with regard to another thread ("a report you may be interested in") and the thought that the society may be looking to eliminate the obligation for members of the governing body to be of the anointed class (wow, now there's a fred franz-style sentence...lol), here are some quotes that touch on this issue.
i've put key phrases in capital letters:.
july 1, 1995 wt: "dwellers together in a restored 'land'".
::So while the GB doesn't directly appoint directors, it still retains a powerful veto ability
No, this is not true. I'm not stating this to challenge you; it's just a flat fact.
::When has an oligarchy ever voluntarily removed itself from power?
You are absolutely right. And the old boys with reduced power are upset at the palace putsch.
Grateful for small mercies,
Maximus
just finished reading the august 1, 2001 watchtower.
the second study article is entitled how to make your advancement manifest.
well, after quoting ephesians 4:11-14, heres what paragraphs 8 and 9 advise:first, since oneness is to be observed, a mature christian must be in unity and full harmony with fellow believers as far as faith and knowledge are concerned.
Nicodemus, I very much appreciate your very astute observations.
Much of what I see, and hear from the inside, represents the internal struggle of the progressives vs. the hardliners. Making a judgment on what is in print in the Watchtower is like reading tea leaves seven months later--pipeline time. Hardliners can throw the progressives a bone once in awhile, which can further complicate matters.
Telephone calls are recorded across the board, not so much to pick up dissident thought, but to protect against further legal liability resulting from "bad" or inappropriate advice coming from various individual desks. The power of Legal looms yet larger ....
As the field starts understanding the relationship between the corporations, the Christian Congregation, the Branch Committee operation that went into effect, as well as modified/mooted functions of various GB committees, there will likely have to be some further clarification.
Replacement of GB members is almost like political appointments to the Court, complicated by the fact that many of the corporate members of the PA board of directors have been running the show for a long time anyway.
An easier way out would be to declare a broader definition of "governing body."
Which way will the behemoth lurch? That's the question. I speak for several who would be keenly interested in your observations.
Maximus
with regard to another thread ("a report you may be interested in") and the thought that the society may be looking to eliminate the obligation for members of the governing body to be of the anointed class (wow, now there's a fred franz-style sentence...lol), here are some quotes that touch on this issue.
i've put key phrases in capital letters:.
july 1, 1995 wt: "dwellers together in a restored 'land'".
What I'm hinting and practically screaming out in various threads is this:
Look for a new definition of what "the governing body" is. Light flashing from the temple. Pay attention to how the various corporations are behaving. Who are the real decision-makers more and more?
::The only thing that the GB fears about new members in the body is the possibility of another Raymond Franz.
"The organization" is not a monolith and neither are those at the top, including the governing body. It is composed of individuals.
The GB itself is not a single entity with thoughts, even though it may be spoken of that way. It's composed of people. A couple of GB members are poles apart <cough> and hate each other's guts. An older example: Milton Henschel and Nathan Knorr would pass each other in the hallway going to their rooms, and did not speak prior to NHK's death. That's a fact.
The reality is: hardliners vs. progressives. The latter want hardnosers, the latter want more liberal appointments on the GB. Stalemate? How is that to be resolved. "Follow the money," i.e., the power.
That's the struggle, plain and simple.
Maximus
a truth - forgery specialist in wattower of may 15, 2000 .
the watchtower of may 15, 2000 attempts to ask question: " evangiles-histoire or myth?
in this page i shall not linger to comment on the two only possibilities that leave us the editors in front of the composed question, nevertheless one can advance that gospel can be a lot of history and myth and not of the history or the myth, classic manichean choice of this kind of fundamentalist movement.
Your English is certainly better than my French, and you really make the point well.
This happens all the time, but few ever pick it up.
Outstanding.
Maximus
i have been trying to make points with some in my congregation by dropping neutral hints, such as: did you know since 1985 we (they) do not baptize in the name of the father, the son, and the holy spirit but we have taken holy spirit out of the process and placed the spirit directed organization into the picture?.
i told several on their way to the convention to look for this as well as the emphasis in the drama on loyalty to the organization.
i havent been to the convention this year but may have to persevere through one more because two folks came back telling me they did not hear any emphasis on organization.
Take a look at the thread started by comment
on GB and anointed members.
Most who use the term "the Society" have reference to the official and definitive leadership of Jehovah's Witnesses. A letter of policy or an answer to a scriptural question came rubber stamped with Watch Tower B & T Society of Pennsylvania, or Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York.
Whether the letter originated with Writing, Service or other departments it was from "the Society." When we wanted direction, we would say, "What does the Society think about this issue?" Obviously we were not referring to a corporation that meets annually, but the decision-makers at the top or their delegates. "They" have tried to "adjust" such terminology and usage, but old habits die hard.
The old Qualified to Be Ministers book advanced the notion that the governing body was "closely associated with the board of directors of the Pennsylvania corporation." Indeed they had all the power. Finally a GB was formally named, which consequently reduced the power of N.H. Knorr.
But for years they have been dying off, and we got that sappy article on the nethinim, "given ones," assistants. Many of these assistants had been running departments quietly for years and far more qualified and experienced than, say, a circuit overseer brought in essentially because he partook of the emblems. These individuals are now recognized by their being in corporate positions.
The letter from the entity the "Christian Congregation" was a letter of policy. Was it cleared by Legal? By the GB? How does Service now fit in? Has the effective/actual power of the GB been diminished?
You're starting to see the first signs of various entities exerting themselves. I'm trying to provoke thought--and the personal input of others.
Maximus
PS It would be MOST unusual to find deviation from the material provided, as all talks are carefully monitored.
with regard to another thread ("a report you may be interested in") and the thought that the society may be looking to eliminate the obligation for members of the governing body to be of the anointed class (wow, now there's a fred franz-style sentence...lol), here are some quotes that touch on this issue.
i've put key phrases in capital letters:.
july 1, 1995 wt: "dwellers together in a restored 'land'".
Hang on to these quotations, comment; they're excellent. Like reading tea leaves, but you are on the right track.
I know you are aware I picked up on your question about the Branch Committee. That's key. Correspondence from the Christian Congregation showing its function as an entity is key.
I think that GB member David Splane's comment gave insight into how they have resolved the aging anointed issue and that of bringing in anointed individuals from the outside, when for many years now individuals considering themselves other sheep have run the show--and are now at the top on the PA corporation.
I'm still waiting for someone to comment on the change involving the Service and other committees of the GB. Has the GB been boxed in? At what cost?
Can the Legal Department overule the GB??????
Put this all together in the framework of their need to have a less hierarchical system to protect against legal liability. Yet the old school approach is more rather than less control at the top. That's their dilemma. You can't have it both ways.
What you read in the Watchtower today started in the pipeline about seven months earlier. I'm not sure how long in advance the DC programs are set in stone. (Uniformity/conformity has bit them sharply in the backside.)
Keep that fertile mind working, comment.
Maximus
for those who are interested a copy of the society's (australian branch) financial reports are available at the following address.
http://www.angelfire.com/mac/why144000/ausfinances1.pdf.
there are more if people are interested.
I've repeatedly been told by those who know that "the Society" is cash rich, but it's really hard to get a handle on the total, as JT says.
The master corporation has always been, of course, the Pennsylvania corporation, Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania.
According to the report:
In 1998 they had CASH assets (and short-term) of almost
$$$$$$$$$$THREE HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS$$$$$$$$
Grant Suiter is turning over in his grave at the disclosure you just shared with me. Never saw it previously.
The Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York has assets too. Note that it is the publisher of The Watchtower and publications. The Watch Tower Society society holds the copyright, of course.
Add their cash assets to the mix, and that of the other corporations, and you have a ton of CASH.
Now, I ask you: Do you know of ANY charitable organization that is sitting on half a billion dollars cash and short-term investments? The ones I know are cash poor, because they put it to work in CHARITABLE ways. No wonder these birds are "nervous."
I would indeed love to have originals, to put some things together ...
Thanks!
Maximus
for those who are interested a copy of the society's (australian branch) financial reports are available at the following address.
http://www.angelfire.com/mac/why144000/ausfinances1.pdf.
there are more if people are interested.
Well, they just didn't put literature inventory into the mix because they have gone to the donation system.
$1.3 million Bethel expenses?
Catch all that airline expense vs. ticketing expense?
Doesn't show how much money from conventions is sent directly to the Pennsylvania corporation.
Losing money? I don't think so.
This was terrific, teejay! Someone will do some sharp-pencil extrapolating from this one, I'm sure.
Now if we could just get the same thing from the Pennsylvania corporation.
Wow!
Maximus
i have just sent an email and letter in ms word format to professor frank gorman over the qfr in the oct 15/00 wt rag.
(pages 30 and 31).. this was a 2 1/2 page detailed letter with supporting documentation.
maximus and marvin s. reviewed and commented on the letter.
For follow-up,
Go to the end of the Blood, The Watchtower and Deceit
thread.
Maximus
dear friends,.
on june 1, 2001 the watchtower society of britain send a letter to all.
bodies of elders about how to handle with child molesters in the.
Someone came to the erroneous conclusion that the letters preceding the date would give away what congregation this was sent to, and thus compromise the person providing the scan.
What is blocked out is the Desk Symbol showing the origin of the letter.
This letter is obviously authentic, but it sure would be good to see it and others in the future in their pristine state. It has enormous ramifications and its early publication in the US will pose problems for the Society.
Maximus
