One of the most astonishing "facts" about Russell is that, the Witnesses aside, there are still groups and individuals who fervently believe Russell was chosen by God to be the "modern-day" mouthpiece for Scriptural truth.
Barbara Anderson- Your new book on Russell
by IW 57 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
Forscher
I wouldn't consider it scandalous that Maria Russell helped with his books though I am sure many among the Bible Students and ex-JWs might. Has anybody ever heard of the great author of western novels Zane Grey? All but one of his novels were polished up by his wife (girlfriend before they married). She had a college education and did a very good job of correcting his English. The one novel released without her editing (100,000 On the Hoof) didn't sell very well.
I wouldn't be all that suprised or offended to find out that Russell needed his wife to polish his grammar a bit. Niether he nor Zane Grey are the only ones who needed somebody in that regard.
Forscher -
greendawn
He was boasting that he was living in a virginal unconsummated marriage in order to more fully serve the Lord, so if he was womanising that makes him a big hypocrite.
He wanted to divorce Maria so as to marry Rose in the 1890's. Would he have had an unconsummated marriage with her too? -
IW
Forscher,
I don't find it surprising that women help their husbands but what riles is the deception in the Watchtower that the sisters are not to take the lead and not to teach because God has given that job to the men. Yet, behind the scenes it is perfectly alright for the wives of some JW elders to write, and I mean actually write (not just proofread) their talks. How many sisters among the 6 million JWs know that a fellow sister, Barbara Anderson, was a reseacher and writer for the Watchtower organization?
Either the brothers do the job themselves or they give credit where credit is due. I think the Golden Rule is in there somewhere.
IW
-
Forscher
I don't find it surprising that women help their husbands but what riles is the deception in the Watchtower that the sisters are not to take the lead and not to teach because God has given that job to the men. Yet, behind the scenes it is perfectly alright for the wives of some JW elders to write, and I mean actually write (not just proofread) their talks. How many sisters among the 6 million JWs know that a fellow sister, Barbara Anderson, was a reseacher and writer for the Watchtower organization?
You won't have much of an argument out of me. I said I wasn't suprised or scandalised by Maria Russell being involved in the writing of her husband's books in some capacity. I cited another couple which were almost contemperaneous as an exmaple. Mrs. Grey didn't get the credit, but she was perfectly happy spending the money they made. Before one gets too judgemental on some things one must remember the times in which they occured. For Maria to get no credit for her work was perfectly acceptable in their time. It hasn't been all that long since things have changed. Remember the artist who let her husband sign her works in the 50's an 60's because she knew she couldn't get anywhere near the fame or fortune for her works otherwise.
If Maria Russell was not properly supported monetarily as alledge by some, that would be scandalous. As for the wives of Elders writing their husband's talks for them and not getting credit, while dishonest, they make that choice. As for them learning about Babara Anderson's many accomplishments, I certainly hope they do. But it isn't going to happen if the WTBTS has anything to say about it.
Forscher -
stev
Apparently Maria had written articles that appeared in the WT as Associate Editor without her name crediting her as being the author. She complained about the changes that Charles made to her articles. She wanted her name to appear without change, so she was made a Correspondent. Perhaps this can found in the WT and printed here.
This would lend some support to the claim that she could have written at least a portion of the volumes without her name appearing. Charles did acknowledge her assistance in the preface to the early editions.
Maria also played a large role in the Hymns of Dawn and the Poem Book. She wrote some of the hymns and some of the poems.
Although she was Secy/Treasurer of the Society, she claimed that she never got to see the books, and that there were very few board meetings. I read this somewhere on the forum here.
However, it should recognized that Charles did recognize her ability and gave her more important work than most of the brothers. In fact., her prominence as a sister is rather exceptional given that only brothers could be elders/pilgrims. At least some of their marital problems can be seen as a power struggle over the direction of the Society, which was made possible by Charles's cooperation in her prominence.
Charles also had planned that on his death that she, his wife, would manage the Society, which plan he later changed. We can speculate on how events might turned out if Maria had been President of the Society. I think she would have done better than Rutherford. This could have been comparable to Ellen White and SDA. The sisters might have had more influence.
The Bible Students claim that Charles produced the equivalent of 39,000 pages, an average of 4 pages a day. This probably does not include private correspondence. Although an individual might on his own write this much in a lifetime, I wonder whether he actually did this himself. In the early years of WT the names of the authors of the articles were printed, but gradually this practice dwindled down. So we don't know how much Maria actually wrote, or for that matter, the other writers on the writing staff. No doubt Maria's course only confirmed to Charles that the authors' names not be given. However, this led to himself being given more prominence as a result.
-
Leolaia
BTW, what in heck ever happened to Maria after the divorce and after publishing The Twain One? All I know is that she ended up in Florida where she later died. Was she involved in the Bible Student movement after Russell's death or did she leave it entirely? Maybe you or RR might know...I've kinda wondered this a bit....
-
VM44
The Twain One, (c) 1906 by Maria Frances Russell.
-
AndersonsInfo
I located a number of Russell relatives and discussed Maria Russell with them. These people were in no way connected with any of the Bible Student groups or Jehovah's Witnesses. All are in the winter of their lives now, but recalled statements made by older relatives about the part Maria Russell played in the authoring of the first four volumes of Millennial Dawn, later called Studies of the Scriptures. Some of my contacts said they were told that Maria was sole author; others said she was coauthor.
I am most impressed with Stev's overview of the Russell relationship and agree with most of his statements. Inasmuch as I'm writing a book that will present facts heretofore unknown, I will save new discoveries for the book which should help clarify much of the Russell relationship.
In the matter of Russell acknowledging assistance by his wife in the writing of the first Millennial Dawn volume, this is what he states in the Preface of one of the 1886 editions (135,000 printed of the one I have access to) of “The Divine Plan of the Ages,” on unnumbered page 5, 3rd paragraph, 4th sentence, "If these truths shall give the reader one-fourth the pleasure they have afforded the author (and his help-meet—to whom you are indebted for valuable assistance rendered in this connection), yours will be a joy which the world can neither give—neither take away."
In a 1898 edition of Volume 1, (660,000 copies printed), which was one year after Maria left Charles, the Preface appeared to be reproduced exactly the same as it appeared in the 1886 edition when 135,000 copies were printed. But it wasn't the same because the words within the parenthesis as quoted above, "(and his help-meet—to whom you are indebted for valuable assistance rendered in this connection)" were omitted. The 1898 edition reads thusly, "If these truths shall give the reader one-fourth the pleasure they have afforded the author, yours will be a joy which the world can neither give—neither take
away."
Interestingly, at the end of the Preface in the 1898 edition, are the closing words, "Yours in fellowship and service," and beneath that the name, CHARLES T. RUSSELL, is printed. Further down the page, on the left, can be found, "Allegheny, Pa., U.S.A." and underneath these words is a date, "November 1886." One would assume from this that the Preface in the 1898 Volume was an exact duplicate of what was penned by him in November 1886. However, as I've shown above, this certainly wasn't true. Consequently, this is just another example I have found in my research of the sly or cunning ways Russell misled through omission and half-truth.
It appears from my research that Maria was not unhappy with Charles for only crediting her with giving him valuable assistance as a help-meet. It was Watchtower writers who charged that Mrs. Russell was unhappy with this role as help-meet and "parted from him [C.T. Russell] because of her own desire for personal prominence" (Proclaimers, p. 143, Footnote). Where is the proof for that statement? This story was spread by C. T. Russell as an explanation of why his wife divorced him. He said in the July 15, 1906 Zion's Watch Tower, "...that the motive back of this suit is revenge; ...as a retaliation for my refusal to permit her all the liberties she desired in the columns of Zion's Watch Tower."
Upon careful analysis, I found that Karl Adams brief account of the Russell problems on page 645 of Proclaimers was a synopsis of C.T. Russell's July 15, 1906 Zion's Watch Tower article. I suppose Karl had no reason to think that Charles would lie about why his wife separated from him in 1897 and then divorced him in 1906, and I didn't either. However, in that 1906 article, there was a statement that didn't seem to me to be accurate, so I did further research and found that Charles did indeed lie. And that, my friends, is the reason I began to further explore other statements he made with further damning results.
Readers of Watch Tower literature knew Mrs. Russell was also author of the books and articles published by Zion’s Watch Tower. Here are quotes from some letters that appeared in the 1890s in Zion’s Watch Towers that indicate that Mrs. Russell was known to be her husband’s sidekick when it came to writing of the literature. I have more material to prove my point that I’m saving for my book, but for now, I thought these would suffice. In 1892, a letter appeared in the April 15th Zion's Watch Tower from H. Vandyne. The letter was addressed: DEAR SISTER AND BROTHER: -- I have read with great interest and delight your three volumes of MILLENNIAL DAWN, and think that your interpretations of prophecies are excellent." On the same page there was another letter, this one addressed, "DEAR BROTHER:" It was from Hiram P. Ganoung, who said, "But we have appreciated, and do appreciate, how much we can not tell, the gratitude we owe to God and to you and Sister Russell, that through you we have been able to learn what the "Gospel of the kingdom" really is." June 15, 1895 Watch Tower: DEAR BROTHER AND SISTER RUSSELL: Although we are strangers to you, you are not strangers to us; and as a slight evidence of our appreciation of the blessings your books have brought us, we venture to trespass upon your precious time long enough to tell you something which may prove of interest.” This letter was from Clayton Woodworth and his wife. And it was this Clayton Woodworth who encouraged Russell to defend himself against Mrs. Russell in, and I quote him as saying, “…a connected statement of the whole history of her defection” and to publish “that she has admitted that her only real grievance against you is that you would not permit her to run the Watch Tower” which resulted in the July 15, 1906 deceitful Watch Tower article that Russell wrote. This is the same Clayton Woodworth who was the crackpot editor of the “Golden Age” magazine.
The Russell problems began in 1894 and not because of Mrs. Russell’s desire have a more prominent role in the religion or to usurp her husband's position as editor, although it might seem that way because of events in their lives which, when related, were taken out of context and used against her. As late as 1897, letters were still appearing in the Watch Tower addressed to BROTHER AND SISTER RUSSELL in recognition of her place next to her husband. Did she want higher status? The facts prove not, but I will not go into details here. What might help us to understand Mrs. Russell is to read her own thoughts which explain her viewpoint about a wife’s position as published in the November 1, 1892 Zion's Watch Tower.
"While the Scriptures represent the husband as the head of the wife, and counsel a deferential attitude on her part toward him, the instruction to the husband is such that, if it is carried out, such an attitude on the part of the wife is the most natural and agreeable thing. A true woman, however marked her intellectual and spiritual attainments, is naturally worshipful. She looks up to God and Christ with supreme reverence, and to the earthly image of God--if such her husband be--(See Eph. 5:33) with something akin to the same feeling; especially when she considers that such a one, so worthy of esteem and reverence and love, has indicated his preference for her above all others of womenkind to be his life-companion and an heir together with himself of the grace of life. If he is truly noble and good and pure and of sound judgment, and yet modest in asserting his prerogatives, as well as humbly mindful that he is short of perfection, and therefore reasonable and considerate when judgments differ, it is so natural for a true wife to defer to such a one that she is rather in danger of exercising her own thought and judgment too little, and needs to guard against such lethargy.--1 Pet. 3:7
"Such husbands are those who love their wives as their own bodies, and "as Christ also loved the church and gave himself for it" (Eph. 5:25-29); and who, forsaking all others, cleave only unto her as the beloved and cherished companion. And no woman, however cultured or refined or possessed of true dignity and worth of character, is in the least degree humiliated by her deferential attitude toward such a husband. Her love and respect will dictate such an attitude, while his love and true nobility will call it forth.
"The law of love, whose foundation is justice, is the only law that ought to rule in the home; and that law should be written in the heart of each member of it. If it is not written there, the walls of the home may be covered with rules and regulations, it may be thundered forth from angry voices, and emphasized with frowns and hard sayings, and yet, notwithstanding all this, anarchy will reign supreme—there will be no home."
At Bethel, I never gave a negative thought to the fact that the Governing Body took credit for all creative endeavors, innovations, and ideas that originated with others, both men and woman, because I believed that whatever work we did it was for God's glory. And Maria believed likewise about her husband, who she thought was God's spokesperson, that is, until she woke up to the fact that he was not what she thought he was. In fact, as found in the divorce transcript, C. T. Russell said his wife would not even walk next to him on the sidewalk because she lost all respect and confidence in him. Just what did he do to her to cause her to lose all love and respect which contributed to making their home full of “angry voices, …with frowns and hard sayings” until there was no “home” anymore? I’ll answer that question in the future.
Barbara -
IW
Hi Barbara,
In fact, as found in the divorce transcript, C. T. Russell said his wife would not even walk next to him on the sidewalk because she lost all respect and confidence in him. Just what did he do to her to cause her to lose all love and respect which contributed to making their home full of “angry voices, …with frowns and hard sayings” until there was no “home” anymore? I’ll answer that question in the future.
BarbaraSadly it's Maria who is villified today both in the Watchtower and among some Bible Students.
Thank you so much Barbara. I appreciated your contribution to the thread, very interesting material you've gathered and I look forward to reading your book!
Warm regards to you also,
IW