Branch Letter", Our Kingdom Ministry, August 1980, "We are saddened to report at this time that five members of the Bethel family, and a few others in the New York city area have recently been disfellowshiped. There has been some apostasy against the organization and the promoting of sectarian divisions in some of the congregations of God’s people. (Titus 3:9-11) Living as we are in times difficult to deal with, it should not be surprising that such things occur. The first-century congregation also experienced deviations as we well know from our reading of the Holy Scriptures.—1 Tim. 1:20; 4:1; 2 Tim. 2:17, 18; 1 Cor. 15:12, 13; Acts 20:29, 30." "Announcements", Our Kingdom Ministry, August 1980, page 2, "This is a notification that Raymond Victor Franz is no longer a member of the Governing Body and of the Brooklyn Bethel family as of May 22, 1980."_____________________
Apostasy (IPA: /əˈpɒstəsi/) is the formal religious disaffiliation or abandonment or renunciation of one's religion, especially if the motive is deemed unworthy. In a technical sense, as used sometimes by sociologists without the pejorative connotations of the word, the term refers to renunciation and criticism of, or opposition to, one's former religion. One who commits apostasy is an apostate, or one who apostatizes. The word derives from Greek αποστασία (apostasia), meaning a defection or revolt, from απο, apo, "away, apart", στασις, stasis, "stand", "standing". Bryan R. Wilson, who was a professor of Sociology at Oxford University, writes that apostates of new religious movements are generally in need of self-justification, and seek to reconstruct their past and to excuse their former affiliations, while blaming those who were formerly their closest associates. Wilson utilizes the term atrocity story, [a story] that is in his view rehearsed by the apostate to explain how, by manipulation, coercion or deceit, he was recruited to a group that he now condemns. Wilson also challenges the reliability of the apostate's testimony by saying that "the apostate [is] always seen as one whose personal history predisposes him to bias with respect to his previous religious commitment and affiliations, the suspicion must arise that he acts from a personal motivation, to vindicate himself and to regain his self-esteem, by showing himself to have been first a victim, but subsequently a redeemed crusader." - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page
______________________
Apostasy - "seeing oneself as a victim denied"Because of strict adherence to Biblical tenets, Jehovah's Witnesses operate at a moderate to high level of tension against their surrounding environment. This has caused some to push for change in areas where there is ubiquitous community opposition to certain doctrines in an effort to reduce such operational tension. The same is often true of an individual who places greater authoritative weight upon secular sources of information when this data challenges Biblical inerrancy and concord. However, where no change occurs, and the mindset of an individual remains fixated upon communal unanimity rather than the greater responsibilities inherent in obedience to the Christian faith, there often occurs a strong tendency to feel victimized by those taking the lead among us.
As a result of seeing oneself as a victim denied, there can occur a powerful drive toward disaffection and apostasy. As is almost inevitably the case, there is a great need on the part of a leave-taker to validate their oppositional stance, and the victim-victimizer scenario greatly assists a person in justifying their course of action. Blame shifting may therefore temporarily relieve a person of accountability, but it will only succeed in sanctioning a person's actions so long as their position is given greater exposure over that of their (former) religious fraternity. Thus, the importance placed upon maintaining a heightened level of awareness toward the apostate's unique view works to reinforce the reasons for their departure by maintaining the consequences of blame and continuing to scrutinize it in the object of hostility. It is not difficult to see then why an apostate so adamantly rejects information that contradicts the typecast that they have worked so hard to establish. Bryan Wilson, Oxford Professor of sociology observes the apostate mindset similarly:
"Sociologists and other investigators into minority religions have thus come to recognize a particular constellation of motives that prompt those who apostasize in the stance they adopt relative to their previous religious commitment and their more recent renunciation of it. Such a person needs to establish his credibility both with respect to his earlier allegiance to a religious body and his subsequent relinquishment of that commitment. To vindicate himself he needs to explain his volte-face." Further endorsement is seemingly found when an apostate locates a support coalition that corroborates a person's disparate or despondent view, which in turn opens new hostilities forged as a result of collective negative experiences. Consequently, apostasy is then empowered and grows exponentially as the individual continually finds reasons to authenticate the rationale of their departure. Part of this rationale is often seen in the "atrocity story" which is tweaked and recounted through various media, and carped upon by those all too willing to overextend their trust when it comes to subjective discourse. However, the "atrocity story" is almost always rejected by sociologists who study the apostate phenomena today.
Perhaps to placate their own sensibilities, but more usually to maintain the semblance of a devoted faith, the apostate must of necessity attempt to convince others that their motives for disaffection were sound and that their new credo is scriptural. Yet, in doing so they must conspicuously evade the clear Biblical injunctions against dissent and contrary expository views. (compare Romans 16:17; 1 Timothy 1:3) Paradoxically, in attempting to establish themselves as providers of spiritual edification, an apostate is forced to break the very commands that a Christian is sworn to keep – commands that their former brethren still keep.
By thus breaking God's explicit commands the apostate commits an act of betrayal against Jehovah and must therefore confront the fallout of their indiscretion. And like any sin, the inevitable fallout is the separation of the sinner from God. However, such thinking is rarely entertained by the apostate due to the angst at having to confront their own error. They must therefore reconstruct their shattered experience in such a way that it favours a new ministry rather than a repentant one.
This is in keeping with the fact that much apostate information is presented under the guise of Christian love with a view to helping others appreciate a clearer truth, yet in actuality the apostate feels impelled to propagate their dissent in order to validate their new self image and fortify their religious convictions. Of course, the welcome reception that such information may receive only grants further recognition to an often aberrant viewpoint, which in turn continues the cycle of disaffection.
As a result, the apostate is able to exploit those who misunderstand the scriptural reasons for the operational tension that exists between Jehovah's Witnesses and the moral majority, and subsequently uses this ignorance to their own advantage.
- By Nathan Unger, 2003
_________________________
Jehovah's Witnesses and the Anti-cult Movement: A Human Rights Perspective (June 2005)
http://www.cesnur.org/2005/pa_brown.htm - John B. BROWN, II (Social educator, Tucson, Arizona)
Jehovah’s Witnesses are not immune to this anticult fervor. Deprogrammers like Wally Shiel and Randall Watters who specialize in Jehovah’s Witnesses solicited deprogramming services at one time. Despite this faith community’s being labeled a destructive cult very few members of the anticult movement will acknowledge the contribution this faith community has made to religious freedom in the United States. The aim of this research paper is to emphasize the contribution Jehovah’s Witnesses have made to religious freedom, and how select members of the anticult movement have violated the religious freedom of Jehovah’s Witnesses and other faith communities. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Ray Franz is probably the most notable figure of the Jehovah’s Witness anticult movement. Franz was a member of the Governing Body of Jehovah’s Witnesses. The Governing Body is the ruling body of the Jehovah’s Witnesses Franz began to have a difference of opinion with official Jehovah’s Witness Doctrine. Franz was asked to leave the Governing Body and was soon officially expelled from the Jehovah’s Witnesses.
Private Message Boards for Former Jehovah’s Witnesses
Nothing has been more controversial then the postings from private message boards for former Jehovah’s Witnesses. The most popular message boards are Jehovah’s Witness Discussion Board (JWD) started by Simon Green, and Jehovah’s Witnesses Online (JWO) Dan Ferro. Even within the anticult community JWD and JWO are said to be famous for “flaming” and even “cyber stalking.” JWD founder Simon Green is on the defense because of accusations. There are reports that Green misrepresented statistics about the number of visitors to his site. This issue will be further researched. There has been one court case against a member of JWD and there are reports of cases pending against members of JWO.”
________________________
Ray Franz's 'Conscience' not really in 'crisis' We all know the story that Ray Franz tells and how Don Cameron and friends merely echo the story without ever taking time to even research it for themselves. Whatever anyone says negative about Jehovah’s Witnesses is always accepted by these apostapposers without question. Facts? Research? No way. Lets take the story and run with it. Lets throw out any and everything we hear and see what sticks. Truth is of no importance, only discrediting JWs is important.
Of course, they have as usual done this with the Mexico military identification card and JWs. Franz says it, and apostates everywhere like Don Cameron repeats it in their books or on their websites or on discussion boards never bothering to research anything about it. Well a little research reveals the truth that they have omitted. - http://settingtherecordstraight.wordpress.com/category/ray-franzs-conscience-not-really-in-crisis/
________________________
I was very sad at the way that the telephone salute to the memory of Ray Franz went on last night. I had suggested to Richard Rawe that he take people who were to speak in alphabetic order and limit them to from 5 to 10 minutes. Unfortunately, Richard paid no attention to the clock and permitted the first three speakers to talk for over an hour. The result was that many of the individuals who were scheduled to speak simply became unavailable. Then Richard went in to a long statement about getting various persons interviews before inviting Rosalie or me on to speak. Ultimately, I broke in, spoke for a few minutes, then went to bed. Whether Rosalie or others ever made it on to the call-in program or not, I don't know. I was so upset at people talking on and on about everything but the memory of Ray Franz that I just couldn't take it any more. I know I am becoming more grumpy as the years go by, but frankly I don't know why people can't limit themselves a bit. After all, the purpose of such a program should have been to honor Ray's memory, not to tell about ourselves. "Let your words be few" is a good biblical maxim. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Randy Watters came on first and talked for some twenty five to thirty minutes. Then Joe and Barbara Anderson came on. Joe read a letter that Ray had sent that was excellent. Then Barbara talked. In many ways the fault was not Randy's or the Andersons. Instead of paying attention to the time, Richard would go on asking leading questions which they continued to respond to. So the fault was really his. Ron Frey spoke, was careful of the time, and was excellent. When Richard asked him about himself, Ron said, "I'd rather talk about Ray Franz." I'm glad you and Grace got on, but I'm still in shell shock over the whole thing. Jim (M. James Penton)
________________________
Jim Penton is a ex-JW, who is complaining on an ex-JW board, about other ex-JWs, does it get any better then this? I don't think so! "He that is walking with wise persons will become wise, but he that is having dealings with the stupid ones will fare badly." - Proverbs 13:20 The above words just about say it all, it appears that apostates love to run off at the mouth (to talk a lot without saying anything important.) This will be my one and only post about Ray Franz, you can read all about him on many of the anti-JW sites. These people love the man and seem to read his books more then they read the Bible. It appears that some dysfunctional codependents' will cling to anything if it makes them feel good. "A time will come when people will not listen to accurate teachings. Instead, they will follow their own desires and surround themselves with teachers who tell them what they want to hear." - 2 Tim. 4:3_____________________
Lonnie D. Kliever, Ph.D., Professor of Religious Studies, Southern Methodist University writes “There is no denying that these dedicated and diehard opponents of the new religions present a distorted view of the new religions to the public, the academy, and the courts by virtue of their ready availability and eagerness to testify against their former religious associations and activities. Such apostates always act out of a scenario that vindicates themselves by shifting responsibility for their actions to the religious group. Indeed, the various brainwashing scenarios so often invoked against the new religious movements have been overwhelmingly repudiated by social scientists and religion scholars as nothing more than calculated efforts to discredit the beliefs and practices of unconventional religions in the eyes of governmental agencies and public opinion. Such apostates can hardly be regarded as reliable informants by responsible journalists, scholars, or jurists. Even the accounts of voluntary defectors with no grudges to bear must be used with caution since they interpret their past religious experience in the light of present efforts to re-establish their own self-identity and self-esteem. In short, on the face of things, apostates from new religions do not meet the standards of personal objectivity, professional competence, and informed understanding required of expert witnesses.”
Religious scholars have routinely found the testimony and public statements of apostates to be unreliable. In his book "The Politics of Religious Apostasy: The Role of Apostates in the Transformation of Religious Movement", Professor David Bromley, Department of Sociology and Anthropology of Virginia Commonwealth University, explained how individuals who elect to leave a chosen faith must then become critical of their religion in order to justify their departure. This then opens the door to being recruited and used by organizations which seek to use their testimony as a weapon against a minority religion. "Others may ask, if the group is as transparently evil as he now contends, why did he espouse its cause in the first place? In the process of trying to explain his own seduction and to confirm the worst fears about the group, the apostate is likely to paint a caricature of the group that is shaped more by his current role as apostate than by his actual experience in the group."
John Gordon Melton is an American religious scholar who was the founding director of the Institute for the Study of American Religion and is currently a research specialist in religion and New Religious Movements with the Department of Religious Studies at the University of California, Santa Barbara. While testifying as an expert witness in a lawsuit, said that when investigating groups one should not rely solely upon the unverified testimony of ex-members, and that hostile ex-members would invariably shade the truth and blow out of proportion minor incidents, turning them into major incidents. Melton also follows the argumentation of Lewis Carter and David Bromley and claims that as a result of this study, the [psychological] treatment (coerced or voluntary) of former members largely ceased, and that a (perceived) lack of widespread need for psychological help by former members of new religions would in itself be the strongest evidence refuting early sweeping condemnations of new religions as causes of psychological trauma.
__________________________
"All who cut loose from the Society and its work, instead of prospering themselves or upbuilding others in the faith and in the graces of the spirit, seemingly do the reverse—attempt injury to the Cause they once served, and, with more or less noise, gradually sink into oblivion, harming only themselves and others possessed of a similarly contentious spirit. . . . If some think that they can get as good or better provender at other tables, or that they can produce as good or better themselves—let these take their course. . . . But while we are willing that others should go anywhere and everywhere to find food and light to their satisfaction, strange to say, those who become our opponents take a very different course. Instead of saying in the manly fashion of the world, ‘I have found something which I prefer; goodbye!’ these manifest anger, malice, hatred, strife, ‘works of the flesh and of the devil’ such as we have never known worldly people to exhibit. They seem inoculated with madness, Satanic hydrophobia [rabies]. Some of them smite us and then claim that we did the smiting. They are ready to say and write contemptible falsities and to stoop to do meanness.” - Oct. 1, 1909
