George,
the things now being found in recent GB patter such as this subject of “intelligent
disobedience” can be read as a trend.
In
contrast with the black and white dogmatism which historically describes the
Watchtower cult and which in the past had made decisions for true believers simple
to make; the push seems to be towards “think for yourselves”.
One
conclusion could be that the WT writers are actually thinking at a primitive
philosophical level and exploring the consequences of moral choices independent
of WT dogma. This is unlikely!
A
second thought would be that a sense of despondency is pervading the org and
the writers are unwittingly or even deliberately betraying the authoritarian
norms of cult control methods. Possible but perhaps not yet!
I
think a more likely interpretation is that they are creating a defence to their
critics in the courts against the charge that they are dictatorial in all of
their dealings. By printing or publicising a recommendation to use common sense
or even disobey them could provide contrary legal evidence that the GB are not totalitarian. Contrary that is, to the
standard WT practice, which is still expected, for absolute obedience.
What
the GB print or broadcast is not necessarily what JWs do. JWs are driven to conform by the existing, historically molded cultural norms which are enforced socially and by elder opinion at the congregational level.
Interpretations are always done in solidarity with the local group-think.
No doubt the impending landslide of litigation because of their dire handling of sex abuse problems, figures heavily in the minds of the GB. What the GB
think can be deconstructed from what they demand in the Watchtower.
To
actually adopt an anti-WT directive and have JWs making their own moral choices would
truly be the thin end of the wedge for GB authority and would permit the downfall of
the cult. Let’s hope the litigation forces this.