Who Is Misrepresenting Whom?
For the second time in recent months brother Guy Caskey has charged me with misrepresenting certain brethren in the papers. In his charges, brother Caskey, actually misrepresents me! Here, for example, are a few of his charges:
1. He accuses me of inferring that Orville Brittell is a premillennialist.
The truth. I stated that Orville was a sympathizer, and I gave evidence to prove it.
2. He stated that I made a similar charge against Bennie Lee Fudge.
The truth. I did not infer that brother Fudge is a premillennialist. I said, "Bennie Lee Fudge . . . knows about this situation and is not telling it."
3. He writes that I have charged him with covering up for Orville.
The truth. If he is not trying to cover up something for somebody, then why this long article he has written?
4. He charged me with never discussing premillennialism with Orville or with sister Brittell, his mother.
The truth. Not only Orville, but also Eldred Echols, Foy Short, and J. C. Shewmaker can testify that we discussed premillennialism the very first Sunday I was in Africa. Most of the discussion, however, was on whether or not we should fellowship the premillennialists, rather than on the actual doctrine itself. Brother Caskey's charge that I used sister Brittell's stove, ate her food, and slept in her bid is a quibble. In the three and a half years I spent in Northern Rhodesia I went to Sinde only twice that I remember, and both times on business. The real issue here is not who ate whose food, but who got permission for sister Brittell to come to Northern Rhodesia? Orville vote for "her to come there? Who wrote the N. R. government for her permit?
Fellowshipping Premillennialists
Brother Caskey admits that Orville Brittell knows his mother is a premillennialist. In my article of July 19, 1951, I said:
"2. He opposes anyone teaching premillennialism. Does Orville oppose his own mother? She is now at Sinde . .. the very same place where Orville works."
(The argument is, of course, that sister Brittell only believes premillennialism, and does not teach it. They have worn that one out on Phillips, Lawyer, Garrett, etc. All of these have been caught teaching it, while they, like sister Brittell claimed only to believe, and not teach, the premillennial doctrine.)
Missionary-In-Charge At Sinde
Brother Caskey fails to give all the facts about the missionary-in-charge at Sinde. (1) We had all the men in Northern Rhodesia to choose from, not just two. (2) The office could have been left vacant as is sometimes done. (3) Orville's innocence at not knowing that Phillips was a premillennialist is simply amazing. One who grown up among the premillennialists and who regularly reports to their "Missionary Messenger" (226 Penn. Ave., Louisville, Kentucky) should have read in this "Missionary Messenger" about Phillips' training period in Louisville just before going to Africa. (4) Phillips did not leave Sinde because of his teaching premillennialism. He left because he could not get along with sister Brittell. Brother Caskey should have known this because Phillips told group in Bulowayo as he was passing through that "sister Brittell is a regular she-devil." The difficulty at Sinde was not over doctrine, but over who was to run the place!
Tea With Phillips
Phillips had been on the mission long enough to know how I stood in regard to him when he came to my house for tea. He came just like any sectarian would have come. It didn't take him five minutes to bring up the subject of premillennialism. If I had not invited him I would have been accused of not discussing the issue with him.
Brittell In Louisville
Brother Caskey says he knows nothing about whether Brittell went to Louisville or not. Well, I can enlighten him. Orville went to Louisville. And while there he spent his time exclusively with the premillennial brethren. Maybe you'd better get more information, brother Caskey, before you inform the brotherhood. In case you don't know it, Orville Brittell has been reporting to the premillennial "Missionary Messenger" since he visited you in Johannesburg. Is Orville "opposing" the group of premillennial brethren in Louisville to whom he reports regularly?
The Issue
The issue is not whether Orville is a premillennialist. I ask brother Caskey to give the reference in any publication where I have ever called him such. I have said he is a SYMPATHIZER with the premillennialists. Do you admit this, brother Caskey?
By the way, what about the brethren you were defending in your first article some months ago? Do you still think they are innocent? It might be interesting to get your present slant on that.