Fred Franz Discredited a GB -- Part II

by RationalWitness 12 Replies latest jw friends

  • RationalWitness
    RationalWitness

    Fred Franz Discredited a GB -- Part II

    After elaborating on how Jesus Christ had 'used' C. T. Russell as a modern-day evangelizer, Franz continued his talk with an historical look at the origins of the Gilead School, evidently intending to remind his audience that it was not a "Governing Body", but the president of the Society who had been 'used' by God to bring about this marvelous educational institution. His comments regarding how the Society's president was "viewed" are of particular note, as they suggest what the Governing Body's nearly year-long discussions were aimed at bringing about …

    Well, so that Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society, uh, operated throughout the years, and then, to make the story short, we come down to the year 1942. And I can remember a special meeting that was held on Thursday, September the 24th, of the year 1942. A new president had, eh, arisen to preside over the affairs of the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society. And on this specified date, why, he called a joint meeting of the Board of Directors of the Pennsylvania Corporation and of the New York Corporation. There was a joint meeting of us members of these boards. Because both of these corporations were involved, now, in the project that was going to be submitted, uh, to this body of men. And I can remember how there was at that meeting, which was held up in Brother Rutherford's, eh, the former president's, eh, office, there were present the president, the new president, N. H. Knorr, and also vice president H. C. Covington, and secretary-treasurer W. E. Van Amburgh, and, uh, H. H. Riemer, who was my roommate at the time, and also T. J. Sullivan, and Arthur Goux, and myself. There were all seven members of the New York Corporation present at that meeting. And there were five members of the Pennsylvania Corporation at that meeting.

    Now, we got together, and the president of the Society, of both societies, Brother Knorr, uh, he first read a portion of the charter of the New York Corporation to this joint board meeting. How it was devoted to, uh, promoting the preaching and teaching of the Good News. And then he called attention to the fact that up there at Kingdom Farm there was this building, Gilead by name, and it was not being used to the full extent, only to one third of its capacity. And then he pointed out the fact, something that he had cherished in his heart for a long time, that this would be an excellent place to establish a SCHOOL, for the training and preparing of missionaries.

    Well, this was a delightful proposal that was submitted by the president to all the rest of us, uh, board members, and there was favorable discussion all around about this proposed school. And then my roommate, H. H. Riemer, he made the motion that the president of these societies set in motion the operation to establish such a school for the preparing of men and women who at a moment's notice could be sent out in preaching work to different countries. Then, H. C. Covington, the vice president and also the legal counsel, he added something to Riemer's motion, and he said that the president of the Society should be AUTHORIZED to make all plans and arrangements to see that this school is established according to his discretion, and that he should also make all plans and arrangements to see that this school is financed and kept in operation. Well, I seconded that motion, and the motion was unanimously, eh, acc, eh…accepted, approved by all those present. And right after that, then, the president, he made further proposals about educational work of the societies, and proposed the publication of a school textbook that would be used by ALL the congregations of Jehovah's people. And after the motion was made, why T. J. Sullivan approved of that educational motion, too. So that now the question was thrown to a united board meeting and this was also unanimously approved.

    So, you see, dear friends, that the boards of directors of the New York Corporation and of the Pennsylvania as constituted back there, they had respect for the office of the president, and they did not treat the president of these organizations as a poker-faced, immobilized figurehead presiding over a society, a 'do-nothing' society.

    Well, you can ask Brother Arthur Goux what he remembers of that meeting, he was there. And here is a copy of the minutes of that meeting [he opens a copy of the minutes; a rustle of noise is evident from the audience], to verify what I've told you. So you can see that, eh, this society really has the right and the authority to send out missionaries. That's the challenging question I raised at the very beginning of this talk. And that society has continued on till now sending out missionaries now to the number of more than five thousand. Now isn't that a wonderful? [Audience responds with sustained applause.]

    And I'm sure that many of us here today are very glad that Jehovah has preserved the original president of the school down till now, and as president of the New York Corporation, why, he will continue in his office until the end of the current term on July 1st, Nineteen Hundred…or rather January 1st, eh, Nine…Eighteen…, Nineteen Hundred and Seventy-Six.

    And when you come to think about it, dear friends, it's really remarkable. Today, do you know, is the seventh day of September, Nineteen Hundred and Seventy-Five. [Loud audience stirring can be heard.] And do you know what that means according to this diary, Hebrew diary, from the land of Israel? Why this is the second day of the month Tishri of the lunar year Nineteen Hundred and Seventy-Six. And do you know what that means? That here on this day of your graduation, why, it is the second day of the SEVENTH MILLENNIUM of man's existence here on earth. Isn't that something? Isn't that something, friends? [Loud applause from the audience.] That the opening days of the seventh millennium of mankind's existence is signalized by the operation of the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society in full compliance with the terms of its charter, sending out the fifty-ninth class of the Gilead School for missionaries. And furthermore, I'm told that, eh, by the arrangement of the New York Corporation, we already have some twenty brothers and sisters who are going to form class number sixty in the Gilead School. And, very interesting that at the end of sixty centuries of human existence here on earth, why class number SIXTY is going to start its schooling at the opening of the seventh millennium of mankind's existence.

    These are, eh, surprising things, startling things, HAPPIFYING things over which we can rejoice. And I'm sure that many of us here can be very, very happy that Jehovah God put into the mind of Brother Knorr and into his heart to establish this missionary school at Gilead. Jehovah God certainly has blessed it, and by its fruits, why it has become KNOWN as an approved agency in the hand of Jehovah God, so that there is no NEED to challenge the RIGHT and the AUTHORITY of this society to send out missionaries. And, friends, notice this, that just as God used the Antioch congregation to send out the two most out...two of the most outstanding missionaries of the first century, Paul and Barnabas, so today Jehovah God is using the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania, in collaboration with the New York Corporation, to send out further missionaries. And they're determined to keep ON in that course. That's something very, very gratifying.

    It is interesting that, after a nearly year-long struggle to wrest control of the Society from its then president, Nathan Knorr, the Governing Body twenty-five years later has seemingly relinquished that control by resigning their positions as directors and transferring oversight of the existing and newly created legal entities to others. One wonders whether these recent developments will--like similar adjustments in the past--become future "fulfillments" of prophetic speculation and a divinely ordained corrective realignment of "God's Organization."

    Cheers,
    Rational

  • ros
    ros
    It is interesting that, after a nearly year-long struggle to wrest control of the Society from its then president, Nathan Knorr, the Governing Body twenty-five years later has seemingly relinquished that control by resigning their positions as directors and transferring oversight of the existing and newly created legal entities to others.

    And Knorr seemingly, as far as it was published to membership at large, willingly relinquished sole control back in 1975. That's why I think the recent 'relinquishing' and resignation of Henshal was much the same. The power was wrested from the GB. My suspician is that JWs will hear less and less about the "Faithful and discreet slave" as being the "Governing body", or even the 144,000. It will be interesting to see.

    One wonders whether these recent developments will-like similar adjustments in the past--become future "fulfillments" of prophetic speculation and a divinely ordained corrective realignment of "God's Organization."

    Or if they will just quietly fade into oblivian. The less they say, the less we exJW "apostates" can refute.

    What I have always found curious is that when this wresting of power from Knorr occurred, it was months before they expected Armageddon in 1975. I have wondered why the other members of the so-called "governing body" didn't have more pressing matters in those "last hours" before the end. Couldn't it wait until after Armageddon? Who know, maybe some or all of them would be raptured to heaven. (Or were they really beginning to doubt Fred Franz's predictions by then? Maybe that was in some way influencing this concern of leadership?) Just thinking.

  • AlanF
    AlanF

    Excellent material, RW!

    Among the many interesting notions in Franz's talk was that he revealed his (and the Society's up to that point) view "that Jehovah God put into the mind of Brother Knorr and into his heart to establish this missionary school at Gilead." That's a direct claim of inspiration! It explains a great deal about the views of JW leaders about their 'spiritual authority', and puts to rest the claims of apologists that Watchtower leaders don't think of themselves as inspired.

    AlanF

  • RationalWitness
    RationalWitness

    Hi Ros and AF,

    One of the things I enjoyed most about Franz's talk was the implication that the then recently enlarged Governing Body was intent (in Franz's opinion) on making Knorr into a "poker-faced, immobilized figurehead presiding over a ... 'do-nothing' society." I have to wonder if one of the GB actually described Knorr in something like those terms. Come to think of it, he did have something of a "poker face". :^)

    Cheers,
    Rational

  • RationalWitness
    RationalWitness

    just bringing this to the top for Maximus's attention.

    Cheers,
    Rational

  • voltaire
    voltaire

    I would be interested in hearing Maximus' read on whether or not the change indicated an internal power struggle. I've wondered if the younger brothers haven't gently pushed aside the aging and frail (senile?) GB members. A sister once told me about an opportunity she had to eat a meal with Schroeder. She said that it was occasionally difficult to folow him. Seems he had difficulty maintaining an entirely coherent line of thought for extended periods.That was several years ago.

  • voltaire
    voltaire

    Clarification on last post-by change I mean the most recent change, not the ' 75 change.

  • outnfree
    outnfree

    Thanks again, Rational!

    Ros,
    I think several members of the GB had decided by then that Armageddon was NOT coming in 1975, and I believe I read somewhere that some had never bought into the idea in the first place.

    I, too, think that AlanF's observation that Franz' remark about Jehovah God putting it "into the mind of Brother Knorr and into his heart to establish this missionary school at Gilead" points to the Society's belief that the presidents were inspired men. That goes a long way into understanding why the directors put up with so much garbage from J.F. Rutherford as well. And I'm sure Fred felt he had a special line to Jehovah, too, and was going to be rooked of the opportunity to be God's "spiritual authority" on earth as heir to Knorr.

    outnfree

  • VeniceIT
    VeniceIT

    ok I posted this on H2O! The original discussion was on a board called 'the Place'. It's really long I'm sorry but it crackes me up how dumb this guy is!!!! he doesnt' even get my name right ahhah!!!

    Ven

    Here’s some funny stuff that’s been posted on a JW only site, they are very selective about what they allow to post there, very controlled, and rude. Anyway here’s a series of posts that I thought were too good not to post.
    __________________________________
    It sure makes one think now about that study we had in the book of Ezekiel sometime back. All the ill postings we get mostly are from those who think in fleshly or Carnal nature. They have absolutely no idea of the ramifications of Jehovah's earthly organization, and what really is going on. Some even turn to that grand Apostate Fred Franz, for enlightenment on what the Organization is up too. How truly funny indeed!
    Make sure you get your new Video ordered, "The Whole Association Of Brothers." It really makes one feel the love our Brotherhood truly has. World wide at that!
    George
    That apostate you mention gave one of the talks at the 1975 fall Gilead Graduation. I will never forget it. He implied that Galatians chapter 2 and other CGS accounts showed that Paul and others did not report to the Governing Body in the first century and in fact there was no Governing Body in the first century. What a bunch of malarky.
    *** Some even turn to that grand Apostate Fred Franz, for enlightenment on what the Organization is up too. ***
    I'm sure you meant to say Raymond Franz, instead of "Fred".
    Friday
    >>Some even turn to that grand Apostate Fred Franz, for enlightenment
    on what the Organization is up too. ***
    I'm sure you meant to say Raymond Franz, instead of "Fred".Friday<<

    Ooooops! I did make a big boo-boo on that one; didn't I? I apologize for the error! Sadly, I'm always twisting those two names around. Right intent, wrong names; sorry bout that!
    George
    __________________
    At this point I posted as Venice, just to clear things up. I let him know that yes Fred is the one that gave the talk, yada, yada, yada. Well here is his reply to me that he posts, funny though he didn’t post mine?????
    _____________________
    Sorry Venice... Tuesday, 17-Oct-00 05:15:57 Although I have been making plenty of errors in the names between "Fred And Ray," which for me at least is consistant; I'm afraid I'll reject your post on Fred. Believe me, I was around also in 1975, and do not ever recall such a talk you say Fred made. If he had done so, I would have known about it. One can easily discern what Paul thought of the Governing body in Jerusalem at that time. After all, he made "appeal" to it. And when that decision was made by the Jerusalem body, Paul stuck with that decision. Thus, I must reject your post, as simply nothing more than further attempt at posting error. I think here, you may have the two boys mixed up... George
    ________________
    I posted back something to the effect that I wasn't the one who was confused, and had the talk on tape, and it's deff FRED's voice, if you've ever heard him speak. And that by trying to deny the facts he's only fooling himself. I get the feeling he won't post this one either, but he might reply to it. AHHHHH they are deff. blind.
    Venice
    Posted by venice [VeniceIT] on October 18, 2000 at 15:09:51 {9dDgu8HKuc0hi4VK0MIQ.bhvhyEsfQ}:
    In Reply to: Always good for a laugh! posted by Venice on October 18, 2000 at 11:21:59:
    And the beat goes on....
    ________________Re: Sorry Venice...
    Wednesday, 18-Oct-00 13:36:45
    I most certianly do not. I happen to have a copy of the tape that FRED gave, and it's deffinetly him, if you've ever heard his voice. I don't know where you were at the 1975 graduation, but you apparenlty were not there. He did give that talk, and I personally have heard the tape and know several that people that were there and heard it live. I'm not the one confused. You can't deny something just because it's hard for you top comprehend. It did happen, your only fooling yourself. Agape!
    Venice
    I'm Sure.... Wednesday, 18-Oct-00 16:21:21 You may have some "copy" of "some tape." I'm not going to dispute that. I ponder, was that a copy of a copy perhaps? Attempting to cast wrong on me, because I won't subject myself to such subjective evidence, coming from some Internet computer board, is certainly not grounded upon much. If Fred had given a talk, totally in disagreement with already known Biblical information, there would have been corrective measures taken, that I can rest assured of. I don't recall any such flap occuring, so must question such accusations. I also have found out time and time again, those not liking what has been told to them, have a real problem with "the power of reason." Romans 12:1. They have a tendency to take given information out of context, and invert their own idea's into it. Whatever the circumstance in truth here is, I'm not desiring to pay any heed to the accusations. You are most certainly correct, I believe Jehovah's organization, over any counter information given against them over this medium. I can personally base that stand, on what I've experienced from this organization over many years of dealing with them. George
    __________________________
    Ahhhh you want to talk about lack of 'power of reasoning' HELLLOOO,
    "Don't confuse me with the facts"
    Posted by Venice [VeniceIT] on October 18, 2000 at 17:18:25 {9dDgu8HKuc0hi4VK0MIQ.bhvhyEsfQ}:
    In Reply to: **Always good for a laugh! posted by circe on October 18, 2000 at 17:00:46:
    Re: I'm Sure....
    Wednesday, 18-Oct-00 19:11:50
    I'm only trying to help you. That talk was legit, Fred gave it. If you'd like a copy I could send you one. I don't understand what you are so afraid of. He gave the talk, that's the truth, you can't change the truth to fit into your own box. You have to acept all truth. Denying that it was given isn't helping the situation. Jesus said to worship in 'spirit & Truth'. Read Galations, this is Paul's account of the meeting in Jerusalem, read Gal. 1:1. The truth is the truth and should stand up to all ridicule. Therefore we should never fear reading the Bible.
    Venice
    Sorry! I'm just not interested....
    Wednesday, 18-Oct-00 19:37:38
    I'm not interested in this at all. I can research any information I care too. But, I really do not care to waste the time on this one doing so. If I was to listen to all the Malarkey coming over this site, I would not be able to find the time to eat. Your supposed information does nothing to my faith, nor moves me in any manner!
    Goodday to you...
    If you want to send something, send me the congregation name and place your are associated with.
    George
    ____________________
    I think I'm giving up on this guy. I mean what does he want to do? Turn me in??? Man some people are so incredibly stubborn
    Posted by Venice [VeniceIT] on October 18, 2000 at 22:46:15 {9dDgu8HKuc/CPYT8orz2.bhvhyEsfQ}:
    In Reply to: ****Always good for a laugh! posted by rinzai on October 18, 2000 at 18:12:39:
    He finally decided so admit it, but notice that instead of acknowledging that he'd been wrong, he has more of an attitude of condescention, that he has decided to bless those of us on the site of his vast intilect and ability to point and click, on the WTS cd-rom
    __________________________

    Well! Maybe A Small Comment For The Record! Wednesday, 18-Oct-00 22:39:46 Just for the record I suppose, we might take a little peek at what brother Franz did say in that graduation address. One can plainly see that his "theme" was not that of down grading the organization, but of simply bringing out some Biblical facts on matters. Below is and excerpt taken from the 1975 yearbook. Nothing in it would lead me to believe in accepting that brother Franz was talking against already known Biblical information. To attempt teaching this was what he was doing, is simply abnormal injection of context. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Addressing the graduates, F. W. Franz showed why they were not being sent by any ecclesiastical body such as exists in the churches of Christendom. According to the Scriptures, neither Philip nor the apostle Paul, two outstanding evangelizers or missionaries in the first century C.E., received missionary assignments from the apostolic body at Jerusalem. Both men did their work under the direction of the real head of the Christian congregation, Jesus Christ. Paul had, in fact, been directly chosen by Jesus as an apostle to the nations. Later, at the direction of God's spirit, Paul and his companion Barnabas were sent out from the Antioch congregation. Both men recognized their assignment as having come, not from men, but from Jesus Christ. The missionaries trained at Gilead School can also be confident of Christ's backing and direction.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~>>According to the Scriptures, neither Philip nor the apostle Paul, two outstanding evangelizers or missionaries in the first century C.E., received missionary assignments from the apostolic body at Jerusalem.<>Both men recognized their assignment as having come, not from men, but from Jesus Christ<

    ______________________
    ***Nothing in it would lead me to believe in accepting that brother Franz was talking against already known Biblical information. To attempt teaching this was what he was doing, is simply abnormal injection of context.***
    Apparently you misunderstood my original post. I was simply clarifying the mater that Fred gave that talk. I did not in any way intimate that he was going agaist any bibical information. Which I agree he was not. What really bothers me is the fact that you did not post my original post but make it sound as though I'm some raving lunatic, who has no idea what they are talking about.
    I find it hard to understand how you so specifically stated that this talk had NOT been given, that I was wrong, or confused. And then without so much as a comment of apology you post a comment from the yearbook about it. What is going on? Why did you try to deny it without looking it up? Why were you so incredibly self-righteous and rude about the entire discussion, when you were the one who was in error? Why do you refuse to post harmless messages so that you can post replies to them to make the author of the original look ridiculous therefore making you look smarter. Well, it backfired on you this time. I suggest that in the future you check your sources, and try to treat people with a bit of dignity. They you won't have to fight so hard to gain yours back.
    Agape,
    Venice
    Posted by Venice [VeniceIT] on October 19, 2000 at 11:50:24 {jZWAT9ORLU/CPYT8orz2.bhvhyEsfQ}:
    In Reply to: *****Always good for a laugh! posted by Venice on October 18, 2000 at 22:46:15:
    You'd think by this time he could have gotten my name right.
    __________________________
    Vanessa Thursday, 19-Oct-00 07:28:52 I would be more than willing to apologize, if that was needed. If I had read your original message wrongly, (which I may have done, but do not think so) then I'm in error. Your essense if I recall, was not on whether Fred had said this or that in one of his talks; but that the message eluded to his "putting down" the Governing body. Now you wish to argue that all you said was that he gave this talk. I do not believe that was the original idea, or context, of your original post. Do you still have that original? If so, would you like to resend it? I'm most busy at this time, and do not spend the time looking over posts as I should. Perhaps I did error, but I'd like to see that original post once again.George
    I'm sorry, but I didn't save my original post, I had no idea you wouldn't post it. I'm sorry if it came across that way to you, but I was a bit upset with the previous post. He was saying that Fred was an apostate, and gave that talk and it was a bunch of Malarkey. I thought that being as Fred later became the Pres. this should be cleared up. He gave that talk, and I believe it was due to some of the changes that were taking place back then, kind of like the changes now. I didn't appreciate your attitude towards me and my posts.
    I don't understand how you so adamantly denied that it happened and then suddenly you post the quotes from the yearbook. I think you are a bit touchy and need to loosen up a bit if your going to last 'online' for long.
    best wishes,
    Venice
    Re: Re: Vanessa Thursday, 19-Oct-00 20:51:46 >>I don't understand how you so adimatly denied that it happened and then suddenly you post the quotes from the yearbook. I think you are a bit touchy and need to loosen up a bit if your going to last 'online' for long.<

    As For Lasting Long... Friday, 20-Oct-00 10:22:10 It might be a blessing in disguise if I don't "make it" online. We certainly have other channels operating, and have absolutely no need for this forum whatsoever. This medium seems to "not" be a very good medium; and would not stop the work in the least if this board where shut down. I have contempulated shutting it down many times, but get a protest from some folks on that. At anyrate, I have no delusions of being "Politically Correct," nor do I strive for that position. Soon the earth will be wiped clean of any mention of Politics, so it's no big deal to me!
    ________
    I did not deny it happened, I denied what I believed to be "wrong" interpretation of the context. Oh well! History now! You are correct on one matter; I am a bit touchy, and wonder why? If you could view the garbage attempted to be posted here, I have an idea you also might be a bit testy as well.
    ________

    ***I did not deny it happened, ****
    REALLY, how can you say that, that is not true. I have a hard time calling someone a liar, esp. someone who claims to be a JW, but I don't know if I'm left with any alternative. Here's why, perhaps you forgot what you posted, seeing as it's now no longer on the board. Maybe this will refresh your memory.

    ***Sorry Venice... Tuesday, 17-Oct-00 05:15:57 Although I have been making plenty of errors in the names between "Fred And Ray," which for me at least is consistant; I'm afraid I'll reject your post on Fred. Believe me, I was around also in 1975, and do not ever recall such a talk you say Fred made. If he had done so, I would have known about it. One can easily discern what Paul thought of the Governing body in Jerusalem at that time. After all, he made "appeal" to it. And when that decision was made by the Jerusalem body, Paul stuck with that decision. Thus, I must reject your post, as simply nothing more than further attempt at posting error. I think here, you may have the two boys mixed up... George ****

    ***I'm Sure.... Wednesday, 18-Oct-00 16:21:21 You may have some "copy" of "some tape." I'm not going to dispute that. I ponder, was that a copy of a copy perhaps? Attempting to cast wrong on me, because I won't subject myself to such subjective evidence, coming from some Internet computer board, is certainly not grounded upon much. If Fred had given a talk, totally in disagreement with already known Biblical information, there would have been corrective measures taken, that I can rest assured of. I don't recall any such flap occuring, so must question such accusations. I also have found out time and time again, those not liking what has been told to them, have a real problem with "the power of reason." Romans 12:1. They have a tendency to take given information out of context, and invert their own idea's into it. Whatever the circumstance in truth here is, I'm not desiring to pay any heed to the accusations. You are most certainly correct, I believe Jehovah's organization, over any counter information given against them over this medium. I can personally base that stand, on what I've experienced from this organization over many years of dealing with them. George****

    "The best way to convince a fool that he is wrong, is to let him have his own way."---Josh Billings

  • VeniceIT
    VeniceIT

    hmmmm double post!!! must be cowboy's surf at it agian!

    Ven

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit