by Epiphany Bible Students

No 34

My dear Brethren: Grace and peace through our Beloved Master!

In the March 1958 Present Truth appears an article with the above words in its heading, the same being presumably a refutation of J. W. Krewson's errors in his pre­sentation of October-November, 1957 on the subject. Generally speaking, so long as he adheres to the writings of the Star Members, R. G. Jolly has done an excellent piece of work in this instance. We compliment him for it; and we hope and pray he may im­mediately determine to adhere as closely to all the Truths taught by those same Star Members as he has done in some parts of his March article on the Epiphany-Apocalypse.

However, it seems to us most lamentable that he could not have the vision, the di­rect approach, the straightforwardness toward J. W. Krewson as did the Star Members in similar cases – and thus use their methods as well as their truth analyses. Never once in his article does he definitely identify J. W. Krewson as such, but repeatedly refers to "this sectarianizer", "this sifter", "this betraying writer", "this errorist", "'Tribute of Respect' writer", etc. In some of the very quotations he offers from the Star Members he has the example put before him, where JFR and G. K. Bolger are clearly identified by name – which left no doubt in the minds of their readers of whom they spoke. In the first line of his ''Lord's Supper" article on page 18 he begins it, "For the sake of new readers"; but he leaves these same "new readers" dangling in space concerning the errorist he discusses on pages 19 to 32. Of course, R. G. Jolly has followed the course of JFR, the PBI and others in so many instances, that it should not surprise us that, in his "refutations", he generously keeps the one he is exposing "incognito" – contrary, of course, to the things "he has learned and been assured of." But it is a pity that the excellent defense he has offered of the Star Members' writings should be sullied with Azazel's technique.

And the acerbity of his attack against J. W. Krewson in this instance, and the in­cisive elaboration he sets before his readers are a spectacle to consider; nor do we fault him too much for this – humanly considered. We have often commented to those near to us that the one thing in all human history that is most resented and stirs up the most deadly passions is the perfidious "double cross". Among the "beggarly ele­ments" it often leads to murder; and it foments schemes dark and sundry to "get even" among those not given to violent settlement of their scores. J. W. Krewson was R. G. Jolly's years'-long bosom friend and confidant; and the methods he used in conjunction with one of R. G. Jolly's still-respected Pilgrims to unseat R. G. Jolly during the years of 1954 and 1955 arouse nothing but righteous indignation in this writer's estimation of them both. R. G. Jolly undoubtedly learned from bitter experience from this shady mach­ination of these two "brethren" how Caesar must have felt when stating to his trusted friend Brutus, "That was the unkindest cut of all." As said, we cannot fault R. G. Jolly too much; but we do realize that the extremes to which he has gone in the instance now being discussed have only further revealed his own sad limitations. He was an "easy mark" for the flattering types, for "Brother Russell's Epiphany Parallels, etc., with which J. W. Krewson lauded him with "buttered words"; and this sad aftermath is undoubt­edly some of his (R. G. Jolly's) fit-man experiences – in which we hope and pray he will be properly exercised. Human beings as they are presently constituted are creatures of extremes – it is only a step, a very small step, from love to bitter hatred, from gen­ius to insanity; and this is only too clearly demonstrated in R. G. Jolly's present casti­gations of his erstwhile "cousin in conspiracy."

For the sake of the record, we think it opportune to state here that Brother John­son had a most friendly and kindly feeling toward J. W. Krewson and his wife for their ever-ready willingness to give him help as occasion required; and we ourselves felt deeply grateful to them both for the devoted service they rendered him during his ill­ness when we were assisting him in 1947. Thus, our beloved Epiphany Messenger gave him as much recognition as he considered compatible with all the circumstances; yet the best office he could see for him was that of an Evangelist – not even did he bestow upon him the office of Auxiliary Pilgrim. And R. G. Jolly knew this just as well as we did; yet he immediately did despite once more to Brother Johnson's judgment to "lay hands hastily" upon the brother immediately Brother Johnson had departed from our midst. It seems R. G. Jolly had learned nothing at all from the rebuffs he had received over the years for gainsaying the judgment of the Epiphany Messenger; and this sad aftermath now rises to haunt him and harass him because he could not heed St. Paul's warning to "know no man after the flesh."

And we must say much the same for Pilgrim Gavin, who encouraged, aided and abetted J. W. Krewson during those fateful years of 1954 and 1955. Their many years in the Truth under both Star Members should have taught both R. G. Jolly and this Pilgrim better things; and we offer the opinion here that either and both of them are the more to be blamed. Had they not gone contrary to all precedent, had they exhibited a better standard of Christian ethics, this present tragic situation might not now prevail – although we real­ize it is a part of the "all things" (Rom. 8:28), and accept it as such. And we opine R. G. Jolly will yet receive much more of the same. Knowing the perfidy of the Pilgrim in question as R. G. Jolly did, he immediately forgot and forgave all when this Pilgrim once more gave him lip obeisance. Both Star Members would have put such a brother "on the shelf" for awhile, at least – to be certain of his true repentance; and we may be sure that any disdain for their sound counsel can result only in mischief and stripes for those who do so. When an old experienced pilgrim like Brother Wisdom offered his services to Brother Johnson, he declined his pilgrim service until such time as the brother might prove himself under his surveillance; and Brother Johnson followed this course at a time when he was sorely in need of help of a competent sort. We know of our own knowledge that Pilgrim Gavin put forth some considerable effort to circulate those first "three discourses" of J. W. Krewson. We have written proof for our state­ment; and the proof of several witnesses that he tried to prevail upon us to make a special trip to Philadelphia to confer with J. W. Krewson about them – which we had no intention of doing, and certainly did not do. We are also reliably informed that he was one of the "Pilgrims" who attended that Krewson secret meeting in New England; and encouraged him to present his program to the General Church, thus upholding him in the usurpation of the office of General Elder. But this conspiracy of the Gavin-Krewson twosome can be described as nothing other than traitorous double-dealing with R. G. Jolly, and it is indeed little wonder that he breathes much personal venom – another trait of those in Azazel's hands.

Nor can we overlook the fact that R. G. Jolly himself is guilty of some of the very charges he now hurls at J. W. Krewson. He says JWK bestows "Judas-like tributes of love and esteem on Brother Russell, while betraying him by repudiating some of his basic teach­ings." R. G. Jolly has done the very same thing with Brother Russell in his Habakkuk ar­ticle; he has also done the same thing repeatedly to Brother Johnson in his consecrated Epiphany campers, his contention about all the Saints having left the earth, etc. This we hope to prove in our near-future writings, D.v.

But for now let us consider the Epiphany-Apocalypse: On page 29, col. 1, par. 2, it is quoted from Brother Russell that the Parousia, Epiphany and Apokalypsis are "three words of distinctly different signification"; and with this thought we agree. Epiphany means "bright shining", and Apocalypse means "uncovering or revealment". When we con­sider them from 1914 on to the end of the time of trouble it is impossible to separate the two – just as it is impossible to separate spirit-begettal and vitalized justification. To illustrate this point: If a man should come into a dark room at midnight, and a dollar bill were lying on the floor, he could by no means see it until he turned on the electric light. Thus, it would be the bright shining of that light (correspond­ing to the Epiphany) that revealed the dollar bill (corresponding to the Apocalypse). It was impossible to see the dollar bill without the light; and this is exactly the re­lationship between the Epiphany and Apocalypse. Therefore, it is impossible to have an Apocalypse without an Epiphany; so that any one trying to set forth an Apocalypse apart from an Epiphany is simply talking rank nonsense.

However, while the Epiphany from 1914 to this date has vividly revealed many things to some, this has been far from true with the many. If a partially blind man came into a dark room with a dollar bill on the floor, he would be cognizant of a bright shining when the light was turned on – unless he were totally blind; but he still would not see the dollar bill. And so it has been with mankind in general during this Epiphany. Many of the more intelligent realize acutely that a "strange act" is going on, without grasp­ing its portent. This is clearly revealed in the course of the United States Government, whose present officials firmly advocate that we must give away about four billions of dollars in Foreign Aid each year if we are to survive. This is nothing more – on a much larger scale, of course – than what happened in Chicago when the Capone gang was in its heyday. They exacted tribute from many merchants for "protection" to insure against vio­lence to themselves, their families and their possessions. We are now pouring out bil­lions each year in a desperate attempt for protection against the "overflowing scourge", which the Epiphany is veiledly revealing to those in high places. But as St. Peter says, "he that lacketh these things (the seven primary graces) is blind, and cannot see afar off", so the "bright shining" is not revealing overly much to the great bulk of humanity. Nevertheless, whatever of uncovering is given to any one, it can come only as a result of the "bright shining"; so it is impossible to disassociate the two acts – which means it is impossible in the Scriptural meaning of the two words to have an Apocalypse with­out an Epiphany.

In the large sense, of course, the Epiphany (as an act) continues throughout the en­tire second advent (E-4-10) – which means that the Apocalypse (as an act) will also con­tinue during that time. But we believe one of the strongest Bible texts to prove the Epiphany as a period of time is still with us is 2 Thes. 2:8 – "That wicked (the man of sin) will be destroyed with the brightness of his coming" – "whom, the Lord Jesus will annihilate by the Epiphaneia of his Parousia''. While the bright shining in this text is defined by Brother Johnson as an act, this act will occur during the Epiphany as a period. Therefore, since the Man of Sin is not yet annihilated, the Epiphany must still be with us.

Strange as it may seem – indeed, "strange" is not nearly a strong enough word for it – R. G. Jolly still clings tenaciously to those errors he once imbibed from this same J. W. Krewson he is now castigating – one of these being his consecrated Epiphany campers, which error he re-affirms on page 27, col. 2 (of which we shall offer more in a later writing, D.v.). And his hold on this error forces him to pervert the writings of Brother Johnson that he claims so loudly to be upholding in the very lines where he accuses JWK. He repeatedly speaks of the Epiphany in the "restricted sense". Where does Brother John­son ever refer to it in that way? In E-4-53 (bottom) Brother Johnson speaks of it in the “narrow sense." Of course, the dictionary says "narrow" is a synonym for "restricted" ­they mean exactly the same thing. Why, then, does R. G. Jolly use the word "restricted" where Brother Johnson does not use it? Not because he thinks it makes no difference; oh, NO! If he used the words "narrow sense", then he could find nothing whatever to justify his conclusions about his 1954 date and his quasi-elect consecrated. Note Brother John­son's words:

"The expression, The Time of Trouble, is used in two senses... In its narrow sense it covers the period from beginning of the World War in 1914 until the end of anarchy and Jacob's Trouble."

From the foregoing, it is clear enough that the Epiphany in its "restricted sense" or its "narrow sense" is not nearly over; therefore, any conclusions based on the assump­tion that it is over can be only Azazelian perversion – the same sort of "stabbing in the back" that R. G. Jolly hurls so viciously at J. W. Krewson. As said, we shall have more to say about this in a future writing – at which time we hope to make a very thorough job of it. But, for now, we state again that if the Epiphany has not ended in its "narrow sense", then we should still be doing the Epiphany work as organized by the Epiphany Mes­senger.

On page 25, col. 2 (bottom) there is some more of the same, where he quotes from E-10-114 – "the message of Revelation 22:11 will not be due until October 1954, when the Epiphany begins to lap into the Basileia, kingdom"... "yet showed that some Great Company members would come into the Truth thereafter." Why didn't he quote some more from page 114 of Vol. 10? We answer – Because he was afraid to do so! Here's some more of it:

"1954 is the date that the last member of the Great Company will get his first enlightenment that will bring him into the Truth by Passover, 1956... and no more persons will enter the tentatively justified state."

The last clause of the above makes bedlam and nonsense of his consecrated Epiphany campers – of which more anon, as we said above. Therefore, we repeat once more that his presentation of this Epiphany-Apocalypse item is excellent so long as he adheres to the Star Members' writings; but it is the usual Jolly admixture of Truth and non­sense when he "leans to his own understanding".

In closing, we think it well to note that J. W. Krewson's treatment of this sub­ject is so crude and bungling that it won't fool any who are "established in the Pres­ent Truth", although it may influence a few of the "unstable and the unlearned"; but this cannot be said of R. G. Jolly's perversions, He injects his perversions much more cun­ningly and craftily. His revolutionisms against the Epiphany Truth are in keeping with his revolutionisms against the Epiphany arrangements, in support of which statement note Brother Johnson's comment in E-10-645 (last line):

"This led to J.'s exposing them (R. G. Jolly, et al) as attempting to gain control of J., the lord's mouthpiece. Not a few in the ecclesia sympathized with them; and had not J. been present and vigorously opposed their resolution, so Azazelianly constructed as, if possible, to have deceived the very Elect, it would doubtless have passed."

Of course, Brother Johnson is not here now to "vigorously oppose" him, so his crafty perversions of the Epiphany Truth and arrangements continue unrestrained in many in­stances. In this discussion he simply changes the word "narrow" to "restricted" (while loudly faulting JWK for doing just that very thing!) in his attempt to show some sort of termination for the Epiphany in 1954 and 1956. But Brother Johnson's statement is clear and decisive that the Epiphany in its "narrow sense" will terminate with Jacob's Trouble – and for this there is clear Scriptural support, because the Bible clearly defines the Epiphany in its narrow sense as the Time of Trouble; where­as, there is nothing – just nothing – in the Bible to show that it ended in 1956 in its "narrow" or "restricted sense." This is simply a fabrication by R. G. Jolly – of which more will be said as we now analyze


On pages 20-23 of J. W. Krewson's August 1957 writing there is presented Seven Questions designed to defeat our contention that Brother Johnson was not the last Saint. In the main, we consider these questions just so much nonsense, with a couple of them even semi-moronic. In his profusion of words here again he shows his close relationship to his "cousin", both of whom perform "as the heathen do: for they think they shall be heard for their much speaking" (Matt. 6:7). His whole Seven Questions can be disposed of with one sentence:

Can you prove there was a Saint living on earth on October 23, 1950?

If that question can be hurdled, then we have no more need for the balance of his three pages than a frog needs a hair ribbon.

In his "first question" he asks what assurance we have that those considering them­selves priests are spirit-begotten – what specific Scripture, history, prophecy or type points them out. Well, some of Brother Russell's Pilgrims are still living; and, while this in itself does not assure them of spirit begettal, it is certain that Brother Rus­sell considered them to be such, or he would never have given them the Pilgrim office. But the "specific Scripture" for which he asks to answer this question is Matt. 13:52, "Every scribe which is instructed into the Kingdom of Heaven ... bringeth forth out of his treasure things new and old." As Brother Johnson has so ably taught, the only ones who brought forth "things new and old" during the Parousia-Epiphany were the more capable members of the Christ Company. Inasmuch as some of these survived him, we have the clear assurance that they were spirit-begotten – and they claimed to be Saints.

His "second question" says we must positively know who the last one will be. Why do we have to know it? We don't know who was the last one to be spirit-begotten – and this is certainly more important than the other; in fact, it is impossible to have the second without having the first. So far as we know, no one recognized that the High Calling had closed until over 3½ years after it had happened; so we must admit – if we wish to be fair – that Brother Johnson and all the others were teaching error on this matter, as they attempted to bring new ones into the Body during that time. We walk by faith, and not by sight; and, usually, such important events are never known beforehand, because the Truth on then often brings a trial upon God's people – just as the "High Calling Closed" most certainly did. "In due time" we shall know who the last one is ­if it proves important for us to know.

His "third question" says the last one would have to be a special teacher. Here again, we say – Why? Brother Russell had produced "unity of the faith"; and his writ­ings were certainly sufficient to enable any Saint to finish his course with joy. We know that those who did not come into the Epiphany Truth had nothing more than he left. As we pointed out in our Last Saint article (copy free upon request), Brother Johnson, as antitypical Zechariah, was the last official mouthpiece – so there won't be any more.

His "fourth question" asks how those Saints still living have performed a service for the Lord – how have they suffered for righteousness? He says it may "seem strange" that he asks this question; but it doesn't seem at all "strange" to us, coming as it does from J. W. Krewson. Aside from the fiery furnace" experiences, let him show where the Saints during the Parousia-Epiphany ever suffered more abuse from their "brethren who cast them out" than did those since Brother Johnson's death. Of course, it's no surprise that he doesn't see this, since he himself has been one of the main ones in­strumental in bringing this persecution upon them.

His "fifth question" wants to know which of the priests are going to complete ex­planation of the Bible .... Brother Johnson taught the Bible would be completely explained. He also taught that he himself would do that explaining; so we think J. W. Krewson him­self should reconcile this matter before asking such a question as he does in this in­stance.

His "sixth question" asks if the evidence of who is the last priest will be strong enough to convince the Truth groups and Babylon. That evidence certainly wasn't strong enough when Brother Johnson was here; they didn't believe him – and, from the evidence at our disposal, they believe it even less now. That is why R. G. Jolly is making al­most no progress in winning Great Company members to his battle cry. Many of those in the other groups know him from way back; and we know from personal conversation with some of them that they have far greater respect for the Master of the House (Brother Johnson) than they now hold for R. G. Jolly. And, as for Big Babylon, does J. W. Krewson think it is more important for them to know who the last Saint will be than for them to understand the High Calling! Or is it more important to know about the last Saint than to know about our Lord's Parousia? Or to know man is not a dual being? Or to "refuse Him that speaketh", as they have steadfastly refused to do with both Messengers? Or to know this is the "day of their visitation"?

His "seventh question" deals with the "little stewardship Truth of the Good le­vites." In our October 1957 paper we treated of this in detail, so it is not necessary to repeat it here. For us to name positively any individual now as a Saint, we would consider ourselves ridiculously presumptuous. Note what Brother Johnson says about it in E-7-327 (top): "As yet, none of those who have not revolutionized knows whether he is among such" (i.e., among the Saints). If they themselves do not know it, why should this writer or any one else expect to know it? Nor did R. G. Jolly know of any such revolutionism in many of those who still held on to their hopes October 27, 1950 – yet he was willing enough to revolutionize against this clear Epiphany teaching, and did do so the very night after the funeral in his first public statement to the brethren.

Coming back to Matt. 13:52 – "every Scribe instructed into the kingdom": Brother George Matthews was the brother who first saw the Truth on Gen. 15:8-10, so we have the assurance that he was one time a member of the Little Flock. The same for Brother Shull of Columbus, Ohio, who brought forth the Truth on the seven vials of Rev. 16. We mention these two brothers because we were intimately acquainted with them early in the Epiphany, often served on Convention programs and other services with them while the three of us were still with the Society. Many is the time we walked to and from meetings with Bro. Matthews when we were neighbors in Dayton, Ohio. He came into the Epiphany Truth, was a member of the Los Angeles Class until his death in 1954 (if we are properly informed, as we cannot say this of our own knowledge). At last reports Brother Shull was still living in Columbus, Ohio; and, while we realize that once having been of the Very Elect does not prove them so now, we want something more than a mere fractured type to prove them otherwise. On several occasions we discussed these brothers with Brother Johnson, because we both had known them so well, Brother Shull being one of those in Columbus who helped Brother Johnson into Present Truth. On none of those occasions did Brother Johnson say he had any evidence to prove either of them out of the Body of Christ, so we would now ask J. W. Krewson – or any one else – what evidence they have for such, aside from their fractured type.

It seems most apropos right here to quote a paragraph from col. 2, page 11 of the January 1927 Present Truth:

"That the Church will not be delivered before Armageddon is manifest, among other passages, from Pa. 46, which teaches that not only throughout Armageddon, but also at least in part of the anarchy, will the Church be in the earth. Verses 2-9 show that not only the kingdoms (mountains) will be overthrown in the Revolution (sea), but that society (earth) will be removed and melted (burned by symbolic fire which takes place in the first part of Anarchy, "the fire", with the destruction of the headless beast) while the Church is here. Seemingly one of the priests, the Epiphany Messenger, will be here until about the end of the entire trouble in order to direct the work of the Great Company and Youthful Worthies, Hence the Scriptures disprove the deliverance of the Church before Armageddon. We marvel that, in the face of so clear a passage, interpreted as above for us by our Pastor, brethren will allow Satan so complete­ly to befuddle them as Bro. Adam has on the passages that he cites to prove his error that the Church will be delivered before Armageddon. Surely it can only be understood when we consider that they are in Azazel's hands, and therefore can not think clearly while in that condition."

The foregoing is a clear Scripture explained by both Star Members, which J. W. Krewson would now set aside with his Seven Questions. It is clear enough that R. G. Jolly revo­lutionized against the above in his first official public appearance in Philadelphia the night of Brother Johnson's funeral October 27, 1950 – and still continues to do so ­thus proving him to be in Azazel's hands, the same as stated about Adam Rutherford; and J. W. Krewson joins him in this error, just as he does on the quasi-elect consecrated, John's Beheading, etc. We have also produced other clear Scriptures in previous writings 1 Thes. 4:17, Zech. 8:10, Judges 16:30, Matt. 5:13-14, 1 Sam. 31:6, etc. Let J. W. Krew­son reconcile his Seven Questions with these clear Bible passages and the clear explana­tions of the Star Members – if he can; and we say the same for R. G. Jolly and all others who accept their leading. As for ''me and my house", we shall abide by the clear Scrip­tures; and we shall allow others to be influenced by seven foolish questions and other perversions as their choice and spiritual condition may determine.

Indeed, we are realizing most acutely the force of Psa. 91:6, "the pestilence that walketh in darkness" – in the Epiphany night – but the promise is still sure and steadfast for all the fully faithful, "It shall not come nigh thee". Therein let us rejoice and give thanks unto our God, for He is good, for His mercy endureth forever!

Sincerely your brother,

John J. Hoefle, Pilgrim


Letter of General Interest

Dear Brother Hoefle: – Grace and peace!

Thanks for the article dealing with R.G.J. and J.W. Krewson matters. Truly, you have, by the Lord’s help, tape-measured them both. The Lord has evidently spared me from the Krewson errors, for I only received one of the first issues, and that did not appeal to me correct in teaching or in spirit. Now he is being manifested as a wrongdoer of the first order, as one who is thoroughly deceived by the Adversary and being used by him mightily to the injury of many who are not sufficiently alert. O, how we do more than ever need to ''watch and pray" in this trialsome period!

We much appreciate your February article as well as this last issue for March. Surely 1 Cor. 15:58 and Heb. 6:10 are very comforting and encouraging, as also are the two following Scripture texts – Jude 24-25 and Isa. 54:17.

May the Lord's rich blessings rest daily upon you and grant you needed "grace and strength" as well as "Joy and peace" in His service is our prayer for you and Sister Hoefle, as well as all those with you. Assuring you of our love and prayers as the ............ Ecclesia, I am your Brother in His Service ............ England

The enclosed list of names and addresses will be useful to compare with your own list.