|
Post by Roselyn T on Jul 20, 2015 23:43:51 GMT -5
It's really a matter if who's telling the story isn't it and what answers the questioner is seeking! For instance I know of some people who would describe me as rebellious, the old ladies I assist say I'm kind, my children at times have said I'm cranky, my paraplegic friend says I'm a good Christian lady, drug addicts, women suffering from DV and those from CSA abuse say I'm a blessing.........yet apart from the rebellious and cranky bit I tend to think they could all be wrong!!!! So being sufficiently rebellious enough and my parents not hiding stuff from me, I set out to find out a few things for myself, did I go to the workers, professing folk, no, Ross I'm sure your parents are/were wonderful, but they certainly weren't who I wanted to test my theories on. Instead I went to where Doug Parker had his business interests, lived and worked amongst those people who were once his people, At the time I did it for my own purpose( I could say God 'placed me there, but I know I persued it), my findings were for me, my future family and are now for my grandchildren, and they are recorded only for them. What is done with it after I die will be up to them. At no time did Doug Parker receive hate mail from me, my findings achieved a purpose although it was not the one I intended. Anybody could have done the same thing, most didn't!! Roselyn it doesn't matter how old I was in the 70's,suffice to say I was rebellious and on a mission and I now have grandchildren. Ross I'm not sure about private funerals people will draw their own conclusions. The question is though, were you in Australia in the 70's ? Who exactly were Doug's people ? You said you didn't know Noel Harvey who was a well known worker in NSW is the 70's ? Did you know John Hardie or did your Family know John Hardie?
|
|
|
Post by howitis on Jul 21, 2015 0:00:07 GMT -5
I'm sure my folks knew them both, but as for me hanging with 'workers' wasn't my priority at the time!! Doug had siblings, cousins, aunts, uncles, business associates, friends etc. There's one thing I've thought of much since.....perhaps those that didn't like the publicans in Jesus day, knew, publicans often know whats going on and often aren't afraid to talk!!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 21, 2015 0:11:21 GMT -5
My research was for personal reasons and I do not intending on publishing my findings in any way shape or form and whilst my comments may well do the FDU thing, if you're that way inclined, I urge everyone to do their own research, it has been a blessing to me and I'm sure you'll all receive the same! If it has been such a "blessing" to you, -I would think that you would want to share the "blessing!"
That you would at least tell people where to look ! Cherie Kropp hasn't told me what church she belongs to. Try as I may I haven't detected the faintest glimmer nor the slightest glint of any gold she wishes to impart. I maintain if you have something of worth you want to share it, and if you don't want to share it then you haven't got it.
So what is this blessing? As I have never been told, after ten years on the TMB, I have to decide for myself what might be. Thus I came up with the... drum roll please......
Irvine Slippers!
On a Sunday morning slip these on. If you should think of those sad Irvinites in their little un-biblical home meetings you can glance admiringly at Mr. Irvine (is there TV in heaven?!)
or, an Irvine Crutch If you feel you haven't got a leg to stand on if asked something about the practices of the foundation church, you can just lean on this.
|
|
|
Post by elizabethcoleman on Jul 21, 2015 0:25:34 GMT -5
Just a few questions of the 'lovely man' Doug Parker if anyone can shed a little light and truth on the following... 1) Why did he take so long to release his book? I expect some will say he was researching, but could it be he was waiting until certain people were frail enough of mind and body that they were unable to refute hs claims.....perhaps even dead! 2) Has anyone actually been to the town where all this occurred and checked out his statements? 3) Has anyone asked his extended family as to the truth of his claims? 4) His little newspaper business that he 'loved', does anyone know about it and what happened to it? 4) Has anyone questioned why he left that town and moved what would be a considerable distance in those days away from his family? 5) What he did with all this so called money that he was going to put in a trust fund or whatever? I think you'll find the answers to some of these questions may well surprise. Not suggesting that there us no element of truth in his statements, but as you know each person reiterates a story just a little differently. Not suggesting he's a bad man, but none of us are snowy white perfection either. Take care everyone and be kind. Hi, Howitis. I knew Doug (and still know his wife Helen) personally. I sat with him for the last time just a few weeks before he died. You seem to be asking many questions that imply certain things with no real basis. Whatever it is you do claim to have found, you seem very unwilling to state or substantiate it. 1) Very simple. Doug spent his life in the ministry (Anglican). He simply didn't have time to write and research a book during his very busy working life of ministry and chaplaincy. He and Helen spent their time and savings during Doug's eventual long service leave travelling to the pertinent places and researching. They knew the allegations that would come their way, hence the very careful documentation of all they investigated and discovered. 5) What so called money? I doubt you have any idea of how much it cost Doug and Helen to travel overseas, research and print The Secret Sect. They met all these costs themselves, including newspaper advertisements in different countries. This was before the days of the internet!! You honestly think they reaped large amounts of money from this book? What trust fund? Where have you ever seen mention of a supposed trust fund? Created by who and for who, with funds from where?
If you have the answers that may surprise, we'd all like to hear them.
|
|
|
Post by Mary on Jul 21, 2015 0:49:02 GMT -5
Wonder if the people you talked to about Doug including his family members were members of your church? I.e. professing and their motive was to discredit him for writing the book.
|
|
|
Post by Roselyn T on Jul 21, 2015 1:32:59 GMT -5
I'm sure my folks knew them both, but as for me hanging with 'workers' wasn't my priority at the time!! Doug had siblings, cousins, aunts, uncles, business associates, friends etc. There's one thing I've thought of much since.....perhaps those that didn't like the publicans in Jesus day, knew, publicans often know whats going on and often aren't afraid to talk!! So were you raised in Australia ? If your parents knew John Hardie what were their views of him?
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Jul 21, 2015 1:39:27 GMT -5
It's really a matter if who's telling the story isn't it and what answers the questioner is seeking! . Instead I went to where Doug Parker had his business interests, lived and worked amongst those people who were once his people,
At the time I did it for my own purpose( I could say God 'placed me there, but I know I persued it), my findings were for me, my future family and are now for my grandchildren, and they are recorded only for them. What is done with it after I die will be up to them. At no time did Doug Parker receive hate mail from me, my findings achieved a purpose although it was not the one I intended. Anybody could have done the same thing, most didn't!! NO.
Not for me it isn't just "really a matter if who's telling the story!
So you "went to where Doug Parker had his business interests, lived and worked amongst those people who were once his people."
Good for you, -if you were where you were able to do that!
It is a little bit of a drive or flight for some of us.
What do you mean by "his people?" The people that he worked with or "his people" of the **TRUTH** were he met?
For me it doesn't really matter.
If you don't want to reveal what you found then I guess we will just have to take Parker's word for what he said, don't we?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 21, 2015 2:37:48 GMT -5
Quote - Apostles were married - No doubt many had children which was the natural thing to do for married couples - The Apostles generally had homes (Paul also worked for a living....) - The Apostles were not the only ones that preached the gospel - the 7 that were appointed in Acts did also, others obviously went up to Antioch to preach, disciples preached, there were evangelists and prophets etc. - They Christians met together in the temple courts I think it was - They had communion with their meals etc No doubt many Apostles WERE married. But we don't think that John the Baptist, Jesus or Paul were married. Second generation preachers would have seen more of a shift to single-dom. It's not "core doctrine", or any doctrine at all, actually. Being single has obvious advantages for the ministry, as well as emphasizing that "bride of Christ" stuff that RCC nuns once went on about. Having kids while you are touring around the country runs the risk of you being seen as a "deadbeat dad." Not good, but again, no real doctrine.
Second generation preachers didn't really have homes of their own. You can see that in the Epistles - they traveled extensively and exchanged partners every year or two.
Evangelist and prophet is not defined. IMO its probably the same guys and gals who were preaching.
Certainly at one stage the Christians "met" in the temple. They certainly couldn't worship there because their worship was not compatible (imagine offering up a lamb!) and within a short time such people were driven out of the temple.
Not sure about this communion with meals means. Certainly I do see a difference there - but it's not well defined as a part of Christian service.Quote - Have you met David Leitch's wife and kids yet - Have you been to his home I don't like to be particular about a person. Again, marriage isn't prohibited - just difficult in the Work. As an aside, some threads here point out particular people in my church. That's like me finding some Anglican minister to judge Parker and his "Secret Sect." It's irrelevant. But it's okay if I say that the Anglican church has a large number of non-believing ministers because that seems to be common in the church.
- Are there many people in your church in Victoria that are out preaching the gospel - Do you have communion with a meal sometimes? Yes, I preach on the TMB. Not that anyone listens. A casual preacher makes his church feel casual. (and that refers to attire, manners, commitment etc..) Jesus' ministry wasn't casual. These people had to give the utmost commitment and even, ultimate price. Ref to His "corn of wheat" sermon. We do have a meal after our service of course. And I do love the fellowship of that.Just wondering
|
|
|
Post by Roselyn T on Jul 21, 2015 2:41:36 GMT -5
I'm sure my folks knew them both, but as for me hanging with 'workers' wasn't my priority at the time!! Doug had siblings, cousins, aunts, uncles, business associates, friends etc. There's one thing I've thought of much since.....perhaps those that didn't like the publicans in Jesus day, knew, publicans often know whats going on and often aren't afraid to talk!! In doing your research did you actually speak to Doug himself?
|
|
|
Post by Mary on Jul 21, 2015 3:01:01 GMT -5
Wonder if the people you talked to about Doug including his family members were members of your church? I.e. professing and their motive was to discredit him for writing the book. You might have missed this, howitis.
|
|
|
Post by Mary on Jul 21, 2015 3:03:34 GMT -5
Well it doesn't really matter if it was John Long and Ed Cooney who started the 2x2's or William Irvine, the point is, someone started it in 1898-99 and it didn't go back to the time of Christ. It's just another version of Christianity started by men who had yet another interpretation of what the bible meant. Lots of them. I believe 2x2, Faith Mission, and so on does go back to the time of Paul, the apostles and Jesus.... ALL the Protestants denominations go back to either the Vaudois or RCC.... One is the Bride of Christ and the other one is NOT.All churches go back to the Bible. The bride of Christ is born again believers not particular denominations.
|
|
|
Post by Mary on Jul 21, 2015 3:13:46 GMT -5
Heed those words Nathan. Not every one who says Lord, Lord will enter the kingdom of heaven. Who said someone who says Lord, Lord is born again.
|
|
|
Post by howitis on Jul 21, 2015 3:44:03 GMT -5
No Mary I didn't miss that post..........by the time I went looking most of Dougs family would be what you call exes. I went looking so I could come back slinging mud, trouble is I found dirt where I hadn't expected.....all was not as I was led to believe......which I've since learnt is often the case when we choose to agree with people without checking things out for ourselves. Roselyn, my father didn't profess until the early 50's and from what I've been told John Hardie was much the same as any minister from any church of that time, my mother in law converted from Anglicanism to Catholicism about the same time and still doesn't wear slacks, jewelry, makeup etc......I don't think the black stockings and hair in a bun were actually Johns religion, just that most of them preached this 'chaste, modesty thing' No I didn't talk to Doug I had heard his side of the story
|
|
|
Post by Mary on Jul 21, 2015 4:57:41 GMT -5
You went looking and even got a job in the town where he was to sling mud? So did you talk to his family who were exes by the time you got there or professing people?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 21, 2015 5:51:24 GMT -5
Well!
So ignore me, my post and continue as you have! Tells me a great deal about you, and your supposed sources, undocumented research, etc
Shame.
Hardly admireable for you to do so from anonymity, is it? What would you think about someone harping about some supposed faults of yours anonymously, avoiding the issues, and not even knowing if you are alive or not? Ma'am, no WONDER you are one of those who must try to hide your real identity. Then there are those accusing others here of "sniping" at the 2&2 preacher group! Shaking my head in wonder at such things...with pity, no need for me to express any more.
These words of yours only increase my admiration for Cherie and all she has done. One claim none can ever make of her is "sniping." (or in my vocabulary, "taking pot shots") at anyone, or anything, nor attempting to practice revisionist history. Her documentation has been as nearly faultless as I perceive possible.
Helen Parker, we've never met, nor do I know if this will ever reach you to be read by you. Nonetheless I send you sorrow for this attack on Doug, attempting to discredit his and your work! From MY 72 years of life, knowledge and experience, and over my own true identity for the entire world to know, this current attack is merely a smoke screen (military use of the term here by first hand knowledge) in an attempt to hide, detract, and deceive. It is not an honest way of accounting, reporting, whatsoever. I am sad that it has happened, especially by someone Doug has obviously not harmed in the least, nor in anyway.
|
|
|
Post by elizabethcoleman on Jul 21, 2015 6:36:25 GMT -5
Yes he wrote his original piece and published it in 1954, the same year as he was going to supposedly go into the work. Why 'supposedly', howitis? Why the insinuation this isn't true? So far nothing you have said has demonstrated any integrity. Quite the opposite. Why bother with this whole charade of saying you know things you aren't prepared to tell?
|
|
|
Post by CherieKropp on Jul 21, 2015 9:40:37 GMT -5
Doug Parker (Alice) talking to John Hardie (CEO)..........
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 21, 2015 10:14:25 GMT -5
Yeah, my feelings exactly. Thanks for that. Dilbert was my favorite comic for many years.
|
|
|
Post by Jesse_Lackman on Jul 21, 2015 10:34:10 GMT -5
Boy the confirmation bias blinders can get ratcheted on pretty tight! Most of you aren't comprehending in the slightest what howitis is saying. It's whooshing right over your heads. Remember Cherie's reminders about the fallacy of too few alternatives - if the data doesn't fit the bias of the made up mind it doesn't exist. That's what you are doing, in addition to "killing the messenger" (which is most likely what you are going to do to me now).
|
|
|
Post by jondough on Jul 21, 2015 10:48:38 GMT -5
I'm sorry but I see no credibility in this.
As a person that is part of the fellowship, our history has never bothered me. I embrace it.
What bothers me is the denial of it. The secrecy. The fact that to talk about it is taboo. To read from howitis that it was NEVER hid, and there was/is no problem in talking about it to any worker is disingenuous all on its own. I'm not sure if howitis is sincere, or someone acting as a professing person just to make us look bad. Either way, at this point, howitis is doing a good job at confirming many things we are being accused of. Please at least admit that to bring up the name William Irving in a room full of professing people would result in immediate silence and awkwardness. I did it once because the room full of people were all family and very close friends. I'll probably never do it again as it took some time after that for them to look at me the same.
-So howitis found dirt on this person but won't say what the dirt is?
-OK, so I can probably find dirt on about anyone, including myself if I look hard enough.
-So on top of the dirt (that you won't say what it is) that you found....Did you find something he wrote that led you to believe that it was a lie?.....or did you just find dirt on him?
-Whatever it is you found, is there verification, or did you just believe it?
Or is this just a big joke?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 21, 2015 11:16:00 GMT -5
...I'm not sure if howitis is sincere, or someone acting as a professing person just to make us look bad.... JD, this is the same thought I initially had regarding review's posts. In fact, I felt even sadder to discover its reality and true identity of poster with time. I'm quite sure this current posing as a female will find out she too, is not as anonymous posting on the Internet as she thinks.
Regarding you and your posts, I regard both quite highly, and can understand your position. I admire your love of family and it's reciprocation. It is sometimes pretty one sided, and a person just has to let them go... (sad sad feeling!) So glad that is not the case with you and yours and may it never be!
|
|
|
Post by Jesse_Lackman on Jul 21, 2015 11:18:27 GMT -5
howitis doesn't owe anyone here anything. Who is denying history? I think it's so interesting to see so many here get up-in-arms and outright reject something that's outside the activist exe box. As Cherie's motto states "Condemnation without investigation is ignorance." We are asked to believe personal exe stories we cannot personally verify - why not extend howitis the same consideration? Instead she is outright condemned. That's what makes this place such a joke, the hypocrisy of it all. Wow.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Jul 21, 2015 11:42:05 GMT -5
Well it doesn't really matter if it was John Long and Ed Cooney who started the 2x2's or William Irvine, the point is, someone started it in 1898-99 and it didn't go back to the time of Christ. It's just another version of Christianity started by men who had yet another interpretation of what the bible meant. Lots of them. I believe 2x2, Faith Mission, and so on does go back to the time of Paul, the apostles and Jesus.... ALL the Protestants denominations go back to either the Vaudois or RCC.... One is the Bride of Christ (Revelation chapters 11-12) and the other one is NOT/the Harlot (Rev. chapters 17-19). We know the churches which Jesus and the apostles started in the 1st century is the Bride of Christ. God left the example in the gospel, the book of Acts, and the epistles as records for us to compare and learn from it.Yes I know you do, but I think your mistaken. The Waldenses didn't have the same beliefs the 2x2's have today and were more in line with the RCC believing in infant baptism, substantiation and other RCC beliefs. The only thing they did that was similar was meet in private homes, likely out of necessity because they were considered somewhat heretical by the RCC. But that was after many attempts by them to become 'blessed' by the pope. They were wanna be Catholics with an emphasis on poverty that the RCC didn't want to back, for obvious reasons. The Cathars also didn't believe what the 2x2's believe because they believed in the Demiurge. Also the Waldenses still exist today so it's unlikely the Faith mission is in any way related to them.
|
|
|
Post by CherieKropp on Jul 21, 2015 12:07:20 GMT -5
howitis doesn't owe anyone here anything. Who is denying history? I think it's so interesting to see so many here get up-in-arms and outright reject something that's outside the activist exe box. As Cherie's motto states "Condemnation without investigation is ignorance." We are asked to believe personal exe stories we cannot personally verify - why not extend howitis the same consideration? Instead she is outright condemned. That's what makes this place such a joke, the hypocrisy of it all. Wow. The above is why I'm asking howisit questions for clarification, giving her information she didnt have, answering some of her questions, and giving alternative explanations she may not have considered.
|
|
|
Post by slowtosee on Jul 21, 2015 12:11:30 GMT -5
I mentioned the name William Irvine in friendly conversation with a worker a few weeks ago, and the tension and discomfort level increased significantly, so just dropped it, and concluded that for sure , the history of the church was NOT open to discussion at all. The worker, a friend of ours, was kinda giving us a ``shot``, about how he had been in the city, and looking through a telephone book and counting how many different Mennonite churches there were in Winnipeg alone, indicating there was no unity and so had to split. That is how Willie`s name came into the conversation, about how he did the `splits``.lol Oh, well, no biggie, we just cant`t talk about that particular elephant in the room, so we talk more wind and weather , and all kinds of other good stuff. Cheers BTW- really good fella, this worker, and we appreciate each other, and he still comes to see us and that is SPECIAL. I believe the thought is that we just didn`t get it`. Alvin
|
|
|
Post by CherieKropp on Jul 21, 2015 12:15:38 GMT -5
howitis: Wondering what view your parents held of WmI? Did they view him as a prophet raised up? The starter? Another worker? And what was their take on his being put out of the work/leadership?
This is not a trick question...I'm always curious about the way WmI was presented to those who were brought up in a household where WmI was common knowledge (which I was not, as you stated). Wondering if any of your parents or grandparents early workers? Often (not always!) it is families with early worker ancestors who were well aware of WmI, et al, and passed it down to succeeding generations.
CK
|
|
|
Post by Jesse_Lackman on Jul 21, 2015 12:19:07 GMT -5
I've talked to workers about Irvine, overseers too, and never got the impression it wasn't open for discussion. I've actually been surprised by the topics workers have been more than willing to discuss.
|
|
|
Post by Jesse_Lackman on Jul 21, 2015 12:24:54 GMT -5
howitis: Wondering what view your parents held of WmI? Did they view him as a prophet raised up? The starter? Another worker? And what was their take on his being put out of the work/leadership? This is not a trick question...I'm always curious about the way WmI was presented to those who were brought up in a household where WmI was common knowledge (which I was not, as you stated). Wondering if any of your parents or grandparents early workers? Often (not always!) it is families with early worker ancestors who were well aware of WmI, et al, and passed it down to succeeding generations. CK We got the book from our elder right after it was published. Parker wrote a book, that was about it. It wasn't a big deal, there was no condemnation or even criticism of Irvine, or his book, that I ever heard from our elder or my parents. I personally never heard any criticism or condemnation of Irvine or "The Secret Sect" from workers either.
|
|