(continuation of clarification)
Before I explain further what the new “Elder arrangement” had to do with changing the administration of the entire organization let me first say the hopeful anticipation of good coming from the “elder” arrangement in the 1970’s is far different from the reality we see today.
The Presiding Overseer form of administration was a dictatorship and as dictators and kingships go, if the king is good the people are happy. If the king is bad the people suffer. Though there were some difficulties in the transition, most saw the change as a giant shift toward a kinder, loving theocratic society, especially with the shift in focus to shepherding the flock instead of beating them. I certainly do not need to expound on the reality we see thirty years later. As JT often says, now we have ‘janitors’ who think they are infallible counselors.
My next comment you quoted was:
This change did not take place because a dissident corp member was looking for a chance to manipulate the political structure and take over. It took place because R Franz was seeking Biblical truth.
Again this was in the context of whether R. Franz would have eventually become president. He was not manipulating political structure. He was “seeking Biblical truth” regarding the elder arrangement of the first century as to how the individual congregation was organized, not validation for a Governing Body to rule the congregations. However, the newly instituted ‘Elder Arrangement’ in the congregations resulted in the flow of change from bottom to top.
In R Franz’s Crisis of Conscience he says (page 78)
The information the book Aid to Bible Understanding presented about the elders doubtless began the process. Till then the congregations had been under the supervision of a single person, the “Congregation Overseer”. His replacement by a body of elders of necessity raised questions about the Branch Organizations where on man was the “overseer” for the whole country, mush as a bishop or archbishop”.
Especially at Brooklyn Bethel we were waiting impatiently for the principles of the elder arrangement to effect change in the Presidency (dictatorship) that governed the world wide congregations.
Finally in 1975 the impatience was manifest as discontent which reached the Presidents ears. In a nut shell, after a series of meetings with the President, Vice President, all WT officers and so called GB appointees, five committees were established, composed of these same men who were to take over administration of the WT organization. The president’s power over the Watchtower Society was revoked and the GB as we know it was born.
As you demonstrated above with your quotes, Islandwoman, he found no scriptural foundation for a governing body. However, his reintroduction of the ‘elder arrangement’ in the congregations had this side effect on the world wide administration and was a welcome change in administration. Ray F says in his book (C of C page 108)
My earnest hope was that the “leveling” and equalizing effect of the change would allow for greater moderation, a reduction of dogmatism, a greater concern for individuals and their individual circumstances and problems and perhaps some day, the elimination of the authoritarian approach that produced so many rules and assumed such great control over the personal lives of people.”
WOW! I, while outside the intimate workings that caused this change, was just as hopeful. It appears I personally had more faith than Ray Franz that the organization was now on the right track. It took me twenty years more than Ray to give up that hope.
I hope this has been clarifying. Please do not hesitate to question me further.
Jst2laws
