AMAZING - Exposing Elders (re: Expose Ave...

by AMNESIAN 126 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  teejay

  Ginny,

  You make good and valid points. I agree with many of them.

  I know it's true that the overall spirit of a congregation is dependent on more than just the elders. Publishers play an important part, too. Elders vary widely in make-up. Some are more intelligent, more personable, etc. Same with publishers. A weak, less intelligent elder is easily manipulated by a more intelligent publisher; a poor one by a publisher who is ambitious or has money. The example of your freedom to go to college is a fair one. We all had the magazines containing the exact same information, but not all elders and not all congregations are the same. Anyone who visits a couple of Kingdom Halls knows this.

  I could comment on more of what you said, but I agree with much of it and the areas were we differ are loosing their importance. However, one comment of your demands a response. You said

  I haven’t seen anyone argue that accountability is equal. Like Amnesian, I’m looking for the truth between the poles of Elders 100% accountable – Publishers 0% accountable. I am uncertain about your assessment that the difference between publishers and elders (I’m thinking of local ones) is huge. Individual circumstances and motives vary so much that I think it’s dangerous to even try to make group generalizations about culpability.

  That was one loaded paragraph that contains perhaps some misunderstandings that I'd like to clear up.

  For one, while no one has said outright that accountability was equal, with the exception of a couple of former elders here, most have couched their recognition of their pass complicity as elders with, "but the publishers..." That is a little disconcerting and grates on the emotions of former publishers whose memories of those times are different. It just sounds good to hear it when a man steps up and, without, in any way attempting to diminish his role, simply says, "hey, I was wrong. I... me. No one else." The gb has repeatedly passed on such an opportunity.

  Secondly, I can positively ASSURE you that it is more than AMNESIA and Ginny who are looking for truth on this board, whether it deals with this topic or any other. I hope you weren't suggesting, simply because your viewpoint differs, that everyone else was hoping to either cover over the truth or pass along untruth.

  I doubt that a fair numerical value could ever possibly be affixed to elders in general and publishers in general that accurately describes their respective levels of accountability. Everyone here knows that such a value, for both elders and pubs, would fall between 1 and 100%. As is commonly known and you, I and many others have pointed out, elders, publishers, congregations are all different and the possible combinations of the three is what's huge.

  In come cases, the disparity of "guilt" in a given situation actually *is* huge, with the elder(s) bearing the much greater culpability. On the other hand, I know of situations where the publisher(s) were indeed more guilty than the elder(s), and an innocent 'older man' (in every respect) unjustly suffered.
  --------------------------------

  I can't help but chuckle a little as I think about what might be, could be, MUST be running through my new friend AMNESIAN's mind as she follows this discussion. Are we even close to what her point is? I can't wait to see...
• 

  GinnyTosken

  Teejay,

  I'm glad you can understand that in some cases a publisher may have more influence than an elder.

  I said:
  I haven’t seen anyone argue that accountability is equal. Like Amnesian, I’m looking for the truth between the poles of Elders 100% accountable – Publishers 0% accountable. I am uncertain about your assessment that the difference between publishers and elders (I’m thinking of local ones) is huge. Individual circumstances and motives vary so much that I think it’s dangerous to even try to make group generalizations about culpability.

  You replied:
  That was one loaded paragraph that contains perhaps some misunderstandings that I'd like to clear up.

  For one, while no one has said outright that accountability was equal, with the exception of a couple of former elders here, most have couched their recognition of their pass complicity as elders with, "but the publishers..." That is a little disconcerting and grates on the emotions of former publishers whose memories of those times are different. It just sounds good to hear it when a man steps up and, without, in any way attempting to diminish his role, simply says, "hey, I was wrong. I... me. No one else." The gb has repeatedly passed on such an opportunity.

  "I was wrong. I... me. No one else" may sound good, but is it true?

  I found it grating to read comments such as, "No, in my minds eye, you cannot ascribe blame or responsibility to the 'average' jw, they simply are doing what they are told," "Face it Frenchy, we who enforced the sanctions, did the bidding of the fds, should shoulder most if not all of the blame, for keeping the whole nasty business going," and "The average JW has no power. Zero. None."

  Such comments insult former publishers, reducing them to mindless drones who would be utterly lost without directives from the elders. That's why I quoted from the French report: One should not forget the voluntary share of the follower, who is not an imbecile that one would manipulate--it is you and me--, but (...) who went deliberately."

  I respect people who neither diminish their role nor inflate it.

  Secondly, I can positively ASSURE you that it is more than AMNESIA and Ginny who are looking for truth on this board, whether it deals with this topic or any other. I hope you weren't suggesting, simply because your viewpoint differs, that everyone else was hoping to either cover over the truth or pass along untruth.

  Not at all. I said Like Amnesian, I’m looking for the truth between the poles of Elders 100% accountable – Publishers 0% accountable. If anything, I was trying to emphasize that I don't have a ready answer and am eager to hear discussion.

  I definitely think it's untrue that elders are 100% accountable and publishers are 0%. Is it maybe Elders 60%, Publishers 40%? To be fair, should we figure in all the other factors, too? This is where I begin feeling uncomfortable and want to know individual circumstances and make individual comparisons.
  
  

  As is commonly known and you, I and many others have pointed out, elders, publishers, congregations are all different and the possible combinations of the three is what's huge.

  You said earlier that you agreed with Amnesian's thesis 100%. I thought this included the idea that publishers have no power and that elders are more culpable because they have more power.

  She never said that she, or any average JW publisher, was exonerated from the part we all played in continuing the lies of the WTS. Her entire thesis however, 100% correct imo, is that the difference (and it is HUGE) is in the matter of degree. About THAT there really can be no debate.

  I understood this to mean that the differences in culpability between elders and publishers is huge, with elders having a much larger share of culpability.

  In come cases, the disparity of "guilt" in a given situation actually *is* huge, with the elder(s) bearing the much greater culpability. On the other hand, I know of situations where the publisher(s) were indeed more guilty than the elder(s), and an innocent 'older man' (in every respect) unjustly suffered.

  I agree.

  I can't help but chuckle a little as I think about what might be, could be, MUST be running through my new friend AMNESIAN's mind as she follows this discussion. Are we even close to what her point is? I can't wait to see...

  I think we've strayed quite a bit. In my reading of Amnesian's post, she focused on those who remain in office once they know what the corporation is really about, not elders in general. To discuss this, I would need to understand how Amnesian defines an elder's "knowing."

  Ginny
• 

  teejay

  Ginny,

  Two comments, and I'm done...

  I'm glad you can understand that in some cases a publisher may have more influence than an elder.

  I am a little amused by this comment. You make it sound as though I've learned something in this discussion. Well... I can't speak for any other poster (or any other Witness for that matter) but I lived as an active, aware, mentally functioning JW for about thirty years. In this (or any other) thread I have learned nothing new about the high jinks vis-à-vis power/gender/elders vs rank&file in the average Kingdom Hall.

  As is commonly known and you, I and many others have pointed out, elders, publishers, congregations are all different and the possible combinations of the three is what's huge.

  You said earlier that you agreed with Amnesian's thesis 100%. I thought this included the idea that publishers have no power and that elders are more culpable because they have more power.

  That may be part of her main ideas. It's my contention, though, and I have no doubt she'll straighten EVERYBODY out at her return with what she meant, that AMNESIAN's thesis was that elders (former and current) are more culpable because in most settings in the average Kingdom Hall the publisher is virtually powerless in the face of an elder who knows the 'real deal' and equally knows how to play the game for all it's worth. If that's what she meant, I agree with her 100%.
• 

  GinnyTosken

  Teejay,

  I am a little amused by this comment. You make it sound as though I've learned something in this discussion. . . . In this (or any other) thread I have learned nothing new about the high jinks vis-à-vis power/gender/elders vs rank&file in the average Kingdom Hall.

  I shudder to think that I dared imply that you might have learned something from this discussion.

  It's my contention, though, and I have no doubt she'll straighten EVERYBODY out at her return with what she meant, that AMNESIAN's thesis was that elders (former and current) are more culpable because in most settings in the average Kingdom Hall the publisher is virtually powerless in the face of an elder who knows the 'real deal' and equally knows how to play the game for all it's worth. If that's what she meant, I agree with her 100%.

  I'm looking forward to reading Amnesian's comments, and I do hope that I will learn something or be reminded of factors I may have overlooked.

  For now, I don't buy that most average elders have more power/influence and that most average publishers are virtually powerless/without influence. I am not convinced that official power is the strongest form of influence.

  I've been mulling two scenarios.

  I'm a JW again back in my old congregation. My father and several of my closest JW friends decide to leave the organization, but the elders stand firm. How would I have reacted?

  I'm a JW again back in my old congregation. The elders decide to leave the organization, but my family and friends stand firm. How would I have reacted?

  I can only guess about the latter scenario, but I have a clearer idea about the first. When just one of my close friends was disfellowshipped, I brushed aside the authority of the elders and went to talk to her. The example of her life as one of Jehovah's Witnesses meant more to me than what I had read, what I had heard from the platform, and the threat of being disfellowshipped myself for talking to her.

  Pointless as it is, I find myself trying to tally percentages for the influences in my life as one of Jehovah's Witnesses. For myself, once I was already in, it looks something like this:

  Father 15%
  Mother 5%
  Other Family 5%
  JW friends 15%
  Elders 5%
  Circuit Overseers 0%
  District Overseers 0%

  JW literature (who is responsible?) 20%
  Bethelites
  Writing Committee
  Governing Body
  Those who pay for literature and make donations

  My desire to please 5%
  My desire for simple, easy answers 5%
  My desire for immortal life in utopia 5%
  My lack of critical thinking skills 15%
  My innocence, naivete, and gullibility 5%

  From what I've read, each of us would rate influences differently. I've shared my perceptions, and you've shared your experiences. I'd be interested to hear how others rate these influences.

  Ginny
• 

  teejay

  Ginny,

  I think your mental participation in this topic might be reaching obsessive levels, what with the percentage breakdown of all JW-related influences in your life. You make a good point, though. Elders worth only 5%, eh? Cool. I bet they'd be disappointed... if they knew.

  Just curious... where did you live when you associated with JWs?
• 

  GinnyTosken

  Teejay,

  I think your mental participation in this topic might be reaching obsessive levels, what with the percentage breakdown of all JW-related influences in your life.

  My hope was that if I attempted to analyze the influences in my life as a JW, others might do the same. I'm only one of many blind men pawing an elephant.

  http://www.cs.princeton.edu/~rywang/berkeley/258/parable.html

  In assigning percentages, I was also trying to apply what I had learned in cognitive therapy.

  http://www.habitsmart.com/pin.html

  Just curious... where did you live when you associated with JWs?

  I lived in Connersville, Indiana, until I was 17. I then moved to Bloomington, Indiana.

  Ginny
• 

  teejay

  I'm only one of many blind men pawing an elephant.

  Twas six blind men of Indostan,
  T'ward learning much inclined.
  Each went to see an elephant,
  Though all of them were blind.
  That each by observation
  Might satisfy his mind.

  I read that in grade school. Had to memorize it. Still remember the first stanza. Waay cool poem. Timeless message.
• 

  teejay

  Found it:
  ------------------------------------

  The Blind Men and the Elephant
  by John Godfrey Saxe

  It was six men of Indostan
  To learning much inclined,
  Who went to see the Elephant
  (Though all of them were blind),
  That each by observation
  Might satisfy his mind

  The First approached the Elephant,
  And happening to fall
  Against his broad and sturdy side,
  At once began to bawl:
  “God bless me! but the Elephant
  Is very like a wall!”

  The Second, feeling of the tusk,
  Cried, “Ho! what have we here
  So very round and smooth and sharp?
  To me ’tis mighty clear
  This wonder of an Elephant
  Is very like a spear!”

  The Third approached the animal,
  And happening to take
  The squirming trunk within his hands,
  Thus boldly up and spake:
  “I see,” quoth he, “the Elephant
  Is very like a snake!”

  The Fourth reached out an eager hand,
  And felt about the knee.
  “What most this wondrous beast is like
  Is mighty plain,” quoth he;
  “ ‘Tis clear enough the Elephant
  Is very like a tree!”

  The Fifth, who chanced to touch the ear,
  Said: “E’en the blindest man
  Can tell what this resembles most;
  Deny the fact who can
  This marvel of an Elephant
  Is very like a fan!?

  The Sixth no sooner had begun
  About the beast to grope,
  Than, seizing on the swinging tail
  That fell within his scope,
  “I see,” quoth he, “the Elephant
  Is very like a rope!”

  And so these men of Indostan
  Disputed loud and long,
  Each in his own opinion
  Exceeding stiff and strong,
  Though each was partly in the right,
  And all were in the wrong!

  Moral:

  So oft in theologic wars,
  The disputants, I ween,
  Rail on in utter ignorance
  Of what each other mean,
  And prate about an Elephant
  Not one of them has seen!
• 

  termite 35

  OOPS, sorry; i thought this thread was some kind of new game;
  'This is elder number one, what's your name and where do you come from?'...........And how much will you bet tonight that we won't reveal what's in envelope number one?????!!!!!!!!

  AW; come on you lot i'll start you all off...

  he,s 52 and a complete hypocrite...
  he,s a closet letch
  he's likely to crap up your life......................
• 

  DannyBear

  Hey Termite,

  What you boring about?

  DB