Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing (epiphany) of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ; Titus 2:13
terrible war, the first feature of the Great Tribulation. Thus we see that fulfilled facts proved that the World's High Priest confessed the willful sins of the nominal people of God, i.e., wrongs that they knew to be wrongs, and were able to avoid, in the hearing of those who had lost their crowns, and who as a result were shortly to be put into the Great Company.
(28) The recital of these sins and the teaching of a future smiting of Jordan stirred up powerfully those in the Truth who were about to be placed into the Great Company, to do a work of smiting the peoples. By the Lord's permitting our Pastor during 1916 sometimes to teach that the smiting of Jordan was then going on, and at other and later times to speak of it as future, the prospective Great Company was impressed deeply with the thought that the future would see the first smiting of Jordan, and hence with great zeal and noise did what they thought was the first, but what proved to be the second smiting of Jordan! But if we keep in mind that the High Priest's confessing antitypical Israel's sins during 1914-1916 over Azazel's Goat was what by another picture is called the first smiting of Jordan, we will have no difficulty in seeing that that was the second smiting of Jordan, which began in the Fall of 1917, starting a year after antitypical Elijah had finished Jordan's first smiting, i.e., a year after the High Priest had finished confessing the above-mentioned sins.
(29) The account of the High Priest's confessing the sins of Israel over Azazel's goat is closed with the statement of His "putting [laying] them [Israel's iniquities, etc.] upon the head of the goat." Thereafter the goat would "bear upon him all their iniquities." In the light of other Scriptures (Is. 53: 4, 5, 6, 11, 12; Ezek. 18: 20; 1 Pet. 2: 24, etc.), to bear iniquity and sin means to suffer punishment for iniquity and sin. Hence we would understand the "putting of them [Israel's iniquities and transgressions in all their
sins] upon the head of the goat" to mean that the High Priest would authoritatively as God's mouthpiece declare that the privilege of suffering for the willful sins of the people was given to Azazel's Goat, and that therefore in the antitype the Lord would privilege the World's High Priest as His Mouthpiece authoritatively to teach in the hearing of these brethren that it is the privilege of the Great Company to suffer the punishment of the world's willful sins. And as we look back to the teachings of those years we find that from 1914 to 1916 it was repeatedly explained to the brethren that the Great Company would be privileged to suffer for mankind's willful sins.
(30) It should not be forgotten that Azazel's Goat consists of the humanity of the entire Great Company. The Scriptures show us that a part of this class would during the Parousia be in the Truth, and that the rest would be in the nominal church. Thus Elisha and Miriam type those Great Company members who during the Parousia have been in the Truth. Lot types a part of the Great Company which, toward the end of the Parousia, from 1910 onward until just before the tribulation involved each country separately, left, in each country, the nominal people of God, and came in among the Truth People, the last one of this particular part of the Great Company coming into the Truth shortly before America declared war on Germany, as is suggested by Lot's leaving Sodom before the fire and brimstone fell upon the city. Abihu and Jambres seem to represent Great Company sifting leaders in and out of the Truth during the early stages of the Epiphany. The Virgin of Cant. 5 represents those Great Company members who, after the escape of the Lot class, but before its complete destruction (v. 7), leave Babylon. Rahab, Eli and the Foolish Virgins represent those Great Company members who remained in the nominal church until the Parousia ended, some of them remaining there until
some considerable part of the Epiphany shall have passed. Some of these seem to be the ones especially referred to as getting their deliverance amid Nominal Zion's travail (Is. 66: 8; Ps. 107: 10-16). Unless we keep in mind these different pictures and note the chronological relations of the different sections of this class to their coming into the Truth, we will fail to see clearly the various views as to certain groups and activities of the Great Company, and will become confused on various Scriptural lines of thought regarding their activities.
(31) In order clearly to understand the High Priest's dealing with Azazel's Goat it is necessary for us to keep in mind that while the confession of the sins was made over the entire class, whether in or out of the Truth during the same period, 1914-1916, the other steps with Azazel's Goat are taken at two different periods, the Lord dealing first with that section of it which has hitherto been in the Truth. Then, after He had begun to deal with its last section among the Truth People, the steps following the confession of the sins were taken by Him with the part of Azazel's Goat not yet in the Truth. Up to July 18, 1920, only that portion of Azazel's Goat which is in the Truth had been dealt with in the steps subsequent to that of confessing the sins and loosing Azazel's Goat; for the fulfilled facts of the antitype prove that only Truth People as parts of Azazel's Goat had been led to the Gate and delivered to the fit man, by him taken into the Wilderness, there let go, and there falling into Azazel's hands. After the last Truth section of Azazel's Goat under bad Levite leaders had entered into the antitype of all of these steps, the Lord began to lead to the Gate Azazel's Goat in the nominal church. We now see that the public testimony that the Little Flock has been giving against Eternal Torment and the Consciousness of the Dead is connected with the leading of the nominal-church section of Azazel's
Goat from the Door of the Tabernacle to the Gate of the Court. Additionally, John's Rebuke, Elijah's Letter, etc., are leading the Catholic section of the Goat to the Gate. The Great Company section in the Truth doubtless tried to fulfill this type; but we are certain that the faithful will be the only ones to persevere therein (1) unto a completion (2) in the true spirit of the High Priest; and therefore they alone will antitype the High Priest's Body under the Head leading the Goat to the Gate of the Court.
(32) Since that part of Azazel's Goat not yet in the Truth has not [This was written in 1920] been dealt with in the steps beyond its leading to the Gate, we will do well to avoid all speculation as to details as to the subsequent steps, since such details cannot be clearly seen before they set in. Therefore in the subsequent parts of this article we will limit [in 1920] our study to the steps taken with the Truth section of Azazel's Goat following the confession of sins over the entire Goat. These steps are the following: (1) loosing the Goat; (2) leading it to the Gate of the Court; (3) passing it through the Gate; (4) delivering it to the fit man; (5) leading it forth to the wilderness; (6) letting it go into the wilderness, i.e., delivering it to Azazel for his using it and destroying its flesh. These six steps, plus the confession of the sins over it, complete the seven (perfect number) things done to Azazel's Goat.
(33) It will be noted that the Authorized Version does not say that Azazel's goat was tied at the door of the Tabernacle, nor does its wording imply it. Yet the Hebrew does imply that this goat, as well as the Lord's goat, was tied at the Tabernacle's door. The word translated "present" (Lev. 16: 7) should be rendered "to place," "make stand," "set," "station," or "fix." Azazel's goat was brought into the Court with the Lord's goat. Therefore it must have been secured at the door of the Tabernacle during the time the High
Priest dealt with the Lord's goat, which must have lasted at least an hour. No normal goat would have remained "stationed" that long unless artificially secured. Hence our Pastor was right in speaking of its being "tied" at the door. Furthermore, the antitype seems to prove this. The figurative rope by which Azazel's Goat has been tied to the antitypical Door is the spirit of consecration knotted by the Word and the Providence of God. Such a condition restrained the natural mind of the Great Company and hindered them from doing as they pleased, typed by the goat's being unable to loose itself. This, of course, applies to the class as such; for such individuals as ceased being of the Great Company by becoming of the Second Death class are not pictured in the goat.
(34) We may be sure that the typical goat, because it was a goat, did not relish remaining bound at
the door; rather that it longed for freedom, and consequently jerked repeatedly at the rope in its efforts to gain liberty, especially, we fancy, as the Priest passed in and out the door, and as time wore slowly on for the goat, "stationed" in such an unusual place. This illustrates how the Great Company because of its double-mindedness has not been submissive to the terms of consecration; but has repeatedly sought, "through fear of death," to obtain freedom from the painful experiences of consecration, especially when the High Priest would be more or less in evidence to them as working sacrificially with them. However, through the power of the Divine Word, one of the figurative knots, and especially through that feature of His providence which placed controllership in "that Servant's" hands—the second knot—the Lord hindered this class from indulging in its characteristic waywardness, as to the general Truth work. The High Priest, in both the Head and members, especially in "that Servant," continually interfered with the selfish and worldly plans of this class.
(35) Remembering that His dealing with this Goat followed September 16, 1914, we are to look for some events which would begin when the confession of sins was about half completed, and which would end after the High Priest would finish confessing the sins over the Goat. These events we believe to be (1) the truth becoming dim on "that Servant's" powers as to his corporations and the various headquarter churches; (2) the death of our dear Pastor, who as "that Servant," the Lord's special eye, mouth and hand, controlled the general work, and held the Levitical leaders, and through them the other Levites, in subjection to himself (Num. 3: 32), as long as he lived, even though for a long time they were very restive under his restraints, as can be seen in America, in the experiences of (1) Bro. Rockwell on the one hand and Bros. Rutherford and MacMillan on the other hand; and (2) Bros. Shearn and Crawford in Britain on the one hand, and Bro. Hemery on the other hand; as well as in the case (3) of Bro. Sturgeon in America on the one hand, and Bro. Holmes on the other hand. Bro. Ritchie also had his little troubles over Bro. Martin's being promoted above him as Manager. However, they were held down until our Pastor's death as a sacrifice was accomplished by the Lord, which completely untied the second knot, when they gained a freedom of action not had before. This lingering death is typed by the High Priest's untying the second knot of Azazel's goat. The steps taken in Britain to take control (1) of the I.B.S.A., and (2) of the Tabernacle away from our dear Pastor and lodge it in British hands, antitype some of the goat's jerkings, as it was being untied, as false views as to our Pastor's powers respecting his three corporations and respecting the ecclesias at the Society's various headquarters gradually grew; and as he was for quite a long time a dying man (for months he was actually dying, but would not give up), under the sacrificial
work of the High Priest. Similarly the quarrels of Bros. Rockwell, MacMillan and Rutherford for pre-eminence in the general work of the Society, those of Bros. Sturgeon and Holmes for pre-eminence at Bethel; and Bro. Ritchie's personal feelings and Bro. Martin's air of triumph over him as to the Tabernacle Management before our Pastor's death antitype the goat's jerkings while it was being untied. The scramblings for power that set in immediately after the death of "that Servant" correspond to the first jerkings of the goat before the High Priest began to lead it to the gate of the Court.
(36) Above we said that (1) the Word of God and (2) the Providence of God, centering in the powers of "that Servant," were two symbolic knots firmly holding by the spirit of consecration (rope) the Great Company to the door of the antitypical Tabernacle. The antitype moves us to assume that, as is usual with firm knots, the goat was secured by two knots. Above we pointed out that these two symbolic knots were untied gradually: (1) by the Lord's permitting the spread of errors on our Pastor's powers, e.g., as to his three corporations and the Brooklyn and London Tabernacles; and (2) by the latter's gradual death. We will offer a few facts to prove that the Lord allowed the Truth as to our Pastor's powers toward his three corporations and the headquarters' churches to be dimmed by the gradual spread of errors on the subject: After (1) Bros. Shearn and Crawford with confederates and (2) Bro. Hemery with confederates had for some time discussed the matters pro and con, at a meeting of the Tabernacle elders the evening of October 22, 1915, the subject was brought up as to whether efforts should not be put forth to secure for the elders "the control of all its [the London Tabernacle's] services and activities." On October 29, 1915, a joint meeting of the elders and deacons discussed the same subject. It was agreed that, if
the congregation should hear of the matter, they should be told that the elders had the subject under advisement, and were going to refer it to our Pastor. This agitation increased among the elders until the evening of October 13, 1916, when 11 of them signed a report, a petition, and a resolution that were calculated to intimidate Bro. Russell (1) into giving up his controllership of the Tabernacle by the implied threat, that things would go to pieces, unless the desired changes were made; and (2) into letting the elders have such controllership (clericalism). The letter of the 11 elders written October 14 (Saturday) as a last attempt to procure the signature of the other 7 elders, reached them October 16 (Monday), and made a deadlock between the two sets of elders, as on the same day Bros. Rockwell, MacMillan and Rutherford came to a deadlock on the occasion of our Pastor's last day at Bethel during his effort to reconcile them. These 11 British elders had the secretary write a letter to our Pastor on the evening of October 21, to accompany their communication. The date, October 21, was the very day that our Pastor during the evening told us that responsible brethren in Britain were disregarding his arrangements! What a significant coincidence! Thus, when the confession of the sins was about half over, the High Priest began untying the first knot and completed it in a year, their communication reaching Brooklyn just after our Pastor's funeral, and before our going to Britain.
(37) The second knot, our Pastor's control of the work, was by his gradual dying untied, until its untying was completed by his death. It was in the Spring of 1916 that he remarked that the British managers, supported by other influential British brethren, were so grossly disregarding his directions that he, as a protest, felt like severing himself entirely from responsibility for the British Branch; for they wanted the I.B.S.A. to be British controlled, as a British corporation.
Perhaps it was at that time that the Lord began to untie the second knot; and we know that He completed its untying on October 30, 1916, in the toga scene on the Pullman car, after which our Pastor lay down to die. Details on these matters we have treated elsewhere. Simultaneously agitations were going on in the Brooklyn Tabernacle to reduce our Pastor's influence there; and false claims were being set forth as to the powers of the I.B.S.A. and the P.P.A. relatively to the W.T.B.&T.S. (our Pastor in reality, while he was alive), in America, especially by J.F.R.; and after our Pastor's death his course as to the P.P.A. and the I.B.S.A. proves that he felt that they were more or less independent of the W.T.B.&T.S., i.e., of our Pastor, who voiced his objections to these perversions in Z '15, 359, par. 7. We here remark that on that page, and wherever else he refers to the Society as controlling the work, he meant himself by the term Society, and did not mean the Directors, nor the Shareholders, nor both of them.
(38) Because of the uses that the Lord has been pleased to make of us, from the time the High Priest had untied the Goat, until the present, in connection with its various sections, we will have to write of ourself, which we assure our readers we do not do to boast nor to set ourself forth "as some great one." God forbid! Our so doing is necessary to clarify our subject. We trust that all will understand our motive. As far as we are personally concerned we were not only free from quarreling for power or pre-eminence with any other leader among Truth people (though we have since learned that our continually increasing advancement by our dear Pastor in the service, particularly from 1912 onward, more particularly from 1914 onward, and most particularly from early 1916 onward, made us an object of envy to certain leaders); but we were also not even aware that any of the Bethel brethren were quarreling for power and pre-eminence,
until A.H. MacMillan, at the Milwaukee Convention (Sept. 16-24, 1916), told us of Bro. Rockwell's envying, etc., his promotion by our Pastor to be the latter's representative at the Tabernacle and Bethel. We knew nothing of Bros. Sturgeon's and Holmes' quarrels, or of Bro. Ritchie's hurt, and Bro. Martin's elated feelings, until after our return from Britain. Then, too, it was only from Oct. 21, 1916, onward that we learned (and that first from our Pastor at Dallas, 10 days before his death) that the English Managers and other prominent British brethren were not submissive to "that Servant."
(39) Thus when through God's Grace it fell to our lot to be selected by Him to take a prominent place among the Body members in the work of co-operating under our Head in leading Azazel's Goat from the Door of the Tabernacle to the Gate of the Court, we, unconscious of the use the Lord was making of us, were put into a most unusual position, in some respects somewhat like that of a sheep among wolves. In our guilelessness we never suspected that brethren could be guilty of duplicity, trickery, fraud, treachery to "that Servant" and to fellow servants, envious grasping for power, lording it over God's heritage, and dividing the Flock in their own interests, unless like former sifters they ceased to be brethren, and were put into the Second Death class. Hence the gross wrongs of the Levitical leaders, brought by the Lord to our attention, filled us with deepest grief at their sad condition, horror at the deep guilt of their sins, righteous indignation at their wrongs against the Lord, the Church and "that Servant," pitying love for their dangerous condition, combined with loving efforts to rescue them, and energetic measures to shield the Flock from their injurious ways. These things have characterized our dealings and attitude toward (1) Bros. Shearn and Crawford, (2) Bros. Hemery and Thackway, (3) Bros. Rutherford and MacMillan, (4) Bro. Sturgeon
and Sr. Henderson, (5) Bro. and Sr. Ritchie, (6) Bros. Hoskins and Margeson and (7) Bros. Hirsh and Kittinger; and will, please God, we hope, characterize us in our future dealing with other Levitical leaders. While we by no means desire to imply that we did not make mistakes in this work, we did the best we knew how to do under most stressful conditions; but we do know that we accomplished the Lord's will in the work He gave us to do, and trust His grace to cover our weaknesses, and to overrule wherein we failed of perfection.
(40) May we again be permitted to say a word as to our writing of our work. Modestly to speak of the use that the Lord makes of one, when it is necessary in the interests of the Lord, the Truth and the Brethren, is not only not forbidden, but is approved by the Lord, as can be seen from the course of Jesus (John 8: 12-59, etc.), St. Paul (2 Cor. 11: 1-12-18) and "that Servant." (Z '16, 170-175; Z '06, 211-239; Z '96, 47; D 613, 614.) We make this explanation because the Levites are likely, as they have in the past, to accuse us of pride in our writing of our activities as to Azazel's Goat. Some Levites claim that we are nursing a grudge, and that this explains our activities toward them, even as Catholic theologians have said the same things of antitypical Elijah. We pity these poor brethren who so surmise evil. They object to our referring to events of the past twenty-two years, claiming that we should forget the past, while they forget that the Catholic Church objects to her past history of nearly 1700 years being urged against her. For the same reason as our Pastor wrote against the Papacy for ancient wrongs do we write against similar past wrongs.
(41) When in August, 1917, we wrote Harvest Siftings Reviewed, we still hoped that a healing of the breach in the Church could be accomplished; therefore we held back some facts that would have been greatly to our advantage to have been told, but that, if told,
would have hindered, we thought, a healing of the breach. Therefore in the hope of benefiting the entire Church we suffered the disadvantage of withholding certain facts that, if told, would have advantaged us by proving unanswerably our claim that our authorization papers on November 10, 1916, the day the credentials were dictated, were by the Executive Committee declared to be bonafide. To hold back these facts now will injure the Church, and benefit proven wrongdoers; and as nothing now obligates us to withhold them, and believing that it is the Lord's will, we will, for the good of the Church, and eventually of all concerned, tell certain facts that the Executive Committee, Nov. 10, 1916, asked us to conceal from the British brethren, because they thought it better for and during the work of adjusting the Tabernacle trouble, if the British Managers and the London Tabernacle Congregation did not learn that we knew these facts, before we left for Europe. We give it in a nutshell: Before leaving for Britain we had read, Nov. 8, 9 and 10, 1916, the full correspondence from both sides of the controversy among the Managers and the elders of the London Tabernacle, telling (1) of Bro. Shearn, supported by ten other elders, seeking to secure the annulment of our Pastor's controllership and arrangements in Tabernacle matters; and (2) of Bro. Hemery, supported by six other elders, seeking to prevent it. Bro. Hemery, we are convinced by his course in other matters, opposed Bro. Shearn's plan because it involved his dismissal from the assistant Pastorship. His course in other matters suggests that he would have favored the plan, if it had been in his interests so to do. However, we did not suspect such a thing, until his evil acts became proven to us after our recall, e.g., his suggestion that we favor his becoming the Pastor of the London Tabernacle, and his course as to the scheme of shearing the Society of controllership over the I.B.S.A., a British corporation.
(42) We will here set forth a few facts to clarify the situation. The letter of appointment, given us Nov. 3, 1916, to secure passports, was sent to Washington Nov. 3, 1916. Nov. 4 the passports were granted, according to the government stamp on the application, which we have in our possession, a fact which unanswerably proves that the credentials dictated Nov. 10 were not given us to obtain passports, as J.F.R. falsely asserted in Harvest Siftings. Nov. 6, on the way to our Pastor's funeral at Pittsburgh, Bro. Pierson suggested to us that we visit Finland, for entrance into which our passport application did not ask. Hence, Nov. 8, Bro. Thomson of Washington, D.C., accompanying us to the passport department, we made request that the passports be made out for entrance into Finland. The clerk informed us the passports had been granted and sent to New York, where they awaited us. To grant our request he had them returned to Washington for correction, and we did not get them until Nov. 11, just before our departure, as Bro. Stephenson knows. We arrived in New York Nov. 8, from Washington. Between 5 and 6 P.M. Bro. Ritchie handed us the full correspondence as to the Tabernacle trouble for our study. We studied it carefully, and recognizing the course of Bro. Shearn and his 10 confederate elders as treachery to our Pastor, reported it as such Nov. 9 to the Executive Committee. Justice and charity, however, prompt us to say that 9 of them were by a base trick deceived by Bros. Shearn and Crawford to support his plan. A certain sister Nov. 10 showed us a long letter from Bro. Hemery, in which he pled with her to present his view of the matters to our Pastor. It was this correspondence that moved the Executive Committee, Bros. Ritchie, Van Amburgh and Rutherford, to make, Nov. 10, 1916, our authorization papers bonafide!
(43) Some may claim that our authorization papers not having been given us by an express order of the
Board were not binding as between the Board and ourself. This claim we deny; because what one does through authorized agents he does himself. The Board, Nov. 2, 1916, in harmony with our Pastor's decision, voted to send us to Europe, charging Bros. Ritchie, Rutherford and MacMillan to make the necessary arrangements with us, not restricting them as to what these arrangements should be, i.e., it gave them discretionary powers. A majority of these brothers, Bros. Ritchie and Rutherford, with Bro. Van Amburgh, the Society's Secretary and Treasurer, in carrying out this charge of the Board, declared, Nov. 10, 1916, that our authorization papers were bonafide. Bro. MacMillan, who was not present at the time, offered no objections, so far as we know, and if he did, he would nevertheless have been bound by the action of the majority of the three brothers appointed Nov. 2 by the Board to make arrangements with us. Hence our authorization papers were binding as between the Board and ourself. And since we were sent by the Board, and it did not authorize these or anybody else to make arrangements for our return, we could not be recalled except by direct action of the Board, whose special representative exclusively we were. If anyone objects that it was the Executive Committee that gave us our authorization papers, and not the Committee of Nov. 2, we reply: (1) There was no Executive Committee as such for the Society until Nov. 7; (2) the work given the Committee of Nov. 2, in so far as our going to Europe is concerned, was executive in character; hence (3) when the Board gave the Executive Committee executive charge of all the work, the latter inherited from the Nov. 2 Committee, whose majority, however, made the authorization papers valid, its one and only executive work. Because of the fact that the latter committee had not finished its work as to ourself, it had to surrender to the Executive Committee, for its disposal, its unfinished work, i.e., necessary
arrangements for our going to Europe. Thus from every standpoint the validity of our authorization papers is vindicated. It was a mere fabrication, contradicted by all the evidence, that we left for Europe with non-bonafide authorization papers. See Vol. VI, Chapter I.
(44) The following fact ought to convince Bro. Hemery that before our departure we read his correspondence as to the matter: After the Executive Committee had bonafided our authorization papers, and had asked us to handle the Tabernacle matter, we remarked to them that Bro. Hemery among other things had sent two 1916 Tabernacle schedules, one being without, and one with, various signs before the names of the 18 elders, indicating their varying stands on the issue. We told the Committee that we wanted the one with the signs on it, so as to have a record of the stand of each elder. J.F.R. then spoke for, and in the presence of the Committee to this effect: We, too, will want one; please copy on the clean one Brother Hemery's signs and the key to them, and thus both we and you will have a line-up on the elders, and will know best how to deal with each one. (We still have this schedule, Bro. Hemery overlooking it, when he rifled our portfolio!) They charged us not to let any one in Britain know that we had seen the Tabernacle correspondence; and of course we kept the charge. When Bro. Crawford the evening of Nov. 22 asked us whether the correspondence on the Tabernacle had reached Brooklyn before we left, well knowing what he meant, we asked, "What correspondence?" We used the same method that our Lord did with the two disciples on the way to Emmaus, when He, well knowing what they meant, answered their query with the question, "What things?" And as the two proceeded to tell Jesus what He knew, so Bro. Crawford told us what we knew; and the next day Bro. Shearn, after conferring with Bro. Crawford, handed us the
full correspondence of his side for our decision on the case. Bro. Hemery also gave us the correspondence of his side. Thus without any breach of confidence toward the Executive Committee, or duplicity towards the Managers, on our part, we left the latter under the impression which they, after the manner of the two disciples, inferred, but which we did not give them, that they were the first to inform us of the Tabernacle situation. The Lord undoubtedly overruled to effect this result.
(45) Above all things else it was the knowledge of this correspondence, coupled with the sense of grave responsibility imposed upon us by our authorization papers, that weighed so heavily upon us as to disable us from making a comforting speech to the Bethel family, when called upon to do so at our last meal before sailing to Britain. On the way to Britain we gave the most prayerful and careful thought to the British situation. By Nov. 17, two days before we landed, our plan of procedure was in general outline made up, and our usual cheerfulness returned, for we fully believed that we could shortly convince Bros. Shearn and Crawford of their mistake, and thus looked forward with pleasure to being a peacemaker. We deeply loved them, the latter for his defense of the Covenants very early in 1909 against the sifters, when the light on the subject was dim; the former because of his helping the conscripted brethren legally and otherwise. Remembering Bro. Hemery's wrong course on the Vow and the New Covenant in 1908 and 1909, we balanced the latter's wrongs of those years with the former's wrongs as to the Tabernacle; and the latter's right stand on the Tabernacle with the former's good deeds just mentioned; and thus on our arrival in England we were thoroughly impartial in our love to all three Managers, and faithfully sought the good of all; and were most deeply disappointed, as we later told the Tabernacle congregation, that our hopes that
our visit would be one of glad service in helping and comforting the brethren, one and all, had not been fully realized in every case, on account of the incorrigible course of Bros. Shearn and Crawford, which we did not at all expect. Details on the trouble with these two brothers we did not give in Harvest Siftings Reviewed. This we did later, on becoming convinced it was the Lord's will that these be given. [See Vol. VII, Chapter I.] Here we desire to give only such general statements as are necessary to show how our conduct toward them was a part of the work of the World's High Priest in leading a part of Azazel's Goat to the Gate.
(46) In every one of the experiences connected with leading various sections of the Goat to the Gate, as the Lord has been pleased to use us, the following things, we are fully persuaded, we did under His manipulation without in the first cases realizing that we were dealing with Azazel's Goat: (1) We had a clear insight into the revolutionism of all the persons involved; (2) we lovingly and plainly showed them the wrongs that they were committing; (3) we made most loving, gentle efforts privately to win them from their wrong course; (4) in the discussion of the principles and facts involved, in every case we refuted the reasons that they advanced in their own justification; (5) we found every one of them guilty of revolutionism, some guilty of error, and all of falsehoods, told to hide the character of their acts; (6) we only then took the aggressive after their unrepentant wrongs resulted, or were resulting, in injury to the Lord's cause; and (7) we with increasing strictness, first privately and then publicly, after they spoke of it publicly, resisted their increasing revolutionism, until we became uncompromisingly opposed to them because of their violations of Truth and Righteousness. We are fully convinced that in these seven activities our Lord used us to accomplish His good pleasure in leading the Goat to the
Gate of the Court, and in putting it into the fit man's hands, in the first definition of that term—"unfavorable circumstances." These seven acts constituted our part under Jesus in leading the Goat out.
(47) It goes, of course, without saying that in the work of leading the Goat to the Gate and the fit man, we did not among the priesthood in the flesh act alone toward the various sections of Azazel's Goat. Under our Head we always have had as colaborers a majority of those who by right had power over the involved section of the Goat, until each section arrived at the Gate, and was put into the hands of the fit man, understood as unfavorable circumstances; and then we were in every case forsaken by the majority, and were left with a small minority, which, however, would increase, until there were gathered to us many brethren, the majority of whom in the next shaking would be manifested as another section of Azazel's Goat, and would be led to the Gate and the fit man. The following facts will illustrate these remarks: As against Bros. Shearn and Crawford we had the support of the Board in our authorization papers, Bro. Hemery and the majority of the Tabernacle Congregation, until they were not only by us, Jan. 14, 1917, but by them, Jan. 22, put into the fit man's hand. The majority of the Board in our authorization papers and the majority of the Bethel family stood with us as against Bros. Hemery and Thackway, until not only we, but also they, had led them to the Gate and placed them in the fit man's hands. The majority of the Board, despite the compromise resolution on the British affair, supported us as against J.F.R. and A.H. MacMillan, until not only we, but they, led them to the Gate, and put them into the fit man's hands. The majority of the Fort Pitt Committee and the New York Ecclesia stood with us as against Bro. Sturgeon and Sister Henderson, until they were in the fit man's hands. Until Bro. and Sr. Ritchie were put into the fit man's hands the majority
of the Mizpah Convention stood with us. The majority of the Fort Pitt Committee as respects carrying out the charge that it received from the Fort Pitt Convention stood with us, until Bros. Hoskins and Margeson fell into the fit man's hands. This is true of the majority of the Philadelphia Church in our dealing with Bros. Hirsh and Kittinger. We opine this will continue to be the case, until all Truth sections of Azazel's Goat will be in the fit man's hands. Thus others of the Body members co-operated with us under our Head in leading Azazel's Goat to the Gate of the Court, in each case the Lord using us first, and then afterward our supporters, to deliver the Goat to the fit man.
(48) The set of facts just referred to also proves that those New Creatures who have lost their crowns are in the High Priest's Body and share in His work until they are manifested as Levites, when they cease acting as a part of the High Priest, and are represented in their humanity as a part of Azazel's Goat, e.g., Jesse Hemery while co-operating with us as against the revolutionism of Bros. Shearn and Crawford was yet in the High Priest's body; but as soon as he became manifest as a revolutionist, which was March 1, 1917, he ceased co-operating with us, and we began with the co-operation of others under our Head to lead him to the Gate. This will account for the fact that has so often been exemplified since the Fall of 1916, that brethren who stood right for a while fell later into revolutionism. We are surely living in a solemn time! It is, among other reasons, because parts of Azazel's Goat in the Truth have not yet been led to the Gate that no one can yet be sure that he will prove to be a "more than overcomer" in the finished work.
(49) Some have asked how we know that the World's High Priest led the Goat to the Gate, since the type does not expressly state it? We answer, We know it for three reasons: (1) 1 Tim. 1: 20; 1 Cor. 5: 3-5 indirectly prove this by showing that the High
Priest in His members indirectly delivers the Goat to Azazel, by cutting it off from their protecting care, which indirectly results in its falling into Azazel's hands; (2) as there was no one but Aaron in the Court during the entire Atonement Day service; and (3) as the fit man belonged to the camp (Lev. 16: 26), evidently Aaron led the goat to the gate of the Tabernacle; and there, as we have pictured it on The Present Truth's cover, delivered the goat to the fit man.
(50) Again, looking at the character of a goat under the circumstances of the Atonement Day, we can readily see that it must have tugged away at the rope, unwilling to be led to the gate; that it jerked repeatedly at the rope in hope of deliverance from the high priest; and that it would not be surprising, if it butted the high priest; for such acts comport well with a goat's disposition! Even if the type does not expressly tell of such acts of the goat, it is a reasonable inference that such acts were committed by it. Certain it is that in the antitype things illustrated by tuggings, jerkings and buttings have set in. The tuggings suggest the steady efforts of the antitypical Goat in revolutionism to go in another direction than toward the Gate and the fit man, as they are led on by their ambitions to work out schemes of their own; the jerkings fittingly picture the repeated efforts of this class to get away from being led and delivered to the fit man, by defending itself against its steady leading by the High Priest toward the Gate; while the buttings correspond to the attacks that the revolutionists make upon the High Priest in His members, e.g., J.F.R.'s pettifogging tactics against us during the first so-called "two hours' hearing before the Board," April 11, 1917, after our return from Britain.
(51) Briefly would we mention the dates and the acts whereby the leaders of the Azazel's Goat class were started toward the Gate, and were put into the fit man's hands. In all these dates and acts our High