Gene Smalley is a longtime Watchtower insider known for representing the organization’s views on medical use of blood.
In year 1997 a secular authority published an article by Smalley offered as an authoritative presentation of positions held by Jehovah’s Witnesses. Regarding blood, Smalley wrote[1]:
Given Smalley’s tenure and position at Watchtower headquarters, it is difficult to think him unaware of the following information sent to tens of thousands of congregations of Jehovah’s Witnesses only a few years previous[2]:
Why would Smalley suggest to readers of a secular publication that each one of Jehovah’s Witnesses carries an annually updated document when it is known such is not the case?
Ironically, Watchtower’s 1993 letter to elders complains the lack of Witnesses carrying what Smalley suggests they all carry could cause misinterpretation! Why should Watchtower worry about misinterpretation of documentation when its spokesperson is willing to suggest misrepresentation of that documentation?
Contrary to what Smalley suggests, all Jehovah's Witnesses do not carry or abide by the documentation he speaks of, and there is a reason for this: All Jehovah's Witnesses do not agree with the Watchtower organization's position on medical use of blood.[3-5] This piece of fundamental information is something Watchtower and its spokespersons want to steer medical authorities away from embracing as a fact of the matter.
Marvin Shilmer
______________
References
1. Gene M. Smalley, “Jehovah’s Witnesses Help with Bioethical Issues,” in Bioethics Yearbook: Volume 5 - Theological Developments in Bioethics: 1992-1994, ed. Andrew Lusting (Houston, Texas, The Center for Medical Ethics and Health Policy, Baylor University, 1997), pp. 259-267
2. Watchtower letter to its appointed elders in the United States, dated December 1, 1993, p. 1.
3. Blood — How Resolute?.
4. Blood — What Happened at Watchtower in 1945?.
5. 80% Accept Blood Transfusion.
___
4 comments:
His statement to the medical journal is 4 years after the 1993 letter - plenty of time for the issue mentioned in the 1993 letter to be corrected.
Further, I highly doubt that carrying unsigned, unwitnessed, or outdated cards constitutes rejection of the blood doctrine, since if they did reject it, they just wouldn't have one! Rather, they simply forgot to keep on top of such things. That is easy to do.
Since Watchtower was not concerned in the 1993 letter about the brothers just not carrying cards, it is likely that the vast majority carried one just as Mr. Smalley stated.
Finally, I wonder what Mr. Smalley would think of your article.
StandFirm,
Thanks for giving this important subject attention; it deserves it.
You write:
“His statement to the medical journal is 4 years after the 1993 letter - plenty of time for the issue mentioned in the 1993 letter to be corrected.”
If you will take another look at the reference you should notice it is a work put together and published for a retrospective of theological developments for years 1992 through 1994. The Watchtower letter I cite expresses a realization of the community of Jehovah’s Witnesses specific to summer of 1993, which is squarely in the period at issue, which is the period Smalley was supposed to be addressing if anything.
You write:
“Further, I highly doubt that carrying unsigned, unwitnessed, or outdated cards constitutes rejection of the blood doctrine, since if they did reject it, they just wouldn't have one! Rather, they simply forgot to keep on top of such things. That is easy to do.
Without a doubt quite a few Witnesses of the time were carrying around outdated documents the result of neglect. But this does not explain documents that had never been executed with as much as a signature. It also does not explain Watchtower’s later disclosure that a majority of Jehovah’s Witnesses had failed to execute the durable power of attorney documents provided regarding blood transfusion. Moreover, it does not explain the documented history of Jehovah’s Witnesses disputing the validity of Watchtower’s blood taboo. Again, if you review the articles cited above in this article’s reference section, you’ll find all this documented.
You write:
“Since Watchtower was not concerned in the 1993 letter about the brothers just not carrying cards, it is likely that the vast majority carried one just as Mr. Smalley stated.”
I was at several of those conventions that summer. The cards were displayed in order to get a copy of the then newly released publication titled Jehovah’s Witnesses—Proclaimers of God’s Kingdom. Many Witnesses did not have cards and were scrambling around trying to borrow cards from other Witnesses in order to secure a copy of the release for themselves. These rationalized the deception by telling themselves they were, after all, entitled to the publication based on the number of years they had been in the Witness community. Many other Witnesses went shopping for blank documents that they could, at that time, execute in order to get a copy of the newly released publication. It was the same at each convention.
You write:
“Finally, I wonder what Mr. Smalley would think of your article.”
He’s already read it from what I’m told. He is welcome to leave feedback here just like everyone else is.
Again, thanks for giving this important subject your attention.
Marvin Shilmer
<>
You wouldn't happen to know whether and how much the WTS goes and reads blogs and websites like yours, do you?
All we have to know information. Proper information can give us true.
Post a Comment