My dear Brethren: – Grace and peace through our Beloved Master!
In our paper last January we offered quite some detailed comment on SILVER in its artistic, monetary and commercial aspects and the pressure that had been building up to force a higher price than the one fixed for many years by our Government in Washington. Before our January paper had been placed in the Post Office the President declared a “free” market on the metal about five o’clock one afternoon; and the price advanced thirteen cents an ounce before the market opened the next morning. Since that time it has edged steadily higher, so that the price is now over thirty cents an ounce above what it was a year ago. The same upheaval is certain to apply to the course of gold, the pressure on which is even now at the exploding point, with secret processes being manipulated in a frantic effort to avoid the inevitable. Some of these are “unlawful for a man to utter”; but the source of our information comes from experts whom we have known for many years and whose integrity has our full respect. This past summer one of the more prominent Florida newspapers carried an editorial on this item, to which we responded with the following letter, which was published on July 9:
Editor: Referring to your editorial in the July 3 paper, Distrust of Dollar Abroad, it is indeed most refreshing to read your commendable observations. Of course, you might have been a little more direct and incisive in your wording. At present we have in the United States about $22 billions of short-term foreign deposits, which are convertible into gold on demand; whereas we have a little over $16 billions of gold to meet that staggering liability.
If the U.S. bank examiners found a bank anywhere in this country in such deplorable financial circumstances, they would not allow that bank to open its doors tomorrow morning.
Therefore, it’s little wonder that foreign bankers – who know the banking rules at least as well as you and I – view the American dollar with critical eye.”
In the foreword to Vol. 4, dated October 1, 1916, Brother Russell had this to say about the world’s financial condition:
“The debts of the warring nations are authoritatively stated to amount to fifty-five billions of dollars – a sum which, of course, can never be paid in gold; and everybody knows there is not sufficient gold even to pay the interest on the debts of the world... Evidently the war will not stop from lack of men to shoot and be shot, but either from lack of food or from financial weakness. That it will be the latter is the author’s opinion.”
A FAR STEP
When Brother Russell expressed the opinion that it would be finances that would wreck the present order, his opinion was surely correct; but little did he then realize the astronomical figures that would appear as present institutions “shall wax old as doth a garment, and as a vesture shalt thou fold them up.” (Heb. 1:11,12) At October 1, 1916 the national debt of all the warring nations combined was fifty-five billions of dollars; in 1962 the federal debt of the United States alone is about three hundred billions (it was about one billion in 1914), and the overall debt in this nation alone (national, state, local and commercial) is now over one trillion dollars, and growing at a rate of about fifty billion annually. Today the currency issued by the United States Government is merely an engraved piece of paper – a “promise-to-pay” nothing; and this is generally accepted without question by the average citizen because so little is said about it. Both political parties have been guilty of using the printing press – the Democrats more so than the Republicans – both guilty enough that they dare not criticize the other; thus, the tremendous vagary is usually given the silent treatment, and the general public remains uninformed.
In all major countries the currency (printed money) has been devalued one or more times since we have come into the Epiphany (the Time of Trouble). By the end of 1923 in Germany there had been issued more than 496 quintillion marks (496,000,000,000,000,000,000), and had by that time become so jittery that it was quoted hourly. We are acquainted with a man here in the United States who was employed in a German industry at that time about two blocks from the Belgian border; and he has told us that, when they received their weekly pay on Saturday, they did not walk, they ran, to the Belgian border to convert their wages into Belgian money before it shrank still further. In 1924 the new Reichsmark was introduced, but it, too, went the way of the former, so that another devaluation was forced in 1948. The same story may be told of the Russian Ruble, the French Franc, the Italian Lira, the Greek Drachma and many other currencies; and the question logically arises, How long will faith in the United States regard “slips of paper” as money? It seems an indisputable conclusion that a dollar confidence crisis lies ahead, the only question mark being WHEN?
CONCERNING ANTITYPICAL JEHORAM OF JUDAH
Due to foreign skepticism of the American dollar, a continuous drain has developed against our gold reserve, so that it is now only about sixteen billion dollars’ worth – down more than eight billions from the high some years back. Our officials have exerted frantic under-cover pressure to prevent further withdrawals, so critical has the situation become. It has been well-defined that a nation is no stronger than its financial structure; it is the sustaining midsection of the figurative sovereign body. In Epiphany Vol. 3, PP. 195-249 Brother Johnson has given us quite some detail on 2 Chro. 21:1-20, as typical of America reaction in cooperation with the evils of the European Ahab. In that Scripture it is related how Jehoram’s “bowels fell out” by reason of the sickness that befell him; and Brother Johnson applied the antitype to the election result in the fall of 1932. But it would seem a more pronounced fulfillment may yet occur in the near future if much more gold is withdrawn from the United States; its monetary structure will experience complete collapse – just as would occur to a human being if the viscera were suddenly removed from the midsection. This is an item well worth watching!
It is properly observed also that the demoralization of the world money structure has been followed closely by deterioration of the moral, ethical and religious fiber of the general public. This is particularly attested in the growing juvenile delinquency, which has many parents and public officials near distraction. It has been a correct expression that, “Many children today feel that the only time they should ‘shift’ for themselves is when their parents buy them a new automobile.” The religious fiber is also strongly on the downgrade; COMBINATIONISM is “defiling the house, and filling the courts with the slain.” (Eze. 9:7) Nor can these things be properly ignored by God’s faithful people. We are indeed to be “sons of peace”; but Brother Johnson has stated this matter so very well in E-3:170 (top):
“But while they are peaceable, they are not primarily peaceable. They are primarily pure: and to maintain purity of doctrine and life, they will break the peace rather than keep it at the expense of principle. Surely all of us have been deeply saddened by the breaking of peace among the Lord’s people.”
AMONG TRUTH PEOPLE
The foregoing is definitely our attitude as respects our conduct toward those with whom we once walked arm in arm. Sweet fellowship in peace is greatly to be desired; but it is a sad commentary of history that the truest and best of God’s people have had constant warfare throughout the Gospel Age with those of their brethren who would pervert Truth and conduct. And usually they have been blamed as the troublemakers as they protested such actions. The wicked and impudent Ahab cast the accusation at the fully faithful Elijah (a type of the Gospel-Age Elect): “Art thou he that troubleth Israel?” (1 Kgs. 18:17) This is also further accentuated in 2 Chro. 25:14-16, where the Lord sent a faithful prophet to rebuke the sinning King Amaziah, with the erring king casting this insolent retort at him: “Art thou made of the king’s counsel?” And here is Brother Johnson’s comment on that situation: “Thus proud wrongdoers usually charge those who rebuke at the gate.” And excellent comment by him on such cases is to be found in E-13:557 (top):
“One of the proofs of human depravity is the rise of corruption after a season of good development in most human movements... a procedure that almost always sets in the case of those new creatures who for a time run well and then later lose their crowns. We see this in the Parousia movement, changing in most cases to more or less corrupt Great Company movements during the Epiphany.”
And, says Brother Johnson in E-13:486, the rebukes and corrections of the faithful increased as apostasy increased; and, in turn, St. Paul’s words in 2 Thes. 2:11 (Dia.) were fulfilled against the apostates: “On this account God will send them an energy of delusion, to their believing the falsehood.”
During 1962 a few such instances have appeared among erstwhile Epiphany Truth people; namely, the Memorial date, and the Jolly-Krewson lawsuit. Each of these “cousins” makes loud claim to the title “Pastor and Teacher”; yet with the Memorial date each of them has been refuted by the Truth we presented. In this controversy they did indeed offer strong “dis”-proof of their claims. The same principle applies to their arguments about the lawsuit, wherein each of them has presented voluminous verbosity, while clearly revealing that neither of them understands the subject being discussed. And in the face of these crushing defeats, J. W. Krewson still has the brazen effrontery to declare in his paper No. 46 that no one has been able to refute his teaching. With little effort we could produce numerous other examples where the “cousins” have been equally crass; but these two should suffice in our “retrospect” for 1962. Clearly enough, many who once seemed in good spiritual health under the faithful guidance of the Epiphany Messenger have now lost much of Epiphany Truth; and we are safe in predicting they will yet lose much more of it if they do not “turn back from their path of error.” (Jas. 5:20-Dia.) Let us consider here another statement from Brother Johnson in E-11:74:
“If Israel would not undertake and persevere in the involved spiritual journey – CONSECRATION made and carried out – it is certain that the Lord would send to them a strong delusion – a symbolic pestilence (2 Thes. 2:9-12) – as He has done and is doing to the unfaithful from 1878 onward in the six harvest siftings (Revolutionism being the sixth sifting slaughterweapon–JJH). The antitypical sword of v. 3 represents controversial Truth refuting the errors of the unfaithful.”
This, too, has been enacted against the measurably faithful, as is shown in our controversies over the 1962 Memorial date, the correct interpretation of 1 Cor. 6:1-6, on Campers “Consecrated,” the ‘chief enemies of Jesus,’ the justification status of unfaithful Youthful Worthies, the types of Abraham and Isaac on Moriah and Moses on Pisgah, etc., during the year past which we now view in Retrospect.
This also from E-13:744 – “Their respective attitude toward Great and Little Babylon, which are to be annihilated, was that they who would treat them as they treated God’s true people would be favored by God (8); and that they who would dash the little sects of both Babylons against the doctrines of the Truth would be favored by God (9).”
Seeing then, that we know beforehand what the end will be for Big and Little Babylon, “we will not fear, though the earth be removed, and though the mountains be carried into the midst of the sea... (because) there is a river, the streams whereof shall make glad the City of God, the Holy of the tabernacles of the Most High.” (Psa. 46:1-4) Therefore, may you who see these things clearly make firm resolution, “my beloved brethren, to be settled, unmoved, abounding in the work of the Lord at all times, knowing that your labor is not in vain in the Lord.” (1 Cor. 15:58-Dia.)
With this comes our heart-felt reciprocal cordial good wishes throughout 1963 to all whose Holiday greetings have come to us, and our prayer for spiritual health and prosperity to all our brethren everywhere. “Cast not away therefore your confidence, which hath great recompense of reward. For ye have need of patience (cheerful endurance amid trying circumstances) that, after ye have done the will of God, ye might receive the promise... We are not of them who drawback unto perdition; but of them that believe to the saving of the soul.” (Heb. 10:35-39)
Sincerely your Brother, John J. Hoefle, Pilgrim
ANNOUNCEMENT OF GENERAL INTEREST
There has been a hearty response from some of our readers to our request for names of Jehovah’s Witnesses, L.H.M.M., and from other Little Babylon groups for our article No. 88, October 1, 1962, re the Jehovah’s Witnesses’ interpretation of Revelation 9; and we think the results have been good thus far. We are having a re-run of the articles to supply copies for additional names received; and we shall welcome such further response.
QUESTION OF GENERAL INTEREST
QUESTION: – A prominent Protestant churchman recently gave a news interview, in which he said he was very happy at the progress being made toward unity among Catholics and Protestants, because we could now stress irenics instead of polemics. What is your opinion of this, and will you please explain?
ANSWER: – We certainly do not agree with such a viewpoint. “Irenics” is properly defined as “theology concerned with securing Christian unity”; whereas, polemics” is “the art of disputation, its object being refutation of errors.” The cleric you mention is advocating just the reverse of the Apostle Jude (v. 3, Dia.): “I had a necessity to write to you, exhorting you to earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered to the saints.” Clearly enough, the cleric and the Apostle cannot occupy the same theological house, because the former is just using intricate speech born of high-sounding words to advocate COMBINATIONISM, while the Apostle Jude is stressing the necessity for doctrine which “is first pure, then peaceable.”
Let us examine Brother Johnson’s definition of Combinationism in E-9:395 (38): “By combinationism we mean an illicit union of God’s people (the sifting of the sixth-hour call.... typically set forth in Numbers 25... representing the great ones of Christendom in church, state and capital – par. 37) with evil persons, principles, things and practices, e.g., introducing clericalistic principles and practices among the consecrated, uniting them in their studies, services and characteristics. The justified practice combinationism when they mix their principles and practices with those of the camp (as R. G. Jolly is now doing by mingling his Campers Consecrated with the great horde of unjustified campers–JJH). The camp practices combinationism when they cooperate with non-Christian religious movements... Examples of combinationism are evident in the union of church and state, of denominations with denominations, of Levite movements with Levite movements.”
“Those that died in the (typical) plague were twenty and four thousand” (Numbers 25:9), the largest toll exacted in any of the Wilderness plagues, the next nearest having destroyed only fifteen thousand. Apparently the number is indicative of the grievous pestilencial force in the end of this Age; and it should be a proper warning to all of us. That this pestilence is boldly on the march is seen in the election of a Roman Catholic to the United States’ Presidency – an event that would have been impossible even twenty years ago. There is now also a Roman Catholic at the head of the French Government; and the same in Germany, one-time cradle of the Protestant Reformation by Martin Luther; and we may reasonably conclude that the frequent visits of the German Chancellor to Washington go deeper than what is revealed in the daily press. And the Protestant leaders in France, England and the United States offer their whole-hearted approval of this spiritual malady. Here is an exact quotation from Rev. Dr. Marc Boegner, long-time leader of French Protestantism:
“Many of the problems may be seen in a new color and in a new mood. What’s important is that polemics be replaced by irenics. There can be something totally new connecting the men of the Roman Church and men of other churches.”
Yes, the ‘new color’ mentioned by Rev. Boegner is closely associated with the expression in Joel 2:6, “All faces shall gather blackness” – a ‘new color’ indeed!
The same tendency is also clearly apparent in Little Babylon, with many now taking a very conciliatory attitude even toward the Little Catholic Church there, with the terrible sins of the past either forgotten, excused or modified, just as is being done with the past sins of the Roman Church. Certainly, those of us who still pray, “God bless the memory” of the last two Principal Men should be even more opposed to combinationism than they were; and all of us who are at all familiar with their attitude know they would not look upon this evil with any degree of allowance. Viewed from this standpoint, those of the L.H.M.M. who now embrace this third slaughter-weapon man (Eze. 9:2) are most guilty of all. They did accept the benign teaching of the Epiphany Messenger when he was still with us – at least, they gave lip-service thereto; yet he had barely left us until this pestilence was allowed to afflict them. At the Chicago Convention in 1961 one man was asked to read the Vow in the morning devotional service, who almost certainly did not believe or practice parts of it, thus making a hypocrite of him and them for so doing; yet it bothered them not at all. They seem ready to embrace about every one except those who are pointing out their sins to them; and our answer to such is the statement of the Master Himself in Luke 12:48 – Dia.: “From any one to whom much is given much will be required; and from him with From much has been deposited (such as the benign and prolific explanations of the last Star Member), they mill exact the more.”
LETTER OF GENERAL INTEREST
Dear Bro. Hoefle:
Greetings in the Master’s Name! I am writing to tell you I have not received the September article .... I have had a glance at Bro. Roach’s. I am also looking forward to the October paper, with some extras. I note what you said about the mixed reception you experienced at the Convention. Such experiences are good, as they afford us an opportunity to manifest Christ’s spirit.
The friends would like to have some tracts before Nov. for distribution: Where are the Dead, Resurrection, etc.... Bro. ------- has had his mind poisoned against you. That was R. G. Jolly’s chief motive in sending that vicious letter to the class, in which he referred to you as “that sifter” – and then to come in person.
Our love to the dear ones. God bless you all!
Yours by His Grace, Bro ------- TRINIDAD
November-December 1962 Present Truth
Inasmuch as the forepart of this paper was through the printer before we received the Nov-Dec Present Truth, we now refute his contentions in this Supplement.
On p. 94, col. 1, par. 5, he raises the question of our honesty for omitting the words “according to Josephus, Book III, chap. 10, sec. 5.” This seems to us a very cheap maneuver on his part, and reveals once more the kind of man he is. If our readers will refer to our “Supplement to No. 80,” it will be noted there that we not only gave the reference, but actually quoted more of it than did Brother Johnson in his quotation. Also, in our No. 87 Special we answered R. G. Jolly’s “cousin” (J. W. Krewson) in detail on a similar bit of nonsense.
When he speaks about the rule that Brother Russell established, Brother Johnson proves (and is admittedly accepted by R. G. Jolly himself) that Brother Russell was at least one day wrong on almost every Memorial he observed – just as Brother Johnson humbly admits for himself a one-day mistake on the Memorial dates he established prior to 1933. Brother Johnson distinctly and clearly tells us in that same Feb. 1, 1933 Present Truth (pp. 24,25) that “Our Pastor had great difficulty in this matter, and so far as we can make out from his varied methods, he sometimes used the full-moon day, sometimes the Jewish calendar..... and sometimes, disregarding all four of these, he used we know not just what method.” Here is a statement that clearly points out that Brother Russell used many different methods (other than the one we now accept – namely, that the new moon “nearest” the Vernal Equinox should always be used, with the exception that Brother Johnson succinctly sets out – “NEVER BEFORE THE VERNAL EQUINOX” – a conclusion of his own, which he derived from the statements of Josephus) – all of them incorrect in one day, at least, according to his “Correction” just cited. So Brother Johnson adds in this same “Correction” – “By showing us the real beginning of the lunar month as He regards it, God indicates that none of us has been on the right tract... We thank God that as a part of the mother of the daughter (a Great Company developing Truth–JJH) we have been cleansed from another item of error and are being sanctified by another item of advancing Truth.”
That Brother Johnson regarded Josephus as an authority, and did not quote him for the purpose of refuting what he said, we quote the following:
“Brethren, in this matter let us adhere to the rule that our Pastor gave as his latest and most mature thought on the method of finding Nisan 1 – a thought that according to Josephus prevailed in the New Testament Times – i.e., that the new moon nearest – whether before or after – the Vernal Equinox points out Nisan l...” (But Bro. Johnson clearly makes an exception to this rule when the new moon nearest the Vernal Equinox sets the date of the Passover before the Vernal Equinox, because he himself makes the observation and statement that Nisan 14 should not be observed “BEFORE THE VERNAL EQUINOX,” based on the statement of Josephus that “the sun must be in Aries” – another way of saying that this celebration should not take place “Before the Vernal Equinox.”)
The method of Jesus and the Apostles during New Testament times, “according to Josephus,” is Brother Johnson’s ONLY citation of authority, since the Bible is silent thereon. So far as we know, both Star Members adhered to this rule (whether their Passover dates were incorrect or not) and never observed the Passover BEFORE THE VERNAL EQUINOX.
Brother Johnson also had excellent reason for following Josephus. As we said in previous papers, if Josephus could be correctly quoted to fix the extreme end of Nisan, he could with equal propriety be quoted to fix the beginning of that month. And Josephus says that when he lived that was regulated by the sun being in Aries – which occurred then at almost identically the same time as the Vernal Equinox.
While it is admitted that Josephus is unreliable as a historian, neither Brother Russell nor Brother Johnson – nor any one else, so far as we know – questions his understanding of Jewish religious ritual when Jesus was on earth (until now, with these new “Pastors and Teachers,” the Jolly-Krewson twosome, who once more demonstrate their “cousin” kinship). Here is something from the autobiography of Josephus:
“My family is not an ignoble one, but hath descended all along from priests... By my mother I am of royal blood, for the sons of Asamaeous, from whom she descended, were both high priests and kings... The high priests and principal men of Jerusalem came frequently to know my opinion about the accurate understanding of points of the Law.”
It will be noted that Jesus had no quarrel with the Scribes and Pharisees as to the date they observed Passover; but He prepared to observe it – and did observe it – on the date the Jews determined. Let us consider also that Josephus himself was of the first-ranking order of serving priests, so that he would be thoroughly qualified to explain the Jews’ religious customs, his uncle having been high priest in Israel – in rank with Caiphas, Eli, Zechariah, Zadok and other successors of Aaron. Clearly enough, Brother Johnson was not refuting Josephus, as he was doing with the modern Jewish calendar; he was quoting him as an authority on Jewish ritual. In fact, there is little other than Josephus’ statement on which we can rely, the Bible being completely silent on the matter (otherwise Brother Johnson would have cited the Scripture); and, whatever was correct for Jesus and the Apostles, would be equally right for us today. That is why Brother Johnson offered us this exception regarding the new moon nearest the Vernal Equinox for Nisan 14 – “NEVER BEFORE THE VERNAL EQUINOX” – a conclusion (not quotation) he based exclusively on what Josephus gave. So we say to R. G. Jolly, as we also said to J. W. Krewson: Show us one instance during the entire Parousia-Epiphany periods that either Brother Russell or Brother Johnson observed the Memorial before the Vernal Eguinox. If R. G. Jolly now rejects Josephus – upon whom Brother Johnson relied in certain essential respects for his conclusions – then let him now direct us to some other authority upon which Brother Russell and Brother Johnson relied for the conclusions they gave us. From all the records we now have, it would seem Jesus had no argument whatever with the statements of Josephus; but this doesn’t seem to bother R. G. Jolly in his rejection of Josephus now.
On P. 93, col. 2, par. 4, R. G. Jolly states that the addition of Ve-Adar in seven of every nineteen years “does not alter the Jewish beginning of each year with the new moon nearest the Vernal Equinox.” This is a false statement – and R. G. Jolly knows it’s false. In 1962, the very year now in contention, the Jews begin Nisan 1 (their new ecclesiastical year) with the new moon after the Equinox, while R. G. Jolly’s statement would force them to use the new moon before the Equinox. Had they used his method in 1962, they would have observed the Passover at about the same date (March 18) that R. G. Jolly mistakenly used for his Memorial. Sad to say, such falsehoods seem to bother R. G. Jolly not at all – all the while he “admits” how “cleansed” he is! “He that worketh deceit shall not dwell within my house: he that telleth lies shall not tarry in my sight.” (Psa. 101:7)
THE TRINIDAD SITUATION
On p. 89 there is more “profusion of words” by R. G. Jolly in defense of his “strange fire” – Epiphany Campers Consecrated, or Consecrated Epiphany Campers, as you wish (because in either case it is a non-existent class). There’s no point in wasting time and space over shallow formality. Apparently R. G. Jolly never read the article, “Worthies – Ancient and Modern.” However, when he tries to make a point that he has been teaching Campers Consecrated “for eight years” (emphasis his), he reveals once more his inability to think clearly on any Scriptural or secular matter. He himself claims to be winning new ones now who have imbibed the errors of Big and Little Babylon for many more than “eight years.” The real issue here is; Did Brother Roach “teach” Consecrated Campers for “eight years,” or is R. G. Jolly now prating just because he himself has taught the error for “eight years”?
And, from whom did he receive the doctrine? When R. G. Jolly claims both Star Members teach such a doctrine he is engaging in gross fraud. Let him show where either of them ever taught Tentative Justification in the Camp. Certainly, none of us ever heard of this doctrine until R. G. Jolly first presented it in his paper. Thus, it is a new doctrine. And in E-10-XXIV and in E-11:495 Brother Johnson says such attempt, especially by a Levite, cleansed or uncleansed, is offering “strange fire” before the Lord. Here is also the clear teaching of the same Epiphany Messenger re such on page 208 of Epiphany Vol. 11:
“While the Great Company are in their uncleansed condition – impenitent – they should not keep the annual Lord’s Supper; and for this reason the Epiphany enlightened saints (such as those who do not accept R. G. Jolly’s “strange fire”–JJH) should not memorialize with them, nor welcome them to their own celebrations.”
From the foregoing it is very transparent what the Epiphany Messenger believed; yet R. G. Jolly now shouts “clericalism!” at Brother Roach because he accepts the Epiphany Messenger’s teaching – while at the same time raising much flapdoodle about the “sifters” and their “deceit.” We shall have more on this in our February paper, D.v.; but we think it appropriate here to quote some of the “good” Levites disputations against Brother Johnson earlier in the Epiphany, of which R. G. Jolly was chief’:
“Repetitiously they tell of their taking part in the discussion, claiming they were speaking in righteousness and sincerity (vs. 2,3) They repeat... that they were God’s workmanship (v. 4). They challenge J. to stand forth and answer them, if he can (v. 5) Believing that they who were crown-losers were crown-retainers, they boast that they have the same relation to God as he, as New Creatures (v. 6)... They charged that he blamed God as picking fault with him, counting him as His enemy (v. 10)... They demanded an answer to their (false) charge that he had been contending against God, who is not bound to account to anyone as to His affairs (v. 13)...”
(Please see full account of these “good” Levites and their disputations, etc., against the Epiphany Messenger in Epiphany Vol. 10, pp. 585-587–JJH)
Once more does R. G. Jolly offer the type of Lev. 12 to justify his teachings and activities since 1954 (see p. 89, col. 2). We certainly are in full agreement with Brother Johnson’s interpretation of this type; but we are also in direct opposition to R. G. Jolly’s application of it. This type has to do with the Little Flock and Great Company “developing truths”; there is not the slightest hint in it to involve Youthful Worthies, much less Campers Consecrated. Thus here – as in many other instances – does R. G. Jolly pervert the Epiphany Messenger’s teachings to serve his own errors (Azazel means Perverter), as he ignores the very truth that he should be accepting. On P. 525 of Vol. 15 Brother Johnson stresses one of the principal Great Company developing truths; namely, they must all be abandoned to Azazel for their cleansing (which includes those who lose Little Flockship by the “skin of their teeth). This truth R. G. Jolly ignores completely so far as he is concerned by claiming he was “cleansed” without this process. Also, he makes no effort whatever to declare it – or accept it – for other Great Company members in his organization. WHY?
FRED E. BLAINE AGAIN
R. G. Jolly has known for some considerable time that his Campers “Consecrated” was causing much difficulty in Trinidad (as it is also doing in many other sections, with the ablest and most enlightened brethren generally being the ones who will have none of it, and the “unstable and the unlearned” being the most ready to receive it). Last spring a year ago he sent ‘trouble-shooter’ Fred E. Blaine to the Trinidad trouble spot; but what do we hear? If we are correctly informed, the special delegate sent to instruct and explain “Campers Consecrated” never once in any of his discourses made any attempt to expound “Campers Consecrated.” Why? He says in his letter published on page 95 of this Nov-Dec P.T. that the doctrine “is built on the writings of ‘that servant’ and the Epiphany Messenger,” so he should be happy and qualified to explain it at every opportunity if he really believes what he now says in his letter.
Anyway, we now propose to him that he appear before the Trinidad brethren on the platform with us – we to ask him questions, and he to ask us questions on the teaching – with equal rights to each of us, and in order and decorum. He charges in his letter that we are a “proven sifter.” Our proposal now provides him with an opportunity of “proving” himself and also “proving” us on the Campers Consecrated issue, and the “sifter” issue as well. R. G. Jolly should be very happy to embrace this opportunity for Fred Blaine by defraying his expenses; but, if he is cheap enough to decline, then the Epiphany Bible Students Ass’n has a special fund for such purposes; and we shall arrange to pay his expenses – and allow him to select the time he wants to be there, too.
One outstanding reason for the world’s demoralized condition today is that it is overpopulated with irresponsible bagatelles – persons whose chief attribute is just a big mouth, which they are afraid to open unless they can hide behind a wall some place where they are sure they’ll be safe. Our proposal now presents the opportunity to Fred Blaine to prove to the Trinidad brethren and to the entire General Church that he is not such a person. May we hear from him soon! Be it noted that of all that 1961 extended trip through Jamaica, Trinidad, Panama and South America, Brother Roach was the only one specifically mentioned by Fred Blaine at the Philadelphia Labor Day Convention in 1961, as being “very clear in Parousia and Epiphany Truth “ We are in full agreement with Fred Blaine’s observation of Brother Roach, because we also found him “very clear in the Truth” when we made our Pilgrim trip to Trinidad in April of 1962.
LETTERS OF GENERAL INTEREST:
Dear Brother Hoefle: – Greetings in Jesus’ Name!
You are perhaps wondering why I have not written to you. I have great opposition from my wife. Brother Jolly and the Present Truth is everything to her. We are at great odds.......
What I meant by the L.H.M.M. needing you, just look at the small gatherings – like in Chicago when I was there, and you also. There is none in ––– and one in ––– and she is sick and feeble......
I will close for this time. Hope you are both well and May God bless you!
Your fellow-servant in His Name ------- (dated 12/3-62)
Dear Brother Hoefle:
Enclosed find check for I sent for some tracts a few days ago, and said I would send a check later when I had a chance to go out.
Sincere Christian love to all ------- Conn.
Dear Brother Hoefle: – Grace and peace be multiplied!
It was good to see you at Chicago, and I am very happy that I could be there. Please send me the tracts – Where are the Dead, What is the Soul and the Resurrection tracts. Brother ------- joins with me in sending you both, and Sisters Dunnagan and Wells, warm Christian love.
As always, Your brother ------- MICHIGAN
CORRECTION:- Please refer to our Dec. 1, 1962 paper, p. 4, par. 1, and change Prov. 19:26 to read Prov. 15:2.