Here is the entire passage from the February 1989 Kingdom Ministry:
"As ministers of the good news, we are known publicly as Jehovah's Witnesses. Our voluntary participation in the field service is motivated by love of God and neighbor. It is not carried on at the insistence of any man or organization but is according to our God-given commission to preach the "good news" and make disciples. (Matt. 24:14; 28:19, 20) Therefore, publishers do well to avoid representing themselves as agents or representatives of the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York, Inc., or any other corporation used by "the faithful and discreet slave" to advance Kingdom interests.-Matt. 24:45-47.
In case of an accident or an emergency or if problems are encountered while working trailer parks, apartments, or certain other territory, publishers may need some form of personal identification beyond giving their name along with a brief Scriptural explanation of the nature of our religious work. If questioned, or when asked for credentials, baptized publishers may use the identification card (S-65) signed by the presiding overseer, which shows one is preaching the good news of the Kingdom in association with the local congregation named on the card.
A supply of identification cards (S-65), which may be issued to baptized publishers when there is a need, will be included with the annual shipment of congregation forms. If any publishers use a personal name card in connection with their field service activities, they should not print thereon that they are representatives of the Watchtower Society."
Remember I posted that this was the result of an accident the Watchtower got sued over because someone in the ministry harmed someone while telling people they were a Jehovah's Witness minister representing the Watchtower? Notice the mention of accidents? Love how they throw in "emergency" or "if problems are encountered" so as not to make a connection too obvious. After all, every Jehovah's Witness knows this is really about not "bringing reproach upon Jehovah's Organization", right?
Notice also the word AGENT they throw in there? It's been so long for me but, honestly, was the word AGENT ever part of our cult-speak? We were "ministers", the word "ambassador" was used in the literature and so was "representative" but AGENT? That word is an allusion to theories of law under which an EMPLOYER can be sued for the actions of an EMPLOYEE because employees are said to have AGENCY for their employer, the Principal and therefore, under the theory of Respondeat Superior, the employer is responsible for harm done to another person by the employee while acting in the employ of the employer. There have been lawsuits filed in which a VOLUNTEER EMPLOYEE was allowed to proceed in suit of an employer they worked as a volunteer for and it was decided the most important factor in deciding the employer/employee relationship was NOT financial or other compensation for work but rather HOW MUCH CONTROL THE EMPLOYER HAD OVER THE VOLUNTEER. This CONTROL determined the employee/employer relationship, not compensation.
Look at the video link I'm providing as this fella reviews a Watchtower filing in puzzlement. Notice the use of the word AGENT over and over again and notice how the Watchtower is working to demonstrate how LITTLE CONTROL they have over this Jehovah's Witness minister's "ministry".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9sJ_aI-2YVE
A Judge hearing this knows EXACTLY what the Watchtower is alluding to. What the Watchtower is attempting to do is separate themselves from liability under any theory that could involve an employer/employee relationship while preserving their First Amendment rights to free exercise.
Oh, and the Watchtower DOES have control over firing of their ministers and grounds for doing so. It's called "disfellowshipping".
I remember when that February 1989 KM came out because it disturbed me quite a bit. I spoke with someone I knew back then that gave me the inside scoop on that one. I've been out for soooooooo many years, I totally forgot about how Jehovah's Witnesses were even informed of that one. I remembered it as an announcement from a body of elders letter. I did a bit of digging on Google to find a couple of posts on the internet about it. One had a photograph of the page talking about not calling themselves representatives or agents and one had the entire quote from the article. The photographed page didn't have the whole article because it jumps to another page in the KM.
I was told by that person I spoke with back then that when the Watchtower received notice of the lawsuit, their lawyers actually hired people off the street to act as jurors and held mock trials to see if they could win that somehow before a jury. They couldn't find a way to win and decided to settle. I'm trying to figure out now, how to find the lawsuit. I've got a bit of digging to do. Not looking forward to this. Maybe the lawsuit was just threatened through correspondence but that seems to be a breach of ethics. I want to find that suit so I can finish tying all these pieces together.
Think about all of that and why the Watchtower formed two new corporations to separate their publishing arm from the management of the congregations and ministry. The use of the literature in the ministry would have made it more difficult to separate them from the relationship of employer/employee/minister/volunteer/agent when everything was under one corporate umbrella. It all comes together in these relationships somewhere: AGENT/AGENCY/EMPLOYER/EMPLOYEE/VOLUNTEER/ORDAINED MINISTER. I feel quite certain of this.