does anybody know how to get in touch with him, if he's still alive?
yes, that's the rene that's mentioned in the franz's "crisis of conscience" i think i knew him better than he knew me, way back when.
i feel regret that i didn't approach him many years ago when i saw him on the street.
Interesting subject, searching there bits and pieces of information about the major players in the purge; almost none about Rene Vazquez. I found a topic of 11 years ago on this matter and it seems that there was some background to what happened to him and that he was taking some license with his teachings prior to the incident.
https://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/101153/misinformation-coc?page=1&size=10
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ag6ftvig9b8.
kacey montoya for channel 5.
For me this item was very useful, I shared it with some friends and later on when I found about the age of the article I informed them; still we were grateful for the information.
Thanks
i am going to engage on a trip to the past and share with you some of the matters that marked the beginning of the jws persecution in cuba.
you will be surprised that the pattern that was followed is very similar to what happened in other dictatorial countries.. in the cuban case, i am going to surprise you and tell you that like what happened with hitler; the wt was partially responsible for their clash and confrontation with the cuban government.
during the early 60s the revolution was fighting for survival and they were willing and ready to demolish any perceived enemy to their cause.. a prime example was their war against the catholic church that was the most influential religious entity in the country; it took the supreme leader only a few public discourses to send the vast majority of clergy packing and back to their country, in this case spain.. the jehovah’s witnesses were an insignificant minority but they over estimated their importance and displayed a belligerent attitude, it was known that this was a us based religion and an easy target to connect them with the cia.
A note of interest: they will be a ban on using Fidel Castro name or figure in public monuments or places.
so our sunday meeting was on the 25th (christmas) and my active jw wife and i were out of town enjoying some family time with relatives.. apparently there were many others in our congregation that missed as well.
so few were there in fact that sisters ran the mics.
(actually it was a sister running one of the two mics) a friend of my wife commented to her about how the brothers just aren't stepping up and it "makes her want to cry.
Way back in third world countries, sisters that were pioneers will go to places without a congregation; as soon as possible they will start a small group. They will conduct meetings and eventually do all the duties normally assigned to brothers, the only thing that they couldn't do was participate in judicial matters; this arrangement continued until they had baptized brothers qualified to take over.
It was common to have sisters in formal congregations doing the duties of assistants or MS; most of the time they did a better job that the brothers.
as a part of the wt judicial arrangement, for many years there was a sort of review procedure called special committee; basically if a person was not happy with a decision or a particular situation they were allowed to write a letter to the society raisin their concerns.. the majority of these complaints were answered with a standard letter with the counsel of “leave matters to jehovah”.
in some instances the matter was serious enough to warrant the need for a special investigation of the case to be done by a special committee.. at one time the travelling overseers were part of this arrangement; eventually they were dropped out of these cases due to the fact of their tremendous input on the decisions and also the implications when a wrong decision was reached.. the reason behind this procedure was that in matters that were really complicated it was not fair to make a decision based in letters and the clearest way was to have “boots on the ground”.
normally a group of local brothers, appointed for this duty heard the cases and make recommendations to the branch.
Thanks Dozy and James Jack
A1
as a part of the wt judicial arrangement, for many years there was a sort of review procedure called special committee; basically if a person was not happy with a decision or a particular situation they were allowed to write a letter to the society raisin their concerns.. the majority of these complaints were answered with a standard letter with the counsel of “leave matters to jehovah”.
in some instances the matter was serious enough to warrant the need for a special investigation of the case to be done by a special committee.. at one time the travelling overseers were part of this arrangement; eventually they were dropped out of these cases due to the fact of their tremendous input on the decisions and also the implications when a wrong decision was reached.. the reason behind this procedure was that in matters that were really complicated it was not fair to make a decision based in letters and the clearest way was to have “boots on the ground”.
normally a group of local brothers, appointed for this duty heard the cases and make recommendations to the branch.
James Jack
Thanks and one additional question, it is my understanding that after the appeal if the two committees disagree, then the reports will go to the Branch and they will make the final decision.
Now, it might go to the CO and he will be the one making the decision. I assume that most of the time he will agree with the second committee.
as a part of the wt judicial arrangement, for many years there was a sort of review procedure called special committee; basically if a person was not happy with a decision or a particular situation they were allowed to write a letter to the society raisin their concerns.. the majority of these complaints were answered with a standard letter with the counsel of “leave matters to jehovah”.
in some instances the matter was serious enough to warrant the need for a special investigation of the case to be done by a special committee.. at one time the travelling overseers were part of this arrangement; eventually they were dropped out of these cases due to the fact of their tremendous input on the decisions and also the implications when a wrong decision was reached.. the reason behind this procedure was that in matters that were really complicated it was not fair to make a decision based in letters and the clearest way was to have “boots on the ground”.
normally a group of local brothers, appointed for this duty heard the cases and make recommendations to the branch.
I keep getting confused, my understanding was that there was a difference between an appeal committee and a special committee.
Please clarify if you know the answer
as a part of the wt judicial arrangement, for many years there was a sort of review procedure called special committee; basically if a person was not happy with a decision or a particular situation they were allowed to write a letter to the society raisin their concerns.. the majority of these complaints were answered with a standard letter with the counsel of “leave matters to jehovah”.
in some instances the matter was serious enough to warrant the need for a special investigation of the case to be done by a special committee.. at one time the travelling overseers were part of this arrangement; eventually they were dropped out of these cases due to the fact of their tremendous input on the decisions and also the implications when a wrong decision was reached.. the reason behind this procedure was that in matters that were really complicated it was not fair to make a decision based in letters and the clearest way was to have “boots on the ground”.
normally a group of local brothers, appointed for this duty heard the cases and make recommendations to the branch.
as a part of the wt judicial arrangement, for many years there was a sort of review procedure called special committee; basically if a person was not happy with a decision or a particular situation they were allowed to write a letter to the society raisin their concerns.. the majority of these complaints were answered with a standard letter with the counsel of “leave matters to jehovah”.
in some instances the matter was serious enough to warrant the need for a special investigation of the case to be done by a special committee.. at one time the travelling overseers were part of this arrangement; eventually they were dropped out of these cases due to the fact of their tremendous input on the decisions and also the implications when a wrong decision was reached.. the reason behind this procedure was that in matters that were really complicated it was not fair to make a decision based in letters and the clearest way was to have “boots on the ground”.
normally a group of local brothers, appointed for this duty heard the cases and make recommendations to the branch.
The special committees are alive.
When the body of elders decides to form a judicial committee to meet with one accused of child sexual abuse, the coordinator of the body of elders will first contact the circuit overseer. The circuit overseer should designate an experienced elder who is on the special committee list to serve as chairman of the judicial committee and, when needed, another elder from the list to serve on an appeal committee. (Chapter 13 – point 5)
http://jwsurvey.org/cedars-blog/major-leak-rogue-watchtower-insider-leaks-circuit-overseer-guidelines-document
as a part of the wt judicial arrangement, for many years there was a sort of review procedure called special committee; basically if a person was not happy with a decision or a particular situation they were allowed to write a letter to the society raisin their concerns.. the majority of these complaints were answered with a standard letter with the counsel of “leave matters to jehovah”.
in some instances the matter was serious enough to warrant the need for a special investigation of the case to be done by a special committee.. at one time the travelling overseers were part of this arrangement; eventually they were dropped out of these cases due to the fact of their tremendous input on the decisions and also the implications when a wrong decision was reached.. the reason behind this procedure was that in matters that were really complicated it was not fair to make a decision based in letters and the clearest way was to have “boots on the ground”.
normally a group of local brothers, appointed for this duty heard the cases and make recommendations to the branch.
