AboutDerrick Holland Expertise I was raised in the religion known as Jehovah`s Witnesses for 13 years. Since becoming a born-again Christian, I have researched extensively this religion, especially their doctrines and their history. I can answer questions about their doctrines from the perspective of Biblical Christianity.
Experience 23 years of Biblical research into the fundamental doctrines of the Christian faith, and how they differ from the teachings of the Watchtower.
I hope that you and your family are doing well. I recently heard of the "Back room" mentioned in relation to the JWs. Supposedly this "Back room" is at JW meetings. The person asked to this room is asked questions by elders and may be shunned. The room was spoken of as something no JW would ever want to be asked back to. What can you tell me about this "Back room"?
Thanks and God Bless You,
Sal
Answer Hello again, Sal. It's been awhile. Actually, I was trying to see what else I could find out about your question, and I came across this on-line encyclopedia article about JW discipline. I have taken excerpts from 2 different places in the article. It doesn't mention a back room either, but does describe the disciplinary process of the religion. Some of it is basically what I said before, but I thought you might find it interesting. I will keep trying to see what I can find. I am sure the "back room" thing is simply the term used to describe where these disciplinary actions are taken. Anyway, here it is....
Discipline
Formal discipline is administered by congregation leaders. In the event an accusation is made concerning a baptized member, if there is sufficient evidence, a tribunal or judicial committee is formed to determine guilt, administer help and possibly apply sanctions. There are three possible formal sanctions that are applied.
Marking
Someone who chooses a course that is deemed unscriptural, but for which the standard of disfellowshipping would not apply, would be marked. Though such a one would not be shunned, social interaction outside of formal worship settings would generally be restricted. The intent of this cutting off of social fellowship is to shame that person into a course considered proper. Generally, a talk would be given at the Service Meeting outlining the shameful course, but without explicitly naming the wrongdoer.
Reproof
This involves sins which are more serious than those for which one would be "marked." Reproof is given "before all onlookers." If the sin is private, the reproof would be private. If the sin is known by a small number, they would be invited by the elders, then reproof would be given before both the sinner and those with knowledge of the sin. If the sin is known generally by the entire congregation an announcement of public reproof would be given. A talk is generally given in the case of public reproof, where the wrong course is outlined, but without explicitly naming the people involved. Reproof is usually linked with a probationary period. Restrictions may include not sharing in meeting parts, not commenting at meeting parts and not praying for a group. The length of the probation period is dependent upon the elders. One cannot pioneer or auxiliary pioneer for at least one year after reproof is given.
Disfellowshipping
The most severe discipline administered is disfellowshipping, or excommunication. This is done at the determination of the judicial committee. The standard put in place to determine if one should be disfellowshipped is the judgment of repentance. To judge repentance, members of the judicial committee ask questions and review actions by the member being considered. The committee must be convinced without a doubt that the repentance is genuine. Baptized members who express disagreement on any doctrine can potentially be disfellowshipped for apostasy. Once the decision to disfellowship has been made a person has seven days to appeal. After the seven days, if the person has not appealed, the disfellowshipping will be announced to the congregation; disfellowshipping does not take effect until the announcement is made to the congregation.
After one is disfellowshipped, all baptized members would cut off all association with that person. They would not speak to such a one, or acknowledge him or her. There are two exceptions. First if a member was forced to have commercial dealings with a member who is disfellowshipped, these would continue as before. Second, if the disfellowshipped member is living with family members who are baptized, they could continue to associate with this one, but are not to speak about matters pertaining to the religion. The extent to which disfellowshipped or disassociated relatives living in the same household would be included in family life would be left to the discretion of the family. Family members living outside the home who are disfellowshipped, would have minimal contact. In the case of doctrinal disagreements, and depending upon the nature and publicity of their disagreement, they may be labelled as an "apostate.
Discipline
Witnesses believe that (excommunicating) and shunning can have the beneficial effect of both restoring an errant former member to the religion and "upholding God's Holy Name". Critics contend that fear of being shunned and family break-up/loss causes people to stay who might otherwise freely leave the religion. Jehovah's Witnesses have no provision for conscientious objectors who freely leave to have any continued normal associations. Critics further contend the judicial process itself, due to its private and nearly autonomous nature directly contradicts the precedent found in the Bible and the organizations' own teachings, and can be used in an arbitrary and punitive manner if there is consensus among just a few to abuse their authority. Also no witnesses or defence are allowed at all in judicial meetings for the one accused, contrary to the many witnesses that would have been there in a public trial in Bible times, or a criminal or civil trial in the modern worlds' courts. Also no tape recorders, microphones or any form of record keeping is allowed for the one accused; it's basically the accused's word what has occurred in the private judicial hearing conducted by the elders who play the prosecution, judge and jury.
