THE CHURCH COMPLETELY ORGANIZED. ITS MISSION. ITS BIBLICAL ORGANIZATION. THE SOCIETY'S PLACE IN THE HARVEST. THE SOCIETY AS A CHANNEL. TWO WRONG VIEWS OF THE SOCIETY AS A CHANNEL EXAMINED. THE TRUE VIEW OF "THE CHANNEL." SOME HINDRANCES TO FRUITFUL SERVICE. EXAMINATION OF FURTHER SOCIETY-CHANNEL CLAIMS. 

‍

[The bulk of this chapter was written in 1919; the rest in 1920.] 

WITHOUT organization no undertaking of a large kind can be successfully carried out. Therefore, organization marks the various forms of large human activities. Civil governments, national alliances, religious denominations and federations, capitalistic combinations, aristocratic orders, labor groups, educational and benevolent institutions, fraternal and mutual societies, civic, reformatory and culture clubs and associations and even the natural family, evidence the presence and advantage of organization. Any organization, to carry out the purposes of its existence, must have within itself the machinery by which the lines of endeavor that constitute its mission are successfully seized and realized; otherwise it is not completely organized for its mission. Whatever is present in an organization, not needed nor adapted to realize its end, is a hindrance, which wise organizers and executives will eliminate from their societies; and whatever is necessary and adaptable to their purposes they will introduce and use. 

In harmony with these principles our Heavenly Father through Jesus and His Apostles made the Church in its constitution an organization; yea, so complete is this organization that it may be called an

Merariism. 

98 

organism whose parts constitute "a Body, FITLY FRAMED and knit together through that which every joint supplieth, according to the working in due measure of each several part." (Eph. 4:16, A.R.V.) This organization is complete in God of itself for the purposes of its existence, and needs nothing organizationally outside of itself, as it is in God, for the successful prosecution of its mission. This is in great elaboration proven in Vol. VI of the Studies, Chaps. V and VI. In this respect the Church is like other organizations; and to graft anything upon her different from or additional to her original constitution would impose upon her a dead weight, as would be in the case of any other body perfectly organized. Wise men will refrain from such graftings. 

Since the founders of institutions strive to construct the organic machinery of their Societies so as to adapt them successfully to carry out the purposes of these organizations, they make a careful study of these purposes and constantly use them as standards whereby they may measure each part of the organization's machinery and agents, to the end that they may reject unsuitable and introduce and use feasible organizational elements. This principle, of course, Jehovah kept in mind when He planned the organization of the Church, rejecting from its constitution useless and harmful arrangements, and introducing only those that would be practical and beneficial. In the Bible He has revealed to His Church what these purposes are, so that, among other reasons, the Church, recognizing what they are, may cooperate with the Lord in realizing the purposes of her organization, by rejecting all foreign corporeal elements, and by using all that are germane to her mission. Hence she finds in the Bible a complete description of her organization and mission, to which organization and mission she faithfully limits her uses and activities, and courageously resists any attempt to corrupt this organization and mission,

Church Organized, in Relation to the Society. 

99 

even as the natural body resists the introduction of chemical elements foreign to those of which it consists, since it instinctively feels them to be poison. 

What is the mission of the Church? For a proper answer to this question a number of things must be said: First, she has a mission toward God and Christ, i.e., to glorify them in all things (1 Cor. 10:31). Second, she has a threefold mission toward herself; and third, a twofold mission toward the world of mankind. The first part of her mission toward herself is to perfect herself in every good word and work (Eph. 4:11-13:2; Rev. 19:7, 8). This includes three things: First, that she in her members as God's mouthpiece gather out of the world persons who are responsive to His invitation to become His own, and, as such, members of the Church (Ps. 45:10, 11; Acts 15:14); second, that she cleanse herself from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit (Eph. 5:25-27; Col. 3:5-9); third, that she become like Christ in character (Rom. 8:29; Col. 3:10-17; Eph. 4:23, 24; 5:9). The second part of her mission toward herself is to sever herself from such of her members as fall into sin and gross error, and refuse to repent. This she has done sometimes by congregational action (1 Cor. 5:1-5, 13), sometimes by individual action (1 Cor. 5:9-11), and sometimes by general action (2 John 7-11). Such a severance has been going on throughout the entire Age, especially during the Harvests, primarily involving Second Deathers; secondarily involving such as will be placed in the Great Company (1 Cor. 5:5). Now, in the Epiphany, it is involving both classes as such. It has also involved some of her members who did not lose their standing before the Lord as members of Christ's Body. So, too, this severance has involved the merely justified and the hypocrites more or less associated with her. The third part of her mission toward herself is to inaugurate and transact such business matters as are necessary for her to carry out her mission.

Merariism. 

100 

The scope and forms of these business matters are all described in the Bible, e.g., the election of the servants of the local church and the appointment of them to their services (Acts 6:1-6; 13:1-3; 14:23; Titus 1:5); maintenance of purity of doctrine and life (Acts 15:1-31; 1 Cor. 5:1-13); support of the servants of the Truth, and relief of needy saints (Gal. 6:6; 1 Cor. 9:14; Phil. 4:15-18; 2 Cor. 8:18-24); and making arrangements for meetings and discipline (Matt. 18:15-17, 19, 20; Heb. 10:25). These three things - self-development, severance from foreigners and transacting her Divinely indicated business—exhaust the mission of the Church selfward. 

Then the Church has a mission toward the world. This embraces a twofold activity: First, witnessing to the world with respect to sin, righteousness and judgment to come, i.e., the coming Kingdom (Matt. 5:13-16; 24:14); and second, reproving the world for sin, righteousness and the judgment to come (John 16:8-11). These two things exhaust her mission toward the world. In the next Age the Church will have a mission quite different from its present one to itself and to the world. This need not be discussed here; because it does not come within the scope of this chapter. To understand clearly the Gospel-Age organization of the Church, its threefold mission, as above described, must be kept in mind. Disregard of these purposes is responsible for the Great Apostacy throughout the Age, as regard of them has resulted in the sealing of the Elect! It is disastrous to neglect, it is beneficial to observe God's arrangements with respect to the mission of the Church, as in all other respects. 

Having seen what the mission of the Church is, we are in a better position to study her organization, and see whether it is adapted to her realizing her mission. In Col. 1:18; 1 Cor. 12:12-30; Eph. 4:4-16; Rom. 12:4-8 the organization of the Church is described under the figure of a human body, an organism, 

Church Organized, in Relation to the Society. 

101 

and not a loosely developed Society or Club. These Scriptures assure us that there is but one Body, one Organism, of Christ, having many members, with Jesus as the Head Member. They assure us that, as in the natural body the members are diverse from one another in their functions, some having a more, others a less, important office in the body, and that, despite this diversity, they are nevertheless harmoniously related to one another in mutual dependence, helpfulness, appreciation and sympathy—so it is with the Body of Christ, in which "the whole Body [is] fitly joined together and compacted by that which every joint supplieth, according to the effectual working in the measure [function] of every part." Like the natural body, this Body, having many members, is but One; and that because it has the one spirit, one hope, one work, one Lord, one faith, one baptism and one God (Eph. 4:4-6). Its one Head under God does its thinking, planning, feeling, willing and directing; as it has pleased God to set the various members, each one in its place, in the Body (1 Cor. 12:18), this Head directs and uses them according to their individual functions in the Body; and as in a normal natural body, where there is but one head, no member has a head separate and distinct from the other members, so in this Body, Jesus, whose Head is God (1 Cor. 11:3), is the Head of every member, and all members maintain their place in this Body by maintaining the condition upon which they entered it, i.e., acceptance of Christ as their Head. Under this figure of one Body, having but one Head and many diversely functioning but mutually related members, is pictured the most complete organization ever formed, though its lack of much of what humans consider necessary to an organization makes many who do not recognize that it is a spiritual organism think that it is no organization at all. 

This organization manifests itself (1) in a particular

Merariism. 

102 

way; i.e., as spiritual, invisible and internal associations of saints amid local, external and visible Ecclesias with their local servants, works, arrangements and meetings, and (2) in a general way, i.e., as a spiritual invisible and internal association without any externality and visibility (a) apart from its general servants, Jesus and the Apostles, now invisible—and the "secondarily prophets," who minister to, and cooperate with the general Church in individual Ecclesias, or in collections of them in conventions by word and work, or in more or less of their individual representatives by works, conversations, mails and the printed page; and (b) apart from its local servants ministering to the saints in each Ecclesia. The whole Body is represented in each individual Ecclesia on account of its containing saints among its members. The internal bond of union between the saints at a particular locality and between them and all others is their spiritual fellowship in the one spirit, one hope, one work, one Lord, one faith, one baptism and one God. The external bond that is the point of contact between a local congregation and the members of this Body in that Ecclesia is its works, its meetings and its officers, i.e., its pastors, teachers (edifying servants), helps (deacons and deaconesses), and governments (chairmen, committees of arrangements who order the course of business, etc.), and the occasional ministration and cooperation of the servants of the general Church (Rom. 12:4-8, compare with last parts of 1 Cor. 12:28 and Eph. 4:11); and the external bond that is the point of contact between the saints of one Ecclesia and the saints everywhere is their conventions and works with the servants of the general Church. 

Thus we see that the true Church is invisible both locally and generally, though manifesting itself through its works, arrangements, meetings and servants visibly, whether it be in one place or all places. In other words, there is no visible general organization of the 

Church Organized, in Relation to the Society. 

103 

Church of the Living God that makes the various Ecclesias or various individuals organically parts of a general visible Body; but there is a manifestation of a local part of the invisible Church in the form of local Ecclesias externally organized, as above described, and additionally using for its purposes the ministries of the servants of the general Church, Jesus and the Apostles and the "secondarily prophets"; while the entire Church, which is invisible, finds its visible expression in the works, arrangements, meetings and servants of the general Church—Jesus, the Apostles and the "secondarily prophets," both generally and locally; in the evangelists, sometimes generally, sometimes locally; and locally alone in the pastors and teachers (elders), helps (deacons and deaconesses), and governments (chairmen, committees of arrangements, etc., who direct the course of business). This enables us to see that no denomination is, nor are all the denominations combined, the Body of Christ, the Church of the Living God; but that the Church consists exclusively of the Sanctified in Christ Jesus. Thus no external, visible organization is the Church. Hence we see the great error—like that of the Papacy, etc.—into which the leaders of the W.T.B. & T. Society fell when they stated (and that on the witness stand under oath) that one joins the Society, an external organization, a business corporation, by consecration. Thus we clearly see that they confounded a business organization with the Body of Christ; for consecration and the Spirit-begettal are the only ways whereby one joins the invisible Church, the Body of Christ (1 Cor. 12:12, 13; Gal. 3:26-28), and not that business corporation which is joined by contributing $10.00 or more. Therefore, to teach that one joins the Society by consecration is to confound the Church with the Society; and this view would set forth the Society friends as a body, not simply the shareholders as a body, as a little Antichrist (a counterfeit Christ), a little Babylon.

Merariism. 

104 

Should not the brethren of the Society strenuously object to their leaders teaching a doctrine containing such implications? 

The organization of the Body of Christ, as above described, is unchangeable until the entire Church passes beyond the vail, though there were temporary features added through the gifts of the Spirit, i.e., miracles, gifts of healing, diversities of tongues, etc. (1 Cor. 12:28), until these passed away (1 Cor. 13:8-12). On the continuance of the above-described organization until the end of the Age, St. Paul gives us clear testimony in Eph. 4:11-16, particularly in v. 13, where he says that these Church offices will remain with the Body "until we all come into the unity of the faith and the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect Man [the one New Man that God is making of the twain, both Jews and Gentiles, Eph. 2:15], unto the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ." Thus we see that there is no external organization, membership in which makes one a member of the Body of Christ, neither in the form of denominations, nor of hierarchies, nor general councils, nor synods, nor conferences, nor assemblies, nor presbyteries, nor committees, nor business corporations. All these are external to her organization, inimical to her constitution, and subversive of Jesus' headship, her unity, the diversity of His members and their mutual relations in the one Body. Against every attempt to associate her organization with such forms of organization the Church should exercise unceasing opposition as being, not from the Lord, but from the adversary. And any attempt to justify their existence in the Church which is His Body, as necessary for the prosecution of her mission, should be rejected; because such necessity does not arise from her Divinely given mission, but from Satanic perversions of her mission. 

Before closing the description of the Body of Christ as an organism, it would be well to point out 

Church Organized, in Relation to the Society. 

105 

the various viewpoints of the four texts cited above: Col. 1:18 is a general description showing the two parts of the Christ in their relations—Jesus as Head, the Church as Body—without pointing out expressly the official relations of other members of this Body than Jesus. Rom. 12:4-8 treats of the unity of the Body and the diversity and harmony of its members, mentioning the diverse functions of the official Body members in a local Ecclesia without mentioning their official names, nor those of the officers of the general Church. Eph. 4:11-13 refers to the edifying servants of the Church, both general and local, as well as to those servants whose work is of a missionary character, evangelists. 1 Cor. 12:28, while omitting mention of evangelists, mentions all other official servants of the Church, both general and local. This passage will, therefore, be seen to be all-comprehensive with regard to the servants of the Church with but one exception, i.e., the evangelists. These four passages are a splendid example of how God caused the Scriptures to be written—"here a little, and there a little," the full Truth not being found in any single passage, but in a combination of all passages dealing with any given subject. 

When we say that the Divine organization of the Church is complete for her mission we do not mean that it is complete for all missions. She certainly is not organized for politics; for few of her members are qualified for politics; and the attempt on the part of certain ones to make her mission include politics resulted in evil to both the church and state. She is not organized for business apart from that necessary for the prosecution of her above-described work; for very few of her members have marked business capacity. She is not organized to solve labor problems; for few of her members have the time, talents and spirit that grapple with such problems. Nor is secular education a field of endeavor for the exercise of the Church's organization; for her members as a rule are not

Merariism. 

106 

"wise." She is not organized for ecclesiasticism; for her membership lacks the spirit, hopes, aims and qualities of ecclesiasticism. Nor is she even organized to carry on the work of the Great Company; for her members have different working ideals, require different incentives, and are qualified for a higher grade of work and treatment of themselves and of others than are called for in the Great Company's work. Thus it will be seen that the Church, which is His Body, is not completely organized for everything; but she is completely organized and qualified for the successful prosecution of her peculiar mission. Hence by the possession of the Spirit, Word and Providence of God and her form of internal organization and its local and general manifestations, she is well fitted to glorify God and Christ. In her members individually, as well as in her general and local servants, she has possessed all that she has needed to gather the predestinated number of the Elect out of the world. That she is perfectly organized to carry out this feature of her work is evident from the fact that she has succeeded in sealing all the Elect. In her individual members and in her servants, general and local, she is fitted to cleanse herself from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit and to perfect holiness in the reverence of the Lord. The fact that she has nearly completed this work (Rev. 19:7, 8), proves that her organization is perfect for these two works. That she is completely organized to sever from her fellowship those who do not partake therein is manifest by the proper exercise of Matt. 18:15-17 in local Ecclesias, and in the general siftings in the general Church. Through the evangelistic activities of all of her members, particularly of her teaching servants, both general and local, she has given the witness respecting sin, righteousness and judgment to come among all nations, as well as given reproof respecting these among all nations. Having already fully realized this feature of her work proves 

Church Organized, in Relation to the Society. 

107 

that she has been completely organized for her mission in this particular. Thus we see that in herself, as constituted by God under Jesus' Headship, apart from any other organization, she is perfectly organized to realize her Divinely intended mission. 

Of course, we do not hold that she should not use earthly instruments to assist her in her mission. She properly can and does make use of human helps in the form of mail, railroad, telegraph, telephone, printing and business systems; so, too, of buildings, inventions, literary products on history, etc., and of Levitical works like concordances, Bible dictionaries, encyclopedias, lexicons, etc. But she does not use these as organizations under her control; and thus she does not use these organizationally. Without corrupting her own organization she cannot take over for the purposes of her mission the control of any organization outside of herself as constituted by God, nor may she permit any external body to control her. Therefore she cannot form a business corporation or company for conducting her mission Godward or manward. To claim that she cannot accomplish her work without such an organization implies that God was negligent in her constitution; that He failed to instruct her by her inspired teachers, orally or in the Bible, to avail herself of the corporation or business companies' privileges sanctioned by the Roman government in the times of Jesus and the Apostles; and that He thus failed to give her a complete organization for her mission. To claim that she cannot accomplish her work without such an organization implies that all of the Antichrists were right in adding to the original constitution of the Church; that the true Church was wrong in protesting against such additions; and that men are wiser than God, when it comes to being "practical"! Surely God's faithful will not agree that the Church needs the splints, bandages, casts, braces, strait-jackets, crutches and canes of human organizers in order to carry out 

Merariism. 

108 

her mission! Must not that work for which any other organization is of absolute necessity be a work foreign to her Divinely given mission? The Bible, Reason and History, both secular and religious, unite in answering this question affirmatively (F 326, par. 2; F 245, par. 1). 

We find in the types of the Old Testament nothing to symbolize that the Little Flock would have need of an organization external to itself to realize its mission, even as we find nothing on that subject in the New Testament. In Scriptural symbology organizations are typed by chariots, which word is used to translate a number of Hebrew words. But nowhere are chariots used to type the instruments that the Little Flock would use with Divine approval for furthering its work, e.g., the priests used nothing of the sort to assist them for their work, though the Merarite Levites used four and the Gershonite Levites two of these for their work (Num. 3:18-21, 27, 33; 7:1-9). In this last passage the word, agalah, is translated wagon; in Ps. 46:9 it is translated chariot. These six chariots seem to symbolize six societies that the antitypical Merarite and Gershonite Levites do find useful for their work. Four of these organizations are for antitypical Merari: the W.T.B. & T. Society, the I. B. S. A., the P. P. A. and the Elijah Voice. The other two are for the antitypical Gershonites—the P.B.I. of America and the B.S.C. of Britain. It will be noticed also that, like the priests, the Kohathites, had no chariots given them for their ministry, significant of the fact that one of the three general classes of the Great Company will not in the Epiphany use corporations or associations for their general work, which facts prove to be the case. Accordingly, the Old and New Testaments ignore any organization, except the Church's own constitution, as necessary to carry out her work. Nor is this omission an oversight. It is eloquent with the fact that God, describing the organization of the 

Church Organized, in Relation to the Society. 

109 

Church, purposely omitted mention of another body, or society, or company, or corporation in the Church, and wanted it understood that none of these were necessary for the Church in her carrying out the purpose of her existence. Thus seen we recognize that the Church through her general servants, assisted by the saints generally, is perfectly organized to prosecute successfully the general interests of her mission; and through these general servants, the servants of the local Ecclesias, and all other saints in and out of these Ecclesias, she is perfectly organized successfully to fulfill the local interests of her mission. She should therefore refuse to accept the service of all hierarchies, general councils, synods, general assemblies, conferences, presbyteries, boards, corporations, committees, etc., which seek to control her work, as additions to her Divine constitution and as unnecessary and harmful to her mission. 

All Bible students will agree that, so far as Biblical passages and facts are concerned, matters are as we have just described them. The passages and facts above referred to prove this abundantly. No less decisive are the facts of Church history. The organization of the Church, as above described, began to be undermined with the bishops being made a distinct order in the Church from the elders or presbyters, and with the "clergy" becoming distinct from the "laity." Each Church, ceasing to have many bishops, i.e., presbyters (Acts 20:17, 28; Phil. 1:1; Titus 1:4-6; [1 Tim. 3:1-15 mentions only two kinds of servants of a local church]), began in the second century to have but one bishop, who was placed over the presbyters and deacons. These bishops, in the interest of their power, began to call synods or councils to legislate for the supposed common interests - not of the Church which is His Body, but of the churches of entire districts and provinces. The first of these synods or councils was held in Syria in 166 A. D., and these synods or councils prove that the churches were 

Merariism. 

110 

externally organized with one another, a thing foreign to the Apostolic Age. These "provinces of the Church" were, before many decades, presided over by archbishops, whose power continued to increase; and all of these archbishops, distributed over the three territorial divisions of the Roman Empire, were in the third century made subject to the patriarchs, of whom there were then three—one at Rome, one at Antioch and one at Alexandria. These introduced other organizations into "the Church," all of them foreign and subversive to the original constitution of "the Church which is His Body." Ever since, all organizations that have been added to the original constitution of the Church have been added on the plea that they were necessary for the work of the Church. But, let us, however, never forget that these were necessary for the mission of the nominal church, which lost sight of the Divinely given mission of the real Church, and which set up a mission of its own, unauthorized for the Gospel Age, i.e., the conversion of the world and the Church's reign over it for a thousand years before Christ's Second Advent. 

The unity of the true Church in the one spirit, one hope, one work, one Lord, one faith, one baptism and one God was strong enough to enable individuals individually (Acts 8:1-7), and individual churches individually (Acts 13:1-4), through representatives, to carry out the mission of the Church; but nowhere in the Bible do we read of a collection of churches uniting organizationally through committees, boards, societies, corporations or otherwise to send forth the message of the Word, though individuals and individual churches individually as such contributed to the expenses of those who preached the Gospel, whether the latter were the former's representatives or not (Acts 13:1-4; Phil. 4:10-18). It is true that a combination of churches did organizationally, through a committee that they appointed, an earthly, deacon

Church Organized, in Relation to the Society. 

111 

work, i.e., raised money for, and distributed it to the needy saints (2 Cor. 8:16-24). But such a combination never in the New Testament through a committee, board, society, corporation or otherwise did an organizational work in furthering the spread of the Word. Therefore we conclude that the latter method of operation is not in harmony with the organization of the Church, while the former is for a deacon work in the Church. At the Asbury Park Convention, overlooking the fact that 2 Cor. 8:16-24 refers to a deacon work alone, we thought and said that this passage warranted a committee's directing a service to the general Church in pilgrim, periodical and convention work. We desire herewith to recall this statement, as neither the Bible nor the history of the real Church nor its organization warrant it. 

But the Society leaders claim that the Lord directed the work of the Harvest through the W.T.B. & T.S. This we deny. God directed the Harvest work - not through the Society, neither by its shareholders, nor by its Board - but by one individual, i.e., that Servant, who was placed by the Lord (a) not only as "ruler over His household" (made the director of the work of the Church as the Lord's Special Representative); but was (b) also "made ruler over all His goods" (the Bible teachings, as the Lord's special Steward), to give the meat in due season (Matt. 24:45-47; Luke 12:42-44). All this is evident, not only from the Bible, but also from the facts of the case, as these are recognized by all who know how the Harvest work was conducted from beginning to end. We can make this matter clear by the recital of a bit of history. Our dear Pastor formed, in 1881, a Society under the name Zion's W. T. T. S., changed later to W.T.B. & T.S., with himself in control until death, to further the work of the Truth by providing "a financial channel or fund" through which the friends could contribute to the work, but not to organize

Merariism. 

112 

the Harvest work. In 1884 he had this Society incorporated, having previously expressly stipulated with his fellow incorporators that he should control all its business and affairs done in or without its name until his death. This controllership stipulation was renewed, from time to time, with new directors. Further, on his giving his copyrights to the Society, he did so, as per his will, under the express condition, to which the board acceded, that he should control the interests of the "Studies," "Towers," etc., until death, and dictate by his will and charter their uses after his death, as well as the policy of the Society. In harmony with these stipulations he did control until death. This control was made an actual fact until 1908, up to which time he had owned the majority of the voting shares of the Society, by his electing all directors and officers and appointing all colaborers and initiating and directing all policies, etc., and since that time, when he ceased to own the majority of the voting shares, by the general acceptance of the thought on the part of the voting shareholders that the Lord wanted him as that Servant to control. Therefore, after 1908 also his directorship nominees alone were elected; and he required of them immediately after their election that they write out their resignations in full, except the date, over their signatures, upon the express stipulation that, if he considered it the Lord's will, he would fill in the date, and thus terminate their directorship. Such resignations were signed, e.g., by Bros. Ritchie, Rockwell, Hoskins, etc. Whomsoever he desired to dismiss from any branch of the service he dismissed from that service without consulting the Board for approval. While at times he would consult with the directors individually and in meetings, and while they would sometimes vote they voted on what and how he wanted them to vote! for he alone controlled and directed everything, as the directors and many others know of a certainty.

Church Organized, in Relation to the Society. 

113 

He spoke of the pilgrims as first the Lord's, and second as his representatives. He did these things, and all coöperated with him therein, because he and they believed, and that rightly, in harmony with Matt. 24:45-47 and Luke 12:42-44, that the Lord willed it so. Therefore the facts prove that the Society, neither as shareholders, nor as directors, organized or in any other way controlled the Harvest operations, but that Servant alone controlled and directed that work. Unorganizedly the churches and individuals, including the shareholders, contributed to the work; as unorganizedly and individually apostolic churches and individuals contributed to the expenses of the servants of the Truth in their time. But what was to be done—how, when, where, and by whom it was to be done—was decided, not by the shareholders, nor by the directors, BUT BY "THAT SERVANT" ALONE, in harmony with what he considered to be the Lord's will. And when in print or orally he spoke of the Society deciding thus and so, he modestly hid himself under that name, as on one occasion he told one of the Lord's people, "I am the Society," and as on another, when one of The Tower proof-readers called his attention to the fact that his writing of himself and of the Society interchangeably would be used by his enemies against him, he answered to the effect that he wanted it to go that way, and he did not change the article. What, then, is the difference between the status of the Society before and since his death: We answer that it was then only an embryo society; now it is a born society, or organization. In the language of corporation lawyers it was then a "dummy corporation," having "dummy directors"; whereas, since his death it is a self-acting corporation. Like the "image of the beast," it was then without life! it is now alive. Like justification before and after the imputation of Jesus' merit, it was then tentative, it is now vitalized. In other words, its charter was in existence, but not

Merariism. 

114 

operative; its directors were in existence, but not directing. Its professed work was being controlled, but not through its directors, as required by the charter. The machinery was all there, and adjusted ready for use; but it had to await that Servant's death before the power came to make its machinery operate as an organization. The same remarks apply in part to the People's Pulpit Association and the I. B. S. A., though the idea connected with them was that they be perpetually controlled by the Society, i.e., that they be "dummy corporations" with "dummy directors" perpetually, when it would take control, as during his life they were all controlled by him. 

Hence we see as a matter of fact that the W.T.B. & T.S. did not conduct the work of the Harvest. It, therefore, is not an example in proof that it is in harmony with the Lord's Word and the practice of that Servant that a corporation or a business company, as an organization, be added to "the Church which is His Body," as an organizational necessity for the work of the ministry given the Church to perform. The Lord seems to have used that Servant, unconsciously to himself, to form the three corporations above mentioned, so that they would be ready for the Great Company's uses, when as such it would spring into being, as actually took place. Since that Servant's death attempts by the W.T.B. & T. Society, by the Pastoral Bible Institute, and by others have been made to put organizations into the Church to take in charge the general ministry of "the Church which is His Body." In all cases these attempts have proven failures; and every other attempt will similarly prove a failure, because as fire and water will not mix, neither will the organization of the Little Flock and a corporation or business company or a committee fuse in harmony for carrying out the Little Flock's work. Corporations, Societies, Business Companies and Committees (any of these organizations answering

Church Organized, in Relation to the Society. 

115 

to a symbolic chariot, Num. 7:3-8), however, may be used in the prosecution of the work of the Great Company, as the Bible, and facts since our Pastor's death, prove. 

Hence we conclude from the whole of the preceding discussion that the Church was perfectly organized in the Harvest of the Jewish Age by God for her Divinely intended mission; that her organization is that of one Body under Jesus her Head, with the Apostles as His plenipotentiaries, fully qualified infallibly and perfectly to bind upon and loose from her all necessary things as teachers of the general Church (Matt. 18:18); with the "secondarily prophets" to act as the exclusively visible but not inspired, or infallible, or perfect teachers of the general Church, after the Apostles fell asleep, as they coöperated with the Apostles as such before these fell asleep; with the evangelists (as sharers with the Apostles and "secondarily prophets" in) serving the elementary truths of the Word to outsiders and beginners; with chosen pastors and teachers to minister the truths to local Ecclesias; with helps (deacons and deaconesses) to minister apart from applying the Word; with governments (chairmen, committees, etc.) to conduct the external business of the local ecclesias, and with every member, official or unofficial, coöperating in the mission of the Church according to his spiritual qualities, human talents and providential situation; that this Church as organized in itself by God is perfectly adapted to fulfill her mission in the world; and that any attempt to fasten upon her another organization is repugnant to her formation, and inimical to the interests of her Divine mission, but to have such organizations for the work of the Levites is not so, as plainly shown from the Bible. Therefore, The Present Truth And Herald Of Christ's Epiphany stands committed to the policy of upholding the Biblical organization of "the Church which is His Body," and of opposing any 

Merariism. 

116 

attempt to corrupt her organization by introducing into her any other kind of an organization - opposing it as a dead weight, a hindrance, an injury and a cancer to be removed for her and others' good; for the organization of the Church is for its purposes perfect, sufficient, spiritual, sublime and effective. It is worthy of our appreciation, love and support—an appreciation, love and support that are aggressive to maintain and perpetuate this Body; and defensive to parry off all efforts to hinder, injure, pervert, limit or add to this organization in its Divinely ordained existence and ministry. 

Undoubtedly the W.T.B. & T. Society is a channel of the Lord for His service. To deny this proposition is to run counter to the Bible and God's arrangements. This has been our view of it throughout the controversy that has been waging about the Society. We therefore cannot sympathize with the viewpoint of those who would set it aside, wreck it, or in any other way disparage its Divinely intended office. While we believe it to be a channel of the Lord's work we cannot endorse some of the claims that some make for it as such. Of this institution there are three views current. According to one of these the Society is an evil institution. How any one who is loyal to our Pastor could so speak of one of his arrangements we are unable to see, especially if such an one believes that he was that Servant. We cannot sympathize with such a view at all, and dismiss it as unworthy of further consideration. According to a second view, the Society has been and now is the exclusive channel through which the Lord does two things: (1) gives the meat in due season to the household, and (2) directs the work of His priesthood. This is the view of those who are now in control of the Society's operations, and their loyal supporters. Several quotations will show this view in its two parts to be held by these brethren: (1) Z. 1919, p. 105, col. 2, par. 1, 

Church Organized, in Relation to the Society. 

117 

"Is not the W.T.B. & T. Society the one and only channel which the Lord has used in dispensing His Truth continually since the beginning of the Harvest period?" [See the entire paragraph from which this quotation is taken.] Again, Z. 1919, p. 107, last paragraph, "In view of these things [those of Ezekiel and Revelation] which have been made plain to us through the only channel which the Lord has been pleased to use in the end of this Age for serving Truth to His household, who can doubt that it is indeed the Lord who has placed upon His table the exposition of these two prophetic books of the Bible, which have never been previously understood by His Church?" Vol. VII, p. 145, "This [the Angel taking and filling the censer with fire of the altar] is a plain intimation of God's purpose to use the Society in further unfolding of His Truth as it becomes due." These quotations suffice to prove that it is officially taught that the Society has been and is the Lord's exclusive channel for giving the meat in due season to the priesthood. 

That these brethren teach that the Society is the channel for conducting the Lord's work among His people is manifest from the following quotations: Z. 1917, p. 327, par. 1, "In the Lord's Providence a body corporate is essential to the work of the Harvest, until it is completed. We have no doubt that the Lord directed the organization of this corporation for the purpose of carrying on His Harvest work." Again, in Z. 1916, p. 390, col. 2, from next to the last paragraph to the fourth paragraph of next page, this thought is given in answer to the question, "How, then, may the Harvest work be thus conducted, since our Pastor is no longer in our midst?" In the answer, among other expressions, the following is given: "The W.T.B. & T.S. … is … strong, because it has been and still is used of the Lord for the carrying out of His work." Their interpretation of part of Rev. 14:18 (Vol. VII, p. 227) contains the statement that the

Merariism. 

118 

Society has "authority over the publication and distribution of expositions of Ezekiel and John, the Revelator, symbolical coals of fire." These quotations prove, as all will grant, that officially the Society claims (1) that it is the exclusive channel of the Lord for giving meat in due season to His people and (2) that it is His channel for conducting His Truth work among and apart from His people. 

There are certain results flowing from this doctrine of the channel that should be considered in order properly to estimate what the doctrine involves. While it does not involve the thought of the channel's infallibility, it does involve the thought that its adherents exercise a meekness toward it that should predispose them to receive its teachings with considerable trustfulness, that they be not suspicious of its teachings, but be inclined toward them; that they do not take toward them a critical but a believing attitude. In practice this theory manifestly results in a mental attitude like the credulity of the average Catholic. It does not put one sufficiently on one's guard against the many admittedly erroneous teachings that have flown through this channel. Hence Society adherents have been finding themselves rejecting not a few things that, shortly before, they insisted were "meat in due season." This theory, therefore, in practice works against the principle of proving all things and holding fast that which is good (1 Thes. 5:17). This effect of the channel doctrine can make and has made its adherents subject to deceptions, and is, therefore, dangerous to their spiritual safety. Another result of this theory of the channel is that its adherents look upon its direction of affairs as of the Lord; or, as Vol. VII puts it, that every detail of its work is being managed by that Servant from beyond the vail. This, of course, has the effect of making its thorough adherents unquestioningly fall into line with its policies and activities. Indeed, so strongly does this thought prevail that many even fear 

Church Organized, in Relation to the Society. 

119 

to examine in a rational and Scriptural manner the methods and policies of the Society, lest, as "murmurers," they lose their crowns. All sober-minded brethren will recognize that such an attitude is like that of the Catholic laity rather than that becoming to priests of God. All must admit that this attitude has caused some acts that are most regrettable. 

Another effect of this theory is giving the channel the same official powers in the eyes of its adherents as our dear Pastor had as (1) the dispenser of the meat and (2) the ruler of the Lord's household, with the addition that the channel has assumed a threatening attitude that he never assumed, e.g., it claimed that brethren would lose their crowns, if they did not engage in "the Big Drive." This effect of the channel doctrine has put J.F.R. as "the [supposed] Steward" in our Pastor's place, if not always in the theory, yet in the practice of those who have heartily accepted this theory. Again, this doctrine brings with it the thought that it is impious to criticize the policies and management of the Society. Even those who exercise the right of sober criticism are regarded as "murmurers" who will fail of the Little Flock, while others who go further in their criticism are regarded as in danger of the Second Death. Hence criticism of the channel is considered as coming from an evil source, just as papists think of those who criticize the papacy. This effect of the doctrine can easily be and has been used to the disadvantage of Truth and Righteousness. Another effect of the channel theory on its adherents is to cause them immoderately to suspect teachings that do not come through the Society. Another of its effects on them is to make them refuse to read religious literature that does not come through the Society, e.g., we learned recently that the members of a certain Ecclesia have subscribed to a written vow not to read any religious literature except what comes from the Society. Surely this is papistical. Another

Merariism. 

120 

effect of it is to make the Society leaders a hierarchy, tyrannizing over the flock, as they have done. Another unhappy effect of this doctrine is the practice of the Society adherents to avoid those of their brethren who cannot conscientiously submit in these respects to a business corporation. And in imitating the teaching and example of the Society leaders they have "avoided" some of their brethren in drastic forms, quite out of harmony with the Lord's Spirit; yea, some of the leaders have even advised their adherents to avoid certain ones as they would "a snake," which advice, we are glad to note, they for a while recalled. How easily the effects referred to in this paragraph can result in one's shutting his mind to light and opening it to error, as these things work among Catholics! 

Having considered some of the natural effects of the channel theory, we now ask ourselves the question, is this view of the Society true? A number of reasons seem to call for a negative answer to this question. We present them to our readers for consideration. Certainly sober-minded brethren, schooled in the spirit and teachings of that Servant, ought to conclude that a doctrine producing such effects as the above cannot be true, but ought to be suspected as coming from an evil source. This theory puts into the Church, as a controller of its work and as the teacher of its members, a corporation or an organization which was not a part of the original organization of the Church; and therefore is a wrong theory. We are all agreed with the teaching of Vol. VI, chapters 5 and 6, that as God originally constituted the organization of the Church it was complete, needing no organizational additions. This our Pastor showed in detail. We condensed his argument above on the Church completely organized. All will admit that Jesus and the Apostles did not arrange for a corporation to be the means of giving the meat in due season, nor of directing the work of "the Church which is His Body," though there 

Church Organized, in Relation to the Society. 

121 

were corporations in their days. Therefore no organization absent from the original constitution of the Church can be inserted into it, to be its teacher or the director of its work, without violating its perfect organization and working mischief to its members. The Bible (2 Thes. 2:1-8) shows us that another organization, the papacy, would be grafted upon the Church; it nowhere warrants, but condemns such a procedure. Hence while God arranged for the W.T.B. & T.S. to do a Divinely intended work among some of His people, He did not intend that it should do the twofold work that it claims to be its functions in and for the Church which is Christ's Body. And the attempt to cause it to do such a work as teacher and controller is an imitation of the papacy and rests under the same Divine disapproval, as it also has wrought like injurious works. 

Again, this theory is wrong because it claims the office functions of that Servant for the Society, He had two office functions, as shown above. These functions were his as an individual. They were never given to him by virtue of his being connected with the Society; for he had these functions before the Society existed. In harmony with these texts he, under the Lord—and not the Society—gave "the meat in due season" and directed the Truth work until his death. All who know the situation during his life know this. These official functions, therefore, were his exclusively. They never before had been given to any other individual apart from Jesus, nor have they been given to any individual or corporation since. But these office functions, the Society leaders, without any authority whatever in Scripture, Reason or Fact, ascribe to the Society, even as Catholic theologians ascribe similar functions to the papacy. The will and charter never transferred our Pastor's exclusive office functions to the Society, nor could he have done so, had he wished; for these were not his to give, but 

Merariism. 

122 

the Lord's. Nor do the Scriptures. The claim is a mere assumption. Will the channel advocates tell us where, when and how the Lord transferred these functions to the Society? If so important powers were transferred from our Pastor to the Society, surely the Bible would indicate this as clearly as it shows that the Lord gave him his office functions (Matt. 24:45-47; Luke 12:42-44). The absence of such teaching in the Bible should be a complete deterrent from making such claims for the Society among those who regard it as the sole source and rule of faith and practice. We ask those who make this claim for the Society to give us book, chapter and verse that clearly teaches their view. They all must admit that there is no literal passage that so teaches. Hence we say that if God stated the same official functions to be our Pastor's in literal passages, which He did not allow to be understood until the history of about 20 years proved that our Pastor exercised these functions; how much more would he have stated this in a literal passage of a Society in whose interests these claims were advanced within a month after our Pastor in death ceased to exercise them, if He granted them to the Society? Again we ask, Where is the authority for transferring that Servant's individual functions to the Society, which was not the Lord's special representative while our Pastor lived? 

Their claims that the Society was throughout the Harvest the Lord's channel for giving the meat in due season and conducting the Harvest work is gratuitous assumption and brazen propaganda without basis in Scripture, Reason or Fact. He himself (D 613, especially the last paragraph; Z '96, 47) says that he was the Lord's channel for these two activities; and the facts prove his teachings on this subject. A third time we ask, Where is the authority for teaching that the Society is the Lord's channel in these two respects? The Society leaders, conceding that there is no literal

Church Organized, in Relation to the Society. 

123 

passage that so teaches, refer to Rev. 8:3-5 as a proof, claiming that the angel who offers the incense is the Society. We reply that a mere babe in the knowledge of Tabernacle Shadows should know better; for during the Gospel Age it is the exclusive function of the High Priest to offer incense, while the Society is a business corporation, created by the civil power, and therefore cannot be in the Holy. How desperate are the straits of those propagandists in search of Scriptural proof for their position when they are forced to lay hold on a passage that refers exclusively to the World's High Priest, and use it to substantiate their unprovable claims of Society powers! Again, they refer to Rev. 14:18 as another proof of these powers for the Society, saying that it teaches the same thing as Rev. 8:3-5. If it does teach the same thing (which we deny) as Rev. 8:3-5, it does not teach that the Society has these powers; for it would then explain actions and powers of the World's High Priest, and not those of a state-created business corporation. Hence neither of these passages refers to the Society. We repeat that a doctrine so important as the channel doctrine as applied to the Society must have a literal Scriptural passage to prove it; since they teach it as a matter of faith and practice; even as the Bible doctrine of the real channel for these things, our Pastor, has literal Scriptures to prove it. Hence, just as there is an utter lack of Bible proof, e.g., that the Pope has succeeded to St. Peter's Apostolic powers, so is there an utter lack of such proof of its kindred doctrine, that the Society has succeeded to that Servant's powers and privileges. The same necessity for any one having such powers does not exist now, after the reaping is finished, as existed for such powers as resided in that Servant while the reaping was going on. Such powers were necessary for the reaping period only. Hence our dear Pastor, since John's death the sole possessor of these powers this side the vail, passed

Merariism. 

124 

away shortly after the reaping was finished; and these powers, with his passing away, have logically and Scripturally ceased to be. 

Moreover, the blundering course of the Society, since it became an independent and self-acting corporation, which it was not during that Servant's life, proves that it is not the channel for directing the work of God's priesthood. The ambitious course of its leaders was a gigantic blunder, as well as a great sin. Their course with the British affair, with the board, with Vol. VII, with "Harvest Siftings," with the 1918 election "campaign," with the military question, which brought about their imprisonment, with the "avoid-them" policy, etc., etc., etc., was marked with most stupid blunders. Surely God has more wisdom than to choose such a blundering channel for directing the work of His Priesthood! Its blunders alone unmistakably prove that the Lord is using it to attract a class with whom blundering is the natural and usual activity—the Great Company, the Epiphany Levites. Further, its many errors of interpretation prove that it is not sufficiently qualified to be the Lord's channel to His Priests to give them meat in due season. Even according to the admissions of its own supporters very many misinterpretations are given in Vol. VII and "The Tower." There are multitudes of misinterpretations in that book that the Society brethren do not yet see. There is scarcely anything properly taught in the book where it interprets things not explained by our Pastor. Additionally, when we consider the interpretational and doctrinal mistakes made in connection with Elijah and Elisha—with the end of the reaping—with the closing of the door—with the deliverance of the Church and with the destruction of Babylon (all of which were expected in 1918)—with the death of the firstborn of Egypt—with a majority vote as being invariably the Lord's will—with the Society as the channel—with the Penny parable—with

Church Organized, in Relation to the Society. 

125 

the seven years of plenty and famine, and with literally thousands of other items, we are forced to the conclusion that the Lord would not select as the channel for giving the meat in due season to His Priestly class a body so lacking in spiritual insight, and so given to unreasonable speculations and guesses boldly advanced as "meat in due season." In justification, they claim that "that Servant" made mistakes. It is true he did make a few; but in the forty-two (42) years that he taught the Church he did not make one hundredth the mistakes of interpretation that the present alleged channel has made. Here and there he altered a small detail in the great system of Truth that he gave through that long period of time. They will have to alter almost everything new that they have given out, since they assumed the office of "the channel." Moreover, he was almost always the one who discovered and corrected his mistakes, while they as a rule do not see theirs until they are pointed out to them by others, or fulfilled events disprove their views. We know of but two of their many forecasts (and one many a natural man forecast) to have been fulfilled, while his usually were fulfilled. He had, while they lack, that balance of mind and clearness of vision necessary to be the channel to give the meat to the household. Hence it is self-evident God would not choose them as such a channel (Lev. 21:20; 2 Tim. 2:15; 1 Tim. 3:2; Tit. 1:9). 

The channel doctrine is wrong because it makes its adherents over-reverence a good institution, which has been put to bad uses, and therefore fail to scrutinize its teachings and policies with sufficient care to secure themselves from great blunders, wrong policies and consequent spiritual dangers (Ps. 146:3). In justification they allege that it is the Lord's concern to keep the channel pure; and thus they fail to watch properly; and leave themselves open to accept rather unquestioningly and credulously what "the channel" 

Merariism. 

126 

offers them. Such an attitude is tempting God (Matt. 4:7), who guarantees no such thing, but disapproves of it by exhorting us to be sober and vigilant, and to prove all things (1 Pet. 5:8, 9; 1 Thes. 5:21; 1 John 4:1). This course produces in its adherents a spirit similar to that of the members of the Catholic Church, a worshipping of messengers, a failure to test their teachings and a swallowing of error and a blind obedience. The channel doctrine is wrong, because it makes God's people subject to an institution to which they should not be subject (1 Cor. 7:23). In practice this doctrine has made the bulk of the Society adherents as subject to it as the adherents of the papacy are to it. The same line of argument is used in each case; "to be out of harmony with the channel is to be out of harmony with the Lord." This thought has spread the spirit of fear among its adherents. They fear to get out of harmony with the Society lest they lose their crowns and opportunities of service and fellowship. Thus they fear properly to weigh its teachings and policies, thereby encouraging priestcraft. These considerations make them subject to a business corporation with a spirit of servile fear unbecoming to Priests of God. 

Additionally this theory is responsible for the fact that since our Pastor's death the Society leaders both in print and orally, have been teaching, like many of the denominations regarding their systems, that the Society is not simply a business but a religious organization, which one "joins by consecration," something which "that Servant" did not teach, but consistently and Scripturally avoided. Such a teaching makes the Society an Antichrist with the Society officials as head and Society members as body, as J.F.R.'s second "new view" of Elijah and Elisha proves. This doctrine has made many of the Lord's people support policies and acts in violation of principle. There is no question but the matters of principle lying at the 

Church Organized, in Relation to the Society. 

127 

root of the difficulties in the Society since our Pastor's death were not decided on the basis of Truth and Righteousness by the Society adherents, but on the basis of the thought of LOYALTY TO "THE PRESENT MANAGEMENT" as the controllers in the affairs of the Society. Hence those who stood for Truth, Righteousness and the Lord's arrangements given through "that Servant" were set aside, while those who with a high hand over-rode these were supported on the plea that they were "the channel," and that the Board's majority was not. A wide correspondence and many discussions with a large number of brethren who hold this channel doctrine prove that it is not so much principle as partisan loyalty to "the channel" that determines matters of faith and practice with the average channel adherent. This is gross sectarianism. Yea, it is precisely the course of Roman Catholics: that the papacy is to be supported, even if principle is violated; that it is not the business of the laity to do their thinking, nor to regulate their conduct on principle; but that it is their duty to stand by the papacy as the channel of the Lord! 

These many considerations clearly prove that this channel doctrine is dangerous, unscriptural, unreasonable and unhistorical. For power to deceive God's people and to exalt priestcraft, for power to suppress Truth and Righteousness, and to exalt usurpers, for power to make God's people servile and uncharitable, and God's faithful servants seem deceivers and injurers - for such powers "the channel" doctrine is well adapted and has been much used. 

We now proceed to expound, largely in our Pastor's language, the third and true view of the Society as a channel. We give the following lengthy excerpts from a booklet that he published in 1894, entitled "A Conspiracy Exposed" (pp. 55-62): 

"The Society was formed in 1881, at the time of the free distribution of 1,400,000 copies of the pamphlet, 

Merariism. 

128 

'Food For Thinking Christians' - now out of print. It consisted of five of the Lord's children, and its affairs were entirely in my charge. Later, in 1884, … the Society applied for a charter … The object in taking out a charter is succinctly stated in 'The Watch Tower' for January, 1891, page 16, as follows: 'This is a Business Association merely. It was chartered as a corporation by The State of Pennsylvania, and authorized to hold or dispose of property, in its own name as though it were an individual. It has no creed or confession. It is merely a business convenience in disseminating the Truth. Anyone subscribing to one copy or more of the Society's quarterly, styled Old Theology Tracts (6c. a year), is considered an active member of this Society - but not a voting member. Any one subscribing for $10 worth or more of the O.T. Tracts, or any one donating $10 or more to the funds of the Society for the spread of the Truth, is a voting member, and is entitled to one vote for each $10 he or she may have donated. [Therefore one does not 'join the Society by Consecration.'] The affairs of the Society are so arranged that its entire control rests in the care of Brother and Sister Russell as long as they shall live. In fact, the only objects in having the corporation are: First, to provide a channel or fund [not therefore the channel to give meat in due season, nor to control the work] through which those who wish can employ their money talent, whether small or great, to better advantage for the spread of the Truth than if each interested one acted and published independently of the others. Secondly, the corporation was called for by reason of the uncertainty of the lives of those at present managing the fund. … The Society owns nothing, has nothing, pays no salaries, no rent or other expenses. Its policy is to use in the work every dollar received, to the best advantage, and as speedily as possible. … It will be seen from this and other mentions of the subject in 'The Watch Tower' that I have never intimated otherwise than that the management of the Tract Society would probably rest entirely in the hands of myself and Sister Russell so long as we live, as provided by the regulations of the charter—that the majority of voting shares elect the executive officers. … Having, up to Dec. 1, '93, thirty-seven hundred and five (3,705) 

Church Organized, in Relation to the Society. 

129 

voting shares, out of a total of sixty-three hundred and eighty-three (6,383) voting shares, Sister Russell and myself, of course, elect the officers, and thus control the Society; and this was fully understood by the directors from the first. Their usefulness, it was understood, would come to the front in the event of our death. But, he assured, we shall take pleasure in sharing the responsibilities of the place we occupy with any one [not many] whose interest in the mission of the Tract Society shall by his donations to its funds relegate our voting shares to the place of a minority. And such a one would, no doubt, be well qualified to direct in the expenditures, etc. [This proves that 'that Servant' never expected that the Society during his lifetime would be controlled by any number or combination of individuals who might own more voting shares than he, but that he would be willing to share in the responsibility of his position with a single individual who would contribute more than he.] … In the foregoing extract from our issue of January, 1891 (which appeared in eight issues of 'The Tower' for 1891), we say, 'This Society owns nothing, has nothing, pays no salaries, etc.' Lest some should misunderstand this, we will explain. The Tower Pub. Co. (which in a financial way represents myself) owns the Bible House, buys the paper, pays for the printing, binding, electroplates, etc., and keeps a large stock of 'Dawns' and Tracts on hand and fills the orders of the Tract Society at any time, and at much lower prices than any worldly firm would charge for much poorer service. To do this requires that thousands of dollars lie idle continually, in electroplates, books, colporteurs' dues, tracts, etc.; and as a consequence the Tower Pub. Co. is now a borrower to the extent of over twenty thousand dollars (the interest on which is over $1,200.00 yearly), all of which, however, is amply secured by other property which I own. The Tract Society's funds are usually spent before received, as under the 'Good Hopes' plan we know about what to expect. It runs a yearly account with the Tower Pub. Co., paying over moneys as received and balancing the account at the close of the year. Is it asked why the Tract Society does not do its own publishing? We reply, because it has neither capital nor credit. No banks would want the Tract Society's note. There are two

Merariism. 

130 

ways in which it could do its own publishing: (1) By doing no work for a while, it could save up the yearly donations until it had a capital with which to purchase or rent a building, buy type, make electroplates, and pay in advance for paper, printing, binding, and have capital with which to give colporteurs some starting credit, etc.; but this surely would not be so advantageous a way as the present one. (2) I could make a donation to the Tract Society of a part or all of the Tower Pub. Co.'s outfit, and take that many more voting-shares. This I no doubt would have done had it not been for the greater caution of my esteemed helpmate, Sister Russell. Her advice was: That would be no real benefit to the work, and you may be sure that, if the Society really had any assets or property, some would soon begin to interfere with its management, or at least to try to. So long as we live we had best keep matters as they are, and at our death put the Tract Society and the Lord's work in general on the best possible footing, and in most consecrated hands we can find. I followed this advice rather reluctantly; but now, in the light of the slanders herein discussed, I see it to have been the very essence of wisdom." 

From this lengthy quotation we see that the W.T.B. & T.S. was simply a "financial channel or fund" for the gifts of the Lord's people, i.e., a channel of financial co-operation whereby our Pastor, controlling everything, paid the bills that he made in directing the work of the general Church. Considerably after 1900 he made over to the Society all of his properties, his copyrights, etc., expressly stipulating with the directors that not only must he, during his life, control all the business and affairs of the Society, as well as the interests of all that he gave, but also by his will, charter, etc., dictate the Society's policies, etc., after his death. Consequently the Society was not during his life the instrumentality whereby the Harvest work was done. As for its place in the Lord's work since his death we would remark that neither the charter, nor the will, nor any of the writings of "that Servant" sets forth the Society as the channel of giving the 

Church Organized, in Relation to the Society. 

131 

meat in due season to the household, nor of controlling the general work of the Church. They all unite in showing that it is intended to be an instrumentality helpful in carrying the Truth to those outside of the Truth, and additionally that "The Tower" editors, as mouthpieces of the Society, should be instruments of edification to Truth people—not however having "that Servant's" power of being the Lord's special mouth, eye and hand, without whose sanction and direction no new truth was to be given to the Church by others, and through whose instrumentality all new truths were first presented to the Church. Consequently the Divinely intended powers of the Society lack totally the two special functions of that Servant's office. In using that Servant to form the Society the Lord did not reveal to him exactly what the uses of this corporation in the Lord's work after his death would be, it not being then due to be understood, as its understanding would have interfered with the trial whereby the Lord was pleased to separate the antitypical Elijah and Elisha. (See Chap. II, Vol. III.) The Lord has since shown us this; hence we now see that the Society is the antitype of one of the wagons, chariots, used by the Merarite Levites (Num. 7:3-8; Ps. 46:9) to help them perform their service in connection with the tabernacle (Num. 3:36, 37; 4:31-33). It will be noticed that God gave the priests no chariots for their work. Therefore antitypical Priests should not be identified with any organization for the performance of their service apart from the Church as an organization. Nor should they accept any organization as their teacher, or executive, or manager, much less as the controller, of their work. 

We are all familiar with our Pastor's teachings that in the end of the Age the Great Company as such would, as antitypical Levites, be revealed apart from the Priests (Mal. 3:2, 3; 1 Cor. 3:11-15; Z 1916, p. 264, par. 1). As such some of them are antitypes 

Merariism. 

132 

of the Merarite Levites; and thus have four symbolic wagons, chariots, organizations, to assist them in their work. We understand that three of these symbolic wagons, chariots, are the following organizations (1) The W.T.B. & T.S., (2) the P.P.A. (The People's Pulpit Association) and (3) the I.B.S.A. it seems that the Mahlite Merarites (Num. 3:20, 33) type those members of the Great Company who partisanly support the clericalistic leaders of the Society. These, accordingly, have three of the four symbolic chariots of the antitypical Merarite Levites, the fourth being in the possession of the Mushite branch of the antitypical Merarites, Elijah-Voicists. Hence we understand that the W.T.B. & T.S. is a Divinely arranged channel for doing the work that certain members of the Great Company have to do in connection with the antitypical Tabernacle, the true Church; that its work is not to give the meat in due season to the Priests, nor to direct their work; but it is to assist the Priests by bearing the antitypical boards, pillars, posts, etc. (Num. 3:36, 37, etc.); to labor for their Great Company brethren, i.e., to edify those of them who are in the Truth; to reach with the Truth those of them who are yet in Babylon; to help the Youthful Worthies; and to give the world a testimony of the coming Kingdom, as well as to reprove it for sin, righteousness and judgment to come. As long as the Mahlite Merarites limit themselves to these activities, their Society will be honored by the Lord as a channel for such services; but He will, as in the past He has done, oppose their organizations in their interfering with the work of the Little Flock. The Lord bless them in their Divinely appointed service, a Levitical service; for in such a service the Society is [was, is so no longer since 1920] a channel of the Lord! 

At the annual shareholders' meeting in Pittsburgh, Jan. 3, 1920, the Lord's will on Society arrangements, as expressed in the Charter was in a number of ways

Church Organized, in Relation to the Society. 

133 

violated. We wish that the shareholders had voted the directors in, not for three years and ten months only, but for life, subject to removal at any time by two thirds vote of the shareholders, as the Charter provides. At any rate what they did as to the directors was a partial recognition of the wisdom of the Charter in providing that directors hold office for life, subject to removal by two-thirds vote of the shareholders, and the unwisdom of an annual election of directors, which has given opportunity for "politics." What was done also demonstrates the insincerity of the plea made during 1917 that there were vacancies on the board, because directors must be elected annually! No honest lawyer who knows the law on the subject would say that there were vacancies in the Directorate for years up to July 17, 1917. 

The passing of by-laws changing the term of the Society's officers, directors and the time of annual meetings is certainly illegal; and such by-laws are null and void for the simple reason that when the state grants a corporation a charter, it empowers the corporation to act along those lines alone which are laid down in the charter. A by-law that changes a provision of a charter is in reality an amendment of that charter; and only the state granting it can amend it. Hence the by-laws passed at the shareholders' meeting, Jan. 3, 1920, are entirely null and void, even if the directors, who alone have the right to make by-laws for the Society, later passed them; even as a by-law passed by J.F.R.'s Board in Oct. 1917, making the share holders' certificates forfeitable, is null and void; because the Charter makes such certificates "non-forfeitable." If to change the title of the Society by omitting the word "Zion" from and by adding the words "Bible and" to the Society's original name required a special decree of the Court in 1896, when the change was made; much more would this be required, when the powers that the state grants in and by the 

Merariism. 

134 

Charter are changed. An opinion of lawyers, who usually for filthy lucre say what their clients want, does not have the necessary authority to make such changes, which require a court decree. No honest lawyer who knows the law on the subject would say that shareholders or directors can legally pass binding bylaws that change the state-granted, state-sanctioned and state-limited provisions of the charter. The only legal way that this can be done is to appeal to the state courts to change the provisions of the Charter. But to make such an appeal would be Revolutionism, the Sixth Slaughter Weapon, as what was done Jan. 3, 1920, was also Revolutionism. This action of the Shareholders, therefore, is another example of disobedience to the Lord's arrangements as given in the Charter, and will surely prove a hindrance to success in service. When will we learn the lesson not to rebel against, but to keep the Lord's arrangements (Ps. 107:11)? 

It will be recalled that, while writing in our Dec., 1919 issue on the Golden-Age Revolutionism, we announced that fit-man experiences would surely follow such a point-blank violation of the Will. Seemingly before arousing the fit man to act the Lord waited for the next outbreak of Revolutionism, that which occurred at the shareholders' meeting, Jan. 3, 1920, against a number of the Charter's provision; for ten days thereafter the Government announced that it would reopen the case against the Society leaders, whom we pity, but who apparently have not learned the lesson that their former fit-man experience should have taught them. 

For the profit of our Society brethren we take this occasion to tell them of an incident that was brought to our attention in Sep., 1917. An unconsecrated Truth friend learning early in August of the ousting of the four directors, at his own initiative and without the knowledge of any of the Truth people, wrote to an 

Church Organized, in Relation to the Society. 

135 

old-time friend of his, the then Assistant Attorney-General of Pennsylvania, asking if J.F.R.'s course of ousting the directors was right. First, in a short opinion this Official replied that J.F.R.'s course was neither morally nor legally right. Later, angered at J.F.R.'s usurpation, as he continued to consider it, the same Official wrote out for his friend a lengthy opinion with numerous citations of legal authorities as proofs to the same effect. Further, he claimed that J.F.R.'s course was an offense against the State of Pennsylvania, which granted the Charter. This official then told his old-time friend that he was going to institute proceedings to annul the Society's Charter; but at the earnest entreaty of his Truth friend, who, as a condition precedent to telling us the incident, committed us to confidence as to his identity, that Official desisted from his purpose. Our object in telling this incident is not to threaten, but to apprise our Society brethren (who, deceived as greatly as they have been, are yet seeking to be loyal to the Teachings, Arrangements, Charter and Will that the Lord gave through that Servant) of the disastrous results that violations of the Charter are likely to bring. These violations are liable to lead to disannulling of the W.T.B. & T.S.! While the power-grasping course of J.F.R. and the group that under him are controlling the Society, moves us to believe that they would not regret such an event, we feel sure that the bulk of the Society brethren would feel it one of the worst imaginable calamities. Hence to safeguard these brethren against such a disaster, we have written this article, and have told this incident. The Priests, whether in or out of the Society, we earnestly exhort to resist to the end the by-laws revolutionism, and thus co-operate with our Head in leading Azazel's Goat to the door of the Tabernacle. It is His, and not our part in the High Priest's work to see that the fit man lays hold of Azazel's Goat for its repeated and unfavorable 

Merariism. 

136 

experiences at his hand. And He will do this out of love for them, as moral suasion and previous fit-man sufferings seemingly have been insufficient to work in them that "godly sorrow that worketh repentance to salvation not to be repented of." 

The April 1, 1920, Tower contains an article entitled, Let Us Dwell In Peace. This exhortation all of the Lord's people, subordinately to purity (Jas. 3:17), should strive to practice. We have decided to discuss in a kindly spirit and plain manner the said article, and to point out the only solution for real peace and unity among the Lord's people. Nobody strove in harmony with Truth and Righteousness harder than we to prevent in 1917 the rupture of peace and unity; and we trust not to be behind others now in 1920 in seeking to restore a peace and unity in harmony with Truth and Righteousness. May the Lord give all of us as His people the necessary help through His Spirit, Word and Providence to seek a Divinely pleasing peace and unity! The article tells us of some British brethren and the Society's president corresponding on certain propositions involving the relation of the W.T.B. & T.S. and the Church. We note that the article without mentioning The Present Truth replies to its views on various subjects, some directly, others not directly involved in the propositions of the article. As in the case of the Tower's articles: Blessed are the Fearless that told of Elijah becoming Elisha, and those which are entitled, Worthies, Ancient and Modern, and Justification, so this article seems not to be aiming at any one; but from our knowledge of J.F.R.'s "tactfulness" we are satisfied that he, its writer, had our views in mind in all four articles above referred to. We are the recipient of accurate information on Society conditions, and are well aware that our views are arousing against J.F.R.'s teaching and practices many brethren in the Society. Hence the article, "Let Us Dwell In Peace," 

Church Organized, in Relation to the Society. 

137 

is another effort to meet our presentations, and quiet an increasingly troublesome situation. In view of this we will give friendly, but plain replies and seek to set forth our understanding of the Lord's mind on the subjects at issue, criticizing not the private conduct of the brethren, which we never do in print; but only their official wrong acts and false teachings, which our duty as a general elder in the Church requires us to do in the interests of the flock. 

The central point in the article under review is the subject of the channel. As on other erroneous views of its writer, so on this subject the article is very vague, e.g., not precisely defining the channel's supposed powers connected with its claimed successorship to "that Servant." The chief confusion in the article is its combining the Society with the Church in a real union, partly like that of state and church, and partly like that of the papacy and the Catholic Church. This thought permeates the article from beginning to end. For the present, limiting our remarks to the similarity in the relation of the papacy and the Catholic Church, we would say that as the Catholic hierarchy combines its organization with that Church, so does the article under review combine the Society with the Church, as it were, in wedlock. The argument clarified and supplemented by other Tower utterances is the following: As the hierarchy is the channel between God and the Church for its instruction and for the management of its general work; so the Society is the channel between God and the Church for its instruction, and the management of its general work. Above we pointed out that the official publications of the Society claim for it that it is "the one and only channel which the Lord has used in dispensing His Truth continually since the beginning of the Harvest period." (Z '19, 105, col. 2, par. 1; 107, last par.; G 145.) How could this be true, among other reasons, since the Society did not come into existence, until years after the 

Merariism. 

138 

Harvest began? This proposition involves the thought, as it does in the case of the pope, that there be especially "one mind," J.F.R.'s, that God specially illuminates with the light as due, and that the Society, J.F.R., by special illumination sees and presents this special light for the friends, e.g., in such articles as Blessed are the Fearless, Worthies, Ancient and Modern, Justification and the one under review, etc., all contradicting the Divinely illuminated views of him who was as "that Servant," the true channel, not as the Society's President, but as that Servant. 

The channel proposition under review clarified by other authorized Society publications, is also exactly like that of the papacy in a second respect, i.e., as the pope is not only the specially illuminated teacher of the Church through the hierarchy, but also the specially guided executive through the hierarchy for the Church; so J.F.R., through the Society, is not only the specially illuminated teacher of the Church, but also the specially guided executive, "the Steward," through the Society for the Church! This is the view underlying the article and is veiledly expressed (Z '20, 104, col. 1, par. 2) and is the general view of the Society's mouthpieces (Z '17, 327, par. 1; Z '16, 390, col. 2, etc.; G 227; Harvest Siftings, 10, col. 2, par. 4). All will admit that this is the official as well as the common view among Society adherents, e.g., as championed in Clayton Woodworth's tract on the Penny and its Steward, which was published in the Swedish Tower, perhaps in others also. The claim that the Society is the successor of that Servant is in line with this thought, as all will grant; and as our Pastor used the term Society of himself, so J.F.R. has used the term of himself. Such a view makes the Society under the headship of its president in its relation to the Church exactly what the Roman Catholic view makes of the Catholic hierarchy through the headship of the pope in its relation to the Catholic Church. 

Church Organized, in Relation to the Society. 

139 

Hence the Society is in little Babylon, the confused condition prevailing among Truth people, exactly what the Romish hierarchy is in the confused condition among the Nominal Church people. To seat such air institution with such claims in the true Church is to seat a little Antichrist in the temple of God (2 Thes. 2:1-9). There can be no successful denial of this proposition. The new doctrine of the Society that has been made to prevail since about the time of out Pastor's death is exactly like the doctrine (of apostolic succession of bishops and the primacy of the pope as Peter's successor) that was with the falling away, in the beginning of the Age made to prevail in the nominal Church. Some day in minute detail we will, D.v., trace the correspondence between the papacy's history, doctrines, practices and constitution on the one hand, and the Society's history, policy-doctrines, practices and constitution on the other hand. 

But one may say, Is that not the relation that that Servant had to the Church, as the one whose mind was specially illuminated with the light as due, whose mouth and pen set this light forth, and whose hand guided the general work of the Church? We answer: by no means; for not as president of a "dummy corporation" with "dummy directors and shareholders" did he have the above-mentioned official functions; but as an individual, apart from any corporation, Divinely chosen to be for the Church the special eye, mouth and hand of the Lord for the Parousia. As the Lord's Special Representative, as an individual, and not as the president, or special representative of the Society, did he function as above. How do we know this? Because he took executive charge of the Harvest work in 1875 as the Lord's choice, when he published his tract on The Object And Manner Of Our Lord's Return, continued it when in 1876 he directed Mr. Barbour to edit a paper, with our Pastor as its publisher, and as one of its associate editors; and in 1879, 

Merariism. 

140 

when the light on the Tabernacle was given him, the storehouse was put into his charge; while the Society was not formed as an association until about Sep., 1881, and as a corporation until Dec., 1884. Hence he was that Servant before the Society was formed; and received none of his powers as that Servant from, on account of, or through it. Rather he controlled it absolutely until his death, which proves that it was not "the channel" for years, but was only a "dummy corporation" with "dummy directors and shareholders," as all people who know the facts are aware. J.F.R. knows and said this, when he wrote that there was but little use for the "so-called Board" during that Servant's life (Harvest Siftings, 10, col. 2, par. 4). 

The article under review claims that "the Society published all the writings of Brother Russell," and that "the Society was the channel for the beginning of these publications." We beg leave to differ. In our quotation above from his booklet, A Conspiracy Exposed, published in 1894, it can be seen that up to 1894, it published nothing; this remark applies also to later years; that the Tower Publishing Co. ("which," our pastor writes, "in a financial way represents myself") owned everything and published everything, and filled the Tract Society's (his) orders for Dawns and Tracts, etc. In that same booklet, as can be seen in our quotation, he called it a financial channel, absolutely under his control, a means whereby he received donations which he expended for the work, as he saw fit. His putting his copyrights, which he took out for only a part of his writings, The Studies, and all his other possessions, apart from most of his publications, in the name of the Society about 1903, was putting them from one of his pockets into another; for he controlled them, just the same after as before so doing, as per his express stipulation with the board. The transfer was made, not to give the Society added powers, but to protect what was his stewardship from the 

Church Organized, in Relation to the Society. 

141 

unholy ambitions and covetous designs of Mrs. Russell. J.F.R.'s statement that our Pastor was an editor, not a publisher, which he says the Society was, is wholly out of harmony with the facts. It is true that from April 15, 1909, for the first time he used the name of the Society as publisher of the Tower; but even from then onward this was merely nominal, and occurred for the first time 6 years after he put his book copyrights in the Society's name. He was the real publisher, i.e., controller; and when in the foreword on the inside page of each Tower he spoke of the Tower as a trust of his to be administered according to his judgment of the Lord's will, he proved that he was both publisher and editor; for an editor who is not a publisher must follow the publisher's orders, unless by definite understanding he can do otherwise. That the Watch Tower was not at all times the official organ of the Society, as J.F.R. claims, is evident, among other things, from the fact that it was published years before the Society came into existence. During our Pastor's life the Tower was his mouthpiece, though nominally for his last 7 years it was published as that of the Society, a "dummy corporation." 

Again J.F.R. is mistaken when he thinks that the Society now controls all our Pastor's writings. Those writings that he for a longer or shorter duration published without copyrights anybody can reprint without the Society's permission, and this includes almost everything that he wrote. Hence the Society cannot control reprints made from copies of his writings that were issued without copyrights. The Tower was first copyrighted after his death, as can be seen from the absence of the words or initials claiming the copyright before his death. Hence the P.B.I. or anyone else is safe legally and morally in republishing literary products from our Pastor's non-copyrighted or expired copyrighted editions. Our Pastor, therefore, as the 

Merariism. 

142 

Lord's eye, mouth and hand for His Church was, as he taught, the Lord's channel. In this sense the Society never was and never will be the channel. In its claims, actual, implied or presumed, to these functions of that Servant it is a counterfeit channel, as the papacy is. As we showed above, it is a channel, Divinely instituted for that branch of the Great Company alone typed by Mahlite Levites and Elisha. 

The Society leaders and their partisan supporters seek hard in many ways to bolster up their claims on Society powers. On some of their other claims thereon we will make a few remarks. First as to their claim that our Pastor was appointed that Servant for the duration of the Laodicean Church, and hence is still acting as that Servant from beyond the vail! This claim among other things is too broad. He was appointed that Servant for the Parousia period of the Laodicean Church (Luke 12:37, 42-47; Ezek. 9:11), not for the Epiphany period, whose peculiar mission and trials required his vacating the office of that Servant and the non-existence of this office. There is no evidence in Scripture, Reason, Fact and his Writings that his office as that Servant persisted after his passing beyond the vail. The reason for the office precludes such an idea; being invisible, while present serving His prospective Bride with the Parousia Truth, our Lord for the best interests of the Parousia Truth and work toward His prospective Bride, had to have a special visible eye, mouth and hand through which He could see for, speak to, and work toward and through Her, until He would accomplish His Parousia mission to Her. For these purposes exclusively the office of that Servant was created; and it lasted until these purposes were realized, i.e., until the end of the Parousia, during which all the watching servants were fed with the Truth, and led in the work of harvesting (Luke 12:37, 42-44; Ezek. 9:11). The purposes of the office having been realized, the office

Church Organized, in Relation to the Society. 

143 

ceased to exist, God ending it when the man with the writer's inkhorn began through his chief member, that Servant, in the toga scene on the Pullman Car, Oct. 30, 1916, the day before the latter's death, to report the completion of that symbolic man's work (Ezek. 9:11). The Lord the next day gave us the unanswerable proof of the completion of the Reaping and Gleaning work ("I have done as Thou hast commanded me": "put the mark on the foreheads," etc.), and the present nonexistence of that office by making invisible through death the only one for whom the office was created; since his functions for the reaping and gleaning work as the visible eye, mouth and hand of the invisible present Lord of necessity ceased, when on that day he by his change of nature ceased to be visible. The Lord would never have had a that Servant, except that as an invisible Spirit He needed a that Servant as a visible special representative, through whom to see for, speak to, and act toward His prospective Bride during and only during the Parousia for its special work. Hence neither an individual nor a corporation is his successor, i.e., has and uses his office powers as the Lord's eye, hand and mouth for His prospective Bride for the Harvest, whose end, having set in, proves our proposition with redoubled force. 

The duration of that Servant's office being limited to the Parousia period of the Laodicean Church, and all the goods being put into his charge for the period of that office only, we being now in the Epiphany period of the Laodicean Church, evidently he could no longer be that Servant, nor could the storehouse be any longer in his charge; nor could he have a successor, the office which he held passing out of existence with its necessity and its period of duration; hence there is no necessity for his having a visible agency (either in the form of the Society, or in the form of J.F.R.) for giving the meat in due season. Moreover, if a channel somewhat like our Pastor were now 

Merariism. 

144 

necessary, it would be the Lord's direct channel, and would not be our Pastor's channel. The Society's claim that our Pastor is now "from beyond the vail directing every feature of the Harvest work," is contradictory to our Lord's prerogatives as the Director of the work from beyond the veil, and is in Little Babylon the counterpart of the papal claim that St. Peter manages the Church through the pope. 

As to the attempted distinction which some Society friends make between the office of "that Servant" and that of "the Steward," with our Pastor retaining the former, and giving J.F.R. the latter, we would remark that there is no difference either in nature, personnel or function, in the office designated by these terms; for Jesus, both in Greek and English (Luke 12:42-46) uses the words interchangeably. The reason why a different word is used in the Greek of Matt. 20:8 is due to the fact that different figures with pertinent names are used in the two passages: the figure of a household and its appurtenances is used in the former, while that of a vineyard and its appurtenances is used in the latter passage; but both words translated "steward" mean an administrator, an executive. Our Pastor now retains no part of this office indicated by these words, and this office now no longer existing, he cannot have a successor therein. Hence neither the Society nor J.F.R. is his successor in this peculiar office. In Vol. V, Chap. II, we proved our Pastor was the steward of Matt. 20:8, and disproved J.F.R.'s being such. There are, however, strong factual reasons for believing that the latter in his work and office as the leader of the Great Company is typed by the power-grasping, money-loving, truth-denying and falsehood-telling Gehazi, the unworthy servant of Elisha (Vol. III, Chap. V). 

To another of their claims, i.e., that that Servant always used the Society as the channel, we would reply that being the channel (1) of controlling the work 

Church Organized, in Relation to the Society. 

145 

and (2) of giving the Truth in due season, which he received by special illumination as that Servant, and not as the Society's president, he never in these two ways used the Society, which term properly means the directors with their agents in their organized capacity, or the shareholders, or both. Whenever he spoke of "the Society," or "The Tower," or "The Studies" as being "that Servant" and "the channel," as he did in some places, e.g., Z '09, 292-294, he did it modestly to hide himself behind these names, as is usual with editors, authors, and corporation controllers, and thus he tactfully prevented opponents from using the matter of that Servant to the injury of the lambs in the flock, as they sought to do. All of us understood the subject and that article in this way for years, until just lately, when in the interests of themselves as power-graspers the Society leaders introduced a perverted and misleading thought thereon (Acts 20:30). We were astounded to find that the article in Z '09, 292-294 was quoted in Z '19, 54-57 in full, and again in part in the article that we are reviewing (Z '20, 100), to prove that the Society always was during the Harvest that Servant and the channel for giving the meat and conducting the work. In that same article The Tower and The Studies are also called that Servant and the channel. This fact should be sufficient to prove even to babes in the Truth that our Pastor, an individual, not a Society, and not as its president as such, was modestly hiding himself behind all three of these names, and by them meant himself, as he sometimes said: "I am the Society." The fact that in Z '09, 292-294, he refers as explanatory of his understanding of that Servant and the channel to D 613, 614 and Z '96, 47, where he speaks (modestly, of course) of himself as that Servant and the channel, should have kept back the Tower Editors from such manifestly deceitful use of the article in question. What a fearful responsibility these Editors are heaping

Merariism. 

146 

upon themselves for using that article as Catholic writers frequently use writings of Church Fathers. We warn them in God's name to desist from such fraudulent use of that article! Further similar use of it they will make at their own peril (Gal. 6:7, 8). 

Above we proved that the Society was not that Servant during our Pastor's life, nor has it become his successor as that Servant since his death. The Tower, deceitfully handling that Servant's writings (Z '09, 292-294), has since his death set up the claim that the Society had during his life always been that Servant, quoting Z '09, 292-294 in full in Z '19, 54-57 and in Z '20, 100 in part, to prove this claim. This deceitful use of our Pastor's article we exposed and showed above to be false and deceitful. In the March 1, 1923, Tower in an article entitled, "Loyalty The Test," with characteristic Rutherfordian jugglery of words, The Tower Editors surrender the claim that the Society was that Servant during our Pastor's life, but set up the claim that since his death it has become his successor as that Servant; that such was our Pastor's intention when he formed the Society; that Jehovah had him organize it for that purpose; and that hence—"and this is the kernel in the nut"—to be out of harmony with that thought and the Society's work is to be out of harmony with the Lord as "murmurers" against his arrangements and to be disloyal to Him, to be loyal to whom, one must accept and work under the Society as that Servant! This theory and its outworking the Society sets up as a test of loyalty to God. Where is this test of loyalty set forth in the Scriptures—the mouth of God that contains for the child of God everything pertaining to faith and practice (2 Tim. 3:15-17)? Above we proved that our Pastor finished the work (Ezek. 9:11) for which the office of that Servant was created. Hence he could have no successor in that office, since, the work and need of such 

Church Organized, in Relation to the Society. 

147 

an office existing no more, the office itself has ceased to be. 

But let us see how The Tower Editors try to prove their proposition. As the proof they offer a quotation from Z '84, Oct. 2, which they claim proves that by Divine intention our Pastor formed the Society to become his successor as that Servant at his death. The quotation follows: "It seems tolerably certain that some of the saints will be in the flesh during a great part at least of the 'time of trouble'; and if so, there will be need of printed matter, tracts, etc., [italics ours] as much then, perhaps, as now, and possibly will be more needed; for 'when the judgments of the Lord are in the earth, the inhabitants of the world will learn righteousness' (Is. 26:9). Should those at present prominently identified with the work not be the last to be 'changed,' some interruption of the work might result; but this may be obviated by having a legal standing, granted by a State Charter." So far the quotation. Above we gave a much longer quotation on the reason for forming the Society, from our Pastor's booklet, published in 1894, and entitled, "A Conspiracy Exposed." It elaborates his reason for organizing the Society given above and adds, among other things, what is not stated in the paragraph quoted above—that the Society was to serve as a depository for funds to send out Truth literature. But to return to the quotation from Z '84, Oct., we remark by way of a preliminary, that Jesus (Matt. 24:45-47; Luke 12:42-44) states the office functions of "that Servant" to be two: (1) to expound the Parousia Truth as due to the Church; and (2) to act as executive of the Parousia work of the Church. Now we ask, Does the above quotation—or any other writing of our Pastor—state or imply that the Society, in the event of his death before the Reaping was finished, would serve in either or both of these capacities? Certainly not! Hence the quotation does not state 

Merariism. 

148 

or imply that the Society at his death would become his successor as that Servant—the Lord's mouth, eye and hand for the Parousia. He did not then, in Oct., 1884, even know that he was that Servant, having first learned of it between 1894 and 1896, let alone arrange for a successor in that capacity. The quotation under consideration proves that the Society was organized to publish in the event of our Pastor's death printed matter like tracts and other Truth literature (which the Will says should consist exclusively of our Pastor's writings, apart from articles appearing in the Tower). The Charter agrees with this, showing that the Society was organized to furnish only inanimate instrumentalities for the spread of the Truth. The last clause of the quotation shows that the Society was organized so that, especially in case of our Pastor's death, the work—that referred to in the preceding part of the quotation: publishing printed matter—tracts and kindred literature—be not interrupted. The quotation does not refer directly or impliedly to interrupting the work of acting as the Lord's mouth in giving the Parousia Truth and as the Lord's hand in administering the Parousia Work. To what desperate straits must one be reduced when in poverty of argument he is forced to quote the above paragraph in an effort to prove that the Society, since his death, is our Pastor's successor as that Servant! All that the paragraph proves is that in the event of Bro. Russell's death, the Society might exercise a very subordinate feature of power, one not restricted in use to the office of that Servant—that of publishing printed matter—tracts, etc., which apart from the Tower must consist of his writings according to the Will. In inheriting such a power, the Society has received from the Lord a power that any Gospel-Age Merarite Levite might have performed. And in moving our Pastor to arrange for the Society to do such a work, the Lord indicated what the 

Church Organized, in Relation to the Society. 

149 

antitypical fulfillment actually shows has taken place—that the Society would be an antitypical wagon (organization) of the Epiphany Merarite Levites! Hence this quotation, instead of proving that the Society would be our Pastor's successor as that Servant after his death, implies, when compared with the work of the Gospel-Age Merarites, that it would after his death become one of the antitypical Merarite Levites' symbolic wagons, which is far removed from successorship to his office! 

Nor must another thing escape our memories: When our Pastor wrote the article in 1884, from which the Tower quotes, he believed that both the Harvest and the Time of Trouble would end by Oct., 1914. Indeed it was not until 1904 (Z '04, 197-199) that he came to see that the trouble could not begin until the lease of power to the Gentiles had expired—1914. Fearing that he might die before the Harvest would end in 1914, and desiring the Truth literature to be available for Harvest purposes until 1914, he arranged for the Society so that it could furnish the literature up to that date in the event of his death before. But he lived until not only the reaping (1914) but also the gleaning (1916) was finished. Thus he finished the work that God gave him to do—the work of giving the Harvest Truth and superintending the Harvest work unto a completion (Ezek. 9:11). We have (in the Appendix of Studies III, 387-404) given 56 reasons from the Bible and the Pyramid proving that the reaping ended by Oct., 1914, and the gleaning by Passover, 1916. Hence the work going on since the latter date is not the HarvestReaping and Gleaning—work. Accordingly, the Society's work is not Harvesting—gathering the Little Flock. Hence it cannot have our Pastor's official functions as the channel and therefore is not his successor as that Servant. 

Repeatedly and boldly the Tower (Z '23, 68, 72) 

Merariism. 

150 

throws out the challenge to others to state what is the channel, if the Society is not such. We would be disloyal to the Lord, if we permitted this repeated, public and bold challenge to remain unanswered. Therefore we answer it as follows: Since our Pastor's death there has been no channel in the sense in which he was the channel. We pointed out above the fact that the Society is a channel of the Lordfor certain features of the Epiphany Merarites' work. If it were the channel as that Servant's successor, its mouthpiece—The Tower—would not in almost every issue bring forth some new erroneous interpretation or teaching contradictory of the interpretations and teaching of the channel—Bro. Russell. Its partisan supporters as antitypical Elisha are also a channel of the Lord—His mouthpiece to nominal Spiritual Israel. But there are other channels than the Society and antitypical Elisha. The Pastoral Bible Institute, the Bible Student's Committee, the Standfasts' Committee, etc., are, each in its way, channels of the Lord as Levitical organizations. The members of the World's High Priest yet in the flesh are also a channel of the Lord—to lead Azazel's Goat to the Gate and to deliver it to the fit man, and indirectly—through the latter—to Azazel (1 Cor. 5:3-5). The Scriptures prove, and facts and the Pyramid corroborate the thought that the privilege of giving the Epiphany Truth pertinent to, and of overseeing the general Epiphany work toward—not the Priests, but—Azazel's Goat, was shortly after our Pastor's death given to us, who amid many tribulations have and will continue to exercise these functions, and will by God's grace complete the ministry toward Azazel's Goat, and shortly thereafter, through the tribulations coming on the Levitical leaders, will be recognized by God's Priests and Levites as the Lord's special representative among the Priests in giving the teachings for, and in overseeing the work toward and of—not the priests, but—the Epiphany Levites. 

Church Organized, in Relation to the Society. 

151 

In answer to the claim that we violate the Will by publishing The Present Truth we would say: the Charter and Will were given exclusively for the regulation of controlling corporations and associations among the Truth people, and not to suppress the existence, nor to regulate the mission of an independent periodical whose publication is necessary for the defense of the Truth against its "channel" and other perverters, and for the defense of the obligatoriness of the Charter and Will against revolutionists (who use or set them aside as it suits their unholy ambitions) in the affairs of controlling corporations and associations among Truth people. 

If the Tower Editors had not so greatly lost the Truth on the organization of the Church as complete, when God originally realized and described it in Apostolic times (for details see above), they would never set forth such claims as they do of the Society in its relation to the Church of the Living God, which as constituted by Him did not contain a business corporation that claimed the specific right of controlling a general ministry toward and for the Church, involving the general teaching office in pilgrim, periodical and convention work, and the control of the literature for the Church's edification and distribution. Such claims with their corresponding acts are like those of the two great Antichrists, the Papacy and the Federation of Churches. 

We do not have to use our imaginations, and indulge in various unprovable, unscriptural, unreasonable and unfactful assumptions as those of the Tower Editors on Society powers on the subject under discussion. All that we need to do is to go to the source and rule of faith and practice for controlling corporations among Truth people: The Charter, Will and those arrangements of our Pastor that are directly stated or implied in the Will and Charter, but not those exclusive arrangements for the Little Flock that flowed out

Merariism. 

152 

of his powers toward the Little Flock as that Servant; and we will know what the Divinely intended powers and purposes of the Society are. Certain facts on their claims on Society powers for pilgrim and convention work and for authorizing new literary products, apart from Tower articles, deserve our study in the light of the Bible, the Charter and Will. J.F.R. has arranged a pilgrim service, appointed pilgrims, additional to those who were pilgrims at the time of that Servant's passing beyond the vail and has called conventions. Where is there Scriptural warrant that he, a board of directors, a collection of individuals, or of churches, or all of them combined has a right to make such arrangements in the Church which is His Body? God and Jesus never gave him or them such authority. Our Pastor never formed a corporation that exercised such powers during his life, nor was it the Divine intention that he should, nor did he intend it. Above we gave dozens of facts, as well as many Scriptures, that prove that in our Pastor's day, never did a Society institute or control such a general ministry toward and for the Church which is Christ's Body; for God did that through that Servant alone. Since the pilgrim office is that of the non-apostolic general elders (F 244, 251, 253, 273 and 274), the only servants of the Truth now living that have the right to address the general Church on matters of faith and practice; and since God alone has the power to appoint such teachers in the general Church, which during the Harvest of the Jewish Age He did by Jesus, especially while the Latter was in the flesh, which during the Harvest of the Gospel Age He did by that Servant, and which during the intervening time He usually did entirely apart from human agents; unless others can show, as an authorization for their claim, a specific command from God, we will emphatically deny their right to appoint pilgrims to minister to the Church which is His Body. As the respective 

Church Organized, in Relation to the Society. 

153 

parallels of Zerubbabel, Ezra and Nehemiah; Marsiglio, Wyclif and Huss (Z '05, 182-185) were, as general overseers, somewhat like our Pastor, put in charge of those "secondarily prophets" who were not general overseers. We did not until recently see that such general overseers were active between the Harvests. The above references distinguish between those two classes of "secondarily prophets." These brethren claim that they are appointing pilgrims to minister to the Little Flock as its general elders. We ask them before God and the Church to show us their authority from the Word of God or from the Will or Charter for such an exercise of power? Furthermore, they have exercised this, their claimed power, which the article under review also asserts, to exclude Divinely set pilgrims from serving as pilgrims in what they claim is the Church which is His Body. We ask them for Biblical proof for such exercise of authority on their part. Such acts are emphatically lording it over the Church, and smiting the brethren. Will they pass these vital points by in silence, as they have others against their unscriptural assumptions of power? Where in the Bible is the board or Society's president authorized to call general conventions? With the above-stated limitations those who were "Secondarily Prophets" in the Church which is His Body had by the powers of their office as teachers in the general Church, the power to call general conventions (provided they lived in a time in which such power was not lodged in an individual exclusively, i.e., when there were no general overseers like Marsiglio, Wyclif, Huss, etc., and that Servant especially) but no other servants of the Truth have had such power. Those who were once Secondarily Prophets, and who are now in the Great Company have neither part nor parcel in the Church which is His Body; hence cannot do anything implying membership therein, let alone do pilgrim work, and appoint pilgrims and general 

Merariism. 

154 

conventions for it. Nor as corporational members of the Great Company have they the right to appoint pilgrims and arrange for general conventions for the Great Company; for God never gave them such powers to exercise. 

But we imagine we hear some one ask: Did not "that Servant" arrange for the Society to appoint pilgrims and general conventions? We answer no; for both the Will and Charter, which are the source and rule of corporational faith and practice for controlling corporations among Truth people, are silent on such subjects, nor do they imply these rights. The Charter by Divine intention empowers the Levites to "disseminate [sow broadcast] Bible truths in various languages by means of the publication [not by means of arranging for the authorship] of tracts, pamphlets, papers and other religious documents, and by the use of all other lawful means [not "agents," animate beings, but "means," inanimate things, like the Photodrama, the Angelophone, etc.], which [not whom] its board of directors, duly constituted, shall deem expedient for the furtherance of the purposes stated." Of course this implies the use of such "agents" as are necessary to operate these means, but no others than such. Hence appointing pilgrims and conventions are not powers conferred by the Will and Charter; and it is usurpatory in the Society or its president to appoint them. Additionally the Will authorizes a self perpetuating editorial committee and a sisters' committee, in which vacancies were to be filled by it, the directors and the editors acting jointly. It authorizes no other class of mouthpieces or agents. Therefore the Society is not a religious body; it is a body (not to provide new literary products apart from the Tower, but) to publish and distribute Bible truths by inanimate means alone, through corresponding agents only. In other words, according to the Lord's and that Servant's intention, apart from the Tower, which he 

Church Organized, in Relation to the Society. 

155 

intended should consist partly of posthumous and reprinted articles of his own, the only literature that the Society may publish is what was produced by that Servant, or what was published by him, though produced by others. Hence all of the other productions that they have published have been issued in usurpation of the Will and Charter. This includes The Finished Mystery, Golden Age, The Harp, etc., etc. Let not, therefore, the Levites act on the principle of the papacy, as they have done; and thus add to, or subtract from the source and rule of corporational faith and practice for the controlling corporations among Truth people! In this connection we desire to recall our statement (P '19, 160, col. 2, par. 2) to the effect that the Charter and Will authorized pilgrim work to be conducted by the Society. We like the rest of the brethren took this for granted from what existed in our Pastor's day; but now recognize such arrangements, as far as that Servant was used to make them, to be the Lord's for the Little Flock alone. 

We do not mean by the remarks foregoing to be understood as teaching that the Lord will not give the Great Company pilgrim privileges; for we believe the Word of God will yet unfold a way in which this will be done; but when it will be unfolded, we rather opine that such pilgrim service will not be authorized by, nor be under the auspices of Great Company Corporations and Associations. However, we can safely wait on the Lord for the clear manifestation of His will on this point. In the meantime let us have done with the Society's claiming more powers than God granted to it; and this means that it should put an end to its pilgrim and convention services and to its meddling in the affairs of the ecclesias. In a word, neither the Society nor any other Truth corporation has a right to engage in publishing activities outside of being a publishing agency of Bible truths in the 

Merariism. 

156 

form of that Servant's pen products, Tower articles and pen products of others which he published being the only exceptions to this rule. Additionally it may distribute Bibles, especially the Bible Students' edition, Concordances, etc., as per that Servant's example. Therefore we appeal to all of the Society's adherents who are loyal to the Lord's Charter, Will and those arrangements of His that are directly stated and implied in the Charter and Will, as all of these were by Him given through that Servant, to work to the end that the Society restrict its mission to its Divinely authorized activities. And this means that they put an end to every activity of the Society not thus Divinely authorized, e.g., busybodying in the affairs of the ecclesias, appointment of pilgrims and their service, conventions, writing or causing to be written for their publication new literature, apart from the Tower. 

The three questions that the article asks, as to whether we believe (1) our Lord's presence, (2) that Servant's office, and (3) his arrangements in re the Society, in the event of his death, do not necessitate the conclusion that the Society has the powers (his powers as his successor) that the article overtly or covertly claims for it, far from prove their claims of powers. These questions like almost everything else in the article under review do not bring out specifically what should be brought out for a proper answer to their claims. We will state them as the facts require their statement: (1) Do you believe that Jesus, present in His Second Advent, did the reaping and gleaning completely from Oct., 1874, to April, 1916? Answer: Yes. (2) Do you believe that He used that Servant as His special eye, mouth and hand toward and for His Church during and for the entire reaping and gleaning period? Answer: Yes. (3) Do you believe that the Lord had him give proper directions for the Society's work, in the event of his death, through the Charter, Will and those arrangements for

Church Organized, in Relation to the Society. 

157 

its work directly stated and implied in the Charter and Will? Answer: Yes. (4) Do you believe these three answers prove that the Society is our Pastor's successor and as such is the inheritor of his office functions as the channel? Answer: No; for there is absolutely no connection between the premises in the first three questions and the Society's answer to the fourth question. Nothing in the Scriptures, Reason, Facts, our Pastor's writings, Charter and Will imply such successorship and powers. Hence the argument of the article under review is entirely without foundation from the standpoint of these three questions—it is mere assumption, as logical as papacy's claims to the successorship and powers of St. Peter—no more and no less. In only one very limited sense can we properly call the Society a successor of our Pastor, but in no other sense: its board, not its president, has inherited only that fractional part of his powers which is to see to the publication and circulation of such literature only as the Will, Charter and their pertinent arrangements prescribe. He could produce original literature; while apart from articles for the Tower, the Society has no right to prepare, or to have new literature prepared! If they insist that they have, we ask for their authority. The Charter says they may disseminate Bible truths by publishing (not by authorizing the writing) of tracts, pamphlets, etc. The Will restricts them to use as tracts that Servant's writings; nor have they a right to institute other arrangements or means than his; nor to change the Charter and Will. 

The article denies that other channels have its specific work. To this we give several answers. Its specific work, as a Levitical one, is not at all toward the Priests, whom it should help, not hinder, as it has done. Nor is its specific work to direct a general ministry in literary, periodical, pilgrim and convention work, for and toward the Church which is

Merariism. 

158 

Christ's body. It can in harmony with the Will and Charter publish the Tower alone as containing new materials; but its proper ministry is that of Mahlite Merarites, and its main work is toward the nominal people of God, typed in Elisha's office powers. No other corporation has the right to invade its province as antitypical Elisha and antitypical Mahlite Merarites. Nor has it the right to invade the province of the Mushite Merarites, nor those of the Libnite and Shimite Gershonites, nor those of the four groups of the Kohathites, much less the province of the Priests. We hope in due time to set forth just what these limits are; but we agree with the article in the claim that the Society has a specific work in which no other body should busybodythe work of the Mahlite Merarites; but it has not the work of the Priests nor that of other Levites. Hence it should not busybody in their work, as it has done. 

Now briefly will we answer the seven general propositions on the first page of the article, using language as nearly like theirs as the Truth will permit. (1) Our understanding is that the W.T.B. & T.S. should be a servant to the Church only as one of the wagons of the Mahlite Merarites (Num. 7:3-8) served the typical priests; that it should not only not exercise control over the Little Flock and Great Company, but not even over Mahlite Merarites, except its officers and agents; and should keep its hands entirely off of local churches; but its course for years has been a constant effort to control both Priests and Levites in the general Church and in local ecclesias. Its work should be almost entirely toward the public! (2) The soul of fellowship and unity in Christ through Justification and Sanctification is the one spirit, hope, work, Lord, faith, baptism and God (Eph. 4:4-6) enjoyed in Christ Godward, Christward and Churchward; and such fellowship and unity are wholly apart from any corporational arrangement, which cannot affect the

Church Organized, in Relation to the Society. 

159 

relation of the Priests of God. The Society in numerous cases by breaking up classes, and forcing an endorsement of "the present management," the Society's policies and Vol. VII has most violently sinned against this fellowship and unity. (3) There should be full liberty of conscience, with no attempt to coerce the views of one by another. But the Society through the spirit of fear that it has aroused by its threats of the Second Death, Judas Class, outer darkness, loss of crowns, etc., has coerced most disastrously many of the weak brethren and weak ecclesias to the dishonor of God, the persecution of the faithful and the injury of all. (4) Church government should be maintained according to the Word of the Master and the Apostles, and all should be willing to submit to the majority, unless the majority should require violation of Truth and Righteousness, in which event the minority should not submit to, but resist the majority. But this principle of majority rule applies to local ecclesias alone. The majority or minority of other ecclesias have no business in the affairs of local ecclesias other than their own, nor in the affairs of individuals not of their classes. Nowhere in the New Testament do we find the churches legislating for one another, or unitedly legislating in religious matters for the whole Church through a corporation, board, committee or individual. To do this is pure Roman Catholicism. Christ through the Apostles did all the necessary legislating for the general Church. Only respecting a deacon work may two or more congregations join through a committee in a work toward brethren in other ecclesias (2 Cor. 8:16-24), but never in a spiritual work. The violation of this principle led to the external union of the nominal church, a union of which the Society adherents have become examples, even as the Bible sets forth the Society as a little nominal church. (5) The Society has no authority from God's word, the Will and Charter to conduct a pilgrim work. If they think 

Merariism. 

160 

they have, let them set forth the facts and proofs. That Servant's example does not apply to the Society; for it does not have his peculiar powers. (6) The Society, while having no authority to determine the qualification of officers of the various ecclesias, has in many cases assumed the right so to do; and in not a few cases to win its point in this very respect has forced divisions on the brethren, stirred up enmity and spread sorrow broadcast where before there were none. In harmony with the limitations of the Word of God, the Will, Charter and the Divine arrangements, directly stated and implied in these, the Society has the right to determine the qualifications of those who shall constitute her officers or servants; and with the same limitations has the sole authority to elect her officers, but cannot give them powers not conferred by God's Word, the Charter and Will, which three things it has no authority to change in any respect. (7) The motives governing all actions in the Church or between the individual members should be wisdom, justice, love and power, re-enforced by such other motives as are under their control. Love, not balanced by wisdom, justice and power, is not enough. The history of the success of Society usurpations proves this. The peace and unity that the article under review asks are not a peace and unity that are Divinely pleasing. In God's time peace will come with many unities, one of the Priests and sixty of the Levites. 

The greatest obstacle to such a Divinely pleasing peace and unity is (1) the Society's priestcraft, its practiced theory (a) as the channel of the seasonal meat for the Church, (b) as the channel of controlling the general work of and for the Church; and (2) the Society's kingcraft, if not the professed theory, surely the actual practice, whereby (a) through deceitful "politics" and "wire pulling" in waging and winning Society election campaigns, "the present management" 

Church Organized, in Relation to the Society. 

161 

perpetuates its autocracy and forms the policies of the Society, and whereby (b) through busybodying in the affairs of the local ecclesias by the Tower, letters, pilgrims and trusted local agents, it seeks to rule all churches, and by warfare divides such as oppose its control and policies, if it can. Therefore in view of such priestcraft and kingcraft, and the multiplied evils that they have produced for years, we call upon all Society adherents who are loyal to the Lord's interpretations, Charter, Will and their properly pertinent arrangement, as these were given through that Servant, to rise as God's children and servants in His might, and by an absolute divorce put an end to the union of little papacy and the little catholic church as manifested in the Society's priestcraft; and by such a divorce put an end to the union of the little state and church in little Christendom as manifested in the Society's kingcraft—both of these evils being introduced primarily by J.F.R., and secondarily by his trusted underlings since about the time of that Servant's death. For such priestcraft and kingcraft are the greatest foes of true Christian liberty, equality and fraternity among God's children! Let us take a single-hearted stand for such liberty, equality and fraternity, which are guaranteed by the Bible, which are safeguarded by the Charter, Will and their pertinent arrangements, and which are the indispensables for true Christian peace and unity! And since true Christian liberty, equality and fraternity are impossible under the controllership of little Babylon's priestcraft and kingcraft, let us as God's freemen repudiate the yoke of little Babylon's bondage (Gal. 5:1)! How may this be accomplished in the Society? By limiting its functions, apart from the Editors' work on the Tower, to printing our Pastor's writings and publications alone and to distributing them with Bible helps consisting of various Bible editions, 

Merariism. 

162 

especially the Bible Students' Edition, various good Bible translations, dictionaries, concordances, etc., even as he pursued this policy. In a word, the only way that this can be done in the Society and other corporational and associational bodies among God's people is by limiting the Society's and other controlling corporations' activities to the sphere prescribed in the Charter and Will, and those arrangements of our Pastor that are directly stated and implied in the Charter and Will. Will we not stand for such Christian liberty, equality and fraternity among our corporational brethren? Many of the principles of the article, "Let Us Dwell In Peace," are fundamentally opposed to Christian liberty, equality and fraternity! And when we consider the policies and practices of J.F.R., and see them stated in part, and for the rest subtly imbedded in the article under review, and when we consider his known double-mindedness, unholy ambition, and persistent opposition to, and persecution of those who stand for the Lord's Charter, Will and their pertinent arrangements given through that Servant, even if he makes an offer of peace, it is but a wooden gift horse (corruptible doctrine). Like the discerning Trojan who, fearing the treachery of the Greeks in giving the Trojans the wooden horse, warned his countrymen: "I distrust the Greeks, though they bring a gift"; we say to one and all, We distrust J.F.R., though he offer a gift, the symbolic wooden horse set forth in his article, "Let Us Dwell In Peace." We will be like the Trojans who spurned the warning and accepted the gift horse containing hidden Greek soldiers who ruined the city after the horse was taken into Troy, if we accept J.F.R.'s gift horse filled with hidden treacherous schemes, which emerging from their hiding place, when taken into the city of God, would destroy it! We will not accept his kind of a peace offer, if, alert to the situation, we love, cherish

Church Organized, in Relation to the Society. 

163 

and defend the principles of true Christian liberty, equality and fraternity imbedded in the Lord's interpretations, Charter, Will and their pertinent arrangements, as given through that Servant. The article under review is both an overt and covert attack upon all of these; hence offers us bondage under priestcraft and kingcraft with pretended liberty, peace and unity with the certainty of future strife and division. It seems to us the final issue, in a word, is this: Shall we be J.F.R.'s bondsmen or God's freemen? Which? The Priests of God will choose freedom in Christ; the Levites more or less bondage; but thanks be to God the days of the oppressor's power are numbered, and will be cut short in Righteousness! And let all lovers of Truth and Righteousness say, Amen! 

We now suggest what we think will bring real Scriptural peace and unity with their liberty, equality and fraternity among both the Priests and Levites. This is indicated for the Priests alone in Eph. 4:3-6, which applies to them in their relations to one another, and not to them in their relations to Levites. For the Levites it is indicated in Num. 8:7. Let the Levites (1) submit to their being sprinkled with the water of separation, the Epiphany truths on the divisions of the Lord's people in their respective groups. This means: Let them accept the Epiphany; the separating truths, in part literally and in part typically and antitypically set forth in the seasonal meat on the Little Flock, Great Company, Youthful Worthies, Second Death class, the World and the Chronology, as these lines of Truth are now going forth; (2) let them by the sharp razor of Epiphany truths and exposures shave themselves clean of their symbolic hairs, powers that do not belong to them, and that they have unjustly grasped; and (3) let them wash their robes, both in the blood of the Lamb and in the water of the Word (Rev. 7:14; Num. 8:7, 12). This threefold

Merariism. 

164 

process will cleanse them; and will greatly inure to a peace and unity that will be pleasing to God and helpful to the brethren. It will spread the Christian spirit of true liberty, equality and fraternity in real peace and unity. Will the Levites do these things? Not now, but later; for they need more experiences both at the hands of the fit-man, and of Azazel, for the destruction of their flesh. And while we know that this means sufferings for them, in which they have our sympathy and prayers; yet as the indispensables of their cleansing we pray the Lord to give them such experiences, that their spirits might be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus (1 Cor. 5:5). Increasingly will this enable them to appreciate and spread Christian liberty, equality and fraternity in Christian peace and unity. Grant it in Thy Grace and Mercy, O Lord!