Governing Body update #2 March 2024

[Goldie]

Fairplay sister,

I'm happy that sisters are more comfortable, and I've talked to my wife, her friends, my sister, and my mom. The opinions very so far. But they all agreed that in the ministry it would be easier, more comfortable, and safer. Safer is something I had not considered, forgive the happy ignorance of a man please. So, I've changed my mind for ministry, but I'm still gut level instinct still says there's something off about blending attire for worship.

Let me explain, because I realize I didn't get a chance to even mention, I also very much oppose the no tie or jacket thing for brothers too. Just as much as I am resistant to sisters in pants. I ask myself, if I had to go to court, or to meet a high official or monarch, would I not wear my best suit and tie? Of course. So I also very much oppose no ties and jackets. In fact, I oppose that more than sisters with slacks.


Allow me to further explain my resistance to slack on sisters for worship. At my midweek meeting, many sisters wore pants, two of them went further than that already, they not only wore pants they wore dress shirts with vests, one indeed wore a tie. They looked strikingly androgenous. That was only the first meeting, now that door has been opened how much more masculine are sisters going to become? Some may ask, who cares?

I think God does, he made us make and female, he gave us distinct and uniquely wonderful roles that accentuate and compliment each other. I think any more to diminish our divinely special characteristics, is an assault on Jehovah's righteous way.
We see this in the world around us, the trans movement is growing ever more popular and powerful. They've subverted God rainbow already, making a mockery of it. Should we let them subvert our Creator's purpose further? These issues are destined to clash with us as Christians. Should we try to be more like Satan's gender bending system? I personally think not. And I think this is a step towards a slippery slope that will only confuse and mislead more sheep.


Perhaps I am being very stuffy and conservative. I pray I am wrong. Thank you for your perspective.

I agree with you brother %

 

[Proverbs 14 v 15]

Fairplay sister,

I'm happy that sisters are more comfortable, and I've talked to my wife, her friends, my sister, and my mom. The opinions very so far. But they all agreed that in the ministry it would be easier, more comfortable, and safer. Safer is something I had not considered, forgive the happy ignorance of a man please. So, I've changed my mind for ministry, but I'm still gut level instinct still says there's something off about blending attire for worship.

Let me explain, because I realize I didn't get a chance to even mention, I also very much oppose the no tie or jacket thing for brothers too. Just as much as I am resistant to sisters in pants. I ask myself, if I had to go to court, or to meet a high official or monarch, would I not wear my best suit and tie? Of course. So I also very much oppose no ties and jackets. In fact, I oppose that more than sisters with slacks.


Allow me to further explain my resistance to slack on sisters for worship. At my midweek meeting, many sisters wore pants, two of them went further than that already, they not only wore pants they wore dress shirts with vests, one indeed wore a tie. They looked strikingly androgenous. That was only the first meeting, now that door has been opened how much more masculine are sisters going to become? Some may ask, who cares?

I think God does, he made us make and female, he gave us distinct and uniquely wonderful roles that accentuate and compliment each other. I think any more to diminish our divinely special characteristics, is an assault on Jehovah's righteous way.
We see this in the world around us, the trans movement is growing ever more popular and powerful. They've subverted God rainbow already, making a mockery of it. Should we let them subvert our Creator's purpose further? These issues are destined to clash with us as Christians. Should we try to be more like Satan's gender bending system? I personally think not. And I think this is a step towards a slippery slope that will only confuse and mislead more sheep.


Perhaps I am being very stuffy and conservative. I pray I am wrong. Thank you for your perspective.

I agree with you even though I'm far more comfortable in jeans and leggings and dressing up in skirts and dresses has always been a pain in the bum but you're right, and this is a slippery slope and to be honest with you, I don't believe the GB are that concerned about it, they seem to be pre occupied with other stuff. They just keep throwing Jehovah's people snacks and treats to keep them quiet..

 

[Ana]

There have been many cases of sexual abuse, but the abuse is not only sexual. I was abused by an elder when I was a child. He acted severely against me. I was only 12 years old. My heart was broken and it still hurts because of that and other things. I could not stop crying. He said hurtful things too. Maybe he did not do that with a bad intention, but that created a trauma in me. It made me believe that Jehovah was a cruel and unreachable God in some way. It was horrible and awful for me and my relationship with Him. I have tried to get over that, but I'm just mentioning it to show that the abuse inside the org against children is real. It's not only sexual, but it has many forms. I can only imagine how many children have felt the same way. I was going to get baptized back then and I could not. He even forced me to do and say things I did not want to do or say. I was terrified. If I felt that, I can't imagine how the victims of sexual abuse have felt. It's horrible!
Pd: He acted like that against me, but when someone was disfellowshipped for fornication, he cried... Favoritism? :/

Están los favoritismos, claro! y con ellos los espías de la congregación queriendo ser el futuro siervo ministerial del anciano severo, por ejemplo. Se les huele a la lengua. Tan educados y correctos, que nunca van de cara. Era algo que siempre solía preguntar cuando falsamente me acusaban de algo y venían directamente los anciano. Nunca me decían quién me acusaba. Yo les decía que eso no era lo que dice la Biblia, que ese hermano que me ha visto debería hablar conmigo primero para que yo confiese. Mateo 18:15 Está era la forma de recuperar a tu hermano. Entonces por lógica si no hacías eso, lo perdías. Y así, lamentablemente perdieron a muchos. Pero no les importaba. Sólo querían la palmadita en la espalda y lucirse en las plataformas.

 

[noname]

Yes, but Deuteronomy 22:5 states clearly: '“A woman must not put on the clothing of a man, nor should a man wear the clothing of a woman. For anyone doing so is detestable to Jehovah your God.'

So, the only text that is available on the topics of beards and clothing, they ignore because its not fitting their 'hidden' purpose

In Bible times men wore short skirts and women wore long. So if anything a women wearing a short skirt would be crossdressing in relation to the customs of those days. In the early 1900's it started becoming acceptable for women to wear pants. It more has to do with what is crossdressing in your local community and region.
For instance, there is a region in the andes mountains and brothers are required to have long hair neatly braided down their back, because its the custom their for men and required to gain the respect of the community.

 

[Charming Primrose]

That's a good point @Charming Primrose about Elder's letting the parents have some say about their child being baptized. Had a case where a brother was being considered to be appointed an elder and question's arose, and I wasn't in agreement as it felt rushed, he wasn't really reaching out and other relevant factors just weren't manifest. Nonetheless, since the majority went along, agreed to let it proceed. The CO did not approve him. Come to find out his own wife expressed she did not see him in that capacity and that was a big factor in he not being recommended. In general, elders should or do speak with the parents, but most parents are giddy that their child has expressed this interest, so parents likely minimize negative factors about their child. Nonetheless, parent's should be honest about their children's readiness.

I've considered baptism questions with several who've expressed this desire, young and old, and typically, it's the heart condition that I focus on. Do they love God? Are they expressing that in their responses? Doctrinal matters and org academics, well, that should be known at a basic level, but I remember one instance where a sister only had a middle-school level education and had difficulty answering the questions well. Nonetheless, her lifestyle, answers and actions did manifest a love for Jah, so, my opinion was she was ready. The other elder with me disagreed. A third elder reviewed Q&A with her and agreed with me. She's doing great 'till this day in all the aspects that the org

That's a good point @Charming Primrose about Elder's letting the parents have some say about their child being baptized. Had a case where a brother was being considered to be appointed an elder and question's arose, and I wasn't in agreement as it felt rushed, he wasn't really reaching out and other relevant factors just weren't manifest. Nonetheless, since the majority went along, agreed to let it proceed. The CO did not approve him. Come to find out his own wife expressed she did not see him in that capacity and that was a big factor in he not being recommended. In general, elders should or do speak with the parents, but most parents are giddy that their child has expressed this interest, so parents likely minimize negative factors about their child. Nonetheless, parent's should be honest about their children's readiness.

I've considered baptism questions with several who've expressed this desire, young and old, and typically, it's the heart condition that I focus on. Do they love God? Are they expressing that in their responses? Doctrinal matters and org academics, well, that should be known at a basic level, but I remember one instance where a sister only had a middle-school level education and had difficulty answering the questions well. Nonetheless, her lifestyle, answers and actions did manifest a love for Jah, so, my opinion was she was ready. The other elder with me disagreed. A third elder reviewed Q&A with her and agreed with me. She's doing great 'till this day in all the aspects that the org expects.

Good for you for thoughtfully considering these very important questions. We are so eager to plz God and the org sometimes we don't see things that others do.

 

[StillA_WorshiperOfJah]

also very much oppose the no tie or jacket thing for brothers too.

I personally think men look better in a suit and tie for formal occasions, and yes I think it honours Jehovah, but I also think it should depend on the culture and climate. For example, I think brothers in Australia have not been expected to wear jackets or long sleeves in ministry for quite some time. Even in England brothers dispense with jackets and long sleeves during heat waves in ministry and outdoor conventions for as long as I can remember.
I know some of my male friends find wearing ties very uncomfortable.

At my midweek meeting, many sisters wore pants, two of them went further than that already, they not only wore pants they wore dress shirts with vests, one indeed wore a tie.

I myself have worn 'vests' or 'waistcoats' as we call them here to meetings years ago when they were in fashion, but I agree with you that these sisters were deliberately probably trying to look masculine, which is not appropriate, but perhaps they were just trying to make a point and have got it out their system now. Or, maybe there is something else going on with those particular sisters. Who knows?
I see your point, but stand by my argument that most women don't wear trousers to look like men. If I was standing before a human judge I would probably wear 'job interview' style trousers, blouse and jacket, so I would be taken seriously, and not suspected of trying to distract the judge with my sexuality, but that's just my perspective.

 

[StillA_WorshiperOfJah]

I agree with you even though I'm far more comfortable in jeans and leggings and dressing up in skirts and dresses has always been a pain in the bum but you're right, and this is a slippery slope and to be honest with you, I don't believe the GB are that concerned about it, they seem to be pre occupied with other stuff. They just keep throwing Jehovah's people snacks and treats to keep them quiet..

I agree, in some ways it is a moot point because I am faded and no longer attend the Kingdom Hall, because of far more serious issues I have with the GB. The dress code is the least of my worries.

 

[NinevehByWayOfTarshish]

I personally think men look better in a suit and tie for formal occasions, and yes I think it honours Jehovah, but I also think it should depend on the culture and climate. For example, I think brothers in Australia have not been expected to wear jackets or long sleeves in ministry for quite some time. Even in England brothers dispense with jackets and long sleeves during heat waves in ministry and outdoor conventions for as long as I can remember.
I know some of my male friends find wearing ties very uncomfortable.

I myself have worn 'vests' or 'waistcoats' as we call them here to meetings years ago when they were in fashion, but I agree with you that these sisters were deliberately probably trying to look masculine, which is not appropriate, but perhaps they were just trying to make a point and have got it out their system now. Or, maybe there is something else going on with those particular sisters. Who knows?
I see your point, but stand by my argument that most women don't wear trousers to look like men. If I was standing before a human judge I would probably wear 'job interview' style trousers, blouse and jacket, so I would be taken seriously, and not suspected of trying to distract the judge with my sexuality, but that's just my perspective.

Ya, I think you are right about those sisters just pushing the limit for fun. I get that I guess. But my resistance is that we've opened that door, and given human nature we will just keep pushing the limits.

That's a good point about visiting going to court in slacks, I guess times do change and styles with them. Maybe I am just being alarmist. But given how quickly the org has been changing things, alarmism might be the correct response. Who really knows what they'll do next.

 

[DavidCJ]

Translation: I was baptised at the age of 12 and it was the usual. At 18 after passing the passage of congregational terror, I tried to commit suicide and left the WT. When Robert wrote his book, don't tell me how I found it, but I resumed the deep study in the Bible and the reserves of faith exploded. And here we are, thank God!! Sometimes when you lose, you win!!

I was baptized at age 30, but became "inactive" after a serious depression less than 2 years later. I could be compared to Nebuchadnezzar's fall in terms of my mental state, which after 4 years ended with attempt at harm, which was to my unending rage just before the March 17 lockdown.

Looking back, it seems the true knowledge that I was given by the faithful messenger, brother King is because Jehovah knew I was ready to receive it. If things happened back in 2015 when I got baptized, I think I would have been those that seriously regretted taking the so-called vaccine. The betrayal I would have felt would have in the future led me to those involved in "brother against brother" events in the future, even though I can assure you many that have known me for a long time would attest I wouldn't be capable of doing a such thing.

The absolute resistance to any attempts for me to message my parents and reflecting back on my past suggest that them and many others need to go through the "terrors" I have went through. Truly those periods were dark times for me. Never in the past it felt like everything was perpetually dark, a mind and viewpoint that felt like complete darkness despite being in the middle of the day in Summer.