THE BLESSINGS OF THE ELDER ARRANGEMENT
In 1972, I was the circuit servant (overseer) in the Oslo circuit. All the circuit servants had received a letter informing them that, from now on, they would have no power over the congregations. But the circuit servants were traveling pioneers who could help congregations in different areas when they asked for it.
The basis for the elder arrangement was that the brothers in each congregation should be scrutinized in relation to the requirements for elders that Paul mentions in 1 Timotheus 3:1-7. Someone had to lead the discussions, and the circuit servants were asked to do that. The discussions were thorough and could last for 10 hours in some congregations.
I show in my book My Beloved Religion — And The Governing Body, third edition, pages 135, 136, that the bodies of elders in the first years of their existence, to a great extent, were independent of the Watchtower Society and the Governing Body. Today, the members of the Governing Body exercise their power over the bodies of elders in two ways: by sending letters of instruction and by the visits of the circuit overseers. These visits are particularly important because the circuit overseers will ensure that all the Governing Body’s instructions have been followed.
In the first years after the implementation of the elder arrangement, the circuit overseer was not even allowed to attend the elders’ meetings when they recommended new elders. But gradually, the circuit overseers gained more and more power until they are even appointing elders and removing them today.
THE WORK OF THE ELDERS AS TEACHERS
It was in 1976, four years after the elder arrangement was implemented, that the Governing Body began transferring power from the elders to itself. Until then, elders had been encouraged to draft their own outlines for public talks based on what they believed would interest people in their territory. From now on, only outlines made by the Watchtower Society could be used.
As I have already mentioned, the Governing Body enacted numerous extrabiblical laws and rules, and the elders had to ensure they were followed. This meant that the elders had to serve on several judicial committees when human laws were broken, and they had to disfellowship some Witnesses. I do not think that this situation was problematic for most elders, and the Witnesses had been taught to have complete confidence in everything the Governing Body did. So those who were not disfellowshipped believed that every disfellowshipping was based on the Bible and did not object when someone was disfellowshipped.
My impression was that during the 20th century, the elders had a good measure of freedom, and the circuit overseers did not behave as police officers. This means that the elders and the congregation members looked forward to the circuit overseer’s visit with anticipation and expected to gain spiritual insights from it. Let us then take a look at the elders’ requirement to be teachers.
According to the words of Paul in 1 Timothy 3:2, elders must be “qualified to teach.” This teaching ability should be applied in three ways: 1) teaching from the platform in the congregation, 2) teaching the congregation members privately, and 3) teaching by one’s example. The instruction in The Watchtower regarding the recommendation of new elders was that private teaching was just as important as teaching in the congregation. This means that a brother did not need to be a good speaker in order to be qualified to teach.
In the first part of chapter 7 in my book My Beloved Religion — And The Governing Body, third edition, I show how the interactive teaching method of The Watchtower greatly benefited my fellow elders and me regarding our qualifications as teachers. As the instructor of 30 two-week courses for elders in 1974 and 1975, I became acquainted with all the elders in Norway. By listening to their comments and the short talks they gave during the courses, I could see that many of them were very qualified to teach.
As I mentioned earlier, we were encouraged to create our own outlines for public talks. Making these public lectures required extensive research, which helped the elders deliver engaging talks with points they personally found interesting. In the first years after the elder arrangement was implemented, we were also encouraged to discuss deep Bible doctrines at the meetings of elders, and not only “the business” of the congregation. All of this led to a situation in which the elders had a very good knowledge of the Bible and taught it to the congregation. So, the congregations flourished, and the spirituality was high.
But then came the new instruction regarding public lectures in 1976. Now we were not allowed to make our own outlines; we had to give lectures based on the printed outlines from the Watchtower Society. And we were also instructed to follow the outline line by line and point by point, and not add any material we ourselves thought was interesting that was not mentioned in the outline. What was the result of this?
In the congregations, there were many good speakers with extensive experience in creating their own outlines for public talks, and who were accustomed to including in their talks things they loved and wanted to convey to the congregation. For some years after 1976, many brothers used the titles of the printed outlines. But they did not follow these lines for line; they included interesting points from their own studies. The result was that the public lectures were generally interesting, and the congregation members learned many new things from these lectures.
This continued for several years. But new elders were appointed who had not experienced the previous interactive teaching, including the ability to conduct personal research and present to the congregations what they themselves found interesting. The tendency during the 1980s and later was that the elders who gave public lectures slavishly followed the outline line by line and point by point. And it is not possible to give a good lecture if you only follow the points that another person has written — then the lecture lacks any personal touch. So most public lectures were boring, and the listeners learned very little.
Around 1990, the prevailing view among the circuit overseers and those working at the branch office was that public lectures were poorly taught. I also received signals from other countries about the same views. It seems that even the members of the Governing Body recognized the poor quality of the public lectures. In the early 1990s, there was a course for elders, and I was assigned to give a lecture on how to use the outline of a public lecture effectively. The outline left a little room for the lecturer’s personal touch, and I used this point to the full. But the public lectures after this course followed the same track— generally boring.
The same has been the case in the 21st century. It has been stressed that the outlines represent the voice of the Governing Body, and it is this voice that the congregations must hear. Therefore, it is important to follow the outlines slavishly.
The quality of the outlines themselves has also contributed to the lack of good teaching. During the 55 years from 1965 to 2020, only about 150 different outlines have been sent to the congregations. Because there is one public lecture each week, there have been 2,860 lectures during these years. If we apply the 150 outlines to these years, it means each lecture has been given, on average, 19 times. But some of the lectures of the first outlines have been given more often than the others. Today, there are even two outlines that I used for public lectures as a circuit servant in the late 1960s.
The elders must be qualified to teach. But it does not seem that the Governing Body members are qualified to teach. Not only are the same lectures given over and over again, but the contents of most of them are inexpressive or vapid. There is almost never a detailed analysis of a text in the Bible. A person who has been a Witness for some years learns very little from each lecture.
But in connection with public lectures, the members of the Governing Body have had a golden opportunity to teach the Witnesses the truth of the Bible. They could, for example, have published a number of new outlines with interesting subjects each year. But instead, the same old unimpressive stuff is discussed over and over again.
As long as there were three meetings every week, including the congregation book studies, elders who loved the Bible and wanted to teach others to love it had a fine opportunity during the hour-long book study. In connection with the questions and answers, the book study conductor could give some personal comments based on his own research. However, the book study arrangement was terminated in 2009, and today there are only two meetings every week. I agree that the change to two meetings a week was a fine decision, but the quality of the teaching material for these meetings, provided by the Governing Body, is much inferior to that we received in the 20th century.
Before the change in 2009, there was a theocratic ministry school and a 45-minute service meeting. Particularly in the 20th century, the outlines for the service meeting and the first part of the school gave the elders the possibility to teach the congregation from their personal knowledge. In the 21st century, the possibilities of personal teaching have been restricted, and from 2009, when the mid-week meeting had a part of the school, a part of the service meeting, and a part of the book study, there was very little possibility of personal teaching from the platform as far as the elders were concerned. It was basically the Governing Body’s voice that was heard at the meetings.
I would also like to mention that the quality of articles in The Watchtower in the 21st century is inferior to that in the 20th century. Only rarely has The Watchtower in the 21st century contained detailed analyses of the Bible’s text, and the study articles usually present material we already know well. I considered all the articles in the Watchtower over the 12 years from 2015 to 2026. Of the 720 articles, I found only 12 (1.66%) with a detailed analysis of Bible passages.
The conclusion is that from the implementation of the elder arrangement in 1972 until the middle of the 1980s, the elders generally had a good knowledge of the Bible, and their teaching in the congregation and privately was a blessing to the congregation members. From the middle of the 1980s, the teaching of public lectures was not good, but teaching by elders with a good knowledge of the Bible at the congregational book study, the ministry school, and the service meeting would strengthen the congregation’s faith. From 2009, when there were two weekly meetings, the possibility of personal teaching for the elders at the meetings was very limited.
The conclusion is that there is a clear difference between the teaching of the elders in the 20th and 21st centuries.
THE WORK OF THE ELDERS AS SHEPHERDS
Since the implementation of the elder arrangement in 1972, the Governing Body has encouraged elders to focus on being shepherds, i.e., helping members of the congregations on a personal level.
From the 20th century through 2009, there were three meetings per week. In addition, all the brothers were encouraged to have a family study one evening each week. The goal for the conductor of the congregation book study was to visit every member of his book study group at their home during a reasonable time.
I served as presiding overseer and later coordinator in the Majorstua congregation in Oslo from 1975 to 2010, when I moved to another congregation. The congregation had between 120 and 140 members, and we were between 5 and 7 elders; two of us were also members of the Hospital Liaison Committee. The situation with four meetings a week and other work in the congregation made it impossible for us elders to visit each member in their home.
However, each elder had a good relationship with the congregation members, and the brothers and sisters knew that if they had a problem, they could get help from one of the elders. Many small and big problems were solved in discussions between an elder and a brother or sister.
We also were sensitive to the particular needs of the brothers and sisters when we were not asked to help. On one occasion, a sister became very sick, and it came to our notice that if the sister did not pay 20,000 Norwegian kroner (2.200 US $) within a week, she would lose her flat — and she had no money. The elders asked the congregation to pay the money, which was granted, and the sister did not lose her flat. On another occasion, a Norwegian pioneer in Lithuania, told us about a boy who needed a heart operation that had to be done in another country. The congregation was informed about the situation, and the congregation members contributed so much money that he could get his operation.
We, as elders, were concerned that we could not visit each congregation member privately, and because we were so occupied with congregation work, we could only, to a limited degree, accompany different publishers in the field service. What could we do?
Among the congregation’s members, there were between 50 and 60 young, unmarried brothers and sisters, and many temptations awaited them in a big city like Oslo. To be shepherds to these young ones, we made some special arrangements. During the year, we held five gatherings to discuss important moral issues with the young ones. We were also concerned with the Bible study habits of the young ones, and not only with moral issues. Two times each year, we invited everyone to a special day that we called “Bible Day,” where everyone present was taught interactive study and interactive learning by personally participating in the program of the day.[1]
We created these special programs because there were so many young, unmarried people in our congregation and because it was difficult to visit each one privately. Other congregations had fewer young, unmarried members, and most had more elders than we did, and were able to do more shepherd visits.
In 2009, the congregation book study was terminated, and the meeting schedule changed. The meeting on the weekend of the public lecture and the Watchtower study continued, and there was the mid-week meeting, consisting of a shortened school, a shortened service meeting, and a book study. And each brother was encouraged to have a family study once a week. The Governing Body should be commended for this change because it gave the elders more time to function as shepherds.
In each congregation, groups of about 15 members were organized, each with one elder as leader. The members of each group would work together in the preaching work. And with more time at his disposal, the elder of each group could visit each member of his group in his or her home during a reasonable time period. This was very difficult when there were three meetings per week in addition to the family study. So, the conclusion is that the elders in each congregation followed the Governing Body’s admonition to be shepherds to the members of their congregations. And this really was a blessing for the congregation.
[1]. For a discussion of these meetings and the Bible Day see the article “Teaching young brothers and sisters to love the Bible.” https://mybelovedreligion.no/2022/03/03/teaching-young-brothers-and-sisters-to-love-the-bible/
THE WORK OF THE ELDERS IN THE HOSPITAL LIAISON COMMITTEES
While the duties of the elders as teachers and shepherds are stated in the Bible, the same is not true of the Hospital Liaison Committee, which was created in 1990. However, if a Witness is sick and weak, taken to the hospital, and the issue of blood arises, it is very helpful to have support from others. Members of the HLC fill this need, and we can view their work as an extension of their duty as shepherds.
From the start of the three-day seminar in Arboga, Sweden in 1990, the members of the HLC got very fine instruction. Norwegian doctors in the 1990s had a good medical education and high expertise. But because they had blood or blood products at their disposal in connection with surgery or chemotherapy, they were not trained in bloodless surgery or bloodless treatment.
The members of the HLC had medical articles on bloodless treatment, and we could call the Hospital Services in Brooklyn at any time to get articles on the situation we were in. They could also give us the names of doctors in different countries who had treated a specific illness without using blood. There were situations in which we supplied a doctor with the name of a doctor in another country, and he called that doctor in the middle of the night for advice on treating a patient. In the early 1990s, the use of Erythropoietin (EPO) and intravenous iron to increase red blood cell counts was in its infancy. But many doctors began using this procedure after we supplied them with specific medical articles.
One side of the HLC’s work was to clarify the situation for the sick Witness and help them make informed decisions about the treatment they wanted. It is clear that when you are sick and weak, you are not in a position to do research in order to choose your treatment. We were admonished never to make decisions for the sick Witness, but to help him or her to understand the principles and issues in order to make a personal decision.[1]
At the seminar in Arboga, we were admonished to inform our wives about our work. In the early 1990s, we did not have cell phones, so we could not be reached immediately in an emergency. But our wives could give information if someone called. Another brother and I met with an experienced surgeon who worked at a hospital specializing in cancer care. He said that if there was an emergency and other doctors would not treat a Witness, he was willing to treat the person even if he or she did not have cancer. I informed my wife about this, and the next day she got a telephone call from a member of the HLC. He was at a small hospital together with a sister who was bleeding, but the doctors did not feel they had the expertise to operate on her. My wife referred to the mentioned surgeon, the sister was rushed to his hospital, and the surgeon saved her life. The members of the HLC functioned as shepherds in special situations, and it cannot be any doubt that the arrangement with the HLC was a blessing for many Witnesses.
THE ELDERS HAVE BEEN A BLESSING. BUT HAVE ALSO CAUSED SUFFERING
In most congregations of Jehovah’s Witnesses today, there is a good spirit, and the members show love for each other. The members of the congregations follow the meeting program, they preach the good news of the kingdom, and they work together in unity. And there can be no doubt that the elders’ work in the congregations has contributed to this unity.
But how have the viewpoints and work of the members of the Governing Body influenced the elders and the members of the congregations? If the creation of the Governing Body has been a disaster, how can the congregations function in such a good way? I show in chapter 1 of my book My Beloved Religion — And The Governing Body, third edition, that Jehovah’s Witnesses is the only religious group whose basic doctrines are built on the Bible. This means that Jehovah God must be behind this religious denomination, and that we must expect his congregations to function well, even though its leaders have abused their power.
In the first decades after the implementation of the elder arrangement, the elders were a blessing to the congregations. They used their deep Bible knowledge to teach the congregations, and they were good shepherds for the flock. So, the congregations prospered. In 1991, the book for elders, Pay attention to yourself and to all the flock, was released and contained 20 disfellowshipping offenses. This means that the Governing Body had added eight disfellowshipping offenses to the 11 mentioned in the Bible. In addition to the fine work of being teachers and shepherds for the congregation members, the elders had to follow the direction of the Governing Body and disfellowship Witnesses for reasons that have no basis in the Bible. The elders were still a blessing to the congregations, but a negative work had been introduced, and because of this, some elders ruined the lives of congregation members by disfellowshipping and shunning them in accordance with human commandments.
From the year 2000 to 2010, when Ted Jaracz was the leader of the Governing Body, more disfellowshipping offenses without a basis in the Bible were introduced, and the book “Shepherd the Flock of God” (2010) contained 35 disfellowshipping offenses that had no basis in the Bible. Jaracz was a hardliner, and the new members of the Governing Body that he chose were hardliners as well. The influence of the Governing Body’s members also made many elders hardliners.
In 2005, the crusade against higher education began — it continued until 2025. The elders in many congregations exerted strong pressure on tens of thousands of young Witnesses not to pursue higher education. This pressure from the elders has been the very opposite of a blessing for these Witnesses, as many of them have difficulty finding decent jobs. All the new extra-biblical disfellowshipping offenses led to a significant increase in judicial cases and disfellowshipping. About one and a half million Witnesses have been disfellowshipped in the 21st century, and this has led to ruined lives for many of these. We must also realize that all the Witnesses who have been summoned for a judicial case but have not been disfellowshipped have received some spiritual scars because of this treatment.
The conclusion is that the elders, who were a blessing to the congregations for a decade or more, gradually became influenced by the hardliners in the Governing Body, and, particularly in the 21st century, they have both been a blessing to millions and destroyed the lives of millions of others. In the 21st century, the elders have functioned in the same way as the judicial system in a dictatorial country like Russia. They have obediently followed all the requirements of the Governing Body, including those that violate Bible principles and laws.
The elders were a blessing for the Witnesses for more than a decade from 1972. For the rest of the 20th century, the elders were a blessing for most of the Witnesses. But during the 21st century, under the influence of the hardliners in the Governing Body, the elders have been a blessing for millions of witnesses and have ruined the lives of other millions. |
CONCLUSION
I am quite certain that the leading brothers in 1971, in all sincerity concluded that a group of experienced elders would be the best leadership for Jehovah’s organization. But something went wrong, very wrong!
The quotations in the first article in this series show that the purpose of the Watchtower Society was to lead the worldwide preaching of the Kingdom, not to make decisions about how the Witnesses should lead their lives. This was reserved for the conscience of each Witness. The reversal of this by the Governing Body is what has caused the real disaster.
If the members of the Governing Body had restricted their decisions to organizational matters related to the preaching of the Kingdom, had not intervened in the personal lives of the Witnesses, and had made only a few rules, the Governing Body would have been a blessing.
But as I have shown in this series, the members of the Governing Body made rules for the daily lives of the Witnesses — rules that were not based on the Bible — and they made up and invented a number of disfellowshipping offenses that were not based on the Bible. In other words, they rejected the principle of sola scriptura (“scripture alone”) and made a Talmudlike set of regulations in addition to the Bible. This has led to a disaster throughout the 21st century for tens of thousands of Witnesses.
The elder arrangement started in 1972, and for more than a decade, the elders were a blessing to the members of the congregations both as teachers and as shepherds. In the last part of the 20th century, the elders introduced new rules and a few new disfellowshipping offenses. But by and large, the elders were still a blessing to their congregations.
However, there was a change in the 21st century. The elders were influenced by the hardliners in the Governing Body. In most congregations, the elders pressured young Witnesses not to pursue higher education. And the elders enforced a number of new rules and disfellowshipping offenses that were made up and introduced by the Governing Body. This means that the elders had, together with the members of the Governing Body, the responsibility for the disfellowshipping of one and a half million Witnesses, and the responsibility for the ruined lives of tens of thousands of these. But individual elders were still a blessing to others in their congregation.
[1]. A discussion of the HLC is found in the article “Disassociation 1 (I) Willingly and unrepentantly accepting blood.” https://mybelovedreligion.no/2025/01/07/disassociation-1-i-willingly-and-unrepentantly-accepting-blood/
OVERSKRIFT 2
“Dette er en eksempeltekst til nettsiden. Når du skriver tekst til nettsiden så er det viktig å huske på at det både er en potensiell kunde som leser dette, men også Google skal «lese» denne teksten. Prøv å skriv innhold som er informativ for det produktet eller den tjenesten du tilbyr, der søkeord, fraser og setninger flettes inn på en naturlig og lettleselig måte. ”
OVERSKRIFT 3
Dette er en eksempeltekst til nettsiden. Når du skriver tekst til nettsiden så er det viktig å huske på at det både er en potensiell kunde som leser dette, men også Google skal «lese» denne teksten. Prøv å skriv innhold som er informativ for det produktet eller den tjenesten du tilbyr, der søkeord, fraser og setninger flettes inn på en naturlig og lettleselig måte.
CONCLUSION
Dette er en eksempeltekst til nettsiden. Når du skriver tekst til nettsiden så er det viktig å huske på at det både er en potensiell kunde som leser dette, men også Google skal «lese» denne teksten. Prøv å skriv innhold som er informativ for det produktet eller den tjenesten du tilbyr, der søkeord, fraser og setninger flettes inn på en naturlig og lettleselig måte.
