Help Maple Leaf
 

We are having a discussion on CAF about the second covering teaching and MB said you could give me a history on it's orgins in NB? Would you be so kind to do that thanks in advance.?

Re: Help Maple Leaf
 

I’m sorry Pastor, but I can’t answer your question. My wife’s family served God under the Pentecostal Tam, but left that behind many years ago. The only significant enclave of “second covering” people that I know of in NB are your friends from Plaster Rock. There were more hats around years ago, but I think that most of them had a connection to Bro.’s Ralston and McKillop.

My grandmother has been a part of the Oneness movement in NB since it arrived in the early twenties. I’ll ask her about the “second covering” origins when I am next speaking with her.

Re: Help Maple Leaf
 

Perhaps it was conceived by a hatmaker in Plaster Rock? LOL!!!!!

Re: Help Maple Leaf
 

I appreciate that very much.

Re: Help Maple Leaf
 

what's second covering? is that wearing a veil?

Re: Help Maple Leaf
 

What's a "Pentecostal tam?" Does it go with men wearing skirts? :ursofunny

Re: Help Maple Leaf
 

Wasn't Bro. Rolston a proponent of the second covering?

Re: Help Maple Leaf
 

What's Mike Blume doing on CAF? ROTFL

Re: Help Maple Leaf
 

When I first saw the title of this thread I thought perhaps MapleLeaf had fallen down and couldn't get up!

Re: Help Maple Leaf
 

Years ago there was a preacher in the South that talked alot about health issues. He spoke on the virtues of drinking fruit and vegetable juices and yes he so happen to have some juicers with him for sell.:whistle

Re: Help Maple Leaf
 

Ted finch?

Re: Help Maple Leaf
 

:ursofunnyMan,,,sounds like a covert mission......all the initials.....

Re: Help Maple Leaf
 

Many years ago I went with Sister Mary Williams and a group Canada and we were in churches that used head coverings...I think the pastor´s name was Richardson...but it was so long ago...wonder if there is any conection.

I sae some from PR at a church in the states all the ladies had on fancy hats...Odd to use for a veil ...

Re: Help Maple Leaf
 

Nice catch. The Pentecostal Tam was loosely styled after the Scottish Tam O' Shanter.

The Pentecostal Tam was the unofficial second covering of yesteryear.

It was made of eight diagonally shaped pieces of material, joined at the centre with a fabric covered button, and banded on the outer edge with a rigid piece of cardboard and an inch wide elastic.

It was a small price to pay for your place in Heaven.

Re: Help Maple Leaf
 

In the business world we call this "synergy"!

Re: Help Maple Leaf
 

Pastor

I spoke with my grandmother about the second covering teaching in NB, and to the best of her recollection, which is surprisingly good considering that she was baptized in the Holy Ghost in about 1925, hats were pretty universally worn in the New Brunswick churches until the forties, but because it was the style of the day, and not because of a "second covering" conviction.

In her local assembly (Bro. Jacques' church in Fredericton), hats were never taught as a Scriptural conviction, but were worn until the forties, with gloves, to be fashionably dressed for church.

When hats went out of fashion, most of the churches discontinued wearing them, with the notable exception of Bro. Ralston and the Plaster Rock church.

Re: Help Maple Leaf
 

When I came to Ohio in 1957 I attended a UPC church in Cincinnati. At that time the ladies wore hats, gloves, and hose to church. A person (adult lady or teen age girl) was not properly dressed without hat, gloves, and hose. That was back in the days of girdles and hose and pantyhose were not around yet.

Re: Help Maple Leaf
 

I thought Passover wine was the juice to drink for your health.

Re: Help Maple Leaf
 

Here's an interesting little tidbit
The message of the hat went from Plaster Rock to Pembroke, Ontario where a pastor named Ralph Reynolds was shown the way more perfectly.
As a result of this light, when the Reynolds' were missionaries to Jamaica the message of the second covering was proclaimed. All because of a layman from Plaster Rock.

Re: Help Maple Leaf
 

To my knowledge the Reynolds still hold to this teaching. Certainly Paul Reynolds in New Westminster does. Last time I was there it was a certifiable "hat parade"! I shouldn't forget about the "cranial napkins" as there were a few veils there also.....

Re: Help Maple Leaf
 

When I was a teenager ,I always had a hat to wear when I went to P.R,wasnt a requirement at my home church but we always respected Bro Rolston and didn't want to offend him.

Re: Help Maple Leaf
 

When you were a teenager, eh?

Back in the days when King George V1 was on the throne, and Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon was setting the styles for ladies all across the realm.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...Bowes-Lyon.jpg

Re: Help Maple Leaf
 

MapleLimb,

You are one brave man! I think there is destiny in your future.

Re: Help Maple Leaf
 

This is TIC, right? Cuz if not, that is a terrible thing to say. JESUS paid the price for our place in heaven. No piece of cloth stuck on someone's head is going to make a bit of difference.

Re: Help Maple Leaf
 

2 Peter 1:10-11

10 So, dear brothers and sisters, work hard to prove that you really are among those God has called and chosen. Do these things, and you will never fall away. 11 Then God will give you a grand entrance into the eternal Kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

Holy Bible, New Living Translation ®, copyright © 1996, 2004 by Tyndale Charitable Trust. Used by permission of Tyndale House Publishers. All rights reserved.

Re: Help Maple Leaf
 

LOL. Although he wouldn't know good music if it slapped him on his toothless, hillbilly head, he is a Hall Of Fame poster for sure!!!! Post more ML!

Re: Help Maple Leaf
 

Close but not quite TN,

RVR never was a proponent of the second covering. RVR believed that it should be left to the individual believer to decide on this issue. It was his son PVR that has made a career of proclaiming this great revelation. According to PVR it was while PVR was a missionary to Jamaica that a layperson in the Kingston Jamaica church challenged him to study this issue that God opened his eyes to this long hidden truth.

Re: Help Maple Leaf
 

The late Bishop S. C. Johnson had a strong influence in Jamaica he died there and taught hat or hell.

Re: Help Maple Leaf
 

I was gonna mention Plaster Rock. Thats the only place I knew of that had preached the second covering. Basically, it is founded on 1 Corinthians Chapter 11. I had the McKillops explain it to me when I was up there. I am QUITE familiar with their church and Sept5SavedTeen can verify that. lol! I got the Holy Ghost up there, graduated up there, got quite a few aquaintances up there, etc. Actually Bro. Daniel McKillop just preached at our church out here for our youth conference.

As for their hat doctrine, it basically I believe is a misconception over 1 Corinthians 11. Here is their "core" verse.

(1 Corinthians 11:5-6 KJV) But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven.
For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn: but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered.

So they believe the hat is the second covering because the hair is a womans glory and something to the effect that no glory can show in God's presence, because it takes away from God.......or something like that. Never mind verse 15. lol!

(1 Corinthians 11:15 KJV)But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering.

Oh well, they mean well. Like I told them up there, I have no issue with it, until it becomes a heaven or hell issue. Because if I dont believe in the hat doctrine, will I go to hell even though it doesnt affect me since I am a guy? lol......A couple of the hotheads got a bit uptight. Alex was standing right next to me when I said that. haha!! He can fill you in on what happened next.....:haloplug

Re: Help Maple Leaf
 

Thumper
I could be misinformed, however, that was the story told to me by the man's son in law.

Re: Help Maple Leaf
 

RVR's son in law or PVR's son in law?

Because it was PVR that told me. However that was quite some time ago memorys tend to get a little murky with age.

Re: Help Maple Leaf
 

I've seen it all...................................

Re: Help Maple Leaf
 

You should know!:tease

Re: Help Maple Leaf
 

Not yet you haven't, if the second covering doctrine surprises you.

At least it may be argued from Scripture.

My personal favourite was the inspired old timer who preached against the Reader's Digest.

Re: Help Maple Leaf
 

MY personal favourite is the BEARDS issue, I have YET to hear that argued from scripture aside from an attempt to imply that the phrase Paul wrote to WOMEN about being SHAME FACED equally applied to men (!) meaning NO BEARDS... Of course the term shame faced means for women to be demure, evidently MEN should adopt this feminine quality and become demure as well...Anyway. Yeah that would be my favourite almost borderline salvation issue (It most CERTAINLY is a fellowship issue.)

The real thing that gets me about this whole head covering discussion is that it NEVER starts at the beginning to come to a conclusion about what Paul is talking about here, but always jumps to the last verse, and then tries to define the whole of scripture by an INTERPRETATION of this one last verse.

The truth of course is that the reason we HAVE to do that is because we have built this HUGE H*U*G*E* doctrine that is mentioned in virtually every Jesus Name Articles of Faith compilation SPECIFICALLY, book after book after book being written about it, that the idea that there just MIGHT be more to the issue than a WOMANS grooming issue is something we absolutely cannot even entertain for a moment lest the whole house of cards come crashing down. Womans issue? ( IT MOST MANIFESTLY IS NOT! IT IS A MENS ISSUE CONCERNING PAUL TELLING MEN THAT THE VEILING OF MEN IN THE PRESENCE OF GOD THAT IS THE TRADITION UNDER THE LAW DISHONOURS CHRIST, we however have taken Pauls illustration of that point by referring to the natural creation of man and made HAIR the issue. The real issue being the doing away with the OLD covenant and the bringing in of the NEW due to Jesus sacrifice on Calvary, all symbolized by the UNveiling of men now when they enter the presence of God .) I was most interested to note that there was NO addressing on the other thread Why Apostolic Women Veil to ANY of the points made in the interpretation of verse 15 the "Her hair is given her for a covering" in the light of Roberts, Jamieson, et al., no just some implication that women who veiled were NOT Apostolic, not of the household of faith, NOT "true" daughters of Jesus Christ.

Maybe some day the great debaters (I mean that facetiously of course ) will begin this subject adressing what Paul actually had reference to when he said that men ought not to be veiled. That just might provide the real key to the whole issue.

Re: Help Maple Leaf
 

The SIL of the guy who talked with him.