Search This Blog

Thursday, January 31, 2019

Please Read This

By B. W. Schulz


            I’ve noted before that this is a history blog. That’s all this is. We do not engage in theological debate; we do not allow those who post here to throw temper tantrums or insult other posters.
            This essay is something of an exception. This is addressed to those Jehovah’s Witnesses who visit this blog, though I hope it benefits everyone. I am a long-serving Witness, probably older than most who visit this blog. When you visit our blog you are very much like a guest in my house. Guests have obligations to their host. Psalms 15:1 suggests this: “O Jehovah, who will be a guest in your tent? Who will reside in your holy mountain? He who is walking faultlessly and practicing righteousness and speaking the truth in his heart.” To my eye, this summarizes respect for one’s host. In the verse the host is Jehovah. Here Dr. de Vienne, my niece, and I are the hosts. On that basis, you owe respect.
            Among those issues that arise for guests is the obligation to contribute to conversation. Many of our visitors do not come from a culture that recognizes that obligation. But Witnesses may remember an article appearing in an older Awake! that says: “Of course, as an invited guest ... you have more responsibility to contribute to meaningful conversation. Try to reward your host by conversation that is enlightening and upbuilding, at the same time giving others the opportunity to express themselves. This will help to make your visit a joy and a mutual success.” Maybe you forgot this, but this is an extension of the Biblical obligation to show respect to our hosts.
            Early in this blog’s life I received emails from Witnesses, some of them elders, asking me to restrain Rachael’s opinions. Recently there has been a repeat of this folly. Rachael is not a Witness; she never was. To put it bluntly, she’s a very intelligent young [well young compared to my ancient self] woman. She is exceptionally well educated, a MENSA member based on an IQ that puts her in the top one quarter of one percent. She is entitled to her opinions. That some wish to include me in controversies with Rachael tells me that they have something less than a Biblical opinion of women.
            Some Witness men focus only on Ephesians 5:22 where Paul says wives should be in subjection to their husbands. They seem to think that in God’s eyes women are of some low class, that they are somehow less than males. But think about that. Peter says that women are equal to men in salvation. The Psalms describe the collective of faithful women as an army. In your experience, do not women predominate among the surviving members of the Body of Christ? When I was very young there were twenty-two partakers in our small congregation. Almost all of them were women. Today spread among eight local congregations there are four partakers. I am the only man in that group. That means that some of the women you may disrespect are going to rule over you. That should give you pause.
            Rachael reminds me of Jael. Certainly our Witness readers know who Jael was. She was not part of Israel but was a Kenite. Kenites were related to Israel in a very distant fashion. Jael entered Israel’s history in the days of Barak and Deborah. In that narrative the one conveying Jehovah’s word was Deborah, a woman, and when Barak failed in some respect Deborah said: “I will surely go with you. Nevertheless, the road on which you are going will not lead to your glory, for Jehovah will sell Sisera into the hand of a woman.” That woman was Jael, a non Israelite. Jael’s bravery was exceptional as was her intelligence. She was one smart cookie, an appropriate choice for God’s agent. Rachael may stand outside of what you consider ‘the truth.’ But she is dedicated to ‘truth’ when it comes to our project. I mean she is determined to write accurate history, even if it makes some of our readers uncomfortable.
            Subjection as used in the Bible, especially the New World Translation, is derived from a word for military rank. It says nothing about the worth of women. It’s about order. And note that the verses say: “A husband is head of his wife as the Christ also is head of the congregation, he being a savior of this body. Husbands, continue loving your wives, just as the Christ also loved the congregation and delivered up himself for it.” This does not extend to your relationship to women not your wife. When considering the relationship of one congregation member to another, Paul says: “Be submitting yourselves to one another in reverence of Christ.” [Berean Literal Bible] So your relationship to ‘sisters’ is determined by that. But remember Rachael isn’t your ‘sister’ in the sense you understand this term; she is a professional historian, an award wining educator. You have no business involving the men in her life – Jerome or me or anyone else – in some imagined controversy. That some have done so plainly says they have forgotten the Bible’s message.
            As I recently said to another, Rachael is an excellent self-editor. When she posts a work in progress she always warns you that it will change. As research progresses our work changes. This is as true of Rachael’s Introductory Essay as anything else. You may not like what we write, but before it makes it to print – to final form – it will change and be as honest and accurate as we can make it.
            Some Witnesses fear what others may write. They do not like even mild criticism. They feel Jehovah and their fellows need protection. What kind of God do you worship if you entertain this view? My God is eternal and all powerful and perfectly capable of defending himself and those he sees as his own. Attacking Rachael’s integrity because you think she’s questioned your faith is weakness. If you have contrary evidence, present it, do so in  a blog comment.
            Some blog readers fear controversy hoping it does not appear on the blog. History writing has always caused controversy. It is the quality of the argument that matters. In recent cases Rachael’s integrity was attacked based on what another wrote. Do you understand how incredibly misdirected this is? Those who indulged in this folly simply did not want dirty laundry aired.
            I’ve been a Witness longer than most of you have been alive. In that time I’ve seen us do some very silly things. It happens on all levels. [My mind drifts off to the annual meeting in 1954 as an example] We are not above criticism and we should accept it when merited. Also, your personal experience, especially limited experience, with another brother or sister does not mean you have a full, accurate response to something Rachael may write about that person.
            In the current version of her essay, sent to me this morning, many of the things some object to are gone, not because of your abuse but because they no longer fit the essay. As I said, she’s a very good self-editor.
            The net result of this rambling statement is that I will not act as Rachael’s parent or husband. I am neither. I will not regulate her thought or work. Appealing to me or anyone else to do so is a sin within the Biblical meaning of the word.

Do not do it ...


I am an equal partner in this project, and I am principal blog editor. If you write to Jerome or Bruce hoping they will 'control' what I say, what my opinions are or the trend of my research, you will not like the result.

I am a 41 year old woman, not a child. I'm better educated that many of you with a number of certifications, two bachelors and two masters degrees and a PhD. I'm not a child for you to control and I hate tattle tales.

If you do not like something I've written, that's okay. Attempting to control my writing by appealing to Bruce will disgust us both. And Jerome, while he writes valuable blog posts, has no voice in our books content. What exactly did you think he could do?

If you see yourself in this comment, don't post comments here. I will delete them. Do not email me. Your email is in my permanently blocked folder. Do not contact me through another. Anyone foolish enough to stand in your place will also not like the result.

There is no way for me to stop your visits to this blog, but I can end your participation and will do so.

Wednesday, January 30, 2019

This blog is covered by international copyright.

Recently, a Russian language blog took content, text and photos, from this blog. This is theft. Without exception, the Russians who have visited this site and commented or emailed have been trolls. None of them are welcome here. Do not steal from this blog. If you wish to use something you find here, ask.

Zion's Day Star



The Rayville, Louisiana, Richland Beacon, November 26, 1881

Saturday, January 26, 2019

More on George Darby Clowes

This is stellar research by "Jerome," and I think it merits some comments. This blog exists, in part, to gather feedback from interested readers. In my view minimal ethics require thanks when we 'feed' off the work of others. I know this is - in this day - an uncommon thought. But, if you had a 'favorite teacher' who opened your mind to life long learning, you have probably thanked them in person and quietly in your mind. ... Someone who teaches you, who wakes you up, who informs you via the Internet deserves the same thanks.

Many of our readers are attracted to "Jerome's" articles because they are short and focus on a single detail. Because they are seldom long, in-depth studies does not mean they do not deserve recognition.

More on George Darby Clowes
by Jerome

Photo reproduced by kind permission of George Darby Clowes' great-great-grandson.

George Darby Clowes is the name given to at least three generations of a family, which can be confusing when trying to trace who was who.

Our George (the pastor of the Allegheny congregation in the early 1870s) was born in Britain on April 26, 1818. He was baptised into the established church (Birmingham, St Martin) on December 29, 1818.  At the age of 19 he was married at the same church to Sarah Fearney on December 6, 1837.


George and Sarah were to have nine known children over the next 24 years. The first two were born in Britain, Emma (b.1841) and James (1843-1916). After James' birth the family moved to the United States, specifically Pennsylvania, because the remaining seven children were born there. These were Hepzebah (1845-1864), Israel W (1848-1915), Fredrick (b.1851), George Darby Jr (1854-1932), Stephen (1858-1920), Sarah (b.1861) and Sumpter (b.c.1865).

George did not apply for naturalization until 1861, but the document with his signature has survived.

George’s wife Sarah died in 1881. From the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette 14 March 1881 page 4.


George had a number of occupations. It may be that some ran concurrently. For example, he was still apparently involved with the Allegheny Arsenal in 1875. From the US Register of Civil, Military and Naval Service, 1875 volume 1. Dated September 30, 1875 it has George working as a Foreman at the Allegheny Arsenal for three dollars a day.


When George died there was a small notice in the paper. From the Pittsburgh Dispatch 26 January 1889, page 7,



We started by mentioning three generations of the family having the name George Darby Clowes. In addition to our George we have his sixth child, George Darby Clowes (1854-1932). Then George’s fourth child, Israel W Clowes named a son George. So we also have George Darby Clowes (1877-1946).


Friday, January 25, 2019

Among today's visitors


Visit One:


[United States] Tuxedo Park, New York, United States
IP Address:
    Watchtower Bible And Tract Society Of New York (208.74.140.116) Label Visitor
Visit Page:      Watch Tower History: July 2013

Visit Two:           

Page Views:     10
Visit Length:     17 mins 32 secs
Total Visits:     2
Location:
    [United States] Tuxedo Park, New York, United States
IP Address:
    Watchtower Bible And Tract Society Of New York (208.74.140.116)
Search Referral:
     https://www.bing.com — Benjamin Wilson's Emphatic Diaglott 2011
Entry Page:
     Watch Tower History: The Emphatic Diaglott and the Watch Tower Society
Exit Page:
     Watch Tower History: The Emphatic Diaglott and the Watch Tower Society

So ...

I've significantly enlarged and changed my introductory essay. Last time I posted it no-one left a blog comment. Comments are important; they help us see how others react to our work. This helps us improve it.

The last post generated some off blog comments. They ranged from something like 'how interesting' to a four page critique that questioned some statements. I liked the critique best. Though I do not agree with the criticisms it helped me see what issues arose, and gave me a clearer path forward.

Yet, from those who read this blog and who should know as much or more concerning the issues I raised, there were no comments.

Do I post the current version? Or must I assume there will be no comments? So posting it isn't worth the time it takes?

There is absolutely no interest in seeing the revised version. Accordingly, I will not post it.

Thursday, January 24, 2019

George Darby Clowes

Posted to supplement the comment trail in earlier post. This is an extract of Separate Identity volume 1:


He [Jonas Wendell] was in Ohio from October 19 to October 26. He was in Pittsburgh on November 5, 1871. He summarized his visit with the Pittsburgh believers thus:

Sunday, Nov. 5th, met with the church in Pittsburgh, Penn., and remained with them about four weeks. We had meetings three times during the week, and three times on Sunday. After I had been there two weeks, Bro. G.W. Stetson of Ohio came to my help, and is to remain till the 17th inst., at which time (if the Lord will) I am to return, and remain with them for a season. The meetings thus far have resulted in great good. The church in Pittsburgh have been like sheep without a shepherd. On the last Sunday I was with them, the church unanimously invited Bro. Clowes to be their under shepherd, to which he consented. Bro. Clowes was until recently a minister of the M.E. church of Pittsburgh. Last summer (as was noticed at the time in the Crisis) he was tried for what they called heresy, and expelled from their conference. God bless Bro. Clowes. He is a true man, one who loves the truth of God more than the praise of men.[1]

As sparse as this report is, it conveys some key points. The body was disorganized; and if regular meetings were held, there was doctrinal difference and some acrimony. We get that from his “sheep without a shepherd” remark. Being an experienced pastor and new to the congregation, G. D. Clowes was elected pastor. It was a logical choice.

George Darby Clowes and the Allegheny Church

George D. Clowes, Sr. was born April 26, 1818 in Warwickshire, England. He entered the Methodist ministry sometime before the Civil War. In the 1866-1867 Directory of Pittsburgh and Allegheny Cities he is listed at the Superintendent of the U. S. Arsenal. An earlier edition names him the Assistant Laboratory Superintendent at the Arsenal. [2] He seems to have left that position in 1870 or 1871. It was not uncommon for ministers of small churches to preach part-time or to hold secular employment. This seems to be the case with Clowes. For a short time he is listed as a laborer; the 1875-1876 Directory lists him as “Clowes, Rev. George D.” It does not list a denominational affiliation and he is not found in the list of churches. J. F. Diffenbacher’s Directory of Pittsburgh and Allegheny Cities. 1882-1883, has him as a “Steel Inspector” and living at 273 Lacock, Allegheny. Diefenbacher’s Directory for 1884-1885 has him living in a rooming house at 66 Federal Street and lists his occupation as “agent,” though we’re not told for whom he acted as an agent. The same directory for the next year lists him as a janitor. He was still living on Federal Street at his death and was thus a near neighbor to the Russells.[3]
Clowes became pastor of the small Allegheny congregation in November or December 1871. Clowes saw his expulsion from the Methodists for heresy as gift from God. In a letter to George Storrs he wrote: “I deeply regret the spirit manifested by some of our brethren who do not see these precious truths. A few years ago I was cast adrift by those among whom I had labored for a quarter of a century … and often since I have thanked my heavenly Father for Liberty. Precious liberty from the shackles of creeds.”[4] Clarence Kearney reports it this way: “From Pittsburgh it was reported that ‘The Fourth Street Methodist Episcopal Church was in a ‘perfect ferment’ over Life in Christ.  Expulsion of a member, Mr. Clowes, was sought but this ‘only gave him a splendid opportunity to circulate tracts.’”[5]
Clowes would sympathize with the Watch Tower ministry, preaching similar doctrines and giving the closing invocation at Watch Tower Memorial Convention in 1886. This is not a guarantee that he closely followed Zion’s Watch Tower theology. A Canadian clergyman and an Age-to-Come evangelist both spoke at the meeting, and neither held exactly to Watch Tower doctrine. A positive indication that he accepted Russell’s belief system as it was at the end of 1876 is his withdrawal as pastor of the Church of God congregation. The Russells remained on friendly terms with him until his death, January 25, 1889.[6]


[1]           J. Wendell: From Bro. J. Wendell: The World’s Crisis and Second Advent Messenger, December 27, 1871.
[2]           See page 85 in the 1866-67 edition and page 58 in the 1863-64 edition.
[3]           His address is noted in a brief obituary appearing in the January 26, 1889, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, Dispatch.
[4]           From Eld. G. D. Clowes, Bible Examiner, November 1875, page 61.
[5]           C. J. Kearney: The Advent Christian Story, Advent Christian General Conference, 1968, page 42. We can’t identify a Fourth Street Methodist Church. We think Kearney meant the Liberty Street Methodist Church which was located on Liberty at the corner of Fourth.
[6]           View from the Tower, Zion’s Watch Tower, May 1886, page 1, notes that Clowes was an active evangelist in at least some sympathy with Russell. One cannot reach a firm conclusion as to how much of Watch Tower doctrine he accepted. Myers and Brookman, both of whom were present at the same meeting, were independent but sympathetic. Russell worked with others who did not hold to his exact doctrine, sometimes working with those who differed considerably in doctrine. Remainder of this footnote deleted as inaccurate. Explanation will be in vol. 2.
His death was noted in the March 1889, Watch Tower, and Russell praised him: “On January 25th our dear Brother Clowes, with whom some of our readers were acquainted, having heard him preach the word of truth at various points near Pittsburgh, passed away full of triumphant faith and glorious hope. ‘Blessed are the dead who die in the Lord from henceforth. Yea, saith the spirit, they shall rest from their labors, but their works follow with them.’”

Among today's visitors

Cesario Lange, Sao Paulo, Brazil
Associação Torre De Vigia De Bíblias E Tratados (138.59.56.252) Label Visitor
Search Referral:
https://www.google.com.br/ (Keywords Unavailable) 
Visit Page:

Sometimes ...

Sometimes things just drop into our lap. These haven't arrived yet, but will soon. I paid more than my budget allows but I rarely see these as originals ...


Tuesday, January 22, 2019

Emma Martin


by Jerome

(updated with extra information about Emma's husband who it appears was also a Bible Student)


When the book The Finished Mystery was released in 1917 while Canada and the United States were at war it unleashed a wave of persecution against the Bible Students loyal to the IBSA. Statements about patriotism were viewed as pro-German propaganda and Bible Students fell afoul of the Espionage Act of June 15, 1917. The book had been prepared before the act came into force, and the main offending pages were cut out of copies being circulated thereafter, but this didn’t stop the prosecution and conviction of the Brooklyn eight – J F Rutherford and seven others. This article addresses the fact that many others were also arrested in the hysteria of the times. One such person was Mrs J Emma Martin.

We know a little bit about Emma’s history. She was married to a doctor, and had at least one child who died in 1910.  The child’s death certificate and census returns from 1900 and 1905 provide most of what we know. She was born as Emma Hart in 1870 in Clinton, Iowa. Her husband, Jeffrey Martin, MD, was born in England in 1851/1852 but came to America in 1879. The 1900 census lists him as a physician and surgeon. They were married in 1897. Their son, Paul, was born in Kansas and died in 1910 in Eire County, aged 6, due to complications from measles.

At some point it appears that both Jeffrey and Emma became Bible Students. Jeffrey died on July 24, 1916, and is buried in the Pioneer Memorial Cemetery, San Bernardino. The Find a Grave site shows his gravestone and the tell-tale letters I.B.S.A. are engraved on it after his name. Emma became a colporteur and in 1918 was energetically circulating The Finished Mystery. One report says she had followed instructions in cutting out the offending pages, but had then reinserted them back into the copies she sold. BOI agents (Bureau of Investigation – later the FBI) infiltrated a Bible Study meeting pretending to show interest in the Bible Students’ message, and their investigations showed Emma had sold 147 copies in the area. The very precise charge suggested they had spent some considerable time and energy interviewing local people in their efforts to convict her.

Three others from the local Bible Students were also arrested in March 1918 and charged with violating provisions of the Espionage Act. (This was a couple of months before warrants went out for the arrest of J F Rutherford and others of the Watch Tower headquarters staff.)

The case came up for trial in July 1918. Emma, and her co-defendants, Edward Hamm, E J Sonnenberg and E A Stevens were all found guilty.

The San Bernardino County Sun for July 26, 1918, reported on the verdict on Emma.


The jury recommended leniency in sentencing. The same newspaper for August 1 reported she was sentenced to three years in a federal penitentiary.


Emma and the others immediately appealed and were released on bail of $5000 each, which appears to have been raised by other local Bible Students. The appeals process kept her out of jail until 1920, but ultimately, in May 1920 she surrendered herself to serve her sentence in San Quentin. This was fourteen months after Rutherford et al were released and the same month the government announced that all charges against them had been dropped.

Emma had her photograph taken at San Quentin. Listed on the same records page as burglars and murderers, Emma was a federal prisoner, occupation housewife, convicted of violating Section 3 of the Espionage Age of June 15, 1917.


At the time Emma went to jail there was a concerted Bible Student campaign on her behalf (and her co-defendants) to obtain her release, making a special plea to President Wilson. The Bible Students’ unofficial newspaper The New Era Enterprise accused the government of entrapment. From the New Era Enterprise for July 13, 1920:


Later the same article gave details of how the BOI had behaved when they attended the Bible Students’ meeting with Emma.



In the climate of the times it was not surprising that Emma's sentence was commuted by President Wilson. In fact this had already happened by the time the above report was published. From the San Bernardino County Sun for June 27, 1920:



Her three co-defendants incarcerated on McNeill’s Island penitentiary were also later pardoned.

Emma’s subsequent history is unknown. She lived until 1949 and died aged 79 in Fresno, California.




With grateful thanks to Gary who sent me on the trail. For those who want to read further about how citizens fared during wartime America, Gary recommends Christopher Capozzola's Uncle Sam Wants You - World War 1 and the Making of the Modern American Citizen.  

Friday, January 18, 2019

My Intro Essay Revisited

Rough draft, revised to fit current circumstances, incomplete. It will change. Never rely on a rough draft. Usual rules. You may take a copy for your own use. Do not share it off the blog. Do not use it in your own work without permission or attribution.

This is posted for comment. Please do so. This is a very temporary post and will come down in a FEW days. Time to comment is now.
This post has been deleted.

Missing Tract


In the February 15, 1902 Watch Tower Russell presents extracts from a tract which he entitled "The Hopes of the Early Church Respecting our Lord's Second Coming." The author's name is not given, and it was unknown to the editor of The Herald of Christ's Kingdom, who republished it in the December 1926 issue.

We need to see the original and we need the author's name. Anyone?

Monday, January 14, 2019

Lemuel


by Jerome

(reprinted)



The main heading in this Pittsburgh newspaper has a vague connection with Bible Student history. Admittedly very vague. The featured murdered lawyer was Charles Taze Russell’s brother-in-law.

When Maria Frances Ackley married Charles Taze Russell at her mother’s residence on March 13, 1879 (the service being conducted by John H Paton) her younger brother, Lemuel Mahlon Ackley, was likely one of the guests. He was born in Allegheny in 1857 and is found in the census returns there for 1870 and 1880.

He started his working life as a local reporter, but then went to law school in Michigan before moving to Chicago in 1887, where he spent the rest of his life.

When Maria left Charles Taze in 1897 she went first to stay with Lemuel in Chicago.

Lemuel turns up in Chicago papers over the years including his own messy divorce proceedings. His estranged wife accused him of only paying limited support in potatoes and increments of 10 cents at a time, and he accused her of assaulting him with a rolling pin. The same account from the Chicago Tribune for 18 March 1909 had him accused of kidnapping his five year old son when his sister, Mrs Amy Russell took him to visit relatives in Pittsburgh. Amy Russell can only be a newspaper blooper for Maria. Lemuel was sentenced to fifteen days in jail on that occasion for contempt of court. All good tabloid material.

Another story involved a property dispute on behalf of another of Lemuel’s sisters, Selena Barto. It was claimed that she’d allowed tax payments to lapse on a property she owned in 1907. A policeman named Kellogg with an eye to the main chance bought up the debt and claimed ownership. It rumbled on and off for fourteen years and in the last few days it was claimed that shots were fired. It became that sort of dispute. Lemuel fought on Selena’s behalf and got Kellogg in court where the judge found in Lemuel’s favour and sentenced Kellogg to two weeks in jail with a fine on top.

Standing there in his full policeman’s uniform complete with pistol and holster, Kellogg drew and fired at the judge. He missed the judge, but fatally wounded Lemuel, before turning the gun on himself. He survived the gunshot wound but never stood trial. Someone later smuggled in poison for him, and he committed suicide on 20 February 1922.

It was such a good story for the Chicago papers that they ran a picture strip story of events.






Lemuel’s photograph is found above. It is of him as a younger man, and can also be found in the volume Chicago Biography c.1891.

Thursday, January 10, 2019

Up-date from a Mush-Brained Woman


This is an update of sorts, though I’m not certain it makes any sense. I had a very bad night with no sleep. Even my strongest medicine – a liquid and a pill in combination that I’m only allowed because of my diagnosis – didn’t work. So I’m mush-brained. Enough of that. Here’s what’s happening:

In the rough draft of my introductory essay for volume 2 of Separate Identity I said the Watchtower has ignored our last two letters, both now months old. B is a very patient man, sensible, but he can be blunt sometimes. So recently he emailed someone at Wallkill, saying [in essence]: “Hey! I wrote you some letters which you have ignored. Why have you ignored my letters?” A prompt reply was: “Well, I haven’t seen them. I’ll pass this up the line.” [All of this is my summary and not an actual quotation from the emails.] Up the line person writes back next day: “Please resend; they didn’t make it to the proper department and we do not know where they are.” B, I’m certain, muttered under his breath: “I thought so.” B attached said letters save one which he lost in a computer crash to email and returned it, summarizing the lost letter. So today ... Said up-the-line person writes: “We located your letters and the enclosures, and will present them to our ‘supervisory committee.’” In other words, our request is going up the line to a governing body committee. This is nice. No matter the answer, I’ll change my essay to reflect this.

As a further note, while we know they have two of the documents we requested it is unlikely that they have two others, but we asked anyway because you never know ...

In the mean time, one of my doctors says if the debilitating pain continues she wants to put me back in the hospital for a while. I’m considering it, though I seriously hate hospitals. I hope you are all well and blessed.

Wednesday, January 9, 2019

Misc.

Thomas Newton's Dissertations, an important book as far as Russellite background is concerned is on ebay for a very reasonable price. I own this, or I'd be trying to squeeze out money to buy it. One of our readers may be interested.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/Thomas-Newton-Dissertations-on-the-Prophecies-which-have-remarkably-been-1787/143031501741?_trkparms=aid%3D222007%26algo%3DSIM.MBE%26ao%3D1%26asc%3D20140131123730%26meid%3D0189e163e6234de48d92a2e76c1cc28d%26pid%3D100167%26rk%3D2%26rkt%3D4%26sd%3D163441256223%26itm%3D143031501741&_trksid=p5411.c100167.m2940

[Download link to digital copy: https://wetransfer.com/downloads/4a324a0618ced032165992bd4573a4ee20190110134859/1cbc3f -- Bruce]

One of William Whiston's books is also on ebay. These are always expensive. You'll have to search for it. But it is seven hundred dollars ...

We will need solid research on Russell's view of paradise earth. This is not an immediate need but something we will use [assuming our outline remains mostly as it is] in volume 3 of Separate Identity. If you want to pursue this, present it to me as quotations from Russell with Watch Tower issue date and page, or title and page if from a booklet or book. Some of this material is in his newspaper sermons. If you have access and find material there, note it by newspaper name and date of publication. Advanced thanks to anyone who wants to take this on.

We still need to see the 1887 publication Hints to Millennial Dawn Canvassers. We have queried some of those with more advanced collections with no result. One person said it was a four page folder, but he did not have a copy. We do not know if that's correct. A request to the Watchtower Society has gone unanswered. If you have it, please send me a scan. If you've forgotten the contact email is rmdevienne [at] yahoo.com.

We need scans or originals of some periodicals. These are The Millenarian, The Spirit of the Word, The Last Trump, Zion's Day Star - later re-titled simply as Day Star. The likelihood of any of our blog readers having these is small. But since I do not know what is out there, I'm asking anyway.

We also need the personal letters of adherents written any time before 1950, no matter how irrelevant they may seem. This request includes postcards. We have a few, and sometimes a brief not adds to our understanding.  

A chapter that bounces between volume 2 and 3, but will probably be in volume 3 address Russellite views of contemporary events. This is partially written but not nearly complete because our focus is on two other, more important chapters. If you want to do the research, connect Russell's statements to contemporary events in the period up to 1912. Again, present this to us with minimal comment as quotations from his books or The Watch Tower. Relevant comments from later publications are usable too.

Anyone? 

Thursday, January 3, 2019

Addition to my Introductory Essay

Up for on-point comments.


            Some, both inside and outside the Watchtower movement, suggest that Russell’s chronological system is Adventist. These are the ‘facts’ usually presented, but that’s not what the record shows. Here is what Russell and his contemporaries tell us:
            Russell was familiar with preaching on prophecies before he met Jonas Wendell, a “Second Adventist” preacher in 1869. Henry Moore, the pastor of the Plymouth Congregational Church, the church Russell joined as a lad, was a student of the prophecies and preached on them. He left behind at least one printed sermon on the subject. Others within Russell’s early acquaintance in the Calvinist community also promoted prophetic speculation. Calvinists in Pittsburgh republished Archibald Mason’s speculations and date setting and remained interested long after Mason’s predictions failed. Others among non-Adventist millenarians speculated about the prophetic numbers found in the Bible. American expositors had done so at least from early in the 18th Century. So Wendell’s preaching was not totally surprising to him. Wendell’s initial sermons were summarized in the Pittsburgh newspapers. And on that basis Russell would not be surprised by their content.
            But what did Russell actually hear from Wendell in 1869? A careful reading of what Russell wrote on the matter suggests that he was most impressed with Wendell’s comments on predestination and hell-fire doctrine. Russell does not mention prophetic content, except in a later reference. But we know what Wendell preached in 1869. Though Wendell started preaching about 1874 early the next year, in 1869 he was pointing to that year as the probable end ‘to all things mundane.’ He tells us this in a World’s Crisis article. The 1869 speculation derived from Aaron Kinne, a Congregationalist clergyman who wrote in the 1830s. W. C. Thruman resurrected it, claiming originality for the ‘research,’ but reading his Sealed Book Opened, it becomes evident that he borrowed from Kinne. Thurman, a Brethren clergyman, became the darling of Second Adventists, particularly Advent Christians, and many of them adopted the 1869 speculation. What Russell first heard from Wendell was the last gasp of this belief. Then the next year he heard Wendell’s proofs that 1873 was the end of the age when the world would be consumed in fire. [I see no need to footnote this. You will find it explained in detail in the first two books in this series.]
            Evidence suggests Russell’s reaction. By 1871 Russell was reading widely in prophetic literature. He was introduced to Storrs, Dunn, Smith-Warleigh and a host of other Age-to-Come non-Adventist writers and to Seiss, a Lutheran, and to Richard Shimeall, a Presbyterian writer. From them he came to restitution doctrine, the belief that Christ came to restore paradise to the earth, not burn it up. And he came to believe in a two-stage, initially invisible parousia. This meant that speculation about world burning was, in his view, false doctrine. He writes about regretting the predictions of Wendell and Thurman and others. Who were the others? He does not say, but someone predicted the end for every year from 1869 to 2000. Among those who were or became his associates and acquaintances some pointed to 1874, 1875, 1875, 1877, 1879 and 1881. Some of these predictions were on questionable basis, even from Russell’s later viewpoints. Some were based on a faked Mother Shipton prophecy and one on a supposed measurement from the great pyramid. Though much is made of Russell’s beliefs regarding the pyramid, he wrote that it was a poor basis for establishing Bible chronology, that it should only be used to support what can be derived from scripture. But that’s something said past the period we’re considering and which we consider later in this volume.
            Did Russell oppose chronological speculation before he met Barbour? It is often said that he did. What he wrote, however, is that because he believed in an initially invisible presence, the only way to know when it occurred was through Bible chronology. In this period his belief was: “It seemed, to say the least, a reasonable, very reasonable thing, to expect that the Lord would inform his people on the subject – especially as he had promised that the faithful should not be left in darkness with the world, and that though the day of the Lord would come upon all others as a thief in the night (stealthily, unawares), it should not be so to the watching, earnest saints.”[1]
            So it’s not a reliable chronology he rejected, but Adventist speculation that included world burning and seemed unreliable. He was looking for a reliable chronological framework. When he received Barbour’s Herald of the Morning in December 1875 (Not Jan 1876 as usually said) the thought he might have found one. He also saw that Barbour et. al. had adopted age to come belief, his belief system and though they might have progressed beyond Adventism into ‘truth’ – enlightenment. He wrote to Barbour who wrote back that he and Paton had been Adventists but no longer were – that they had pursued other doctrine. The other doctrine was age to come, doctrine Russell had learned from Storrs, Stetson and a variety of others, some of whom he mentions directly and some we can surmise from available evidence.  What made Barbour’s chronology different was that it was expressed not in Adventist terms that Russell would reject out of hand but in Age to Come/ Literalist / One Faith terms that matched Russell’s theology. Russell says this, though most who have quoted him have missed the import. Describing his introduction to Barbour’s chronology, he wrote: “It was about January 1876 that my attention was specially drawn to the subject of prophetic time, as it relates to these doctrines and hopes.”[2]
            The “doctrines and hopes” to which Russell refers are his Age-to-Come, non-Adventist expectations of a premillennial advent, initially invisible, and leading to a restored paradise earth, the blessing of mankind. So Russell accepted a chronology with which he was familiar having heard it from Wendell. He did not accept it when expressed in terms of Adventist world-burning theology; he accepted it when expressed in Age-to-Come terms.[3]
            Did Adventism have an effect on Russell. He says it did, that it helped him to unlearn certain things we can readily identify as Calvinist predestination and hell-fire. Did Russell believe he was adopting some form of Adventism by accepting Barbour’s redefinition of the events of 1873-1874? No. Instead he saw it as a step forward in his Age-to-Come belief in restored paradise. Should we see it as an Adventist influence? I think not. Russell did not adopt Adventist doctrine; the chronology was expressed in Second Adventist terms. The origin of the 1873-4 date was primarily in Anglican writings. Barbour even acknowledges this.


[1]               C. T. Russell: Harvest Gatherings and Siftings, Zion’s Watch Tower, May 1890, page 4.
[2]               ibid.
[3]               As far as I can tell, other than ourselves, no recently published writers who consider Watchtower history have followed Barbour after he left Adventism. Barbour left Adventism for Mark Allen’s Church of the Blessed Hope. Some issues of Allen’s journal, Herald of Truth and Evangelical Messenger, exist. They are not impossible to find. For the most recent writers, this facet of Watchtower history does not exist. This is another example of confirmation bias and lack of curiosity.

Gift to our Research

We are grateful for the occasional monetary help. Original research is expensive; most of the income from our books is invested in it, and much of our 'mad money' is too. We looked for the book pictured below for some years, finding copies in the thousands of dollars. One came our way costing much less than normal, but still out of our price range. One of our regular readers heard of it and covered the cost, and we are extraordinarily thankful. Herewith is the title page.


Friday, December 28, 2018

Temporary post ...

I think that it's time to post my Introductory Essay for volume 2. It is partial, incomplete, in rough draft, and a work in progress. It will displease a few of our readers, but understand it will change. Make your comments now, because this will not be up long.


Preface One – By R. M. de Vienne


            It’s taken longer to write this volume of Separate Identity than we anticipated, but as with the two previous books, few of our expectations have stood up under the light of better research. We believed that a second volume would complete our research. It has not done so. There will be, assuming we live long enough to complete it, a third and final volume. 



The remainder of this post has been deleted.