Reorganization of the Watchtower Society?
At the annual meeting of the Watch Tower Bible & Tract Society
of Pennsylvania (WTS) October 7th 2000, some judicial reorganizations
were announced regarding the administration of this corporation.
The seven directors, all members of the Governing Body of Jehovah's
Witnesses (JWs 1), resigned their office and were replaced
by seven new directors, none of which are member of the Governing
Body.
One newspaper called this the "largest reorganization ever"
amongst JWs. While most JWs are completely ignorant of any change
at all, in circles of ex-JWs theories of possible meanings of this
change are formulated. The spokesman for the WTS, James Pellachia,
simply says: "The reason for the changes was both theological
and practical".
Close examination reveals, perhaps surprisingly, that no theological
change whatsoever has taken place; just the filling of a few offices
has changed: for the first time since the installation of the Governing
Body the Board of Directors consists of members other than members
of the Governing Body.
It's not surprising to find even an official spokesman having difficulty
explaining what exactly has happened. In some publications by the
WTS in the past, the terms Society, Governing Body and "faithful
and discreet slave" were complete synonyms, in other editions
there was made a formal distinction. What does this all mean, how
did this evolve, what has been changed, and when?
In 1884 Charles Taze Russell applied for incorporation for his
association "Zion's Watch Tower Society". He wanted to
make the transition necessary after his death a smooth one. He stressed
the limitations of the corporation in the following manner: "Zion's
Watch Tower Society is not a 'religious society' in the ordinary
meaning of the term; for it has no creed or confession of Faith.
It is purely a business association, whose mission is to serve in
a business manner the wishes of its beneficiaries, who are
represented in its officers"2
While Russell in 1881 read Matthew 24:45-47 as a general encouragement
to be faithful and wise3, Maria F. Russell, Russell's
wife, in 1894, a period of various charges against Russell, found
in it a prophetic description of the position of her husband4:
"the faithful and discreet slave".
Although Russell reluctantly seemed to accept the interpretation5,
he was a great lover of congregational government without a centralized
body of power. He could have easily set himself up as an undisputed
ruler of each congregation without their realizing what was going
on, but he was able to resist this temptation because of his strong
belief that the church should have no visible ruler. While Russell
was convinced some prophetic symbols had foretold his own work,
he never needed the interpretation of the "discreet slave"
to legitimize his position as president of the WTS of which he was
founder and by far most important shareholder.
His successor, Joseph Franklin Rutherford, was in a completely
different position. In the beginning his leadership was vexed, and
he was desperately holding on to his position of President of the
WTS, left vacant after Russell's death in 1916. In his will Russell
had provided for a "editorial committee of five", responsible
for approving articles to be published in The Watch Tower
and a "Board of Directors" of the WTS, consisting of seven
men.
In 1917 in The Finished Mystery (presented as posthumous
by Russell), the view was expressed that Russell was still ruling
the headquarters in his resurrected body. How was Russell supervising
the work? Woodworth (the actual author of the book) found the answer
in passages of Revelation mentioning the eight angels. Generally
seven angels predominate in the book's symbolism, which seven angels
Woodworth understood to be St. Paul, St. John, Arius, Peter Waldo,
Wycliffe, Luther and Russell. But twice "another angel"
appears, which could reasonably be Russell's successor. Both these
times (Revelation 8:3; 14:18) Woodworth interprets the eighth angel
to be the corporation.
"The corporate body - the WATCHTOWER BIBLE AND TRACT SOCIETY,
which Pastor Russell formed to finish his work. This verse shows
that, though Pastor Russell has passed beyond the veil, he is
still managing every feature of the harvest work."6
This was the first time the business corporation was put at the
head of the work of the church and was of course a gross misunderstanding
of the purpose of Russell in organizing the corporation. The author
of the book, C.J. Woodworth, also saw other prophetic foreshadowings
of the WTS (like Elijah's chariot). With this the strictly legal
function of the WTS was definitely abolished: the WTS became personalized
and fullfilled prophetic symbolism. The WTS was viewed as successor
of Russell or, more correctly, as the instrument through which the
ressurrected Russell was working. And from January 6th 1917, when
Rutherford was elected president of the WTS, the corporation became
the lengthened shadow of Rutherford. After the annual meeting of
Januari 4th 1919 Rutherford was never in any doubt regarding his
position as president of the WTS. On July 7th 1917, by dismissing
four corporation boardmembers, an act to which he had no legal authority
as president of the WTS, he had shown he did not have scrupules
concerning his strive for absolute power over the Society7
and he had reduced this 'Board of Directors' effectively to a powerless
group of 'advisors'.
In 1919 and 1920 Rutherford's adverseries distributed amongst JWs
an article titled "The Church Organized in Relation to the
Society", written by Paul S. L. Johnson, a former director
of the WTS and intimate of Russell. In it Johnson ably defended
Russell's ideas on the business function of the WTS. Not being able
to extricate himself from this position by argument or retreat,
Rutherford tried a subtle move: he gave a "broader sense"
to the term "Society" and consequently equated it with
the "discreet slave" (until the release of the New World
Translation the expression 'wise servant' was used):
"While the Society is a body corporate with required officers
and servants, yet these alone do not constitute the Society.
In the broader sense the Society is composed of the body of
Christians organized in orderly manner under the Lord's direction
for the carrying on of his work.
Often when asked by others, Who is that faithful and wise servant?
- Brother Russell would reply: 'Some say I am; while others
say the Society is.' Both statements were true, for Brother
Russell was in fact the Society in a most absolute sense, in
this, that he directed the policy and course of the Society
without regard to any other person on earth."8
The slight change of meaning of the term 'the Society' eliminated
the charge that the corporation was being used improperly. It equated
the term "the Society" with the term "the church".
Of course this is very confusing: on the one hand Russell is 'the
Society', on the other hand 'the Society is composed of the body
of Christians'. Consequently Russell as well as all Christians as
well as 'the Society' are the "discreet slave". In the
following paragraph Rutherford introduced also the term 'organization',
a term that after 1925 would have just the same mythical sound as
'the Society' or 'the slave-class'. Since 1928 'the Society' is
spoken of as 'the visible part of Jehovah's universal organization':
"Somebody in that visible organization must formulate
plans of operation. It seems to have pleased the Lord to have
done this at Society's headquarters and that from there regulations
are sent out to the various ecclesias.9"
Formally all articles to be published in The Watchtower
had to be approved by the 'editorial committee'. In 1925 Rutherford
wrote an extremely controversial article entitled "The Birth
of The Nation". The 'editorial committee' did not approve it
and this "really marked the beginning of the end of the editorial
committee"10. The names of this powerless Committee
continued to appear in The Watchtower until 1931, when they
were removed and replaced with the Scripture citation: "All
thy children shall be taught of the Lord."
There remained but one obstacle to absolute power and that was
the (lack of) influence of the Society on local ecclesias. Until
then local elders and deacons were elected by voting; also there
were no lists of membership that were registered somewhere centralized.
At first Rutherford did not change this, but invited all congregations
from 1919 onwards to "to ask the Society to register it as
a "service organization." Then a director, or service
director as he came to be known, not subject to yearly election,
was appointed by the Society. As the local representative of the
Society, he was to organize the work, assign territory, and encourage
participation by the congregation in the field service. Thus, alongside
the 'elective elders and deacons', another type of organizational
arrangement began to function, one that recognized appointive authority
outside the local congregation and that gave greater emphasis to
the preaching of the good news of God's Kingdom."11
With each increase in work the power of the service director increased
correspondingly. Rutherford discouraged public discourses - an elder's
work - and replaced them with weekly studies of The Watchtower
- a congregational participation study. Finally, in 1932, the system
of 'elective elders' was completely replaced by a 'service-committee',
officers appointed by the WTS and were Rutherford's powers secured
at all levels. Although Rutherford was always very careful to avoid
saying that he was the head of the church, Consolation said
(4 september 1940, p. 25):
"The Theocracy is at present administered by the Watch
Tower Bible and Tract Society, of which Judge Rutherford is
the president and general manager."
These were the powers Nathan Homer Knorr inherited in 1942 after
Rutherford's death. One letter in The Watchtower said on
him:
"You are the visible director of the earthly interest
of The Theocracy . You are the chief servant of the Lord here
on earth.12"
The motion of the Pennsylvania corporation also expressed the actual,
if not claimed, power of the President when it said:
"Instructions come to the Lord's people on earth from
the office of the President of the Watchtower Bible and Tract
Society.13"
On the 1944 annual meeting Knorr for the first time altered something
in the administration of the corporation of the WTS: there was to
be an alteration in the method of voting to eliminate the $ 10 contribution.
It was to be replaced with a system of membership of about 500 JWs,
each of which were given one vote each. The $10 vote, said Knorr,
was not theocratic. Further changes "broadened the powers of
the Society" (corporation)14. The gist of these
broadened powers was to make legal the powers the corporation had
already been exercising since Rutherford took over; it included
such powers as the sending forth of "missionaries, teachers,
and instructors in the Bible".
In 1944 the term 'Governing Body' was introduced in The Watchtower15.
Milton, G. Henschel, a director of the Pennsylvania corporation,
explains who governs JWs as follows: "The Governing Body consists
of seven ministers serving as a board of directors."16
From the fourties onwards the term Governing Body was used frequently,
but as we have seen this was synonymous to the Board of Directors
of the WTS. This can also be inferred from the fact that Hayden
C. Covington in September 1945 "declined to serve further as
vice president of the WTS, explaining that he wished to comply with
what was then understood to be Jehovah's will for all members of
the directorate and officers-that they be spirit-anointed Christians,
whereas he professed to be one of the "other sheep.""17.
As we have already seen the Board of Directors was practically stripped
of all power during the reign of Rutherford and during Knorr's first
years as President this was not changed.
The Watchtower of December 15th 1971, pp. 755-62, for the
first time explained that the Governing Body was not identical with
the Board of Directors. The Governing Body could consist of more
members than the seven 'directors'. At the same time four new members
of the Governing Body were appointed. Also on local level some changes
were made, like appointing more elders than just one service-director.
With this change the chain was unbroken again on local level; the
situation was exactly the same as before abolishing the 'elective
elders and deacons' with one difference: now the WTS appointed these
officers, so there could be truly said: "elders . are the Governing
Body's representatives"18.
In April 1975 Knorr appointed a Comittee of Five to study the relation
between the corporations and the Governing Body. Until then the
power of the Governing Body was very limited; in fact it only had
an advisory function (only the President of the WTS had decisive
powers). But then, in a meeting of the Governing Body on April 30th
1975, Knorr made a motion that thenceforth all matters be decided
by a two-thirds vote of the active membership (which by then numbered
17). During the same session the Committee discussed a preliminary
report and stated: "The committee feels that today the Governing
Body should be directing the corporations and not the other way
around"19.
On August 15th 1975 the Committee of Five presented its definitive
report and it was discussed by the Governing Body in the period
between September 10th and December 4th 1975. The report advised
an organizational structure that finally was accepted and implemented,
and published in The Watchtower of January 1st 1977, pp.
15-1720.
Thís was the largest reorganization ever amongst JWs. It
stripped the President of the WTS from all real power, although
still only members of the Governing Body could become members of
the Board of Directors. From 1976 all power is in the hands of the
Governing Body. A few years later the explanation came (apparently
with power post facto):
"To keep matters in proper perspective, however, it was
pointed out that when The Watchtower referred
to "The Society," this meant, not a mere legal instrumentality,
but the body of anointed Christians that had formed that legal
entity and used it. Thus the expression stood for the faithful
and discreet slave with its Governing Body."21
What took place during the annual meeting on October 7th 2000,
was therefore nothing more than some alterations in filling a few
offices of the Board of Directors of the WTS. The theological basis
was already there from the'70s.
Of course the question remains why this change takes place only
now, 20 years after providing the doctrinal justification. Possibly
there is a connection with the age of the members of the Governing
Body. Although this year, 2000, some younger members were added,
the average age remains high. Since there already have been appointed
not-'anointed' ones in sub-comittees of the Governing Body and there
is no increase in 'anointed' Witnesses, let alone in 'anointed'
ones who meet the requirements for membership of the Governing Body,
it seems only a matter of time until not-'anointed' ones will be
admitted to the Governing Body.
Raymond V. Franz, former member of the Governing Body and only
insider ever to publish on the inner workings, suggests that the
seperation of theological and judicial responsibility could be inspired
by lawsuits the WTS could face over its ban on bloodtransfusion
and its practice of expelling members. In the recent past Watchtower-publication
already encouraged 'proper' use of the term Society with a hint
of legal implications (say: 'the Bible taught me.' instead of 'the
Society tells.' as in The Watchtower, March 15 1998, p. 19).
A more speculative, but not less interesting, option an expert
on JWs presented to mecould be that this is just the surface of
a deep-rooted upheaval: a power-struggle in the ranks of the WTS.
Is it possible that younger, intelligent and capable administrators
want to take over command? Recent figures indicate numerical decline
in developed countries (Northern America, Western Europe) and also
a decline in zeal (measured by reported field-service). Do the younger
leaders no longer accept the dictatorial gerontocracy and will they
fall back on pre-1975 structure to set things straight? Will prophetic
symbols like Elijah smiting the waters with his mantle and handing
it over to Elisah be applied in a new way to find a doctrinal justification
for the change of power? Since Don Adams, the new President of the
WTS, said he considers it a privilege to cooperate with the Governing
Body, this is not at all likely, but the tempestuous history of
JWs has shown more than once before that even the most unlikely
option has to be taken into serious consideration.
1 Although historically incorrect, the term JWs for
Jehovah's Witnesses is used throughout this article.
2 w 10/15/1894, pp. 330, 331. reprints p. 1320
3 w 10/1881 p. 5, reprints p. 291
4 w 7/15/1906 pp. 215, 216, reprints p. 3811
5 w 12/1/1916 pp. 356, 357, reprints p. 5998
6 The Finished Mystery, pp. 12, 144, 227, 256
7 Rutherford justified this dismissal by arguing that
the directors were never legally elected. Johnson refuted this,
supported by Rutherford's lawyer and the attorney of the Board.
However, Rutherford did not yield and pressed through using manipulation,
misuse of power and even physical violence.
8 w 3/1/23, p. 68
9 w 11/1/28, p. 332
10 w 6/15/38, p. 185
11 Proclaimers, p. 212
12 w 2/15/42, p. 63
13 Yearbook, 1943, pp. 226, 227
14 w 11/1/44, p. 334
15 w 12/15/71, p. 755-62
16 A Guide To the Religions of America, edited
by Leo Rosten (Simon and Schuster). (Article by Henschel). See also
Qualified to Be Ministers (1955), p. 381: "During the
days since the Lord came to his temple his visible governing body
has been closely identified with the board of directors of this
corporation."
17 Proclaimers, p. 91
18 w 7/1/76, p. 401
19 Crisis of Conscience by R.V. Franz, 1983,
1992, p. 71
20 The arrangement went into effect on January 1, 1976
21 Proclaimers, p. 219
©
Maurice van Elburg. May
not be reprinted without permission.
This article appeared first on http://members.tripod.lycos.nl/ludwig7/reorg.htm
|
