How John Paton told it

In 1915 John H Paton wrote his autobiography. It ran to 19 pages of typed manuscript with handwritten alterations in places. In his story, Paton managed to excise all mention of his association with Charles Taze Russell and Zion’s Watch Tower.

But much earlier, in 1890, he had been more forthcoming. At this time the readers of his paper World’s Hope were often readers of Zion’s Watch Tower too, so he spent some time telling his side of the story as he veered towards Universalism. His paper published a special four page supplement in its issue for February 15, 1890 (Volume 8, number 4). 

A transcription of the above document now follows. Modern readers may note certain issues in his story. For example, Paton complained that ZWT did not give readers his address to order his book Day Dawn. However, since CTR had approved of publicising Day Dawn at that time and carried details of it in ZWT he would hardly have neglected to pass on orders. And anyhow, Paton’s address and the address of his publisher, A D Jones can both be found in ZWT (see for example in June 1880). Paton accused CTR of making a false statement that Day Dawn was out of print, but Paton himself had said the first edition was exhausted in an early World’s Hope, so CTR was merely repeating what Paton had said. We could go on, but I think readers will get the drift. Paton was probably not expecting eagle-eyed researchers to match his 1890 comments against his own earlier statements in his own journal as well as ZWT.

But, for better or worse, this is the version of history that Paton shared with his readers in 1890.

A transcription of a four page supplement issued with The World’s Hope for February 15, 1890. (Volume 8, number 4).

THE EDITOR’S EXPERIENCE AS A PUBLISHER

FROM the year 1875 to 1879 my time was given to proclaiming in several states the principles of Bible truth as later developed in DAY DAWN. In the autumn of 1879, Bro. A.D. Jones, then of Pittsburg, urged me to write the substance of my lectures and have them published in book form, He said, “We need such a book, to give people who hear these lectures the evidence in permanent form, as well as to reach many who have not the opportunity of hearing; and I am convinced that you are the one to write it. Have you not thought of writing such a book?”

I confessed that I had thought of it, having realized the need of it in my work, and having often been moved in spirit to write these things, but had never ventured even to speak of it, because, for certain reasons, it seemed impracticable.

“Are the reasons of a financial nature?” he asked.

I admitted that such was the case; that being dependent on the fruit of my labor for the support of myself and family, I had no means to invest in publishing.

“Well,” he said, “I am willing to publish such a book, paying all the expenses, if you will write it.”

It seemed to be of the Lord, and after further deliberation, I decided to make the effort. I left off traveling, except to fill my regular Sunday appointments, and devoted myself five days in each week to writing for the book, and in about seven weeks, DAY DAWN was ready for the press. Then followed the care of proof-reading, while it was being printed.

The book was completed and ready for circulation about the month of May, 1880. This was the first edition of which 4,000 copies were printed. It was arranged that I should have all the books I could sell, and that we would give them to the Lord’s poor – those unable to pay. I disposed of five hundred copies, but always found it easier to give, than to sell. The book was freely advertised in Zion’s Watch Tower, for which I was then a constant writer, but for some reason my Post Office address was not given, so that orders for the book did not come to me as a result of that advertising.

The first edition was mainly all disposed of in less than two years. My publisher came to Almont in August 1881, and said that we should soon need another edition, and offered to publish it on the same terms as before. To this I consented, as I was still unable to publish it myself. He suggested that I should revise the book, making such changes as seemed best to myself. Since sending out the first edition, by a careful examination of the Word, my mind had undergone a change as to the nature of Christ’s sacrifice, and the Atonement. I did not deny the Ransom, as some have positively affirmed, but only denied the correctness of their, and my own former theory of the matter. I now saw that the idea of Substitution, or that Christ died instead of mankind, was unscriptural and untrue, as we all die. The unity of Christ, as the Second Man, with the whole race, I saw to be the Apostolic idea, so that all died and rose in him. So this fundamental and vital union with Christ, as the basis of a practical and experimental at-one-ment with, or reconciliation to God, took the place of substitution in DAY DAWN, when revised. Out of this Scriptural idea that Christ is the “Head of every man,” and that all were reconciled to God in him, grew the idea that every man would, indeed must, in due time, be personally and practically reconciled to God through him. These two ideas, related to each other as cause and effect, and clearly sustained by many Scriptures, constitute the chief, if not the only, difference between the first and second editions of DAY DAWN. Those who understand the position taken, can see that so far from ignoring or belittling Christ as the Redeemer of men, it emphasizes his work as the Life-Giver, so that, “As in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.”

About the time of the revision of DAY DAWN, my articles, on account of the change above noted, were excluded from the columns of Z.W.T., its Editor regarding the doctrine as a dangerous and “damnable heresy,” and those who accepted this change as unpardonable sinners, and therefore doomed to annihilation at death. I personally endeavored to disabuse the brother’s mind of such a great misconception of the idea; but it seemed of no avail.

About the same time, for some other reason, my publisher had also been shut out from the pages of Z.W.T., and the publication of Zion’s Day Star had commenced. Its Editor requested me to write for his paper. This I did for a few issues, but to my great surprise, an article on the “Atonement,” was rejected and returned. What counsels led him to such a conclusion, I did not know. But I could feel that a crisis had come. It was not pleasant to be misunderstood, and thus treated by brethren, but having the assurance that I was right, none of these things moved me, and I quietly awaited the issue.

Soon my publisher sent me word that he wanted to see me in reference to the republication of DAY DAWN, and suggested that we meet at Dansville, N.Y. As this matter of republication had been arranged at the time of his visit to Almont, before the re-writing of the book, which was now done, I thought I knew what this proposed visit meant. We met at Dansville in the early winter, in the presence of two others, and after canvassing the situation for about twenty-four hours, I was informed that he could not conscientiously publish the revised edition.

This was a heavy blow; but dark as it then seemed, I have had great reason many times since then to thank the Lord for that decision. I returned home feeling somewhat sad, but not overwhelmed. I said to my wife, “It seems that the Lord does not want me to have the book republished, and if so, I do not want to have it done.” Here the matter rested for several weeks, nothing being said about it by me. Being in Detroit, preaching, I called on a brother who was somewhat interested in my work, and in the course of our visit he said,

“Brother Paton, I understand that you are going to have DAY DAWN republished.”

“No,” I answered, “that has been given up.”

“What does that mean?” he asked, looking up with marked surprise.

I answered, “My publisher has refused to do it.”

“On what ground?”

“On account of my change of view on the Atonement.”

“Then publish it yourself.”

“That,” I replied, “is easier said than done.”

“But why not do it yourself?” he persisted.

The answer was candid: “The want of means.”

Think of my surprise when he replied, “Go ahead and publish it in your own name; I will furnish the means.”

Thinking this might be an impulse of his kind heart, expressed without due consideration, and without knowledge of the amount of money required, and that he might regret it, I said, “You surely do not realize what you are offering; you have no idea how much it would cost.” To which he earnestly replied,

“I do not care how much it costs.”

Still thinking he might be surprised at the amount, I told him it would require a direct outlay of not far from $800.00.

His reply was, “Is that all? Go ahead and do it and I will run all risk of getting it back.”

This seemed another Providential opening, and I acted accordingly. The book was published forthwith. I may say, the brother never seemed to regret his offer. He supplied me with the money as fast as it was needed, but, as two others, learning of the facts, wanted to carry part of the burden, he was only required to furnish half the amount named. He would not even take a note of hand, and refused to take any interest at the final settlement. One of the other two furnished about $300.00, and afterward said, “I do not want you to pay any of it back to me, but let it go to furnish the poor free, and to help support your family as the books are sold.”

This edition was only 3,000, and yet it has taken much longer to dispose of it than the other. This has been partly due to the want of a means of advertising the book among those who knew me, and who were interested in such matters; and, no doubt, in part to the confessed effort on the part of the editor of Z.W.T. to hide the revised edition by publishing a false statement that DAY DAWN was out of print, and by the promise of a similar book, with a similar name; - which promise after several years of waiting was fulfilled. It is not the first time that a strong-willed and earnest man has done evil that a supposed good might come of it, or “verily thought he was doing God’s service,” when persecuting those preaching or holding advanced truth. And God overrules even the wrath of man for good. I rejoice in the assurance that the book with a similar name, Millennial Dawn, as well as Z.W.T., is doing much good, reaching many we could not reach, and leading them to the knowledge of the same general plan as that advanced in DAY DAWN, and causing many to go in advance of their teacher, even to accept the larger hope as proclaimed by DAY DAWN and THE WORLD’S HOPE. I have many evidences of this.

I would not mention these unpleasant points only that they seem so intimately connected with this “Experience,” and show some of the difficulties over which the Lord has brought us.

After the publication of the revised edition of DAY DAWN, in the summer of 1882, many friends urged me to publish a periodical, as a means of spreading the gospel as I understand it. This too was a silent ambition or earnest desire of my own heart, but I waited for the moving of the waters. I wanted to be led by the Lord in the matter, and I have long believed that the Lord in such things often moves through his people. I waited to hear through them in whom I had confidence, what he would have me do in the matter, assured that if he would have me publish a paper, he would through them furnish the means.

Finally one brother said, “Brother Paton, I think you must publish a paper. These things are too good to be kept all to ourselves. And now I make you this offer. If you will go ahead and publish a paper, sending out samples to as many as possible, I will furnish means, if necessary, to the extent of $1,000.00 for the first year.”

Knowing that his heart was in the offer, and that he had the means at his command, I accepted the suggestion as of the Lord, and began at once to make the arrangements needed. But another trial of faith awaited me: for just when the first payment was needed, the brother was laid upon a bed of sickness, and for about four months was unable to do any business, or even to talk about these things.

Again I said to my wife, “It seems as if these plans are to be frustrated.” She answered, “Well, if the Lord wants the paper, he will furnish the mean: and if otherwise, better stop now, than after you have gone further.” To this I agreed, and rested the matter there.

But it was not allowed to rest long. In about two weeks, a letter came from a brother, unknown personally to me, who lived in Illinois, asking me to visit his place and give a course of lectures. Soon after we met, he said,

“Do you know why I sent for you? It was not only to hear you; there is another matter that controlled me. We want a paper, and I think you are the man to publish it. Have you ever thought of such a thing?”

I said I had thought of it, but that it did not seem practicable. And he said, “Why?”

I was cautious in my reply, being anxious to know what the Lord had been doing with him. He was persistent:

“Is the difficulty a financial one? Would you publish a paper if you had the means?”

I finally admitted that I would. He then said:

“I think we must have such a paper as you would publish, and I think there are others who will help; but if it would start you in the work, I have $500.00 for you at once.”

I then told him what had been done, and how the work had been suspended. He had been moved in the matter just in time to help out of the difficulty. From that event, THE WORLD’S HOPE began to be published, and I have never doubted that I was doing the Lord’s will in the matter.

The sick brother recovered, and though it was not necessary for him to give as much as he had offered, yet for years he gave liberally, to support this cause, and to send the good tidings free to the poor. His heart is still in the work, but by a peculiar turn of affairs, he has not, for the past year, been able to give as before. This was another trial of faith; but still the means have been supplied from other sources, and the poor are still being fed.

The HOPE has now been published over seven years. For three years it was a monthly, and the printing was done away from home. Then it was thought best to make a semi-monthly, and to print it at home. The means were supplied to buy type, printing press, paper-cutter and other furniture for the office. And the editor and his family, (with some other help) have learned the printer’s trade, so far as this work requires.

There have been many little incidents of interest, that have been encouraging to faith. Some may seek to account for these things as accidental; but it has become easier to see the hand of the Lord in them. Some of these have been recorded. I will now record another.

The last thing of special importance with which the printing-office was furnished, was the paper-cutter. I had learned that a new one, such as I needed, would cost $80.00. But I found a second-hand one, that could be bought for $55.00. Soon after, a brother said, “Isn’t there something else you need in your office?”

I did not wish to tell him about it, as he had already done so much, so I said, “I think we are pretty well supplied.” But he was not satisfied, and said, “I cannot help thinking there is something else you need, and I want you to tell me, that I may help you.”

I then told him, but that I wanted to obtain the means in some other way. He handed me $37.00, and said I must take it, and I would perhaps get the balance somewhere else. I was a little surprised at the peculiar amount. I would not have thought of it had it been $35.00 or $40.00. On coming home, I received a letter from a brother five hundred miles from the other, and who knew nothing of the facts, and the letter contained a present of $18.00, - just enough, with the other, to make the $55.00 needed.

So many such things have occurred in our experience, that when doubts and fears arise, as they sometimes do, the Saviour’s words seem appropriate, “O, thou of little faith, wherefore didst thou doubt?”

These things are no evidence of infallibility either of doctrine or life. But the Lord uses and blesses imperfect agencies, to lead others into light. One earnest sister said, “I am puzzled to know why the Lord can so bless such a heretic as you are.” Would he so bless one who had committed an unpardonable sin?

For some time the idea has been suggested that another edition of DAY DAWN is needed, as nearly all are gone, and orders for them continue to come. This impression has been growing stronger, and yet just how it will be done, does not appear. The thought, as before, has been, if the work should be done, the Lord in some way will supply the means. Within a few days, the brother in Illinois, who was specially used for starting the HOPE, and who for years has been largely taken up with another branch of work, so that we have had but little correspondence, has again come to the front, to learn as to the need of the work, and proposes to aid in getting out a new edition of DAY DAWN, and also suggests a plan (given below) by which all who desire it, may help toward a larger circulation of the paper and books. And I have just received from a friend in North Carolina, ten dollars to help toward the new edition of DAY DAWN. It will not require as much immediate outlay for another edition as the last, because much of the work can be done at home. The sum of $500.00 will do about as much now, as $800.00 did then.

This, then, is our present attitude. It has been decided to begin at once; preparations having already been partly made; and to proceed with the work as rapidly as the Lord gives ability. We desire and expect his blessing on the effort, and we crave the sympathy, prayers and co-operation of all who believe we have the truth, and who desire a share in the work of making known the “good tidings of great joy, which shall be unto all people.” We do not dictate as to what any one shall do, or how they shall work, but hope each one will say, “Lord, what wilt thou have me to do?” And may he direct us all to his glory, and the blessing of many.

This experience is given by request, and as an illustration of some of the Lord’s ways. Believing that “Thus far the Lord has led me on,” I would thank him, and still go on with courage.

PLAN OF THE WORK

WE will endeavor to describe the plan of work which has been suggested by the brother before mentioned. Its object is to advertise and circulate THE WORLD’S HOPE, DAY DAWN and MOSES AND CHRIST, and to secure to each reader of the HOPE a copy of each book. We have decided to try it, as it seems right, and thinking it more blessed to try to do a good work and fail, than not to try at all.

The plan is to appoint each reader of the HOPE, who desires to co-operate with us in this work, an agent for the sale of the book, MOSES AND CHRIST, urging that each one who has not a copy already, will obtain one. Each agent thus appointed may do the work without even leaving home. To this end, let each one send us a two-cent postage stamp, and we will forward him a package of twenty envelopes and the same number of printed copies of a circular letter, to be signed by the agent and mailed to twenty persons of his own choice. The letter will advertise our works, and invite each one receiving it to send for a copy of MOSES AND CHRIST. If all the twenty respond, the agent will receive as his reward, a cloth-bound copy of DAY DAWN, and credit of a year’s subscription to THE WORLD’S HOPE. Thus each reader will possess both books. If all do not respond, the agent will be supplied with more letters, if he wishes, till twenty do respond; but a credit of nine cents will be given to the agent for each sale he secures, though all the twenty do not respond.

The package of letters sent out will all be numbered, and, in our account book, the number of the package will be marked beside the name of the agent to whom it is sent. Then if each agent will send us a list of the names and post offices to whom he sends the letters, and if each one receiving such a letter, and sending for a book, will return the circular letter to us, we can then give each agent the proper credit.

Each one sending for the book, MOSES AND CHRIST, may also send for a package of letters, and by acting as agent, obtain the reward of DAY DAWN and WORLD’S HOPE, like the others.”

By co-operating with us in this plan, many who have expressed a desire to do something in this cause, but knew not how, will have a good opportunity. Let this statement of the plan be carefully studied, and then let those interested, and who are willing to make the needed effort, send the two-cent stamp for the package of letters.

The prices of the books, postage paid, are as follows: MOSES AND CHRIST, in paper cover, 30 cents; cloth-bound, 50 cents; DAY DAWN, in paper cover, 50 cents; cloth-bound, 75 cents. THE WORLD’S HOPE is $1.00 a year.

ADDRESS: J.H. PATON, Almont, Mich.   (Feb. 15, 1890.)

“Whatever thy hand findeth to do, do it with thy might.” – Eccle. ix. 10.

John Paton's Farewell

From the very last page of the very last issue of John H Paton’s World’s Hope, Volume 34, number 16, August 15, 1916.

Paton’s magazine provides us with obituaries for key figures like Nelson Barbour and William Conley. If he had only continued publishing for a few more months he would no doubt have written an obituary for Charles Taze Russell.

John H Paton's obituary

When John H Paton (former associate of Charles Taze Russell and editor of the World’s Hope magazine) died it was to be expected that the local paper, The Almont Herald, would publish an obituary. Unfortunately the Almont library holdings are missing the key year 1922. However, the obituary was picked up and republished by the Yale Expositor (Yale, Michigan) on Thursday, September 21, 1922.

There is one key piece of information this supplies that was previously unknown, namely that George L Rogers conducted the funeral service. This makes a lot of sense. Rogers, like Paton, had come originally from Scotland, and like Paton had first been a Baptist minister in Almont. Like Paton he became a Universalist and would be associated with the Concordant Publishing Concern, a Universalist group which attracted a number of former Watch Tower adherents. These included Fredrik Homer Robison (who lived at Brooklyn Bethel with CTR and was imprisoned with JFR in 1918), Walter Bundy (one time Pilgrim) and Menta Sturgeon (CTR’s traveling companion on his last journey). Robison and Rogers became friends and often spoke on the same Concordant platform over 1923 and 1924. Since Rogers took Paton’s funeral, and since Paton had officiated at CTR’s wedding way back in 1879, one can imagine the two men had a number of things to talk about. It is a small world sometimes.

Horace Randle

Photograph from the Duluth Evening Herald - 1900

Horace A. Randle is mentioned in the Proclaimers book (page 418) where his efforts to share the message of Millennial Dawn with other missionaries in the Orient is described. Horace had been a medical missionary in China. As detailed by Caroline Wah in Jehovah’s Witnesses and the Empire of the Sun (Journal of Church and State – January 1, 2002) he had received the message himself from a Presbyterian missionary named Miss C B Downing (now know to be Calista Burke Downing) who had sent materials to other missionaries including Horace, who was then a Baptist missionary. Horace had been in China since 1876. Eventually Horace’s new understanding of scripture through Millennial Dawn caused him to resign and leave China.

The record cards in Baptist mission archives show the date and reason for his resignation.

Horace made his way to America and visited CTR in the Spring of 1900 (see ZWT May 15, 1900, reprints pages 2632-33). From there he made his way back to England, his home country.

In 1901 he published an eight page tract on Future Probation which also advertised The Plan of the Ages by Pastor C T Russell.

The address on the tract takes us to the census returns for London in 1901 which describe him as “Medical Missionary and Preacher, Millennial Dawn Christian.” He was then living with his wife Ellen, and son Arnold.

In 1906 Horace was still espousing Millennial Dawn doctine and several newspapers contain advertisements of talks he was scheduled to give in Salford, in what are called the British Midlands. From the Wharfdale and Airedale Observer, May 11, 1906,

In 1907 he started a short-lived magazine of his own entitled Good News of the Coming Age published in Salford. At least one issue is in the British Library, but only a small portion can be copied, and then only by someone physically visiting the library. Until this can be examined we do not know whether he was still in harmony with Watch Tower thought at the time.

In the 1911 census, Horace was in Salford at his sister’s home, along with his mother and two brothers. His younger sister, Florcence, is single and a school teacher. Horace’s wife and son Arnold were still living in London. References to Millennial Dawn have now disappeared; he was now just described as Medical Missionary formerly of China, retired.

He appears to have left association with ZWT over the New Covenant issue (see Proclaimers page 630) and by 1914 was circulating material critical of both CTR’s revised views on the New Covenant, and also his high profile in the media of the day.

As a result, the St Paul Enterprise – a newspaper mainly published for Bible Students – in its issue for September 25, 1914, printed a response from an Alex Evans of the Olive Branch Ecclesia in Louisiana.

This response was viewed as sufficiently important to be reprinted in a special issue of the St Paul Enterprise in November 1914, where Evans is described as “one of our colored brethren.” This suggests that Randle’s criticism was quite widely circulated at the time in the Bible Student community.

Below is a transcript taken from the first publication of Alex Evans’ rebuttal.

Alex. Evans replies to Mr. Horace A. Randle

A Member of an Ecclesia at Olive Branch, Louisiana, in defense of Pastor Russell, Submits this Open Letter.

Olive Branch, La., Sept. 3d, 1914.

Editor St. Paul Enterprise:

I have read an open letter to Pastor Russell by Horace A. Randle, in which he makes several charges. I wish to make the following reply:

The letter is written in an apparently Christian Spirit. But herein lies its Evil Subtility, for we remember the Betrayal kiss by Judas which had the outward appearance of an act of Love, but proved to be the farthest thing from Love.

Randle claims that Pastor Russell and the Bible Students’ movement has changed in recent years; to this I quote the following Scripture: "The path of the Just is as a shining light that shineth more and more, unto the perfect day." (Prov. 4:18.) "Walk as children of the light." (Eph. 5:8.) "If we walk (not ‘sit’) in the light." (1John 1:7.)

Some claim that the one whom the Lord would use as "That Servant," at His second advent (Matt. 24:46; Luke 12:42) would need be infallible, perfect, and make no mistakes. But there have been only two perfect men on earth, Adam and Jesus. I have heard people say that both of them made mistakes: That Adam made a mistake in thinking that it would be better to transgress and die with Eve than to live alone after her death. And that Jesus made a mistake in going to a certain fig tree for figs and found nothing but leaves. Whether this be so or not, I can’t see why anyone should blame Pastor Russell for making and correcting a few little errors during the long period of the last forty years. Rather we should say, He has done well.

Randle says that, the pastor errs in saying that the Goat of Lev. 16:15 is a type of the church, and that it signifies that the church is a joint sacrifice with Jesus in the world’s great sin offering.

If the Lord’s Goat, and its process of offering did not typify the church and its suffering with Jesus, I ask, What then did it typify? All Bible Students ought to be able to agree that Jesus was an exact corresponding price for Adam, and that justice calls for nothing more. Yet we can see how it could "permit" more to be put on the measure. We remember how Jesus spoke of giving measures. He said: "Pressed down, shaken together, and "running over." (See Luke 6:38.) What if the church is found to be making the measure overflow? And what shall we do with the following Scripture if the church is not a joint sacrifice with Jesus?

"Let us go forth therefore unto Him without the camp, bearing His reproach." (Heb. 13:13.)

"We are members of His body, of His flesh and of His bones." (Eph. 5:33.)

"Who now rejoice in my sufferings for you, and fill up that which is behind of the afflictions of Christ in my flesh for His body’s sake, "which is the church:’" ( Col. 1:24.) (There was a portion left behind for the church to fill up according to this Scripture.) Again we read, "Both he that sanctifieth and they that are sanctified are one." (not two.) (Heb 2:11.)

"I pray for them, I pray not for the world, but for them which thou hast given me." (John 17:9.)

"A people for his name." (Acts 15:14.) (What people?)

"To whom God would make known what is the riches of the Glory of this mystery among the Gentiles; which is Christ in you (the church) the Hope of Glory." (Col. 1:27.)

"If ye be Christ’s then are ye Abraham’s seed and heirs according to the promise." (Gal. 3:29.)

"If children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint heirs with Christ, if so be that we suffer with Him, that we may also be Glorified Together." (Rom. 8:17.) (The joint heirship depends upon the joint sufferingship, in the type the Goat suffered with the Bullock.)

"If we suffer with Him, (as did the Goat with the Bullock) we shall also reign with Him." (2 Tim. 2:12.)

I could cite many more Scriptures showing that the church (His church) takes a part with Jesus in the world’s great sin offering. Not that justice required it, but that wisdom and love arranged it so. It is not an obligation, but a great privilege, the greatest ever offered.

There are two more standpoints from which we can view nearly everything, and so it is with the subject under discussion. From one standpoint, we can view it as being all done by Jesus, because all the merit resides in Him, and from another viewpoint we see each member of His church presenting themselves to be joint sacrificers with Jesus filling in a place as though the sin offering would not have been complete without them. But from either view point it remains materially the same.

Jesus wears the title of priest at the present time and the apostle says every priest must have something to offer (Heb. 8:3) and the intimation is that when He ceases to have anything to offer, then His priestly office will end. Now I ask, what does Jesus have now to offer, remembering that He has long since offered Himself once for all time? Still he has something to offer, and what else could it be but His church, His mystical body in the flesh? Rom. 12:1 comes in right here. We present ourselves to Him, and He presents us to the Father. The High Priest in the type supervised all the sacrificing and the same is being done in the antitype. It is all so beautiful and clear to many Bible Students, including the writer.

The relation or connection that Christ and His church bear one another, has been the mystery unsolvable for many centuries to not only the world, but also to the nominal church.

But now in the light of the foregoing we can understand Heb. 5:3. As the church was to become part of Himself, (His wife, Rev. 19:7) in the sense of becoming a member of the great Messianic body of which He was the head, it can thus be said the he made an offering for himself, although he had no personal sin. (Heb. 7:25.)

Concerning the "new covenant," I will say, If it has gone into operation as Mr. Randle and others say, I would like them to tell us why it is that the Jews don’t know anything about it? According to the Scriptures it is to be made with them. (See Jer. 31:31, and Heb. 8:10.) And where is the "new heart" and general knowledge that is to result from it? I know that these questions are unanswerable, except from the viewpoint that both Jesus and His church are the world’s great testator; and before the Testament can go into effect, the death of the Testator must take place. As the church, which is a part of the great Testator, has not finished dying. The "new covenant" has not gone into effect yet; for where a Testament is, there must also be the Death of the Testator, says the apostle. (Heb. 9:16.) Though we are now serving, and being made able ministers of the "new covenant," in the sense of preparing ourselves for it.

Randle complains about the Pastor’s name appearing in a certain Tower more times than the name of Jesus. There is no virtue in mentioning a name, nor a lack of virtue by not mentioning it. Bible Students will remember that Jesus said that many will say to Him in that day, Lord, Lord, (calling his name double) have we not prophesied in Thy name, and in Thy name done wonders, cast out devils, etc.? And he will answer them saying, I have never recognized you; depart from me ye workers of iniquity. (Matt. 7:23.)

Again He asked: Why call ye me Lord, Lord, (so many times) and do not the thing which I say? (Luke 6:46.) Upon the testimony of these Scriptures we can rest assured that nothing is to be gained by calling the Lord’s name so many times. And as to Pastor Russell’s name appearing in the Jan. 1, 1912, Tower a good many times, that is the special Tower setting forth the beginning and development of present Truth, and the Harvest Work as was called for by newspaper editors who were contracting to publish the sermons; because they knew that the world wants to know about the personality of a man, where he came from, etc.; and had Pastor Russell not granted their innocent request, He would not have been acting wisely, because editors would have refused to publish a man’s sermons who had refused to make Himself known, and the Tower contained such, together with newspaper clipping; that all its readers might know how the work we love so much was progressing. The pastor objected to his picture going at the head of his sermons but the editors protested that it must be and he granted it only to keep from hindering the cause he loved so well as to sacrifice his thousands of dollars and himself for.

The Pastor made clear his unselfish motive in the start when he sacrificed his prosperous business and himself for the good of others and he maintains this same motive even unto this day. And the facts, when all of them are known about this noble man, will prove that a prophet sent of God has been in our midst, and he will go down in history as one of the greatest of men.

I am glad that I had the privilege of reading that open letter for it has caused me to research my Bible and Pastor Russell’s writings in the Tabernacle Shadows and to thus review the cloud of Scripture witnesses in the Pastor’s doctrinal favor. And I would suggest to all those who have not read the "Tabernacle Shadows" and "The Divine Plan of the Ages," by Pastor Russell, to do so on the first opportunity and begin to enjoy the feast of fat things therein revealed. They can be obtained from the W. T. B. & T. Society, 17 Hicks St., Brooklyn, N. Y., at a nominal cost or free to those who need.

"I live for those who love me,

And awaits my coming too;

And the good that I can do."

For the cause that lacks assistance,

For the future in the distance,

For the Heaven that smiles above me,

For the wrong that needs resistance,

For those who know me true;

Yours in the defense of the Lord’s Truth, and His special servant,

ALEX. EVANS.

(end of transcript)

Randle died in the Salford area in the latter part of 1926 aged 71. His obituary in the Acton Gazette for Friday, November 19, 1926 (the area in London where his wife lived) suggests he had continued practicing medicine, but had returned to the Baptist fold. There is no mention of his former Watch Tower connections.

For fuller details of the history of both Calista Downing and Horace Randle, see the chapter In all the Earth: China etc. in the forthcoming Separate Identity volume 2 by Schulz and de Vienne.

Charles Taze Russell and Andrew Eychaner - a series

This is a story of how an apparent account of Charles Taze Russell speaking at an Age to Come conference in 1895 raised questions on the reliability of sources, even those that on face value seemed irrefutable. Questions were raised back in 2011 but the queries were not solved until 2015, and then only by accident. It’s a lesson on the need to always check historical “sources” carefully, and take the checking as far as you can if something doesn’t seem right.

Three articles follow – the first two from 2011 and then one from 2015. Ideally they should have just been rewritten into one composite whole, but that would have been a lot of work for what might be deemed a peripheral issue. So all three articles are simply reproduced here in date order, and there will be an overlap of material in them. Those interested, but without the stamina to read the lot, should probably go straight to article number 3 which is also illustrated.

Eychaner and Russell 1 - What Really Happened in 1895?

Recent research (written in 2011) has made a connection between the work of C. T. Russell (hereafter abbreviated to CTR) and the Bible Student movement, and that of 19^th century Age to Come congregations, called variously One Faith, Abrahamic Faith, Church of God, Restitutionists, etc. CTR’s first books and booklets were reviewed in the Restitution newspaper with diminishing enthusiasm, as the groups veered apart. Early reviews were tolerably friendly; some later reviews were positively hostile.

But into this scenario is one incident that does not appear to fit the pattern. In 1895 a Restitutionist evangelist, A. J. Eychaner organized a series of meetings for his Iowa conference. According to his personal diary a featured speaker throughout the event was none other than CTR.

This was picked up by Mark Mattison in his well-known article The Provenance of Russellism as proof that Church of God and Millennial Dawn still cooperated at times in a vague sort of way. Mattison describes CTR as the guest speaker at the Church of God Conference in Marshalltown, Iowa, August 16 to August 25, 1895. He writes: (quote) The conference would not be a particularly unique one if it were not for the guest speaker. The record indicates that "C. T. Russell" opened the conference with a sermon on Friday and addressed the conference throughout the week. Russell's final sermon concerned "the greatness of God" and was delivered at 2:30 on the last Sunday. After being briefly mentioned a few times in Eychaner's record, Russell's name disappears. He attended the conference, preached several sermons, and left (end of quote).

Even though Mattison then correctly stresses CTR’s developing theology that would preclude close cooperation, just his attendance at an 1895 conference is a bit like a piece of a jigsaw that doesn’t seem to fit the picture.

As noted above, the Restitution had not been at all happy about the activities of CTR and Millennial Dawn. For example, in the Restitution for May 16, 1894 page 2 a letter is printed from E. D. McClees which referred to CTR’s ministry. His letter reads in part: Many false prophets have arisen among us and are scattering the flock...some are following Russell’s teachings ...we started out to teach in a nice tent...but the adversary began his work calling it the “Free Gospel Tent”...Other preachers were allowed to come (he then gives a whole list including SDAs, Advent Christians and Millennial Dawn people)...it has become a perfect Babel (end of quote). He concluded with a plea for help.

McClees bemoaned his lack of control over (amongst others) Millennial Dawn people. But at a State conference, the Age to Come people did have control. For a high profile Restitution figure like Eychaner to then allow the actual author of Millennial Dawn onto a shared platform throughout a 10 day series of meetings seems incongruous. Had word got out, it would not have sat at all well with the McClees of the Age to Come community.

It is true that Eychaner had previously reviewed CTR’s book The Time is at Hand in The Restitution for February 4, 1891 page 1. This review was far less censorious than previous reviews of Divine Plan, Food for Thinking Christians and Object and Manner. In the review Eychaner even called CTR “Brother” and made a conciliatory statement “Submitted in all charity”. So if anyone from the Age to Come movement would share a platform with CTR it would be someone like Eychaner. ONLY THIS DID NOT HAPPEN.

No matter how strong the surface evidence appears, August 1895 is a non-event. Mattison is in error – although in fairness to him it was Eychaner who erred originally. And in fairness to Eychaner, he never expected people to be scrutinizing his diary a century later. Exactly how and why this happened, we will discuss below. But it serves as a warning when conducting historical research.

First, we must establish that Eychaner’s diary is, in fact, incorrect. This is quite easy to do because the movement’s paper The Restitution carried notices and reports of their various State meetings and conventions. The advance notice for this specific event is found in The Restitution for August 7, 1895 page 2. Here the complete program for the Marshalltown conference over August 15-25, 1895 is given, to encourage readers to make the journey and attend.

It is a simple matter to compare the program with Eychaner’s diary of what actually happened on the day. There were obviously some changes between intent and realization, and Eychaner’s notes are sometimes brief, but a clear pattern is seen.

We will list first what Eychaner wrote in his diary, and then compare it with what had officially been advertised in The Restitution a week or so before.

One diary page lists Eychaner’s expenses which for August 17 reads – paid Bro Russel (sic) (Lord’s Box)  1.00 (one dollar). There is obviously no advance detail of this in the newspaper, but at the outset, Eychaner paying CTR a dollar expenses doesn’t sound right.

Coming to the actual program Eychaner’s diary for August 16 says Friday – C. T. Russell – sermon.

The Restitution program for August 16 says “Our Duty” C. W. Russell.

Eychaner’s diary for Sunday August 18 says 2 pm Russell (no initials).

The Restitution program for August 18 says 2 pm “What to do to be saved?” C. W. Russell.

Eychaner’s diary for Monday August 19 says Primmer, Russell and Kennedy.

The Restitution program for August 19 lists J. M. Primmer and C. F. Kennedy as speakers, but there is no mention of Russell.

Eychaner’s diary for August 20 says Chown, Essays, Russell.

The Restitution program for August 20 lists G. W, Chown, Essays and “talks by all” but there is no specific mention of Russell.

(The above two references simply suggest that Russell may not been scheduled originally, but spoke anyway on these two dates).

Eychaner’s diary for August 22 says C. T. Russell.

The Restitution program for August 22 says 8 pm “Obedience to the truth” C. W. Russell.

Eychaner’s diary for August 25 says C. T. Russell 2:3 “Greatness of God”.

The Restitution program for August 25 says 2.30 pm “Now is the day of salvation” C. W. Russell.

There is no doubt that while some aspects of the program evolved, the diary and the Restitution announcement are covering the same event – the Marshalltown conference held over August 15-25, 1895. However, no matter what Eychaner wrote in his diary, we obviously have two different Russells here – one is C. T. Russell and the other, C. W. Russell. To compound the problem, the C in both cases stands for Charles.

So who was the mysterious C. W. Russell, who shared Eychaner’s platform?

C. W. Russell first appeared in the pages of The Restitution in the issue for July 11, 1894 page 3, in the article Iowa Tent Work written by Eychaner. C. W. Russell is assisting in tent work with him. (A Mrs C. W. Russell had been down as a contributor to the Special Evangelist Fund for several months prior to this).

The Restitution for July 18, 1894 page 3 in the article The Iowa Conference has C. W. Russell presented with a teaching certificate. He has come to them from the Garfield Congregation in Chicago with letters of commendation. Two letters of recommendation are printed on this page, one of which gives his names as Chas. W. Russell.

By The Restitution for September 12, 1894 page 3 the Iowa conferences were being advertised in press releases signed by both A. J. Eychaner and C. W. Russell.

C. W. Russell worked with Eychaner up to and including the August 1895 Marshalltown event. But not long after this he disappears from the pages of The Restitution, although Mrs C. W. Russell is still listed on occasion making contributions.

So what conclusion can we draw from the above? Simply put, the C. W. Russell at Eychaner’s conference had no connection with CTR, the subject of this blog. CTR never attended this Church of God meeting. CTR never appeared on their platform on this occasion as guest speaker.

Which raises an interesting question – what possessed Eychaner to consistently write the wrong initial in his diary – to confuse writers and historians a hundred years later? And once confused, the error to be thereafter repeated as established fact?

We can only speculate; but it is possible to have a name in one’s mind – yet continually confuse them with someone else – not literally, but just in name.

To illustrate, an elderly relative of mind used to regularly confuse a name in his congregation. To protect the guilty, I will provide parallel names to illustrate the point. Imagine an attendee  named Debbie Richards who regularly wishes to share in commenting. The chairman of the meeting has obviously seen the film “Singing in the Rain” and has the name of the actress Debbie Reynolds implanted in his mind. Forever after, poor Debbie Richards is going to be announced as Debbie Reynolds. The brother knew what he meant. The congregation – after a certain hilarity – knew what he meant. Debbie Richards sighed a bit, but also knew what he meant. It was just the way things were – forever thereafter. Perhaps Eychaner had Charles T. Russell on the brain – having reviewed his book, or because he was much in the minds of Age to Come groups through the proselyting work of the Bible students. Eychaner knew who he meant. He just didn’t quite write who he meant. And he wasn’t to know that a century later people would pore over his handwritten notes and assume infallibility.

That’s my theory.

The moral? With ancient sources we are at the mercy of the imperfections of humans and their fallible memories, let alone, in many cases, their own agendas. If at all possible, it is good to establish something out of the mouth of two or three witnesses. Always go back to primary rather than secondary sources if they are available. Even then, we have to exercise certain cautions, particularly if something seems like a piece from the wrong jigsaw.

Caveat lector. Let the reader beware.

Eychaner and Russell 2 - An Addenda

Earlier this year (written in 2011) this blog featured an article on Eychaner and Russell, relating to an 1895 Church of God conference where it was long believed that Charles T. Russell both attended and spoke. The aim of the article was to show that while A. J. Eychaner certainly referred to C. T. Russell in his diary, he did not mean our Charles T. Russell, but rather a Charles W. Russell who had previously worked with him. Since the article was posted, research has uncovered more references about both Charles Russells in the pages of The Restitution newspaper. While the original article can stand as it is, this addenda is posted to provide the additional information, for any future researcher to know where to look.

My argument was that Eychaner would not have welcomed CTR on the same platform because his people by this time had come to view CTR with great suspicion. CTR’s early association with The Restitution when they circulated Object and a Manner for him was in the very dim and distant past.

Over 1894-1895 there are several references to CTR and his ministry in the pages of The Restitution. None of them are flattering.

Starting in its issue of September 26, 1894 the paper published a series of articles entitled Justification by Faith. They started life as lectures at the Indiana State conference. No author is given, but the Restitution was published from Plymouth, Indiana, and M. Joplin was corresponding editor at this time, so perhaps he was the author.

Episodes 10 and 11 (as found in the Restitution for December 5 and 12, 1894) spend most of their length attacking CTR.

Episode 10 starts with an account from three months before when (quote) A gentleman stood on the side walk in front of our place of worship one Sunday evening, and handed eight page tracts to those entering, entitled “Do You Know” (end of quote). This was Old Theology Quarterly No. 21. Whether the Church of God place of worship was specially targeted we do not know, but not surprisingly the writer was unimpressed. He took particular issue with page 5 of the tract, point 3:

DO YOU KNOW that our Lord Jesus paid the great price for all; to secure for all a FULL OPPORTUNITY to gain everlasting life by faith and obedience? – 1 Tim 2:6; Acts 3:22,23.

The writer’s immediate riposte was: (quote) Our answer to the author is: “No we know nothing of the kind; do you? If you do it would be kind of you to tell us how you know it.” The writer no doubt thinks he knows it, for he has appended two references to prove it: they are taken as proof by him and offered as such to us. (end of quote). The writer then discusses his own somewhat different slant on the verses CTR has quoted; with a reference to Millennial Dawn volume 1. A sample of the style comes over from phrases such as (quote) Evidently the Christ Mr. Russell expects to reign with, never died for him....we admit there is a fraud, and as between the Lord Jesus and Mr. Russell, we decide it is the latter; but our readers can take their choice (end of quote).

In Episode 11 of Justification by Faith, the writer had Millennial Dawn volume 2 in his sights. In Millennial Dawn volume 2: The Time is at Hand: Study 5 - The Manner of Lord’s Return and Appearing, CTR outlined his understanding of scripture on Jesus’ resurrection. In discussing what happened to Jesus’ fleshly body on resurrection, CTR theorized that maybe in the kingdom the literal body as preserved by God might even be shown to the world. (most editions: page 130). His main point was that Jesus did not take his literal body back on resurrection but “he was now a spirit being” (most editions: page 126).

 The Restitution writer came out with all guns blazing. Regrettably, the extant pages of the December 12, 1894 Restitution are somewhat difficult to decipher, but some selected salvos included (quote):  Had he not been blinded by his own invention he would have seen that the words he quotes to prove it, positively DISPROVE it...Evidently this popular author has not learned that Christ is the first fruits of the great harvest of dead ones...we squarely charge the author of Millennial Dawn with setting aside the death, burial and resurrection of Christ and representing his as deceiving the apostles by creating a body and clothing for that purpose. A man who would represent him in whose mouth was no guile, as capable of such abominable trickery in order to sustain his own, or some borrowed subterfuge, ought to be closed watched...All this folly grows out of want of faith in that great and glorious truth – justification by faith (end quotes).

Interestingly, it had to be admitted that CTR was now a “popular author”. His work was spreading. And as the previous issue indicated, one of his co-laborers even had the temerity to hand out tracts outside one of their churches.

These attacks were followed up in The Restitution for April 17, 1895. This issue contained a short article entitled The Millennial Dawn on page 2, which was a reprinted piece from Herald of the Coming One. This was a journal of the Evangelical Adventists. The EAs kept far more mainstream doctrines of Christendom than did other groups looking for Christ’s return, including the trinity, the natural immortality of the soul with either eternal bliss or everlasting punishment ahead (see Cornerstones of Faith by Charles H. Small 1898 page 398). Because they were seen as little different from mainstream Christendom they died out as a separate body in the early twentieth century. They were strange bedfellows for an Age to Come journal, but in 1895 they shared a common problem – his name was Charles Taze Russell.

The article is quite brief, and in the style of much of the day is one long paragraph. But this is the warning The Restitution reprinted:

A correspondent writes us asking if we have seen a work called "The Millennial Dawn," and if we have, he would be glad if we would give an opinion of it in these columns. We have

seen the work, and once or twice have warned our readers concerning it. We can only repeat what we have before said. The work is so craftily written that the unsuspecting are liable to be led astray by it. A deal of Scripture is quoted, and unless you are on your guard, you will swallow the poison with it. It is premillennial in its teachings, but at the same time it is rank Universalism. The author believes that all men will be finally saved. Entering a home, not long since, we found the three volumes comprising the work, and explained their character. The man of the house said that he was afraid of the result of such teachings. But a large number of the hooks are in circulation. Money is used freely to scatter works which deceive and lead away from God. O that the professed people of God would use their money as freely to scatter the truth. "The Millennial Dawn" is not worth the paper it is printed upon. Josh Billings said that "Rum was good in its place, and hell was the place for it." The book referred to is good in its place, but a blazing hot fire is the place for it. We hope that none of our readers will be deceived by its false teachings – Herald of the Coming One.

Just three weeks later (Restitution May 8, 1895 page 2) the paper began including a paragraph each week to advertize the forthcoming August Marshalltown conference. But looking back on the three articles cited above, there is no way that someone linked with such negative terms as false, fraud and folly could have been welcomed on that platform.

The Restitution had its skirmishes with Seventh Day Adventists, Mormons, Methodists, Campbellites, Christadelphians, etc, but – although I cannot give precise documentation - somehow CTR seemed a bigger headache by this time. As observed above, the warnings about him admitted that he was “a popular author”. It was noted that a large number of his books were in circulation. And those who believed his message were outside their churches handing out tracts. And while they had many doctrines in common, even a platform like conditional immortality was suspect. CTR’s belief that the resurrection of the “saints” was now instantaneous on death sounded too much like the old immortal soul concept to some.

And the negative feeling wasn’t to get any better. A nephew of Benjamin Wilson would publish a booklet attacking “Russellism” and then, as papers like The Brooklyn Eagle gave a negative tabloid slant to CTR’s activities, so The Restitution always seemed to find space to run the same stories.

This then was CTR – who did NOT appear with A. J. Eychaner at the 1895 conference – or at any time thereafter!

So what about the other Charles Russell? The original article pointed out when he first entered the picture as a working companion of Eychaner, and over 1894-95 there are several references to him. One key one that has come to light is from The Restitution October 17, 1894 page 3.

This issue carries the Iowa Conference report, which states (quote) State Evangelist Brother A. J. Eychaner and assistant evangelist, Brother C. W. Russel (sic), made a full report of the summer’s work (end of quote). On the same page, the full Iowa Evangelist’s Report for June 7 to October 4 is printed. Signed by Eychaner it covers the activities of Eychaner and Russell over these months, where they preached, how many sermons they delivered, how many they baptized, etc. and the exact numbers show AJE and CWR more or less level in effort and results.

So Charles W. Russell would obviously be expected to speak at the same convention as Eychaner. It was what he did at this period of history.

After the 1895 Marshalltown meeting C. W’s subsequently activities are not reported and he seems to disappear. However, seventeen years later, in 1912, a letter was printed from a Charles W. Russell who was now preaching in Colorado. (see The Restitution for November 19, 1912, page 2).

So these are our two Russells. But we are still left with the conundrum of why Eychaner wrote C. T. rather than C. W. in his diary. For the moment, I can only stick with my theory in the first article.