2023 Governing Body Update #8 / BEARDS!!!

[jdcarlson]

I must admit I am a "child of the previous century."

 

Personally, I do not like beards. I grew up in a time that a man with a beard (or even a moustache or long hair) was not respected by society as a whole (at least in the area where I grew up).

 

Yes, at age 81 it takes more energy than before to shave every day.

 

But, men who keep thier beards well groomed spend the same energy, or even more, than a clean shaven man, when properly tending to their grooming.

 

I do not like open collar shirts with no tie at the Kingdom Hall. Some of this comes from working over 50 years as a Certified Public Accountant. A VERY conservative industry. The firm I started with even required a coat and a tie when we would come in on weekends during income tax filing season (because of the heavier workload of individual tax returns on top of the audits and tax returns for commercial clients).  For several years when I first started in the CPA industry, I was also a full-time pioneer. Thus I became accustomed to wearing a coat & tie seven days a week.

 

I have been active in Jehovah's Organization over 75 years. During that time I have seen many changes. 

 

I remember when only brothers were allowed to have parts in the Ministry School.

 

I remember when Pioneers reported time directly to the Society rather than to thier local Congregation.

 

I remember when Pioneers paid less for literature than publishers paid.

 

I remember when we asked for money when we placed literature.

 

I remember when "Return Visits" were called "Back Calls."

 

I remember when the questions were asked at the Watchtower Study (and at the Congregation Book Study) BEFORE the paragraphs were read.

 

I remember when it was acceptable for the Watchtower Study Conductor to call on someone for a comment when they had not raised their hand.

 

I remember when there was a 15 minute break between the Public Talk and the Watchtower Study.

 

I remember when there was no set number of paragraphs to cover each week at the Congregation Book Study.

 

I remember when Sisters could be assigned duties that are now restricted to Brothers (my mother was "Accounts Servant" for several years).

 

I remember when Watchtower study articles were so long that sometimes we took two weeks to get through a single article.

 

I remember when Public Talks were a full hour, and the Watchtower study could be as long as an hour and ten minutes.

 

I remember when the Congregation Book Study was one night in the week and the Service Meeting and the Theocratic Ministry School were together on another night later in the week.

 

I remember the long sideburns era when brothers let them grow quite long (It was unusual to see some who were starting to go bald and it was like a straign line starting at one jaw, then up and over the head and down the other jaw where the hairline transitioned from the sideburns to the hair on the head).

 

I remember when some congregations insisted brothers wear a white shirt when giving a talk (and yes, some congregations would keep spare white shirts on hand in case a speaker showed up with a colored or tined shirt).

 

I remember one time when a VERY capable and mature brother was not alowed to work with me in Auditing at a District Convention because he had grown a beard.

 

Other things have also changed. Since this thread started back in 2023, now sisters can wear slacks or pants suits to the Kingdom Hall. Brothers do not have to wear a tie in service or to the Kingdom Hall (unless they have an assignment).

 

Personally, I do not like changes. But, that is merely my PERSONAL opinion. I have no right to try to impose my personal preferences on others. If the GB decides certain modes of dress and grooming are, or are not, acceptable, or anything else needs to be done differently, I have no "standing" to object.

 

Even in my most innermost thoughts I must remember this is Jehovah's Organization, and he alone has the right to make rules, requirements, standards, and principles to apply to his organization. It is my obligation to follow Jehovah's instructions as we receive them through the Governing Body. For me to question the Governing Body would be the ultimate in arrogance.

 

For me to speculate about "why" or "what will change next" or "how far can we, or I, take this" is meaningless and just takes time and energy away from doing what I can to advance Jehovah's Kingdom Interests.

 

The whole matter is a "Tempest in a Teapot" over something meaningless.

 

Thanks,

Jim

 

[Dages]

1 hour ago, jdcarlson said:

I must admit I am a "child of the previous century."

You are a pearl in Jehovah's eyes, brother.

[gusdn1]

1 hour ago, jdcarlson said:

I remember when the Congregation Book Study was one night in the week

 

This is the one thing I vividly remember from my childhood.

 

It’s all because of those big dogs that kept scaring me and that green clock in the living room with its seconds hand gliding so smoothly. 🤣🤣

Edited April 19 by gusdn1

[➕👇 ꓤꓱꓷꓠꓵ🎵Tone]

1 hour ago, jdcarlson said:

I must admit I am a "child of the previous century..."

For me to speculate about "why" or "what will change next" or "how far can we, or I, take this" is meaningless and just takes time and energy away from doing what I can to advance Jehovah's Kingdom Interests.

The whole matter is a "Tempest in a Teapot" over something meaningless. 

Although you have a couple of years on me Jim, I relate to your list.

I still shave, wear a jacket, and feel 'uncomfortable' when I do not wear a tie.

It has given me a new perspective on the adjustment of our first century family.

I feel how some back there felt. Eat pork? NEVER! Work on the Sabbath? NEVER!

I do not want to be a modern-day 'Judaiser.' I do need to adjust my views on certain things.

We live in interesting times, Jim @jdcarlson

[Amygdala]

I started going to meetings as a young girl when I remember the pause during the meeting, but it was only a couple of times and then ended. Didn’t notice at the time. I love hearing the history of what we used to do and not do.

 

For me personally, the message I get with all these gradual changes is less judging, and allowing more individual autonomy for a person in the congregation. How many  misunderstandings, stories or misjudgments about a person are now avoided, and more unity within a diversity of personalities, cultures , situations , even neural diversities in a congregation? 
 

It is unfortunate but there are certain people where efficacy trumps love, and any sort of deviation from the written ”rules“ gave some reason to withhold privileges from a person, essentially labeling their spirituality based on a person’s personal autonomy as bad. To me it shows what is most important to Jehovah. He doesn’t want anyone to be bullied into submissive worship when it comes to conscience matters, but wants all in the congregation to flourish based on their faithfulness and love for Him, and feel refreshed when coming to the congregation and pursuing and supporting His interests. We have come a long way!

[Jwanon]

6 hours ago, jdcarlson said:

I remember when it was acceptable for the Watchtower Study Conductor to call on someone for a comment when they had not raised their hand

 

oof

[gusdn1]

8 hours ago, jdcarlson said:

I remember when it was acceptable for the Watchtower Study Conductor to call on someone for a comment when they had not raised their hand.

 

I just remembered this now. It was a Sunday meeting, and no one was raising their hands for one of the review questions. The WT conductor, who was an elder, started calling on the pioneers who hadn’t commented yet. My grandmother, who’s a regular pioneer, was one of them, but she wasn’t able to answer. 😅😅 Sadly, the elder passed away a few days later. 😭

[jwhess]

I noticed that the word "unity" has been used more than once.  I wonder if it is the right expression.

 

I am going to use 'hyperbole' and stretch the actual situation for effect.  Basically, witnesses can wear anything they like (modest hopefully) to go to a meeting.  They can wear anything they like to go in the field ministry.  They can attend their grooming in any manner that pleases them.  So anybody can do anything anywhere, they can be similar or completely different and be accepted.

 

How is that "unity"?  They are all different.  I understand it is 'permissible', I understand it is 'freedom of choice', I understand we all share the same 'direction', but how does it emphasize "unity"?...♥️

 

Our Br. James in his post above showed how we used to act.  Do you remember when you were driving through a town on a vacation and you saw two young people walking on a residential street wearing "good clothes" (women in dresses and men in suits) and who were "modestly groomed" (hair or makeup or clean-shaven).  When you looked out the car window you automatically said, "They must be witnesses."

 

How does it look now?  A bearded guy wearing a polo shirt and chinos walking next to a woman with her blouse tucked into a pair of slacks.  Do you stop your car and say, by the way they dress, "They must be witnesses?. They could be anybody on the street.  How does that add to our identity and how does it indicate unity?

 

 

[Mike047]

For those of us who are older, and used to a particular standard of dress and grooming, it seems like a drop in standards. We find it challenging to change our attitude to meet with the broader guidelines given us by the GB,

 

Whilst out, recently, we saw a couple of Mormon sisters in their ministry, and they still have the same more restrictive style of dress and grooming that we oldies are used to. It would be a shame if they were mistaken for Jehovah's Witnesses, simply because  of their appearance, because their spiritual 'dress' is very different, and is not life-giving.

[Tortuga]

12 hours ago, jdcarlson said:

I remember when it was acceptable for the Watchtower Study Conductor to call on someone for a comment when they had not raised their hand.

You mean we can't do that anymore?  

When I have a QA part, I remind the elders that I might call on them even if they haven't raised their hand. 

[davanz]

Brother jdcarlson, I enjoyed reading your post. I believe that you remember these items also. Initial call on Sunday door to door work was a 6-8 minute, 4 scripture sermon, before offering the literature. Brothers at assemblies going out to parking lot at meal breaks to smoke cigarettes. Having a large chart on the stage at the Kingdom Hall showing the month by month service activity of the congregation.

[puddum_queen]

9 hours ago, jwhess said:

I noticed that the word "unity" has been used more than once.  I wonder if it is the right expression.

 

I am going to use 'hyperbole' and stretch the actual situation for effect.  Basically, witnesses can wear anything they like (modest hopefully) to go to a meeting.  They can wear anything they like to go in the field ministry.  They can attend their grooming in any manner that pleases them.  So anybody can do anything anywhere, they can be similar or completely different and be accepted.

 

How is that "unity"?  They are all different.  I understand it is 'permissible', I understand it is 'freedom of choice', I understand we all share the same 'direction', but how does it emphasize "unity"?...♥️

 

Our Br. James in his post above showed how we used to act.  Do you remember when you were driving through a town on a vacation and you saw two young people walking on a residential street wearing "good clothes" (women in dresses and men in suits) and who were "modestly groomed" (hair or makeup or clean-shaven).  When you looked out the car window you automatically said, "They must be witnesses."

 

How does it look now?  A bearded guy wearing a polo shirt and chinos walking next to a woman with her blouse tucked into a pair of slacks.  Do you stop your car and say, by the way they dress, "They must be witnesses?. They could be anybody on the street.  How does that add to our identity and how does it indicate unity?

 

 

There’s a difference between unity and uniformity. Jehovah has given us free will to make personal decisions. If we all dressed the same and had the same hairstyle we would uniform. Our unity is in our doctrinal beliefs. 
 

Sadly, our unity gets threatened when we try to control areas of personal decisions for one another.

[MullumMiss]

Thanks Bro Jim @jdcarlson I remember some of those things too.  One of our elderly brothers who has since passed away found it hard seeing no ties.  

I had a RV come to the memorial this year.  I studied with her a few years ago but stopped the study but continue to call on her.  Anyways she has been to the Memorial and meetings before.  She noticed all the beards.  So I kindly explained some of the changes and added my opinion as to why.  

[jwhess]

5 hours ago, puddum_queen said:

There’s a difference between unity and uniformity. Jehovah has given us free will to make personal decisions. If we all dressed the same and had the same hairstyle we would uniform. Our unity is in our doctrinal beliefs. 
 

Sadly, our unity gets threatened when we try to control areas of personal decisions for one another.

Thank  you for a perspective on 'unity'.  I went back an reread the previous comments in this thread and still wonder if we use the word in its proper meaning.  i thoroughly agree as to our 'doctrinal' unity worldwide.  We share the same beliefs, publications and meeting types with our global brotherhood, irrespective of the local language.

 

I grasp the slightly larger step of saying that we agree in a 'unified' way that the new directions will allow for individual expression.  But I am not sure that encouraging multiple avenues of expression of our differences in belief as to dress, grooming and so on is "PROOF" of our unity.  It might be agreed that our doctrinal unity is sustained despite our differences...but I can't see how the differences prove our unity.

 

Anyway, thank you for responding.  It is probably just a matter of semantics and definitions.  In the reflection of past values, it is good to remember the GB thought...those weren't the "good old days", they were just the "old days"...♥️

[puddum_queen]

1 hour ago, jwhess said:

Thank  you for a perspective on 'unity'.  I went back an reread the previous comments in this thread and still wonder if we use the word in its proper meaning.  i thoroughly agree as to our 'doctrinal' unity worldwide.  We share the same beliefs, publications and meeting types with our global brotherhood, irrespective of the local language.

 

I grasp the slightly larger step of saying that we agree in a 'unified' way that the new directions will allow for individual expression.  But I am not sure that encouraging multiple avenues of expression of our differences in belief as to dress, grooming and so on is "PROOF" of our unity.  It might be agreed that our doctrinal unity is sustained despite our differences...but I can't see how the differences prove our unity.

 

Anyway, thank you for responding.  It is probably just a matter of semantics and definitions.  In the reflection of past values, it is good to remember the GB thought...those weren't the "good old days", they were just the "old days"...♥️

Differences show unity when we respect one another’s personal choices.

[LeolaRootStew]

2 hours ago, jwhess said:

I grasp the slightly larger step of saying that we agree in a 'unified' way that the new directions will allow for individual expression.  But I am not sure that encouraging multiple avenues of expression of our differences in belief as to dress, grooming and so on is "PROOF" of our unity.  It might be agreed that our doctrinal unity is sustained despite our differences...but I can't see how the differences prove our unity.

 

 

Why does our clothing have to prove our unity instead of, for instance, proving our dignity or our cleanliness or our respect for God and neighbor? I'm not sure where the premise came from that it must prove unity.

 

Maybe you mean it used to make us more identifiable? That may be true, but others have theorized that that may help us in some way during the GT, so it could work out for the better. Maybe people will even open up their doors because they assume the bearded guy isn't a Witness.

[puddum_queen]

28 minutes ago, LeolaRootStew said:

 

Why does our clothing have to prove our unity instead of, for instance, proving our dignity or our cleanliness or our respect for God and neighbor? I'm not sure where the premise came from that it must prove unity.

 

Maybe you mean it used to make us more identifiable? That may be true, but others have theorized that that may help us in some way during the GT, so it could work out for the better. Maybe people will even open up their doors because they assume the bearded guy isn't a Witness.

 

28 minutes ago, LeolaRootStew said:

 

Why does our clothing have to prove our unity instead of, for instance, proving our dignity or our cleanliness or our respect for God and neighbor? I'm not sure where the premise came from that it must prove unity.

 

Maybe you mean it used to make us more identifiable? That may be true, but others have theorized that that may help us in some way during the GT, so it could work out for the better. Maybe people will even open up their doors because they assume the bearded guy isn't a Witness.

I’m wondering myself about the “prove unity” idea. Not sure where that is coming from. 

[DancesWithWife]

4 hours ago, jwhess said:

But I am not sure that encouraging multiple avenues of expression of our differences in belief as to dress, grooming and so on is "PROOF" of our unity.

We often dress completely different when not at the meetings, assemblies , conventions and other theocratic assignments. It's how we act that makes a difference including our speech.

 

One time, when I was a retail manager a witness couple came in that I had met at an assembly. They did not recognize me or remember me, but I did hear them interacting with some of my associates. They were rude and demanding. Were they dressed for a meeting or other theocratic event? No. They were dressed nicely. But it was there attitude that set them apart. 

 

I will give you another example. When I was in a pain management facility with worldly people we would have group discussions. During these discussions individuals who were there related their frustrations with colorful metaphors (profanity). I on the other hand always controlled my frustration.

 

Finally, at one session I identified myself as a Jehovah's Witness. The gentleman next to me, jumped out of his seat, literally. Looked at me and said that explains everything. He said you don't swear, you don't drink, things are not going well for you but you are still positive. And now I know why you are so calm instead of angry.

 

What was I wearing? T-shirt, shorts very casual. I could have been anyone walking down the street. While clothes may identify us in theocratic activities how are we perceived when dressed casually? How are we perceived at worldly events?

[jwhess]

2 hours ago, puddum_queen said:

I’m wondering myself about the “prove unity” idea. Not sure where that is coming from. 

It was mentioned in one or more previous posts by others.  I just didn't think the current "dress-code" was an indication of more unity.  It was not important.  If others did not highlight those comments then there is no need for me to harp on it.

 

 

Edited April 20 by jwhess

[Eejay]

On 2/26/2025 at 2:28 AM, Tortuga said:

You don't know how others truly feel about your beard until they tell you how glad they are that you shaved it off.

I was asked recently by bearded brothers, "why haven't you grown a beard yet?". My response at the time: " I prefer to wear my crown on my head, not around my chin" Pro.16:31.

Edited April 20 by Eejay

[Eejay]

2 hours ago, jwhess said:

I just didn't think the current "dress-code" was an indication of more unity.

I agree with this. Differences in dress and grooming preferences are not indicators of "unity" any more than uniforms are.

 

Our unity is expressed in our acceptance of those who express these differences within the acceptable parameters. Acts 10:34-35 "Now I truly understand that God is not partial, but in every nation the man who fears him and does what is right is acceptable to him"

[Amygdala]

7 minutes ago, Eejay said:

I agree with this. Differences in dress and grooming preferences are not indicators of "unity" any more than uniforms are

 

Some were held back because of choice of dress and grooming. Such as this thread about wearing beards. Only in exceptional cases were brothers given privileges. Uniformity in dress was required at one point, eg. wearing only of white shirts on the stage, whereas this may not apply in some countries. Some individuals today still disagree with certain types of buzz haircuts, although this may not be viewed in such a way in their local area. Some feel wearing cultural costumes is not appropriate when living in other countries. Sisters are judged being too casual if they wear dress pants with a blouse. Some examples that could cause upset and disunity.

[Amygdala]

Also if someone wasn‘t liked, this added to the disunity and improper grounds to be judged. So here instead, the GB is giving us reasons to promote unity, and view persons in the right light. Unless promoting apostasy, commiting a sin or going down a questionable path, to do less unnecessary judging, more shepherding and imitating Jesus view of others.

Edited April 20 by Amygdala

[Andrey]

22 hours ago, Tortuga said:

You mean we can't do that anymore?  

When I have a QA part, I remind the elders that I might call on them even if they haven't raised their hand. 

 

I hope, Brother Richard, the elders don't do that to you? 🤣

 

[Dark King]

8 hours ago, jwhess said:

was mentioned in one or more previous posts by others.  I just didn't think the current "dress-code" was an indication of more unity.  It was not important.  If others did not highlight those comments then there is no need for me to harp on it.

*** od p. 206 Concluding Discussion With Baptism Candidates ***

2. Do you understand that your baptism identifies you as one of Jehovah’s Witnesses in association with Jehovah’s organization?

https://www.jw.org/finder?wtlocale=E&docid=1102014954&srctype=wol&srcid=share&par=5

 

I agree 💯 with you 100%. 

 

After the baptism questions the brother will say as the public speaker will say "Now you all are ordained ministers of Jehovah God. "

 

Sometimes we have a cultural in our organization to be a Jehovah's witnesses, but not an ordained minister. Yes, we need to dress as ordained ministers in the community. The Catholic Church have their identifying Mark of some little tie 👔 thing. The white tie thing. What is our identifying Mark as ordained ministers in the community? It used to be the way we dressed in the ministry so I agree with @jwhess.

Edited April 20 by Dark King