|
'heresy' may have been 'unintentional.' He does not go far enough in his definition of heresy, for it is possible to be heretical even while declaring a large portion of Bible truth and being 'orthodox' in most of your teaching. But the heretic cannot ever be 100% true to Scripture for he is bound to trample on some texts as he abuses his power and tramples on the body of Christ, as he did in this fellowship. We will emphasise this later. Again, the age old question of how you prove whether some action is intentional or unintentional is proven by a persons wilful choice of action, which is part of the definition of heresy! When the deceiver ignores Luke 17:3-4 ('So watch yourselves. 'If your brother sins, rebuke him, and if he repents, forgive him.. If he sins against you seven times in a day, AND seven times COMES BACK TO YOU and says, `I repent,' forgive him.'') and does not come to you to apologise after repeating his sinful action then you know that their repentance was false!]
54. Beware attempts to 'gag' witnesses
Elaine Smith [wife of Peter Smith, deacon] : I come as a church member, not as a deacon's wife. I have my own opinions and my husband obviously does. As a church member, I have an opinion to bring. I found the letter from the deacons to be somewhat wishy-washy, because it didn't give us a clear guideline as a church. It said: 'did not deliberately preach heresy.' And that leaves me wondering where the diaconate stands on this? Because if they are saying 'Yes, he is preaching heresy,' Why didn't they stop him preaching? Why didn't they approach Roger and say, 'Excuse me Roger, your teaching's a little dodgy; let's sit down together and talk about this.' And I have had grievances with Roger. I have no grievance to bring tonight. Why? Because I went to Roger and we talked them through. And we got them sorted. And I would urgently encourage any of you who have come here tonight with your grievances, who have not followed that Scripture, to hold your tongue tonight. Because that's not Scriptural. But I still pose the question: 'If the deacons thought he was preaching heresy, whether deliberate or not deliberate, why did they not stop him preaching until they got it sorted?'
[Elaine is correct about the 'wishy-washy' statement - Zoë had already used it to describe the deacons before our first meeting with them! But Derek has already made it clear that it was deliberately so, thus confirming their inability to make a decision and therefore the fact that they were not, in any way, a Scriptural leadership. Deacons are not described as leaders in the New Testament - this is the job of pastors/elders/overseers/bishops (interchangeable titles describing the same position although the role may differ) - ref. 1 Corinthians 12). Almost ten years previously the church had foolishly changed the church rules to insist that an elder who had been nominated for the position needed to receive at least 70% of the church vote in order to be installed into the position. I pointed out very clearly at the time that this was both un-Scriptural and dangerously illogical for, if there ever came a time when the church was divided, we would never be able to vote in new elders and would be left with an ineffective and weakened leadership! Surprise, surprise - it happened! This was how we finished up with the single elder, Roy James, who was quickly removed by the factious (antagonistic, un-cooperative, contradictory and divisive) 'pastor' Roger Wheelhouse. Following the conclusion to this debacle you will see what happened to the current 'leadership.' If you listen carefully to the jargon of the Wheelhouse's you will hear that Elaine Smith was so indoctrinated by them that she uses the same 'sorted' jargon as Sue Wheelhouse! This was not in vogue amongst other members of the church outside of the Wheelhouse faction! I suppose 'confession of sin' would be too Scriptural for them to use? For her to attempt to gag abused and vilified witnesses to Wheelhouse's behaviour, by applying Matthew 18:15-17 alone, is an illustration of Pharisaical application of the 'letter' while omitting the Spirit of the Law (Romans 2:29; 7:6). No orthodox Christian would allow this to happen and we will soon see what God allowed on this evening]
.
55. Beware deacons ('leaders') who allow themselves to be insulted and 'gagged'
Derek Evans (deacon) : I speak as an individual deacon but, no doubt, I believe I represent a number of people on the diaconate. The question was asked, 'Why didn't the deacons restrict, or ask Roger to stop?' We have, or had been, in recent deacons' meetings, instructed not, as deacons, to 'pick about' Roger's sermons. If we have a problem with the sermons, if we have a problem with his sermons, en carte, we are to go to him individually. That's why the deacons, as a group, I believe, did not act. As to your accusation that it is wishy-washy, I believe that Roy's statement, concerning the heresy, sums up my feeling on it. And I know it sums up Marilyn's [his wife - also a deacon].
[So, the factious heretic Wheelhouse had effectively gagged the diaconate, so that his own 'self-willed opinion' was 'substituted for submission to the power of truth' leading to 'division and the formation of factions (sects). By dividing the deacons he could bully and manipulate them individually, which is how Nesta Bowen came to be attacked in a 'sermon' of Wheelhouse where he used a 'modern parable' to obliquely insult her (see Page 10 - Section 64). It also parallels the behaviour of Tugwell, in Case History I. Again, this defines Wheelhouse as a heretic and a man to be avoided! Derek and his wife, Marilyn, like Roy James, naïvely believe that this is accidental].
56. Beware the factious heretic
Alison Heron: And I'm coming to you like Elaine. As just a normal member, and a Mum. All I can say is when Roger was OK'd - we loved you. I don't think I've prayed more for a situation, for my own personal situation and for the people here whom I love. You're my family. And for Roger and Sue. And we were so thrilled when you came. You were so charismatic, everything about you. I always, always, held the opinion that if you've got a problem with the leadership then you are a stumbling block to them. Move out. And that has always been my belief. And then as time went on and I started getting involved with the Green Room [the room which held discarded materials for re-circulation within and without the fellowship]. And then, as you know, we opened up the kitchen [to feed the 'down and outs' in Cardiff]. And then lots of little things began to bother me. And I suppose the first time that I realised, for me. I can only speak for me. That I was concerned - was when I happened to pop into the church one day, and I was going down to the Green Room, and Bonnie [wife of deacon John Jones] called me in. I have to say, I used to have a problem with Bonnie, she won't mind me saying that. I found her intimidating. I didn't know her. I don't find her particularly approachable. So when Bonnie asked me to go into the office to say, 'Can you help,' I thought, 'My, my - I've arrived.' And I say that with a lot of love. And so I sat in, and Bonnie was called into Roger's office, and I was just doing my little job, whatever it was. And I heard you, Roger, talk to Bonnie in a way particularly, through the walls. And when Bonnie came back I thought to myself, 'How can you stick this?' Because - and I'm not easily intimidated. . . .[voice trailed off]
And then, as time went on, Margaret Hooper invited a number of us to Harne Hill Christian Centre, and it was a time of gentle Christian fellowship. We went along. Prior to that we'd had a fairly boisterous church meeting. And I couldn't believe what was going on in this meeting. And, Roger, forgive me, but you were very rude about an elder's wife. And Derek stood up and said, 'Excuse me, I'm not very happy about that.' I can't remember the words - but my eyes were out, I couldn't think. That following Saturday, which is two days later, we went to Harne Hill. It was lunch time, we all met together, and then Roger said, 'You know, I had a telephone call from Marilyn to say that Derek had had a suspected heart attack.' And, you may not remember this, Roger, you turned to me and said: 'That'll teach him for standing up to me at a church meeting.' And I was shocked! And the last thing I have to say, which I have to say, which was fairly recently. I mean, all this is new to me. You can't make this sort of thing up. And the last time was fairly recently. As you know I used to help out in the kitchen, and then for various reasons I had to call it a day. So I prayed about it and was sorry to have to leave and, I won't say the reasons why I was leaving, that'll come out in a minute. But the long and the short of it is: there are a couple of members I know - that you have said that I had lost my vision. And that I wasn't interested in helping out any more. Can you remember the reason why I left?
Sorry - I'm asking a question Roger?
Richard Lewis : We've asked him not to respond.
Alison Heron: Oh, I'm sorry! Well, the reason I actually left was purely personal. I was helping out with an elderly gentleman of a Christian family - and his daughter was desperate for a break - ands so it was my concern for them that I should look after him to give her a break. And that involved the third thing - and that was the reason. And when I discovered that behind my back, other people were told it was because I'd lost it - and lost the vision. I was hurt. But I was more concerned about Derek's hurt over the situation - over the situation of the suspected heart attack. And I can only say - you know I love you lot - and I'm just so sorry that this meeting had to happen - that the letter had to be written. But I'm just an ordinary member.
[Alison could have shared how horrified she was when the Wheelhouse's attempted to coerce her into marriage with a member of the church who was sadly divorced from his Christian wife who had left him to follow a (formerly shared) vision. The Wheelhouse's insisted to her that this former deacon 'had needs too', while ignoring the adultery they were encouraging! They should also have been aware that Alison was separated from her non-Christian husband on strictly Biblical grounds - he had divorced her and re-married because he could not accept her Christianity, but she remains single (bringing up her only child alone) waiting faithfully for the Lord to bring them back together (her husband is now going through a painful divorce and her faithfulness could yet be rewarded!). In a denomination and church claiming to base all creeds and rules on the Bible we should be astonished to find the Scriptural instruction of the Holy Spirit through the Apostle Paul being ignored (1 Corinthians 7:10-17):
10 But to the married I give instructions, not I, but the Lord, that the wife should not leave her husband 11 (but if she does leave, let her remain unmarried, or else be reconciled to her husband), and that the husband should not send his wife away. 12 But to the rest I say, not the Lord, that if any brother has a wife who is an unbeliever, and she consents to live with him, let him not send her away. 13 And a woman who has an unbelieving husband, and he consents to live with her, let her not send her husband away. 14 For the unbelieving husband is sanctified through his wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified through her believing husband; for otherwise your children are unclean, but now they are holy. 15 Yet if the unbelieving one leaves, let him leave; the brother or the sister is not under bondage in such cases, but God has called us to peace. 16 For how do you know, O wife, whether you will save your husband? Or how do you know, O husband, whether you will save your wife? 17 Only, as the Lord has assigned to each one, as God has called each, in this manner let him walk. And thus I direct in all the churches.
Sadly, Roger Wheelhouse's attitude to many important issues, such as marriage and homosexuality, reflect the liberal and heretical view more often associated with Anglican bishops. Unfortunately, the prevailing attitude to marriage in Calvary Baptist Church before Wheelhouse's arrival was also closer to current Anglican than Scriptural and this type of error prepared fallow ground for this heretic to work in!
The church's mission to the homeless was well down Roger's list of priorities, as he clearly had a problem giving up very much of his time to the work, but this did not stop him occasionally regaling these people with his extra-Biblical revelations such as the astonishing claim that 'Mary Magdalene probably fancied Jesus' which was witnessed by Alison. When there have been so many attempts in recent years by perverted film directors to make their own versions of Biblical history, such as 'The Last Temptation of Christ', the last thing we need in the church is so-called leaders, who support God dishonouring speculations, damaging our protests against this kind of deception.
Alison, who spent more time working near the Wheelhouse's in the early days of their ministry in Cardiff, also privately declared that the Wheelhouse's would constantly bring up the issue of past problems in the church to excuse their errors and to cast the blame onto others. This is also consistent with our 'Check List for the Pseudo-Messiah' on Page 5 - Section 8.
Regarding Wheelhouse's view of God, I quote A. W. Tozer:
Without doubt the mightiest thought the mind can entertain is the thought of God....That our idea of God correspond as nearly as possible to the true being of God is of immense importance....A right conception of God is basic not only to systematic theology but to practical Christian living as well. It is to worship what the foundation is to the temple; where it is inadequate or out of plumb the whole structure must sooner or later collapse. I believe there is scarcely an error in doctrine or a failure in applying Christian ethics that cannot be traced finally to imperfect and ignoble thoughts about God....
The man who comes to a right belief about God is relieved of ten thousand temporal problems, for he sees at once that these...cannot concern him for very long; but...the one mighty single burden of eternity begins to press down upon him with a weight more crushing than all the woes of the world piled one upon another. That mighty burden is his obligation...to love God with every power of mind and soul, to obey Him perfectly, and to worship Him acceptably....
Among the sins to which the human heart is prone, hardly any other is more hateful to God than idolatry....The essence of idolatry is the entertainment of thoughts about God that are unworthy of Him....The heaviest obligation lying upon the Christian Church today is to purify and elevate her concept of God until it is once more worthy of Him - and of her.
A.W. Tozer, The Knowledge of the Holy]
57. Beware accusations unsupported by Scripture
Kevin Dare: I think it's becoming apparent - the truth of Richard's statement at the beginning - that the heresy question here, I don't think, really arises. I've read that letter. I've read it through several times. I forced myself - to read it through. And I forced myself to look up the references - and I tell you it was a work - a very, very difficult work. Because to be honest with you it is very, very tedious. It is -um, it shows a very, very poor level of understanding of Biblical truth. I mean on David's part. It's very, very idiosyncratic. You know, you, you read it. David didn't have to sign it, you could hear who it was from.
[It was no surprise to hear Kevin describe the letter and references in this way. It is sufficient to say that Kevin's own ministry and doctrinal stance are perfectly reflected by his comments. His idea of Biblical truth is to take the view that 'prophecy' today does not need to be 100% accurate (cf. Deuteronomy 18:20-22 etc. as explained on Page 5) - a position that is perfectly at home with the view of the many Charismaniacs and Gnostics exposed on these pages. He believes, for instance, that 100% accuracy was not achieved by the prophet Jonah, and therefore we should not use this as a judgement call on prophecy because, by his understanding of Scripture, we risk calling Jonah a false prophet. Perhaps he would call this 'understanding Biblical truth', but the truth is that he fails to understand the importance of 'but/if' and 'conditional' prophecies - which are accepted by all orthodox theologians! If you follow the hyperlink you will see that this does not make Jonah a false prophet because he KNEW that God was going to give Ninevah a second chance and this is exactly what he objected to and complained about to God. You can call Jonah 'self-righteous' and 'a hypocrite,' as Kevin has done in sermons, but do not say he ever prophesied less than 100% accurately for God. He told the people EXACTLY what the Lord had told him to say even though he judged them and thought them unworthy of another chance. He was wrong to judge them as unworthy of life, but right to warn them about their behaviour (doctrinally, spiritually and morally), just as we had to warn Wheelhouse in this instance, because when God tells you to do something you risk failing in obedience to a vision from Him and to His Word which are in perfect agreement! If the people of Nineveh had not repented they would have been destroyed, as they were years later when they reverted to their old ways.
After Wheelhouse preached on 1 Timothy 5 and expressed the view that elders and deacons were not necessarily the make up of the church leadership of today, I asked Kevin his opinion of the sermon, because I know that he had expressed a similar view, and he commented: 'It was very good.' These two men clearly shared some things in common, including the view that God does not necessarily have 'a perfect plan for our lives' - in other words He makes mistakes and His Word is insufficient for these men. In this they share a very common contemporary view that allows more than recontextualisation of the gospel, doctrine or anything else that they feel that God has got wrong. Kevin is happy to mock 'Hell-fire Screechers who try and frighten people into heaven' (quote from his sermon), but in doing so he mocks recent heroes of the faith who recognised that before men are saved they need to recognise that they are one foot from stepping into Hell. The fact that Jesus spoke more about Hell than any other person was called to record in the Bible means we are missing a very strong emphasis in our gospel in the contemporary church.
Kevin's adherence to the errors of psycho heresy, in which he applies the errors of psychoanalysis - which I referred to briefly in the letter - to the problems of individuals in the church during his pastoral ministry, have also caused damage to Christians in this church.
Read Kevin's statements carefully - they are included in their entirety - and see if he makes even one reference to Scripture to support his views!
Incidentally, as far as the 'idiosyncrasies' of the letter are concerned, my wife had a large input! Kevin simply never tires of being wrong.]
Kevin Dare : And I looked at it very carefully and I could not find it in my heart, to put the label heresy on it because, to me, heresy is a very specific sin. Heresy is - for me anyway - this may not be a strict dictionary definition, but heresy for me is something that's intentional. It's a misleading of people. And I do not believe that Roger has intentionally mislead anybody. Now I would have a lot of things to discuss with Roger about some of his interpretation. I would not agree with everything that he says. Some of those things are fairly minor, one or two of them would be fairly major. But none of them would come under the heading of heresy. And I was really pleased at the beginning, when Richard said, 'We won't discuss that!' Because it seemed to me that it would clear the air for what I think was the real issue here. That people wanted to talk about it. But I see now, as people have come up to the microphone, that it's not the heresy issue really that's the problem here, there's a pastoral issue. It's all to do with the pastoral work within this church. I have to say, right from the beginning, that I have absolutely no personal complaint against Roger. Roger and Sue have been very supportive and helpful to us from the moment we arrived. Roger has been to visit us, he has prayed with us. If you remember Judith went off to Thailand and Bangladesh with Tearfund a while ago. Roger came round to pray with her before she went and came round to talk about things when she came back. He's been round and he's talked with Chris and he's prayed with Chris, and he's been nothing but supportive. But I listen to what people are saying. I hear what's going on - and the things that have been said here publically now, I've heard almost from the beginning. At first I didn't want to believe them, but then - there were just too many of them. I hear of problems between Roger and the deacons - somebody had put it that it wouldn't be too strong to say that 'they're at war with one another.' I have heard - I have been at church meetings where I have thought, of Roger's leading, 'There is no way that he should be allowed to get away with that.' Things that have been done, the way they've been said, in church meetings. I'm not thinking specifically of the one's that have just been mentioned, but other things have come up. When it's not been according to, perhaps, the agenda that Roger would have liked to have seen followed. He has been very - he seems to have found it very easy to use his position as chair, as he was earlier, to put forward his own particular views."
[If you look at Vine's definition of heresy and heretic, which I read out at the beginning of the meeting, you find these clear statements:
'HERESY is derived from the Greek word HAIRESIS which denotes (a) a choosing, choice (from haireomai to choose) ; then; that which is chosen, and hence, an opinion, especially a self-willed opinion, which is substituted for submission to the power of truth, and leads to division and the formation of sects, Galatians. 5 : 20 (marg., 'parties') ; such erroneous opinions are frequently the outcome of personal preference or the prospect of advantage....'
|
|
