'Orthodox' Heretics

Savage Wolves!

What on earth is wrong with the Christian Church today? (cont.)


66.  Beware those who don't bother with the facts because they've made up their mind by 'feelings'!

Margaret Hooper: I just feel I have to stand up - I haven't been in church very long but that's long enough.  But God brought me to this church. I came with oodles of hurt from the other church where I came from. And God has used you in this fellowship to heal those hurts. And there are one or two of you here who have prayed with me and God has healed that pain that I was left with and I was healed.  God has brought me to this church - God has a wonderful purpose for this church. But let me tell you - and I hope you will take this in love. Because this is how it's coming. Before Roger Wheelhouse ever set foot in this church there are oodles of hurt here - from the past!  And they've not been faced! [shouting angrily!] There are hurts from Hope and Victoria joining! [the combining of two churches which was the origin of Calvary Baptist Church]  Some of you can't even  [voice breaking in apoplectic rage!] bear to think that someone's come, you know, from another church - and it hurts me, it really does.  To hear people, still on about I'm part of Hope - and I'm part of Victoria. The Lord has had enough - I say this to you in love, I want the Lord to use this fellowship in the area.  The hurts were here before Roger.  I'm not saying Roger is perfect - who, of any of us, can say we're perfect? That we haven't hurt somebody?  I can only tell you from the personal experiences - and some of you know what I've gone through in the past two years.  That Roger and Sue have been so supportive - as I have sought to divorce my husband after 35 years of being married.  And, either way, they have never persuaded me - they've been there, they've prayed with me.  And I just want to tell you that's my experience. And then last, and about the heresy, and I have to bring that it was on the 5th of December, at our early morning prayer breakfast - I didn't know what was going on. I can honestly say that. Sue turned up without Roger - I didn't know anything about the letter. But during that prayer time - and they are good prayer times - the Lord brought the words that: 'This man preaches the truth.'   And, like a 'nana [banana?] I didn't pray it out! I rang Roger and Sue later on to say, ' I'm sorry, and this is what God' [told me?] - and this is before I knew anything about the letter. I just want to share this - I'm not the perfect Christian, but just let me tell you that since Roger's been here, I believe that God has used him particularly to become open to God, to listen to Him. Because so often we don't listen. And those times when we've had times of healing, times open to the Holy Spirit, I believe that God has spoken to people. And I believe - because this is what Roger is doing - imperfect as he is!  But - Satan doesn't like this because I believe he knows what God wants for us - here, in the area of Canton. And then the last thing I've got to say - because I was the person who was with Alison at Harne Hill. And I honestly cannot remember, um,  what, um,  Roger had said that day, I was concerned in one way, there is no way, I feel, what Alison said was the - the truth. And I just plead with you that in love for each other, so that God Himself is honoured and glorified in this place and in the area.

[Margaret was out of control for much of this outburst which exemplifies the characteristics that 'ministries' like the Wheelhouses thrive on. 

(Proverbs 14:29) : He who is slow to anger has great understanding, But he who is quick-tempered exalts folly.

(James 1:19) : This you know, my beloved brethren. But let everyone be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger;

Alison Heron did not mention it in her testimony, but had also witnessed the Wheelhouse's constant attempts to blame the failures of their bullying ministry on the past hurts of Calvary Baptist Church.  As a member of 10-15 years I can honestly say that
I never once heard of any division between the supposed factions of Hope and Victoria.  Notice that Wheelhouse's faction is quick to accuse others of that which they are guilty of perpetrating - again, a mark of such deception.  To declare that 'some of you can't even  bear to think that someone's come, you know, from another church" had absolutely nothing to do with the examination of his teachings and behaviour and this was simply another attempt to use emotion to try and deflect the meeting from its' purpose in examining Roger's un-Scriptural ministry.  The cults are adept at declaring: 'We've made mistakes - nobody is perfect!' as Margaret did in her outburst:' 'I'm not saying Roger is perfect - who, of any of us, can say we're perfect? That we haven't hurt somebody?' You do not just test a ministry by seeking perfection in the fruits (Galatians 5:21-23), or whether that person is genuinely 'walking in the Spirit,'  for it is only possible for 'the spiritual man' (1 Corinthians 2:15) to discern these things and, of course, Wheelhouse regularly claimed to be that man with a wonderful, prophetic gift!  We are called to test the gospel brought by even an apostle or an angel from heaven (Galatians 1:6-9) and all doctrines and, if anyone brings 'another gospel' or 'another teaching' (2 Corinthians 11:14) they are anathema ('accursed').

Margaret declared ' That
Roger and Sue have been so supportive - as I have sought to divorce my husband after 35 years of being married. And, either way, they have never persuaded me - they've been there, they've prayed with me.'  Were the Wheelhouse's supportive of a Christian divorcing her husband, and did they really fail to persuade her 'either way'?  Did they bring Scriptural support for the only two cases allowing divorce - adultery and a pagan refusing to live with a Christian (Matthew 19:3-9; 1 Corinthians 7:10-16)?  Knowing their track record in this area I have no confidence that Margaret received Scriptural advice. 

Margaret's 'experience' with the Wheelhouse's is only as important as her recognition that Scripture determines the outcome - not 'experiences.'  If
'the Lord brought the words that: 'This man preaches the truth' what 'truth' did he bring?  The whole truth?  Clearly not, for the overall witness shows that he was not careful with the Word and that he was often seen displaying 'a self-willed opinion, substituted for submission to the power of truth, leading to division and the formation of sects.'  I've lost count of the Jehovah's Witnesses who I have discussed the gospel with and pointed out to them that their doctrines are not found in the Bible, but have been arrived at by men and demons manipulating the Word of God.  They regularly claim that they, or someone they know of, believed these Watchtower doctrines before a Jehovah's Witness ever came to their door!  The cults (and this includes the modern-day heretics, such as Word-Faith, in the church) are adept at 'revelations of convenience' and I am sure this is the truth about Margaret's so-called 'word from the Lord.'  Why can I be so certain of this?  Simply examine her next statement about Alison's testimony.  Margaret said, categorically:  'And then the last thing I've got to say - because I was the person who was with Alison at Harne Hill. And I honestly cannot remember, um,  what, um,  Roger had said that day, I was concerned in one way, there is no way, I feel, what Alison said was the - the truth. And I just plead with you that in love for each other, so that God Himself is honoured and glorified in this place and in the area.'  She admits she cannot remember what Roger said that day!  And then 'pleads' that 'there is no way, I feel' - again, a cultish 'testimony of feelings' - that Alison told the truth.  To have the gall to ask that 'God Himself is honoured and glorified' after a testimony like this almost beggars belief.  How often is this happening in the church today?  Do you really think that God will honour such a church - a church that allows such garbage to go unchallenged?  Does Margaret really think that 'Satan doesn't like this because I believe he knows what God wants for us'?  Satan is absolutely loving the way British churches allow Wheelhouse's and Tugwell's to trample on God's Word and His Bride!  The things that Margaret witnessed as 'times of healing, times open to the Holy Spirit . . . that God has spoken to people' are times inherited from the Toronto Deception.  Wheelhouse brought the Deception into the church and it fed off the unbelief already there.  He allowed 'good reports' to be brought from the Deception and for Hagin and Copeland books to be distributed in the church by equally deceived adherents who infiltrated from King's Church, Newport, which is a 'nest of vipers' in South Wales.  When people follow personalities, then we have no choice but to question these `personas', because they have become - to a greater or lesser extent - idols in the minds of their followers.  It becomes a matter of : `If Pastor Roger says it, then it must be of God' and can go so far as `touch not the Lord's anointed' if one dares to level a criticism of the preacher?  In this case a different, but predictable and predicted attack, occurred!]

67.  Beware those who 'hope' to be 'Biblical' but avoid the whole  truth

Roy James (former elder) : Of course, before Roger came, we weren't a perfect church - and we'll never ever find a perfect church and, yes, there was hurt. I've just picked up that point from Margaret. But I just want to thank you that I'm not 'a Roger man', I'm not a 'David and Zoë man', but I hope and pray that I am a Biblical truth man standing for integrity and trust. And that last word is a vital one as far as this issue is concerned. And you, as members, might have had your hearts and eyes and ears closed to this for a very, very long time. But you will have discerned tonight that there is a lack of trust - and that is something that comes from the top. Deacons to Roger, Roger to deacons - and permeates the church. The whole question of how we view our brothers and sisters in the Lord Jesus. What importance we give to each other. Preferring one another. Saying that 'he is better than me!' She, better than me! And there's one statement in the scripture that most of you, all of you, will quarrel with - and I certainly quarrel with - when Paul says, 'I am chief of sinners.' You will all debate that issue! Because every single one of us here this evening - Yes, Association Secretary as well - chief of sinners. And I would say this to you, that every single one of us needs to ask forgiveness of each other from time to time! Deacons to members and so on and that happens - and Tricia is quite right you know, and those who referred to the fellowship as a loving fellowship - we say, 'Yes', it was a loving fellowship. I'm not quite sure Margaret's got the full picture, but we were known as a loving and caring fellowship. And we didn't have our heads in the clouds - we had our feet on the ground to some extent. But I don't want to go back into that past, except to say this: ' I need to ask forgiveness and you need to ask forgiveness. But I would say this - unpalatable though it might be - when a minister is ordained, it's an unpalatable truth maybe, there's a special way in which a minister needs to ask forgiveness  from brothers and sisters. Now, that may seem to be a contradiction - but as soon as you place a man in a position 'ordained unto God', the expectation of a fellowship has, can be, a high expectation - concerning, 'Sorry! I shouldn't have said that! I shouldn't have done that.' And, you know, when that happens with people, with individuals, or leaders, do you know that people warm to that - they put an arm around and say, 'Yes, I forgive you too, brother.'  But there's one issue that I must raise and it is a question - and Roger knows this, because I've raised it with him. The whole question, because the call had been mentioned, by Graham and by one or two others. But you know, at no place - the fellowship need to be reminded - that the pastorate committee, which I established, you remember, six years ago - the pastorate committee, and the leaders - at no point did we ever receive the word evangelist  from Roger!  Now that has more [sic] - the statement now - in latter days, and this is mentioned in the letter, the statement that he is an evangelist - not necessarily a preacher or teacher. Now that cause problems - it is a big problem to me - 'cos, once again, I have to say to this brother: ' I do not discern the gift of evangelism in Roger Wheelhouse!'  I do not!  And gifts need to be discerned.  Now, I can't ask for a vote or a show of hands, but it is for the body to see, to recognise, to identify gifts - gifts in a brother, or a sister. And that one is a problem to me. Because it was not in the call - nowhere at any point.  Because - I'm looking at Gordon Humphries - sat there somewhere, because he always was, 'Roy, we want someone with a pastor's heart - we want someone who will come in and love the people.'  And that's what we were thinking we were having when the call went out to Roger. And that was confirmed by the membership at that time, in quite an overwhelming way, as you know. And so I just want to say to you -this: That there must be repentance on every individual behalf, every individual's behalf.  And, that the membership, the leaders, and, I would say this: deacons, you have to get yourself sorted out.  You have to begin with speech.  Because that was the other issue that has been touched on.  But the whole question - I think it was Derek who mentioned - I can't remember now - the muzzling of the deacons.  Deacons should be able to come to a leaders meeting and be able to pour out their hearts. It may be niggling even, yes, but the deacons have to be trusted - have to be trusted to tell a member who comes with some highfalutin, fiddling [sic] complaint or something: 'Oh, go away - don't bother - and only bring  to the deacons meeting those things which are absolutely essential and vital.'  So, we're back to where I started.  The question of the word 'trust.'  You know, Roger and I, trusted each other all the time I walked with this brother. Difficult though it was sometimes - difficult though it was - walked with him as elder. I found it tough sometimes, because of some of the idiosyncrasies of character he's got. But he had my problem too. Because I wasn't easy to get on with, maybe, sometimes. But I say that to you - the whole question of trust. And where we're going from here. All I can say is this - I can't answer that - it's the million dollar question. But we can't be the same as we've been.  That is for certain.  Things have got to change.  Things have got to move. Whether that starts from the top, to the deacons, to the membership - things have got to change.  And God's going to come in and He, if we honour Him, will pour His Spirit out into our hearts and on all of us here. And we will see a movement of God's Spirit in this place.  He is the one who is the most important - He is the Pre-imminent One - not Roger Wheelhouse, Roy James, David or Zoë - or anybody else. It's Him and the glorification of Him.  It was lovely to have our brother on Sunday who brought several of these things to us. The whole question of glory to God.  And glory to the Lord Jesus Christ. Thank you for listening.

[applause from floor]

[When Roy said: 'You will have discerned tonight that
there is a lack of trust - and that is something that comes from the top . . . Deacons to Roger, Roger to deacons - and permeates the church' he was talking about something that he had witnessed first-hand - having been repeatedly abused by Wheelhouse in private.  But why would he choose to say it came from 'Deacons to Roger, Roger to deacons'?  In the whole of this meeting you will find a mass of evidence that the factious heretic Wheelhouse trampled on many in the congregation.  But where is the evidence that deacons had offended heavily against Roger, other than to 'dare' to try and question his sermons and behaviour which resulted in them being threatened with disciplinary action and coerced into submission?  They had offended in allowing Scripture to be over-ruled and subsequently failing to deal with a factious man and in this they had offended against God and His Word!  But in this they were joined by most of the church who still maintained that they had done nothing wrong despite the evidence of their own eyes and ears.  No doubt those who welcomed king Saul to Lord it over Israel remained equally unrepentant.

Roy continues with the belief that Calvary Baptist Church was known as
'a loving fellowship . . . we were known as a loving and caring fellowship. And we didn't have our heads in the clouds - we had our feet on the ground to some extent' - but anyone witnessing the behaviour under Wheelhouse's ministry and the witness from this evening would have doubted this statement.  Roy also has his own reasons for his views on the:  'special way in which a minister needs to ask forgiveness  from brothers and sisters. Now, that may seem to be a contradiction - but as soon as you place a man in a position 'ordained unto God', the expectation of a fellowship has, can be, a high expectation - concerning, 'Sorry! I shouldn't have said that! I shouldn't have done that.'  Roy was the lone elder in the church when Wheelhouse arrived, and he and the deaconate of the time had invited Roger 'to preach with a view' to accepting the pastoral role in the church.  Roy had 'retired' quite suddenly and surprisingly with the church marking the retirement with a suitable presentation during a church service.  There were probably quite a few members surprised at the 'suddenness' of Roy's departure and, after our letter reached the church, we learnt the real reason from Roy's wife, Val James.  Roy had found it impossible to work with Roger Wheelhouse.  Why?  We were given a simple example.  They discussed a project and Roy spent hours working on it, drawing up details in notes which he passed to Roger.  After some time Roy asked Roger about the things he had put together.  Roger was dismissive - 'Oh, I threw your notes away!'  Now you may think this is  childish - and, of course, it is - but then, so is all sin.  When we set out to destroy another member of the body in some way we use the simplest methods - insults and ridicule will do it every time.  But, of course, it is alright for the man on the pedestal to do this - the sheep just have to suffer the abuse.  So why did Roy state that the order of trust was 'Deacons to Roger, Roger to deacons'?  Later he returned to this subject: 'So, we're back to where I started.  The question of the word 'trust.'  You know, Roger and I, trusted each other all the time I walked with this brother.'  Can we really believe that there was trust 'all the time' they walked together?  Not on the evidence of his wife, Val!  But this is a major problem with Christianity today - pretending to tell the whole truth and showing ourselves to be hypocrites!  We are so like the world in every way that there is no way they would want to join us when they see this behaviour.  I have found that the two most regularly stated reasons for my neighbours not accepting invitations to attend local churches is simply gossip and hypocrisy.  They have allowed ministers into their homes, shared in confidence, and then found that this confidence was 'blabbed' around the church.  They will respect the holiness of a Christ-like believer when they see it but, today, they rarely see it.

Roy here admits: 
'Difficult though it was sometimes - difficult though it was - I walked with him as elder. I found it tough sometimes, because of some of the idiosyncrasies of character he's got. But he had my problem too. Because I wasn't easy to get on with, maybe, sometimes.'  Unfortunately the 'idiosyncrasies of character' he talks about are factious and heretical - but to admit this would be to admit a mistake in calling this man.  Roy was honest enough to go on and question Wheelhouse's claim to be an 'evangelist' and to state clearly that: ' I do not discern the gift of evangelism in Roger Wheelhouse!'  I do not!  And gifts need to be discerned.'  The evidence of the Wheelhouse sermons  points to the truth of this statement, for he displayed little, if any, concern for the well-being of other believers in the church, let alone the eternal destiny of the unsaved.


Unfortunately, if a body fails to even recognise that the 'gifts of the Spirit' (
1 Corinthians 12) are still for today, then how are they going 'to recognise, to identify gifts - gifts in a brother, or a sister'?   The church had already previously insulted the Holy Spirit through elders denying that He was speaking through the gifts given to another brother.  It had long been a leadership custom to reject what the Spirit was saying through the fellowship by the humanistic, pseudo-psychological mind-babble response: 'Oh, that's just your past speaking!'  This is what happens when you allow the occultic study of the psyche through psycho-heretical psycho-babble to take preference to Bible-based examination of sin.  The gifts of the Spirit, with His searingly accurate insights through prophecy and words of wisdom and knowledge, have been replaced in Bible Colleges with 'New Age' occultism, and the flesh of humanistic thought, so that pastors need re-training to follow the ways of the Spirit and abandon the garbage that liberal and heretical scholars have used to indoctrinate potential pastors in today's Seminaries.

While Roy thought they were calling: '. . . someone with a pastor's heart  . . .  someone who will come in and love the people .  . .
that's what we were thinking we were having when the call went out to Roger', it is obvious from the later response that his conclusion, that 'that was confirmed by the membership at that time, in quite an overwhelming way', was false.  Our former elder was furious with this claim, according to his wife, for Calvary leadership had specifically asked Roger if he was a pastor first and foremost and he had acquiesced.  But then, this follows the pattern of the deceiver.  Either the fellowship did not agree that this was the call (despite the total lack of contrary evidence), or they were deceived by Wheelhouse, for he proved that he had another agenda.  Of course, the church was far too arrogant to admit this was true and so they had to insist that there were ways to retain this deceiver and subsequently tried to manipulate this through the meeting and the follow-up meeting in February.

The church leaders and members were quite happy to demand
'repentance on every individual behalf, every individual's behalf', as long as they did not have to do any public breast-beating themselves.  It is a sad fact that the un-Scriptural deacons who had allowed Wheelhouse to 'muzzle' them, had also attempted to re-instate Roy James in some capacity in order to preside over this fiasco!  But, of course, they never publically declared this and relied on subterfuge and secrecy so they could remain remote from the resulting flak.  Sadly for them this ploy also failed.

The question of '
the muzzling of the deacons' was never addressed, even though this was one of the clearest indications of Roger Wheelhouse's heresy.  Again, read the definitions of a 'factious' man, one who we are instructed by the apostle Paul to avoid, for Wheelhouse perfectly exemplified the Scriptural definition.

Roy's appeal to the body was allied to a promise which was never going to be fulfilled in a church that still refused to put the Word of God and therefore the God of the Word, first: 
'God's going to come in and He, IF we honour Him, will pour His Spirit out into our hearts and on all of us here. And we will see a movement of God's Spirit in this place. He is the one who is the most important - He is the Pre-imminent One - not Roger Wheelhouse, Roy James, David or Zoë - or anybody else. It's Him and the glorification of Him.'  It was, truly, a big IF! 

2 Samuel, Chapter 22, records one of David's most beautiful psalms. It appears again as Psalm 18 and we find David's own recognition of the things that made for greatness in his kingdom.  He acknowledged God as the source of all human strength and the One who alone can bring deliverance.  He stated that what a man is to God, God will also be to that man.  If one is open and honest and forthright with God, He will also be open and honest and forthright in return.  But if a man insists on being crooked and perverse and deceitful, God will cause the circumstances of his life to deceive him.  If king David experienced this as a result of his sin with Bathsheba and his murder of Uriah, why does the western church believe it can escape similar judgement?  They can declare until eternity that God is a God of love while leaving out His justice and truth - and then still deny the evidence before their very eyes.

This fellowship asked for a pastor like other churches, just as Israel asked for a king like the other nations (
1 Sam  8:4-9; 10:17-19).  The church still tried to cling to Wheelhouse - even when he showed he was a Saul - and we should remember how Samuel was called to warn the people of the consequences (8:9):

"Now then, listen to their voice; however, you shall solemnly warn them and tell them of the procedure of the king who will reign over them."
 
When Paul declares in
Philippians 3:12"I press on in order that I may lay hold of that for which also I was laid hold of by Christ Jesus"  he is declaring that what God had been to him, he desired to be to God.  Sadly, this is not a picture of the British church today.  Too many play at Christianity and pay lip-service to the Word of God.  The Wheelhouse deception had been totally exposed but the church refused to believe the evidence that was before their very eyes.]

Home Page   |   Expositor History   |   Other Religions   |   Cults   |   Occult  |   New Age Movement   |   Rome & Ecumenism   |   Breaking News

christian.expositor@ntlworld.com