The Watchtower’s Unholy Trinity

by Dogpatch 7 Replies latest jw friends

  • Dogpatch
    Dogpatch

    The Watchtower’s Unholy Trinity

    Most Jehovah’s Witnesses believe that when the Society appears to clearly designate a new doctrinal position on some issue, like blood transfusions, it is what they really follow and believe. Such naivete’ is typical of those who have never worked in a large corporation.

    That Watchtower is indeed a corporation, an ENTITY in and of itself, with its own personality, modeled after the past and current leadership. All such entities seek to protect themselves at all costs, and most of the employees know they are expendable for the “greater good” of the organization. Its profits and goals are the most important issues to maintain, again, at all costs. Unscrupulous and/or plainly illegal techniques are used to keep the true policies and financial records from the public in most organizations. The larger they are, the more attorneys they will employ in order to protect the entity from harm or absolute extinction.

    The Mouth That Speaks to the Public

    This is no different when it comes to religious organizations. A single church or branch may be honest, but the larger corporate identity will always have rats in the closet. They might even have subversive policies to prevent damage to their reputation through the sacrifice of individuals that might tend to have a big mouth. The addition of a Public Relations Department that has exclusive rights to tell the “truth” about itself is a sure sign that they have things to hide, and must control -- perhaps not so much the actual doctrine or policy itself, but control bad publicity. The PR man’s job is to present favorable information in an exaggerated or devious way, in an attempt to distract people from important questions that need to be answered. Each time an answer is to be given to an outsider or even a lesser-ranked member of the organization, it is carefully tailored to what audience is being addressed. Case in point is the teachings of the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society. During the latest court cases and bad publicity about the Watchtower regarding the concealing of child abuse, J.R. Brown was the P.R. man chosen to assure the public that the Watchtower has exceptional policies and exceptional elders, and that opposers are just trying to make them look bad.

    The Mouth That Speaks to the Elders

    The local elders in the congregation are given special instructions at elder’s meetings every few months, where a representative of the New York corporation makes known it’s new policies and procedures, especially in matters of handling judicial committees, apostates, fornicators, and in general anyone or anything that causes trouble in the organization. Since the organization is deeply rooted in legalism and punishment and perpetual shame rather than the grace of Christ (as they are supposed to), the elders will follow what they learn from the “Shepherding the Flock of God” elder’s book, the special meeting instructions, and advice given over the phone by the Service Dept. Example: For decades the Watch Tower Society instructs the rank-and-file to go to the elders first when they see a serious problem. In the case of serious crimes such as pedophilia and physical beatings, etc., they have always told the elders and publishers to CALL THE SOCIETY BEFORE THE POLICE. Why? To keep it a secret from the outside world. That way they can save face from public scrutiny and maintain the image of “God’s Organization.”

    The Mouth That Speaks Only in Situations to Others One-on-One

    Over the eight years of time I spent as a member of the Watchtower organization, serving at its higher levels, and especially when I was appointed one of the special 300 “inner circle” of Bethel elders at the time, I was able to attend secret meetings with the Governing Body periodically, and these were occasions when the powers-that-be spoke openly and let down their hair, revealing the true emotions and the primal drive behind each leader. It was extremely enlightening to learn the character of each of these men, and how their individual styles contributed to the “personality” of the greater entity, the Mother Organization. This “godhead” of the Watchtower is hosted by their very own enforcement police team, the Service Department. They are the keepers of the inner policies that the Watch Tower will not put into print for fear of legal reprisals or losing legal recognition as a religion in other parts of the world.

    Though never having served in the Service Dept. (Bethel hell), I gained quite a bit of insight into what I call the “third mouth” of Watchtowerspeak. I lived on the 10 th floor of the 107 building facing Manhattan Brooklyn and Manhattan Bridges. My room was adjacent to that of Harley Miller and his wife Brook (who rarely left her room except in a bathrobe). At that time (mid-80s) Harley was in charge of the Service Dept. I guess the Bethel office was too cheap to put a phone in his room (a serious misjudgment) so he had to step outside of his room door to answer the hall phone, which was a few feet away from my door.

    Trouble is, hallways carry noise quite well, so I often got to listen at length to Harley’s conversations with Circuit and District overseers and elders who had difficult decisions to make with difficult problems such as child molesters or crooks or “apostates” or whatever was the flavor of the day. I don’t actually remember much citing of any Bible verses in Harley’s answers. It was either his own learned “wisdom” in protecting the reputation of the organization at all costs, or was most-often created on the fly, using common sense and appropriate problem-squashing techniques. Cronyism was quite common, and advice often differed according to who liked Harley Miller or knew him personally. It was rather noticeable, as sometimes very different answers were given for the same problems that you see in the “second level” of Watchtower secrecy, their Elders Handbook, “Shepherding the Flock of God.”

    But the elder’s book was intentionally printed with wide margins on both sides of the page, and elders were instructed to put “second level” secrets (those secrets too legally problematic to be put in print where outsiders might get ahold it it). These books were NOT to be kept once they ceased to be elders, as they very much desired no one else to get their hands on them. But if they did, the writing of the ELDERS who owned the book could be disputed, and the Society had only printed things in it that were vague enough to be interpreted many ways (which it is!) I know a lot of people would like to read the “secret” elder’s book and they have, only to be bored out of their mind because it rarely says anything they don’t already know if they are in tune with the organization.

    The darker side of the “third level” mouth of this unholy Trinity of mouths is the hiding of criminals and pedophiles. Often the legal department has to get involved in these. They involve such matters as what to do when a JW secretly donates all of their possessions to the Watch Tower at their death, excluding the family, and how to harass the victim and the courts into getting their due money, often rudely brushing off the bereaved family, making them fend for themselves. (A déjà vu of when Knorr one time refused to pay a one-way ticket for a sick missionary to come home, and she jumped ship in despair on the way back home.) They have also been famous at paying the court costs of child custody cases, so that the children remain with the JW parent. This was VERY effective, as few people can afford custody attorneys on their own, so the WT would often win by threatening the other party with bankruptcy. They even wrote a secret book on how to “educate” the child as to what to say in court, called Preparing for Child Custody Cases. It has no author or date listed inside, and is very difficult to get a copy of it.

    Other issues, more common, were domestic violence and child abuse, troublemakers among the elders, and all matter of problems of everyday life. To my knowledge NONE of these gems of unholy advice were put into print, but were left in the hands of a “few accomplished men” who were slick enough to talk their way into benefitting “Jehovah’s Organization.”

    The Service Dept. mantle was eventually passed on to Ted Jaracz, a Governing Body member appointed by then-president Nathan Knorr, close to his death. Jaracz was to be the new head of the Service Dept., knowing it would rankle the REST of the newly appointed Governing Body in the late 70s. President Knorr and Vice-President Frederick W. Franz greatly opposed a Governing Body, preferring an autocratic ruling president, such as Rutherford and Knorr had been. The splitting of power leads to an organization’s weakest leader becoming the weakest link in the chain, and this hurts the overall power and control over the organization. Rutherford and Knorr were keen businessmen, and they knew how to DEVELOP ON THE SPOT new policies and assign some scripture taken completely out of context to support it.

    Thus began, in around 1977-1978, the darkest years in Watch Tower history thus far, where any vestige of the Bible’s teachings on “grace” were replaced with the Pharisaical hard hand, demanding full obedience to the organization.

    The Watchtower is once again afraid of takeover from within by some charismatic elder or elders who dare to openly disagree with WT policy. They are deathly afraid of an inevitable schism. Well, my Watchtower friends, that schism is not only coming but has existed in infant stages for years, starting in Africa and now leading out to Brazil and other countries who suddenly have access to information negative towards the Watchtower. These articles and news items and court cases can be instantly translated right in their own Internet browser. As I write, many Witnesses in Brazil are picketing the Watchtower for its shunning practices.

    Other countries are re-assessing the lies told to Bulgaria (in their efforts to become recognized as a legitimate religion), where the WT PR machine plainly said, “We do not disfellowship our members for taking blood transfusions.” But in secret Bethel meetings, the third-level guardians of the inner secrets instruct the elders that when someone breaks one of the Society’s laws or openly disagree with any doctrine, they are “disassociating themselves.”

    Really? Did they ask for that? Did they sign anything or present a letter to the elders seeking to be disfellowshipped? That RARELY happens. No, the Society just has a clever way of getting rid of potential troublemakers – speaking out of two or even three mouths – one to the public, one to the local elders, and the third usually to the Circuit Overseer or a trusted mole in the congregations. So it is made to appear the “disobedient” Witness kicked himself out! They wanted to make sure no other Witness would ever speak to them again. By the use of Watchtowerspeak, they have attempted once again to cover their asses.

    Yet almost NO ONE really knew the primal reasons for the outcome. Of course, it was always to preserve the interests of the Mother Organization, the unholy godhead.

    There may be more heads on this icon. But for now, I clearly see a head with three lying mouths speaking different things to different people.

    Blood Transfusions as a Prime Example

    Blood transfusions are a perfect example. When was the last time you ever heard of a Witness being disfellowshipped for taking a blood transfusion (without other reasons being involved)? IT ISN’T HAPPENING. Zen Dean made several call to the Service Dept. about whether taking a blood transfusion is a disfellowshipping offence, and they plainly said, “No.” He then asked if they are necessarily considered disassociated, and the answer was that “taking a blood transfusion is not a disassociating offense.”

    Yet the articles in the PRIVATE Watchtower edition, not offered to the public but studied in the congregations, as well on parts of this summer’s assembly coming up, are still scaring the rank-and-file over getting blood transfusions! They are coming just short of saying they will get disfellowshipped. This is clearly “NEW LIGHT”, and may have begun to take shape about 10-11 years ago, when a R. Jensen (elder) started sending a series of letters to the Society regarding blood transfusions. From around that point forward, the innermost “third level” of the Service Dept. began to change their spoken advice to leaders – apparently to avoid the publicity of disfellowshipping over being denied a life-saving procedure.

    Soon Zen Dean will reveal how elders who are members of the Hospital Liaison Committees get their training, and how extensive that training is. He will share how conversations with one member who is on an HLC Committee shared with him how he knew just delaying a letter of approval by the WT or a phone call for just a few minutes will make a martyr out of the poor victim as they lay dying on the operating table, whereas a quick note to the frantic doctor may save the life of the JW. The elder had the power of life and death in his hands.

    Today over 7 million Witnesses must live in fear of being shunned for taking a blood transfusion to save their lives. They are threatened with shunning. But interestingly enough, they are not being disfellowshipped or considered “disassociated.” It is usually swept under the rug because it prevents further bad publicity to the great Unholy Trinity.

    Randy Watters

    The AJWRB site index is at:

    http://www.ajwrb.org/sitemap.htm

    Two links I am going to put at the bottom:

    Things I LearnedFrom Calling the Watchtower Society

    the R. Jensen letters:

    http://www.ajwrb.org/currentwtpolicy/watchtower/index.html

    What Happened at Watchtower in 2001?

    http://marvinshilmer.blogspot.com/2011/02/what-happened-at-watchtower-in-2001.html

    Randall Watters

  • stuckinamovement
    stuckinamovement

    Randy, I read Zen's account about the phone call to the service dept and am confused. (probably not enough blood in my brain)

    Am I correct in understanding that the society will no longer disfellowship a person for taking blood, or declare that a person has automatically disassociated themselves for taking blood? It is now a don't ask, don't tell policy? If this is true, how much liability will they have for changing the stance but not informing the congregations/ publishers? There are many people who will continue to refuse blood for fear of being dfed that will die unneccesarily.

    How could they be that stupid to quietly change it without informing the congregations? Something doesn't add up. (or maybe they are that stupid)

    SIAM

  • Dogpatch
    Dogpatch

    Hi Siam,

    I will post a response to this after talking to Zen, as I was not there listening to the phone call. He called me right after making SEVERAL calls. He can explain it better. But here's a cursory answer:

    Am I correct in understanding that the society will no longer disfellowship a person for taking blood, or declare that a person has automatically disassociated themselves for taking blood?

    That is the clear message that Zen was trying to elicit.

    It is now a don't ask, don't tell policy? If this is true, how much liability will they have for changing the stance but not informing the congregations/ publishers? There are many people who will continue to refuse blood for fear of being dfed that will die unneccesarily.

    No more liability than they faced when they changed their stance on Hemophiliacs taking the Rh factor. You would never know unless you were dying and called the Service Dept. They will definitely not put such things in print until enough time has passed to make it a moot point. They also will not put it in the elder's book. That's the "third mouth." It was used extensively in covering over the handling of pedophiles for years. Many more examples, perhaps Barb or others have good examples for this post.

    How could they be that stupid to quietly change it without informing the congregations? Something doesn't add up. (or maybe they are that stupid)

    No, they are being quite clever, just like the corrupt politicians they are. Legal issues have a lot to do with it. Blame it on the elders, not the Society, who "never printed that."

    Randy

  • Londo111
    Londo111

    I have heard some things about the Brazil courtcase...but what is happening in Africa? Please forgive my ignorance.

  • wha happened?
    wha happened?

    Based on my own experiance, I learned that I followed a coporation, not a religion. An I don't even have any stock options for my efforts

  • Dogpatch
    Dogpatch

    LOL to wha happened! :-))

    There have been many sects of the JWs in Africa for years - the WT just ignores them but would never tell you. All 3 mouthes of the unholy Trinity clamp shut.

    Randy

  • Shawn10538
    Shawn10538

    Hi,

    What the service dept. said to me was, verbatim, "Taking a blood transfusion is not a disfellowshipping OFFENSE." The context of the conversation was essentially discussing, "How bad of a sin is taking a blood transfusion.'

    What i'd like to see, however, on the part of JWNers, is that they do not believe me. They shouldn't just take someone's word for it on issues like this. so I beg you to call Bethel yourself, and ask them directly, "is taking a blood transfusion a disfellowshipping offense? Yes or no." Then if they say no, as I am sure they will, ask them then how it could be a disassociating offense since disassociation carries with it exactly the same consequences. If you call, and I would like to hear about thousands of people calling, tell us what they said. I'll have to figure out some way of documenting this response it looks like. So I'll work on that.

    In the meantime, I still maintain that noone should fear disassociation for taking blood. if you are a JW don't even think about it if you are in a medical emergency. Do what you have to do to live.

    If the society were really serious about disassociating its members for this life saving medical treatment, then they will come after you. They will hunt you down. After all, don't they want you to die over this? But they won't come after you because they aren't really serious about disassociating anybody over this. if you have a big mouth about it they'll nail you for that you can bet. But just the act of taking blood on its own is not going to get you in trouble according to history.

    It's like a gobernment saying, XYZ is against the law and will get you the death penalty if convicted. But then they never arrst or cite or fine anybody for committing XYZ. people would demand answers. Is it worthy of the death penalty really? if so then why aren't we putting people to death over it? Why are we not even arresting people for it? But if it's not really worthy of the death penalty, as your actions suggest, then why are you saying it is? what would be the benefit of saying such a thing?

  • Londo111
    Londo111

    bttt

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit