Utelias2 kirjoitti: ↑21.10.2021 19:56
Olisin kysynyt että riittääkö JT Miehen Erottaminen Seurakunnasta Pelkän Parran takia?
Ei eroteta, mutta myöskään "etuja" ei tipu parralliselle. Lavalla ei juurikaan näe parrallisia. Johtaa kieroonkatsomiseen ja usein myös pehmokarttamiseen.
Parrattomuuden saneli Seuran toinen presidentti Rutherford. Russellilla ja monilla Raamatuntutkijoilla oli ollut komea parta.
Pohjimmiltaan kyse on kahdesta asiasta.
Ensinnäkin Seuran toinen presidentti Rutherford halusi tehdä selvän hajuraon Russellin ajan Raamatuntutkijoihin. Rutherford oli kateellinen Russellin muistolle ja maineelle ja halusi päästä niistä eroon. Rutherford halusi yksin olla "uskollinen ja ymmärtäväinen orja", johtaja ilman Russellin varjoa. Uskonnolle keksittiin uusi nimi, uudistetut opit ja uudet tavat.
Toisaalta amerikkalainen liike-elämä oli havainnut menestymisen edellytykseksi sopivan ulkoasun, mihin liittyy konservatiivinen vaatetus ja tuohon aikaan parrattomuus. Nämä samat periaatteet ovat hallinneet liike-elämää lähes tähän päivään asti. Ja Rutherfordille kyse oli juurikin liiketoiminnasta, painotuotteiden myynnistä.
Lloyd Evansin kirjassa
The Reluctant Apostate on kerrottu asiasta seuraavasti (Evans, Lloyd. The Reluctant Apostate: Leaving Jehovah's Witnesses Comes at a Price . JLE Publishing. Kindle Edition. ):
Under Rutherford, the lives of followers of the organization began to be micromanaged to a degree never before seen. Perhaps nothing highlights this better than the Judge’s bizarre resentment of beards—a resentment that is still felt by Witnesses to this day. In his book 30 Years a Watchtower Slave, William Schnell gives his firsthand account of a remarkable incident at Watchtower’s German office in Magdeburg in 1925:
An amusing incident took place at the time of the Judge’s visit. The Director of our German branch, as had many before him, had grown a large beard, patterned after Charles T. Russell’s beard. The Judge did not want anything at all to remain which might remind him of Russell—not even the cultivation of a beard. So, sitting at the table for dinner one night within my earshot, the Director asked the Judge for one more large rotary press. The Judge said nothing for a while, merely ate. Then suddenly he looked up, his eyes pinned severely on the Director’s huge beard and said, “I will buy you the press if you take that thing off,” pointing to the beard. It surely shocked the Director’s sensibilities, but he meekly heeded the warning and soon shamefacedly appeared minus his beard.
In the decades following this incident, beards would become a major taboo among Witnesses. Illustrated publications released both during and following Rutherford’s presidency would depict Bible characters clean-shaven (yes, even Jesus!) and it would become generally understood that Witness males who insisted on sporting facial hair could expect diminished responsibilities.
Obviously, the reasoning given for this comical stance could never be Bible-based, since nowhere in the Bible does it say anything close to “Thou shalt not grow a beard.” (Quite the opposite, if you consult Leviticus 19:27.) Instead, general advice is given to the effect that in certain cultures beards are “not the custom and are not considered acceptable for Christian ministers.” “In fact,” suggests a 2016 Watchtower, “having one may hinder a brother from bringing glory to God by his dress and grooming and his being irreprehensible.”
Irrespective of the official justification, it seems more than likely that the incredible prohibition on beards that continues to impact the grooming habits of millions of male Witnesses deep into the 21st century stems from little more than petty resentment on Rutherford’s part. It would appear that, at least in the Judge’s troubled mind, anyone wearing a beard was signaling nostalgia for his predecessor—and that simply would not be tolerated. Anything that could be linked with devotion to the Pastor or his teachings had to be purged.