For a GB member to DA?? I think it's realistic. They know about the things like the ARC, child abuse cove-ups and what not.
Could we ever see a GB member disassociate?
by pleaseresearch 41 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
Esse quam videri
Strange. I wrote a whole paragraph of outstanding and amazing comments and it disappeared when I saved it.
-
ozbrad
2/3 of them thought overlapping generations was a good idea. -
TheListener
Oh come on no discussion at all about some members of the GB using another member as a scapegoat to lay blame for losing J's blessing? I really think they'd do it if they felt it would increase donations and reinvigorate the rank and file.
If they did scapegoat someone I think Geoffrey Jackson is a solid candidate because of his ARC testimony.
-
done4good
To answer the OP, it would be extremely unlikely.
As mentioned, Ray Franz did not disassociate. However, he did have the moral character to challenge the prevailing direction the organization had long since been following. He was intelligent, articulate, well connected, (Freddy's nephew), and just a bit naive. He was also young by standards of the day, (around 50 when the GB was formed in 1971).
The GB of the '70s were of a very different era, and came to power for different reasons than their current existence is being allowed for today. Pre-GB, (1971), Knorr had 100% control of the organization. Knorr also trusted in his little buddy, Fred Franz, unquestionably in areas of doctrinal concern. Due to the 1975 hysteria, (created by F. Franz), the presidency was about to run the organization off a cliff. The board of directors saw this threat, and knew it had to act to perform damage control long before 1975 came around. The board promoted itself to become the "Governing Body", (prior to 1971, any reference to the board of directors as a governing body, used the non-proper lower case reference), absorbed the president and vice-president to save face with the R&F, (the presidency was vehemently against the arrangement, as they saw it for what it was, essential mutiny), and by Jan 1, 1976, (not a coincidence), assumed 100% control over all of the organization's business. Ray was one of an additional 11 added to that board between 1971-1974.
That was the Governing Body that Ray attempted to challenge. A new, untested, somewhat disorganized group of 18 members. While this group may have been formed to prevent the corruption that existed among the presidency, at the end of the day, no progressive reforms were ever made in the organization. The authoritarian structure remained, and it simply refracted itself from a small concentrated oligarchy of one or two, to a new group of 18. Ray was not a lone wolf, however he, (and perhaps Swingle and Sydlik), were not able to overcome the inertia of the authoritarian structure. Since Ray was the most vocal of any would-be reformer, he was pushed out.
I added the above for context. Today, the corporate structure, business model, and purpose of the GB itself are very different from what they were in 1970s or 1980s. A Ray Franz type incident today would be a true black swan event, not impossible, but very improbable. If it were to happen, it would shake the organization to its knees, and for this reason alone, a structure has been created to prevent it from happening.
d4g
-
sparky1
If I can't get a job, what will that fat f*** do if he leaves?
Maybe he can wait until one of these folks retire?!
-
Nathan Natas
NO.
It will NEVER happen.
It is impossible!
[THIS is my 10,000th post!]
-
Vidiot
What Nathan said.
They're too carefully vetted these days; full-on company men are the only ones who make it to the top, and they've got way too much to lose.
Without the WTS, these guys would have nothing.
They would be nothing.
-
jwleaks
If a current member of the GB decides to defect, go rogue (public), or disassociate himself then you'll find the remaining members will have a crisis meeting and decide that the most appropriate theocratic course of action would be to personally send the unfaithful one directly to Jesus and Jehovah for discipline. -
Beth Sarim
''If a current member of the GB decides to defect, go rogue (public), or disassociate himself then you'll find the remaining members will have a crisis meeting and decide that the most appropriate theocratic course of action would be to personally send the unfaithful one directly to Jesus and Jehovah for discipline. ''
I always wondered that too.
