Category: Congregation

  • What of All These Changes in Recent Months? – Part 1

    What of all these changes in recent months? 

    Jehovah’s Witnesses have counted their time in the ministry for 100 years. Now they don’t do it any more.

    Next, it was beards. Jehovah’s Witnesses have been beardless since Russell days. Suddenly they start sprouting them.

    Then it is changes on how disfellowshipped ones are treated should they return to the Kingdom Hall. And also a newer, softer, way of treating minors who veer from the straight paths in which they were raised.

    And then—knock me over with a feather!—ties at meetings and in the ministry are placed on the chopping block. Forget about them if you want to! Look, I’ve seen photos of our brothers striding through the jungle with ties affixed!—and suddenly they’re optional! (A few shed them both at the next meeting and occasion for field service, but most did not.)

    And then, sisters may choose to wear slacks. Again, a few did. Most didn’t.

    I mean, that elder I love to tease—I told him I had expected him to show up in a Steelers sweatshirt! (which he did not)

    More on the horizon? I’ve got my eye on that slick two-seater sports car, just in case. I also might fix the starred out L-word in Tom Irregardless and Me: “L*ck.” Wine glasses filled up (with Coke) just awaiting people to toast.

    It’s even a bit surreal how fast things are changing. 

    Vic Vomodog (we used to pull together in the work!) contacted me recently. He thinks that with all these changes, now he can:

    Give me a second . . . . yeah, it is a little crazy. But it still works well.

    These days, a long-time favorite quote of mine is coming into play again: “It is remarkable that persons who speculate the most boldly often conform with the most perfect quietude to the external regulations of society.” (Nathaniel Hawthorne—The Scarlet Letter)

    I instantly thought of Witnesses upon reading that quote. Nobody ‘speculates’ more boldly than Jehovah’s Witnesses, They turn established paradigms of religious, philosophical, and secular life upon their head. At the same time, with what they regard as petty—matters of style, and so forth—they “conform with the most perfect quietude to the external regulations of [their] society.”

    It just makes life easier when people don’t go kicking against the goads over every silly little thing. And so, few of Jehovah’s Witnesses do. They save their kicking for things important. For trivial things, they go with the flow.

    However, this can result in silly situations in which people resist innocuous trends of the greater world because nobody wants to be the first to make an issue over something minor—and the first to do so is frowned upon by the others. We’re clearing out a lot of baggage now that might have been cleared out long ago but for our ‘sheeplike’ nature. It is a little embarrassing, because it does leave you open to sneering from Vic and his buddies, who have opted for a more independent model, but—well, sheep is the animal God chooses to represent those people he favors—not cats that cannot be herded.

    Times change. If you can change with them without sacrificing any core principles, that’s the thing to do. It makes life easier. You find yourself not taking a hard stand over things that don’t matter. Such things have built up over the years. They’re being cleared out now.

    To be continued here.

    ****  The bookstore

  • A Watchtower Study to Settle the Faith-Works ‘Debate.’

    Reference was made at yesterday’s Watchtower Study about how “For centuries, the relationship between faith and works has been hotly debated in Christendom.” Some insist it is saved by faith, and some insist by works. So the Study explored that topic, and it is a big ‘Duh.’ A child can understand it. Barely any ‘education’ at all is required. It is different ‘works’ in different contexts that Paul and James refer to.

    [‘Faith and Works can Lead to Righteousness’—December 2023 issue]

    So you begin to wonder why the learned one haven’t been able to settle it “for centuries.” Is it that “debate” is their method of choice, as though the way to settle anything is through triumph of the intellect? One brother pointed to a faulty silver lining in that approach; it enables professional debaters to say that it’s okay never to reach resolution because the Bible writers themselves couldn’t agree! However, said that Watchtower (paragraph 9): “Jehovah inspired both Paul and James to write what they did. (2 Tim. 3:16) So there must be a simple way to harmonize their statements. There is​—by considering their writings in context”—and, without fuss, they did it.

    Or is it that God blesses those who put obedience first? As in, ‘obedient ones are blessed with understanding, but the ‘great thinkers’ never figure it out?’ As in, “Look! To obey is better than a sacrifice,” (1 Samuel 15:22) in this case, the ‘sacrifice’ of brainpower. As in, ‘You don’t have to know everything, but act upon what you do know.’

    I suspect that’s why the scholars will never be running the show at JW Central. It’s too easy for scholars to take refuge in their scholarship and be unconcerned that no practical application is ever made of it. Said Jesus to the learned of his day: “How can you believe, when you are accepting glory from one another and you are not seeking the glory that is from the only God?” (John 5:44) The first activity interferes with the second—it is a trap scholars can easily fall into. Run with what you have, instead. If you don’t have everything, as you never will, figure it out on the fly.

    Or is it some other factor? Is it that the faith people are such because they don’t want to do any works? Or the works people are such because they don’t have much faith, but do like to shine before others? At any rate, it is very strange that the relationship between faith and works can be cleared up in a single Study at the Kingdom Hall (it was just a refresher study anyway, not anything new) whereas the theologians have debated it “for centuries.”

    Some of these points came up in field service the day before. ‘Here you are going door-to-door,’ one evangelical man said to us, ‘but don’t you know that salvation is by faith and not by works?’ ‘Yeah, everyone knows that,’ I replied. None of Jehovah’s Witnesses think they’re ‘earning’ anything. It’s just a matter of showing appreciation for a priceless gift. If you receive such a gift and it makes no change whatsoever in your life afterwards, one might justifiably wonder just how much you really do appreciate it.

    This fellow also went on and on about the pastor of his church. The pastor will quote this or that from the Bible and then you should not just take his word for it, he would say, but you should check it. ‘Yeah, we’re trying to make all our people pastors,’ is what I would have said had I thought of it in time—our best lines always occur to us too late. Of course, not all our people are pastors—we too have plenty of weak or immature Christians—but the Witness organization doesn’t cater to them by appointing just a single person to serve as the ‘pastor.’ There’s no reason everyone can’t attain to the role. Besides, a pastor is always at risk that his special qualifications and background doesn’t go to his head. Sometimes it does.

     

    ******  The bookstore

  • Mahomes! Maauto! Who Leads in the Christian Congregation?

    ‘Man is a political animal,’ Juan says, ‘and naturally forms and flourishes in societies. And every such society needs leadership that preserves the peace and unity of that society. And the best form of leadership capable of fulfilling that function is a unified head. And the same is true of the Congregation. . . . So if a person has an incorrect notion of the nature and function of civil government, this will make it more difficult to grasp the true nature and function of ecclesial government.’

    Yes. Of course. The two are connected, If you have a shaky grasp on one, you may well have a shaky grasp on the other, just as those who had a rotten father may struggle to grasp the concept of a loving heavenly father. How to deal with those who, in an intense age of independence, find even the governing structure of the Christian congregation oppressive? Some go so far as to agree with critics that Jehovah’s Witnesses all but worship their organization and pursue a model of ‘following men.’ How do you answer that?

    The Governing Body of Jehovah’s Witnesses might be likened to the coach or the teacher—both of whom may lean into their charges from time to time as a legitimate function of their job. Persons too prickly in our independence-savoring age are inclined to chafe at such legitimate roles. 

    ‘Who needs a math teacher?’ such persons are wont to say. ‘Just study numbers. I don’t serve a teacher!’ And if the teacher betrays any evidence of being imperfect, they jump on such evidence to justify the surly attitude.

    ’Who needs a coach?’ they will say. ‘I’m not serving any coach. Just practice football!’ And if the coach betrays any evidence of being imperfect—say, he eats too much, like the Chiefs’ coach, they seize on that circumstance to justify the grumbling.

    But anyone with a proper view of civil government has no problem at all acceding to the authority of the teacher or coach. They don’t confuse such relative submission with becoming ‘slaves to men.’ They know full well they are ‘serving’ math and football, not their respective teachers or coaches in such. They know full well the latter exist just to bring out the best in them. Even when the coach seems to flounder a little and thinks it cool that  Kelse should become ‘Maauto’ because it complements ‘Mahomes,’ they just put on that new jersey and continue, albeit maybe with a little grumbling. They may not be so sure about this new light to bundle your home and auto insurance, but they know it’s not worth making a fuss over such minor things.

    Once in a while there appears a student who truly does not need a teacher, and for whom a teacher just gets in the way. Think Gates, Jobs, Einstein, Musk. What then? Do they use their atypical gifts to tear down the need for teachers? Do they carry on that to acquiesce to the teacher’s (or coach’s) authority is to allow that one to ‘lord it over’ them? Unless they are drunk on the contemporary spirit of independence, they do not. At most, Kelse doesn’t don his squirrelly ‘Maauto’ jersey, but neither does he quit the team over it. ‘Ah, well, we need coaches’ he says.

    Should he do this, almost for certain, the assignment to become ‘Maauto’ will fall upon some other teammate. That teammate will accept it, maybe with the enthusiasm of being a good organization man. Maybe he’ll even recall the expression, ‘Even if the coach asks something that doesn’t appear to make sense, be obedient.’ Sounds odd, he says, but he does it anyway.  He wouldn’t bump off another player on that authority, but he knows that putting on a jersey is not in that league. Or maybe he says, ‘Maauto! Cool! What a great idea!’ and dons the shirt instantly. Kelse doesn’t try to talk him out of it, even though he declines himself. He knows the Chiefs will make the Super Bowl if he keeps his mouth shut, but they may not if he goes on bellyaching about his enlightened view that you can tell the coach to kiss off.

    Sheesh! You’ll hear it all the time from adversaries, about worshipping an organization, to the point where others being to pick it up. Put it to rest. I would never say that brothers or sisters worship the organization. I might say that I have seen some engage in activity that so closely resembles worship that you can confuse the two, yet even here I would couch my words.

    Recently my wife and I were invited on a Kingdom Hall remodeling project. At my age and non-skill level, I am not going to be any major player in anything, but I appreciated the invitation and accepted a two-day stint along with my wife.

    Safety training is required—a lot of it before you even set foot on the project. For one session online that I was informed might take up to three hours—several videos followed by answering questions off the master safety document—Man, that’s a lot! I thought. I’d better not see God strapped into His chariot for safety. But it did not happen and I could not help but think that the quality of training would be the envy of any construction organization. The way scriptures were interwoven was masterful. Even the verse of the ‘overconfident one who comes to ruin’ was applied to the experienced worker inclined to blow past safety regulations because he is so experienced he thinks himself immune. Nobody blows past anything when it comes to safety, experienced or not. You’re dismissed from the site if you do, but I didn’t see anyone coming even close to grumbling over such rules of safety, which are iron-clad. Zero accidents is the goal.

    Not just the training, but the project itself. The people skills on display far outshone what would be found on any secular construction site. The abilities of volunteers, some experienced and some not, was harnessed to an astonishing degree. Always, there was a brother with oversight to accommodate any skill level and to break any task into doable steps—and always with the safety and overall well-being of participants placed even ahead of the job itself. First of all, they are shepherds, I am told—that is incorporated into their training. In short, I’ve never seen anything like it—even if the chariot was not on visible display.

    That was just after two days. People are the sum of their experiences. Imagine the one immersed in such an atmosphere continually. Might they not get super-enthused about the theocratic organization that they experience repeatedly and see works so well? Would I not be displaying cynicism were I to say, ‘They worship the organization?’ I would never say it.

    I’m not even sure I’m wise not to get more immersed into it. On the exhaustive skills list is ‘Writing’ broken down into several subcategories—creative, historical, technical, etc. I could put something down there. But I’m scared I might be assigned some long and monotonous project that I would choke on. Sort of like how Davey, the brother that everything he touched turned to gold, once told me he he’d been assigned to write an article, as though testing him out, to tentatively appear in Awake. But it was on some generic topic that he just couldn’t work up much enthusiasm for, and he never got around to it.

    Or, for the box specifying experience,  I might say, ‘From blogging,’ and then the Build brothers would say, ‘Oh….it’s that yo-yo.’ So I just say that I can pick up sticks and on the above occasion I was called upon to pick up some, plus a few other things.

     

    Brother Winder undertook at the 2023 annual meeting to explain how the Governing Body decides things. A question comes up; either they have thought it up themselves or it is posed to them from without. Sometimes they jump on it right away. As often as not, however, it comes to resemble that thorn in their side—due to changing times and circumstances (beards are a perfect example)—that they figure at last the time has come to deal with it. They discuss it at their meeting. They assign it to a committee. That committee researches, among other things, anything that’s been written on the topic before. That committee submits a report, apparently with recommendations, and the Governing Body again puts it on their calendar. When it comes up for consideration again, they hash it out and maybe go along with the recommendations and maybe (per Winder’s talk) they don’t.

    It all seems very competent, very thorough, very reassuring. It all seems to optimize the verse about drawing strength from a ‘many advisers.’ (When there is no skillful direction, the people fall, But there is success through many advisers—Proverbs 11:14) But there is nothing blatantly supernatural about it. You can imagine a public utility doing the same. 

    Arguably they could have provided this ‘transparency’ before, but this too appears to be an issue whose time has to arrive, and now it is judged that it has—maybe because grumblings have finally reached them that they lack ‘transparency.’ Due to such lack (if that’s what it is), some brothers have all but assumed an angel appears to them at those weekly meetings, setting them straight on what ever needs direction. Now they see it is not that way.

    What is also not that way is that the first century governing body of Bible record had men endowed with supernatural power to confirmed their divine authority. Not so today—just regular men who don’t raise the dead, heal the sick, or walk on water.

    This bothers some. It may be surprising they should be so bothered since scripture plainly says that such miraculous gifts would pass away. Maybe they had come to think that, in the case of the divine/human interface, they wouldn’t. Surely, there is an angel in that room, they suppose, or some other unmistakable supernatural manifestation that hits all over the head as with a sledgehammer that we’re talking divine authorization here. Nope—it doesn’t happen. I mean, there is prayer, to be sure, but a little more pizzazz is what some would prefer. Anybody can pray.

    I was happy to hear Brother Winder’s explanation. It calls to mind what weird Mike used to say, a person with issues as long as anyone’s arm, who had a knack for simplifying the obscure. ‘Everyone of Jehovah’s Witnesses studies their Bible constantly,’ he would say, a bit too naively. ‘The Governing Body studies it all the time. Eventually, a point dawns on them. They discuss it thoroughly. When they have reached agreement, that point appears in a subsequent Watchtower.’ He didn’t for one instant expect miraculous light in the GB meeting room, as though in the Holy of Holies.

    ’Now, the thing is,’ he would continue. ‘In your personal Bible study, you may have noticed that point, too—maybe before they do.’ “And if this was Christendom, you’d run out and start your own religion over it!” But because it is not, you wait on divinely appointed authority to take the lead. Mike was ever so enthused about the unity of Jehovah’s Witnesses. Everyone fresh from the world of religion is, really, even of irreligion; everyone is impressed with that. I had another friend whose formulative experience was to visit several far-removed Kingdom Halls to asked detailed biblical questions. The identical answers from persons who did not know each other impressed upon him that he had found the truth.

    But, in time, some begin to take such unity for granted, as though it would exist without any coordinating governing body. Others begin to look askance at such unity, acceding to the contemporary view that it represents the thinking of a cult. Times change, and the question is asked online: “Is JW.org considered a cult site by some formerJehovah's Witnesses? What are their reasons for this belief?”

    Yes, I think so. We live in unprecedented and intensely independent times. Paul’s counsel that we should all speak in agreement minus any divisions (1 Corinthians 1:10) has historically been wise Christian counsel. Today it reads as though an invitation to cult-thinking. We should not read the situation as Jehovah’s Witnesses having gone crazy. We should read it as this world has gone crazy and Jehovah’s Witnesses are holding the line of sanity.

    The modern anti-cult lunacy can be seen in all fields, not just that of religion. ‘Ask not what your country can do for you. Ask what you can do for your country,’ were the noble words of a statesman (JFK) years ago. Today, they would be the words a a cult leader.

    It also bothers some that all persons known today holding a position of Governing Body are self-professed. They lay claim to be anointed, but how is anyone to verify that claim? Might a fraud or a loon slip in and pull the wool over everyone’s eyes?

    They may be self-professed as to being anointed, but they are also field-tested—field tested for a long long time, serving full-time in circumstances at times quite lowly, lowlier than those of most whom they will later lead. It’s more than enough time to screen out anyone not genuine. Nothing is more taboo among Jehovah’s Witnesses than ‘partaking unworthily.’ (“whoever eats the loaf or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily will be guilty respecting the body and the blood of the Lord.”—1 Corinthians 11:27) Nobody is going to do that and if they do, nobody is going to keep up that pretense a for lifetime, both prerequisites to be invited to serve on the Governing Body.

    That’s why I like the clarification a few years back that the ‘faithful and discreet slave’ consists of the Governing Body only, not just the entire population of those anointed. Of course. Anointed is an indication, for the most part, of a future assignment. Does it take 10,000 anointed ones to lead the present congregation today? Moreover, the clarification tends to weed out any person mistaken, maybe persons not well-balanced, not to mention any frauds or loons. In case any of these should become overly fond of authority or influence they imagine they ought to have now, this adjustment tends to nudge them into proper position. Serve faithfully under the present arrangement, and then upon death or the new system, their role as priests and kings will be exercised—or not, in case they truly were mistaken. At any rate, it’s no one’s problem until the new system and then it falls into the hands of those who can handle it.

    Of course, in this skeptical age, some may begin to question the concept of anointing itself. Either they think it an experience common to all Christians or to none. But, by the time they have descended to that view, there really is no point in even calling themselves Jehovah’s Witnesses and they are best served by ‘running off and starting their own religion.’

    ******  The bookstore

  • Beards Get the Green Light

    An entire Update dedicated to beards might seem like overkill, but when they tried underkill it didn’t work.

    Watchtower September 2016, in a study article, it said:

    “The Mosaic Law required men to wear a beard. However, Christians are not under the Mosaic Law, nor are they obliged to observe it. (Lev. 19:27; 21:5; Gal. 3:24, 25) In some cultures, a neatly trimmed beard may be acceptable and respectable, and it may not detract at all from the Kingdom message. In fact, some appointed brothers have beards.”

    When that Watchtower Study finally came, that paragraph was like the elephant in the room that everyone was awaiting, and then Yessss! paragraph 17–some congregations spent extra time to ‘explain’ it. I thought that would be the end of it. Instead, it seemed like congregations doubled-down, as if with the attitude: ‘Well, okay, ‘weak’ publishers can wear beards if they insist, but no way will they ever be appointed.’ A few publishers grew beards, but beyond that–nothing.

    ’Look, we don’t have an issue with it,’ is what the GB finally said in this latest 2023 Update, 7 years later. It’s not new. They said it before but it didn’t take. This time, to make sure it wasn’t another misfire that didn’t take, they made it a big production, brought in bells and whistles, the chariot, disclaimers for the guys who say, ‘It’s about time!’ and cushioning for rigid guys who had drawn a line in the sand and were aghast to see it erased. Old habits die hard. This one sure did. For me, it is like when the man who invented autocorrect died. The obits read: ‘Restaurant in peace.’ There were even some harsher ones that said, ‘May he rot in hello.’
     
    The greater world solved the beard issue decades ago:

    And the sign said, “Long-haired freaky people, need not apply” So I tucked my hair up under my hat, and I went in to ask him why. He said, “You look like a fine upstandin’ young man, I think you’ll do” So I took off my hat and said, “Imagine that, Huh, me workin’ for you.”

    There. Done. Settled. Back in 1990. Whereas, we don’t settle it till 2023! But, in fairness, it ought be remembered that the overall world is going down the toilet and Jehovah’s organization is not. More than once the Bible says that those drawn to the Lord must become like young children. And indeed, they have proved to be that way, not just in the good ways but also the not-so-good.

    It was not in the Bible. It never appeared in Watchtower print. (other than many examples of ‘shaving one’s beard’ listed in the changes made on the road to baptism) The reasons for it, linkage with beatniks and hippies, disappeared decades ago. There were articles to the effect that Witnesses don’t do rules, but mostly principles. And yet, no rule was more firmly enforced than the unwritten no-beard rule.

    Ah, well. ‘We have this treasure in earthen vessels.’ (2 Corinthians 4:7) The treasure is the ministry and the earthen vessels is us, with all of our petty flaws, mild hypocrisies, stubbornnesses, obtusenesses, insensitivities, and idiosyncrasies. Blame God for doing it that way, I guess. He could have assigned it all to angels.

    The 2023 Update began: “A number of branch offices around the world have written to us, indicating that there continues to be question about whether or not it is proper for a brother in an appointed position to wear a beard. . . . The Governing Body has concluded that there is a need for clarification.”

    Translation: “There continues to be a question.” There shouldn’t be by now. We keep getting letters. We’re tired of it. So:

    “The Governing Body does not have an issue with brothers wearing beards.”

    Got it? We don’t. To prove it, we’re now pulling out all the stops, employing all the bells and whistles, bringing out the chariot, because when we first said it was a non-issue, no one listened! So now, let us repeat…..(drum roll, please)….. We. Don’t. Care!

    Witnesses were the last (by far) to notice the world had moved on from no-beards. They missed it because they were ‘insular,’ a problem more difficult to remedy than you might think because it is the flipside of the ‘no part of the world’ coin. If you are the second—which Jesus says you have to be—you are almost by definition the first, ‘insular’ to an extent. That’s what insulation is—something that keeps two things that should not mix separate.

    At long last, the mess is resolved. It looks a little silly the way it happens, but it is resolved. It comes close on the heels of another irritant being resolved—the matter of ‘counting time’—applicable at one time, but less so with passing years, as it introduces curious, counterproductive notions of being ‘on duty’ and ‘off duty.’ It is a relic of guys raised in the factory era, when even if there was nothing to do, you’d better look busy to make the boss happy. Times change. God is not like that. It has been discarded. Two nettlesome things resolved in fairly short order.

    It is hard to direct a large group of people. One says, ‘Thanks for the new rule!’ whereas his neighbor says, ‘Huh? Did you say something?’
     
    My first thought upon hearing the Update was that my on-again, off-again study with Santa Claus might be actually on-again. He briefly came to meetings after that 2017 article, but soon dropped off. We weren’t all that sad to see him go. He had proved annoying, with thunderous “Ho Ho Ho’s!” if the speaker cracked even the lamest joke. Very judgmental, too, always pronouncing people good or bad. And he had shown no sign of giving up his annual extreme sport.

     

    ******  The bookstore

     

    ***

    Notes: 

    My first thought upon hearing the Update was that my on-again, off-again Bible study with Santa Claus might once more be on-again. He was doing so well until he saw that magazine equating a shortening beard to spiritual progress. Now, maybe, just maybe, he will resume his study. Of course, I’ll still have to help him with the holiday thing, but at least the beard thing is no more.

     

    If an entire Update dedicated to beards now being okay seems like overkill, one might recall that the Governing Body tried underkill and it didn’t work. From the September 2016 Watchtower: “Does Your Style of Dress Glorify God?”

    What about the propriety of brothers wearing a beard? The Mosaic Law required men to wear a beard. However, Christians are not under the Mosaic Law, nor are they obliged to observe it. (Lev. 19:27; 21:5; Gal. 3:24, 25) In some cultures, a neatly trimmed beard may be acceptable and respectable, and it may not detract at all from the Kingdom message. In fact, some appointed brothers have beards. Even so, some brothers might decide not to wear a beard. (1 Cor. 8:9, 13; 10:32) In other cultures or localities, beards are not the custom and are not considered acceptable for Christian ministers. In fact, having one may hinder a brother from bringing glory to God by his dress and grooming and his being irreprehensible.—Rom. 15:1-3; 1 Tim. 3:2, 7.

    This paragraph was a big deal at the time, at least in my area. Brothers were talking about it seemingly the day after it was written. When that Watchtower Study finally came, that paragraph was like the elephant in the room that everyone was awaiting, and then Yessss! paragraph 17 finally arrived and you could talk about it. Some congregations spent extra time to ‘explain’ it.

    I thought that would be the end of it. I thought at long last the issue had been laid to rest. I thought beards would soon be showing up—at first in publishers and then in MS and elders. Instead, it seemed like congregations doubled-down, as if with the attitude: ‘Well, okay, ‘weak’ publishers can wear beards if they insist, but no way will they ever be appointed.’ A few publishers grew beards, but beyond that–nothing.

    ’Look, we don’t have an issue with it,’ is what the GB finally said in this latest Update. It’s not new. It’s what they said 7 years ago only it didn’t take. This time, to make sure it wasn’t another misfire that didn’t take, they made it a big production, brought in bells and whistles, the chariot, and disclaimers for guys who say, ‘It’s about time!’ and for the more rigid guys who drew a line in the sand and are now aghast to see it erased. Old habits die hard. This one certainly did.

    For me, it is like when the man who invented autocorrect died. ‘Restaurant in peace’ the obits read, though there were a few harsher ones that said, ‘May he rot in hello.’

     

    On the one hand, it all seems pretty silly. The greater world solved this beard issue decades ago:

    And the sign said, “Long-haired freaky people, need not apply” So I tucked my hair up under my hat, and I went in to ask him why. He said, “You look like a fine upstandin’ young man, I think you’ll do” So I took off my hat and said, “Imagine that, Huh, me workin’ for you.”

    There. Done. Settled. Back in 1990. Whereas, we don’t settle it till 2023. But, in fairness, it ought be remembered that the overall world is going down the toilet and Jehovah’s organization is not.

    More than once the Bible says that those drawn to the Lord must become like young children. And indeed, they have proved to be that way, not just in the good ways but also the not-so-good. Paul said: “Brothers, do not become young children in your understanding, but be young children as to badness.” (1 Cor 14:20) Why did he say this—because they never became young children in their understanding?

    So it has proved today, with issues taking longer to resolve than you might think would be the case. Those the Lord can work with are like ‘young children.’ Those whom he cannot are ones too insistent upon their rights to be molded. They are left to the reward of whatever their discord can produce. In short, “they are having their reward in full.”

     

    It was not in the Bible. It never appeared in Watchtower print. (other than many examples of ‘shaving one’s beard’ listed in the changes made on the road to baptism) The reasons for it, association with beatniks and hippies, disappeared decades ago. We’ve had articles to the effect that we don’t do rules, but primarily principles. And yet, no rule was more firmly enforced than the unwritten no-beard rule.

    If you want to blame someone, blame God. He’s the one who created the paradigm of ‘We have this treasure in earthen vessels.’ (2 Corinthians 4:7) The treasure is the ministry and the earthen vessels is us, with all of our petty flaws, mild hypocrisies, stubbornnesses, obtusenesses, insensitivities, and idiosyncrasies. Blame Jehovah for arranging it that way and not handing the whole assignment over to angels.

    Believe me, I am sensitive to this issue. Years ago, I went to bat for a youngster being drummed out solely for not shaving a beard. I learned later he had a very atypical reason, unknown to me at the time, but all the brothers could see was obstinacy and standing upon ‘his rights.’ ‘Before this is all done, I’m going to grow a beard!’ I told certain elders. ‘It’s one thing to shove around a youngster. Try doing it with an adult.’ Trouble is, I didn’t want one. It’s too easy to get food caught there.

    It is fixed now. It’s about time, but it is done. If Jehovah is going to permit earthen vessels to have the treasure, you cannot be shocked if they behave earthenly. It’s his doing. Earthen is as earthen does.

    Are the brothers conservative? Things don’t have to conform to my taste. It is absolutely shocking to look around the world and see how people misuse their ‘freedom.’ I’m not a fan of authoritarian countries, but I can see how they might look at what happens in the West when all restraints are removed and say, ‘Whoa! We don’t want any part of that!”

     

    The reason for the change came out in the update itself:

    A number of branch offices around the world have written to us, indicating that there continues to be question about whether or not it is proper for a brother in an appointed position to wear a beard. . . . The Governing Body has concluded that there is a need for clarification.”

    Translation: “There continues to be a question.” There should not be by now. We keep getting letters. We’re tired of it. “There is a need for clarification. Nothing new, here. Just restatement of the old.

    “The Governing Body does not have an issue with brothers wearing beards.” Got it? We don’t. To prove it, we’re now pulling out all the stops, employing all the bells and whistles, even hauling out the chariot, because when we first indicated it was a non-issue, no one took us up on it. So now, let us repeat…..(drum roll, please)….. We. Don’t. Care.

    “We thought sending a message 7 years ago was enough:

    “What about the propriety of brothers wearing a beard? The Mosaic Law required men to wear a beard. However, Christians are not under the Mosaic Law, nor are they obliged to observe it. (Lev. 19:27; 21:5; Gal. 3:24, 25) In some cultures, a neatly trimmed beard may be acceptable and respectable, and it may not detract at all from the Kingdom message. In fact, some appointed brothers have beards. Even so, some brothers might decide not to wear a beard. (1 Cor. 8:9, 13; 10:32) In other cultures or localities, beards are not the custom and are not considered acceptable for Christian ministers. In fact, having one may hinder a brother from bringing glory to God by his dress and grooming and his being irreprehensible. —Rom. 15:1-3; 1 Tim. 3:2, 7.” (Watchtower, Sept 2016)

    “We thought that would do the trick. “In some cultures, a neatly trimmed beard may be acceptable and respectable,” we said. “Near as we can tell, we live in one of those cultures,” we figured elder bodies would say. They didn’t. So now we’re saying it so emphatically that nobody could possibly misunderstand it.”

    It may well be that Witnesses back in the day disliked beards but so did everyone else of their time and well after. Look at television shows of that time. Count up the beards. Maynard G Krebs the beatnik had one. Beyond that, nearly zilch. I barely recall seeing any beards at all during by non-Witness youth, certainly not among my parents’ generation.

    Witnesses were just the last (by far) to notice the world had moved on from no-beards. They missed it because they were ‘insular,’ a problem more difficult to remedy than one might think because it is the flipside of the ‘no part of the world’ coin. If you are no part of the world, you are almost by definition ‘insular’ to a certain extent. That’s what insulation is—something that keeps two things that should not mix separate.

    After that 2016 Watchtower, bodies of elders considered its local applicability. Some began to not fuss over beards for appointed servants, but most continued to. Some of those that did fretted that beards among servants would stumble congregation members, completely missing the point that Paul’s counsel about stumbling (over eating meat) was out of concern for new ones or nonbelievers. In the case of beards, these ones had no issue with it, but only some ‘veterans’ who had made it a virtue in itself to be beardless and who you’d think would have moved on by now. Old habits die hard, especially when you are insular.

    At long last, the mess is resolved. It looks a little silly the way it happens, but it is resolved. It comes close on the heels of another irritant being resolved—the matter of ‘counting time’—applicable at one time, but less so with passing years, as it introduces curious and crippling notions of being ‘on duty’ and ‘off duty.’ It was a relic of guys raised from the factory era in which, even when there was nothing to do, you’d better look busy to avoid the boss’s displeasure. Times change. God is not like that. It has been discarded. Two nettlesome things resolved in fairly short order.

    It makes for unity to do things like #8. It also looks a little silly to those who have acquiesced to a disunited world, who consider that normal, and who grumble when anyone actually seeks unity not done their way, unity not achieved by waiting for all “the brokenhearted people living in the world [to] agree”—the way that history has demonstrated they never have or will.

    JWs in the United States are almost exactly 1/3 white, 1/3 black, and 1/3 Hispanic, says Pew Research, also with about 5% Asian. Meaning? They have solved racism, an issue that tears the greater world apart. Though, at first glance, it seems not the same thing, if you want unity, you have to oil the cogs every once it a while, maybe even give it a good whack with a hammer. and Update 8 is an example of that on a lesser issue that unexpectedly became large.

    Any criticism or ridicule of such ‘oiling’ is only valid if it comes from ones who themselves enjoy unity. Otherwise, it is little more than sour grapes. Some have simply acquiesced to a world without unity as ‘normal.’ Their criticisms don’t count. If you have long ago become part of the world, you can’t criticize the travails of those who haven’t.

     

    ***Xero is “not privy to the GB’s private thoughts, but “I can imagine them being frustrated at) some who have the desire to worship the organization,” he says.

    He cites a scripture: “…But when the apostles Barnabas and Paul heard of it, they ripped their outer garments and leaped out into the crowd, crying out and saying: ‘Men, why are you doing these things? We too are humans having the same infirmities as you have. ” Acts 14:8-18

    He cites another: “On hearing this, they began to glorify God, but they said to him: ‘You see, brother, how many thousands of believers there are among the Jews, and they are all zealous for the Law.’” (Acts 21:20)

    Those referred to are Jewish converts to Christianity, yet still devoted to observing the Jewish law (the Mosaic Law). “Even then the customs were including a lot of things which weren’t written in the Mosaic Law. Yet they kept doing them. This is why it doesn’t surprise me that there are some who see changes in certain areas to be faith shaking because these have equated certain practices of the past to have been unequivocally scriptural, and if the Governing Body ever suggested we should adopt pattern A, rather than pattern B, then that was as good as scripture to these.”

    Yes. It is hard to direct a large group of people. One says, ‘Thanks for the new rule!’ whereas his neighbor says, ‘Huh? Did you say something?’

     

  • The Man Who Memorized the Bible—and Still Wanted to Become a Jesuit.

    It’s a bit of a cheap shot—but on account of that Babylon the Great scripture we Witnesses are known to take such shots*—John Barr, the GB member until he died, related an amazing feat: a candidate who was rejected as a Jesuit for being too short. Whereupon, he memorized the entire Bible to prove his worthiness.

    The truly amazing thing, John Barr related, was that after having done so, he still wanted to be a Jesuit.

    As I recall it, the account was included in Barr’s talk at a District Convention. Such GB talks would often find their way into the Watchtower magazine within the year. When his did, the magazine dropped the line about still wanting to become a Jesuit. Instead, it skipped right over to the more milquetoast, “Surely, however, it is far more important to understand God’s Word than it is to memorize it.” It declined to take the ‘cheap shot’ that Barr could not resist.

    The Watchtower paragraph, from the February 1, 1994 issue (pages 8-9):

    “In the 17th century C.E., a Catholic man named Cornelius van der Steen sought to become a Jesuit but was rejected because he was too short. Says Manfred Barthel in his book The Jesuits​—History & Legend of the Society of Jesus: “The committee informed van der Steen that they were prepared to waive the height requirement, but only with the proviso that he would learn to recite the entire Bible by heart. The story would hardly be worth telling if van der Steen had not complied with this rather presumptuous request.” What effort it took to memorize the whole Bible! Surely, however, it is far more important to understand God’s Word than it is to memorize it.”

    ___ *As for ‘cheap shots,’ nothing is a more cardinal sin in Jehovah’s Witnesses’ eyes than obscuring Bible teachings. Examples are the teaching of trinity, which makes God incomprehensible, someone impossible to know. Another is the hellfire teaching, which makes him cruel, someone you would not want to know. The Jesuits were firmly in that category, never mind whatever good things they did.

    IMG_1031

     

    ******  The bookstore

  • When My Favorite Circuit Overseer Died

    Just over the Zoom Watchtower reader’s shoulder hangs the embroidered artwork—“Kindness Matters.” No surprise there. Kindness typified the man who coined the complete expression from which the snippet was taken. It was my favorite circuit overseer, long ago retired, who said, “Some things are black or white. But in all other things, do what is kind. Kindness matters.”

    He died recently. Well into his nineties, he had been maintaining circuit overseer hours even in his old age. Perhaps he maintained them even in the nursing home he’d at last entered, for he was studying with one other resident and had seven attending Zoom meetings with him.

    A man of empathy, intelligence, and unflinching honesty, he is mentioned several times in Tom Irregardless and Me, although only once by name. He is the only person of the book mentioned by name within his lifetime. Everyone else has been renamed, if not made up. His trademark expression, “just do the best you can” made him an unwavering source of refreshment, though there were a few hard-driving brothers who murmured their fear that some of the friends would “take advantage” and do nothing.

    He is the brother who cut me off when I was carrying on about my wonderfulness—not carrying on per se, but decrying those not so wonderful, which amounts to the same thing. Here I was working with him in that city congregation—I worked with him a lot—and I started in about how some with growing families had left the gritty city for the cushier burbs, leaving the local congregation high and dry—but as for me and my household…” “You always do what is best for you family,” he interrupted.

    One place he appears in the book unnamed, as “the retired circuit overseer,” is when 77050FB8-36F7-4D43-9FED-1A6876673205we had him over for lunch after the public talk, along with some twenty-somethings. Iron sharpens iron, and so forth—that’s why we did it.

    Presently, young Justin approached the fellow:

    “So, how long were you in the circuit work?” he asked.

    “Thirty years!” came the reply.

    “Wow! You must really miss it.”

    “Nope!” the C.O. shot back.

    “Well . . . um . . . I mean . . . that is,” (this was not the answer he’d expected) “it must have been a big adjustment.”

    “I adjusted that afternoon!”

    “Look, I don’t want to sound unappreciative,” he told a friend later. “It’s just that a lot of the job is not my first choice. You know me, I’m an outdoors guy. (in his younger days, he’d worked on the railroad) And so what am I doing all day? I’m sitting in meetings! Still, Jehovah apparently has found a use for me, so I stay the course.”

    It’s called counting the costs. It’s a good thing to do. Aren’t mid-life crises launched when people don’t count the costs, then are floored when the bill unexpectedly arrives? Be it family, job, responsibilities, goals in life: people go haywire for never having counted the costs. But if you blow off steam as you go, acknowledge this part is good, that part not so much, and adjust accordingly, either deciding to stay the present course or make modifications . . . well, I’ll trust those folks much more quickly than those who have never made introspection.

    And Jehovah did have a use for him, apparently. In one of those training schools, where the traveling ministers instruct all the assembled elders and servants, I noticed that the weightiest parts were invariably assigned to him.

    He also appears in the chapter ‘The Regional Convention’ in which I speak of how before there were videos, I was assigned a talk and had to choose two pillars of the faith (I chose Howie and Jake) to interview.

    We worked several weeks and ran our interview past the circuit overseer in rehearsal. He was ecstatic: “Oh, my! What a wonderful job! How hard you brothers have worked! This is exactly what the organization is looking for. The hours and hours you must have spent! How wonderful that . . . ” he gushed on and on.

    “Only,” I looked up from my humble head nod, “a tiny bit on this point here . . . I wonder if that could be tweaked just a little, not much. Just a little, to make it line up even more with what the slave is conveying.”

    “Sure,” I replied uneasily, “we could adjust that.”

    “Yes, I think that will go a little smoother. Everything else you brothers have worked on (you’ve worked so hard!) is fine. Just fine . . . except . . . this small bit here . . . I’m just thinking . . . we have to consider everyone in the audience . . . And actually . . . I wonder if anyone could possibly miss the point of this line. Hmm. Maybe you could . . . ”

    By the time he was done, there was nothing left! In a situation like this, there is only one thing a brother can say, and I said it: “Thank you, Brother Hartman, for your counsel.” Jake interjected: “What do you mean, ‘thank you?’ He messed it all up!” But we worked the part over, and when it was presented at the convention, it fit better. It was more integrated into the overall theme.

    Sometime after I wrote the book, I sent him that chapter. Never one to be anything but frank, he replied that it “didn’t make much sense to him,” a comment especially worrisome to me since he “still thought he had all his marbles,” an he went on to ask about my family. So I said I could take his name out of the ebook for a substitute. But he said he really didn’t care at this point, so I left it as is. I probably should have foreseen it. These are men very much in the tradition of anonymity, bringing attention to God, not the person serving him, same as everything printed by the earthly organization is written anonymously.

    Or maybe he thought the book stunk. If so he didn’t say so. It is better for the self-esteem to stick with the first possibility.

     

    ******  The bookstore

  • Jesus and Socrates—the Parallels

    We don’t know much about Socrates. If we’re called upon to read his name aloud from print, we say what an embarrassed Michael Jackson said, that he had heard the name many times but had never seen it spelled out. How was he to know it was three syllables and not two? So, what do we know about So-Crates? We know he died from hemlock poisoning. We know he drank it himself, that he had been sentenced to die. And that’s about all we know, plain ‘ol people that we are.

    22831E0C-15F6-4966-8358-60D356D7A8EFOf course, if we have had some training on the topic, then we know more. We also know enough to say his name correctly. But most people are rank and file, unconcerned with Socrates because Socrates does not touch upon their daily lives—or if he does, they don’t know just how. They do know about Jesus, however, because Jesus is the lynchpin of the major religion. To be sure, much of what they know about Jesus is wrong, but they do have a lot of wannabe-facts at their disposal, some of which are true, whereas for Socrates they have almost nothing.

    Simplify Greek history exponentially by knowing his relationship to other big names of the era. Socrates was one-on-one teacher to Plato, Plato was one-on-one teacher to Aristotle, and Aristotle was one-on-one teacher to Alexander the Great. There, doesn’t that help?

    I was already delving into the unlikely. I was already drawing some parallels between Socrates and Jesus. Both had a way of buttonholing people, prodding them to think outside the box. Both attracted a good many followers in this way. Both were outliers to the general world of their time, and were looked upon askance for it. Both infuriated their ‘higher-ups’—so much so that both were consequently sentenced to death. Their venues were different, and so we seldom make the linkage, but linkage there is. As a result of auditing the Great Courses lecture series, I was beginning to play with the idea.

    Imagine my satisfaction when I come across one of those professors, J. Rufus Fears, who has not only begun but has fully developed the idea in his lecture series entitled ‘A History of Freedom.’ Happy as a pig in mud I was, for it proved I was not crazy. Nearly all subsequent points are taken from his lecture, “Jesus and Socrates:”

    They were both teachers, for one, Jesus of the spiritual and Socrates of the empirical. They both refused pay, a circumstance that in itself aroused the suspicion of the established system. (Victor V. Blackwell, a lawyer who defended many Witness youths in the World War II draft days, observed that local judges recognized only one sort of minister: those who “had a church” and “got paid”—“mercenary ministers,” he called them.)

    7CAC7F61-0CCF-44E9-BF12-876C94793101Fears may be a bit too much influenced by evolving Christian ‘theology’—he speaks of Jesus being God, for instance, and the kingdom of God being a condition of the heart—but his familiarity with the details of the day, and the class structure social mores that both Jesus and Socrates’ transgressed against, is unparalleled. Jesus reduces the Law to two basic components: love of God and love of neighbor. This infuriates the Pharisees and Sadducees, because complicating the Law was their meal ticket, their reason for existence. After his Sermon on the Mount, “the crowds were astounded at his way of teaching, for he was teaching them as a person having authority, and not as their scribes.” Depend upon it: the scribes didn’t like him. Socrates, also, did the Sophist’s work—the paid arguers who ‘made the weaker argument look the stronger,’—better than they. They were jealous of him.

    Neither Jesus nor Socrates encouraged participation in politics of the day. Jesus urged followers to be “no part of the world.” Socrates declared it impossible for an honest man to survive under the democracy of his time. Both thereby triggered establishment wrath, for if enough people followed their example, dropping out of contemporary life, where would society be?

    Both Jesus and Socrates were put to death out of envy. Both had offended the professional class. Both became more powerful in death than in life. Both could have avoided death, but didn’t. Socrates could have backtracked, played upon the jury’s sympathy, appealed to his former military service. Jesus could have brought in witnesses to testify that he never said he was king of the Jews, the only charge that make Pilate sit up and take notice.

    Both spoke ambiguously. In Socrates case, he was eternally asking questions, rather than stating conclusions. His goal—to get people to examine their own thinking. In Jesus case, it was “speak[ing]to them by the use of illustrations” because “the heart of this people has grown unreceptive, and with their ears they have heard without response, and they have shut their eyes, so that they might never see with their eyes and hear with their ears and get the sense of it with their hearts and turn back and I heal them.” He spoke ambiguously to see if he could cut through that morass, to make them work, to reach the heart.

    What if Jesus were appear on the scene today and enter one of the churches bearing his name, churches where they don’t do as he said? Would they yield the podium to him? Or would they once again dismiss him as a fraud and imposter, putting him to death if he became too insistent, like their counterparts did the first time?

    If Jesus is the basis of church, Socrates is no less the basis of university. His sayings had to be codified by Plato, his disciple, just as Jesus’ sayings had to be codified by some of his disciples. Thereafter, Plato’s student, Aristotle, had to turn them into organized form, founding the Academy—the basis of higher learning ever since. Professor Fears muses upon what would happen if Socrates showed up on campus in the single cloak he was accustomed to wearing, “just talking to students, walking around with them, not giving structured courses, not giving out a syllabus or reading list at the start of classes, not giving examination” at the end. Would they not call Security? And if by some miracle he did apply for faculty, which he would not because he disdained a salary, but if he did, you know they would not accept him. Where were his credentials? Yes, he had the gift of gab, they would acknowledge, but such was just a “popularity contest.” Where were his published works?

    Similarly, where were Jesus’ published works? Neither Jesus nor Socrates wrote down a thing. It was left for Jesus’ disciples to write gospel accounts of his life. It was left for Plato to write of Socrates’ life. If either were to appear at the institutions supposedly representing their names, they would not be recognized. Shultz, the chronicler of early Watchtower history, recently tweeted that when he appends a few letters to his name, such as PhD, which he can truthfully can, his remarks get more attention than when he does not. He says it really shouldn’t be that way, but it is what it is. Both Jesus and Socrates would have been in Credential-Jail, neither having not a single letter to stick on the end of their name. It wouldn’t help for it to be known that each had but a single garment.

    Today people are used to viewing “career” as the high road, “vocation” as the lower. Vocation is associated with working with ones’ hands. Fears turns it around. “Vocation” represents a calling. Jesus was literally called at his baptism: the heavens open up, and God says, “This is my son in whom I am well-pleased.” Socrates had a calling in that the god Apollo at Delphi said no one is wiser than he. Socrates took that to mean God was telling him to go out and prove it. “Career,” on the other hand, stems from a French word meaning “a highway,” a means of getting from one place to another, considerably less noble than “a calling,” a vocation.

    We who are Jehovah’s Witnesses are quite used to pointing out that religion has run off the rails. What is interesting from these parallels is the realization that academia has no less run off the rails. Both have strayed far from their roots, and not for the better. Both have devolved into camps of indoctrination.

     

    ******  The bookstore

  • Rolf’s New Mustang

    A class-conscious ad designed so that upscale people will book a cruise features a Daddy Warbucks-type fellow pontificating over how ‘As you begin to get older you realize that time is your most precious commodity.’ Believe me, the video fully conveys the image that he has ‘commodities’ up the wazoo—I mean, this guy is ‘successful,’ as you are too, no doubt, or soon will be. What sumptuous surroundings form his world!

    And since your most ‘precious commodity’ is limited and fleeting (as with wings it flies away, the scripture might as well be speaking of time instead of money) what more noble thing can a scion like yourself do but blow his less-precious commodities on river cruises, thus expanding the mind through travel? Sheesh! Why not say it? ‘As you begin to get older and reap the enormous wisdom of grey hairs, as I have, you begin to realize that this life is all there is!’ How to masquerade shallowness as depth.

    Look, I’ve nothing against travel. Like The Beach Boys, I get around. Just last week I was in Oswego and dined in a restaurant (no—not McDonalds) that didn’t quite live up to its reputation—where they poured us wine and everything. Finally, I have all the bugs out of ‘Go Where Tom Goes’—a travelogue for those who aren’t fussy—of all the places my wife and I have been, up and down the eastern U.S, but mostly PA and NY. It is my first book with pictures. It is my first book of which I can readily gift copies to friends, it not dealing in anything controversial. Although road travel is a theme and I get in my licks for historical sites, informal witnessing is a sub-theme—there are plenty of spiritual diversions thrown in. You could even call it a primer on informal witnessing, where you don’t incessantly stay in, ‘Would you like to live forever in paradise?’ mode, but you add a spiritual layer to whatever topic is already under discussion. Sometimes people bite on that and sometimes they don’t.

    So I, too, realize that time is my ‘most precious commodity.’ I too am getting more brilliant by the second, making wise use of it. But I don’t share this baron of wealth’s utter defeat, disguised as a victory, that my most precious commodity is soon to run out. It may be put on hold someday. But if I mind my P’s and Q’s, continuing to put my faith and trust where it belongs, continuing to kick Rolf in the rear end when he (I just read a post of his) grumbles over Kingdom Hall consolidation in the West, asserting that HQ vacuums up money like a Kirby these days, offering no reason as to why, and leaving the impression that they just fill swimming pools at Bethel with the stuff and bathe in it.

    It is a slander of people’s motives. Frankly, I think it’s a better way to see through this guy than with his grumbling over congregation discipline. After all, ‘kicking against the goads’ of discipline can result in dramatic change for those not yielding to it. But being on the losing end of one Kingdom Hall folded into another? At most, a 30 minute drive to and from another Hall twice a week. Inconvenient, to be sure, but hardly life-altering, and what do you get for it?

    Sell one underperforming Hall in the U.S. to combine with another, and with the proceeds you can build 50 in developing lands where there is an immediate need. Sometimes it also goes to building a Kingdom Hall in Western areas where land is so astronomically priced that no way will the needy local congregation be able to afford it.

    How come Rolf doesn’t say this? How come he leaves the impression that the Governing Body he feuds with is doing nightly champagne and oysters on the Potomac like McClellan?—that they just like to funnel money to themselves for the sake of funneling money to themselves? What beef does he have with the ‘equalizing’ that you would think would be the very essence of a worldwide Christian community?

    For I do not want to make it easy for others, but difficult for you; but that by means of an equalizing, your surplus at the present time might offset their need, so that their surplus might also offset your deficiency, that there may be an equalizing. Just as it is written: “The person with much did not have too much, and the person with little did not have too little.” (2 Corinthians 8:13-15)

    This verse was referred to continually as the new equalizing program was under consideration. Why does Rolf treat it as untouchable—as though it were from the Book of Mormon? If this good news of the Kingdom is to be preached in all the inhabited earth, and disciples are to be made throughout, at some point you have to abandon the attitude, “I got mine. If they can’t get theirs, too bad for them!” If Rolf doesn’t have that attitude, he has one that so closely resembles it that it’s impossible to tell the difference.

    When the rush of Kingdom Halls were built over the decades, the plan was to fill them to the rafters. For the most part, that hasn’t happened. Kingdom Hall attendance holds its own in most areas. Sometimes it even diminishes. The young are not so enamored with religion as the old, and their notion of spirituality can have more to do with ‘mindfulness’ than with God. I once thought we would be immune to the trend, which certain churches counter with in-house rock groups and pizzazz, but it has proven not to be the case. Why not consolidate what there is lesser need for? One must not whine forever on, ‘Why were the former days better than these?” for it is not out of wisdom that you ask this.’ (Ecclesiastes 7:10)

    To be sure, we keep speaking about our ‘great growth,’ whereas if anyone else did it, we’d say they were going belly up. But some places do experience growth. And these places—duh—tend to be where people are not obsessively planning their next river cruise. It’s no surprise that the Christian message will resonate more clearly to the poor and underserved than to the monied people. “God chose the insignificant things of the world and the things looked down on, the things that are not, to bring to nothing the things that are,” the apostle says (1 Corinthians 1:28), as he repeatedly points out that “not many” of the loftier type were chosen. Wealth has a corrosive effect on humility, not withstood by all, and humility is a bedrock requirement for following Christ.

    There is inconvenience in catering to the entire brotherhood—that’s for sure. One Florida congregation I visited had amassed a considerable sum toward the building of a new Kingdom Hall on the main drag with better parking facilities (otherwise, the existing Hall was very well appointed, not inferior in any way). When the new equalizing arrangement went into effect, all that money was syphoned into the ‘Worldwide Work.’ Was there any grousing about that? I asked my host. “Oh, yeah,” he said.

    Of course there will be. It’s a substantial shift. Governance from the Witness organization is “top down”—it make no pretense of being a democracy, or even a representative democracy—just as is the pattern in the invisible realm. Moreover, the congregation is trusting, for if their organization is not transparent to the nth degree, it is way more transparent than any other government they can think of. The congregation scrutinizes finances to a scant degree. It would approve a nuclear reactor if one were floated in resolution—not that one ever would be, and everyone knows that. Opponents do all in their power to break down that trust but it remains intact—even though ones like Rolf make as much noise as Gideon, hoping to make the same impression as that one.

    The policy of ‘equalizing’ reflects leadership style. Anything done can be done differently. Nothing garners immediate unanimous applause (contrary to what the magazines sometimes suggest). Eventually, those taking the lead have to decide, as they monitor the pulse of the congregations through continual feedback from traveling (circuit) overseers. Our people ultimately buy into the notion that they ought not just focus on what benefits them, but that which benefits the “whole association of brothers” that they are supposed to, and do, “have love for.” (1 Peter 2:17). Why isn’t Rolf on board with this?

    Wandering, you say—starting off with cruises and pivoting to Rolf? Not a bit of it. What is the outfit with which the wealthy sophisticated commodity magnate, who has disdained ‘everlasting life’ as a fairy tale for chumps, and so regards the here-and-now as the be-all and end-all, is planning his next cruise? The Norwegian River Cruise line. And what country is Rolf from? Norway. Wandering, my foot! Tune in next time when I tell you about his newest purchase of a classic Fiord Mustang.

     

    ******  The bookstore

  • At the New System Dinner Table: Part 5–Sticking to Script

    See Part 1 and Part 2) Part 3 Part 4

    The former guard regales his tablemates with how he became a disciple. ‘With Jehovah’s help and the patience of these good people [pass the Bible chips, please] I was baptized before the start of the great tribulation.’

    Can you believe it?—Ensconced in his Zoom couch, Oscar Oxgoad appends to the remark, “but it really sucked for those who were only in the middle of their baptism questions!"

    What is wrong with him? I mean, you can go there, but why? Think it’s easy writing a Bible drama? It’s not. If you’re content to let your Moses pop Pharaoh in the nose and get the girl it is but we don’t do that. You have to stick to script. It makes for some clunky dialogue now and then, but you have to stick to script. If there’s one thing we know about Jehovah’s people, it is that they will stick to script. 

    HQ is locked into that big book they follow. “Baptism, which corresponds to [the ark, in which you had to be on it to survive]  is also now saving you,” says 1 Peter 3:21. They can’t just blow past that verse as though it was nothing. If any of them harbor secret thoughts that God will go all-softy at the last moment like in Nineveh they must keep that to themselves.

    It is a consequence of taking ‘knowledge by revelation’—not personal revelation but the revelation coming from God’s communication with us, the Bible. They can’t go ‘empirical evidence’ that God has gone all-softy in the past so maybe he will this time too. They can’t tell him what to do. It’s all very nice to say when individually queried about whether this or that person will make it through Armegeddon, “Well, I’m not Jesus and I don’t know,” but in your video you have to be bound by 1 Peter.

    It’s a little like when Bro Morris related at the Atlanta Regional how he desperately needed to have cash on hand by a certain date, that such cash was contingent on the sale of his house, and said house wasn’t selling. “It’s getting a little tight, here,” he related how he had looked heavenward, but then added, “He’s God. He can do what he likes.” Per this theory, God apparently gave him a break, for it did sell at the last second. Relieved, Morris streamlined a few procedures. The buyer commented, ‘It isn’t usually done that way,’ and he retorted, ‘It is today.’

    Same here. God gave those Ninevites a pass when they shaped up with seconds to go, but you can’t tell him he must repeat the procedure. He’s God. He can do what he likes and he doesn’t spill on every little thing.

    Oscar Oxgoad giving me a hard time over this! And to think his brother Ozzie gives me a hard time the other way! “In my opinion, things will have to reach a point where world powers (or whoever) is seconds away from pushing the nuclear button, and at that point Jehovah will step in to prevent the earth from blowing up,” he says.

    Oh yeah, I answered. And the clock will read 666 instead of 007 and the big fried thug will be the one with his horns stuck in the bars. Background music yet to be determined. An original song yet to be composed, no doubt.

    3F2F592F-A249-48CF-9C99-21886D395926

    (Photo: Den Haag Louwman Museum) 

    To be continued: 

    ******  The bookstore

  • At The New System Dinner Table, Part 3–Tales of Pursuing Peace

    (See Part 1 and Part 2)

    Mmm, this counsel is delicious! Nancy, you really must tell me your recipe!

    I don’t have to. You have it in your recipe book already, same as it is in mine! It’s in the Taste and See Psalms section. It’s so good!

    Yum—pass the Bible sandwiches please. I’ll have another.

    E77C21E8-1E45-4866-8DBC-2DB51AB7F5F9

    We sure have had fine conversation along with some surprises. Here is Tim the guard, come into the truth because the guard at Acts 16:25 came into the truth when he heard Paul and Silas sing. And what a delight to hear from Mefibberpest, that faithful man of old who no one can pronounce his name! I think we have time for one more experience. Is there anyone else here who cleared up a misundstanding to make peace with a brother? Connery?

    I faced a trial like that, brother. Truetom said something about me online that I thought was an insult. He is a brother who blogs on the internet.

    A blogger. Oh my. What happened?

    Well, I started to follow him on Twitter. After he found out, he began referring to me as “that elder, the worst speaker in the circuit, possibly the world, who follows me on Twitter so I try to make it worth his while.”  I was offended. It’s not true.

    No, I would say not, Connery. The world is a very big place. Did you report him to the elders?

    No. I decided to do like Jesus said at Matthew 18:15, that if you think your brother has committed a sin, you go and talk to him about it first. So I approached him.

    What excuse did he offer?

    He said he thought I was okay with it because I had said I was. He also said he tries to keep a virtual presence in the virtual neighborhood the same as someone keeps a physical presence in their physical neighborhood. That way he can interact with online neighbors, just like people interact with physical neighbors, and sometimes get to put in a good word for God.

    Hmm. Well, he seems to mean well, but . . . 

    He also said he likes to use humor, even about himself, because people like humor and he wants to reach them. But I told him not everyone has a sense of humor so he should stop. 

    I like your reasoning. Did you win him over?

    I thought I did. But then overnight—I’m not saying it was him—someone defaced my truck. See?

    E81B8F32-DCCB-459F-97E6-07716E511968

    I like it that you don’t jump to conclusions, brother. That’s maturity at work. I don’t think he would do that. Truetom is a little bit ‘out there,’ but he’s basically a good guy.

    (Photo: Unknown. Meme pics on social media are common property, so far as I know. If it’s yours, claim it.)

    To be continued…here.

     

    ******  The bookstore