Wednesday, July 13, 2016
Tuesday, July 12, 2016
Setting things straight
A seminar
on Jehovah’s Witnesses was held April last in Antwerp, sponsored by CESNUR. It
drew colleagues and friends. I have five children and other responsibilities which
explains why, though I was invited, I did not attend.
Separate
Identity, our book, drew some comment, some positive and some negative. Not
everyone will like what they read regardless of who wrote it. Some won’t like
the writing style. Some will reject conclusions that differ from their own. The
criticism to which I object is the claim we do not cite opposition writers.
This is false on its face. And it reflects a lack of understanding of the
nature of original research. Original historical research is not based on
secondary sources. It is based on original sources. These are memoirs by event
participants, contemporary documents and articles in contemporary periodicals. Few
opposition writers represent original sources. Reliance on them is an
affectation derived from the writing style of sociologists. It is not, nor
should it be, part of a historian’s kit, except when their statements are
challenged or a shared conclusion is referenced.
Contrary to
the claim made by a conference attender, we reference opposition writers at
least twenty-two times. Some of these are former adherents; some are not. Some
claimed academic credentials but are truly polemicists. One in the final
edition of his book met a high academic standard but is still an opposition
writer.
Why anyone
would trash our book, no matter how politely, with this false claim puzzles me.
Herewith is the list of opposition writers we cite in footnotes and text:
1. R Bowman and A. Gomes – page 81;
2. G. Burns – page 256. 3. W. T Conner – page 178; 4. C. C. Cook – page 178; 5.
J. V. Coombs – page 51; 6. R. W. Coon – page 51; 7. M. D. Curry, Jr. – page 175;
8. C. G. Falkner – page 306; 9. W. Gavin – page 232; 10. D. Graham – page 60;
11. E. Gruss – pages 210, 329, 332; 12. J. Haughlen – page 234; 13. C. O.
Johnson and J. Penton – page 168; 14. Morris and Kross – page 232; 15. A. T. Rogerson
– page 179; 16. J. J. Ross – page 51; 17. T. T. Shields – Page 314; 18. F.
Springmeir – page 193; 19. E. Young – page 51.
With the
exception of Wikipedia nonsense, we felt no need to footnote controversialist
web pages of little to no worth. We stand by that decision. None of them are
original source material. In those few cases where original source material is
reproduced online, we cite it in the usual way.
There may
be more examples but my memory suggests only three: On page 185, footnote 12 we
cite Lottie F. Warner’s diary which is found online; on page 203 we cited Early
Lives of Andrew and Lydia Ann Beeman, reproduced online; on page 257 we cite a
Davies family memoir also found online. These are original sources.
Saturday, July 9, 2016
FORTHCOMING ATTRACTION!
THE SEQUEL TO THE PHOTODRAMA
PRODUCED BY THE MENA
FILM COMPANY
(see WT March 15, 1918 page 94)
See Alfred Garcia (as Satan) tempt F.A. Turner (as King Herod)
An article on this film, premiered at an IBSA convention in 1918 is to follow in due course.
WATCH THIS SPACE
Wednesday, July 6, 2016
French language Songbooks
Miquel has kindly sent me some photographs of historical French language Songbooks that have come to hand.
This songbook, a second edition printing from 1919 corresponds to one of the Zion's Glad Songs series.
This 1928 songbook corresponds with the 1928 Songs of Praise to Jehovah, which basically replaced Hymns of Millennial Dawn for IBSA meetings.
Tuesday, July 5, 2016
You can get excited over this one ...
http://www.ebay.com/itm/222173541433?ssPageName=STRK:MESELX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1555.l2649
We're selling this to pay Aunt S's medical expenses.
Monday, July 4, 2016
Don't get TOO excited...
As seen on Ebay
The blurb reads:
Don't get TOO excited, this is a nicely bound copy of a photocopy (of a photocopy) of the original 1880 volume. Check the photographs carefully. Someone had a photocopy of the book (two pages to a sheet) and it was heavily underlined. The photocopies were all then folded in two and "perfect bound" together. It means that you have two pages of text, and then two blank pages throughout the book, so the width of the volume is twice the normal size. What you are buying here is basically a nicely bound volume to go in the bookcase; something that LOOKS good, but ultimately is just a so-so copy of J H Paton's work.
Saturday, July 2, 2016
Friday, July 1, 2016
Friday, June 24, 2016
We need some help with this
A Witness newsletter from Baltimore, 1935. We're told that this was put out by Anton Koerber and that Rutherford objected. It was stopped shortly afterward. We cannot verify this. It is too big for my scanner, so part of it is missing. What can you tell me?
Click on image to see entire.
Click on image to see entire.
Thursday, June 23, 2016
Temporary Post
This is a rough draft of a chapter from volume 2. The usual rules apply. You may copy it for your own use. Do not quote from it or rely on it. It will change. References to Second Adventists will change to Age-to-Come, a different system. Wording will change. Some issues need verification. Do not circulate it. Do not reproduce it. It is copyrighted material as is. I'm posting it for comment. It will go down quickly. Now is the time to comment.
The Publishing Ministry
The first publication to come from Zion’s
Watch Tower was Songs of the Bride, a 134 page hymnal containing 144
songs. Russell and William I. Mann were joint editors. All of the hymns would
have been familiar to Watch Tower readers, but almost all of them were
revised to reflect their unique doctrinal mix. Some were radically changed, and
some received a one or two word revision. Russell explained the rational behind
their choices:
photo
William Imre
Mann in 1880
We
have long felt the need of a Hymn Book containing a larger number of spiritual
songs free from objectionable theology, and this is our reason for publishing “The
Songs of the Bride.” We have selected according to our judgment they hymns
best suited to the wants and desires of the more matured and consecrated
Christians, the “little flock,” … the true “Church of the first-born whose
names are written in Heaven,” … hence the perhaps peculiar name “Songs of
the Bride.” They are not the songs of the world, nor of cold or half dead
Christians, but of the Chaste Virgin Church, waiting and longing for her union
with the heavenly Bridegroom.[1]
Illustration
Title Page – Songs
of the Bride
We do not know how great a part
Russell played in developing this songbook. He pointed to William Mann, thanking
him for “valuable assistance” in arranging and revising the songs. It appears
to have been a joint effort with Mann taking the lead. As would be true with
the later Hymns of Millennial Dawn, most of the songs were taken form Gospel
Hymns No. 1, The Jubilee Harp, and Winnowed Hymns. They also drew
from C. C. Barker’s Hymns of the Morning, the basis for the abbreviated
hymnal published by the Herald of the Morning. The authors’ names were
omitted, as were many of the original titles. Russell explained that he “would
gladly give credit of the hymns to their composers, but have been obliged to
alter many of them to such an extent that we feared their authors would feel
offended if their names were associated with them as they now are.”[2]
Advertising matter in the back promoted Russell’s Object and Manner and Zion’s
Watch
The remainder of this post is deleted.
The remainder of this post is deleted.
Wednesday, June 22, 2016
Sunday, June 19, 2016
Jonathan Ling
In recounting the very
early years of Bible Students in Britain, Bruce and Rachael wrote about Tom
Hart and Jonathan Ling. Both names were mentioned in the 1973 Yearbook history
of Britain. A paragraph about Ling was extended as a result of research made on
Ancestry and also a reference found in Tony Byatt’s book on the history of
Bible Students/Witnesses in London.
The combined
information reads:
(quote) Thom Hart was born in Calcutta, India, in 1853. At the time
of the 1881 Census he had moved his family from the Islington address to 5
Lavinia Grove, Middlesex, London. He was “a carman” for one of the railroads. In
another place he called “a railroad shunter.” He and his wife had three
children, two sons and one daughter, all under the age of four. Jonathan Ling
was born in Blaxhall, Suffolk, early in 1858. The 1891 census has him as a
railway guard at Islington, an occupation he still had in 1901. He was married
Elizabeth, maiden name unknown, and they have seven children, ranging in ages
from one month to 17 years old. He died June 20, 1922. We lack an exact date
for Ling’s conversion, but it appears to be early. Ling’s daughter Ruth
remembered that their meetings were held in the common room of the King’s Cross
hostel, a layover spot for railway workers. (end of quote)
As a result of contacts via Ancestry, I have made contact
with one of Ling’s great grand-daughters, Elizabeth. Although the census return
referred to above gave Jonathan Ling seven children, it appears he eventually
had ten. His wife, Elizabeth, was originally Elizabeth Moody and lived to be 100.
The modern Elizabeth’s branch of the family did not remain with the Bible
Students.
Great grand daughter Elizabeth (from the line through
Jonathan’s son, Lewis Charles Ling) has very kindly supplied the two
photographs below, and has given permission for them to be reproduced here. I have
not cropped them but just reproduced them as received. Elizabeth has also given
permission to reproduce the photographs in the second volume of Separate
Identity if required, with just an acknowledgement requested.
Thursday, June 16, 2016
An article by Roberto
The name in Italy
The question of group designation was an issue for the first Italian Watch Tower believers. All the Italian publications, letters and documents, inside and outside the movement, avoided the name “Bible Students” until 1915.
The most used name was the generic “Church”, but there are some exceptions. In 1903 the first number of “La Vedetta di Sion” – Italian Zion’s Watch Tower - called themselves with the generic name “Church”, but also “Christian Church" and “Faithful Church” [1]. In 1904 besides the name “Church” they called themselves “Church of the Little Flock of Believers” and “Evangelical Church” [2]
In 1904 the Waldensians pastor Giuseppe Banchetti wrote a positive review of the Italian Divine Plan of the Ages in a periodical [3], and avoids any name but “the Present Truth”.
In 1905 a letter of Daniele Rivoire was published in the Zion’s Watch Tower French edition (Le Phare de la Tour de Sion), he said: “Next Sunday afternoon I will go to S. Germano Chisone for a meeting with five or six people deeply interested in the Present Truth”. He used also the the expressions “Holy Cause” and “Work”, and avoided any name [4].
In 1908 Lara Lantered (widow Chantelain) in a long letter called the Watch Tower believers, “Readers of the Dawn and Tower”. She wrote: “May God grant us to be frank and honest in our testimony of the present truth and in the unfolding of our glorious flag. May he give to all the readers of the Dawn and Tower to rejoice in the Lord. He desires that our joy may be complete and would not allow anyone to take it away from us” [5]. In 1910, in another long letter, Lanteret evaded any name and used the expressions “Light” and “Precious Truth”. She said: “I am glad to announce that Mr. M., a former old Baptist Minister, after frequent discussions with the two of us (Lara Lantaret and Fanny Lugli) has fully entered into the light and accepted joyfully the precious truth that God has well revealed through his dear and faithful servant Russell” [6]
In May 1910, four members of the Waldensians Church resigned, joining with the Watch Tower Movement. They were Henriette Bounous, Francois Soulier, Henry Bouchard, and Luoise Vincon Rivoir; In their long letters of resignation they avoided any name. Henri Bouchard alone used the phrase “Church of Christ” one time [7].
This continuous change of names, or absence of a name, generated confusion outside the movement. The Consistory of the Waldensias Church disfellowshipped Henriette Bocenous, Cesarine Bocenous, Francois Soulier together with his wife and daughter, Henry Bouchard and Louise Vincon Rivoire (or Rivoir) with the following words that we find in the minutes of the meeting:
“The President reads the letters that he has written in the name of the Consistory, to those individuals that from many time or lately two years ago, have left the Waldensian Church to join the Darbysts, or to set up a new sect ……… while Louise Vincon Rivoire has become a Baptist” [8].
As a matter of fact they were all Watch Tower believers.
In its May 21, 1915, issue the Waldensians paper L’Echo des Vallees an article entitled “Courrier Anglo-American," saying: “Doctor Nixon, fights to the bitter end, the millennial movement that is becoming a dangerous movement, and Pastor Russell is the leader of this new religious agitation started in the United States” [10]
Also, in 1915 the Catholic priest at Bagnolo Piemonte, wrote an article against the booklet The Triumph of the Bible published by the Italian Branch of the International Bible Students Association. The priest called them Protestants and Waldensians [9] . In January 1916, the Italian branch replied saying that they were neither Protestants or Waldensians:
“We of the International Bible Students Association want to free them from that charge, declaring that we are out of any religious sect or renowned nominal church, Catholic or Protestant, and that the brothers of the Association although in the past were members of those religions, they harried up to go out, because they (Catholic and Protestants) are part of the Great Harlot Babylon, so well drowned in Revelation chapters 17 and 18” [11].
After 1915 the name Bible Students became common inside and outside the movement .
Footnotes - all the references can be found in the book “Enciclopedia storica sui Testimoni di Geova in Italia” (Historical Encyclopedia on the Jehovah’s Witnesses in Italy, vol. I) by Emanuele Pace, 2013.
[1] Vedetta di Sion vol. 1, n.1, October 1903 p.2, §7; and p.3 column 2, line 4
[2] Vedetta di Sion vol. 2, n. 1, January 1904, p.3, column 4, line 4; and p.3 §3.
[3] Letter wrote in 1904 July 13 and published in La Rivista Cristiana 1904, September, vol. VI, pp. 351-354.
[4] Le Phare de la Tour de Sion 1905, January-March edition, p. 117
[5] Le Phare de la Tour de Sion 1908, May, p. 139
[6] Le Phare de la Tour de Sion 1910, April, p. 79
[7] Archivio della Tavola Valdese (Archive of the Waldensian Table) – Torre Pellice, Turin
[8] Archivio della Tavola Valdese (Archive of the Waldensian Table) – Torre Pellice, Turin
[9] Bollettino Mensile della Chiesa (Montly Bulletin of the Church) 1915, September
[10] Clara Cerulli Lantaret replied to the charge, with a letter published in the paper “Il Pellice” dated 1915 June 4. The dispute is reported in the Italian Watch Tower tract “Giustizia” (Justice), page 6
[11] “Il Vero Principe della Pace” (The True Prince of the Peace), Associazione Internazionale Studenti Biblici, 1916, January, p. 14
The question of group designation was an issue for the first Italian Watch Tower believers. All the Italian publications, letters and documents, inside and outside the movement, avoided the name “Bible Students” until 1915.
The most used name was the generic “Church”, but there are some exceptions. In 1903 the first number of “La Vedetta di Sion” – Italian Zion’s Watch Tower - called themselves with the generic name “Church”, but also “Christian Church" and “Faithful Church” [1]. In 1904 besides the name “Church” they called themselves “Church of the Little Flock of Believers” and “Evangelical Church” [2]
In 1904 the Waldensians pastor Giuseppe Banchetti wrote a positive review of the Italian Divine Plan of the Ages in a periodical [3], and avoids any name but “the Present Truth”.
In 1905 a letter of Daniele Rivoire was published in the Zion’s Watch Tower French edition (Le Phare de la Tour de Sion), he said: “Next Sunday afternoon I will go to S. Germano Chisone for a meeting with five or six people deeply interested in the Present Truth”. He used also the the expressions “Holy Cause” and “Work”, and avoided any name [4].
In 1908 Lara Lantered (widow Chantelain) in a long letter called the Watch Tower believers, “Readers of the Dawn and Tower”. She wrote: “May God grant us to be frank and honest in our testimony of the present truth and in the unfolding of our glorious flag. May he give to all the readers of the Dawn and Tower to rejoice in the Lord. He desires that our joy may be complete and would not allow anyone to take it away from us” [5]. In 1910, in another long letter, Lanteret evaded any name and used the expressions “Light” and “Precious Truth”. She said: “I am glad to announce that Mr. M., a former old Baptist Minister, after frequent discussions with the two of us (Lara Lantaret and Fanny Lugli) has fully entered into the light and accepted joyfully the precious truth that God has well revealed through his dear and faithful servant Russell” [6]
In May 1910, four members of the Waldensians Church resigned, joining with the Watch Tower Movement. They were Henriette Bounous, Francois Soulier, Henry Bouchard, and Luoise Vincon Rivoir; In their long letters of resignation they avoided any name. Henri Bouchard alone used the phrase “Church of Christ” one time [7].
This continuous change of names, or absence of a name, generated confusion outside the movement. The Consistory of the Waldensias Church disfellowshipped Henriette Bocenous, Cesarine Bocenous, Francois Soulier together with his wife and daughter, Henry Bouchard and Louise Vincon Rivoire (or Rivoir) with the following words that we find in the minutes of the meeting:
“The President reads the letters that he has written in the name of the Consistory, to those individuals that from many time or lately two years ago, have left the Waldensian Church to join the Darbysts, or to set up a new sect ……… while Louise Vincon Rivoire has become a Baptist” [8].
As a matter of fact they were all Watch Tower believers.
In its May 21, 1915, issue the Waldensians paper L’Echo des Vallees an article entitled “Courrier Anglo-American," saying: “Doctor Nixon, fights to the bitter end, the millennial movement that is becoming a dangerous movement, and Pastor Russell is the leader of this new religious agitation started in the United States” [10]
Also, in 1915 the Catholic priest at Bagnolo Piemonte, wrote an article against the booklet The Triumph of the Bible published by the Italian Branch of the International Bible Students Association. The priest called them Protestants and Waldensians [9] . In January 1916, the Italian branch replied saying that they were neither Protestants or Waldensians:
“We of the International Bible Students Association want to free them from that charge, declaring that we are out of any religious sect or renowned nominal church, Catholic or Protestant, and that the brothers of the Association although in the past were members of those religions, they harried up to go out, because they (Catholic and Protestants) are part of the Great Harlot Babylon, so well drowned in Revelation chapters 17 and 18” [11].
After 1915 the name Bible Students became common inside and outside the movement .
Footnotes - all the references can be found in the book “Enciclopedia storica sui Testimoni di Geova in Italia” (Historical Encyclopedia on the Jehovah’s Witnesses in Italy, vol. I) by Emanuele Pace, 2013.
[1] Vedetta di Sion vol. 1, n.1, October 1903 p.2, §7; and p.3 column 2, line 4
[2] Vedetta di Sion vol. 2, n. 1, January 1904, p.3, column 4, line 4; and p.3 §3.
[3] Letter wrote in 1904 July 13 and published in La Rivista Cristiana 1904, September, vol. VI, pp. 351-354.
[4] Le Phare de la Tour de Sion 1905, January-March edition, p. 117
[5] Le Phare de la Tour de Sion 1908, May, p. 139
[6] Le Phare de la Tour de Sion 1910, April, p. 79
[7] Archivio della Tavola Valdese (Archive of the Waldensian Table) – Torre Pellice, Turin
[8] Archivio della Tavola Valdese (Archive of the Waldensian Table) – Torre Pellice, Turin
[9] Bollettino Mensile della Chiesa (Montly Bulletin of the Church) 1915, September
[10] Clara Cerulli Lantaret replied to the charge, with a letter published in the paper “Il Pellice” dated 1915 June 4. The dispute is reported in the Italian Watch Tower tract “Giustizia” (Justice), page 6
[11] “Il Vero Principe della Pace” (The True Prince of the Peace), Associazione Internazionale Studenti Biblici, 1916, January, p. 14
Wednesday, June 15, 2016
Saturday, June 11, 2016
Film frames of C T Russell from Photodrama
This was recently sold on eBay.
The blurb read:
This is a genuine strip of 35mm film from the Photodrama of
Creation, taken from one of the introductions, featuring Pastor Russell. There
are seven frames in this strip, although only six are shown. (The bottom frame
had the seller’s thumb in the way.) I have resisted the commercial temptation
to cut the film into smaller pieces to sell individually. That was the fate of
other Photodrama films of Russell that ended up on cards as souvenir bookmarks.
The provenance of the strip of film goes back well over 40 years,
when someone gave it to me. It had gone through various hands but came originally
from an elderly JW who was a projectionist at Princes Theatre, Shaftsbury
Avenue, London, when the Photodrama first came to Britain in 1914. I traced this
person and where he lived and after some correspondence travelled to meet him. During
his time as projectionist he was normally entombed in a metal projection box
because of fear of fire. Under carbon lighting of the day, he would strip down
somewhat, but still roasted.
When the showings ceased he somehow ‘inherited’ a two minute reel
of film which languished in his attic for decades. But he’d now taken to
cutting off little bits as souvenirs for friends. I was able to climb into his
attic and borrow what was left of the film. Although the sprocket holes were
considerably damaged in places, I got a colleague in a London laboratory to run
me off 35mm and 16mm prints for the minute or so that remained. The original reel
then went back to its owner, and I don’t know what happened to it. I used the
reprinted film in several projects, and if you obtain a DVD of the Photodrama
today, or just watch it online, my minute or so of reprinted film is
incorporated into that restoration.
So that is the story behind these few frames. Although most 35mm
film of the date was highly dangerous nitrate stock - leaving safer film for
the substandard gauges (17.5mm, 9.5mm, 16mm etc.) - the film of CTR was
actually produced on a safer version of stock. That is why it could be copied safely
and legally and it is why these few frames can now be offered on eBay.
It sold for 206 GBP.
Friday, June 10, 2016
Des. Res.
Modern photos courtesy of : Instagram: watchtower_of_allegheny_tour
Two years ago when I visited Pittsburgh I was taken to
see the former residences of the Russells, father and son. At that time
this was the photograph I took.
The properties were on the market, and the owner was
offering to turn them into whatever you wanted for over $400,000 per plot. Much of the interiors had to be gutted, because all new floors
were needed. However, the aim was to restore the homes as sympathetically as
possible. So the double spiral staircases on each side were to be fully restored.
Now
they are completed, and here is another recent photograph to show what the
exteriors now look like.
So any
collectors with too much money can forget about bidding on eBay for rare bits
of paper and perhaps collect some historic real estate instead.
For any new
readers, these two houses were at one time owned by the Russell family. Joseph
L Russell owned the house on the left, and Charles T Russell owned the one on the right. Joseph L died in his property in 1897. and left it to his wife, Emma.
When Maria left CTR,
she moved back into the house on the right, and rented rooms out to lodgers.
Her mother Selena died there in 1901. When CTR ultimately took back the
property, Maria simply moved in with Emma next door. The two women would live
together at various locations in Pittsburgh and later Florida until Emma died
in 1929. Maria lived on until 1938.
Wednesday, June 8, 2016
Tuesday, June 7, 2016
Friday, June 3, 2016
Ernest Charles Henninges
Ernest Charles
Henninges was born on 12 July, 1871. He became a Bible Student c. 1891. He
married Rose Ball on 11 September 1897. He died on 2 February 1939.
He was a Society
director from 4 January 1896 to 2 January 1909. During this time he was the
secretary/treasurer of the Society on two occasions.
The first occasion was
from 13 May 1898 to 12 February 1900. He then travelled to the United Kingdom
to organize a branch there. He was in Britain from April 1900 to November 1901
(and can be found in the British census for 1901). Back in the States he again
became secretary/treasurer from 2 February 1902 to 24 March 1903. He was then
on his travels again, first to organize matters in Elberfeld, Germany, from
June to October 1903, and then in Australia, arriving in Melbourne on 10
January 1904. His replacement as a director in January 1909 officially severed
his relationship with CTR.
(With grateful thanks
to Bernard who supplied the picture and most of the dates)
Thursday, May 26, 2016
Wednesday, May 25, 2016
A response ...
My comments about another's research drew an email response. In fairness to the author, I reproduce it here:
Dear Rachel,
Your recent attack on my research is not to your credit. I have researched this subject since the 1970´s and I don´t bring any preconcieved ideas into my writing. I started trying to figure out what happened and why and I now know the answers. One has to stick to a high level of ethics, that´s for sure. That Is why I will not claim that Rutherford had extra-marital affairs as so many others have done.
In the nature of things the brief response to Chryssides new book that I made public couldn´t give justice to my thorough research. I stated that Macmillan was not reliable and said his old age was the reason. Since he made so many astonishing mistakes in his presentation my verdict was a charitable one. The alternative is that he lied knowingly. I can demonstrate over and over and over again how unreliable his testomony was. His testimony is condtradicted by all the contemporary sources, even Rutherford´s writings, and that is the real reason why I don´t accept much of what he stated. However, I accept one interesting piece of information that he brought forward, and that in spite of the fact that there is no corroboration from the contemporary material. But generally his long life in an ever changing organization has affected his memory.
I believe you were wrong when you stated that the corporate law under which the Society was incorporated was formulated in 1876. It was formulated in 1874. [He's right.] Also, the legal arguments used by Rutherford did not date only from 1906, as you seem to suggest. They were part of the Pennsylvania Corporate law much earlier as an earlier Pennsylvania law book that I have shows. But that does not mean that the issues of of 1916-1918 are given a new color. It is still true, moreover, that Rutherford NEVER tried to explain how the charter could contain illegal clauses. It would be most useful for him to do so. If new laws had the effect that the charter was superseded , why not say so? Why not give the dates and details of such new laws? Even the Philadelphia lawyer he mustered did not say a word about this and so the ousted board members remained convinced that they were the legal directors of the Society.
It is clear that you don´t have any real knowledge about this, and if the thoughts you presented came from your father, he is ignorant, too. That you stated that you are Schultz´s daughter was good. It explains a lot. [I'm not Bruce Schulz' daughter. He misread what I wrote.]
Dear Rachel,
Your recent attack on my research is not to your credit. I have researched this subject since the 1970´s and I don´t bring any preconcieved ideas into my writing. I started trying to figure out what happened and why and I now know the answers. One has to stick to a high level of ethics, that´s for sure. That Is why I will not claim that Rutherford had extra-marital affairs as so many others have done.
In the nature of things the brief response to Chryssides new book that I made public couldn´t give justice to my thorough research. I stated that Macmillan was not reliable and said his old age was the reason. Since he made so many astonishing mistakes in his presentation my verdict was a charitable one. The alternative is that he lied knowingly. I can demonstrate over and over and over again how unreliable his testomony was. His testimony is condtradicted by all the contemporary sources, even Rutherford´s writings, and that is the real reason why I don´t accept much of what he stated. However, I accept one interesting piece of information that he brought forward, and that in spite of the fact that there is no corroboration from the contemporary material. But generally his long life in an ever changing organization has affected his memory.
I believe you were wrong when you stated that the corporate law under which the Society was incorporated was formulated in 1876. It was formulated in 1874. [He's right.] Also, the legal arguments used by Rutherford did not date only from 1906, as you seem to suggest. They were part of the Pennsylvania Corporate law much earlier as an earlier Pennsylvania law book that I have shows. But that does not mean that the issues of of 1916-1918 are given a new color. It is still true, moreover, that Rutherford NEVER tried to explain how the charter could contain illegal clauses. It would be most useful for him to do so. If new laws had the effect that the charter was superseded , why not say so? Why not give the dates and details of such new laws? Even the Philadelphia lawyer he mustered did not say a word about this and so the ousted board members remained convinced that they were the legal directors of the Society.
It is clear that you don´t have any real knowledge about this, and if the thoughts you presented came from your father, he is ignorant, too. That you stated that you are Schultz´s daughter was good. It explains a lot. [I'm not Bruce Schulz' daughter. He misread what I wrote.]
Tuesday, May 24, 2016
Pay attention to the words ...
There are,
I think, things you do not understand. Let me clarify issues for you.
Some of you
believe this project depends on me. You think that because I am principal blog
editor. What is posted here appears under my rather silly post-it name. From
the beginning this project has depended on B. W. Schulz – not on me. He
conceptualized it. He was and remains the principal author and guiding light of
this work.
We often
write in tandem, writing the same chapter or parts of the same chapters. We
mold our separate writing into a unified presentation which we hope (and I
believe) our readers cannot easily assign to either of us. So when you praise me
for this work, your adulation is misplaced.
Some of you
misread my comments. I usually write exactly what I mean. I expect that my
words have meaning; injecting contrary understanding into them is at least
irritating and at its worst it abuses the gift of language, occasionally an
unforgivable sin. I did not say I was withdrawing from the current
project. I said that after it is finished, I will not remain to complete book
three. So all the distress expressed in private emails is misplaced. And one of
you said that you would not support Mr. Schulz if he moves on to book three, tentatively
called On the Cusp of Fame.
I am lead
on this blog to relieve Mr. Schulz of some burdens. He is aged, infirm, and
stubborn as a mule. He also continues to research, write, and guide this
project. Some of you act as if he has turned vegetable. Stop it.
Without
being offensive, I cannot clearly tell you how upsetting it is when you
attribute Bruce’s work to me. I take credit for my own work; I do not take
credit for the genius of others.
Another
issue must be addressed. One of the friends of this research, a retired history
professor, lives across the Columbia River from me. He pointed me to comments
on a controversialist chat board. Nice things were said about our work. I
appreciate the kind comments. However, there was other nonsense there that exemplifies
the ethical and procedural issues attendant on historiography. Another writer, I
think not a trained historian, is writing about the post-Russell controversies.
Someone should write about that, but the approach noted there is faulty.
He rejects
A. H. MacMillan’s testimony as given in Faith on the March because
MacMillan was ‘old’ and his memory faulty. MacMillan wrote exactly 40 years
ante. He was not particularly old. And if he was, age is not reason to
question memory. Mr. Schulz, my father, and others of my acquaintance are far
older than MacMillan was in 1957. No-one can fairly describe them as mentally
challenged. If you read hardcore science, you’ve probably read one or more of
my father’s books, many of them written when he was well-past MacMillan’s age.
Discounting
evidence because it does not support your point of view is unethical. Don’t do
it.
The same
writer fell into the trap that lures many. He hasn’t followed the trail to the
end. He separates some issues that cannot be separated. He comments on the
nature of the Watch Tower board of directors and the election process. The
Society was incorporated in 1884 under the laws of Pennsylvania as formulated
in 1876. Corporate law changed in 1906. The new laws changed Watch Tower
Society legal obligations. This gives the issues of 1916-1918 a new color.
If we write
to our pre-conceived ideas, our history will be flawed. Seriously flawed. Go
where honest research takes you. Do not write to an agenda.
Now ... do
you all feel scolded?
I see that
I’ve omitted a thought. Most of you know that I am not a Witnesses. I’m a
professional historian and educator. I write to be read. I do not write to
further a religion, not even my own. I do not write out of ‘principle.’ I’m a
storyteller at heart. That’s what I do. Storytellers want to be read and
appreciated.
Saturday, May 21, 2016
J F Rutherford's First Book
(revised)
I didn’t realize, until
I did a search, but I have actually posted something on this several years ago
- J F Rutherford’s very first book. But having lost an hour of my life actually
reading it earlier today, I decided to post again.
In 1895 the Boonville
Advertiser, the official paper of Cooper County, gave away a free 128 page book
entitled Laws of Missouri - Business Manual. The author and compiler was one J
F Rutherford of the law firm of Wright and Rutherford.
The book is not dated
as such, but one of the advertisements for the Cooper Institute announced that
its 26th year of operation would begin on Tuesday, September 3,
1895, so we can reasonably assume that the volume came out earlier that year.
In the main, only the
right hand pages contained text, the left hand pages contained full page
advertisements for the various services available in a rural area. There are
thirteen law firms in the area for example, but top of the list is Wright and
Rutherford, with offices in the Windsor Block. There is a glowing endorsement
of Rutherford in the Publisher’s Preface:
“THE ADVERTISER has had
Mr J F Rutherford, one of the leading members of the Boonville bar, to compile
and arrange the laws herein. His fitness for such work is a guarantee of its
usefulness to the farmers and businessmen.”
The table of contents
shows the scope of legal matters that Rutherford covered.
One might note such
subjects as Conveyance of Real Estate, Divorce and Alimony, Mortgages and Deeds
of Trust, and Wills are covered. Knowledge in some of these areas would make J
F Rutherford very useful to CTR when he became the Watch Tower’s legal counsel.
Of course, there is
nothing whatsoever theological in this volume; Rutherford’s first foray into
scriptural interpretation would not come until 1907 with the publication of
Man’s Salvation, from a Lawyer’s Viewpoint. But still, for completionists, this
is a volume to obtain. As you can tell from the grainy opening picture, alas, I
do not have an original.