There were a series of letters and lessons written by Merie Weiss that led up to or followed her split from the mainstream Churches of Christ. Here are some of the documents that have been circulated by the church over the years. The most commonly referenced when I was growing up were the Brethren Letter, Moyer Letter, Holy Spirit Lesson, and Church Lesson.
Thanks to several contributors for filling in some of the gaps in this collection.
- The Brethren Letter (1967) – This was the “open letter” sent to the “brotherhood” of Churches of Christ that Merie acknowledge as “faithful churches” at the time. Essentially her split was really a “split of a split of a split,” because the Churches of Christ had already been fractured by schismatic teaching over 70 years.
- Letter to Brother Cogdill (1968) – This was a letter from Merie to Roy Cogdill about the state of the “conservative” faction of the Church of Christ and it’s expressed interest in holding dialogue with the “liberal” faction at the Arlington Meeting.
- The Moyer Letter – This is an “open letter” to a Church of Christ preacher named Forest Moyer with whom Merie had engaged in a number of doctrinal arguments.
- Reply To Moyer Letter (1971) – This is a letter written to Merie in reply to her open letter to Forest Moyer. It includes Merie’s handwritten notes in response.
- Public Confession – This is a study done by Merie on the subject of public confession in the church.
- Angels – This study was done by Merie on the subject of angels. I don’t have the date it was published.
- The Holy Spirit Lesson (1973) – This is a lesson prepared by Merie to support her view that the subject of the Holy Spirit was being incorrectly taught in Church of Christ doctrine.
- Twelve Questions To Spring Valley & Answers (1975) – A nearby church (Seminole Drive Church of Christ in San Diego) posed 12 questions to the Spring Valley church led by Merie in order to determine Spring Valley’s stance on various issues. This document is Spring Valley’s response to those questions.
- Baptism of the Holy Spirit (1977) – This was a letter prepared by Merie and sent to Debbie Morris in Boise to support Merie’s view on the baptism of the Holy Spirit.
- The Church Lesson – This lesson was prepared by Merie to give some fundamentals lines of reasoning for church members knocking on doors so they would at least have the appearance of Biblical truth supporting their claims to be the “one true church.”
- Put Up Thy Sword – This book caused some concern in the church when Merie first wrote it, because they had been adamantly taught not to waste time reading “books of men,” but to only study the Bible. Nevertheless, she wrote the book and it was published and distributed to the churches. I don’t know whether she paid the publishing costs or if the church did. I seem to remember discussions about the church paying for it, but if anyone has accurate information, please let me know.
This is just a sample non-member lesson delivered by Merie:
- Non-Member’s Lesson – This MP3 of Merie is the only one I personally have, and it’s only part 1 of 4 of a non-member lesson she gave.
I have the privilege of being marked and avoided i.e. excommunicated for having stated "Sin when repented of can be completely and rapidly healed by God,and in certain cases we can be cleansed whiter than snow". Thank you Kevin for putting in writing what has been ongoing for some time. I had a great upbringing, but when a person begins to search for truth, no amount of tradition can stand in the way, neither can personal failures, and neither can the threat of organized punishment.
Amen. Pursue truth relentlessly, and love even more so, brother.
Anonymous, now that IS standing up for the truth and preaching the gospel! You continue to stand strong, never give up and never give in! God's obviously blessed you with a special heart, one that is courageous, like the apostles!
After listening the this partial speech given by Merie Weiss I am puzzled as to how can she can be said to have had a meek and quiet spirit as women are instructed to have? Can a meek and quiet spirit manifest itself in this type of speaking and fist pounding? Mainline Churches of Christ don't believe in women teaching in mixed classes and by the announcement linked in a previous page she at one time followed this way of thinking. The linked article says she was teaching a class and men were prohibited. When did she change her thinking… Read more »
I'm guessing it happened over time. I know she used to be a protester at rallies at some point in her life. One person that knew her when she was in the mainstream COC only remembers that Merie really "went off the deep end."
These are portions of the non-member lesson posted at the bottom of this blog entry. 14:43 You've got an opinion? Prove it! 15:26 Truth never varies or contradicts itself. 16:09 My words are truth, TRUTH. The miscellaneous stuff started from men who changed the Bible. They twisted it to their ways and everyone of them are going straight to hell. 20:20 Every religion has it's idols. Back here they had idols all over; religious institutions build them up, they built them up. Mary Baker Eddie is the idol of the Christian Science; Smyth is the idol of the Baptists; Joseph… Read more »
Interesting, Anon 5:23. Thank you for this.
I like how she says "You've got an opinion? Prove it!" Then when asked about crosses, offers no proof, just an assertion that we don't do that.
Yes, I believe her own words condemn her teaching tactics.
Merie said at 46:49 of her non-member lesson that "There is no sin until you've broken the law of Christ yet she taught her opinions as if they were law. Is the church following the law of Christ or the law of "the older ones"?
Anon 11:39, exactly. Their own words condemn themselves, but they've done like the Pharisees and made void "the law" with all their traditions.
I would like to comment on the The Twelve Questions… These are a few of the highlighted pieces of the document and my comment in parenthesis: 1. A good rule to follow as we grow in the faith is never to teach anything we cannot prove. (I agree!) 2. We believe it is a sin to go to movies; and we thus teach. (See #1… how soon you forget!) 3. There will be no recreational activities, baseball games, golf, tennis, movie houses or television sets in heaven. So why develop a taste for such here? (There is also no taco… Read more »
Her teaching that going to a movie is sin must be the reason the current church allows their children (and some of the members will allows themselves) to watch G rated type movies on their computers but not at a movie theater. Wake up people!
Yes, whatever happened to speaking where the Bible speaks and being silent where it's silent?
I heard Merie say that she didn't believe that God would take her if she was sitting in a movie theater and the world ended. So she bound her own conscience on everyone else and that mind set continues in this sect (someone's conscience is always being bound on others by way of a multitude of rules and rebukes for things that are not sin).
Thanks Anon 1:40, yes that's true.
On a related note, I'm interested in the facts of what she believed would happen regarding her own death and the death of Christians in general.
I believe she thought she'd be taken on a Sunday, no loss of mental aptitude, and Christians would not die of cancer, but I'd like confirmation.
In response to the Twelve Questions letter and Spring Valley's reason for not allowing recreation because "There will be no recreational activities, baseball games, golf, tennis, movie houses or television sets in heaven." I would like to add that THERE WILL BE NO MARRIAGE IN HEAVEN.
"Baffled" – Yes, and this perhaps chillingly explains why marriage and family relationships are so unimportant to the church. Family and marriage are just "necessary" and "carnal" evils.
There will be no marriage, or kids, or daddy daughter dates, or father son bonding, or romantic date nights with your spouse, "so why develop a taste for such here?"
Kevin; Because at least two strong sacrificing preachers in my time died on Sunday. One being Benjamin Franklin who got up from his death bed, preached a sermon, went home and died that night. Merie Weiss greatly respected these Christians of old, their labor, their sacrificing for the Kingdom and their ability to save many souls. She also alluded to the fact Christians were free from sin on Sunday, were together in fellowship and worship of God and that would also be a time to be taken from the earth. This was not taught as doctrine, this was simply sharing… Read more »
Elder Scott, did you flourish under oppression?
Elder Scott, Benjamin Franklin did not want us to follow his example. He wanted us to follow Christ. That is the driving theme of this blog, an important point that seems lost on you. We don't follow Paul, or Apollos, or Tolbert Fanning, or Alexander Campbell (who belived in the millenium), or Benjamin Frankin, or Merie Weiss. Was Benjamin Franklin crucified for you? You said he died on a Sunday. Did he die for you, Elder Scott? Do you really want to sit there and admit, "Benjamin Franklin died on a Sunday for me?" Did he not do many wonderful… Read more »
Well said, Anon 9:30. The very fact that Merie's theology meant one was only sinless on Sunday should tell you something. Jesus died for our sins, not so we could live one-seventh of our lives free of sin–and that only if we remember ever last sin in order to confess it in the proper format, and don't sin on Sunday at all–but so we could be clothed in his righteousness 24/7.
I believe I can well understand why the Stanton Church members are not addressing your questions. They are met with very unreasonable words that have no value. Obviously Merie Weiss was not telling her brothers and sisters to all die on Sunday so they could be following Benjamin Frankin's example. That is ludacris. Your generation is very short sighted.
Anon 9-13 @9:30PM Amen! I find it so contradictory that this sect uses Acts 10:26 against the Catholics' Popes in non-member classes but raise up "Mother" Merie as their spiritual leader. What began as a "Merie said" religion transferred into a "Kim said, Gary said or Tom said…" religion; instead of Jesus said, the gospel says, the Apostles said. This example alone should be a warning sign to followers of this sect. We are supposed to trust in "His" word (meaning Christ) not the words of fallible human beings. There can be only one God we serve and that is… Read more »
Why do they continually defend Merie Weiss, when they openly admit her errors by shelving her tapes and discontinuing her harsh, opinionated methods, including unscriptural withdrawals and puritanical rules for the marriage bed? Her sloppy exegesis of scripture left a trail of pain and suffering for hundreds of families. She got the re-marriage question wrong, she got "uncleanness" wrong, she got "the bed undefiled" wrong, she got "the effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much" wrong, she even got "study to shew thyself approved wrong." They still believe, 45 years later, the old English "study" means bookwork –… Read more »
Elder Scott, I believe you meant "ludicrous." Ludacris is a rap singer.
Elder Scott, perhaps you're younger than you're letting on? Most elders don't know about rappers.
I have to object to the flimsy defense of Merie Weiss, claiming her opinions "were not her doctrine." Seems to me, she taught her opinions quite liberally, and any good she did does not excuse her from the grievous wrong she did, nor does it excuse the wrong her followers continued to execute upon others.
Anon 1:28, just cant trust those 1800's spell checks.
Elder Scott, I would like to know your view concerning the current practice of women teachers in the Stanton sect? I was under the impression that during your time this would have been strictly forbidden.
Just a note… I am a different poster than Sept. 14th Anonymous 5:48am. I am specifically asking Elder Scott his understanding of women teachers. Thank you.
Anonymous at 9:30, I don't know that was a fair accusation to level at Elder Scott. He simply stated Merie thought dying on Sunday wasn't a bad thing, and it does not appear reasonable to see he is labelled as a hopeless heretic for doing so. If we are to oppose the wrong doctrines of the Church of Christ, it must be done fairly, and it must not be accomplished by ganging up on anyone showing the slightest sympathy for the church. If we respond to the church in this matter, Elder Scott is right, we will have no response.… Read more »
Anon 7:34, I didn't see any accusations from Anon 9:30. The individual identifying him/herself as Scott is trying to make a case supporing Merie Weiss, based on an assumption that 1800's preachers did things and taught things even more strict than Merie. One of Scott's examples was when, in his day, they withdrew from brethren for forsaking the worship. If you read all of Scott's posts, he's general approach is, the methods of preachers from 150 years ago can be compared to Merie's methods. What I'm saying is, these people were not cucified for us, drawing from I Cor. 1:13.… Read more »
Anon 8:26 – Amen, I wish there was a LIKE button for your comment above. 🙂
I must say here for the sake of fairness, if different people on this blog find it necessary to condemn Merie Weiss that very act would also dictate the right to defend Merie Weiss. By blocking her defense you are doing the very thing you condemn the Stanton Churches of. Conducting Kangaroo Courts. Some of you know what I mean by that term.
Confused: Answering your question concerning women and their place in the Churches of Christ I will use the Stanton Churches as my example:1. I believe women conducting bible classes with both men and women in attendance is against scripture.2. I believe women wearing the title elder or deacon is unscriptural3. I believe it is unscriptural for woman to baptize or serve in any part of the worship.4. I believe it is unscriptural for a woman to wear the title evangelist.5. I believe it is unscriptural for a woman to be considered a preacher.6. I believe a Christian woman must be… Read more »
On the above post, I am in agreement with Elder Scott. However, I have not seen condemnation of Merie Weiss on this blog. Criticizing a person's beliefs or actions is different from condemning the person, or throwing someone out of the church. I esteem Scott's courage and his dissenting viewpoints are welcome. There is such a thing as loyal dissent, a concept hardliner legalists do not seem to understand. Kevin made a great point: unanimity is not the same thing as unity. You are loved, Elder Scott, regardless of your opinions. You are appreciated. But are you real?
In response to Elder Scott's referral to a kangaroo court and for those of you who might not be familiar with that phrase or who might not have been in Iowa at a certain kangaroo court as well as multitudes of other such common proceedings….Kangaroo courts are sham legal proceedings which are set-up in order to give the impression of a fair legal process. In fact, they offer no impartial justice as the verdict, invariably to the detriment of the accused, is decided in advance.
In answer to anon 2:12 pm on 2013; My voice still is heard even in your generation. All truth through out generations is still heard. Just as the world learns from its history the Lord's church does as well if we would listen.
You have to get the gist of what Merie is saying. It is not a sin, per se, to go to movies, but it could be a sin to watch certain things. We know watching the Lion King is no sin, but if I am watching rated R movies that show and support the sins that we are to abstain from, it could be sin. We are to think of holy things. It is what we are allowing in our minds. Remember, a carnal mind is enmity with God. Also, a lot of the 12 questions were pointed at carnal… Read more »
If the church would leave it just at what you said…that we need to be watchful of what we allow into our minds from the culture…I am totally on board with that message.
It's going beyond that and teaching that "Christians don't go to movies," etc. that I have a huge scriptural problem with. It's no different than the Pharisees of Jesus' day interpreting the law for the people. It's "teaching for doctrines the commandments of men."
The way I always understood it is that going to movies is just a door way. Like, the bible doesn't teach against drinking wine. Even the elderly are said could drink it for stomach's sake. Where the sin comes in is when I become a drunkard. The sin isn't in the wine. It is in what I do with it. Just as watching TV and going to movies. Watching TV and movies isn't sin, but what I watch and allow in my mind is. I remember listening to Tom C. saying that, "where will it stop?" as we can get… Read more »
First off, thank you Kevin and the anonymous donors for providing all the documents listed at the top of this page. As I was reading through the Public Confession Document (on page 1, 3rd paragraph), I noticed once again Merie talks about proving yourself based on the scriptures but then she contradicts herself by stating, "babes will of course need to trust his or her teacher." In other words, you must pretend to believe (and not trust your God given conscience) until you convince yourself that the teachers are more reliable than your own conscience. This mindset is still practiced… Read more »
Wendy, I noticed that too. The heavy trust placed in your "teachers" started way back in the beginning, and is the linch pin of the church's tyranny over conscience.
We all have to stand before God, and we won't be able to say "my teacher told to me to believe that." We'd better be able to give an answer for ourselves, and if we can't, we can neither hold nor teach that belief in good conscience. Teaching something we suspect isn't true is disingenuous and is the exact definition of "false teaching." It is teaching a lie.
I have a question; I see various posts from women on this blog. What is your understanding of 1 Tim 2:13; "But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man but to remain quiet." The posts I am observing from women are not just to add to the list of offences concerning the Stanton Churches of Christ but rather they are TEACHING or giving understandings of scriptures. I would like an answer to what appears to be a contradiction.
I will write about this in more detail when I get some time, but I don't personally believe it wrong for *any* woman to teach *any* man. That is not the context of Paul's instruction to Timothy. It is women teaching and assuming authority over their husbands that he is talking about. Adam and Eve were husband and wife.
So to clarify; If Paul's instruction to Timothy was regarding only husbands then you DO believe, per scripture, that women can teach a man. Do you believe she can baptize? Preach a sermon in the pulpit? I know the scriptures are very clear on elders and deacons, but what about evangelists and be the teacher over a mixed bible class? Sorry still unclear.
Anon 11:17 – Since we have examples of women teaching, praying, and prophesying in the public assembly, I would have to say that prohibition of women teaching needs to be taken in the context it's given, which is limited to wives usurping authority over their husbands. That's what he was addressing. Genesis 2 – This is clearly defining the marriage relationship, not the relationship of all women to all men. We can be sure of this because the writer says “**Therefore** shall a man leave his father and mother and cleave unto his wife, and they shall be one flesh.”… Read more »
I found your answer to women in the church very interesting. If fact I made your answer a point of study and meditation. I have a few questions: Are women who are not married except from the Gen. 2, Gen, 1 Cor. 11 and 1 Cor 14? I will start there.
To: Kevin September 14, 2013 at 8:49 AM This particular passage is speaking of women not usurping the authority of the male in the church duties. Not to put down women, but to keep things the way God intended. It is the mens responsibility to lead the worship, Lord's Supper, classes, prayer while the women learn in silence. If there is no man present she lead classes, songs, and prayer. This is not to keep women oppressed and down. It is the order that God set up. Like it is the man that is the head of the family and… Read more »
Anon 2:23 – I'm glad you found it interesting. I will not pretend to have all the "rules" ironed out. That is our first mistake…believing that there is a Biblical "rule" for every contingency. If I don't believe it was Paul's intent to create a new rule or law, then why do we so often feel the need to force one into the text? I have 7 kids from 6 to 21, and the idea that I could be 100% consistent and apply the same rules to all of my kids in parenting them was a naive thought I believed… Read more »
Hi,
I'm trying to read the 12 questions document and its difficult to understand with all the weird CoC jargon that defies logic and God's word. One thing that I did pull from it is their definition of a "dead or lukewarm" church, and their references to number of baptisms. So I ask, what is their definition of an acceptable number of baptisms? What is each congregation's average? What is their goal?
Thanks
Yes, it does defy logic and clearly is not aligned with the Word. Obviously there is no fixed number they could give you…I'm guessing many of their congregations have the same or worse "baptism rates" as the "off church" in Merie's time. It is ludicrous to equate baptism rates to the health of the congregation. Is Mormonism favored by God because it's growing so fast? How about Islam? It's going through the roof worldwide…is that because God favors them? There have been half a dozen baptisms at my congregation in the last couple months, but I don't take that to… Read more »