I have taken considerable time on this, because we have a history over 45 years of individual women trying to upset the whole Church by wanting to change God’s Festival dates. Especially we MUST ALL SPEAK THE SAME THING, and what we speak is put into the Church by JESUS CHRIST, through His chosen apostle.
You did right in bringing this directly to me, and I trust I have made clear what we are all to speak in regard to this. But you MUST NOT carry this as a personal hobby to others in the Church, lest you come under Romans 16:17. Christ is now setting His Church back on the track of UNITY, rooting out all division. Nevertheless, I’m sure your research on this has given you experience.
Page 5 has more from Dixon Cartwright on why he is shutting down The Journal. It includes the reasons he started it and why he published some of the things he has over the years.
We were different from In Transition in that John’s aim was to have two of his trusted friends check out articles before they were published in In Transition for correctness of doctrine.
The friends were Ron Dart and Leon Walker.
Doctrinal opinions welcomed
I did not share the view with John that that was an appropriate consideration for my newspaper. Rather, from the beginning I welcomed creative essays, even those advocating unorthodox versions of doctrines, and did not feel the need to make sure they were correct or for me to agree with them As a result, we printed many such opinion pieces—editorials, letters, essays—with many of them disagreeing with each other, frequently in the same issue of THE JOURNAL.
My main consideration was that writers deal politely with each other in their doctrinal and political discussions, especially since people with different interpretations of Scripture can all reasonably prove their varying doctrines from the Bible.
In the beginning I believed my publication, at least my reason for publishing, was almost a necessity: if not a necessity then something that I thought would be a worthy service to the brethren.
I still think that it is a worthy service, but not a necessity. Thinking THE JOURNAL was almost a necessity was presumptuous and naive. I can further make this point by mentioning my opinion about salvation.Later he has this to say:
I do get some flak from some of the anti-Armstrongism bloggers for supposedly being an “enabler,” as one of my critics likes to say. (He also likes to say I’m insane.)
However, I’m not trying to enable anybody. I’m trying to provide a forum and an avenue for fellowship.
I’m not concerned about supporting or refuting, for example, Herbert Armstrong or other preachers.
If I enable people to communicate and fellowship and voice their opinions, then I guess by definition I am some kind of enabler.While I have questioned some of the crazy articles submitted by COG leaders, I have never called him an "enabler."
Page 5 has another story regarding the Texas church shootings. Page 5 also includes a letter defending William Dankenbring. It includes a story on how a bunch of mean ministers ganged up on him in Australia which led Tkach to start a witch hunt spurred on by these mean ministers who intensely persecuted Dankenbring.
Reg Killingley has an article on the Protestant Reformation, which is far more informed than Rod Meredith take on it in LCG's latest magazine article.
Check out the full issue here: Issue 200