[AGuest: please consider the following. You can play to their pseudo-spiritual side, but I'll stick to their pharisaical legalistic angle. It is very interesting that you used the word RATIFY. For that very word, I cannot and will not go.
BTW, I've been down your path. I wrote this for a general comment, but have included some items directed to you.]
I actually had a fleeting thought about going, but rapidly regained sanity and decided against it.
I have a deep seated reason for not going: I will not compromise my exit.
What does this mean?
I left in 1974; yes, that is right, BEFORE 1975. I rolled the dice and said that it was #$%^&* balderdash 32 years ago. And I left on the eve of the GREAT PROPHECY, at that.
But in doing so, I also left BEFORE the Baptismal Vows were changed in the early 80's. Therefore, I did not RATIFY the changes.
RATIFY? We have been over that before, discussing Pre-Majority Baptism (as contrasted with Infant Baptism). Ratification is a legal doctrine: it is the endorsement of a change to an old stated matter or the acceptance of a new matter when presented. [AGuest is using this principle in her dissertation.]
It is a dirty trick of the legalistic mind that ratification can occur inadvertently when one is NOT FULLY INFORMED. In this instance, SILENCE IS ASSENT.
[Credit Card companies do this when they inform you of a rate change in fine print: few people read it all and bother to try to understand it; yet when they use the card again, after the stated date, the new rate goes into effect.]
I was baptized (under Age of Majority) under the old Baptismal Vows: as my brother once stated, they are essentially a non-denominational, generic CHRISTIAN set of Vows.
Those older vows do not PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO BROOKLYN, a publishing company or any specific earthly organization , especially a church of organized religion.
And that is the way I intend to keep it. If I set foot in a KH, it would violate that record of staying clean from the newly contaminated and enforced self-realization from Brooklyn: that they had screwed up and didn't close the loophole (likely from CTR's day) that dedicated JW's to a generic religion.
(I briefly considered that it wasn't in a KH, but a publicly rented hall; that still doesn't change things and is only a trap.)
Yes, in the 1980's that closed that loophole. I will not assist them and finally close it from my end. To set foot in their domain would do so for me.
And I don't need to go up to the temple of false prophets to affirm anything.
This reminds me of the "alternate arrangements" set up by the king of the northern kingdom of Israel to keep the 10 tribes from consorting with the 2 tribe kingdom of Israel in worship.
Don't contaminate yourself. But if you went to meetings or otherwise participated after the early 80's this doesn't apply to you; so you may "do as is good in your own eyes".
BTW, there is nothing of worth offered at that place.
Mustang (of the "maintaining his integrity" Class)