OLD LETTERS FROM AUSTRALIA:
By Ted & Kay Arvig
To our much loved friends, both saints and servants of God:
Be not afraid to read this message. There will be no accusing of individuals, no tattling, no exchanging of railing for railing, no effort to draw anyone to our side or any conflict for we believe such is not a mark of the righteous. Psalm 37: It is written because we know there some who have heard twisted or false reports about our attitude, and we want our loved ones to know where we stand. We cannot agree that any worker or saint is abiding in the doctrine of Christ (II Jon. l0) if he or she has part in putting out of fellowship, whom we know and love, who were once put in by Christ, for it is only the place of our Lord and not ours to do any cutting down. Luke 13: 9. Because of this we know that some of our loved ones will misunderstand us and will believe it is because we have not sacrificed enough, or have not been teachable and meek under the workers, or have not attended gospel meetings enough, or haven’t studied the Holy Scripture enough. But that you may know we have had communion with God and Christ our Lord in giving much time to study of His Word, and that our only doctrine is Christ’s teaching, you may be the judge:
Before we go farther, let us make it clear that we believe the complete sacrifice is just as necessary as you believe, but that it must come out of love or it stinks in God's nostrils. We believe that meekness and teachableness and humility on our part are also necessary in living Christ, but they must not hinder our love toward our brothers and sisters, for Love must come first.
What does the Scripture say? Does it say "God so desired the service of the world for himself that He gave His son to show us how to sacrifice and serve, and to warn us that we will go to Hell if we do not", or does it say "God so loved the world that He gave His only son that whosoever believes in Him shall never perish,” (showing God set the example by first loving and then giving, so we might be touched by love and so moved to give.) John 3:16.
Does the scripture say "This is the whole duty of man, to fear the workers who have sacrificed all, and to keep their commandments," or does it say "This is the whole duty of man, to fear God and keep His commandments”? Ecc. 12:13.
Did Jesus say "The Kings of the Gentiles exercise lordship and authority over them, and ye shall be the same," or did He say "but ye shall not be so?” Luke 22:25
What then are His commandments that we are to keep? Did Jesus say "This is the first and greatest commandment, that ye serve God with all your life, with all your sacrifice, with all obedience and the second is like unto it that ye serve and obey the ones who have the rule over you,'' or did he say ''This is the first and greatest commandment that ye love God ** and the second is like unto it, thou shalt love thy neighbor * and on these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets”? Mat. 21:38. If all laws and prophesies must first come out of these two commandments, how then can we be sure we first love?
Did Jesus say “Yes, you may be sure you love me if you fully enjoy the fellowship of hearty ones, of the meetings, the conventions, and seek to bring others into it, "but you don't have to put yourself out to help the certain few who have been brought in, but are weak, partly blind, sickly, - let them alone lest you catch their disease, God will take care of them," or did He say "As ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me, and shall go away to everlasting punishment"? Mat. 25:45.
Did John say “If a man says he loves God, and seems to love some of his brothers and sisters but not others, he is a true man," or did he say "If a man say ‘I love God’ and hateth his brother, he is a liar"? I Jon. 4:20.
Did Paul say “Those who love the brethren shall quickly pass on hear say, even before it is proved true, to warn the others, and shall accuse and judge one another of what appears to be wrong, and shall suspicion one another, at all times,” or did he say “Love worketh no i11 to his neighbor”? Rom. 13:10.
Who then are our neighbors, and who is neighborly to us? Are they the ones who merely look upon us when we are accused, when we’ve been beaten, stripped and left so that others are too embarrassed to notice us? Are they the ones who then pass by on the other side, going on to enjoyable fellowship, forgetting the one is not able to help himself to get back into that fellowship as a clothed man whose nakedness is covered from accusers? Or would it be the one who before enjoying fellowship himself, stops to do all he can to the very limit of his ability, to bind up the wounds, and clothe, and feed the unfortunate one, so he can again lift up his head without embarrassment among others? Was it the priest who did the kindly thing, or was it just a Samaritan? Luke 10:36
Did Jesus say the disciples will be known by the fact that they worship in groups where the church is in the home and the preacher is without a home, or did he say “By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, that ye have love one to another”? Jon. 13:35.
Did Paul say "Even tho’ I love God and love my brethren but have not sacrificed in the way some do, I am nothing”, or did he say “Even tho’ I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and tho’ I give my body to be burned, but have not love, I am nothing"? 1 Cor. 13.
Did Jesus say "Forbid anyone who is not a servant of God making the complete sacrifice as we do, if he dares try to cast out devilish things among us,” Or did He say: “Forbid him not, for he that is not against us is on our part"? Mark 9:39.
Of the servant who was afraid to do anything but bury his talent, for fear he’d not be keeping his right place or making the right move, did his Lord say "Well done! At least you were humble and did not expose my hardness,'' or did he say “Thou wicked and slothful servant!”? Mat. 25:26.
Did Jesus choose for the disciple who should lead in feeding His sheep after His departure, a man who had been the most virtuous of the twelve, the most self controlled, gave the best sermons, sacrificed the most as far as never knowing what it was to have a wife or a home, or did He choose Peter, a man who made many mistakes after beginning to walk with Christ, who knew what it meant to be forgiven for foolish blunders, who knew what it was to have a wife, and thereby had learned natural lessons of love and forgiveness, so he could fully understand and show mercy to even the least of the brethren, either saints or servants? Before putting this responsibility upon him, was Jesus most concerned about his qualities of willingness to sacrifice, or of his love? Did He not ask even three times “Lovest thou me?” Jon. 21:15, 16, 17.
There is an old saying: “Fools rush in where Angels fear to tread”. Such will be said of any who seek to do anything about the lack of love among us, but it is a comfort to know that Jesus quickly forgave Peter when he rushed in and cut off an ear, but Jesus said if we do not do what we can even for the least of the brethren that is what we will go to eternal punishment for, - we can be forgiven for trying and blundering, but not forgiven for not trying. “As ye did it not-” Mat. 25:45.
Now are we to treat a person who appears to be a true shepherd by the sheep’s clothing, the outward evidence of sacrifice, but is not proving his or her love as an example of the right fruit the right doctrine of Christ? Are we to bid him God speed, or are we not even to allow him in our house? II Jon. 10. Jesus said Mat. 7:15, beware of wolves in sheep's clothing. The wool is typical of sacrifice to others, as we can see by outward marks, but did Jesus say they’d be known by that? He said they’d be known by their fruits, that which comes from the heart and shows only in deeds. Where is sacrifice mentioned as a fruit of the spirit, as listed in Gal. 5:22? Is not love listed first?
We may quickly tell whether we are on the side of truth or on the side that leads to death by asking ourselves the questions in I John 3:17, 18, 19. When sheep must be corrected we will know the true shepherd by the way he does it, as in II Tim. 2:24, Gal. 6:1. If anything else but love is our first and greatest purpose in all we do or do not do, then Christ died for us in vain and we stand among the Pharisees who crucified Him because they preferred to give a loveless sacrifice. If anything else but love is our first and greatest purpose in all we do or do not do, then Christ died for us in vain and we stand among the Pharisees who crucified Him because they preferred to give a loveless sacrifice.
Does it say in John 4:25 that our worship should be measured by the number of extra meetings we attend other than the regular breaking of bread on Sunday mornings, or does it say the Father seeketh such as worship Him in spirit and in truth? Is it not possible that the real sincere communion with God in spirit can be neglected while attending all the meetings far and wide? Are not our fruits, such as mentioned in Gal. 5:19, - 22, evidence of which kind of worship is really taking place? How then can we judge one another by the number of gospel or midweek meetings we attend? And even where two or three are met together in an informal way, is this not taking care of “Neglect not the assembling of yourselves together”, if it is done in Christ’s name?
Jesus said “I am the door”. If God is love, and God and His son are one, then Christ is love. If Christ is love then the door is love. If we entered into the fold by the door of love, - by being first touched by His love, and so moved to love in return, then we are true sheep. But if we entered in by feeling that if we sacrificed personal gain in some ways, we would gain more personal gain in other ways (such as feeling we are on our way to heaven, or such as prestige of being looked up to as a worker,) then we entered in not by the door of love and are a thief and a robber. John 10:1. Then is when the trouble enters into the fold. It is these who tattle and whine if somebody else is not sacrificing just as they are, or if someone seems to be getting a better deal than they are. It isn’t the true sheep that tattle and accuse and point out individuals in a complaining way, for their service comes out of love, not out of seeking gain.
What does John 10:12 say about the shepherds when the sheep are scattered and crying for help? Does the true shepherd stay away silent, ignoring letters or verbal pleas for help? "He that is not the shepherd whose own the sheep are not, seeth the wolf coming and leaveth the sheep and fleeth.” Is not silence the same?
Before a child is born and a mother has not learned to love it, if she were forewarned of all the illness the child would have, of all the sleep she would sacrifice, of all the comforts of her own that would have to be forgotten, she would not want it. But once the child is born and she has learned to love it, she will go to no end of sacrifice of her own sleep, food, comforts, to nurse that child to good health. If the child becomes ill, does she drop it in horror and leave it, thinking only of the shame of having an unwhole child in the family, and of her own danger of catching the disease? No! She will never leave that child until it is either well or dead. All she asks for her reward is the child’s welfare. Does she think the child was selfish to demand so much more attention than the healthy children? Does she love it any less? Why? Because love is its own reward. It is the same with our love for God’s son. His love should be our reward, “We love Him because He first loved us.” Love begets love.
Why then labor for souls if when they are once born into the kingdom, they are to be dropped at the first sign of illness? Would it not be like dropping a baby on the pavement, to let it be born into the family and then let it find out that the love is not there as it was first led to believe it was and then ignore its cries for help from the hurt of that bump, and silent to its pleas in letters or in other ways?
Why should we bring lost souls to hear the workers when they have done these evil things to ones who have already been brought in? Had we not better make sure first that we have a fit place in which to bring them, before exposing them to such unnecessary heartaches?
These questions and their answers should make very clear why we stand where we do, and why we do as we do, so that none need misunderstand, unless they choose to have it so.
Ted & Kay Aarvig
NOTE: After Ted died, Kay married again and became Kay Curtis Arvig Downs. She passed away July, 1993.
By Willis Crane
815 W. Wade St.
El Reno, Oklahoma
“Mine answer to them who do examine me” – 1 Cor. 9:3
Our attention has been called by the biography of the late William Irvine, to the gospel he preached and afterward repudiated. This man is said to have denounced the hired clergy synagogue system, and declared himself to be the anointed of the Lord, claiming no denominational name. He gathered around him a few friends who in an effort to contend for the faith which was once delivered to the saints and carry out the N.T. ministry, sold their possessions and went forth into the world, with what they called the Gospel of Jesus. During the past 55 years, since this movement started, many in many countries have listened, believed and accepted their faith, but there has been a division among them; in fact it is now claimed this Wm. Irvine was sadly lacking morally, mentally and spiritually and as a result was rejected by his own people, went to Jerusalem in exile and died there. Others who were instrumental in removing him from his place of authority became the leaders of this movement. It is now claimed that some of them deny ever having known him, or that what they preach is anything other than a continuation of that which the apostles preached from the beginning.
Some of us who have embraced this faith and have preached it to others are conscious of the fact that some of our leaders have been a disappointment. Some of them, in order to hold their place as overseers, have used dictatorial methods, and have resorted to purging out their “enemies”. This has resulted in a reaction and retaliation, and accusations have not only been brought against them but against what they teach and what we believe.
There is a possibility of others heading this resentment move so that we will be divided into two definite factions, and how are we to know if that would not be starting right over again to only come eventually to the same sad end. The question for us to answer is: What are we going to do?, and we may as well first take a little review before we decide that. Is there not some way that we can know if we are saved at all or not? In answering these questions we must resort to what is written, for Jesus often did this, and He said: “It must needs be that the scripture be fulfilled”. He also said: “If any man will be a doer of the word, he shall know of the doctrine whether it be of God or man”. Now, do we know what doctrine we have believed, and does it agree with what is written – or have we just followed cunningly devised fables? If what has been reported is true (that our faith is in men flesh and blood), we may as well conclude that our faith is in vain, and all we have done has gone for nothing.
It is true that God has always used human instrumentality to get people saved, but if we never see past that instrument, we see nothing and we get nothing. We must receive that faith which would cause us to DARE to be a Daniel, a Stephen, a Paul. These stood ALONE, and their faith was not daunted, tho no one stood with them. Daniel said: “There is a God in Heaven”. Stephen said: “I see the heaven opened and Jesus standing at the right hand of God”. Paul said: “I am persuaded that He is able to keep that which I have committed to His trust”. Let us not forget this: These men whose lives were at stake knew Him in whom they believed and also knew Him whom he had sent. This is life eternal.
What about our friends whom we have known, who have lived and died in this faith; are they lost? Because others who in times past helped them, did since get wrong? If this could be true of those who were doers of the word, then who could be saved? Who has anything to offer us? What is right? What is wrong? If we can’t put our confidence in God and His word, then the ideal life would be to get everything we can here and now, either by hook or by crook. Man must have faith in something. The Ideological faith in the collectivist idea makes Communists capable of achievement and sacrifices that surpass normal human strength; only faith that is in no way dependent on material events can resist this ideology. This faith, this conviction, must inspire us to risk our very lives for the ultimate values of freedom, personal dignity, the lives of other men, and the truth of the Gospel of Jesus. These cannot be abandoned for these are not mere worldly philosophy! We must emphasize spiritual values rather than a high standard of living and the expectation of future well being. We cannot but promise those who are out for money and who carry the $ sign in their eye their teaching is as ludicrous as the movie stars council is on how to be happily married, or as would be the instruction on how to be beautiful, by a circus clown, or freak. They whose hearts are set on being great may have gifts or talent and ability such as oratory, with nice sounding words and fair speeches, hold large audiences spellbound and get their praises, but they can never hold one true friend, for friendship is built on faith, confidence, trust and loyalty. True friendship can not be obtained through flattery, nor can it be held through fear, or for favor, or bought for money. It is kin to love, in that it is a mutual thing. To have a friend, I must be a friend. The unnoticed wife and mother who has learned this is of more value to the world than the greatest orator or movie star who ever lived. So the church, as the Bride of Christ, must learn this lesson or all is vain. When we have learned this, then our purpose and prayers touch the heart of God and we are assured of having His favour and know that He will not let us down and in the long run we cannot lose.
We do not know what became of the man whom God used to give Paul his message; that wasn’t the all-important thing; it was the message that Paul never forgot and it was when he heard this message he got his blind eyes open. “God has chosen you, that you may see that Just One, hear the word of His mouth, know His will, and be His witness”. And when Paul was facing martyrdom, testimony was that he had been true to that heavenly vision, that is the thing that will honor God and God will honor. We believe that Ananias was a man of honor, but God may use the most wicked men to obtain praise and honor to His name from others. At one time speaking through a dumb ass, He forbade the madness of the prophet, but neither the dumb ass nor the prophet will get any reward for speaking the word of God, though God uses it for good.
Our faith in God can be like the flag of our country; when fighting the enemy the soldiers prize that flag, to take it down means surrender—it means “I give up”. Whether it is up or down makes the difference between freedom or slavery. When men go down who were upholding the flag, others step up to take their place. So it is with men going out to the world with the gospel of Jesus; the gospel is never lost if they go down. There is no indispensable man: God can get along very well without any of us.
When I listened to the gospel, I saw that God had a plan of salvation for the sinner, a plan of worship for the Christian and a plan of service for the preacher, and it made no difference as far as right and wrong were concerned whether or not the sinner, worshipper OR PREACHER knew and did it. I saw Jesus as the pattern and example and I knew that one example was worth a thousand arguments. I knew that I was a sinner and I knew that I should do what I could to be saved. Thru repentance, I received forgiveness, and with forgiveness came salvation which was proved by love begotten in me, for righteousness and truth—and a hate for iniquity and lies. If those men who preached to me turned out bad and became enemies of the Truth, should I just look at them and say I have been fooled? — or should I be obedient to what I have come to see and know? It was disheartening when Benedict Arnold betrayed his country to the enemy, but the other soldiers did not lay down their arms of war and pull down the flag and give up, and they won the war without him. They were fighting a cause that was far more important than the whole American Army and the fact had to be pointed out to them by such a man as Patrick Henry, whose words are still on the tongue of every schoolboy: “Give me liberty or give me death”, but with us, as with soldiers of war, there are always two choices and only one we can make.
It is voluntary
along the way, and all we have to do to fail is nothing, just
In eternity we will be rewarded or punished for what we have done or
done. We do not judge man’s patriotism by what he says but by
he does. So our faith in God is not judged by what we say but by
we do. The hypocrite is the one who says but does not do.
Jesus’ day men told Him they were Abraham’s children and (Moses
His reply was if they were Abraham’s children they would do as Abraham
and if they were Moses’ Disciples) they would have believed in Him, a
like Moses, but Moses, the man in whom they “trusted” would be the one
would condemn them because they were living contrary to Moses.
We are living in days that try men’s souls, and we have among us God’s Best people and the Devil’s worst people. Everyone is known by the fruit he brings forth; we do not gather grapes from thorns, nor figs from thistles, and whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap. These are both laws of God and laws of nature which cannot be disregarded, and if we contribute to the delinquency of those who bear bad fruit and then complain about it, then it is like having a beam in our own eye and trying to take the mote out of theirs, and we are actually more guilty than they.
We know that the Lord established this New Test. Ministry and that it is the same ministry for the Jew and the Gentile. It is true that according to Mat. 10, Jesus sent His disciples to the Jews and He said: “As the Father has sent me, so send I you.” It is also true that after His resurrection according to Mat. 28, they were sent to ALL nations and told to teach all and to observe all things that He had taught them, and this they actually did as recorded in Acts. The ministry was not changed. These men were men who hazarded their lives for the Gospel’s sake and suffered the loss of all things. Like their master, they rode in another man’s boat, or on another man’s beast, slept in another man’s bed, ate at another man’s table. These are some of the things that made the New Test. Ministry contemptible to some men, and none of us like to hear people say that we are beggars, spongers and crazy men. So the natural tendency would be to make preaching more honorable in the sight of men and have a car, a home and things of one’s own as the other people do. Many would encourage us to do this and are ashamed of us when we don’t do it, then blame us if we get into trouble by doing it. Why was Jesus so particular about this? Did He just want to make it hard for His disciples? No, it was not that; He wanted to see qualities worked into them that had been worked into Him by the same experience; He was perfected thru suffering, and these were the men who were eventually to be exalted, and it was necessary for them to prove they could be trusted even when the going was hard.
The story of the life of Joseph makes that very clear. Before he
exalted in Egypt, he was sold by his brethren to be a slave in
He was lied about, put in a dungeon and became a servant to
Those years in Egypt were the years that prepared him for
If he had not known that, he might have later got puffed up and given
His Faith in God. We have seen some among us who were given a
“place” and it soon went to their heads and often we have seen people
could be trusted as a farmer, merchant or laborer, who, when they were
to some public office could no longer be trusted because pressure was
to bear upon them that they had never known before. Of course
always have been people who would never learn no matter how they were
or who taught them, and there is nothing like the gospel to bring out
is in people.
There is a circular being distributed among our friends entitled “A Spiritual Fraud Exposed” naming a number of workers and stating things which (so is stated) they have done which are wrong and while we do not object to wrongness being exposed, we do object to reflections being made on what is according to scripture, the things that are assuredly believed among us. To do this would be as wrong as those are in whom we are so disappointed. There is no reason for finding fault with God and Christ and what He said and what is written by Inspiration in His book, because men made a mess of it. This letter I am writing is not an attempt to defend anything or anybody who is not of God and for all that we know, those who are named in this circular may indeed by guilty of the things which they are accused. But whether true or not, we do know that somebody is badly wrong and that a house divided against itself cannot stand, and because of this we are ashamed and embarrassed, but this is no proof that God never did speak to them or by them nor that they never had a vision in the beginning.
been called to work in God’s Harvest field who once answered that call
went forth and did well for awhile but when they saw what was against
and what was to be done, they folded up like an empty sack and went
or began looking for a place where they could comfortably look on and
orders to the others still laboring, and so instead of becoming great
(as they might think they are), they have become little dictators of a
Could it not be that these men heard God’s call and, after having
to it and preaching His word to others (when they saw greater cost and
unwilling for it) have become castaways—and that neither they or those
believe in them realize it? Could it be that thru the years at
they became experts at hashing and rehashing what they got from Heaven
their early days, while we sat there and swallowed whatever they gave
and called it good?
It might not do us any harm to speculate a little further—could it not be true, as the following leaders’ believers claimed, that God did call Alex Campbell, Pastor Russell, Ballington Booth, Joseph Smith, John Daviow, Amy McPerson, Billy Sunday, Billy Graham and many others, who could have been useful to Him all their lives but because they attracted attention, were honored and obtained many followers who poured out their money to them, they got big in themselves and because they thought they were something God had to spue them out of His mouth. The older their organizations get, the further their preachers are from what the New Test.’s were and if the preacher is not right, how can he put others right?
To put it another way—How can a man lead others over a road he is not travelling? Whether a religion is right or wrong, its ministry is its foundation. The doctrines and commandments of men must be taught by men or books which men write. They do not get them from the Bible as they claim, therefore every religion must have its own kind of preacher to preach its own particular kind of doctrine. And because many men of many minds have many creeds of many kinds and the result is Babylon instead of Christiandom. It is not hard for us to see that Babylon is not of God (confusion) but it is hard to see that those in whom we have believed, those in whom we have trusted and have had confidence, have turned aside and have run greedily after the error of Balaam for reward. God has to let them kick us and get right down mean to us before we can catch on! If our faith and hope depended on these men, our case would be pitiful and whatever we have given them is lost. They may have control of the machine that we helped build and may crush us with it but they cannot destroy the Way nor the plan of God with it. A man may steal another man’s car and run over him with it, but he cannot destroy the highway with it.
A thief or a liar when caught will accuse the one who caught
of being the thief or liar so we can only expect such from those who
wronged some when we expose them they will be sure to accuse us of
to them. The prevalent idea today is that everything you do is
right so long as you don’t get caught at it. Or, if you can seem
point out that the end justifies the means. But the faith of
is still upon the earth; we have with us both saints and workers who
been through the mill, who have been tested and tried and are faithful
can be trusted, and we thank God for that. If he gets any of us
Heaven, He will deserve great credit for it and while here, we will
to learn that when Jesus said FEW He did not mean MANY.
There is forgiveness for wrong doing but no excuses for it. For to excuse sin is to justify sin, and sin justified is not sin. If there was not a righteous man upon the earth today, we still would be left without excuse before God, because of Jesus having lived a righteous life upon the earth. He was tempted in all points such as we are, yet without sin.
We today can see a repetition of what happened to the early church in the New Test. Days; there were both the true and false in the church and we know that those who kept true were the winners, tho many times it may not have seemed that way to them. So, today we are making no mistake when we tighten our hold on that which we have obtained, hold fast our confidence, and let no man take our crowns, when we get to the end of the rope, tie a knot in the end, hang on; if we keep the faith we cannot help but win, but if we lose faith, we lose all.
Note: The writer of this letter, Willis Crane, went forth to serve in God’s harvest field about 40 years ago, still bears this testimony: “A Workman that needeth not to be ashamed”.
Dear Mr. Parker,
Earlier this month just the day before we found ourselves leaving what we once called the church (and now call the C.C. group in accordance with their officially registered name "Christian Conventions"), we received your newspaper, "Spiritual Fraud Exposed", from Mr. Fred Hanowell in Germany. It was an astounding exposure of the group and clinched the issue for us most effectively. We are very grateful for your considerable efforts.
We are a forty year old couple who have been wholehearted in this group for twenty and fifteen years respectively. I was in good standing in the work for six years here in Washington prior to our marriage thirteen years ago and for the past seven years have been the elder in one of the local assemblies.
Whether we have “left” or been “put out” is academic. We could not stay and they would not allow us to remain. However, they have not wanted to be in a position where it could be definitely said that they had "put us out". Perhaps your exposure of many being put out has made them more cautious in the practice of their methods. Although we had unanswered questions about the origin and history of the movement and had long been puzzled over the evasive response to our questions on that score, we had tried to push that situation aside in our minds, not having seen concrete evidence of anything being wrong, and having nothing substantial to go on.
However, Three years ago we began to notice that there was but scant reference either in the preaching or testimonies to the blood of Christ - scant reference to Christ as our Saviour and none whatsoever to him us our Redeemer and Sin Bearer; much attention to his earthly life and ministry, none to His atoning death - only a heavy emphasis on Him as our Example, 9 especially as demonstrated to us by the workers which emphasis we know was not that of the N.T. Gospel. (If following an example of God's righteousness could save, then the law could have saved. Scripture says it didn't. Rom. 3:20ff; Gal. 2:16, 21). Also, we noted a heavy emphasis on works and scant reference to faith, a heavy emphasis on effort und less on rejoicing. Whereupon we began to wonder whether we had long been reading our own evangelical beliefs into the preaching and perhaps those beliefs were not actually held by the workers, albeit not denied.
Tactful enquiries kindly made were turned aside and the workers became suspicious of us. We continued to study tile Scripture and to compare it with what we heard in the meetings - it seemed a1most certainly different. So nearly two years ago we began carefully to speak of these neglected crucial doctrines in our own testimonies each week, at first simply to test the reaction to it. Later we began to recognize it as an opportunity from God to try to speak as clearly us possible of trusting the saving work of Christ to these who were so unaware of such Good News even though they were so pitiably earnest toward what they believed to be things of God. And the friends listened and some enjoyed it, but in time became puzzled.
The workers' response was different and we were put under immediate surveillance. They resisted our testimonies and tried every way possible to counter-act them without having to oppose Scripture openly. We found they refused to be pinned down as to just what they believed, much less as to just what the gospel consisted of. We could see they didn't agree with us at all, but would not openly admit it. At every encounter (and there were a number or of them) they tried to sidestep the doctrinal issue, even though they tried to counteract it in their preaching. In conversation they would only accuse us with: “There is something there in your testimonies which is not ‘of us’, not the ‘same spirit.’” And they eventually resorted to branding us with a "bad spirit" (an easy dodge), although we had been most careful on that score, and the charge was completely without foundation. The workers' clever control of the friends was incredible - a brief word or look was sufficient, always inferring, never proving. Although we had enjoyed the respect and confidence of the friends for years, it meant nothing. It became clear the friends had learned to uphold the workers without question, but had learned nothing of upholding the Gospel of the grace of God.
As we this winter gradually learned more and more of the history of the church by letter from Mr. Hanowell, we were not actually too surprised. We resolved to say nothing of these things at the time, however, for we knew many would simply put their heads in the sand and say, "Forget the past; enjoy what we have today." Many must have long since taken that very course, for we now see that most of this information was liberally distributed to workers and elders here in the Northwest in the fifties. Although I was in the work at that time, older companion prevented my reading the literature and told me nothing of it.) Anyway, it was our hope to demonstrate that they didn’t have a saving gospel today, that they were trusting a church (the “perfect Way"), a set of ministers, their own imperfect faithfulness, their own efforts and "willingness to follow" a set of vague, ill-spelled out conditions; that they were not trusting the Saviour, nor relying on his atonement to reconcile them to God. And having learned something of the subtle power of inference, we always kept a positive approach in our testimonies, simply assuming that, of course, they shared our faith and confidence in the reconciling work of Christ, our thankfulness that we did not need to depend on the feeble above-mentioned substitutes, our praise to Him for meeting our need for a Saviour.
One of our aims was to make the workers openly admit and demonstrate their opposition to salvation by grace by putting us out on that ground alone. However, they did their best to remain slippery on that point, not wanting to tangle openly with any of the Scripture which we used. Finally in April the week after your newspaper arrived, the workers formally forbade us the emblems before eight called witnesses on the ground that we were reported to have mentioned privately a few days earlier church splits in Australia and the church’s a having taken a name.
Still trying to dodge the issue; On exactly what specific grounds does a man become reconciled to God; just exactly what is the Gospel. They really don't want to come rig]it out and admit: “WE will reconcile you to God. WE are the Good News." It just wouldn't sound good, but it's what they actually mean. They constantly infer such and then wait for the attending outsider to absorb it. When he does, he is said to be "seeing it" and has now become "one of us", "able to see the Way" and "willing to follow in the Way" “with us - the people of God". The Saviour as such doesn't come into it. Actually they don't talk about "trusting Christ as their Savior," but of "seeing (through their workers’ teaching) that this is the WAY and being willing to walk in it." It is the Way that is upheld, not the Saviour. It took us a long time to realize this, as it's very subtle.
Well, to continue: It is of interest that when we countered their charge by asking them whether they expected us to praise the church for splits and name-taking, they replied that they would not answer that question. When we used our opportunity to turn to the doctrinal issue, they retreated with some reference to revelation as opposed to a reasoned examination of the Scripture. Incidentally, they did not deny us freedom to attend or to speak in fellowship meetings (we feel they would rather not have that on their record), but we feel their ground work has been such that our usefulness in that capacity is at an end.
Four months earlier I was relieved of the eldership and offered a variety of back-handed insults by a committee of workers, led by the overseer of this state, Therald Sylvester. Since that time an older worker has attended our every meeting, weighing our words and paralyzing the friends. Quite torturous months they have been and, although we were grateful for our opportunity to speak, we're glad they are over. Opportunities are open to us now which we could not use earlier, and we hope to do all we can to get the facts into wider circulation.
And so, our foremost reason for contacting you just now: Do you additional copies of your newspaper which we could obtain for distribution? We would be happy to reimburse you for them. The one copy we received is too worn to try to duplicate and had been so trimmed to fit its envelope that a number of lines of the text are missing on both pages, front and back. (Mr. Hanowell's sight is quite dim.) In spite of the workers' controlling tabu here, we feel certain that at least 15 of the 55 families here will read and attempt to fairly consider such a piece. And, of course, we feel the responsibility of many contacts in other cities and states developed over the years.
Also, have you ever put out a fuller report? We would be most interested. (Curiously enough, just a few months before received our newspaper, we had been wondering what a trip to Ireland might possibly uncover. But we didn't dream the extent of it. We had supposed that it began away from public view, since it operates that way today. Again, thank you so much for your efforts.) By the way, a visiting Australian reported to us this winter that someone whom she thought was from England had visited her Australian convention last season in order to take pictures and gather information for a book he was writing on the group. He was put off the grounds, but managed to retain his camera, which the workers would like to have confiscated. We wonder if you have knowledge of such an effort and we would surely wish to obtain a copy of: any available or forthcoming publication.
We were interested to hear that you had returned to the Church of England, although we are not familiar enough with it to know just what that means. One of the evils of the C.C. group is that it closes the door to fellowship with other believers even after individuals have left it and are supposedly free of it. We fear that some who have left the group may simply aspire to be the makings of something similar and are in danger of limiting the grace of God to themselves, recognizing no fellowship with other evangelical Christian groups and seeing no common Christian heritage with them. While we know, of course, that much of present day Christendom has succumbed to liberalism on the one hand or sensationalism on the other, we know also, that there are still some conservative, evangelical congregations - plagued by imperfections, of course, but nonetheless preaching the Scriptures.
We would appreciate as early a reply as possible, for we know it is important to contact folks before our blackened name has had opportunity to precede our efforts. We surely feel concerned about the plight of the people in this church. They are blind, putting their trust in the church and its methods instead of in Christ. And we feel for those who are under the “stress” of making a “choice” to go into the group. When my wife professed as a young woman the stress was such that in a matter of weeks she lost ten pounds and her auburn hair turned dark brown.
Do you know anything of John Kelley? See the second name on the enclosed list. We suspect some here will try to say he was an older worker through whom Irvine professed.
Sincerely yours in His Name,
Signed: Fred E. Miller & Ruth D. Miller
Click Here to read Fred Hanowell's leter to Millers
Just a few lines in answer to your last in regard to your experience with the Christian Convention Sect. It is all very typical of the procedure that started with William Irvine in 1899. He was one of the worst characters that any respectable person could come in contact with and become a victim of his influence. Although he has long passed away, the same procedure continues and has been the means of blighting the lives of thousands of honest people and continues up to date to do so.
We do feel very sorry for many of the people who have not taken time to go into detail in regards to the origination of this vicious hostile sect, registered and documented in Washington, D.C. It was hard to take or believe on account of what we had heard in the beginning, about the year 1914 and 15 from Willie Jamieson and his companion, Henry Hanson . My wife and I accepted what Jamieson preached without any reservation. On the face, it looked like what was right and we did as best we knew how to be faithful and to bring our then young family up in fellowship with that way.
Once in a conversation with Jamieson I asked him about the origination of his ministry. He told me about William Irvine, what a wonderful preacher he was and how through him he had accepted the gospel and went to preach because he wanted to be able to preach like him. I told Jamieson I would like very much to meet William Irvine. He told me it was not possible because he was recuperating from overwork and not in good health.
I found out later this was a made up lie by him and others of his brethren to keep people from knowing the truth. William Irvine was excommuni cated out of the ministry and fellowship by Jack Carroll and others and had taken up his abode in Jerusalem as he claimed to be the second witness spoken of in Revelations. Jamieson continued to resurrect this man and bring him to the platform with him at conventions and many other places. He ought to be ashamed of any remembrance of Irvine. But the old saying is true: "Birds of a feather flock together."
A few years ago, Jamieson came to our home and stayed overnight. He seemed badly disturbed about many things that were taking place. I asked him where these things originated and he said in the ministry. So I told him it was better to settle it with the ministry and not bring it into the churches. I was then an elder and the church had been in our home from the time we professed, almost forty years at that time. After relating to us all these wrongs in the lives of others, before he retired, he went to his grip and produced a bottle of whiskey, helped himself to a large quantity of it and told me if his friends knew he imbibed in such stuff they would not have any faith in him. So dear friends, this is not hearsay. It is personal experience. So you see it is a pure case of the blind leading the blind.
We could no longer go along with the inconsistencies. Jamieson removed the meeting from our home and expected us to go to another home. We said no, if we were not worthy of meeting in our home we would not be worthy to go to someone else's home. So friends, that has been the end of our fellowship with the Christian Convention group and will continue to be so. I know from past experiences, if you will stay out of the Christian Convention group you will enjoy more of the pres ence of God and His Christ in your lives. Jamieson has proven to us that he and many of his associates have never gotten any victory over the flesh.
Because we were friendly to Ron Campbell he asked me to renounce Ron and I told him I would not do that to anybody who had never done me any harm. Since then I have learned he was asking me to renounce the wrong man. It has all turned out to be a blessing from God to be free from bond age to such a source.
He thought that because we were his converts, we would not expose him and we were living in fear of being taken out of fellowship. He found out he was very badly mistaken. I exposed him plenty, but he denied it all and made some of his friends believe it. Some people are so much in bondage and fear they believe anything that is told them by a worker, regardless.
In Jeremiah 5:30-31: "A won derful and horrible thing is committed in the land; the prophets prophesy falsely, and the priests bear rule by their means; and my people love to have it so; and what will ye do in the end thereof?"
This is the very condition that existed between them and many of their friends; lies, falsehoods, alibis, covering up their faults and failures, blind leaders of the blind, blind to what they are going to have to face in the end. I could keep on writing many pages of my past experiences but we were never discouraged, just disappointed in men. The promises of God are sure to those that learn to love and honor His Son and no power on earth can separate us from it.
Christ, and He only, is the author and finisher of our faith. As Paul says, "I planted and Apollos watered, but God gave the increase. Neither he that planted or he that watered are anything."
Some years ago a friend of ours who professed in same meetings we did, decided to get more tales in regards to both sides. So we wrote to William Irvine in Jerusalem and got an answer to our letter which my friend still has in his posses sion. Irvine at that time still believed in an exaggerated form of the old opinion of an inner il lumination and regarded the Bible as simply a dead book. He wrote and preached that God made him the Head of the Church, ignoring the scripture that Christ was the one and only Head.
So evidently at the close of Irvine's life, he real ized he had left a dirty trail across the European and American continents and was convicted in his conscience. He stated in his letters it was all just an experiment when he claimed to be the second witness spoken of in Revelations and that he be longed in Jerusalem. Jack Carroll and others encouraged him to do so. He realized these fellows did it to get his mantle and for no other good reason as their lives were no exception to his. Or in other words, were doing the same things he himself was guilty of. He admitted his own faults and failures and that is more than they ever did, only behind closed doors. So we can see now, and have for a number of years that they were never based upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets and have never complied with the commission given to the twelve apostles or the seventy.
These men know that they have not the faith that would enable them to exist to do so. That is the reason Irvine and Cooney adopted the system of conventions and they got the idea from the Faith Mission. Irvine said, we must look to Keswick. It will get our people together and we will get fi nance to continue on and that is just what it has materialized into today—the financial life line.
You and can plainly see that what they claim to have is from their own beginning and has abso lutely no marks of that which was planned of God through His well beloved son in his beginning. There is a transformation—Satan is also transformed into an angel of light and his ministers as the minis ters of righteousness.
So dear friends, it is not with any hatred or rebellion in our hearts that I write these things as our experiences in the past has been a blessing. And it helps us to see how easily many people can be deceived to think that they are walking in the light of Christ and are not.
Will close for now and hope this answer to you will not make you weary.
Greeting, Your friends in His name and Way and no other,
A. and H. Singleton and family
OLD LETTERS FROM AUSTRALIANS
Dear Brother in the Lord,
To-day a Circular was handed to me dated March 1st, 1915. In it I saw your request for information about the origin and doctrines of the people known as "Cooneyite". As I to my sorrow know a good deal about these poor deluded people, having some relatives and acquaintances among them, I thought it right to give as far as I am able the desired information.
The originator of this sect in the hands of Satan is a man with the name of Erwin, of England, who was a member of the Presbyterian Church, but left about 28 years ago. Claiming Apostleship he professed to have received direct revelation of the true gospel which had been lost sight of. He is a man of strong personality, judging by his photograph, and the description of his followers "energized by that spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience".
Among his first converts was a man with the name of Cooney, who being a gentleman of means gave up all his possession end become a "tramp preacher". Thus the name of Cooneyites" was given them, which they will no more own then we own "Plymouth Brethren". Their doctrines are as old as Cain, who offered a bloodless sacrifice to God. They seek salvation by imitating the Life of Christ, perverting such Scripture as "how much more shall we be saved by His Life, to support this soul-destroying heresy.
The Sacrificial and Substitutional death of our Blessed Lord is lowered to an example for self denial, a death of self. According to this principle they also "break bread", which is done every Lords day morning. Their attitude in regard to the Atonement is that of Sheldon in his "In His steps". They profess to believe in the Deity of Christ but deny His Godhead by blasphemous utterances, as "Jesus overcame His own flesh". They are THE Church, all the rest of Christendom is under condemnation; all preachers are false prophets.
Notwithstanding the apparent Simplicity of these preachers, there exists a real Priestcraft. They preach (men and women) and are sent out in twos according to Matt. 10. They call themselves "Matt. 10 preacher", confounding the gospel of the Kingdom with the gospel of Grace. But unlike the "Pentecostal people" they do not believe in any supernatural manifestations. They say God is not in the least concerned about these bodies, or in any of the affairs of our daily life.
They practically ignore the work of the Holy Spirit. All is self effort. The preaching claims to be the 140,000 in Rev. 14, which number they identify with the Bride. When this number is complete, they believe the Lord will come for them. The "saints" have not such a privileged position. There is distinct Nicolaitanism, The preachers are Christ come into the flesh. They profess to live on Faith lines, but they know how to drill into the people that they are not their own and all their substance belongs to Jesus, who walks among them in the form of the preachers. Consequently they have sent forth hundreds of preachers into different countries. They have not gone to heathen countries, believing they are "beginning at Jerusalem". They get hold of those people whose consciences have been stirred up, in many cases by Brethren who have passed one and left the poor souls at the mercy of these Agents of Satan, who for the sake of one soul will preach for two or three months every night.
Their methods of working is effectual. Eternal life is only imparted through the example and preaching of their preachers, as in a case of emergency one of the "saints" may be used. The Bible is a deed book except it is made a live thing through the mouth of these preachers. The bible is read by every one of them morning noon and night, but alas! “the God of this world has blinded their eyes lest the truth of the gospels may shine into their hearts.” Satan with his myriads of subordinate evil spirits uses the very Word of God through his yielded human agents to impart "doctrines of demons".
Their work through these people is different from that among the Pentecostal people or Spiritualist. All seems so natural, and sober, just suits the unregenerated religious minds of sober quiet people.
They teach the necessity of the new birth, which takes place by turning from the "wrong way" into "the Jesus Way" or into "the Testimony of Jesus", which also is a favorite phrase with them. This means that you give up everything which formerly you have received as truth and yield implicitly and unconditionally to the teaching of these preachers. None of them seem to be quite sure about their eternal salvation. They may fall away, in fact some have left them already; for such is no hope. They cannot possibly be renewed. But while they are in the "Jesus Way" they are safe.
The preachers discourage, marriage, in fact in a subtle way forbids the marriage of preachers. Those who were married before they were chosen in the number, generally separate, the children are given up, and the wife is sent out with another woman. They disregard natural relationship, seek to kill all natural affections, and have thus caused much sorrow. They quote in supporting this teaching, the Lord's words "Who is my mother, brother and sister," etc. They find abundant Scriptures, perverting the precious name of God, to cover Satan’s lie.
They profess to believe in the resurrection of the body and eternal punishment. They do not believe in the salvation of little children. This would contradict their doctrines and bring in free grace, Sovereign grace, which thy bitterly oppose.
Their meetings are similar to ours, but every one is expected to give a testimony, men, women and children. They meet in houses. The Sunday morning meeting is in the house of the "Bishop". They have prayer meetings twice a week, nothing except sickness will hinder them from going. They are mostly honest earnest people.
We firmly believe that many will be delivered from the snare of the devil. We praise the Lord that a number of dear souls in South Australia, who were just on the verge of joining them have been prevented through our decided attitude against this subtle scheme of Satan. These preachers are very bitter against my husband, and me; they say we go about blaspheming. You can easily recognise a daughter of the Harlot in this system and one not at all unlike her old mother. What a responsibility is ours to whom so much truth has been entrusted. “He that hath my Word let him speak my word faithfully”. We have sadly failed. May the Lord stir us up at any cost to His own honor and Glory.
Kindly give our Christian love to the Saints.
With love in the Lord from us both to you and family
Yours by grace divine
(SGD) Esther Karlson
ARE YOU THE TRUE?
Doubtless you have long since heard that I have withdrawn from your sect, but it is doubtful whether you have learnt my reason for doing so. Having been in contact with a large number of your people and having heard a number of your preachers, called by you "the true preachers" or the preachers of "the lowly way" or "Jesus Way" and having duly considered, searched, and prayed about your doctrines and tested them by the Word of God, I regret to say that I found them to be full of error, and they would not stand the test of Scripture.
Your teaching is one of the perversions of the Gospel of Christ of which Paul speaks in Galatians 1, 6-12. It is not another, but a perversion, for there is in it no justification "through faith in His blood" (Romans 3. 24-25), and no salvation through the perfect finished work of our Lord Jesus Christ. I have made many enquiries as to this, and always the reply was in the negative.
The only salvation you believe in is that by receiving these teachers and their teaching you become followers of them, and “thus followers of Jesus Christ". Then you are taught to have communion with them only, and thus with Jesus Christ and His "Apostles and Prophets". Any other communion you say is not of God, and therefore of Satan. I find no warrant in all God's Word for your assumption, or I should say, your presumption.
I believe in an open Bible, and if you think yours is the better way of service and worship, well and good, but you must not make your thoughts a test of salvation and shut yourselves up from all spiritual intercourse with other Christians, whose desires to serve the Lord in all faithfulness may be even deeper than yours. Unfortunately you are blinded by your own opinions and refuse spiritual intercourse with any but your own people, claiming that you alone are saved. You claim not to be a sect but you are one, and a very narrow one at that, as I have proved for myself, for you do not recognise any one as a Christian except they agree with you. I have been told that, because I will not bow down to, and follow your preachers, I am a child of the devil, and all my fellow-Christians who hold the same faith as myself are likewise children of the devil and on their way to hell.
I thank God I know better, for I know Whom I have believed and am persuaded that He is able to keep that which I have committed unto Him against that day. I love His appearing, and wait with joy that moment when He will come for His own. My only sorrow is that I have done so little for Him here.
One of the first results of your "lowly way" doctrine is the loss of natural affection. I saw it in others and found it so in my own experience. This is not of God as all Scripture testifies. Christian husbands and wives, parents and children, brothers and sisters, who were accustomed to kneel in prayer and sing hymns of praise together, may not do so now with the one, whichever it may be, of the family who has joined your sect, for this one accounts all the others as unclean and outcast, thus making themselves out to be too holy to associate with the rest of the family, although the others may have faith in the Person and work of the Lord Jesus Christ. All this is of Satan and not of God.
By making your "Jesus way" a necessity for salvation, you thereby deny that the atoning death of our Lord Jesus Christ on Calvary is alone sufficient, and as this is the foundation of all blessing, (Rom. 3, 25-26; Eph. 1, 7; Col. 1, 14), your denial of it classes you with every anti-christian sect, whether you call yourself "lowly way", "being in the Testimony", "The Truth". "The Spiritual Israel", or any other name.
We have redemption through His blood (Eph. 1, 7). We are redeemed by the precious blood of Christ. (1 Peter 1, 13-19). Everywhere throughout Scripture, its teaching is, that blessing flows to us through the death and blood shedding of our Lord Jesus Christ, which you deny. The devil does not mind what else you preach about the Lord Jesus so long as you deny the efficacy of His work on Calvary's Cross. It was there He offered Himself a sacrifice for sin, and it was by His resurrection from amongst the dead that Satan's power was broken.
In. Gal. 1, 6-12, Paul tells us distinctly that if any man, or even an Angel from heaven, were to preach any other gospel than that which he preached, let him be accursed. He does not say anything of "the lowly way" or "the Jesus way" as the way of salvation, but the way he sets forth is through "faith in the blood of Christ, shed for us" as I have pointed out.
Not that we are to despise the lowly way, for every Christian should manifest something of our Saviour's lowly grace, and be clothed with humility, but this is not in Scripture put as the means of our salvation. No! Only His blood; for we are redeemed by the precious blood of Christ.
I would notice too that Scripture does not say one word as to which servants we are to receive or hear this message from, but simply tells us that "being justified by faith we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ", the One who was delivered for our offences and was raised again for our justification. (Rom. 4, 25; 5, 1) And again it says, "Being now justified by His blood, we shall be saved from wrath through Him". (Rom. 5, 9).
I know you teach that you are saved by Christ's life, quoting Romans 5, 10, but no thoughtful intelligent reader of Scripture could take that clause to mean Christ's life on earth before the Cross. Note verses 6, 8, and 9. These verses speak of the sinful and ungodly being justified by His death, and how can you get the last clause of verse 10 put before His death without throwing the whole teaching of the Apostle in these verses out of harmony?
No! It is His life after death, His resurrection life, His living in glory, that saves us, for He ever liveth to make intercession for His saints. (Heb. 7, 25). And so we are kept. His own spotless, sinless, life as a Man here on earth was ended at the Cross. He there offered Himself a sacrifice for sin in our stead. God dealt with Him there as a sin-bearer, and poured out His wrath upon Him in those three hours of darkness, and He finished the work there. God has accepted Him, and He rose triumphant over death and ascended to the right hand of the Majesty on high. And just as in the passover lamb, Exodus 12, the blood which was its life was of no avail until the lamb was slain, and the blood was sprinkled on the door posts and lintels in order to shelter those inside the house, so Christ's earthly life does not avail for you nor me, except that it was part of God's wonderful plan of redemption that Christ should live so before men that they might see His spotless holy life down here before He was offered up.
Seeking to follow His life on earth as you do, does not avail for our salvation. It is His shed blood that alone avails. The chastisement of our peace was upon us and by His stripes we are healed. Jehovah hath laid upon Him the iniquity of us all. To the eunuch who was reading this Scripture, Philip preached Jesus. (Acts 8) He who knew no sin was made sin for us. He bore our sins on His own body on the tree, and righteousness is imputed to us who believe on Him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead. This is the consistent teaching of both Old and New Testaments. I beg of you to test your teachings by the unerring Word of God, as I have done.
Your teachings arc the "Traditions of men", and not the Word of God. They are full of error and misunderstanding of the Scriptures, and any one with any knowledge of the Word of Truth can plainly see through them, But when your teachers come along, they seek to shake the confidence of the simple in what God's Word plainly declares, and in many cases these begin to doubt and think it must mean something else, because the preachers have said so, and they claim to be true preachers. When doubt enters the mind it is then good soil in which to plant the evil teachings by which your preachers delude the simple and attach them to your sect.
Your preachers talk much about the lowly way and persuade people that they are very lowly minded, when in reality they are just the opposite. They go about seeking to establish their own righteousness in contradistinction to the unrighteousness of every other preacher.
Mr. Adam Hutchison spent some time trying to persuade me that the only right way to worship the true God is in a meeting held in the home, or house, of one of your saints. Scripture nowhere makes this a necessity, although in certain cases shows it was done in the house of a believer, Only you look upon it as part of the lowly way, churches, chapels, and meeting rooms being designated the high or false way. Paul, however, preached in the Synagogues whenever he had opportunity, and after all, it is what suits the convenience of all the Saints that is best in all circumstances, for one can easily conceive that a private house might become too small for the numbers.
Another of your teachers, John Harding, taught that to be a true preacher one must be unmarried and have no settled home, and that is that is what characterises your preachers. This is Romish in its essence. I understand also that originally, if you prevailed on a married couple to go out and preach, they separated, the woman going with another woman preacher, and the man with another man. This I believe you have modified somewhat, and in a few cases the husband and wife may go out together preaching, But you think it quite wrong for a True preacher to have a settled home and a family, though you allow that a saint as you call a man who joins your sect, and has his own settled home, and a wife children, may be a true preacher. You do not limit saints, so one of your chief preachers said, but what a contradiction it is! These are your strongest points and then compared with scripture, how much they disagree with apostolic practice. Was not Philip married, with a home and children? And also John and Peter? My dear friends, all the points for which you differ so essentially from other Christians are unscriptural and unsound.
Now as to my own experience, in connection with you, I wish I could unveil to you a little of what I suffered through getting under the power of your teaching. I was almost poisoned spiritually by your errors. I thank God for opening my eyes to see, before it was too late, and after much agonizing in prayer before God, and holding on to His promise that if any one will do His will they shall know of the doctrine whether it be of God, I can now praise Him, Who has so wondrously led me and overruled all for my good, and I trust for His glory.
I do not say that you are wrong in all you teach, but I do say that your foundation is wrong, and that salvation, as God's Word reveals it, is not taught. I found too that the antidote to the poison I had swallowed was the reading and meditating on God's own Word, His precious and revealed truth, and oh! how lovingly He has led me out, though the suffering has been intense.
There is much more I might have brought before you, but I will conclude with praise to Him Who has used me to help a few who were in danger of being ensnared. I hope my remarks may lead many amongst you to review all your teaching in the light of the Word of God and trust that you may be delivered from the snare of the fowler and be brought into the liberty of the Sons of God.
By Hilda M. Weymouth
(no date; probably sometime in the late 1920s; letter was forwarded to Loizeaux by W.M. Rule)
This letter is referred to in the July 3, 1931 Pinaroo and Border Times,