My dear Brethren:
Grace and peace through our Beloved Master! In accordance with our promise of March 27, we now submit the concluding comments on
“The Case of John. J. Hoefle” Reviewed
On page 27 of the March Present Truth, R. G. Jolly discusses the “Time order of Antitype differs from Type”. He says “if we view it more specifically the sprinkling of the blood of the Lord’s Goat, and not the High Priest’s dealing with Azazel’s Goat, is the last thing the High Priest does before removing his antitypical linen garments.” Is it possible he is purposely trying to confuse his readers here? The sprinkling of the blood of the Lord’s Goat types something done in Heaven; whereas, the delivery of Azazel’s Goat to the Fit Man is something done here on earth. This is so elemental to any one who has just a casual understanding of Present Truth that it certainly didn’t occur to us as necessary to offer detailed explanation on such a self-evident premise.
R. G. Jolly then shows his own mental confusion on this whole subject (of which he accuses us with his usual profusion of words) by injecting the garments of glory and beauty into the discussion. We never once made mention of those garments, because they have no place whatever in this picture. Is he trying to dispute that the linen garments type the sacrificing work of the Gospel‑Age Priesthood? And, if, as he himself emphatically contends, the last Priest is now gone, then is not the sacrificing time of the Gospel‑Age Priesthood a thing of the past? In Lev. 16:23‑24 we are told “Aaron shall put off the linen garments... shall wash his flesh with water in the holy place (the Court).” Thus, it is indisputable that there was a time in the type when Aaron stood naked, not wearing any garments at all. How much time elapses in the antitype between the change of garments we do not know; nor will we be likely to know it until the whole performance is completed. We have no thought of disputing that the donning of the garments of glory and beauty in Heaven and the beginning of blessing the people (which blessing will be continuous throughout the Millennium) are substantially synchronous.
Nor do we have any thought whatever of disputing that all the Great Company and Youthful Worthies must first finish their course in death before the World’s High Priest can don the garments to “bless the people,” since Christ’s merit must all be returned before any of it can be available for the blessing of the people. Therefore, it may properly be said that all three of these things – return of the merit, donning the garments, and blessing of the people – are practically synchronous. But what does any of this have to do with the last earthly work of the High Priest? Its injection by R.G. Jolly into the discussion is simply confusing the real issue – the delivery of the last Truth section of Azazel’s Goat into the hands of the Fit Man. In passing, we offer the reflection to keep down further unnecessary argument, that so long as there was even one Priest here on earth, it would not be proper to say the Priesthood (this side the veil or the other side of it) had removed the linen garments of sacrifice. And, if, as some still stoutly contend, there are still Priests on earth, then it would still be wrong to say so.
Here it may be well to set out a point which had escaped our notice, but which observing brethren directed to our attention, re two statements in Brother Gohlke’s letter at the top of page 35, col. 1, as follows:
“Brother Johnson rejoiced to inform the brethren that he (Note: R.G.Jolly) is faithfully seeking to cleanse himself” (in 1942).
The above is certainly a clear and definite statement that R. G. Jolly was not cleansed in 1942; but notice, then, how Brother Gohlke contradicts the above statement right in the following paragraph:
“The reinstatement into service of the Good Levite leaders... is clear evidence that so far as they were concerned, they were being dealt with by the Priesthood as cleansed Levites.”
The two statements foregoing very clearly contradict each other; yet they are presented to their readers by the two of them as “Present Truth.”
On page 29 under “Other Falsehoods Exposed”, he says we misquoted him in our statement: “You said you would rather die than accept Brother Krewson as a teacher.” Quite a few others who were at that meeting received the same impression we did; but we certainly wish to do R. G. Jolly no injustice. If he now denies stating it the way we understood him to say it, we offer no further argument against him. BUT, that still leaves unanswered the question we offered in connection with our statement:
“When you accepted the errors you did accept from him and fed them to the unsuspecting sheep, were you heading toward death then?”
Perhaps he will now give us an answer to that question.
Coming now to “The Christ’s Thousand‑year reign” on page 30, we wish to admit a blunder – a stupid blunder – when we injected 1 Cor. 15:24 into our statement. We agree with Brother Russell and Brother Johnson that the “end” here is at the beginning of the Little Season. The Millennial Age extends from 1874 to 2874. To deny this, one would be forced to deny the Second Presence of our Lord, which we certainly have no thought of doing.
However, aside from the above, R. G. Jolly again injects profusion of words and new issues, one of which is his oft‑repeated “thousand‑year Mediatorial reign”, as he states it on pages 30 and 31. In Vol. E‑6, page 685, Brother Johnson says:
“The Mediator is the Head and Body; and therefore the New Covenant cannot be made or inaugurated until the humanity of the entire Mediator is dead.” Thus, the only part of the Mediator that will have lived for a full 1,000 years is the individual Christ, although in no sense of the word will even He serve as such for 1,000 years in the Millennial blessing of mankind in general; and in no sense can it be said that the mediation covers 1,000 years after inauguration of the New Covenant. There can be no mediatorial work between God and men until the Body of Christ is complete. Also, we fully agree that the mediation will cease in 2874 when the Little Season begins. But, at Philadelphia last September he was discussing “the (the Body members) lived and reigned”. Now, note what Brother Russell says in 1912 on page 117 of Questions and Answers:
Question: – “Is it scriptural to say that the glorified members of the Church have reigned at any time up to the present?”
Answer: – “No! They have not reigned at any tine... The reign of Christ did not in any sense begin in the past.” (i.e. prior to 1912)
Then note the Berean Comments on Rev. 11:17: “And hast reigned .... In a sense from 1878; actually, from 1914.”
In view of the foregoing clear statements, how can he possibly label what we said about the matter as “new light”? Can it be possible that his own mind is so befuddled on this question, or is he in desperation wilfully falsifying to his readers? Also, in Vol. E‑15, page 210, Brother Johnson says:
“Therefore, the `end’ of 1 Cor. 15:23 is the end of the millennium — the reign of Christ over the earth — in the narrow sense of that word.”
And on page 211: “We see that they (the enemies) are not persons, but things.”
One of the words translated “end” in the New Testament is “sunteleia”, which means “full end”; as in Matt. 13:39 where Jesus said “the harvest is the sunteleia (full end) of the world.” But in 1 Cor. 15:24 the word there translated “end” is “telos”, which simply means “end” – and not the full end. What conclusion shall we draw from this? Simply that Paul in 1 Cor. 15:24 was not discussing the “full end”, but merely the “end” of what he was explaining. And what was he explaining? Why, the enemies, the last of which,is “death” (the Adamic death with all its concomitants). Therefore, after 2874 no one will longer suffer the Adamic death; rather, only the Second Death will be operative after that.
In passing, it may be well to notice here, too, that another thing will come to its telos (end) at 2874; namely, the Judgment Day of Acts 17:31. At the end of 2874 God will know the hearts of each sheep and each Goat – just as He knew each Little Flock and each Great Company member in September 1914. But, the Sheep and the Goats will not know that about each other, any more than did the Little Flock and the Great Company know each other at September 1914. And, just as there has followed an Epiphany season here to “make manifest the counsels of hearts,” so the Little Season will do for the Sheep and the Goats. But it is unthinkable to believe that the Christ and the Great Company will betake themselves from earth’s scene at the beginning of the Little Season. Why? Because without their interference Satan and his hosts would almost certainly immediately destroy the Worthies and many, if not all, of the Millennial Sheep. And we know of a certainty that “none shall hurt nor destroy” any of those Sheep. R. G. Jolly grudgingly admits the substance of what we say here in his statement at the top of page 31, col. 1 – “The Church possibly also (will share) in the pronouncing and inflicting of the final rewards and punishments.” Inasmuch as those “final rewards and punishments” will occupy the Little Season, which will end in 2914, just why should he take several pages to criticize our statement – “Thus, the Scripture, `They lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years’, means exactly what it says – ALL of them living and reigning the full thousand years as a complete entity?”
Coming now to the “Great Company Forever higher than Y.W.’s” on page 23, col. 1: R. G. Jolly suggests the reference in ours of September 15, 1955 probably came from Vol. E‑16 – which indeed it did. Then he proceeds to make quite some capital because we did not quote more of what Brother Johnson said about it on page 200, says we “stooped” low for not doing so. Did Brother Johnson dispute himself in the part he now quotes? Certainly not! In fact, when R. G. Jolly leaves out the vital part of what we quoted, may it not be that he himself is “stooping” pretty low! In substance, here is what Brother Johnson says:
“All three of these groups of antitypical Levites (Great Company and Ancient & Youthful Worthies) may be on the same plane as spirit beings... Again it is possible they will be on three different planes of spirit being... but as said above, the Scriptures being silent on this matter, we must not teach it as a matter of faith.”
Take particular notice that the true Pastor and Teacher clearly states that “The Scriptures being silent on this matter, we must not teach it as a matter of faith.” All we did was to quote the true Pastor and Teacher — who plainly said he didn’t know, because he could find no Scripture to prove his generalized opinion. But the self‑appointed Pastor and Teacher is absolutely sure of it – although he does not produce any Scripture to prove his certainty either. Let him do so, and we may readily agree with him.
He quotes copiously from Vol. E‑4, which was published in 1938, whereas Vol. E‑18 (mis‑numbered Vol. 16 by the Editor of the Present Truth) appeared in 1954. Even though the statement that appears in 1954 was repeatedly stated in prior years by Brother Johnson, he must still have believed it when he prepared Vol. 18; so it must be taken as his last statement on the subject. If that be true, then why go back to 1938? And why stop at 1938; why not go back 16 years more to 1922, when Brother Johnson was teaching it was wrong for Youthful Worthies even to repeat the Lord’s Prayer, because he said they should not address God in prayer as their “Father”? Or, why not go back to 1903, when Brother Russell said, “The blessing and power of the Lord accompanied David’s anointing in some manner — just how we may not understand – enabling him to progress in knowledge”? Brother Russell said he could not understand the operation of the Holy Spirit in Worthies; and Brother Johnson also had a very vague understanding of it in the early days of the Epiphany. (Along the same line, Brother Russell originally taught the Gershonites type the saved world in the Millennium, although we see clearly now how wrong that was.) But advancing Truth and close personal association with Youthful Worthies gradually enabled Brother Johnson to enlarge his teachings concerning them, so that he eventually appointed them as Pilgrims, etc., with full authority to address the General Church all over the world. In later years he frequently said that some Youthful Worthies had a clearer and more comprehensive knowledge of the Truth than even many of the Priests in the Epiphany Movement. And he saw, too, that some of them were far superior in their characters to many New Creatures in the Epiphany Movement.
Brother Johnson stated there is a chance that all three Classes may occupy the position left vacant by the logos. It has also been suggested that there are now two “mansions” without occupants – that formerly occupied by the Logos and the other by Lucifer – and that the Worthies will occupy one of these, and the Great Company the other. But there is no proof for this, and it is stated here merely as an observation. However, if it should prove eventually to be the truth, then the Worthies will very likely occupy the “mansion” vacated by the Logos; and the Great Company will have that left vacant by Lucifer. There is another thought: The Great Company are usually referred to in the scriptures as “Daughters”; whereas, the Youthful Worthies are now prospective “Sons”, and will eventually be actual “Sons.” Of the four ruling classes, the Great Company are specifically styled “daughters” and “handmaids” in the Bible.
It should be considered, too, that all during the Gospel Age the crown‑lost leaders – once they became separated from Star Members – were never blessed with advancing Truth; in fact, they almost invariably garbled, juggled, and contaminated with error even those stewardship doctrines that had been committed to them by the Star Members. And we have the clear evidence that this same thing has gone on during the Epiphany. Every one of the Sects in Little Babylon has lost more or less of the Truth as committed to them by the Star Members after they became separated from those Star Members; and the present leaders in the LHMM are no exception to this statement. Just a little reflection should cause us to realize it would be contrary to God’s Justice to bless with advancing Truth any crown‑lost leaders who were of the “Measurably Faithful” during the Gospel Age, when there was standing right alongside such perverters some “Faithful” members of the Little Flock. It should be noted, too, that Brother Johnson wrote only of the Great Company as “The Measurably Faithful”. Why? Because the Scriptures clearly designate the Little Flock, Ancient and Youthful Worthies as fully faithful in God’s sight. Of Abraham, the Father of the Faithful, it is written: “He believed God, and it was counted to him for righteousness.” In fairness, it should here be stated that some Great Company members have contributed elucidation and elaboration, as well as some advancing Truth, while they were under the tutelage and restraint of Star Members – although we cannot know how much of refining correction was contributed even to those teachings by their superiors – the Star Members.
There are some other Scriptures, as well as a certain type, which throw considerable light on the status of the Great Company and the Youthful Worthies; and these we expect to expound in due course, D.v.
On page 21 R. G. Jolly says “J.J.H. ASCRIBES EVIL MOTIVES”: Is this R. G. Jolly the same person who rudely threw “self will” at those who could not immediately agree with him that the last Saint was gone? And is the one who “ascribed evil motives” then now crying about being judged by “the words from his own mouth”? Also, he quotes a few words from our letter of January 18, 1954 with his customary jugglery, even while he is accusing us of “stooping” in our quotation of Vol. E‑16 – although our quotation does not in any way change Brother Johnson’s thought; whereas, his few words put quite a different light on what we wrote him in 1954. Here is some of what we wrote him:
“At the very outset in 1950, had you been motivated by a proper humility and just very ordinary ethics, it seems to me you should have issued a statement in the Present Truth:
(1) This is what has come under my supervision; and
(2) This is what I intend to do with it.
In more than three years now you have said nothing whatever of your intentions regarding Brother Johnson’s writings on Revelation. Why? Can it be those writings contain something you do not want the brethren to know – maybe something like Brother Johnson’s comments on Rev. 19:1 & 6 agreeing with those of Brother Russell, the publication of which would make a shambles of much of your program? Certainly, those writings are not your personal property, so I ask that you now give a clear statement immediately as to what we may expect regarding them.
“Also, I suggest that you consult a competent attorney to determine your legal rights and your legal obligations under your Trusteeship; then resolve to abide by the laws of the land, as well as the laws of God.........
“Your Flying Saucer tract is an unprovable guess. Science has satisfactorily explained about 90% of them; and last summer the Canadian Government officially announced it had been responsible for many of them, some of them at a speed of almost one‑half mile per second. The remainder of the Saucers may be evil spirits; and they may not be. I do not know it for a fact; neither do you know it for a fact. Therefore, your tract must be rated as a speculation. Yet, in your ninety‑minute sales talk at the Chicago Convention last October 31 (Note: which sales talk R.G.J. began without even a hymn or prayer), you had the effrontery to state that the solid proven truth of Brother Johnson’s tracts – the truth that abides in the minds of all of us without the slightest doubt – has become “timeworn and threadbare,” but your speculation is something “up to the minute” with public appeal. (Billy Graham has great public appeal, too.)”
Back in 1937‑38, when our present Executive Trustee was trapped in his Revolutionism, he very quickly manifested at least an outward repentance, for which we admired him over the years, because it certainly gave every outward indication of a proper and truly repentant spirit. Therefore, we at first felt he would quickly receive our well‑meant observations and corrections, many of which were given him verbally “in the spirit of meekness” in the years 1951‑53. The words we have since used against him have become sharp and direct; and they will become even mores if conditions require it. There are yet some terribly crushing proofs, in addition to what has already been said, that will be forthcoming in due course, D.v., if there is not soon some evidence of “godly repentance” and faithfulness in his office of Executive Trustee. But we wish to offer the observation that this last Present Truth is a limited step in the right direction – vile though it be in its many falsehoods, perversions and jugglery – because R. G. Jolly has finally come out into the open, which gives us a chance to meet him openly – something we could not do against his “whispering.” His last paper does indeed contain at least one true statement when he says it is “especially painful” for him to come out “publicly” with this matter, as we can readily realize he would have much preferred to continue to use his choice “secret weapon” against us. His being forced a step up the ladder of respectability by the Lord encourages us to continue in the hope he is still in the Lord’s Blessed Household and may yet “wash his robes” and find his eternal place among those “servants before the Throne” with “palms of Victory” for whom “God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes.” This continues to be our prayer for him.
It seems expedient to make this additional observation regarding Brother Johnson’s funeral: A number of criticisms have come to us over the years following that service that it was much too short – the blame for such brevity having been placed upon this writer; so it now becomes necessary to record that R. G. Jolly had complete charge of all funeral arrangements, including the five minutes each allotted to him and to Bro. Gavin, as well as confining the speakers only to the Pilgrims present that day, and to none others. When we arrived in Philadelphia the Wednesday evening before the service on Friday, October 27, all arrangements had been completed, including selection of the casket, and the time to be consumed for the complete ceremony at the Tabernacle.
We pray that all of you may read what he says and what we say with an open mind in an honest effort to determine the Truth for the Truth’s sake “without partiality” (sectarian partisanship) in a sincere effort to receive the “mind of the Lord” in this most‑distressing situation. We have been informed our “bad spirit” has been R.G. Jolly’s excuse for his failure to answer us in the Present Truth (altho he discussed us far and wide in his “whisperings”). This is the identical charge used by That Evil Servant against Brother Johnson’s exposures of his errors and sins to prevent his deluded followers from reading Brother Johnson’s writings. We hope and pray that his change of tactics may now help to free him from the clutches of Azazel, and will enable all God’s people to develop that true “holiness without which no man shall see the Lord”.
Sincerely your brother,
John J. Hoefle, Pilgrim