The Heaps' story begins with the issue of a phenomenon called Geopathic Stress. A subject totally unrelated to Biblical doctrine but one which Harry Sullivan felt he had a right to pass judgement on, even though he is ill-informed about the topic.

Simply stated Geopathic (or Geopathogenic) stress is stress induced in the human body (and certain other organisms) by metabolically harmful frequencies emitted from the earth's crust. Some call the frequencies concerned Telluric radiation. Whatever you want to call the phenomenon, the effects are the same – weakening of the body's immune system to varying degrees, depending upon the strength of the radiation and the length of exposure to it, leading in turn to various maladies and pathogenic disorders, even ME, MS, leukaemia and cancers in the severely exposed.

The phenomenon first became known in Germany in the 1920's, but has since been widely discerned in many other countries. The principal research into Geopathic Stress and its effects was conducted by a German, G F von Pohl, and was written up in detail in his book "Earth Currents – Causative Factor in Cancer and Other Diseases" (Publ. Frech Verlag 1983). Von Pohl's work included a detailed survey of Vilsbiburg in Germany which demonstrated to the open-minded scientific fraternity that there was both a relationship between these harmful frequencies (he called "earth currents") and the exacerbation of disease. Other works have since verified von Pohl's findings and university students in Munich are currently conducting similar research.

Like most pioneering scientific studies and new discoveries, it has been ridiculed and rejected by many, (but so too were the motor car, aeroplanes, electricity, radio, television, photography, penicillin, etc., when they were first suggested). Not all can grasp the significance of the phenomenon. Some do not have a scientifically- orientated mind. Others cannot understand the energies involved. But few of those same people would doubt or question that electricity, radio waves, x-rays and nuclear fall-out exist. We have all grown accustomed to these forms of radiation or energy. It should be no different with telluric radiation.

However, Mr Sullivan took exception to the Heaps believing in such a phenomenon and its relevance, (for reasons we will come to later). And he also took exception to the Heaps discussing it with their friends, so much so that he, and eventually others in Elstree House, banned them from talking about it to others!

He claims that he had the authority to limit their freedom of speech in this way. A claim that is not supported by Scripture, (and he has not attempted to support his claim), even so it was supported by those above him in church administration in Elstree House.

Rather, Scripture forbids the ministry to 'lord it over' others, dictating what they may or may not think, say or do. (Lk. 22:25-26 and Mk. 20:25-26).

In fact, contrary to current Worldwide Church of God claims, if you carefully check Christ's teachings, you will find NO support for any ministerial authority other than that mentioned in Luke 9:1-2 – authority over all demonic powers, authority to heal the sick and authority to preach the Gospel. [See footnote at end.]

There is no scriptural support for any minister usurping his authority by dictating what members may think, say, or do! Members are free moral agents, and so long as they stay within the parameters established by God's Law, they have total freedom. Unfortunately, Harry Sullivan wanted to restrict that!

As regards the issue of Geopathic stress the Heaps were not unduly concerned if people wanted to be ignorant of it or if they chose to ignore it, that's their prerogative, and they have never pressured anyone into a particular point of view. But the issue is a scientific one which lies outside the jurisdiction of the ministry of the church upon which to pass judgement one way or the other. Tragically however, the ministry of the Worldwide Church of God have pressured people – albeit subtly – against this phenomenon. They claim that they have a God-given right to do so. (Which the Bible does not support).

Harry Sullivan has done so privately in conversations with other members ('gossip'), and so too has Paul Suckling, who even spoke against it in a sermon on 'alternative health therapies' on 09/09/89, in Dunstable, calling Geopathic stress a figment of the imagination, even though it can be demonstrated scientifically. There are machines designed to measure the strength of the radiation, called Geomagnetometers. (A script of extracts from that sermon was enclosed herewith). [This script is available for a small donation, from the address at the end.]

Paul Suckling ridiculed and denigrated many aspects of personal health care and choices of therapy, implying that Christians would be in spiritual danger if they chose these options. But he gave no proof, nor evidence to support his suppositions, merely his opinions. Yet it is the policy of the church, categorically stated in the healing booklet, that such decisions are the sole personal responsibility of the members, and theirs alone. A minister has no right to express his opinions unsolicited.

Notice the following quotes in this regard, Pg. 47 - "...He (God) charges us with the responsibility to take reasonable steps to ensure our own good health." (Emphasis ours) The previous page (Pg. 46) contains the statement, "that the Bible does not condemn ... scientific methods of helping ourselves in illness."

Moreover, "the sick person is held responsible before God for his own decisions, and HE, AND HE ALONE, must decide whether the means at his disposal are reasonable in his case or not" (Emphasis ours). Also on page 51, "everyone must make his own decisions in these matters."

If that is official church policy, then who gave Paul Suckling the right to preach for or against certain aspects of health care and therapy? He was out of order by going against church policy and against Biblical principles in that 'sermon' of 9/9/89.

The Healing booklet also states, (Pg. 54), "Under no circumstances should a Christian brother (or minister) ever stand in vocal or even silent judgement of his sick friend's faith, righteousness, or decisions about therapy". And it continues, (Pg. 54), "No one should impose on another unsolicited suggestions, or consider his own health approach to be the best or most spiritual..."

But this was exactly what Mr Suckling did!

"The minister is schooled in the Bible and Church doctrine" (Or at least he should be, so how come Paul Suckling is so flagrantly violating both?) "and is not qualified to offer health advice." (Pg. 54) "...he is NOT AUTHORIZED by the church to offer such advice." (Pg. 54) But Mr Suckling certainly acted as though he was authorized to do so! Is he above sound church teaching and Biblical principles? [Ministers often act as Gods in the WCG!]

"The Church... does not take any position for or against any particular health therapy or procedure except to recommend that any care sought should be the best available..." (Pg. 56)

So then it seems that Paul Suckling was acting contrary to Worldwide Church of God policy. [But he was never disciplined for this flagrant violation of church policy, nor was a retraction of his unethical statements ever made from the pulpit or otherwise! Yet it is biblically correct for an errant minister to be correctly PUBLICLY! (1 Tim 5:20).] The administration both here and in Pasadena were notified by the Heaps and others, but all were ignored, and no public retraction was made. This incident is well over two years ago now [written Dec 1991], so the administration has had ample time to act if it so wished.

By going against church policy and promoting his own ideas about health care, Mr Suckling has influenced the thinking of the congregation. People unwittingly regard Paul Suckling's personal views as though they were official church policy. Any who are known to hold different views about health care are looked down upon and judgemental approaches prevail. Such evils were condemned by the apostle Paul in his day. In Romans 14, he pointed out that we should not judge one another. What some do is no business of anybody else. Our decisions are ours and ours alone!

But the sermon by Paul Suckling delivered on 9/9/89 split the church. It encouraged judging. Two schools of thought developed. Those who agreed with him (not with the Bible!) and those who disagreed with him. Division was the automatic result!

He put a stumbling-block before those who wished to follow certain health care procedures and modes of therapy in which he personally saw no value. Such is UNSCRIPTURAL (Rom 14:13). The time has come to remove the stumbling-block (Is. 57:14). The church should not be subjected to the restrictions of men!

Malcolm Heap wrote to Paul Suckling immediately following his unscriptural 'sermon' of 9th September, 1989, pointing out errors of fact, inaccuracies, fallacies and prejudices that Mr Suckling had expressed openly as though they were church dogma. Malcolm asked for a public correction of the errors to be preached and for clarification of church policy. (Enclosed is a copy of the salient points of that letter). [Available upon request from the address at the end.]

In reply, Mr Suckling admitted no error and corrected nothing.

The reply Malcolm received conceded that, as a result of that sermon there were many points that needed addressing. But to date, over two years later those points have not been addressed. [Now, 9 years later, they STILL have not been addressed!!] The points which Malcolm brought up were very valid as the sermon had encouraged disharmony and division.

If error is preached it ought to be corrected and if a minister is out of order he too should be corrected. In any reputable organisation, if an executive is publicly out of order, he is reprimanded publicly, so all can know of the infraction. Such has never been enacted.

However, for bringing these points to the attention of the administration, and for persisting to talk about Geopathic stress with their close friends, after Sullivan had indicated he did not want them to do so, he disfellowshipped Malcolm and Helena. This was against scriptural principles (Jn. 10:12).

In issues such as these, God commands us to obey Him rather than men (Acts 5:29). We should obey God at all costs. And the Heaps pointed out that they will follow the teachings of the Bible where there is any dispute with what men say. Both Harry Sullivan and Paul Suckling are out of step with church policy, AND, more importantly, out of step with Biblical teaching! (More of this later).

This issue is very serious. We would not write to you otherwise. The church must correct error, not cover it up. It must be open with its membership, not secretive. We hope Mr Tkach would want that, but it seems that certain men under him in the administration do not want that, for it would reveal too openly their true motives. In being secretive, the church is leaving itself open to accusations of behaving like a cult.

A minister's primary concern should be to serve the flock in true concern. (It is not man's flock but Christ's). Such love would transcend such petty issues, and overcome disagreements. But it was obvious from the way the Heaps' case was handled that Christ's love was simply not present in such men. They didn't want them around. They wanted rid of them. Rather than correcting their own errors, they had the Heaps excommunicated – which, incidentally is unscriptural. Only gross moral abuse or moral depravity is a just reason for being put out of the church.1 There is no scriptural basis for disfellowshipment being used as a weapon to control the membership over differences of views.

Control is not Godly, it is Satanic (Luke 22:31).

It is the wolf who gets rid of faithful Christians (John 10:12).

If the Heaps are supposed to have committed some heinous sin why doesn't Harry Sullivan tell you? Because he knows that he is in the wrong! He was in error and he was acting out of his jurisdiction.

He claims before the church that the Heaps need to repent. But repent of what? Going against his directive, that's all! That is insufficient grounds for disfellowshipment.

But rather than hold an open tribunal before the rest of the church as Matthew 18:17 and I Cor. 6:16 imply, with older and experienced members presiding as a 'jury', so that equity and truth can prevail, the innocent are IGNORED! The minister's powers are made unchallengeable – this is against scripture!