Restrictions

ozziepost

There is a practice among JWs of applying restrictions to individual members. It forms part of the judicial process and, although having no scriptural basis, is applied automatically to erring ones who are judged to be repentant.

So, for a period of time, usually up to 12 months, the individual is not allowed to share in commenting at meetings, offering public prayer, appearing on the platform in congregation meetings, or in ‘serving’ as an Auxiliary Pioneer.

As with any man-made law, difficulties arise from this practice. Although no announcement has been made to the congregation, individual congregation members can have their curiosity aroused.

For example, take the real-life situation where a sole parent has been placed ‘on restrictions’ by a judicial committee. Whilst attending the group book study, others in the group begin to wonder why the restricted person is not commenting. After all, previously, he/she was in the custom of having a full share but now, even in a small group of no more than 15, he/she does not speak at all. The parent’s child also raises questions. What follows on from this is a problem of lack of confidentiality. Is this really what a “loving organisation” would do?

Another area of restrictions is in the area of a disfellowshipped person attending meetings in the Kingdom Hall.

A DF person is not entitled to receive a copy of ‘Kingdom Ministry’. If there is a believing spouse, they cannot share the KM, for that would be fellowshipping spiritually on the part of the JW spouse! So the DF person is expected to attend the Service Meetings (as a sign of repentance) yet not be able to follow the meeting outline in the Kingdom Ministry, nor be able, if they wished, to prepare for the meeting.

Elders reading this may like to examine their own hearts over restrictions for they must have taken part in applying these regulations. Background information is found in “Pay Attention to Yourselves and to All the Flock”(ks91) page 130, and “Our Kingdom Ministry” February 1987 page 8.

Does it make sense? Is it scriptural? Is it loving? Some elders are troubled by these things but comply out of loyalty. But to what or whom? Is the question. To the organisation or to Jehovah God?

Ozzie

ICHING

ozzie - yea it's scriptural - refer to the eg. of the Pharisees

I-CHING

ozziepost

I agree I-Ching that it's Pharisaical in application, but I don't think even they hade developed the regulation of restrictions!

Ozzie

Gopher

Ozzie, great topic!

What you have outlined shows that 'private reproof' does not really exist. Goodness, even before the elders meet with you word gets around. I mean, if the "friends" see 2 or 3 brothers going with you into that dreaded conference room, how long before people talk about you? 15 seconds or so?

That part about DF'd people not having the 'privilege' to read the KM was one thing that really made me re-evaluate, was all this humiliation worth it? I guess this is some sort of TEST. If you can withstand all the humiliation for some extended time period, then you can rejoin the group with all its 'privileges'.

Of course, none of these practices will change. It would be too loving!

Gopher, who only learns about the recent KM's from this Discussion Board

ICHING

ozzie - you may be right - more specifically what i meant was - making stuff up and adding it to the scriptural mix - as if the made up stuff WAS scripture - it's hard fro me to get worked up over this - the wtbts is so right it's wrong

I-CHING

buscar

Lets face it folks there is no LOVE at the Kingdoom Hall. One elder with his lies can turn the whole Hall against you and you have no redress. You are told "we'll have to leave it in Jehovahs hand"

Better be prepared for a long wait.

All these restrictions, marking, dfing, are PUNISHMENT for daring to speak up against the elders. Love has nothing to do it. How are you loving your neighbour as yourself when you treat them like sh!t?

Boy am I glad I escaped from that phycological prison.

Carmel

Great topic! It reminds me of my experiance first as a student, then a teacher and finally as a parent and community member with public schools. Whenever a student skips school, and there are some very interesting reasons and excuses for doing so, what does the school policy require? Well of course, we have to expell said offender with a minimum three day suspension! Our collective egos are offended that someone thinks some other way of spending the day is superior to being in the hallowed halls of our "school". Rarely does the system stop to think about the stupidity of this approach. Why not take a look at why Johnny is motivated to take a day and do whatever he choses as an alternative? Anyway, in all my years, I have only had one highschool administrator or school board member agree with me that the suspension practice is counter-productive. He was a super who had the best educational philosophy of any educator I have met. He also reduced the amount of class cutting by 80 percent.

I say let the shunning continue, it's a self-limiting sociopathic disease.

carmel

Englishman

Ozzie,

These restrictions used to be called probation.

As one who found himself "on probation" (for loving my neighbour too well) I had every so called privilege removed including opening and closing prayers.

Nobody told the WT study conductor of my lowly state, so I was frequently called upon to do the honours. I had a pal who used to jump in on my behalf when this happened, and guess what? Nobody EVER noticed the substitution!

Englishman.

Edited by - Englishman on 24 March 2001 7:9:56

ozziepost

English,

I can remember those 'good old days' when we an 'on probation' class. Ah, those were the days!

An interesting comment on re-instatement is found in the October 1, 1998 isuue of The Watchtower. On page 17, paragraph 16 it states of those who are reinstated to the congregation: "Like the prodigal's father, jehovah treats with dignity those who do return, accepting them back as full-fledged members of the family."

At the time of this Watchtower, I asked several elders and C.O. to comment on that. Notice it said that re-instated ones are 'full-fledged' members. I asked how could they be 'full-fledged' when they are on restrictions? Not one elder/C.O. could answer the question. The best I got was that if we wait on Jehovah, it appears as though there is going to be a change in procedure! Well, that was nearly 3 years ago, so I guess the waiting is over!

I guess it's a demonstartion of the truism that the more rules man makes, the more become necessary. Just ask the Pharisees!

Cheers,

ozzie

Englishman

Ozzie,

I seem to remeber the WT society issuing an edict that DF`d ones could resume servants privileges after their 10th year back in harness. Prior to that once DF`d meant no privileges EVER.

Englishman.

Restrictions

Share this