I'm just making my way through Crisis Of Conscience for the second time and once again I am struck by the presentation of such detailed records. Letters are shown in full - copies of letters from the Branch, and to the Branch. Reports are quoted vebatim. Comments made during meetings are reported on - and so on, and so on.
Either Raymond Franz was a compulsive record keeper, or he made a point of making a copy of anything that he felt was potentially incriminating. This could be construed as the actions of a man who knew what he was planning to do.
This is not necessarily a criticism. Most people who leave the Organisation would say that it was something that happened ove many years. The seeds of doubt are planted some time back and gradually it grows in to full-blown disbelief. Perhaps this was the case with Raymond. The number of men who are appointed as elders only for that to be the catalyst for change - because seeing the inner workings of the congregation is the last straw - is probably quite high. Maybe we struggle with misgivings but we believe we can affect things from the inside, only to find we have simply been installed as a small cog in a vast infernal machine. Perhaps that was the case with Ray Franz, only in his case it was the top-most "body of elders".
He thought he could be of great use on the inside, but only succeeded in having his faith dashed all the more so. He was on the writing committee, and I can't help but think whenever he quotes a controversial article from any time between 1972 and 1980, "Yeah, but you probably wrote that one." Was he taking the opportunity to insert words which he could later use against the Organisation?
I'm not by any means suggesting he was doing all this maliciously, but I do wonder how deep his scepticism went.
Any thoughts?