Society on Documenting Personal Views

by Marvin Shilmer 35 Replies latest jw friends

  • JanH
    JanH

    Patio,

    While I agree on all that is said in this thread about WTS basically forbidding personal views, it doesn't differ that much from the government agency that employs me. There are certain people designated to speak to the press.


    You're confusing two very different issues. Of course only designated persons can speak authoritatively for the corporation. Naturally, not every 6 million+ JW can speak for the Watchtower Society, neither for the JW religion as a whole. But scholars don't care much about such things. They want individuals to tell them how they personally experience their life as a JW. JWs interviewed will only be expected to tell how they themselves live their lives.

    So, naturally, you cannot speak for your agency, and even less the state. But you are permitted to speak for yourself. If scholars asked you to tell them if you liked your job, etc, you will certainly be able to do so. If they asked what the agency means about various issues, you could not.

    In an authoritarian sect like the JWs, the individual doesn't exist as such. He is merely a tool for the greater Organization. Kill the "old personality" and take on a new one with the suit and tie...

    As I said, I did send this around to a few scholars of religion. They found it very amusing and, as I said, extremely naive. "What a mental world!" one said.

    It is sad that the WTS thinks its interests are better served by hiding their members' feelings to scholars and the public.

    - Jan
    --
    Faith, n. Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel. [Ambrose Bierce, The Devil´s Dictionary, 1911]

  • patio34
    patio34

    JanH,
    Thanks for the clarification. It's true the JWs individually wouldn't be speaking for the WTBS, just individual surveys.

    Pat

  • Francois
    Francois

    As noted previously, the tighter the society tightens its grasp, the more publishers will slip through its fingers.

    The truth will OUT!

    Francois

    P.S. - Hope you boys at 114 Adams Street are sleeping well. See ya on the news! What DID you do with the money?

  • BoozeRunner
    BoozeRunner

    Such Beautiful sentiments from the WTS resident HENCHMEN, the Service Dept!!!

    "we certainly want to avoid having publishers expressing personal viewpoints that may not be in line with the Bible principles that really govern each Christian's conduct and the united efforts of the brotherhood to carry out Jehovah's will."

    But after taking off my Rose-colored glasses, the above passage read QUITE differently......

    "we (THE BORG) certainly want to avoid having OUR DRONES THINKING FREELY FOR THEMSELVES which is not in line with the obectives that really govern our CLOAK and DAGGER style of PUBLIC RELATIONS and the willy-nilly efforts of our ENFORCERS to apply conformity"

    [8>]

  • MacHislopp
    MacHislopp

    To Marvin: I 'm sure that you notice on the WTS letter:

    "The elder could provide such researchers with a copy of the brochure Jehovah’s Witnesses—Who Are They? What Do They Believe? On page 13 of the brochure, the basic beliefs of Jehovah’s Witnesses are listed together with the Scriptural reasons for those beliefs. We accept the Bible as the inspired Word of God. It is the basis for all our beliefs and teachings. It is reliable, whereas tradition is not. "

    So according to this letter …" the Bible is THE BASIS FOR ALL OUR BELIEFS"???

    I'm not going to provide a list , you all know …this kind of reasoning is again for the benefit of the media.
    Like this part too:

    "In addition, reference can be made to the Watchtower Society’s Web site so that the researcher may have access to a wide array of information, all of which explains the Scriptural basis for the position that Jehovah’s Witnesses take on vital issues".

    To Seeker: .

    "Without mentioning the real issues that are about to be asked about, they talk about minor issues for which ready answers can be provided. Everything else that the elders are not prepared for should be directed to the Society, with no comment from the local brothers. Thus reporters will be turned away when this happens."

    Very good, straight to the center!

    And also from Ozziepost:

    "It's always intrigued me as to who a "qualified elder" might be? Using the adjective 'qualified" implies that there are other elders who must be 'unqualified' doesn't it?"

    You're …not alone Ozzie!

    Agape J.C. MacHislopp

  • tydy
    tydy

    The thing that really stood out to me was this.

    "When approached by researchers, the elder should treat them kindly, and he may listen to what they have to say."

    When they say the word ....may.... they imply that they have the power to grant permission. That means that they could just have easily said "may not". This should show to outsiders the kind of authority the ORG. has. In this case we're not refering to speaking to the researcher. They are refering to just listening to him. What kind of organization will reserve to right to tell its members to whom they may or may not listen.

    Tim

  • SixofNine
    SixofNine

    Tim, I thought that word "may" stood out like a sore thumb as well.

  • outnfree
    outnfree

    Now, see? I thought the "may" was meant more along the lines that the elder, when approached, might treat the researcher UNkindly and not even deign to listen to him/her (because some worldly person unworthy of respect was asking questions about JEHOVAH'S Organization!).

    Therefore, the QUALIFIED elder needed to be reminded that he should treat the researcher "kindly" and that he should listen to him/her so as to appear to not have at the ready the pre-programmed, Society-scripted reply to all such inquiries that the elder actually has been given. This "may" lull the researcher into not realizing that s/he has been given a non-answer (or been stonewalled).

    Of course, as noted above, the tactic will likely fail! Isn't it interesting to sit back and watch as the Society falls all over itself with missteps?

    outnfree

  • waiting
    waiting
    the elder should treat them kindly, and he may listen to what they have to say."

    Yup. That's strange counsel. "Elder, treat them kindly and you may listen. We have spoken."

    These would seem to be two separate ideas. 1. An action - treat kindly. 2. Permission to listen as opposed to orders to not (may not) listen.

    Wow.

    waiting

  • LDH
    LDH

    Of course, any 'Qualified Elder' is burned out, as we know. They may be having their own doubts, and then along comes a USA TODAY reporter who wants to ask them particulars.....A little grouchy, perhaps?!?!?

    A little on the defensive side, perhaps?

    If someone would be so kind as to scan this letter in there is nothing I would like better than to release it to the Religion Editor of every newspaper, with the caption WHY JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES CAN'T TALK TO YOU FREELY.

    I am sure that contributors on this board would be glad to send a copy to their local paper.....

    Can't you just see a Catholic Priest telling a reporter, "Check with the Vatican, I'm too busy to help you?"

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit