiabilité.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
Provenance de la numérisation.Supreme Court of Norway, Communication Department translation (legal authenticity remains with the Norwegian text).
Date de consultation. 19 septembre 2026 · Identifiant de la source.src-court-no-2026-0429-supreme-court
Publication primaire des Témoins de JéhovahVérifié
27 mars 2025 · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania
“Jehovah’s Witnesses have been fully vindicated in that the decisions to deny grants and registration are invalid.”
Reports the Borgarting Court of Appeal decision of 14 March 2025 and costs of NOK 8,500,000; says limiting contact with removed members 'is not a violation of his rights' and, for minors, 'does not constitute psychological violence' (as quoted by jw.org).
Reports that the Borgarting Court of Appeal found it not shown ('ikke sannsynliggjort') that the practice of social distancing toward members who leave violates the right to exit, nor that the practice toward minors constitutes psychological violence or negative social control.
Position de l’organisation ou explication ultérieure : jw.org : la décision 'protects several fundamental human rights... including freedom of religion and personal autonomy'.
29 avril 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'.
Note de provenance et de vérification 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)
Note sur la fiabilité.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
Provenance de la numérisation.Supreme Court of Norway, Communication Department translation (legal authenticity remains with the Norwegian text).
Date de consultation. 19 septembre 2026 · Identifiant de la source.src-court-no-2026-0429-supreme-court
Publication primaire des Témoins de JéhovahVérifié
8 mai 2026 · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania
“The decision protects several fundamental human rights for all people in Norway, including freedom of religion and personal autonomy.”
Statement by Jørgen Pedersen (Scandinavia Branch Committee). A companion piece dated 30 April 2026 (jw.org/en/global-communications/country/norway/Norways-Supreme-Court-Rules-to-Protect-Citizens-Right-to-Believe/) reports costs of about NOK 11,864,000 and describes the practice as 'the removal of unrepentant wrongdoers from the congregation'.
Note de provenance et de vérification for jw.org Newsroom, Norwegian Supreme Court Issues Significant Ruling in Favor of Jehovah’s Witnesses
Note sur la fiabilité.Both pages opened; dates and wording confirmed. jw.org gives the decision date as 30 April 2026; the judgment itself is dated 29 April 2026.
Notes.Date discrepancy (29 vs 30 April) noted; the judgment PDF controls.
Date de consultation. 19 septembre 2026 · Identifiant de la source.src-jworg-2026-0508-norway-supreme-court-release
Note de provenance et de vérification for Religion Clause (law blog by Prof. Howard M. Friedman), Norway’s Supreme Court Upholds Jehovah’s Witnesses State Registration and Funding
Note sur la fiabilité.Page opened; used only to locate the official judgment.
Date de consultation. 19 septembre 2026 · Identifiant de la source.src-religionclause-2026-0507-norway-supreme-court
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.
Position de l’organisation ou explication ultérieure : La FAQ cite l'opinion de l'ancien juge de la Cour européenne des droits de l'homme Pinto de Albuquerque selon laquelle des tribunaux ont jugé la pratique licite.
10 juin 2010 · paras 109-113 · European Court of Human Rights
“as long as self-dedication to religious matters is the product of the believer’s independent and free decision and however unhappy his or her family members may be about that decision, the ensuing estrangement cannot be taken to mean that the religion caused the break-up in the family.”
Para 110: 'The domestic courts did not give examples of any forceful or threatening action on the part of the applicant community calculated to break the families of its members apart.' The passage concerns complaints by non-Witness relatives of converts, not the shunning of ex-members; the Norwegian Supreme Court (2026, para 110) said the ECtHR had not, to its knowledge, ruled on shunning of former members.
Note de provenance et de vérification for European Court of Human Rights, Jehovah’s Witnesses of Moscow and Others v. Russia, no. 302/02, Judgment (First Section), paras 109-113
Note sur la fiabilité.HUDOC document body opened via the HUDOC conversion endpoint (https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/app/conversion/docx/html/body?library=ECHR&id=001-99221); paragraphs 109-113 read verbatim.
Date de consultation. 19 septembre 2026 · Identifiant de la source.src-echr-2010-0610-jw-moscow-v-russia
29 avril 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'.
Note de provenance et de vérification 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)
Note sur la fiabilité.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
Provenance de la numérisation.Supreme Court of Norway, Communication Department translation (legal authenticity remains with the Norwegian text).
Date de consultation. 19 septembre 2026 · Identifiant de la source.src-court-no-2026-0429-supreme-court
Les études évaluées par les pairs portant sur d’anciens Témoins sont de petite taille ou reposent sur des participants auto-sélectionnés ; aucune ne mesure la prévalence dans des conditions contrôlées, de sorte qu’aucun lien de causalité ne peut en être déduit. Elles font état de façon constante d’associations entre l’ostracisme et une mauvaise santé mentale, y compris des idées suicidaires, ainsi que d’une résilience avec le temps. La formulation employée ici est « associé à », et non « cause ».
Une étude de 2021 évaluée par les pairs, fondée sur des entretiens avec six anciens Témoins (Ransom, Monk & Heim, Journal of Religion and Health), rapporte que l'ostracisme après le départ 'peut être associé à une santé mentale dégradée', que les participants ont comparé la perte de leur famille et de leurs amis au deuil de personnes vivantes, qu'un participant a fait état de deux tentatives de suicide et un autre d'un comportement autodestructeur, et que l'un d'eux a décrit le suicide de son fils après l'excommunication de celui-ci. Source: Journal of Religion and Health, 61(3): 2458-2480 (online 19 Jan 2021; issue June 2022), 19 janvier 2021
19 janvier 2021 · pp.2458-2480 · Abstract; Results · Heather J. Ransom; Rebecca L. Monk; Derek Heim · Springer (open access, CC BY)
“Narratives suggest that experiences of ostracism following religious exit can be associated with diminished mental health, while having a sense of agency and establishing new (online) social connections may help mitigate adverse consequences.”
Six former JWs in the UK (aged 25 to 60s; disfellowshipped or disassociated), semi-structured interviews analysed with interpretative phenomenological analysis. Results: 'the sudden loss of contact with loved [ones] was akin to grieving their living friends and family'; one participant reported two suicide attempts, another self-destructive behaviour, and a third described her son’s suicide after he was disfellowshipped and one a son's suicide after disfellowshipping; 'the indication is that being disfellowshipped may potentially have serious implications to physical and mental health'.
Note de provenance et de vérification for Journal of Religion and Health, 61(3): 2458-2480 (online 19 Jan 2021; issue June 2022), Grieving the Living: The Social Death of Former Jehovah’s Witnesses
Note sur la fiabilité.Open-access PDF (Deutsche Nationalbibliothek copy, https://d-nb.info/1230971017/34) downloaded and read; citation verified against Crossref and Semantic Scholar; Edge Hill repository record opened.
Une étude de 2023 fondée sur des entretiens avec dix anciens Témoins (Luther, Pastoral Psychology) a conclu que l'ostracisme 'a un effet néfaste à long terme sur la santé mentale, les perspectives d'emploi et la satisfaction de vivre', la solitude, la perte de contrôle et le sentiment de ne rien valoir étant fréquents après le départ. Source: Pastoral Psychology, 72(1): 105-120 (online 31 Dec 2022), 31 décembre 2022
“Results suggest shunning has a long-term, detrimental effect on mental health, job possibilities, and life satisfaction. ... Feelings of loneliness, loss of control, and worthlessness are also common after leaving.”
Ten former JWs (USA, aged 20-44) interviewed; interpretative phenomenological analysis.
Note de provenance et de vérification for Pastoral Psychology, 72(1): 105-120 (online 31 Dec 2022), What Happens to Those Who Exit Jehovah’s Witnesses: An Investigation of the Impact of Shunning
Note sur la fiabilité.PubMed Central full text (PMC9803876) opened; abstract confirmed verbatim; citation verified against Crossref.
Date de consultation. 19 septembre 2026 · Identifiant de la source.src-luther-2023-what-happens-exit
Une enquête en ligne menée en 2023 auprès de 424 anciens Témoins d'Autriche, d'Allemagne et de Suisse (Thoma et al., Mental Health, Religion & Culture) fait état d'un tiers des répondants ayant eu des pensées suicidaires et de 10 % ayant fait une tentative de suicide, avec des symptômes cliniquement significatifs et une faible qualité de vie, en particulier chez les femmes et chez les personnes parties en raison d'abus. Source: Mental Health, Religion & Culture, 26(7): 644-662, 9 août 2023
9 août 2023 · pp.644-662 · Abstract · Myriam V. Thoma; Andreas Goreis; Shauna L. Rohner; Urs M. Nater; Eva Heim; Jan Höltge · Taylor & Francis (open access, CC BY)
“This study assessed a sample of former Jehovah’s Witnesses (N = 424 ... ). Most participants (66%) were born into this faith community. Half the sample left voluntarily, 21% were expelled ... One third reported suicidal thoughts; 10% had attempted suicide.”
Online survey; self-selected sample; no control group. Women and survivors of child maltreatment identified as particularly vulnerable sub-groups.
Note de provenance et de vérification for Mental Health, Religion & Culture, 26(7): 644-662, Characteristics of health and well-being in former Jehovah’s Witnesses in Austria, Germany, and Switzerland
Note sur la fiabilité.Publisher page returned HTTP 403; abstract and bibliographic data taken from the Semantic Scholar API record and verified against Crossref (two independent indexes). Original not opened.
Date de consultation. 19 septembre 2026 · Identifiant de la source.src-thoma-2023-health-former-jws
Une étude britannique de 2026 portant sur 21 anciens Témoins officiellement mis à l'écart (Grendele, Bapir-Tardy & Flax, Pastoral Psychology) a conclu que l'ostracisme 'peut avoir un effet significatif sur le bien-être physique et affectif des personnes', mais que la plupart des participants ont fait preuve de résilience et d'une croissance psychologique grâce à des stratégies d'adaptation. Source: Pastoral Psychology (online 4 June 2026), 4 juin 2026
4 juin 2026 · Abstract · Windy A. Grendele; Savin Bapir-Tardy; Maya Flax · Springer (open access, CC BY)
“Twenty-one former Jehovah’s Witnesses who were officially shunned were interviewed online or by phone, and the data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. ... the majority of participants demonstrated resilience and psychological growth.”
Received 19 Feb 2026, accepted 3 May 2026. Shunning 'may significantly impact individuals’ physical and emotional well-being'; some participants initially adopted maladaptive coping.
Note de provenance et de vérification for Pastoral Psychology (online 4 June 2026), Coping After Shunning: Experiences of Former Jehovah’s Witnesses in the United Kingdom
Note sur la fiabilité.Open-access PDF downloaded from link.springer.com and read; citation verified against Crossref.
Date de consultation. 19 septembre 2026 · Identifiant de la source.src-grendele-2026-coping-after-shunning
15 novembre 1952 · pp.703-704 · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania
“But to have religious communion with the disfellowshiped person—no, there would be none of that! ... Hurt to such one would not be authorized, but there would be no spiritual or religious fellowshiping.”
A ‘balanced viewpoint’: family decides about relatives
It was ‘not right to treat such ones in an inhumane way’; contact with disfellowshipped relatives outside the home is left to the family. Source: The Watchtower, 1 août 1974
Ouvrir les preuves A ‘balanced viewpoint’: family decides about relatives
Publication primaire des Témoins de JéhovahVérifié
1 août 1974 · pp.466-473 · par. 5, 9, 17-23 · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania
“As to disfellowshiped family members (not minor sons or daughters) living outside the home, each family must decide to what extent they will have association with such ones. This is not something that the congregational elders can decide for them.”
15 septembre 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?”
15 septembre 1981 · pp.26-31 · par. 11, 13, 18-19, 22-26 · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania
“Consequently, Christians related to such a disfellowshiped person living outside the home should strive to avoid needless association, even keeping business dealings to a minimum.”
15 juillet 1985 · pp.30-31 · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania
“But the Bible elsewhere shows that this had a wider application. ... John was saying that they ought not even greet such an individual with khaiʹro, a common “good-day.””
10 juin 1987 · pp.819 F.2d 875 · paras 1, 11-12, 23, 36-37 (as numbered in the Public.Resource.Org text) · United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
“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.”
15 avril 1988 · pp.26-31 · par. 3, 13-14, 17, 20, 23; footnote a · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania
“The situation is different if the disfellowshipped or disassociated one is a relative living outside the immediate family circle and home. It might be possible to have almost no contact at all with the relative. Even if there were some family matters requiring contact, this certainly would be kept to a minimum”
2008 · pp.207-209 · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania
“Although there might be a need for limited contact on some rare occasion to care for a necessary family matter, any such contact should be kept to a minimum. Loyal Christian family members do not look for excuses to have dealings with a disfellowshipped relative not living at home.”
15 janvier 2013 · pp.12-16 · par. 16-20 (quote at par. 19, p. 16) · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania
“Really, what your beloved family member needs to see is your resolute stance to put Jehovah above everything else—including the family bond. ... Do not look for excuses to associate with a disfellowshipped family member, for example, through e-mail. (1 Cor. 5:11)”
octobre 2017 · pp.12-16 · par. 17-20 (quote at par. 19) · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania
“Despite our pain of heart, we must avoid normal contact with a disfellowshipped family member by telephone, text messages, letters, e-mails, or social media.”
15 juillet 1995 · pp.25-27 · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania
“Ever since the Christian congregation came into existence 19 centuries ago, true Christians have put up a hard fight to protect it from spiritual and moral uncleanness.”
septembre 2017 · p.8 · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania
“Watch the video Loyally Uphold Jehovah’s Judgments—Shun Unrepentant Wrongdoers, and then answer the following questions: What situation tested the loyalty of Sonja’s parents? What helped them to remain loyal? How did their loyalty to Jehovah benefit Sonja?”
octobre 2016 · pp.13, 70-72 · section 7.7; endnotes 618-636 · Commonwealth of Australia (ISBN 978-1-925289-89-3, CC BY 3.0 AU)
“The Jehovah’s Witness organisation’s practice of shunning members who disassociate from the organisation has the very real potential of putting a survivor in the untenable position of having to choose between constant re-traumatisation at having to share a community with their abuser and losing that entire community altogether.”
“courts can only review the decisions of public decision-makers and that private decision-makers don’t have to follow fair procedures unless an enforceable legal right is at stake”
“De vzw Christelijke Gemeente van Jehovah’s Getuigen werd veroordeeld tot een geldboete van 96.000 euro voor het aanzetten tot discriminatie en haat tegen ex-leden.”
A ‘simple greeting’ at meetings becomes a conscience matter
Publishers may greet and welcome a removed person at a meeting and invite them to meetings; elders to follow up after ‘a few months’. Socialising and eating together remain excluded. Source: jw.org (Governing Body Update video), 15 mars 2024
Ouvrir les preuves A ‘simple greeting’ at meetings becomes a conscience matter
Publication primaire des Témoins de JéhovahVérifié
15 mars 2024 · Mark Sanderson (Governing Body) · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania
“Under our current arrangement, we don’t say a greeting to individuals who’ve been removed from the congregation. However, the Governing Body has decided that publishers can use their Bible-trained conscience to decide whether to give a simple greeting and welcome a disfellowshipped individual who attends a congregation meeting.”
août 2024 · pp.26-31 · par. 3-6, 10-15; footnote b; box · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania
“In the past, we would not greet such a person. Here again, each Christian needs to use his Bible-trained conscience in this matter. Some may feel comfortable with greeting or welcoming the person to the meeting. However, we would not have an extended conversation or socialize with the individual.”
août 2024 · pp.20-25 · par. 17-18 · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania
“What about baptized minors—those under 18 years of age—who engage in serious wrongdoing? The body of elders will arrange for two elders to meet with the minor and his Christian parents. ... However, what if a baptized minor unrepentantly persists in a wrong course? In that case, a committee of elders will meet with him along with his Christian parents.”
“The State has not demonstrated in concrete terms whether, and to what extent, baptised minor members of Jehovah’s Witnesses actually experience pressure not to commit norm violations or not to withdraw, out of fear of being subjected to a disfellowshipping process ... and of losing relationships with family and friends within the religious community.”
29 avril 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.”
The organisation’s framing. Note that disassociation by letter is treated identically, so a person who leaves for reasons of conscience receives the same treatment as an unrepentant wrongdoer.Source: Organized to Do Jehovah’s Will (od), 2019
They concern greetings and invitations at meetings, follow-up visits and minors. The ‘not even eating’ rule, the announcement and the outside-household guidance are unchanged.Source: The Watchtower (Study Edition), août 2024
Si vous envisagez de partir
Les règles ci-dessus expliquent pourquoi la manière de partir compte : une lettre de dissociation est traitée comme une exclusion, alors qu’un retrait discret ne l’est pas. Voir partir en sécurité et aide et soutien. Rien sur ce site ne constitue un conseil adapté à votre situation.
Non vérifié, non utilisé
Le contenu de la vidéo d’assemblée « Sonja » de 2016, au-delà de son titre officiel ; une décision rapportée de la Cour européenne, en 2023, au sujet d’une plainte norvégienne ; le texte de l’arrêt de la cour d’appel de Borgarting (ses constatations sont citées d’après l’arrêt de la Cour suprême) ; et toute édition du manuel des anciens postérieure à 2024. Le manuel n’est cité que d’après les chapitres produits devant la commission royale d’enquête de Nouvelle-Zélande et devant les tribunaux norvégiens, jamais d’après des copies divulguées.
Sources citées sur cette page
Show all 37 sources, in date order
Each opens a full record with links, provenance and a confidence note.
Publication primaire des Témoins de JéhovahVérifié
15 novembre 1952 · pp.703-704 · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania
“But to have religious communion with the disfellowshiped person—no, there would be none of that! ... Hurt to such one would not be authorized, but there would be no spiritual or religious fellowshiping.”
1 août 1974 · pp.466-473 · par. 5, 9, 17-23 · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania
“As to disfellowshiped family members (not minor sons or daughters) living outside the home, each family must decide to what extent they will have association with such ones. This is not something that the congregational elders can decide for them.”
15 septembre 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?”
15 septembre 1981 · pp.26-31 · par. 11, 13, 18-19, 22-26 · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania
“Consequently, Christians related to such a disfellowshiped person living outside the home should strive to avoid needless association, even keeping business dealings to a minimum.”
15 juillet 1985 · pp.30-31 · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania
“But the Bible elsewhere shows that this had a wider application. ... John was saying that they ought not even greet such an individual with khaiʹro, a common “good-day.””
10 juin 1987 · pp.819 F.2d 875 · paras 1, 11-12, 23, 36-37 (as numbered in the Public.Resource.Org text) · United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
“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.”
15 avril 1988 · pp.26-31 · par. 3, 13-14, 17, 20, 23; footnote a · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania
“The situation is different if the disfellowshipped or disassociated one is a relative living outside the immediate family circle and home. It might be possible to have almost no contact at all with the relative. Even if there were some family matters requiring contact, this certainly would be kept to a minimum”
15 juillet 1995 · pp.25-27 · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania
“Ever since the Christian congregation came into existence 19 centuries ago, true Christians have put up a hard fight to protect it from spiritual and moral uncleanness.”
1 novembre 1999 · pp.28-29 · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania
“As to whether they will personally vote for someone running in an election, each one of Jehovah’s Witnesses makes a decision based on his Bible-trained conscience ... What he does in the polling booth is between him and his Creator.”
2008 · pp.207-209 · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania
“Although there might be a need for limited contact on some rare occasion to care for a necessary family matter, any such contact should be kept to a minimum. Loyal Christian family members do not look for excuses to have dealings with a disfellowshipped relative not living at home.”
10 juin 2010 · paras 109-113 · European Court of Human Rights
“as long as self-dedication to religious matters is the product of the believer’s independent and free decision and however unhappy his or her family members may be about that decision, the ensuing estrangement cannot be taken to mean that the religion caused the break-up in the family.”
15 janvier 2013 · pp.12-16 · par. 16-20 (quote at par. 19, p. 16) · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania
“Really, what your beloved family member needs to see is your resolute stance to put Jehovah above everything else—including the family bond. ... Do not look for excuses to associate with a disfellowshipped family member, for example, through e-mail. (1 Cor. 5:11)”
15 août 2013 · p.8 · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania
“parents may even study the Bible with a disfellowshipped minor who continues to live with them ... it would seem reasonable that a disfellowshipped minor could also quietly sit with his parents.”
octobre 2016 · pp.13, 70-72 · section 7.7; endnotes 618-636 · Commonwealth of Australia (ISBN 978-1-925289-89-3, CC BY 3.0 AU)
“The Jehovah’s Witness organisation’s practice of shunning members who disassociate from the organisation has the very real potential of putting a survivor in the untenable position of having to choose between constant re-traumatisation at having to share a community with their abuser and losing that entire community altogether.”
septembre 2017 · p.8 · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania
“Watch the video Loyally Uphold Jehovah’s Judgments—Shun Unrepentant Wrongdoers, and then answer the following questions: What situation tested the loyalty of Sonja’s parents? What helped them to remain loyal? How did their loyalty to Jehovah benefit Sonja?”
octobre 2017 · pp.12-16 · par. 17-20 (quote at par. 19) · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania
“Despite our pain of heart, we must avoid normal contact with a disfellowshipped family member by telephone, text messages, letters, e-mails, or social media.”
“courts can only review the decisions of public decision-makers and that private decision-makers don’t have to follow fair procedures unless an enforceable legal right is at stake”
2019 · pp.141-156 · par. 24-40 · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania
“When it is necessary to disfellowship an unrepentant wrongdoer from the congregation, a brief announcement is made, stating: “[Name of person] is no longer one of Jehovah’s Witnesses.” This will alert faithful ones in the congregation to stop associating with that person.—1 Cor. 5:11.”
19 janvier 2021 · pp.2458-2480 · Abstract; Results · Heather J. Ransom; Rebecca L. Monk; Derek Heim · Springer (open access, CC BY)
“Narratives suggest that experiences of ostracism following religious exit can be associated with diminished mental health, while having a sense of agency and establishing new (online) social connections may help mitigate adverse consequences.”
“De vzw Christelijke Gemeente van Jehovah’s Getuigen werd veroordeeld tot een geldboete van 96.000 euro voor het aanzetten tot discriminatie en haat tegen ex-leden.”
avril 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.”
“Results suggest shunning has a long-term, detrimental effect on mental health, job possibilities, and life satisfaction. ... Feelings of loneliness, loss of control, and worthlessness are also common after leaving.”
9 août 2023 · pp.644-662 · Abstract · Myriam V. Thoma; Andreas Goreis; Shauna L. Rohner; Urs M. Nater; Eva Heim; Jan Höltge · Taylor & Francis (open access, CC BY)
“This study assessed a sample of former Jehovah’s Witnesses (N = 424 ... ). Most participants (66%) were born into this faith community. Half the sample left voluntarily, 21% were expelled ... One third reported suicidal thoughts; 10% had attempted suicide.”
15 mars 2024 · Mark Sanderson (Governing Body) · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania
“Under our current arrangement, we don’t say a greeting to individuals who’ve been removed from the congregation. However, the Governing Body has decided that publishers can use their Bible-trained conscience to decide whether to give a simple greeting and welcome a disfellowshipped individual who attends a congregation meeting.”
août 2024 · pp.26-31 · par. 3-6, 10-15; footnote b; box · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania
“In the past, we would not greet such a person. Here again, each Christian needs to use his Bible-trained conscience in this matter. Some may feel comfortable with greeting or welcoming the person to the meeting. However, we would not have an extended conversation or socialize with the individual.”
août 2024 · pp.20-25 · par. 17-18 · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania
“What about baptized minors—those under 18 years of age—who engage in serious wrongdoing? The body of elders will arrange for two elders to meet with the minor and his Christian parents. ... However, what if a baptized minor unrepentantly persists in a wrong course? In that case, a committee of elders will meet with him along with his Christian parents.”
“The State has not demonstrated in concrete terms whether, and to what extent, baptised minor members of Jehovah’s Witnesses actually experience pressure not to commit norm violations or not to withdraw, out of fear of being subjected to a disfellowshipping process ... and of losing relationships with family and friends within the religious community.”
29 avril 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.”
4 juin 2026 · Abstract · Windy A. Grendele; Savin Bapir-Tardy; Maya Flax · Springer (open access, CC BY)
“Twenty-one former Jehovah’s Witnesses who were officially shunned were interviewed online or by phone, and the data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. ... the majority of participants demonstrated resilience and psychological growth.”
18 septembre 2026 · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania
“So we do not socialize with someone who has been removed. However, we do not ignore him completely. We treat him with respect. He is welcome to attend our religious services, where he may be greeted by Jehovah’s Witnesses. He may also request spiritual assistance from the elders.”
Something here wrong, unclear, or missing? Proposer une correction à cette page.
Corrections are checked against the original source and logged publicly.