Vart Land January 13, 2024
“One of the worst nights I’ve had” Rakel Fjelltvedt (26) left Jehovah’s Witnesses because of the exclusion system.
It’s one of the worst nights I’ve had. It felt like I was opting out of a lot of people that I love.
One October evening just over three years ago, Rakel Fjelltvedt went home to her parents in her childhood home in Sandnes in Rogaland. She carried with her a message that she knew would have devastating consequences for their relationship:
She wanted to resign as a Jehovah’s Witness.
All her life, Fjelltvedt had been active in the religious community, as did the rest of her family and group of friends. Already at the age of eight, she wrote her own speeches. At age 17, she was baptized. She spent several hours a week studying the Bible and going door to door preaching the message of Jehovah.
But in recent years, she had felt a nagging unease. She believed in God, but she was unable to find any biblical basis for several of the distinctive features of the denomination’s teachings. This applied, among other things, to their views on blood transfusions, which as a newly qualified nurse she found challenging to put into practice. In the Bible, she also failed to find good reasons for skipping birthday celebrations, Christmas, and May 17.
But what she experienced the most difficulty with was a scheme that, especially in recent years, has come into the public eye: the practice of exclusion.
As a Jehovah’s Witness, Fjelltvedt was taught to stop associating with members who were excluded, she says. According to the website of Jehovah’s Witnesses, a baptized member may be excluded if he or she has committed “a grave sin” and does not regret what he or she has done.
“However, even those who choose to withdraw from the religious community will, in line with the guidelines, be treated as excluded. I myself was,” she says.
‘A loving arrangement’
For Fjelltvedt, the consequences of her decision quickly became apparent after the congregation announced that she is no longer one of Jehovah’s Witnesses.
Over the course of two or three days, she witnessed how her Facebook friends list plummeted from 700 to a couple of hundred.
With the exclusion, Jehovah’s Witnesses hope that the excluded will eventually realize what they have lost and “come to their senses,” that is, return to Jehovah, according to the denomination’s website. They therefore refer to it as “a loving arrangement.”
But for the 26-year-old, the scheme doesn’t feel that way:
“It’s brutal.
Believes they prevent free withdrawal
On Monday, a two-week long trial began in Oslo District Court, where precisely the exclusion practice of Jehovah’s Witnesses is central. Two years ago it became known that the State Administrator in Oslo and Viken is denying the religious community state subsidies for 2021, and since then also for the next two years. They were also stripped of their registration as a religious community.
The reason is the Jehovah’s Witnesses’ practice of exclusion. On two points, it is in conflict with the new Religious Communities Act which came into force in January 2021, the State Administrator believes:
It prevents free declaration of the religious community.
The practice involves a violation of children’s rights in the form of “negative social control”. The state administrator believes, among other things, that he can demonstrate that minors who have been baptized as Jehovah’s Witnesses can be excluded in the same way as adults.
The religious community, for its part, disagrees with the decision. They believe, among other things, that the decisions are based on factual errors and that they (the state) are in breach of basic human rights. For that reason, they have chosen to sue the state. In the ongoing court case, they demand to be repaid over NOK 50 million in state subsidies, with nominal interest.
Reviewed literature
When the State Administrator decided two years ago to scrutinize the religious community’s exclusion practice, it was, among other things, to investigate whether it could be an obstacle to opting out of Jehovah’s Witnesses.
According to Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), everyone has the right to freedom of religion, which also means freedom to change religion. Following feedback from former Jehovah’s Witnesses, as well as a review of the religious community’s own literature, the State Administrator believes that the practice precisely prevents free expression.
The consequence of leaving the congregation is that the person concerned is no longer allowed to have contact with family and friends in the congregation, as the State Trustee sees it. “This practice can result in the members feeling pressured to remain in the religious community,” says the decision in which Jehovah’s Witnesses were deprived of state subsidies for 2021.
This is, among other things, contrary to the Religious Communities Act section 2, but also the article in question in the ECHR, the County Governor believes.
For Kim Hein Pedersen, the scheme came to the rescue. Photo: Caroline Teinum Gilje
Defends the practice
In Jehovah’s Witnesses, the State Administrator’s decision has caused reactions. Shortly after the decision to deny grants in 2022 became known, the Ministry of Children and Families was flooded with 1,400 letters of support from members, Vårt Land wrote.
In the same newspaper, a member of Jehovah’s Witnesses has recently come out and defended the practice of exclusion.
Kim Hein Pedersen, who lives in Jørpeland in Rogaland, has himself experienced being excluded from Jehovah’s Witnesses. For him, the arrangement became what was needed to return to Jehovah.
“The thing that is most often overlooked is that most people who are excluded choose to come back themselves,” he writes in the post.
As a 27-year-old, he himself was excluded because he had been unfaithful to his then-spouse, and that without regret, according to the post.
The fact that members may be excluded on this basis does not form the basis for the County Governor’s decision. But with the post, Pedersen shows how he thinks the scheme can provide a necessary corrective.
First of all, he points out that becoming a Jehovah’s Witness is an “active choice.” Before choosing to be baptized, which he himself became at the age of 14, one undergoes “a thorough training.” In his case, this happened over several years, he says.
He therefore understood that he was excluded because of adultery.
“I had no problem accepting that I was excluded because I had chosen not to follow the Bible’s advice anymore, so it was obvious that it ended that way,” he writes.
During the time of exclusion, his family and friends chose how much contact they wanted to have with him, based on their own conscience, according to him. For example, he was in regular contact with his father by telephone and letter. He had no contact with the other friends in the congregation, he said.
For Pedersen, this was a decisive reason why he chose to return to the religious community:
“It was my choice to return, not because I wanted to reconnect with family and friends, but because I wanted to have a good relationship with my God, Father and friend, Jehovah,” the post states.
Pedersen does not want to comment beyond what he has written in the post.
Mental preparation
Rakel Fjelltvedt experiences the practice of exclusion differently. Today it is three years since she last saw relatives and childhood friends belonging to the faith community. After the congregation was informed that she was resigning as a Jehovah’s Witness, all normal contact ceased, she said. Since then, she has had to build a new life.
At home in her living room at Pollestad in Klepp municipality, there is little that reminds of the past in the religious community. She who never celebrated Christmas, today has two Christmas trees. One that sparkles with stylish balls in the living room, and one in the kitchenette. From the branches of the latter hung everything from a snowman to a roe deer, a gilded muffin and a bathing duck with a Santa hat. It belongs to Matheo, Fjelltvedt’s four-year-old son.
Right now, though, he’s mostly concerned about a police car built of Lego.
– “Bæ-boo, “bæ-boo”, bæ-boo”, he imitates the sirens.
He was only one year old when his mother withdrew from the religious community and has few memories of his extended family. Fjelltvedt, on the other hand, has many fond memories of his family and time with Jehovah’s Witnesses. Therefore, the day she realized that she could no longer profess herself as a Jehovah’s Witness marked the beginning of a grieving process.
Both mentally and practically, she had to prepare for the cessation of normal contact. Outside the religious community, she built up a new social network. She also set a specific date for when she would tell her parents and congregation about the decision she had made.
Until then, she said goodbye to them, one by one—inside.
“There’s something about doing things with your family and knowing this is the last time… I was at dinner with my grandmother and grandfather and knew this is the last time. “This dinner is the last with my grandmother and grandfather.” And “this is the last time I travel with my mom on a girls’ trip.” All those things became very violent for me, because it was a preparation for what was going to happen. But I’m glad I was able to do it this controlled way. I think it helped reduce the grief,” she says.
She emphasizes that she herself has been clear that her door is “always open” for her family.
Believe in a God who is more spacious
Fjelltvedt does not want to underestimate the experiences of those who experience exclusion as something positive. But in her case, she sees the cessation of normal contact as a means of pressure to get her back into the faith community.
Because she has not committed a “grave sin,” she has nothing to regret. She has also maintained faith in God, and she represents many of the same values as Jehovah’s Witnesses, she points out. Today, she attends a local Puls church, formerly known as Hillsong.
She was also clear that faith in God is intact when she sent a text message to the church three years ago that she wanted to resign.
“I wrote that I believe in a God who is more spacious than what I experience in Jehovah’s Witnesses, and I want the freedom to practice my religion as I believe is right,” says Fjelltvedt.
Were you free to withdraw from Jehovah’s Witnesses?
“There is no doubt that withdrawal is possible. However, I do not believe that I was free to opt out in the way that one should be according to the Religious Communities Act, given that withdrawal had such major consequences at a very basic level. I also believe that the threat inherent in a potential exclusion is likely to prevent members who wish to do so from resigning as a member or joining other, less conservative denominations. Ergo, members do not have full freedom of choice when it comes to their own religion and religious practice.
Will be respected
In their statements to the County Governor, Jehovah’s Witnesses have emphasized that they respect the right of members to change religions. They have argued that each individual must decide for himself or herself what he or she wishes to believe.
“Therefore, Jehovah’s Witnesses do not force their faith on others. Instead, we believe that people should be free to absorb knowledge so that they can make an informed choice,” one of their statements said. For this reason, they do not practice infant baptism, they have pointed out.
In the same statement, they maintain that a member who chooses to resign as a Jehovah’s Witness will be respected for his or her decision.
At the same time, they add that “each individual associated with the congregation can use his or her personal religious conscience and follow the Bible’s admonition to limit or completely avoid having contact with that person.” Similarly, excluded people are also treated, they write.
Believes withdrawal takes place without obstacles
In the ongoing court case, Jehovah’s Witnesses’ lawyer, Anders Ryssdal, has stated that the decisions on refusal of state subsidies and registration are invalid.
He denies that members are not free to opt out. Even if opting out has consequences, that does not mean that you are not free to opt out, he believes.
In addition, he believes the state’s decision violates several provisions in the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). By denying Jehovah’s Witnesses state subsidies and registration, the state has encroached on Jehovah’s Witnesses’ freedom of religion and assembly, as the lawyer sees it.
He also believes that the State Administrator and the Ministry of Children and Families have based their decisions on their own interpretation of the Jehovah’s Witnesses’ religious texts. They do not have the opportunity to do this either, he believes, and refers to the same article in the ECHR.
Government lawyer Liv Inger Gjone Gabrielsen, who represents the state, believes for her part that Jehovah’s Witnesses’ freedom of religion is safeguarded by the State Administrator’s decision to refuse grants and registration.
In her final post, she reminds that the state does not have a positive duty to provide religious or life-view communities with state subsidies or the right to marry. Although Jehovah’s Witnesses may not be registered as a religious community, they are still free to practice their religion, she writes.
Must testify for the state
On Friday, Rakel Fjelltvedt was among those on the state’s witness list. She herself does not believe that a possible victory for the state will lead to Jehovah’s Witnesses changing their exclusionary practice. However, she believes that the decision to deprive the religious community of state grants and registration sends an important signal:
By setting requirements for religious communities that apply for grants, the state says something about what we can accept and not in society, she says to Vårt Land.
Fjelltvedt says that she has no doubt that her parents love her, and that they both express it.
She herself has tried to understand her family’s choices. By father, she can follow the logic:
“As parents, you want to do everything for your kids. It also means securing eternal life for them through what is thought to be God’s true organization. Then one might think that they will endure exclusion in this life. But it’s a shame for the kids who can’t do it, and the adults who can’t stand it. My impression is that there are quite a few.
Although Jehovah’s Witnesses with the exclusion practice hope of returning members, this is not an option for Fjelltvedt.
“Becoming a mom myself was very powerful for me. Until then, it hadn’t quite dawned on me how much you’re actually being asked to give up when you’re asked to turn your back on your own child. For me, it became important that Matheo didn’t grow up knowing it could happen.
Vårt Land has not been able to get a comment from Fjelttvedt’s father. Her mother declined to read or comment.
Jehovah’s Witnesses respond
Jørgen Pedersen, spokesman for Jehovah’s Witnesses in Scandinavia, commented as follows:
“Since we do not have all the facts about what has or has not happened in the case of Rakel Fjelltvedt, we prefer not to comment on the experiences of individuals.
However, we respect her feelings and will not trivialize them. We respect her free decision to withdraw from our faith community. On the other hand, we believe that the point of view of her family and former acquaintances about limiting contact with her should also be respected.
It is important to remember that each individual Jehovah’s witness decides for himself, based on his or her personal religious conscience, whether he or she should limit or completely stop having contact with former members of the congregation, in light of the biblical injunction in 1 Corinthians 5 ,11-13 and 2 John 1,9-11. The religious community does not force members to do so.
Although some feel that following these biblical principles prevents them from expressing themselves freely, several high courts have consistently held that this is not the case. For example, on 19 December 2023, the Belgian Court of Cassation stated the following: ‘the case material does not show that the shunning policy as such affects the rights of believers or former believers protected by Article 9 ECHR, namely whether or not to leave the religious community’.”
Jehovah’s Witnesses
In 2022, the Ministry of Children and Families decided that Jehovah’s Witnesses are not entitled to state subsidies. Later, they also withdrew the Jehovah’s Witnesses’ registration as a religious community.
The state believes that Jehovah’s Witnesses have an exclusionary practice that prevents free expression. They also believe that the practice of exclusion violates children’s rights.
Both claims are disputed by Jehovah’s Witnesses.
From 8 to 19 January, the parties meet in the Oslo District Court. It is Jehovah’s Witnesses who have gone to court, to get back registration as a religious community and state subsidies.
Jehovah’s Witnesses are a religious denomination. They teach that the Bible was written by God (Jehovah), with the help of writers who were under God’s direction. Therefore, the Bible is understood as God’s infallible and reliable word and the only necessary guide in all matters of life.
Jehovah’s Witnesses were established in the United States in the 1870s, initially as a Bible study group. Eventually it developed into a religious community under the leadership of Charles Taze Russell (1852-1916).
According to their own statistics, in 2022, Jehovah’s Witnesses were active in 239 countries and had about 8.5 million members (active publishers) in 117,960 congregations. Children and others who are not active preachers come in addition.
Source: Great Norwegian Lexicon duck jw.org