Things Rutherford got wrong that Fred Franz had to clear up (page 2)

dropoffyourkeylee

I could live with Russell's goofy 19th century beliefs, and with Rutherford's booze and megalomania. But the things that really make me scream came from the twisted minds of Franz and Knorr. Disfellowshipping, higher education, exclusionary world view

slimboyfat

These are good points 👍

careful

I’ve read that it was Gene Smalley who came up with the blood ban and maintained it over the decades.

Wasn't blood transfusion banned back in the 1950s? Was Smalley at Bethel then? Was he even an adult then? Since when have underlings set policy/doctrine? The organizational model has, since JFR, always been from the top down, from the anointed rulers to the non-anointed other sheep flunkies, not any other way. What uninformed source were you reading?

Smalley has, however, been the point man in defending the issue, apparently supposing that Jehovah would never have guided his people into such an egregious doctrinal/practical error that has caused the death of so many.

Franz was preferable to Rutherford

Isn't that a bit like preferring simple imprisonment over imprisonment with daily floggings?

DisgruntledFool

You are correct, Careful. The blood transfusion policy began to coagulate (pardon the pun) in the late 1940's early 1950's long before Gene Smalley came onto the scene. The September 22nd ,1949 AWAKE pg 26-27, THE WATCHTOWER 1949 edition pg 367-368 and THE WATCHTOWER 1950 pg 79-80 discuss the subject clearly for the first time as it pertains to Jehovah's Witnesses.

Rattigan350

"2. Rutherford insisted on the rather forced reading of Romans 13 that the “superior authorities” are not governments but Jesus and Jehovah. That was a pretty incredible claim that Franz had to walk back while maintaining neutrality as a principle that is not dependent on this forced reading of this passage."

I don't agree here. Rutherford read that for the times that he went through. To him at that time, how could the governments be the superior authorities when they were doing evil things to him and the other Bible Students?

Russell was too liberal. Rutherford went the other way and was too conservative. Franz/Knorr put it in balance in the center.

TonusOH said "He didn't clean everything up (such as restoring a lot of holidays and religious observances)"

Why would Franz restore holidays? Franz was a hardliner for obedience too. He was the one responsible for no blood because he thought that obedience was necessary.

Nathan Natas

This is amusing to me, because to me this is a contest to decide the better of two evils. I understand that many here are in the "believers" class, but I'm not. I'm an atheist, and to me the entire issue sets off on the wrong foot:

First, with the assumption that there exists a "spirit realm" containing creatures both friendly and unfriendly to man. Maybe I should also add creatures who are indifferent to man's plight.

Second, that there *might* be elements of Watchtower dogma and expectations that are TRUTH.

It is like having an imaginary barrel that contains imaginary rotten, maggot-ridden fish and thinking, "Some of that fish might be tasty."

Rutherford was, MAYBE, an intelligent man whose major concern was HIMSELF, even to the exclusion of his wife and their son.

Franz was a religious fanatic who believed that he was "blessed" with special "spiritual" insight.

History has shown both of these fools to be LIARS.

Which LIES do you like more?

Even if you're "spiritually inclined," how can you think that there was any crumb on the table these guys set that was not poison?

If it was Tuesday and either one of them said it was Tuesday, I'd still check a calendar.

Balaamsass2

lol. This question is like asking "Which one of the Three Stooges should I follow for life advice?" :)

The Three Stooges Classic Turst Us Digital Art by Devi May - Pixels

Las Malvinas son Argentinas

Contrasting personalities and lifestyles too.

Rutherford:

Privately profane and boorish

Extravagant lifestyle - Beth Sarim and apartments kept for him in NY and Bethel

Alcoholic

Abandoned his wife and lived with a mistress

Racist

Franz:

Friendly and accessible

Lived in a humble Bethel flat

Possible teetotaler? If he drank it wasn’t an issue

Lifelong Bachelor and celibate

Spoke several languages and enjoyed going to foreign conventions

By all accounts, Bethelites enjoyed having Freddie around while they longed for Rutherford to go back to San Diego. I think that’s a huge reason why Franz’s era seemed to be celebrated more than Rutherford’s. Even Knorr wasn’t as big of a prick as JFR was. Certainly Franz had a higher degree of morality than Rutherford.

Don’t let that fool you. The Knorr/Franz team was every bit as destructive as Rutherford.

vienne

Looking through my mom's research notes I find this:

Blood transfusion rejection came about because two witness doctors had a Witness patient who refused blood they believed he needed. In 1945 they wrote to the Society seeking help to persuade their patient that he misunderstood Acts' prohibition on blood. To their surprise the society said he was right, and the Watchtower article that year followed. See July 1, 1945, issue which has, I believe, Franz style.

This came from an interview with one of the doctors involved. Since they have living family, I probably shouldn't include a name. Blood transfusion became a disfellowshipping offence in 1961 through a question from readers in the January 15th Watchtower.

I have no details of the internal discussions. Wish I did.

slimboyfat

This is interesting and seems entirely plausible. If true, it means that Franz was responsible for the blood ban.
Also Gene Smalley wasn’t around early enough to be the originator of the idea. 👍
If I remember correctly, there was a Golden Age article in the 1930s that commented on blood transfusion in a positive light. As in, it’s a miracle of modern medicine, kind of idea, without saying the Bible forbids it.

Things Rutherford got wrong that Fred Franz had to clear up

Share this