The Governing Body presently comprises nine members. Why is this? Some decades ago it was up to about 18 members, I think.
How low can the number go? Are there any rules on this...is there some minimum number written into some constitutional document or something? Is there any rationale at all as to how many members are on the Governing Body at any given time?
Jack Barr is 96 and will surely cash in his chips any day now (I have no idea how mentally competent he still is). Ted Jaracz is 84 and must be very tired now and slowing up considerably, having already suffered a heart attack. He could also pop his clogs any day.
I believe the process for selecting replacements is simply a vote by the existing members of the GB. But do they also vote on whether or not to appoint a replacement? For example, if Barr and Jaracz died within a few days of each other, do you think they may choose not to replace either of them?
Is it possible that the oldest ones like Barr, Jaracz, Pierce and Herd have deliberately held the number down to maintain their power and maintain the status quo as long as possible? Do you think failing to replace numbers to the same levels as before could indicate that certain GB members have little confidence in those waiting in the wings, perhaps suspecting that there are senior Watchtower colleagues in the background hoping to become GB members who would like to see major reform?
yadda