Letter read cong is now an association

by Yomama 27 Replies latest jw friends

  • Phizzy

    Yes Rick , I see the move as motivated entirely by this, thus the org itself would not be Sued for compensation, and the poor victims would not get what they should for having a life both stolen and ruined. The Elders and local Cong have few assets, not even a K.H that belongs to them !

    Heartless money grubbing bastards, JW Org.

  • road to nowhere
    road to nowhere


    The controls are well documented so any judge can recognize the weaseling they are trying.

    Big question if the rank and file can see it

  • RickJones

    The pedophile situation within the JWS and how they handled it never made any practical sense to me, as in why would they leave the matter open and unresolved just because the individual denied the act and realistically just disfellowshiping the individual is leaving the rest of general public to availing harm.

    People talk in congregations and spread rumors behind doors leaving people to think about what kind of social environment they are in.

    You would think they would encourage a police investigation particularly if there is a denial by the accused, and wait upon what the law authorities come up with.

    If there is a charge of pedophilia toward a member of their congregation, they should then Disfellowship the individual to protect the rest of the congregation and local congregations as well from potential harm.

  • waton

    I like to hear seamless confirmation about the reading first. but

    Calling members "publishers" made them kind of personally responsible too.

    That is why i am ashamed to have published the wt stuff 2/3s of my life*. compared to Jesus only 10% of his time.

    Walmart announcement: ask any associate for assistance.

    * on second thought that figure is wrong, I use wt material now only to debunk the j--- P. S. wt writers already use the term "associate", when they call a jw who has terminated his membership ( by voting for trump/biden for example) as "disassociated"

  • RickJones

    The WTS doesn't think to accept the fact that elders have been charged with pedophilia as well, not just so called associated members (baptized publishers) of the congregations .

    ......no that cant be elders are the most righteous of the righteous !

  • LongHairGal


    This is the first place I read about this change of terminology...How can anybody keep up with this?

    I also believe the cost of leaving is great for many JWs:..they are shunned. Doesn’t matter if they didn’t do anything morally wrong in a scriptural sense.

    It must be particularly hurtful for people who were popular and in the thick of things with a great social life and many friends - only to see it dry up overnight. That’s why anybody planning their exit has to prepare with new acquaintances and contacts beforehand!

    I guess I was fortunate in the sense that I was not popular and had few friends in the religion since I worked full-time..I was already an ‘outcast’ in their eyes - so it didn’t matter all that much when I ‘Faded’.

  • Jeffro

    What letter?

  • JeffT

    I'd like to see the letter. I'm not a lawyer, but I was an accountant for twenty-six years. I have some professional understanding of legal matters.

    This may well be used to try to legally sever the link between the individual Congregations and JW Org,

    I don't think this can be done, at least not with anything like the current configuration of the Witness Organization. As long as money flows up and orders flow down, the link exists, whether or not the WTBS acknowledges it. And, as one of my accounting professors said "the first rule of law is sue somebody with money." I spent fifteen years in three congregations and I can only think of two elders that might have had enough money to make a lawyer interested in suing them.

    In other words, playing word games won't shelter the WTBS

  • Yomama

    In the letter they kept referring to the ecclesiastical governing body.

  • JeffT

    Late thought, OK the brain is almost 70 years old and I haven't been in a Kingdom Hall since 1988, the gears turn slowly.

    I seem to recall that we were told not to identify ourselves as Jehovah's Witnesses because only the 144,000 were the actual witnesses. We were "associated with Jehovah's witnesses." Maybe they're going back to old terminology.

Share this