The REAL reason for the elder and ms appointment change......

by EndofMysteries 31 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  leaving_quietly

  There's the law of agency, though, right? That is, if a representative of an organization does something, it's as if the organization itself does it. I'm not sure how this insulates WTBTS legally.

  Oh, wait. COs are part of some OTHER organization, if I recall... The Worldwide Religious Order of Jehovah's Witnesses, or something like that.
• 

  sparrowdown

  So if you desire to be appointed you just go directly to CO's butt and start kissing, you dont have a whole body of elders to "win over " anymore.

  Will this make easier or harder to be appointed? I havent figured that out yet.
• 

  joe134cd

  What ever their reasons they are up to no good.
• 

  JeffT

  As I said on another thread, I don't think this relieves the corporation of liability.
• 

  Oubliette

  JeffT: As I said on another thread, I don't think this relieves the corporation of liability.

  In the past, the Branch approved all appointments. Now they have plausible deniability. They will have no direct involvement, therefore no liability.

  The actions of the Holy Spirit seem suspiciously like those of a cagey lawyer.

  I wonder what BOTR has to say about this move ...
• 

  joe134cd

  That article just about sums it up Oubliette. plausible liability.
• 

  SadElder

  I still believe that Crooklyn will somehow be involved. Perhaps the CO will send something to them as he does now. They will correspond with him and then he notifies the congo of the appointment. Being the contol junkies they are I can't see them giveing up control completely.
• 

  Listener

  Thanks for the link Obbiette, it states that these are the flaws of establishing plausible liability

  Flaws [ edit ]

  The doctrine has six major flaws:

  • It was an open door to the abuse of authority; it required that the parties in question could be said to have acted independently, which in the end was tantamount to giving them license to act independently. [ 15 ]
  • It rarely worked when invoked; the denials made were rarely plausible and were generally seen through by both the media and the populace. [ 16 ] One aspect of the Watergate crisis is the repeated failure of the doctrine of plausible deniability, which the administration repeatedly attempted to use to stop the scandal affecting President Richard Nixon and his aides.
  • "Plausible denial" only increases the risk of misunderstanding between senior officials and their employees. [ 17 ]
  • It only shifts blame, and generally, constructs rather little.
  • If the claim fails, it seriously discredits the political figure invoking it as a defense.
  • If it succeeds, it creates the impression that the government is not in control of the state.
• 

  stillin

  If the GB never appoints any elders, they will never make a mistake. It wouldn't be proper for God's representative on Earth to make so many mistakes. Circuit Overseers come and go. If they make a mistake, the r&f can understand how that might happen but the credibility of the GB is still intact.

  besides, the GB is too busy taking the lead in Field Service to sit down and talk about people who they have never met.
• 

  konceptual99

  That article just about sums it up Oubliette. plausible liability.

  If you meant plausible deniability then I am not so sure. I can see the reasoning behind such a conclusion however the CO will have to perform the checks that the branch were originally doing. To do so he will have to access information held at the branch. The branch maintains the records on each appointed man. I don't see that this pushes the corporate liability completely away.

  I think this change is not much more than them streamlining the process and reducing man power requirement. The far more interesting things to me is (a) if this will make it easier for the CO to impose his will beyond what is currently possible and (b) if the Nov WT will promote a scriptural reason for this that actually makes it easier to ask questions as to why they have done the wrong thing for so long.