Solomon,
Well I hope I'm not jumping the gun. It is a natural question to ask, I'll be patient.
Rutherford's smear campaign (a must read)
by Leolaia 198 Replies latest watchtower scandals
-
-
-
Leolaia
I'm glad you noticed that, frankiespeakin. Indeed that letter has imo the first signs of real questioning about the Society, though he still affirmed its authority; now he seems to consider more openly the possibility that it has become corrupt.
-
VM44
Moyle wrote:
"...the continuous bringing up of the matter in the Tower thru its articles and letters sent it."
Yes, if Moyle is to believed, and I see no reason not to, he did not circulate the letter to others.
That so, what explains Rutherford's continually bringing up the matter in the publications?
It appears that Rutherford wanted to discredit Molye to the Witnesses preemptively, and he used the Watchtower to do so.
Rutherford wanted to destroy Moyle!
The man was evil.
-
glenster
"Did he form his own little bible study group?"
In his later years, he became one of the leaders of the United Israel World
Union, a movement that sought to convert people, particularly Christians, to
Judaism. Moyle became involved with David Horowitz and the work of the United
Israel World Union, formed in 1944 to "preach a universal Hebraic faith for all
humankind."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olin_R._Moyle"Indeed that letter has imo the first signs of real questioning about the
Society, though he still affirmed its authority; now he seems to consider more
openly the possibility that it has become corrupt."? I'm enjoying the research, but I think Moyle had the same complaints as
Walter Salter had in 1937 (corruption, liquor, misappropriation of funds, lavish
lifestyle in contrast to treatment of followers, hypocrisy, etc.). Likewise,
unlike Franz, etc., he just didn't want to play ball and left after sending Ruth-
erford a letter of his complaints.W.F. Salter's letter to Rutherford:
http://gwest59.tripod.com/ChristIsLord/id30.htmlPreviously in 1937, and like Moyle, he'd also openly criticized Rutherford's
Beth Sarim as lavish misuse of Watch Tower funds. This was denied by Amburgh:Walter F. Salter, former manager of the Canadian branch of the Watch Tower
Society, also criticized Rutherford's use of Beth Sarim. A reply to Salter's
criticisms of Rutherford was published in the May 2, 1937 Golden Age, with a
photocopy of a letter from W.E. Van Amburgh, Secretary-Treasurer of the Watch
Tower Society, stating:Not one cent of the funds of the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society went into
the construction of the home in San Diego where Judge Rutherford does his winter
work. It was the gift of friends. I did not know of the existence of the house
until I read of it in The Golden Age. Not one cent of the funds of the Watch
Tower Bible and Tract Society went into either of the Cadillac cars used by Ruth-
erford at San Diego and Brooklyn. They were the gift of friends.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beth_Sarim#OccupationWalter was disfellowshipped in 1937:
W 4/15/39 126
July 1, 1937, page 207, and which resolution, amongst other things, contained
the following:"We received from the Canadian branch, Toronto, this afternoon, information
leading to the disfellowshiping of Walter F. Salter by the Toronto company."Followers were advised about Salter:
"The destruction, without reading, of any such literature received through the
mail or otherwise."(4) The turning of a deaf car to anyone among us manifesting a desire to de-
bate or argue respecting this course of action."
http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/watchtower/beliefs/149159/2/The-disfellowshipping-of-Walter-SalterSplits that maintained some common religious ground
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Taze_Russell#Split_with_Barbour
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Taze_Russell#Allegation_of_Immoral_Conduct
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watch_Tower_Society_presidency_dispute_%281917%29
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jehovah's_Witnesses_splinter_groups
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conrad_C._Binkele -
Leolaia
Yes, if Moyle is to believed, and I see no reason not to, he did not circulate the letter to others.
Well, Moyle does say that he sent copies to people who wrote to him inquiring the facts. And his sister did circulate the letter to three congregations in Wisconsin. She said in her letter that she had his authorization to do so, although it is possible that he did not intend for her to distribute it in that way. Moyle did not publish the letter or give it general circulation like Walter Salter did with his letter (that is, while he was still a JW). The Golden Age published an article refuting Salter's letter point by point, but the Society never did so with Moyle's letter, probably because it wasn't widely distributed. Then Moyle became greatly concerned that he was hearing reports of the letter being circulated in places where he had never sent it, and he started hearing stories of him and Fink going to certain companies and reading the letter aloud, which Moyle denounced as lies. It is possible that once it got out, people unbeknownst to him were sending it around. The main fact that emerged in the trial was that he did not send copies of the letter prior to the publication of the 1 September 1939 Watchtower. Laura's circulation of the letter was clearly in reaction to what the magazine said about her brother.
I'm enjoying the research, but I think Moyle had the same complaints as Walter Salter had in 1937 (corruption, liquor, misappropriation of funds, lavish lifestyle in contrast to treatment of followers, hypocrisy, etc.). Likewise, unlike Franz, etc., he just didn't want to play ball and left after sending Rutherford a letter of his complaints.
The complaints are quite similar, and the Golden Age also attacked Salter's character (including hinting that he was having an affair with his secretary). But unlike Salter, Moyle did not just leave after sending the letter. He considered himself still a JW and he tried to build a new life in the Milwaukee Company of JWs. There was no reason for him to endure many months of shunning unless he really wanted to continue as a Witness. I think his situation was much more like Ray Franz in that respect (and like Moyle, Franz thought of his situation initially as reforming things that needed to be changed rather than opposing the organization).
-
frankiespeakin
Moyle definately was the sincere type, But the literal biblical god view was definately screwing with his psyche, the Deity that has righteous only indignation and the end is near and the need to convert to a beleif or hook up with some cause in order to be spared eternal innilation.
I firmly beleive in choosing your deities well and stay away from the vengeful type, bound to make you very lopsided, because who you imagine god to be will effect your whole world view and it could be good or it could be bad a 4 square god maybe? and he needs to have good and bad both you have more freedom if your deity is a balance of opposites.
-
glenster
Your mileage may vary, but to me there's an important difference between RF and
Moyle:R. Franz was originally a sincere missionary--not the kind you'd make a GB
member no matter how much a beloved nephew. He was taught by 4-5 yrs. research
staff to be in on the con (including about deaths of people and their kids over
the blood policies) (or he was a dumb researcher, which he wasn't) and agreed to
tell the same lies before being accepted into the meetings of the leaders 8-9
yrs. (His own version has him realize the con at the end of those 8-9 yrs.,
which my own research tells me is impossible and isn't how a scam is done.) He
made waves over things like wanting 607 changed to 587 as though to put his stamp
on GB leadership.He put up with two extra efforts to get rid of him like they were unusual dark
clouds that might pass over and hoped they'd take him back into the GB, not
because he was still one of the chumps--that ended 15 yrs. before.Moyle on the other hand was still the sincere missionary who complained like
one (too much cursing, drinking, and worldly pursuits) but, unlike most followers,
had gotten to know too much about the little group at the top, whom he then an-
noyed like someone's Mom at a stag party. He put up with too much abuse hoping
other followers would see how good he was till he gave up the ghost.In either case, they knew too much about the top so extra effort was made to
tell the customers to not listen to them. -
Leolaia
Then Moyle wrote to the shareholders of the Society asking for the campaign against him in the Watchtower magazine to stop:
#54
Olin R. Moyle to the Shareholders of the Watchtower Bible & Tract Society, Inc., 8 Jan. 1940: "On September 1st the Watch Tower contained a notice that my services as counselor were terminated because of my alleged unfaithfulness to Kingdom interests and to the brethren. On September 24th M. A. Howlett came to Milwaukee as a Society representative and denounced me from the platform, claiming that I was stirring up division and dissension among the companies. The September 15th Watch Tower contained a statement entitled INFORMATION, signed by the Board of Directors and approved by the President, which among other things alleged that every paragraph except the first of my letter was false, and that I was going among the companies reading the letter to them and stirring up dissension and division. Early in September one LeRoy B. Jackson of Racine wrote a letter to the Society alleging that Harvey Fink and myself were going among the companies, reading my letter to Judge Rutherford, making statements concerning the same, and thereby stirring up strife and division. Jackson's letter was false and proof of its falsity was given to the Society. Nevertheless Brother Fink, in spite of many years of faithful service to the Lord and his organization, was summarily removed from office. Later two pioneers Leland and Laura Rouse were denied pioneer privileges solely because they endeavored to give the facts to the brethren in their area. The November 15th Watch Tower in its leading article 'Snares' alleges that I have assaulted the organization with evil and false words and that I was unfaithful in the handling of cases for the brethren. While all this publicity and agitation has been conducted by the Society, I have quietly attended to my own affairs. I have participated in Kingdom activities with the Milwaukee Company and have not engaged in any propaganda work against the Society in any way....C. J. Woodworth made a great tactical error in signing his name to a letter admitting the truth of a major portion of my letter, and then later signing a statement alleging that the letter was entirely false, with the exception of the first paragraph. Woodworth thus exposed the prevarications of the entire Board of Directors. With one breath he says that Moyle told the truth, but that Judge Rutherford had the right to lambast his brethren. Then he stated that Moyle lied in everything. This would be funny if it were not so revolting to see men in responsible positions in the Lord's organization use such tactics. The claim that I have caused my letter to be publicly read and circulated among various companies is absolutely false. An honest investigation would readily prove that fact. The men who signed this statement cannot produce a single company of Jehovah's witnesses where I have caused the letter to be publicly read and circulated. The allegation of unfaithfulness in the handling of cases for the brethren is a new one incubated and brought forward since I protested against Brother Rutherford's wrongful acts....
Because I pushed these cases vigorously I have been accused by some of these judges of violating legal ethics, and have been threatened with contempt of court, and disbarment. I have on hand many letters from the Society's President in which he commends me for my zeal and earnestness in handling cases of his brethren....My letter to the President was not an act of disloyalty or of opposition. It was a protest against wrongful acts by the chief executive of the organization. The Society's President claims that I have no right to write such a letter even though it be true. Such claim is false. The course I followed was in full accord with Society policy and the Scriptures. I went to him with a private communication to show him the error of his actions. Sister Moyle and myself were the only ones seeing that letter prior to our excommunication from Bethel. The Society's president has caused it to be exhibited to a dozen times as many people as I have. Since leaving Bethel I have followed a course of action fully in harmony with Society policy. I have been misrepresented and lied about but have kept quiet and attended to my own affairs. It is strange that the Board of Directors and the President will lose their eyes and refuse to accept any evidence that I am behaving decently. It is strange that they will accept the false, libelous statement of Jackson and publish it as the truth, but refuse to accept and publish the facts. Doesn't this indicate a pernicious desire to convince all people that I'm an evil servant? Publication of the so-called INFORMATION in the October 15th Tower opened the door of many opportunities to show disloyalty. I received letters from all parts of the United States and Canada and from England inquiring about the matter. Many from opposition groups wrote in asking for a copy of the letter to Judge Rutherford. None received it, and I cite a portion of my reply to one such letter which gives evidence of my position: 'If Russell Pollack wants to see me on a legal or business matter I will be glad to see him, but frankly I am not the least interested if it is his purpose to secure my cooperation with any movement or organization not in harmony with the Watch Tower. I am still a part of the Society; not opposing it in any way, and actively working in its interests. Therefore I do not care to attend the meeting you mention or confer with any person on matters not in harmony with the Truth' ....
No amount of words could justify the upbraidings and revilings given to Bethel brethren by the Society's President. The only recourse left open was to condemn my letter as entirely false. Men who have privately admitted such acts then signed a statement which they knew to be false.... Howlett's activities in this area were pernicious and wrongful. Howlett appeared here as the Society's representative. He exploited and published the false statement of the Board of Directors. He added some false items of his own, one of them being the reason Moyle had written his letter was that 'the Judge had given Moyle a trimming and Moyle couldn't take it'. That was a lie out of whole cloth. Howlett made no honest investigation to determine facts but circulated and published falsehoods to further bring my name and reputation into disrepute. The use of the October 15th and November 15th Watch Towers for the purposes of controversy and personality are contrary to Society policy. The Watch Tower masthead carries this statement: 'It does not indulge in controversy, and its columns are not open to personalities'. These two issues are clearly contrary to Society policy...
It looks to me as though Brother Rutherford was frightened for fear that I would publish and circulate the facts concerning his unbridled use of the tongue and therefore used the Society's facilities in a smear campaign to destroy my reputation completely so that none would believe anything I say....You have it in your hands to decide whether this campaign of hate and falsehood against myself shall continue".
-
sabastious
I know cult leader's personality trickles down to the rank and file members, but I didn't realize that it even works across generations. The way Rutherford attacked Moyle is standard apostate procedure in the Watchtower today. Smear, smear, smear until their reputation just can't pull through, that'll make them think twice! FOR THE BRETHEREN!
-Sab