by WingCommander 20 Replies latest jw friends
When I did some extended temp work in the early 80's I got some flack from a few over my Rolex Oyster Perpetual Datejust and my rings. Too bad for them. If they knew what it is they would really squawk over my white gold Rolex Daytona that I also have now. Unless you know you wouldn't know it's an expensive watch.
Remember Mr. Coffee going off on some people, "another new suit this one has, $14 dollars a month, suckers, robots"?
Wonder if Jodi still has real estate holdings?
WING COMMANDER:
You saw the hypocrisy up close and personal. You saw certain people be ‘rewarded’ for their wrongdoing (not that it’s wrong to get that education) - but others were ‘punished’, ie. ostracized and not invited.. It all depended on who you were related to.
Yeah, the whole religion is corrupted from top to bottom and too bad the world doesn’t know.. You sound as if you were born in or raised in.. I came in as a young adult with a job I wouldn’t quit to appease these SOBs who hate women. (They didn’t tell some brother to quit his job to clean toilets! Nah they just targeted women for this garbage. But I wasn’t buying it.)
The reason that we are all angry, in my opinion, is that there will never be justice for all the past atrocities and/or unequal and unfair treatment many JWs and ex-JWs suffered.. In my case, I never listened and just did my own thing. Thank God.
I can only claim ‘hurt feelings’ over shunning years ago.. Big deal.. It is worth every penny now to have been excluded from JW gatherings back then.. I’m sure many broke pioneers today might wish they had that full-time job years ago and said shove it to those worthless special gatherings!
All in all, we are Glad we aren’t in the religion now.. I can guarantee you that somebody would come up to us with an envelope asking for $$ for people there who never really worked.👎 In my case, the answer would be No.
I don’t have a problem with the churches (or anyone really) not being taxed, but since we all do pay taxes, I do think these kinds of ‘benefits’ should be accrued towards their personal income and they or the org should pay employee taxes on it.
The IRS has been very keen on prosecuting individual pastors the Biden and Obama admin didn’t like and making sure any private use of church property, even accidental was treated as tax evasion, yet these assholes live fully on the dime of their ‘flock’ and NYS and the Feds both don’t seem to care at all.
Note that pastors CAN have both income and benefits that are “reasonable” for their position. Income however should be taxed and benefits cannot be “personal”, my mother living in the house and paying a fraction of the mortgage is considered taxable income for me, if I got a Rolex from her, I would have to report it as income, yet the GB lives like kings in private hotels and don’t pay a dime in taxes, get Rolexes and don’t consider it paying ‘income’ (the state publishes the annual tax records of all non-profits).
I am not here to defend the GB… but how can you tell from a video whether a watch is a $20,000 Rolex or a $200 copy ?
Giving tax breaks to religious groups is one thing, but when you see these TV pastors buying mansions and personal aircraft worth millions of dollars, it's clear they are taking advantage of the system. The WTS sold billions of dollars worth of real estate. Are they free from taxes for those transactions, or are capital gains exempt?
I think I'd like to clarify a few things:
1. I don't have a problem with the GB or anyone else dressing nice, having nice watches, jewelry, etc or anyone else for that matter. I don't expect these guys to be wearing suits from JC Penny. Not at all. Anyone in a higher position of authority or even Pastoral, can certainly dress a little better to represent their cause, position, stature. It's to be expected. They do run things more as a "business", even more so than a religion.
2. Having said that, I've been asked several times over the years whether these are "Real" Rolexes. Now I'll admit, that clones are REALLY good today. But I ask you, do you really think wealthy individuals, self-made individuals like Hendricks and Jody Jolene in particular who made their wealth outside WatchTower (and even Stephen Lett with his real estate ventures), wear fake-ass shit? You can see they have fine suits, Geoffrey Beene eye glasses, other gold jewelry. Do you really think they'd be caught dead down on Canal Street buying CRAP, and passing it off as the real thing? Not a freakin' chance! And yes, I can tell from the bracelet, and in particular the clasp with the fold-over clasp and Rolex crest logo on the clasp that it's a Rolex. It's not Invicta or some other homeage crap. It's a Rolex.
3. Having said the above, I've also heard the excuse that maybe this jewelry and watches are donated, gifts, etc from wealthy JW friends, etc. Ok.....fair enough. Now the question becomes, is this APPROPRIATE as a man representing God's Organization, to be flaunting such obvious wealth? Wouldn't this benefit the Org and God's Organization BETTER by taking it down to the Diamond & Watch District of NYC and selling it, and taking the money and investing it back into the Org, using it to help people? The GB can wear an Apple Watch (like Sanderson does) or a Hamilton or Tissot. Something below the $1000 mark. A $20,000 Rolex does not reflect a spirit of "humility." Jesus didn't have a pillow to rest His head upon, but these guys dress to the nines, have accommodations on a compound in a forest next to a remote-controlled lake in New York? GTFOOH! Nothing "humble" about them.
4. That being said, remember too that the Flock is constantly brow-beat about not having a "showy display of one's wealth", "not being part of the world", and to "give God all of your precious things." Ok Governing Body, YOU guys go FIRST! Lead by example, right? Be "footstep followers of Christ", by throwing off your fine garments and following Him, I mean you guys are His "Brothers" right? You first to give up your wealth. I'll be waiting.
5. It's very obvious to me and anyone else with 2 functioning brain cells that the Governing Body are not bound by the Bethel "vow of poverty." Hell no! Doesn't apply to them. TOMO3 drove a Cadillac as his personal vehicle. He had money from before. What, a Toyota Prius or Corolla wasn't good enough? How about just a nice reliable Camry? Nope! CADILLAC, just like that old booze-hound Rutherford had to drive. The irony! Stephen "Lett-the-rubber-faced-Clown" it worth MILLIONS OF DOLLARS due to his outside real estate investments and portfolio with his brother down in the southeast USA. You think Jody Jolene took a "vow of poverty" from his real estate ventures to be on the Governing Body? LOL!! Not happening. How many poor, pauper Bethel workers even know about this wealth? I'd guess not many outside of the Legal and Accounting Departments.
I think points 3 and 4 are the most relevant. Should they be trying to appear wealthy and sophisticated, with fancy looking watches and nice suits? Is that the example they learned from Jesus? They want brothers and sisters to dress modestly and be presentable. Shouldn't they set the example? Look nice, not wealthy.
Why are you focusing on what people do? You let people stumble you?
This raises a good point which, IMO, validates once again actual Bible principles vs the WT interpretation and implementation of them.
The Bible makes it clear that it is the underlying materialism itself - not the valuable objects - that are the problem. In doing so, it encourages Christians to actually go to the root of the issue and deal with it there. If you do not desire these things in the first place, then you won't be put in a compromising situation.
Now look at the GB. They become caught in the following dilemma while recommending others should "keep your eye simple" and not pursue "material things":
1) You purchase expensive items for yourself because you desire them.
Do you wear/use them while preaching to the "flock" live or on broadcasts? If so, you appear at best insensitive to the relative poverty of your followers, and at worst, a hypocrite.
Do you decide NOT to wear/use them while preaching so as not to offend others? Then again, you appear a hypocrite. If you are seen wearing/using items you are not prepared to wear/use in front of followers, people will inevitably ask "why?"
2) You are given expensive items as gifts and keep them for yourself because you desire them.
Do you wear/use them? If so, you again risk appearing greedy and hypocritical. People will rightly wonder why such items haven't been "donated" for the worldwide work, as many others are expected to do with their "valuable things".
Either way, choosing to wear/use such items any time, wherever they came from, compromises your position.
What if you decide to keep the valuable items without wearing/using them? What's the point? What motive would you have except to take them out sometimes and gloat over the fact you have them? Would it not be better to sell them if you are not going to use them for the purpose they are intended?
There are also other risks. Having those expensive items around you becomes all about image and vanity. It also means you become afraid of losing them, perhaps to the extent of being mentally dependent on having them. Like Gollum with his "precious" ring!
So if you are supposed to be advocates for "keeping your eye simple", the only solution to putting yourself in that situation is to take the original scriptural line and not desire what is materially excessive in the first place. As WingCommander said, you can wear a watch that does the job and still has a good inherent value without it being a massively expensive status symbol. Likewise with the kind of clothes you wear, car you drive, and so on.
As Tonus added, it's about the motive and the example you set (two things which again, they are constantly counselling the R&F about) and it always looks bad when the GB appear like this while promoting "self-sacrifice" and "modesty" and showing pictures of the elderly and little children putting their last pennies in a contribution box.
Not sure I agree that they should even wear 'above average' suits in their roles as GB members. They are supposed to be humble, discreet men and their clothing should reflect that. These guys dress like princes.
I've seen old photos of Fred Franz in the office at Bethel and he looked like he just walked in from yard work with his checkered shirt. One of the suits Fleegle wore recently looked like a crushed green velvet - tailor cut affair.
It's actually sickening if it's money from donations that pay for it. If it's their own money, they need to show some restraint.
But then again 'Judge' Rutherford dressed and acted like Daddy Warbucks, so there is a precedent for them to follow.
