|
Post by Alan Vandermyden on Jan 29, 2011 4:16:48 GMT -5
We've been commenting on things we learned from companions, which sometimes implies a specific intent by someone to "teach," though sometimes those things were just learned by observing too. This thread is to reflect on things we were taught regarding the ministry - whether it be "doctrine," ways of conducting ourselves, or other things you may come up with. I kind of have in mind things that were taught in workers' meetings, though I'm not intending to shut out things taught in visiting with companions, in discussions with other workers, or in other manners.
I might start by saying that I did - and still do - highly value Eldon Tenniswood's oft-repeated advice to us to be very careful with money, and to serve - help wherever we could - in people's homes. I will admit that it could get to feeling like a forced thing at times, particularly when we would have a group of workers - say 10 or 15 - in a home, and several of us younger ones were trying to "serve." For me, even though I did not at all mind washing dishes and stuff - and was often thanked for helping out - this feeling of guilt or obligation when there were really too many trying to help was very stressful!
I think it is easy for good, helpful advice to become a set of rules, and the fault probably lays on both "sides," with younger ones aware of being watched and being "evaluated" on such things.
And this leads to other questions . . . for people who preached that our service is "before God," and that we were to be directed by the Spirit, how and why did we often allow ourselves to be in such bondage to what older ones thought? I loved and respected my older companions, yet I found myself so afraid and desiring their - and other workers' - approval that I was often in bondage, trying to make my actions "look right" to them. Harold Hilton helped me to learn to "be myself," and not just try to "act like a worker" (whatever that means!) during my third year in the work, and yet I was afraid of his disapproval too.
Is it our "fault"? In a way, yes, but I am not much for assigning blame - I find it far more productive to understand the tangled web of relationships we all live in - then we can learn to be truly free, while extending compassion to others too. Though we respected the older workers, we also saw them come down quite heavily on ones they disapproved of at times, and we feared that. Many of us enter the work with the intent of remaining there for our lifetime. In trying to make that become reality, we, like many humans, were able to convince ourselves of a lot of things, denying an underlying tension, or lack of peace. We wanted to admire older ones, and there were things in them to be admired. But I know there were many things that I kept telling myself would "get better."
Were we specifically taught to "never question an older worker"? Perhaps not, but I know that I have seen more than one worker humiliated just by an older worker's response to a question, and I have been ridiculed too a few times. That tends to make us leery of saying much, of not conforming . . .
|
|
|
Post by a friend on Feb 2, 2011 5:57:51 GMT -5
Hi, It's interesting that you posted that but I'm curious to know why? I have the utmost respect for the friends and the workers but I get a strange feeling about information like this out there. But sometimes I would love to combat what people say about the friends that couldn't be further from the truth.
|
|
|
Post by Linford Bledsoe on Feb 2, 2011 10:35:44 GMT -5
Al: I guess I was different than some. I never felt in bondage to my companion. I had a part in the work just the same as he. I have seen some though that had lived so much for the day they became the senior worker that they failed to treat their companion the best. The disciples struggled with this, who would be the greatest. Even today in the workplace I am not in bondage to anyone. I just do my best. This is my philosophy of life.
|
|
|
Post by Alan Vandermyden on Feb 2, 2011 12:20:10 GMT -5
It's interesting that you posted that but I'm curious to know why? I have the utmost respect for the friends and the workers but I get a strange feeling about information like this out there. But sometimes I would love to combat what people say about the friends that couldn't be further from the truth. I suggested this board - Coffee Talk - after reading many comments on various forums that made it evident that people assumed a lot of things about workers' lives and thoughts. These weren't necessarily "negative" comments, but they were nevertheless assumptions. And I knew that the assumptions were many times not true, at least in my experience! It wasn't that they were "making me look bad," or "putting me down," or anything like that, but they just didn't fit! I find that talking of experiences can help to bring out the individuality of anything, of any group, removing the strong tendency essentialize the entire group as either "good" or "bad." I once hesitated to talk about things like this, and I realize even yet that some will find it difficult to either talk about them or to read them. But I find that in "humanizing" people I'm actually able to respect them more, and also better able to pray for them in whatever struggles I may perceive. And please note that this is only an attempt to bring out our own experience, not to "trash" anyone else. Obviously, others are involved - in the workers' case we're often talking about companions or other workers - but we do try to not identify individuals. Many have commented - both publicly and privately - that they have enjoyed reading these threads, so I assume people aren't finding them offensive, worrisome, or whatever . . .
|
|
|
Post by Alan Vandermyden on Feb 2, 2011 12:26:06 GMT -5
Al: I guess I was different than some. I never felt in bondage to my companion. I had a part in the work just the same as he. I have seen some though that had lived so much for the day they became the senior worker that they failed to treat their companion the best. The disciples struggled with this, who would be the greatest. Even today in the workplace I am not in bondage to anyone. I just do my best. This is my philosophy of life. Linford - I think this expresses what I have hoped to see on this board - that we all experience the work or anything else in individual ways. Sometimes I see someone reacting much more strongly than I would to a particular situation, but then I realize they have an entirely different background, have learned different ways of responding, etc. This is not to say that all ways of responding or acting are equally helpful or productive. It's just acknowledging another person's experience. And I have found that simple acknowledgment can go a long way toward breaking down barriers and beginning to establish trust. Thanks for sharing your experience . . .
|
|
|
Post by ronhall on Feb 3, 2011 6:17:49 GMT -5
I suggested this board - Coffee Talk - after reading many comments on various forums that made it evident that people assumed a lot of things about workers' lives and thoughts. These weren't necessarily "negative" comments, but they were nevertheless assumptions. And I knew that the assumptions were many times not true, at least in my experience! It wasn't that they were "making me look bad," or "putting me down," or anything like that, but they just didn't fit! I find that talking of experiences can help to bring out the individuality of anything, of any group, removing the strong tendency essentialize the entire group as either "good" or "bad." I once hesitated to talk about things like this, and I realize even yet that some will find it difficult to either talk about them or to read them. But I find that in "humanizing" people I'm actually able to respect them more, and also better able to pray for them in whatever struggles I may perceive. And please note that this is only an attempt to bring out our own experience, not to "trash" anyone else. Obviously, others are involved - in the workers' case we're often talking about companions or other workers - but we do try to not identify individuals. Many have commented - both publicly and privately - that they have enjoyed reading these threads, so I assume people aren't finding them offensive, worrisome, or whatever . . . Put me down as one who finds these threads beneficial. It is interesting to read of the various experiences those of you who spent time in the work had. These kinds of things have seldom been shared to us in our home -- and when they were, it was very apparent that the sharing had been carefully pre-sanitized. While this may seem to be the wisest course, it tends to portray a false aura to the worker experience that makes it seem altogether boring. Perhaps it is boring, I really don't know. It is also interesting to read about the experiences in the work of the various personality types, e.g., Linford vs Al. I think if one were to rate Linford an 8 or 9 and Al a 5 or 6, I would come out about a 1 or 2 on the scale. Perhaps that is why I never had any serious thoughts about the work as a young person. I just didn't feel I would have anything to contribute and end up being a drag on the others.
|
|
A10D
Junior Member
Posts: 68
|
Post by A10D on Feb 3, 2011 10:06:09 GMT -5
I have found the "Coffee Talk" threads to be interesting for my learning at this point of attending meetings.
|
|
|
Post by Alan Vandermyden on Feb 3, 2011 17:48:15 GMT -5
Thanks for your in put, ronhall and a10d.
I haven't been online too much for a couple of days now, as we just moved down the hall (within the same apartment complex), and I'm waiting for my landline/DSL service to be moved . . . they had to wait for a week for some reason.
So, I'm in the the "real" Coffee Talk here in Kaimuki, Honolulu right now, which happens to have free wireless service . . .
|
|
|
Post by Alan Vandermyden on Feb 7, 2011 16:39:41 GMT -5
A number of the “things learned” that we’ve mentioned so far (here and on the "Things We Were Taught" thread) have been related to things individual companions taught us, mostly related to their own interests or skills, or their own convictions regarding proper conduct for a worker. There were further things that we were taught in workers’ meetings and certain overseers would repeatedly focus on particular topics, such as Eldon Tenniswood’s emphasis on serving. And of course there were lessons learned in working together as companions, as we worked our ways through various circumstances and situations.
But there were also some things that I seldom, if ever, heard explicitly spelled out, and because they aren’t specifically articulated—at least in a “formal” time and manner—it’s easy enough to say they aren’t “rules.” But they’re there, often taught through implication–heavy comments, the withholding of approval, perhaps through a glance or a word of disapproval. Even a “resounding silence” can tell a person they have somehow crossed a line.
I’m thinking in particular of the areas of responsibility—territories, fields, etc.—and the oft–unspoken taboo on crossing those borders. Sometimes even the friends wouldn’t understand our hesitancy in doing or saying something that we knew could be taken as crossing into someone else’s “responsibility.”
In many ways the existence of boundaries may seem entirely natural—businesses, governments, the academy—all establish them. I find it useful to reflect on this—each of these has been historically created, by a particular group of people, for a particular purpose. We may or may not agree with that purpose, but my point is that they did not just “drop down from heaven.” They are a result of human choices, and they reflect positions of “power.” Of course, if they do coincide with our own interests, it’s easy to see them as entirely “natural.”
Much has been written on the “disciplines” within the academy, which is a particular interest of mine, as my entire academic career has been within “interdisciplinary” departments, where we actually learn from many disciplines—history, anthropology, sociology, psychology—and gain a more fully–dimensioned picture of some things. This is not to say the disciplines have no value; it is simply saying that we can also gain something by talking between the disciplines. And, we find that these historically–created boundaries to enable control of knowledge, which translates into power and control.
Perhaps an apt example, from another realm, is the governmental or corporate “bureaucracy” we encounter when we seek to address an issue with a service or a product, finding ourselves shuttled from department to department, with seemingly no communication between departments. Have you ever been left feeling frustrated and “powerless” in this type of situation? Does the division not work to retain a control? Yes, I know this is “just the way it is,” but I contend that these systems are historically created—people have made decisions and created structures, implemented policies, etc.
Boundaries and divisions are also related to authority—the academic “knows” a specific topic, and the letters tagged onto his/her name make him/her an “authority” on that topic, regardless of how personally “out of touch” that individual may be. And that authority is often invoked to override personal, subjective experience. In governmental and business realms, individuals are given authority, and these of course depend on boundaries, defining the extent and limits of that authority.
Authority can be explicit and “coercive”—backed by police, guns, judges, jail cells, etc.—but it can also be earned, such as that earned by a nurturing mother, or a dedicated, supportive teacher. I have tried, in these paragraphs, to draw attention to some of the questions that come up when we talk about authority, which may arise also when we speak of workers’ authority and areas of responsibility.
For me, authority and territories—“areas of responsibility”—are not “bad” in themselves; it can be a very productive way to divide “labor” and to decide “who does what.” However, there are also questions that need to be asked as to how authority is gained, and I also see a problem when workers state that “this is not an organization; it’s a family.” It is true that families have organization and authority too. But the problem with the workers’ assertion is that they are implying there is no organization involved, that everything is done “out of love.” Love may be involved, and I am not denying that. But I also think we’re all aware enough of some lists—worker lists, convention lists, study lists, etc.—to know that much planning and organization is involved. This is not necessarily “wrong,” but many of us see it as problematic when its existence is denied.
Divisions of responsibility and authority exist at several different points among workers. There are brother–sister boundaries, age difference boundaries, those between the “responsible” or “older” worker and his/her companion, field boundaries, the areas administered by “junior” overseers, and the larger regions administered by the fewer overseers. And these “tier” structures do vary from region to region.
How were we taught this? Of course the lists themselves define some things—I still read a worker list (the CA one in particular) in the way we “devoured” and talked about them in the brother worker quarters. Someone was being given responsibility, someone else had it taken away for some reason—and that may have been for a valid health concern, or just to “give them a break.” Pairings were very interesting—who is being entrusted with a new worker, who is now an “older” companion, and who is a “younger” companion to a new “older” one. Of course, my “ability” to read them diminishes as I know fewer and fewer of the workers on the CA list—older ones die, middle–aged ones move to other states or countries, new ones appear.
But there is much besides the defining of these boundaries and responsibilities—what do they mean? How are they to be treated and respected? I did often hear Eldon and others talk about some of these relationships–particularly between brothers and sisters, and with workers in adjoining fields, or who preceded/succeeded you in a particular field. Communication was encouraged; respect and discretion were also encouraged. I appreciated a lot of this.
But I do not recall the overseers ever explicitly instructing us on their territories, authority, or the boundaries. I think a lot of this was done through talk—producing a “discourse” which becomes a “reality.” Most California workers nearly “worshiped” Eldon, and we often expressed to one another how grateful and fortunate we were to have him as an overseer—this was often spoken in regard to the east–west “divide” on divorce (and please don’t pin me to a specifically “western” set of views on that now!), and in regard to Eldon’s perceived administrative capabilities. And I heard much the same kind of “worship” of Howard Mooney by the Oregon staff. It became a sort of “patriotic” fervor, disallowing any significant questioning or disagreement.
I vividly remember a conversation in August of 1987, during the week of Buttonwillow preps prior to our collision. I had returned from Micronesia (Pohnpei and the Marshall Islands) the preceding December, and I fiercely missed the islands! I was lamenting to John Walker (who was killed in the collision a few days later) that Eldon tended to pull us back home from the islands after relatively short stays (I had four years that time, including a year each in Hawai`i and on Guam), while Howard allowed his workers (the Guam and Micronesia sister workers were mostly from Oregon/Montana) to remain longer. John very quickly and emphatically told me that “Howard isn’t your overseer.”
I believe it is this kind of interaction that taught us the bounds—we nearly worshiped these men, and we were taught that they “knew what was best for the Kingdom.” I’m sure they did have some wisdom we didn’t have, but the granting of absolute, unquestioned authority like this has become highly problematic too! It has only been in very recent years that I have finally been able to say that I disagree with Eldon on things. And it is not a matter of me wanting to “tear him down.” I just feel that it is healthy to be able to express a difference of opinion without fearing for your future.
Is this just my problem? I was taught this worship through the example of other California workers, and, as I mentioned earlier, I also witnessed it in Oregon workers toward Howard. And I have seen it, to varying extents, toward workers in “eastern” states too. I don’t think it existed in Washington, as Tharold wasn’t a real communicator, and seemed to often brush people off rather sarcastically. From visiting with workers who had worked under Tharold’s jurisdiction, I perceived a more intense sense of competition there. But I have over and over heard California workers—my friends—express admiration for Eldon and reluctance to significantly disagree with him. And I can think of one in particular—an outspoken sort—who did express disagreement and disgust at the “power plays,” and was obviously not favored in California. He was a good friend of mine, though I haven’t seen him in a few years now. He is no longer in the work.
Perhaps another noteworthy situation is that which existed in Guam and Micronesia, with both Eldon and Howard “contributing” workers (Tharold did too, but he pretty much left administration of the region to Eldon). This region was (and still is) on the California worker list, so it was “officially” regarded as being under Eldon’s jurisdiction, but Howard continued to make plans for the sisters he sent out there. This did at times become frustrating, as Eldon did communicate well with us, and asked for our input, while the sister workers were often wondering, right up until the last minute, whether they would be going to Hawai`i or the continent for conventions or not. And this of course does significantly affect the cost of airline tickets.
Well, on this particular occasion, the sisters were still waiting for word, and Eldon told them that if plans were made accordingly, they would certainly be welcome at Hawai`i convention. They relayed this open invitation to Howard, and were astounded at his angry reaction to Eldon “making plans for his sisters.” They dearly loved Howard, and were not at all “critical” of him—just surprised at his reaction. Perhaps it was partially due to his advancing age at that time, but I do have a sense that there was a long-standing rivalry between the two men, who had both worked in California for years back in the forties and fifties. They respected one another, but had very different approaches in preaching and in administration, and this territorial thing became a “hands–off” issue! And though I felt Eldon did pull us back home rather early, he did allow us more autonomy in making our own plans while we were out there. And I am in no way meaning to depict Howard as a sinister, uncaring, monster of a man. There is much that I greatly appreciate and highly respect about Howard. And I well realize that the two men’s long history of “rivalry” affected this scenario, and I obviously do not know the “other side of the story.” My point, however, is that authority and territory are important to overseers, and we learned, through various means, to not cross those bounds! This case only resulted in frustration in making plans, but it can have more serious consequences, namely the inability to address wrongdoing.
This has become lengthy . . . people have asked me how we were taught certain things, and there is no constitution or charter I can point to, and there was no specific “course” or set of instructions that we were given. Much as when an individual is being maligned, a discourse is produced—things are said or implied, these are repeated over and built on until they become a “reality” in people’s minds—and in time they’re assumed to be “the natural order of things.” This is done in all human communities and societies, and is not “bad” in itself. But failure or refusal to recognize it can enable and validate oppressive practices in people’s minds. Have you ever noticed too that it can often take much longer to challenge or refute something, than to just simply agree with the common talk? We can easily respond with “Yeah, those people are all . . .” and simply allow our comments to build on an already-existing discourse. But if we wish to present a new, different, challenging idea, we can either give a quick answer that often comes out rather sarcastic–sounding, or we can take the time to build our case, and then risk being called too "long-winded," “theoretical” or something to that effect . . .
Please, please, please do not take this as an attack! It is a plea to continue to listen and to communicate, to question our own assumptions . . .
|
|
|
Post by apple on Feb 7, 2011 17:12:48 GMT -5
One time 2 sister workers were visiting my parents.The elder worker was in her 70's and the younger in her early 20's.Everytime the younger worker was offered tea or biscuits the older worker answered for her.After an hour of this my dad had had enough and told the older worker to shut up and not answer for others- she did shut up and she also left the house very quickly after that!It just shows how controlling older workers can be.
|
|
|
Post by Alan Vandermyden on Feb 7, 2011 17:21:59 GMT -5
One time 2 sister workers were visiting my parents.The elder worker was in her 70's and the younger in her early 20's.Everytime the younger worker was offered tea or biscuits the older worker answered for her.After an hour of this my dad had had enough and told the older worker to shut up and not answer for others- she did shut up and she also left the house very quickly after that!It just shows how controlling older workers can be. Wow! I wish more people had the courage of your dad! This reminded me of my first companion - Whenever a lady would ask me if I liked eggs cooked hard or soft, he would blurt out, "He likes them however they come out!" This seemed strange to me, as the lady was asking, wanting to know how to boil or fry the eggs . . . and this same companion was known to be very vocal about his food preferences. And I was very timid in those days, not expressing my opinions on anything very much - it wasn't like I had been setting rules on how I liked things done . . .
|
|
A10D
Junior Member
Posts: 68
|
Post by A10D on Feb 8, 2011 9:40:29 GMT -5
Thank you for explaining what has been my observation.
|
|
|
Post by apple on Feb 8, 2011 12:22:38 GMT -5
One time 2 sister workers were visiting my parents.The elder worker was in her 70's and the younger in her early 20's.Everytime the younger worker was offered tea or biscuits the older worker answered for her.After an hour of this my dad had had enough and told the older worker to shut up and not answer for others- she did shut up and she also left the house very quickly after that!It just shows how controlling older workers can be. Wow! I wish more people had the courage of your dad! This reminded me of my first companion - Whenever a lady would ask me if I liked eggs cooked hard or soft, he would blurt out, "He likes them however they come out!" This seemed strange to me, as the lady was asking, wanting to know how to boil or fry the eggs . . . and this same companion was known to be very vocal about his food preferences. And I was very timid in those days, not expressing my opinions on anything very much - it wasn't like I had been setting rules on how I liked things done . . . Al, I think the workers are scared of my dad.. ;D He's a good dad but he takes no nonsense from anyone (except his pets who run rings around him, are spoilt rotten and whom he talks to in a soft voice..).
|
|
|
Post by CherieKropp on Feb 9, 2011 16:35:57 GMT -5
Excerpt from my brother Galen's story:A baby worker needs all the help, advice, encouragement, and friendship he can get, but this man had no concept of how to be a friend, teacher, father, brother, companion or anything. It was quite obvious he would far rather be alone. A young companion was just a burden for him to drag around, and his life apparently would have been a lot simpler without me; but since that would be against Jesus’s 2x2 “orders”, he had to put up with me to fulfill the scriptures. Why on earth he was always the one to get a first-year companion is beyond me, though some apparently liked him and said they had a pretty good year with him. His last few companions had all been teenagers or thereabouts, so he treated me (ten years older) the same way, like I was a dumb kid. And not once all year was there the slightest word of spiritual guidance, of how to speak in gospel meetings, or what to preach about. There were plenty of instructions on table manners though. We were up nearly every day at 6:00 a.m. and to bed at 11:00 or 12:00 p.m., which was never enough sleep for me, so I was dead tired all the time, and just living for the rare afternoon nap. One day he stayed somewhere else, and the lady of the house let me sleep till 9:00 a.m. I got into no end of trouble when he found out. What a bad example! “No elbows on the table” was his strictest rule. I’d had a bad back for years, and having to sit for small-talk in hard straight chairs for an hour or more after every meal with no elbow support was ridiculous, especially when the people of the house were all doing it. So I twitched and squirmed and sat sideways with my arm over the back of the chair for support, which looked far worse than the elbows on the table ever would have. He was hyperactive and always on the move. In total violation of one of Jesus’s most specific commands to the disciples when He sent them out, “Go not from house to house”, there were occasions when we actually hit seven houses in one day; and almost always we visited three or four. We got to some homes in our field far more often than others, and some we never went to. He didn’t like two of the families in our area. He actually said he could feel a bad spirit in the meeting whenever they were present. We only visited their homes once all year -- and they were two of my favorite families in the whole field! He did all the talking, and too much of it. I heard him tell the same trite anecdote to the same family four times; but it spared me the trouble of having to talk much, and he said I didn’t have to anyway. I was never a good conversationalist, so at least that worked out fine. Nothing about the work bored and irritated me more than the apparent necessity for trivial chatter around the table at least three times a day. He was extremely tight-fisted, always concerned about wasting the Friends’ money. I was reasonably diligent about the same, but I resented not being able to take a decent shower, the one simple luxury a person ought not to have taken away. I was instructed to get wet for a few seconds, and then turn off the water and soap up, and then turn it back on (which invariably would freeze or burn you) and rinse quickly. He was often listening to see if I did it right. All to save a few cents of water. A sister worker once told me that her first companion made her do the same thing. But soon into her second year, her new companion told her she needed to take longer showers; she was afraid she wasn’t getting clean enough! I couldn’t even buy myself a candy bar on a rare afternoon walk without feeling guilty about wasting the Friends’ hard-earned money. However, my companion was totally addicted to coffee (which I never have liked) and even carried a large jar in his suitcase in case the Friends ran out after his many essential cups a day. I seem to have poor circulation in the morning and I’m always cold after getting up, so during the winter I started putting on a sweater for breakfast every day. Right away he informed me that wouldn’t do at all, because the Friends might feel their house was too cold, and go turn the heat up (exactly what I wanted), which would cost them too much money. So I had to sit there shivering in a thin shirt every morning, while he tanked up on hot coffee. Still, never a word of spiritual talk. Perhaps he thought that I knew enough about all that, or maybe saving those pennies was more important to talk about. But the money given to me was piling up. I had many hundreds of dollars in my suitcase most of the time, and not a thing in the world to spend it on except gas. I sent most of it to foreign workers. I guess I figured all workers were as tight as he was with their money, because I was quite appalled later when a whole bunch of workers went out to an expensive restaurant once, and rather surprised when I saw another middle-aged worker actually putting quarters into a video game. I thought that I had given my life to help save lost souls, but only twice the whole year long did we visit an outsider’s house. All the rest of the time we were with the Friends helping solve internal problems, about which I was always kept in the dark -- he handled them alone. All that sort of suited me. One thing about the work I had dreaded the most was the idea of endlessly knocking on strangers’ doors and getting them slammed on me. It never happened. So if you think a worker’s life consists of constantly going out to witness to the “unsaved”, it doesn’t. I figured out that they feel maintenance is more important than evangelizing -- they find it easier for them to keep the existing Friends in the church than to try to win new converts to it. It wasn’t long until I was literally counting the days until I could get back to preps, which was still many months away. It was truly a miserable existence, but I didn’t feel it was my place to try to befriend my companion more, or to make the first move toward a better relationship. He was the older companion, and he knew what he was supposed to do -- that was part of his job, to help me, to be an example, to take me under his wing, to give me a good start in my life’s new work; he knew it, but for some reason he didn’t want to. Instead, I literally wanted to die. If the rest of my life was to be this dreary, I didn’t want it. There was no question of me dropping out of the work -- I had too much pride for that. Nothing is drilled into workers at preps more than staying in the work. “You can’t just try the work, like you can’t just try marriage – it’s for life.” Every letter and conversation between workers is full of encouragement to stay in, stay in for life. That type of reinforcement, competition, and appeals to one’s pride is necessary, or else they would be dropping out like flies -- and plenty of them do, in spite of it. I was determined I wouldn’t. Whenever I heard of a young worker who had dropped out, I’d always try to get the exact details so I’d be sure never to get into a similar situation. I’m sure each of us six new workers secretly wondered who would be the first to go, and I was bound and determined it wouldn’t be me. (It was.) But since getting out and staying in were both horrible, death seemed far more attractive, though unlike several other young workers I’ve heard of, I was never even remotely suicidal. I just wished it would happen, because for the first time in my life, I truly felt saved. We were never supposed to feel that way before, but I knew good and well I was obeying every possible rule and command in the whole 2x2 religion; and I was so constantly surrounded by other people that I couldn’t possibly sneak in a major sin. Therefore, I was saved. And to go on to my reward wouldn’t be such a bad thing. I certainly had nothing else to look forward to but a lifetime of drudgery. The rest of Galen's story may be read here on TTT and in the book Reflected Truth: www.tellingthetruth.info/testimonies_stories/berryg.php
|
|
|
Post by Linford Bledsoe on Feb 9, 2011 16:44:19 GMT -5
That's one persons story. Not everyone's story.
|
|
|
Post by Alan Vandermyden on Feb 9, 2011 16:53:49 GMT -5
That's one persons story. Not everyone's story. This is very much what I like to point out, Lin, that our stories are very different. I dislike "lumping" people together, whether as "good" or "bad." Things are covered, and people get hurt, either way. I had the same first companion as Galen (I started in '80, Galen in '81), and though I enjoy talking with him, and have maintained a friendship, I can say that everything Galen says about his manner with companions and in homes is true. And many other young California brother workers can attest to the same thing, although we all dealt with it in our own ways. I was afraid to say much, and just "swallowed" a lot!
|
|
|
Post by johnvdm on Feb 10, 2011 12:02:01 GMT -5
That's one persons story. Not everyone's story. This is very much what I like to point out, Lin, that our stories are very different. I dislike "lumping" people together, whether as "good" or "bad." Things are covered, and people get hurt, either way. I had the same first companion as Galen (I started in '80, Galen in '81), and though I enjoy talking with him, and have maintained a friendship, I can say that everything Galen says about his manner with companions and in homes is true. And many other young California brother workers can attest to the same thing, although we all dealt with it in our own ways. I was afraid to say much, and just "swallowed" a lot! Galen and his companion was in our home a few times during this year, and what Galen states is very true. When Galen would be out taking a walk his companion would make comments to my wife and myself, it was very uncomfortable for us. My wife had known Galen and his family and her family met with them in their home in CA. Al and the same companion were also in our home during Al first year, and AL being my son had to come home for some Dental work a couple of times that year and was always stress about getting back to the home were he was to meet this man. Al always insisted that we get him back before he knew the companion would be at the home. I like Al have always had a good relationship with the individual but found him to be very rigid and hard to get close to.
|
|
|
Post by Christopher J. on Feb 10, 2011 12:27:25 GMT -5
I will echo a lot of what Al & Galen have reported, except I was with the man for a few weeks after 18 years in the work and a fair amount of responsibility, including having had several first-year companions. Yet I was treated as a complete non-entity -- not allowed to choose a hymn in gospel meeting, rarely allowed to drive, shushed or contradicted if I tried to participate in conversations. If I washed a dish or wiped a counter, he came behind me and re-did what I had just done. One time, a half hour after I had washed the car, I looked out the window and saw him re-washing it. On one of the rare occasions when I was actually driving, he insisted that we pull into the filling station to get gas. I told him that I had just filled up when I had gone out an hour earlier to do some personal errands. Nevertheless, he insisted. So we put 50 cents worth of gas in the car. (It's kind of embarrassing to go in to pay for 50 cents worth of gas, but maybe that was the whole point.)
I could go on and on. After a few weeks I had high blood pressure for the first and only time in my life, and constant headaches from the stress of knowing nothing about what was happening next. (I never had more than a few minutes notice regarding where we were going or what we were doing.) Fortunately, after a few weeks I was scheduled to go to another state as a special meeting visitor, so I got a break. Imagine my relief while, during that absence, other plans were made and I never had to go back to be with him!
On the few occasions we've seen each other through the years since then, he's always greeted me very friendly, and I conclude that it was nothing personal against me, but just his way with everyone. I should also stress that it was, in my experience, very much the exception to be treated that way by a companion. Thankfully, no one else has yet succeeded in giving me high blood pressure! :-)
|
|
|
Post by Linford Bledsoe on Feb 10, 2011 12:39:24 GMT -5
I'm not saying what Galen says is not true. I was sent one time with a man who had the same reputation as the one Galen mentioned. He always made fun of people that didn't eat like he did or what he ate. He would ridicule people that ate pancakes. One time we were in this little cabin and I was hungry for pancakes. So I made myself pancakes. I gave him his dish for his bran flakes. He kept looking at them,and asked me if they were good. I said delicious. So he said why didn't you make me some. I reminded him about ridiculing people for eating them. That was the last time I ever heard about pancakes. Everytime I made them he bellyd up. In fact the next year I asked to go with him again. After I left the work and was married,he wasn't able for the work he stayed with us for a while.
|
|
A10D
Junior Member
Posts: 68
|
Post by A10D on Feb 10, 2011 12:39:53 GMT -5
I have a few questions. This may not be where I should ask them so please move it if I am wrong.
John Wegter, are you currently a worker?
johnvdm, did you have other children besides the one that became a worker? Was the worker different than your other children? Are you in the 2x2 church now?
|
|
|
Post by Alan Vandermyden on Feb 10, 2011 12:46:58 GMT -5
On the few occasions we've seen each other through the years since then, he's always greeted me very friendly, and I conclude that it was nothing personal against me, but just his way with everyone. I should also stress that it was, in my experience, very much the exception to be treated that way by a companion. Thankfully, no one else has yet succeeded in giving me high blood pressure! :-) I should stress too that this was not the way I was normally treated by companions. Others had their idiosyncrasies of course - as we all do - but they were willing to talk things over and work them out. Though this man may be considered an "exception," it is still strange that he was given responsibility for so many brand-new workers in California, and that the issues were never acceptably addressed. To me, this points to a "systemic" problem, with some, who are kindly, Godly people, still refusing to deal with the problems, protecting an image of "the ministry." I would cringe to see some lumped together with the difficult ones, yet they tend to bring that on themselves by repeatedly "avoiding the issue."
|
|
|
Post by Alan Vandermyden on Feb 10, 2011 13:01:14 GMT -5
I'm not saying what Galen says is not true. I was sent one time with a man who had the same reputation as the one Galen mentioned. He always made fun of people that didn't eat like he did or what he ate. He would ridicule people that ate pancakes. One time we were in this little cabin and I was hungry for pancakes. So I made myself pancakes. I gave him his dish for his bran flakes. He kept looking at them,and asked me if they were good. I said delicious. So he said why didn't you make me some. I reminded him about ridiculing people for eating them. That was the last time I ever heard about pancakes. Everytime I made them he bellyd up. In fact the next year I asked to go with him again. After I left the work and was married,he wasn't able for the work he stayed with us for a while. Thanks, Linford - and we do realize you're not meaning to negate our not-always-pleasant experiences. I think there's a way we have - in society in general - of using one experience to counter or negate another experience, insofar as defining the group anyway, though we likely will acknowledge the different experience, perhaps as an "exception." To me, there is so much unpleasantness that can be avoided if we all learn to acknowledge and deal with the tendencies before they become issues, rather than protecting (or accusing) something that is a cherished part of our identity.
|
|
|
Post by johnvdm on Feb 10, 2011 13:10:45 GMT -5
I have a few questions. This may not be where I should ask them so please move it if I am wrong. johnvdm, did you have other children besides the one that became a worker? Was the worker different than your other children? Are you in the 2x2 church now? We have 4 children Al being the oldest. As in all families all of the children have there on personalities. Today 2 are in the 2x2 way one granddauther just went into the work, and other one offered. My wife and are I no longer are members of the 2x2 way.
|
|
|
Post by CherieKropp on Feb 10, 2011 13:25:00 GMT -5
At my husbands fathers graveside service in San Diego this past July, DB officiated, along with Steve Pierson.
Before the service, at the cemetery headquarters, the two workers came up to my husband and me in the parking lot. My husband has known both of them practically all his life and he gave Steve a great big hug and introduced me. I told Steve that I was Galen's sister; and he appeared delighted. He asked all about Galen's whereabouts and what he was doing, etc. Wanted me to be sure to give Galen his greetings.
I dont think DB could hear Steve and me talking, but I'm sure Steve would have told him I was Galen's sister when they got in their car together to drive to the grave site. Even so, DB never initiated any further contact with me.
Typically the California friends assume I am just some worldly woman my husband married after he left meetings, and they speak to me and thats it.
So they are often amazed (like Steve was) when they find out differently; that the wife (me) has 2x2 connections, including a brother who was once a worker in CA and who lived in CA for 20 yrs or so; that many of them knew personally; that I also know many CA friends; and also that I was raised on the conv. grounds in Mississippi.
At another funeral we attended in CA, I was standing off to the side by myself and a nice lady Friend came up to me and asked how I knew the deceased lady. I told her she was a close friend of my husbands. We chatted a little, and then I asked her, "Did you ever know Galen B---?" She said, "Why, yes I did." She was totally shocked to learn that he was my brother.
WELL! Shortly thereafter, several friends began to come up to us and introduce themselves and tell me they had heard that I was Galen's sister...and then they would chat about him, etc., and tell me nice things they remembered about him, etc. And that continued all afternoon long and through the reception afterwards!
Even the bro worker John VanDenBerg came over to us and said he had heard that Galen was my brother--and talked to us for about 45 min to an hour. I knew his grandmother was an early worker on the 1905 workers list and asked him about her. We had a very nice conversation about the 2x2 history.
Before I mentioned my brother's name - I was a non-entity - after wards, Galen was my claim to fame! Whodathunkit??
|
|
|
Post by Christopher J. on Feb 10, 2011 13:33:03 GMT -5
John Wegter, are you currently a worker? No, I am not. I was in the work for 27 years, and left the work a little over 4 years ago.
|
|
A10D
Junior Member
Posts: 68
|
Post by A10D on Feb 10, 2011 14:10:16 GMT -5
John Wegter and johnvdm, thank you for your response.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 10, 2011 15:32:05 GMT -5
Before I mentioned my brother's name - I was a non-entity - after wards, Galen was my claim to fame! Whodathunkit?? It actually makes sense on several levels. I'm very shy, and I have a horrible time figuring out what to say to someone I don't know. However, if I have any bit of information about the person to use as an ice breaker, walking up to them to start a conversation much more doable.
|
|
|
Post by emy on Feb 10, 2011 19:34:07 GMT -5
At my husbands fathers graveside service in San Diego this past July, DB officiated, along with Steve Pierson. Before the service, at the cemetery headquarters, the two workers came up to my husband and me in the parking lot. My husband has known both of them practically all his life and he gave Steve a great big hug and introduced me. I told Steve that I was Galen's sister; and he appeared delighted. He asked all about Galen's whereabouts and what he was doing, etc. Wanted me to be sure to give Galen his greetings. I dont think DB could hear Steve and me talking, but I'm sure Steve would have told him I was Galen's sister when they got in their car together to drive to the grave site. Even so, DB never initiated any further contact with me. Typically the California friends assume I am just some worldly woman my husband married after he left meetings, and they speak to me and thats it. So they are often amazed (like Steve was) when they find out differently; that the wife (me) has 2x2 connections, including a brother who was once a worker in CA and who lived in CA for 20 yrs or so; that many of them knew personally; that I also know many CA friends; and also that I was raised on the conv. grounds in Mississippi. At another funeral we attended in CA, I was standing off to the side by myself and a nice lady Friend came up to me and asked how I knew the deceased lady. I told her she was a close friend of my husbands. We chatted a little, and then I asked her, "Did you ever know Galen B---?" She said, "Why, yes I did." She was totally shocked to learn that he was my brother. WELL! Shortly thereafter, several friends began to come up to us and introduce themselves and tell me they had heard that I was Galen's sister...and then they would chat about him, etc., and tell me nice things they remembered about him, etc. And that continued all afternoon long and through the reception afterwards! Even the bro worker John VanDenBerg came over to us and said he had heard that Galen was my brother--and talked to us for about 45 min to an hour. I knew his grandmother was an early worker on the 1905 workers list and asked him about her. We had a very nice conversation about the 2x2 history. Before I mentioned my brother's name - I was a non-entity - after wards, Galen was my claim to fame! Whodathunkit?? Is DB the "stiff" worker being discussed? I can only think of one DB and certainly didn't think he was difficult.
|
|