Is There a Judicial Committee Quota?

by Stephanus 11 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  Stephanus

  Just had a thought: after reading the physical repercussions of JCs thread, I was speculating, on the basis that many elders can apparently be bought, that a benevolent, rich, philanthropical type of person could possibly strike a deal with the elders of his local cong.: "No JCs in this cong (they're too cruel and nasty), and you'll be well looked after". Then I thought, no, it wouldn't work, would it? Brooklyn would be always notified of JCs and their outcomes. A sudden drop or cessation in JC hearings would have alarm bells ringing and investigations by the CO, at the very least. Which means, basically, that there is a JC quota - an acceptable level of JC hearings and DFings! So what is this quota? What's the correct number of annual JC hearings and DFings?

  Elders and ex-elders: over to you!
• 

  Farkel

  Steph,

  : So what is this quota? What's the correct number of annual JC hearings and DFings?

  No quotas, but the answer should be self-evident: "whatever it takes to keep the printing presses rolling at full speed, and the buyers of that literature buying at full speed."

  Those who disagree with this business decision will be vetted. Period.

  As Michael Corleone said, "this is not personal. This is strictly business." Since the leaders of the Watchtower Corporation don't feel a thing for the personal feelings and lives of its followers, I can safely rest my case.

  Farkel

  Edited by - Farkel on 10 February 2003 2:50:9
• 

  Prisca

  Just had a thought

  Is that what the noise was?

  that a benevolent, rich, philanthropical type of person could possibly strike a deal with the elders of his local cong.: "No JCs in this cong (they're too cruel and nasty), and you'll be well looked after".

  I can only see this possibly happening if the rich brother had many family members in the congregation, and some of the relatives were in trouble of some sort. I extremely doubt someone would bribe a group of elders (and not be df'd himself for corruption in the cong) to help others apart from his own family.

  A sudden drop or cessation in JC hearings would have alarm bells ringing and investigations by the CO, at the very least.

  From my experience with CO visits and the like, the Society prefers not to have JC committees forming all the time - after all, if someone is df'd, then it's one less WT salesman, isn't it?

  So there's no quota for JC hearings, nor disfellowshipping. Despite the impression this board may give sometimes, not every elder or group of elders are necessarily corrupt. Yes, there are some who are corrupt, but there are also some who do care about their flock. I knew one group of elders that tried not to df a girl who had committed immorality, and was pregnant to the guy. They gave her extra time to think about things, but she had decided to continue with the relationship, and ended up living with the guy. They reluctantly df'd her.
• 

  TheOldHippie

  Farkel quoted and said that "As Michael Corleone said, "this is not personal. This is strictly business." Since the leaders of the Watchtower Corporation don't feel a thing for the personal feelings and lives of its followers, I can safely rest my case." I so agree, Farkel, my friend; it is strange they don't see it themselves. That a person has been "faithful" for decades, but then runs into some problems he reacts "not quite according to the book" to, is not understood, there is no psychological insight, just - away with him! "Is this a problem some drug addicts might have even years after they have quit?" the boss asked another one in my JC - well, perhaps he ought to have done some investigations beforehand. Perhaps one ought not to be judged by unknown persons. Perhaps some nameless guy at the branch ought not to decide singlehandedly, as was done in my case.

  Prisca, I agree with you, and if more elders had been like they OUGHT to be, and like some are, then many of these problems, much of this now facing and threatening the business corporation, would never have happened. If only some Christian behaviour had flourished.
• 

  Stephanus

  The corrupt elder scenario is just a vehicle for the hypothetical created here. Note I said "many", not "all". The possibility of a kind and gentle BOE doesn't detract from the original point being discussed here - a kind and merciful BOE may well decide to stop JCs out of GENUINE concern for the flock.

  If raw JC figures don't matter, then what about CHANGES in those figures - where a large increase or decrease occurs in a certain congregation? Would Brooklyn notice then and send out someone to investigate, or would it, as Farkel suggests, only occur if there were a corresponding drop in contributions?
• 

  roybatty

  I believe if you were to ask many of the ex-elders on this board, you'd find a huge difference in the number of JC their congregations had. I've been in congregations were JCs were monthly events to other congregations were JCs were extremely rare. A huge part of it is left up to the elders and what they deem as "JC issues."
• 

  minimus

  When a congregation has MANY disfellowshippings, red flags go up. If most of the matters are reproofs, only the Circuit Overseer might look into it. The Society has disbanded at least 2 congregations that I know of that had 'too many" judicial committees disciplining people. But the only thing the Society is really concerned about is numbers. If there were no disfellowshipping for years in a congregation, that would be fine. If a drop in meeting attendance or field activity occurs----Watch Out!
• 

  Blueblades

  At one of our meetings with the C.O. he noted that we had no J.C.M. and no reproofs,no removals, etc. His comment for this was ,"This is good ,it shows that you Elders are working hard doing a fine job in caring for the flock." ??????? Blueblades
• 

  Pork Chop

  I know of one congregation that had one judicial committee meeting in 23 years. When it came along they really didn't know how to deal with it. The person was reproved in the end and they said they hoped they didn't have another one for 20 years.
• 

  Stephanus

  Interesting points. My thought was based on the belief that JCs were popular among the jumped up little Hitlers in the org and smiled upon by Brooklyn. If they don't like them, why then do they encourage them with the existence of so many arsehole rules?