The Corbin God Gene and Evangelical Zionists

On April 9, 2012, I recieved an e-mail from Kendall W. Corbin, the brother of my long term friend, Edward Malcom Corbin. Their father was the head of the Mayo Clinic and has two citations in Who’s Who. Kendall Brooks Corbin, married Eryl Portia Wallace, the daughter of Emilie Susan Cavenagh, who married Robert Bruce Wallace. Portia decends from the infamous William Wallace, and it looks like, Roberty Bruce. But what I am interested in is Portia’s kinship to Francis Cavenagh, a member of the Plymouth Brethren.

At Ed Corbin’s house I read about twenty pages on the Cavenagh family containing letters which mentioned the Plymouth Brethren throughout. Those papers Ed owned, got missplaced. When I spoke to Kendall on the phone, he said he would look for them. but, having just moved, this might take awhile.

“Francis Cavenagh (1810‐1875) and his wife Susan Prince (1812‐1885) were
parents of: (1) William Cavenagh (b. 1840), who became a banker; (2) Frank (most
likely Francis?) Cavenagh (b. 1842), who became a Plymouth Brethren missionary
on the Shetland Islands;”

There exist much controversy about the Brethren and their ties to John Darby who is being accused of inventing the Rapture Tribulation – now considered a heresy. He based this new religion on the visions of a fifteen year old girl kin to members of the Brethren – who may have owned the God Gene.

Kendall is a well educated Genesist, he authoring papers on birds. Ed and our friend, Mark Gall, graduated from Harvard and was the head of the Univerity of Oregon Department of Education. Mark is in Who’s Who. Richard Alpert was Mark’s councelor at Harvard, and believes he was given a dose of LSD when he was paid for being a Guinea pig. Mark’s dissertation was on creative and non-creative groups. Perhpas he sees some merit in the work of Gene Hammer that links LSD to the God Gene.

Consider the Mormon interest in genealogies, and Mitt Romoney’s trip to Israel where he promised to make Jerusalem more – American!

There is a secret ritual peformed by the Exlcusive Brethren where a Last Supper is performed and the breaking of bread. Here is the real Da Vinci Code.

DISSERTATION
An investigation of verbal style in creative and noncreative groups. (Doctoral dissertation, University of California at Berkeley.) Ann Arbor, Michigan: University Microfilms, 1968. No. 68-13, 905.

On Saturday, Joy Gall and I talked about the show she saw on the Hippie Movement where a new science of communication was born, including the Internet, that has been discribed as a Secualar God.

Kendall and I talked about Ed’s use of LSD while attending Harvard, he a disciple of Timothy Leary. I believe Ed Corbin has the God Gene. His three sons are very creative, thus, this gene was passed on.

Jon Presco

Copyright 2012

KENDALL W. CORBIN
Department of Ecology and Behavioral Biology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55455
BRADLEY C. LIVEZEY AND PHILIP S. HUMPHREY
Museum of Natural History and Department of Systematicsa nd Ecology, Universityo f Kansas,
Lawrence, KS 66045
Abstract. Electrophoretic and isoelectric focusing analyses of liver proteins of the steamer-
ducks, Tachyeresp atachonicus,T . pteneres,T . brachypterusa, nd T. leucocephaluss,h ow
these species to be distinct genetically, with the latter three species being more closely related
to one another than any one of them is to T. patachonicusT. here is also significant differentiation
among populations of T. patachonicus.

DISSERTATION
An investigation of verbal style in creative and noncreative groups. (Doctoral dissertation, University of California at Berkeley.) Ann Arbor, Michigan: University Microfilms, 1968. No. 68-13, 905.

Jon, it was only a small scrap of information … not much use to you I am afraid.  I will continue looking for those letters written by my grandmother, Emilie Susan Cavenagh Wallace. There may be a bit more there; I would not have paid much attention to Plymouth Brethren info when I was reading her letters 20 years ago.

Cheers, Kendall
On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 4:12 PM, John Ambrose wrote:
Thanks Ken.
 
Jon Presco

From: Kendall & Susanne Corbin
To: braskewitz@yahoo.com
Sent: Sunday, April 8, 2012 8:47 AM
Subject: A small piece of the Cavenagh genealogy

I have attached a PDF file that contains a reworking of the information I have in my files.  It eliminates a lot of the redundancy that would have been in the files that my brother, Edwin, would have shown to you.

I hope this will be useful to you in your quest.

All best wishes.  Kendall 

Kendall W. Corbin, Ph.D.

The Cavenagh Lineage: (Cavenagh/Kavanaugh/Cavanagh/Kavanagh)
In 1770, at the time of the birth of Sylvester Cavenagh, the family surname was
Kavanaugh, but Sylvester’s brother, James, brought shame to the family through
his activities as a smuggler. To avoid this shame, Sylvester changed his name to
Cavenagh.
The descent of this portion of the family lineage was as follows: Sylvester
Cavenagh (1770‐1847) ne Sylvester Kavanaugh of Ireland married Mary Ann
Sherwin of Wicklow, Ireland. Sylvester and Mary were parents of (1) Kate
Cavenagh and (2) Francis Cavenagh (1810‐1875) of Dublin, Ireland, who married
Susan Prince (1812‐1885) of Ireland.
Francis Cavenagh (1810‐1875) and his wife Susan Prince (1812‐1885) were
parents of: (1) William Cavenagh (b. 1840), who became a banker; (2) Frank (most
likely Francis?) Cavenagh (b. 1842), who became a Plymouth Brethren missionary
on the Shetland Islands; (3) Edward Cavenagh (1844‐1931), who was a
businessman; (4) Malcolm Cavenagh (1845‐1922) of Dublin, Ireland, who was
trained as a farmer at Temple Moyle Seminary and later became an estate
manager for Nathaniel Hone in Dublin, Ireland, and (5) John Paul Cavenagh (1854‐
1931).
Malcolm Cavenagh (1845‐1922) married Emily Jane Reynolds (1844‐1927) of
London, England. Malcolm and Emily were parents of: (1) Emilie Susan Cavenagh
(1871‐1952) of Cork, Ireland, (2) Malcolm Cavenagh (1874‐1966), (3) Maude
Lavinia Cavenagh (1876‐?), (4) Frank Cavenagh (1878‐192?), (5) Robert Cavenagh
(1881‐195?), and (6) John Sidney Cavenagh (1885‐1912).
Emilie Susan Cavenagh (1871‐1952) married Robert Bruce Wallace

Emilie Susan Cavenagh (1871‐1952) married Robert Bruce Wallace (1870‐1929) of
Simcoe, Ontario, Canada. Robert and Emilie were parents of: (1) Winifred
Leonora Wallace (1901‐198?) who married William Barton (the science writer for
the Los Angeles Globe), (2) Helen Lucile Wallace (1902‐?) who married Herbert
Popenoe (a professor at the California Institute of Technology), and (3) Eryl Portia
Wallace (1909‐2009) who married Kendall Brooks Corbin of Oak Park, Illinois.

Ken, any news about your kindred – is BIG NEWS! They changed the world for better of worse!
 
Jon Presco

Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 4:12 PM, John Ambrose wrote:
Thanks Ken.
 
Jon Presco

From: Kendall & Susanne Corbin
To: braskewitz@yahoo.com
Sent: Sunday, April 8, 2012 8:47 AM
Subject: A small piece of the Cavenagh genealogy

I have attached a PDF file that contains a reworking of the information I have in my files.  It eliminates a lot of the redundancy that would have been in the files that my brother, Edwin, would have shown to you.

I hope this will be useful to you in your quest.

All best wishes.  Kendall 

Kendall W. Corbin, Ph.D.

Re: A small piece of the Cavenagh genealogy
TO: 1 More1 recipient
CC: recipientsYou More
BCC: recipientsYou
Show Details
FROM:
John Ambrose
TO:
Kendall & Susanne Corbin
Message flagged
Tuesday, April 10, 2012 1:10 PM

Bellett lived in Dublin and was a leader of the Plymouth Brethren. He wrote letters to John Darby, and your kindred, Francis Cavanagh, is mentioned in one of his letters. The Brethren launched the career of Tim LaHaye who has put in print over a hundred million books, and made many videos concerning the visions of the Plymouth Brethren. Francis was party to Bellett’s vision.
 
60 Minutes did a show on LaHaye and the evangelical influence on American poltics.
 
“Evangelicals have been on the cultural defensive. But they have waited in the wilderness. And now in the fullness of time, they have come into possession of what they felt was once rightfully theirs,” says Gomes.

“And so, with the White House, and Tom DeLay, and in the House of Representatives, the attorney general … talk radio, the conservative Fox News, all that sort of thing, these are parts of the righteous army that has finally come into its own.”

Gary Bauer, who once competed with George Bush for the Republican presidential nomination, now runs a Washington organization that lobbies for evangelical Christian issues. He remembers being at the Iowa Republican Presidential debate, when all candidates were asked which political philosopher they most identified with.

President Bush said: “Christ, because he changed my heart. When you accept Christ as a savior, it changes your heart. It changes your life.”
 
“Oct. 7. When I went into his room this morning, after he had held me in his arms for a few moments, he said, ‘Wondrous has been the thrust of Satan at me this night, and blessed the victory given, but it is as sure as you are my Letty.’ I asked what he referred to; but he said he could not tell me then.
“Soon after breakfast he called us to read; and he spoke a little about the verses 19 to 23 of St. Luke 7. He said that ‘John was weak in one point;’ he expected his prison doors to be opened as the eyes and ears of others were opened. He failed, as ‘every other steward has done, except the One in whom every promise is yea and amen.’ He then offered a short prayer, in which he mentioned the reality of the enemy’s fiery darts, and deliverance from them. Immediately after, he called my uncle and me to either side of the sofa-bed, and gave us the following account of what he had experienced: –
“‘Soon after Francis Cavenagh and I were left alone for the night, a mist seemed to come round me like the mist of hell, and one was sent to me. I thought I had known him before, he was clothed in white. He denied the truth of Scripture. I took the Word in my hand, and bolted one passage after another at him, but still he held his ground. “The moral glories of Scripture a lie!” I said; “they are as true as heaven and earth.” The temptation still continued; and I felt weak. But I cried to the Lord for help; and gradually I rose out of the mist into a calm atmosphere; and I was with my Evangelists again. But it was dreadful while it lasted, That is a plain, unvarnished tale.’
“My dear father told us afterwards that he would not but have gone through this exercise. No shadow seemed to remain upon his heart, and he said it had been a fresh link between his Lord and him.
“We asked Mr. Cavenagh if he perceived anything of it while he watched through the night; and he told us he had been conscious that my father was passing through some new exercise of heart, for he heard him repeating to himself, ‘What time I am afraid, I will trust in Thee,’ and other verses of the same character. He heard him also say, ‘The unassailable Scripture, a tower of beauty and strength.’ He thought it continued for some time; but my father did not seem to him much agitated, and lay quietly for some time after it had passed before he went to sleep.

http://pages.uoregon.edu/mgall/vita.htm

“Oct. 7. Evening. He asked for the servants to come up, as he wanted to pay what would shortly be due to them himself. As he gave each little parcel of money, he said that they had been ‘faithful,’ and asked if he had been ‘kind.’ While Uncle G. sat beside him, he spoke of a fall he once had from a pony in early days, and reminded him of a battle he had once fought for him at school, saying that ‘he was a cowardly fellow.’
“My uncle was obliged to leave us again for two days. On Oct. 8th Mr. Cavenagh watched him through the night with tender care, and my dear father warmly expressed his affection for him.”
I have now come to the last entry in the little journal.
“Oct. 10. He called me to him, and putting his arms round my neck, held me thus for a few moments. He then told me to ‘write,’ and gave directions about some business. I asked if Mary and I should read a few verses; he at once assented and said, ‘Read the close of Matthew 6.’ We did so; and he said a few words, partly prayer; they were a little confused, but there were some about ‘exchanging such a world as this, for Christ’s world.’
“He wished to see the servants again, to give them the little legacies left them by Aunt Alice. With entire clearness, and remembering exactly which little parcel was for each, he placed them in their hands, saying he had ‘wished to give them’ himself. Afterwards he lay for some time in a half-sleeping state; but about twelve o’clock a sad fit of coughing came on;. and he called us to prop him up, and open the window. Then, for about an hour, we watched him as he lay in a kind of faint. When he revived, his own dear look came back a little. He asked if he had been ‘sleeping,’ and then said, ‘Why don’t they all come and tell me they are satisfied?’ When we told him they were so; in the sweetest voice he asked, ‘And is the Lord satisfied?’ and when I said ‘Yes,’ he bent his head to rest it on my shoulder like a child, and he was ‘satisfied.’ He would take nothing all day but water now and then.
“Later on Dr. Walter and Mr. Cavenagh came, and remained with him. He held out his hand to each, and now and then looked round, as if wanting some one else. It was now an effort to him to speak, but he asked to be wheeled into his room, and Mr. Cavenagh tenderly lifted him into bed.
“The breathing was disturbed, but he did not appear to suffer much. Dr. Walter had to leave for a while, but he called after him, and said, with some effort, ‘Tell me, am I going on?’ Dr. Walter assured him that he was; and he was content.
“Mr. Cavenagh, Mary, and I, stood by the bed-side. The servants gathered round. Mrs. Cavenagh had asked if she might come in and look upon him once more; she and one of her sons were in the room. Beside these, there was one more present — our kind and faithful friend, Miss Ferrall.

“From time to time a few words were said, but we did not know whether he noticed them, except once when Mr. Cavenagh repeated the verse, ‘My times are in Thy hand,’ he lifted his right hand, and said clearly, ‘Amen.’ He looked, every now and then as before, as if expecting someone, and this was surely my dear uncle. He tried to say something more than once, but was unable, and the effort by degrees stopped. He looked round the bed at us more than once, calmly and steadily. Gradually the breathing began to cease, and in a few moments he was at rest; and he is ‘satisfied’ for ever.
“My dear uncle came the following morning to find his tenderly-loved brother gone. He was grieved indeed not to have been with him, for he would fain have ministered to him to the end, with that love that for sixty-seven years had never been disturbed by even a passing shadow; but he felt it was all God’s ordering, and he patiently submitted to it.”
Of the days that followed, I need not write. Each day brought fresh proofs of what the sorrow was to many hearts.
One and another came, and asked to see him once more; and each one saw the face they had loved, with its sweetest expression of happiness and rest.
Of all his friends in Dublin, none were willingly absent, and some came from a distance, when he was taken to his last resting-place in Harolds-Cross Cemetery, and there, by the hands of those only who loved him, he was laid by the side of my dear mother and Aunt Alice. The whole inscription on the headstone is given below, the beautiful verses which immediately follow my dear, father’s name being suggested by my uncle:
 

Tweaking the God Gene

The work of Dean Hamer, a geneticist at the National Cancer Institute, raises the prospect of genetically engineered mystics. Hamer claims to have found a gene associated with “self-transcendence” or “spirituality” in a group of 1,000 subjects who filled out surveys that probed their beliefs in God, ESP, and so on. Hamer calls this gene “the spiritual allele” or, even more dramatically, the “God gene”—which is also the title of the popular book in which he describes his research. Francis Collins, director of the Human Genome Project, has called Hamer’s claim “wildly overstated.”

Rick Strassman, a psychiatrist at the University of New Mexico, suggests focusing on genes associated with dimethyltryptamine, the only psychedelic known to occur naturally in the human brain. In his book DMT: The Spirit Molecule, Strassman presents evidence that endogenous DMT underpins mystical visions, psychotic hallucinations, alien-abduction experiences, near-death experiences, and other exotic cognitive phenomena.

Our natural mystical capacity, Strassman speculates, might be enhanced with genetic modifications that boost the production of DMT or of the enzymes that catalyze its effects. A clever, unscrupulous geneticist might even transform us all into mystics without our consent. “I can envision a situation where a cold virus is tinkered with to turn on our methylating enzymes,” Strassman says, “spreads around the world in a couple of years, and there you have it.”

Good Old Psychedelics

Psychedelic (or entheogenic, literally God-containing) compounds such as LSD and psilocybin represent by far the most mature mystical technology available. Legal research into the therapeutic and spiritual benefits of psychedelics collapsed in the late 1960s after the drugs were outlawed but is now undergoing a renaissance.

Reseachers at UCLA, the University of Arizona, Harvard, and other institutions are treating post-traumatic stress disorder, obsessive-compulsive disorder, and anxiety with psilocybin and MDMA (aka Ecstasy). Last year, a team at Johns Hopkins University reported that psilocybin had triggered profound spiritual experiences in two-thirds of a group of 36 subjects. “Psilocybin, the active ingredient of ‘magic mushrooms,’ expands the mind,” the Washington Post noted drily. “After a thousand years of use, that’s now scientifically official.”

Psychedelics still pose risks. Peyote triggers nausea, MDMA has been associated with neurotoxicity, and psilocybin caused panic attacks in some subjects in the Johns Hopkins study. Future research could identify regimens and compounds that yield greater benefits with fewer side effects. Independent chemist Alexander Shulgin has identified more than 200 psychotropic compounds that have potential as therapeutic and spiritual catalysts.

Our current mystical technologies are primitive, but one day, neurotheologians may find a technology that gives us permanent, blissful self-transcendence with no side effects. Should we really welcome such a development? Recall that in the 1950s and 1960s, the CIA funded research on psychedelics because of their potential as brainwashing agents and truth serums.

Even setting aside the issue of control, mystical technologies raise troubling philosophical issues. Shulgin, the psychedelic chemist, once wrote that a perfect mystical technology would bring about “the ultimate evolution, and perhaps the end of the human experiment.” When I asked Shulgin to elaborate, he said that if we achieve permanent mystical bliss, there would be “no motivation, no urge to change anything, no creativity.”

Both science and religion aim to eliminate suffering. But if a mystical technology makes us immune to anxiety, grief, and heartache, are we still fully human? Have we gained something or lost something? In short, would a truly effective mystical technology — a God machine that works — save us, or doom us?

RELATED ARTICLE: Neural Pathways to Enlightenment

http://www.newble.co.uk/writers/Bellett/biography.html

http://members.shaw.ca/larryarnett/heacock/heacock.htm

.      Rapture doctrine is one of the most recent “new doctrines” in the history of the Church. The only doctrine more recent is the invention of the sinner’s prayer for salvation by Billy Sunday in 1930, which was made popular by Billy Graham in 1935.
2.      The fact that John Nelson Darby invented the pre-tribulation rapture doctrine around 1830 AD is unquestionably true. All attempts to find evidence of this wild doctrine before 1830 have failed, with a single exception: Morgan Edwards wrote a short essay as a college paper for Bristol Baptist College in Bristol England in 1744 where he confused the second coming with the first resurrection of Revelation 20 and described a “pre-tribulation” rapture. However Edwards ideas, which he admitted were brand new and never before taught, had no influence in the modern population of the false doctrine. That prize to goes to Darby.
3.      Prior to 1830, no church taught it in their creed, catechism or statement of faith.
4.      Darby has had a profound impact on religion today, since Darby’s “secret rapture” false doctrine has infected most conservative, evangelical churches. While the official creeds and statements of faith of many churches either reject or are silent about Rapture, neither do they openly condemn this doctrine of a demon from the pulpit.
5.      While not all dispensationalists believe in the Rapture. All those who teach the Rapture also believe in premillennialism. Both groups use Israel’s modern statehood status of 1948 to be a beginning of a countdown to the end.
6.      All premillennialists, rapturists and dispensationalists alive today believe the Bible reveals the general era of when Christ will return. The date setters of the 1800’s (Seventh-day Adventists, Jehovah’s Witnesses) based their predictions upon speculative arrangements of numbers and chronologies in the Bible. Today’s date setters without exception wrongly believe that Israel gaining state hood in 1948 fulfilled Bible prophecy and that Christ would return within one generation.
7.      There are two kinds of premillennialists: Those “Date setters” and “Date Teasers”. “Date setters”, set specific dates which are in fact a countdown clock to the extinction of their own ministries. (William Miller, Charles Russell, Ronald Weinland, Harold Camping, etc.) “Date teasers”, share the same rhetoric of urgency that the “end is very soon”, but refuse to lock into a specific date. (Jack Van Impe, Hal Lindsay, Tim LaHaye, Pentecostals, Baptists, Grant Jefferies, Christadelphians.)
8.      Most of the TV preachers who promote rapture and/or “date set” all wrongly believe they are a prophet of God with special illumination. Pentecostals believe they are inspired directly from the Holy Spirit as modern day prophets. Baptists believe they are illuminated with guidance from the Holy Spirit through the Calvinist doctrine of Irresistible grace.

In early 1830, Margaret McDonald, a 15 year old Scottish Girl had visions that included a Secret Rapture of believers before the appearance of the Antichrist. Edward Irving (1792-1834) her Scottish Presbyterian pastor and forerunner of the Pentecostal and Charismatic movements, attended prophecy conferences that began in Dublin Ireland in that same year, 1830, at Powerscourt Castle. There he promoted the doctrine of the Secret Rapture.

John Nelson Darby (1800-1882), a minister of the Church of Ireland, later became a member of the Plymouth Brethren and also promoted a Secret Rapture after attending the same Powerscourt Bible Prophecy meeting in 1830 where he learned of Margaret McDonald’s vision. He visited Margaret McDonald at her home in Port Glasgow, Scotland, then later visited America several times where his Secret Rapture theology was quite well accepted.

The writings of John Darby greatly influenced Cyrus Scofield (1843-1921) who incorporated this doctrine in the notes of his Scofield Reference Bible, first published by Oxford University Press in 1909. One million copies were printed by 1930, firmly establishing this Futurist interpretation in the Bible schools and denominations of the United States in the 20th Century.

6 Frederick Wayne Wallace b. Sept. 8, 1907 d. March 16, 1991 m. Nov. 18, 1928 Mary Velma Leavelle b. March 11, 1911 d. Nov. 27, 1979

Share

Birthdate:
December 30, 1907
Death:
Died July 22, 1999

Managed by:
Kendall W. Corbin
Last Updated:
April 3, 2010

Evangelicals and Israel: Theological Roots of a Political Alliance

by Donald Wagner

Donald E. Wagner teaches at North Park University in Chicago. He is the author of Anxious for Armageddon (1995) and Dying in the Land of Promise: Palestine and Palestinian Christianity from Pentecost to 2000 (revised edition, 2003). This article appeared in The Christian Century, November 4, 1998, pp. 1020-1026. Copyright by The Christian Century Foundation; used by permission. Current articles and subscription information can be found at http://www.christiancentury.org. This article prepared for Religion Online by Ted & Winnie Brock.

——————————————————————————–

When Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu visited Washington this past January, his initial meeting was not with President Clinton but with Jerry Falwell and more than 1,000 fundamentalist Christians. The crowd saluted the prime minister as “the Ronald Reagan of Israel,” and Falwell pledged to contact more than 200,000 evangelical pastors, asking them to “tell President Clinton to refrain from putting pressure on Israel” to comply with the Oslo accords.

The meeting between Netanyahu and Falwell illustrates a remarkable political and theological convergence. The link between Israelis Likud government and the U.S. Religious Right was established by Natanyahu’s mentor, Menachem Begin, during the Carter and Reagan administrations. However, the roots of evangelical support for Israel lie in the long tradition of Christian thinking about the millennium.

In Luke’s account of the ascension, the disciples ask Jesus, “Lord, is this the time when you will restore the Kingdom to Israel?” The question illustrates the early church’s fascination with Israel and its prophetic role at the end of history–a fascination that continues to this day. Reflections on the end times draw on the Book of Daniel, Zechariah 9-14, Ezekiel 38-39 and various apocryphal books, as well as Matthew 24, the early Pauline letters (1 Thess. 4:16-17; 5:1-11) and the Book of Revelation.

An early version of Christian eschatology, called “historic premillennialism,” held that Jesus would return and establish his millennial kingdom after the world had been evangelized. However, by the 18th century another model of eschatology emerged in England that emphasized the role of a reconstituted Israel in the end times. This eschatology was rooted in three streams of British Christianity: the piety of English Puritanism; the view that Britain was the “new Israel,” a theme that dates back at least to the seventh century and the Venerable Bede; and a hermeneutic that interpreted biblical prophetic texts as having a literal, future fulfillment. Among the forerunners of this movement was Sir Henry Finch, a prominent lawyer and member of Parliament. In 1621, Finch wrote a treatise in which he called upon the British people and its government to support Jewish settlement in Palestine in order to fulfill biblical prophecy.

As the year 1800 approached, several premillennial theologies emerged as a result of the insecurity surrounding the American and French revolutions. Among them were various utopian movements and the Millerites (a group that later became Seventh-day Adventists). During this period John Nelson Darby (1800-82), a renegade Anglican priest from Ireland, popularized and systematized eschatological themes while simultaneously developing a new school of thought which has been called “futurist premillennialism.”

During 60 years of unceasing travel and preaching across the European continent and North America, Darby converted a generation of evangelical clergy and laity to his views. Darby held that biblical prophecies and much of scripture must be interpreted according to a literal and predictive hermeneutic. He believed that the true church will be removed from history through an event called the “rapture” (I Thess. 4:16-17; 5:1-11), and the nation Israel will be restored as God’s primary instrument in history.

According to Darby, Christians must interpret history in light of seven epochs or “dispensations,” each of which reflects a particular manner in which God deals with humanity. For example, we currently live under the dispensation of “Grace,” whereby people are judged according to their personal relationship with Jesus Christ. This hermeneutical method is called dispensationalism.

According to the dispensational model, a time of turmoil lies ahead, but believers will be “raptured” away before it begins. This period of tribulation will culminate in the final battle at Armageddon, a valley northwest of Jerusalem. As evangelical historian Timothy Weber points out, for premillennialists “the historical process is a never-ending battle between good and evil, whose course God has already conceded to the Devil.. . . History’s only hope lies in its own destruction.”

Through Darby’s influence, premillennial dispensationalism became a dominant method of biblical interpretation and influenced a generation of evangelical leaders, including Dwight L. Moody. Perhaps the most influential instrument of dispensational thinking was the Scofield Bible (1909) which included a commentary that interpreted prophetic texts according to a premillennial hermeneutic. Another early Darby disciple, William E. Blackstone, brought dispensationalism to millions of Americans through his best seller Jesus Is Coming (1882). Blackstone organized the first Zionist lobbying effort in the U.S. in 1891 when he enlisted J. P. Morgan, John D. Rockefeller, Charles B. Scribner and other financiers to underwrite a massive newspaper campaign requesting President Benjamin Harrison to support the establishment of a Jewish state in Palestine.

Similar efforts were under way in England, led by the social reformer Lord Shaftesbury, who, like Blackstone, was so taken with Darby’s eschatology that he translated it into a political agenda. These seeds of the Christian Zionist movement preceded Jewish Zionism by several years. Loni Shaftesbury is also credited with coining an early version of the slogan adopted by Jewish Zionist fathers Max Nordau and Theodor Herzl: “A land of no people for a people with no land.” Both Lord Arthur Balfour, author of the famous 1917 Balfour Declaration, and Prime Minister David Lloyd George, the two most powerful men in British foreign policy at the close of World War I, were raised in dispensationalist churches and were publicly committed to the Zionist agenda for “biblical” and colonialist reasons.

The establishment of Israel in 1948 gave dispensationalism new momentum. The restoration of a Jewish nation was taken as a sign that the clock of biblical prophecy was ticking and we were rapidly approaching the final events leading to the return of Jesus. During the cold war, dispensationalists readily interpreted the Soviet Union and its allies as the Antichrist. Passages such as Ezekiel 38-39 were read as predictions of an impending Soviet attack on Israel. A ten-member confederation–often interpreted as the European Union–was expected to join the Soviet Union in this attack.

When Israel captured Jerusalem in the 1967 war; dispensationalists were certain that the end was near. L. Nelson Bell, Billy Graham’s father-in-law and editor of Christianity Today, wrote in July 1967: “That for the first time in more than 2,000 years Jerusalem is now completely in the hands of the Jews gives the student of the Bible a thrill and a renewed faith in the accuracy and validity of the Bible.”

By the early 1970s numerous books, films and television specials publicized the premillennial dispensationalist perspective. Hal Lindsay made a virtual industry out of his book The Late Great Planet Earth: it sold more than 25 million copies and led to two films, as well as a consulting business with a clientele that has included several members of Congress, the Pentagon, and Ronald Reagan.

In the mid 1970s at least five trends converged that accelerated the rise of Christian Zionism. First, evangelical and charismatic movements became the fastest-growing branch of North American Christianity. Mainline Protestant denominations and the Roman Catholic Church were declining both in budgets and attendance.

The election of Jimmy Carter; a Southern Baptist Sunday school teacher; to the presidency in 1976 increased the visibility and legitimacy of the once-marginalized evangelical movement. Time magazine declared 1976 “the year of the evangelical.” Still, the mainstream media seemed confused by the various traditions and polarities within the complex evangelical movement, failing to distinguish between the diverse political and theological voices clamoring to claim the term “evangelical” for their particular viewpoint.

Israel’s occupation of Arab lands after 1967 created tension between many Jewish organizations and the mainline Protestant, Eastern Orthodox and Catholic communities. Many Jewish organizations, particularly lobbying groups such as the American Israel Political Affairs Committee (AIPAC), turned to the growing evangelical community for support. As Rabbi Marc Tanenbaum of the American Jewish Committee stated, “The evangelical community is the largest and fastest-growing bloc of pro-Jewish sentiment in this country.” AIPAC and the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) added staff to focus on relationships with evangelicals and fundamentalists. The Israeli ministry of tourism eyed evangelicals as a major new market for Holy Land tours and thus a source of revenue.

The fourth factor that stimulated the emerging evangelical Christian Zionist movement’s political agenda was the election of Menachem Begin as Israel’s prime minister in May 1977. Prior to Begin’s election, Israeli politics had been dominated by the secular Labor Party. Begin’s Likud Party was dominated by hard-line military figures such as Raphael Eitan and Ariel Sharon, and supported by the increasingly powerful settler movement and by small Orthodox religious parties. Likud constituencies used the biblical names “Judea and Samaria” for the West Bank and employed a religious argument to justify Israel’s confiscation of Arab land for settlements: since God gave the land exclusively to Jews, they have a divine right to settle anywhere in Eretz Israel. Evangelicals welcomed the Likud leaders and endorsed their political and religious agendas.

The final development that accelerated the alliance between Likud and the Religious Right was Carter’s March 1977 statement that he supported Palestinian human rights, including the “right to a homeland.” Likud, when it came to power just two months later; immediately reached out to Christian evangelicals. Likud’s strategy was simple: split evangelical and fundamentalist Christians from Carter’s political base and rally support among conservative Christians for Israel’s opposition to the United Nations’ proposed Middle East Peace Conference.

Within weeks, full-page advertisements appeared in major U.S. newspapers stating, “The time has come for evangelical Christians to affirm their belief in biblical prophecy and Israel’s divine right to the land.” Targeting Soviet involvement in the UN conference, the ad went on to say: “We affirm as evangelicals our belief in the promised land to the Jewish people . . . . We would view with grave concern any effort to carve out of the Jewish homeland another nation or political entity.”

The ad was financed and coordinated by Jerusalem’s Institute for Holy Land Studies, an evangelical organization with a Christian Zionist orientation. Several leading dispensationalists signed the ad, including Kenneth Kantzer of Christianity Today and Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, singer Pat Boone, and dispensationalist theologian and Dallas Theological Seminary president John Walvoord.

The advertising campaign was one of the first public signs of a Likud-evangelical alliance. A former employee of the American Jewish Committee, Jerry Strober, who had coordinated the campaign, made the political connection in a statement to Newsweek: “[The evangelicals] are Carter’s constituency and he [had] better listen to them… The real source of strength the Jews have in this country is from the evangelicals.”

At times the new alliance was uncomfortable for Jewish leaders. On one such occasion, the president of the Southern Baptist Convention, Bailey Smith, stated that “God does not hear the prayers of the Jews.” Within weeks, the AIC took Smith on a trip to Israel and corrected his views. While Christian Zionists and Jewish organizations agree on many points, the Christian Right’s enthusiasm for evangelizing Jews remains an unresolved point of tension.

Evangelicals, major Jewish organizations and the pro-Israel lobby supported Ronald Reagan in the 1980 election. Carter’s loss of the evangelical vote played a significant role in his defeat. Likud policy was aggressively represented by AIPAC both on Capitol Hill and within the Reagan administration. For example, when Israel decided to invade Lebanon in the spring of 1982, Begin sent Ariel Sharon, his defense minister, to Washington to enlist the Reagan administration’s support. By late May, Sharon was reportedly given the green light by Secretary of State Alexander Haig. Within days of the June invasion, full-page ads appeared in leading newspapers requesting evangelical support for the invasion.

Begin developed a unique relationship with Reagan and many fundamentalist leaders, especially Jerry Falwell. Falwell and his Moral Majority had long supported Israel. In 1979, Grace Halsell reports, Israel gave Falwell a Lear jet and in 1981 gave him the prestigious Jabotinsky Award during an elaborate dinner ceremony in New York. When Israel bombed Iraq’s nuclear plant in 1981, Begin called Falwell before he called Reagan. He requested that Falwell “explain to the Christian public the reasons for the bombing.”

In March 1985, while speaking to the conservative Rabbinical Assembly in Miami, FaIwell pledged to “mobilize 70 million conservative Christians for Israel and against anti-Semitism.” He also takes credit for converting Senator Jesse Helms (R., N.C.) into one of Israel’s staunchest allies. Helms soon became chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

The Reagan administration regularly conducted briefings and seminars for its Christian Right supporters, briefings in which the pro-Likud lobby (Americans for a Safe Israel and AIPAC) participated. Among the approximately 150 Christian fundamentalist leaders invited to each event were Hal Lindsay, Jimmy Swaggart, Jim and Tammy Bakker; Pat Robertson and Tim and Bev LeHaye.

Reagan himself was a committed Christian Zionist. His support for Israel derived from both strategic political concerns and a vague dispensationalist perspective. He told Tom Dine, AIPAC’s executive director; “I turn back to your ancient prophets in the Old Testament and the signs foretelling Armageddon, and I find myself wondering if we re the generation that is going to see that come about.” The remark was published by the Jerusalem Post and widely distributed by the Associated Press.

Netanyahu’s 1996 defeat of Shimon Peres brought Likud back to power. During his years as Israel’s representative at the UN, Netanyahu spoke regularly on the Christian Bight’s “Prayer Breakfast for Israel” circuit and similar venues. Within a few months of his election, in conjunction with the Israeli ministry on tourism, he convened the Israel Christian Advocacy Council. Seventeen American evangelical and fundamentalist leaders were flown to Israel for a tour of the Holy Land and a conference at which they pledged support for what was essentially a Likud agenda. Included in the delegation were Don Argue, president of the National Association of Evangelicals; Brandt Gustavson, president of the National Religious Broadcasters (an organization that oversees approximately 90 percent of Christian radio and television broadcasting in North America); and Donald Wildmon, president of the American Family Association. The evangelical leaders signed a pledge expressing the hope that “America never; never desert Israel.”

Several members of the Advisory Council backed the pro-Israel advertisement in the April 10, 1997, New York Times. Titled “Christians Call for a United Jerusalem,” the ad may have been a direct response to a December 1996 Times ad sponsored by Churches for Middle East Peace, calling for a “Shared Jerusalem.”

The Christian Zionist ad claimed that its signatories reach more than 100,000 Christians weekly and called for evangelicals to support the Likud position on Jewish sovereignty over Jerusalem. Using several familiar dispensationalist themes, the ad claimed: “Jerusalem has been the spiritual and political capital of only the Jewish people for 3,000 years.” Citing Genesis 12:17, Leviticus 26:44-45 and Deuteronomy 7:7-8, it spoke of Israel’s biblical claim to the land. The ad was signed by Pat Robertson of the Christian Broadcasting Network; Ralph Reed, then director of the Christian Coalition; Ed McAteer of the Religious Roundtable; and Falwell, among others. Voicing one of Netanyahu’s themes, the ad asked that Israel “not be pressured to concede on issues of Jerusalem in the final status negotiations with the Palestinians.”

Likud also turned to evangelical and fundamentalist Christians to offset the decline in contributions for Israel from the American Jewish community. In response to the increasing power of the Orthodox parties in Netanyahu’s government and the second-class status these parties assigned to non-Orthodox Jews, Reformed and Conservative Jewish communities cut back their usual generous contributions to the Jewish National Fund and other agencies in the U.S. that support Israel. But the International Fellowship of Christians and Jews, led by Rabbi Yechiel Eckstein of Chicago, raised more than $5 million for the United Jewish Appeal, almost all of it from evangelicals and fundamentalists.

In a separate initiative, John Hagee, pastor of the Cornerstone Church in San Antonio, Texas, and a signer of the Christians for a United Jerusalem Statement, announced in February of this year that his church was giving more than $1 million to Israel. He claimed that the money would be used to help resettle Jews from the former Soviet Union in the West Bank and Jerusalem. “We feel like the coming of Soviet Jews to Israel is a fulfillment of biblical prophecy,” Hagee stated. When asked if he realized that his support of Israel’s Likud policies was at cross-purposes with U.S. government policy and possibly illegal, Hagee retorted: “I am a Bible scholar and a theologian and from my perspective, the law of God transcends the law of the United States government and the U.S. State Department.”

While the U.S. and European governments in 1997 were pressing Netanyahu to negotiate with the Palestinians, the prime minister’s public relations specialists developed another strategy involving the cooperation of Christian Zionist organizations in Jerusalem. The initial phase of this strategy was launched in an October 22, 1997, report on Israeli Radio (Kol Israel) News, a report claiming that the Palestinian National Authority (PA) was persecuting Christians.

Two days later the Jerusalem Post published an article charging that, according to a new Israeli government report, “the few Christians remaining in PA-controlled areas are subjected to brutal and relentless persecution.” The report alleged that “‘Christian cemeteries have been destroyed, monasteries have had their telephone lines cut, and there have been break-ins to convents.'” Moreover; the Palestinian Authority “has taken control of the churches and is pressuring Christian leaders to serve as mouthpieces for Yasser Arafat and opponents of Israel”

A month later; Congressman J. C. Watts (R., Okla.) reiterated these charges in the Washington Times, blaming Arafat and the PA for the Christian exodus from the Holy Land and calling into question the $307 million in grants the U.S. has given the PA.

Palestinian Christian leaders were quick to respond. Said Bethlehem mayor Hanna Nasser, a Christian: “Our churches have complete freedom, and I’ve never heard that they’ve been under pressure.” Mitri Raheb, pastor of Bethlehem’s Lutheran church, challenged the Israeli report as pure propaganda. He noted that while Bethlehem was under Israeli occupation, his house had been robbed and his car stolen twice; but “there have been no robberies since the Palestinian Authority has taken over. On the contrary, there is a greater sense of security now than there was under occupation.”

Last May, Evangelicals for Middle East Understanding and Open Doors International sent a 14-member team to the Holy Land to investigate the allegations of persecution. The delegation interviewed more than 60 spokespersons in Israel and the Palestinian territories, including a number of Christian leaders; Uri Mor, director of the Israeli Ministry of Religious Affairs in the Department of Christian Communities; and several Christian Zionist leaders.

The delegation concluded that though there were isolated incidents of discrimination and increased tension between Christian and Muslim communities in certain areas, there were no cases that could be characterized as persecution in the territories under the Palestinian Authority. Four converts from Islam to Christianity had experienced pressure from their families and communities. One or two who had criminal backgrounds had been pressured by the PA. But in neither case could the context and reasons for the pressure be construed as persecution. Furthermore, though some Christian Palestinians are concerned that if Islamic law (Shari’a) becomes the law of the Palestinian areas, the religious freedom of Christians maybe restricted in the future, no evidence of this development is present.

The investigative team found “disturbing indications of political motivations behind [the] recent publicity about Christian persecution.” The team learned that a Christian Zionist group, the International Christian Embassy–Jerusalem, had cooperated with the office of David Bar-llan, Netanyahu’s chief spokesman, in exaggerating accounts of Christian persecution and circulating them to the international press. A staff member of the U. S. consulate in Jerusalem interviewed Mor; the Israeli religious affairs official, who stated that the report was intended to be an internal document, but Bar-llan’s office leaked it to the Christian and secular media.

Asked why the prime minister’s office would do such a thing, Mor noted that Bar-llan uses such information as his “bread and butter” in the Israeli propaganda war against the PA. Clearly, there was no attempt by either the Israeli government or the Christian Embassy to note the criminal status of some claiming to be persecuted, or to distinguish between persecution and understandable pressure from families or communities opposing a member’s conversion to another faith.

It is true that Palestinian Christians are leaving the Holy Land. But it is not because of Muslim persecution. They are leaving because of the brutality of Israeli occupation and because Israel’s resistance to negotiating a just peace with the Palestinians makes them despair about the future.

At this juncture, it appears that the hardline Likud position has the backing of both houses of Congress, the major Jewish lobbies, and the Christian Right. President Clinton and those who advocate the Israeli Labor Party peace formula, or the Oslo Accords, have little leverage with Likud. Palestinian Christians and their supporters fear that the Christian Right’s alliance with Likud may in the end serve as a self-fulfilling prophecy, heightening tensions in the region and leading to a new round of conflict in the Holy Land, which the Christian Zionists will readily interpret as “the final battle.”

ID: I4351
Name: Robert Bruce Wallace
Given Name: Robert Bruce
Surname: Wallace
Sex: M
Birth: 30 Aug 1870 in Windham Township, Norfolk Co. ONT CAN
Death: Aft 1920 in Pasadena, Los Angeles Co. CA
Change Date: 30 Nov 2008 at 09:54
Note:

1881 CAN ON>Norfolk North>Windham David B. Wallace 34 ON, Sarah C. 37 ON, Ethelda M. 11 ON, Robert B. 10 ON, Mabel R. 4 ON, Maggie 2 ON, Grace 1 ON, John A. ON, Robert Jones 30 ON labor, Charlotte Tate 38 ON

Marion Grace Wallace, Date of Birth: 7 Jul 1899, Gender: Female, Birth County: York, Father’s name: R Bruce Wallace, Mother’s name: Emelie S Cavenagh

d. 7/30/1899 of meningitis Toronto CAN

1910 CA>Los Angeles>Los Angeles Assembly District 71 Robert B. Wallace 39 CAN [imigrated 1901] oil business auditor, Emilie S. 37 IRE, Winnifred [Leonara] 9 CA, [Helen] Lucile 7 CA, [Ervol] Portia 5 mos CA, Elizabeth Stogdill 15 CAN nurse

1920 CA>Los Angeles>Pasadena Robert B. Wallace 49 CAN oil company accountant, Emelie S. 48 IRE, Winnifred 18 CA, Lucile 17 CA, Portia 10 CA

1930 CA>Los Angeles>Pasadena Emelie Wallace 59 IRE widow, Portia 21 CA

marriage information listed Robert Bruce Wallace as a merchant

Robert was deceased before his father David died 3/6/1930.

Ancestry Hints for Robert Bruce Wallace

    4 possible matches found on Ancestry.com

Father: David Bruce Wallace b: 26 Dec 1846 in Townsend Township, Norfolk Co. ONT
Mother: Sarah Catherine Jones b: 4 Sep 1843 in Beverly Township, Wentworth Co. ONT CAN

Marriage 1 Emilie Susan Cavenagh b: 7 Jul 1871 in Ireland
Married: 13 Feb 1896 in Toronto, York Co. ONT CAN
Change Date: 30 Nov 2008

ID: I9170
Name: Emilie Susan Cavenagh
Given Name: Emilie Susan
Surname: Cavenagh
Sex: F
Birth: 7 Jul 1871 in Ireland
Death: 19 Apr 1952 in Pasadena, Los Angeles Co. CA
Change Date: 30 Nov 2008 at 09:53
Note:

birth/death date CA Death Index

Ancestry Hints for Emilie Susan Cavenagh

    4 possible matches found on Ancestry.com

Marriage 1 Robert Bruce Wallace b: 30 Aug 1870 in Windham Township, Norfolk Co. ONT CAN
Married: 13 Feb 1896 in Toronto, York Co. ONT CAN
Change Date: 30 Nov 2008

ID: I4305
Name: David Bruce Wallace
Given Name: David Bruce
Surname: Wallace
Sex: M
Birth: 26 Dec 1846 in Townsend Township, Norfolk Co. ONT
Death: 6 Mar 1930 in Windham Township, Norfolk Co. ONT CAN
Burial: Oakwood Cemetery, Simcoe, Charlottesville Twp., Norfolk Co. ONT CAN
Change Date: 19 Sep 2007 at 10:42
Note:

death reg. # 167-026175, of myocarditis, complication prostate and liver cancer, retired merchant; stationery and book store, informant J. [John] Alex [Alexander] Wallace son, bur. Oakwood Cemetery

St. Thomas Times-Journal
St. Thomas, Ontario, Canada

14 March 1930

Page 6 c3 Died – David Bruce Wallace, 84th year (born Bloomsfield, Norfolk County), son of late Alexander Wallace & Sarah Ann Culver, husband of late Sarah C. Jones (married about 1867). Buried Oakwood cemetery, Simcoe. A daughter, Mrs. C. H. Emerson & a son, Robert Bruce Wallace, died previously

Marriage 1 Sarah Catherine Jones b: 4 Sep 1843 in Beverly Township, Wentworth Co. ONT CAN
Married: 8 Aug 1868 in Bloomsburg, Townsend Township, Norfolk Co. ONT CAN
Change Date: 3 Aug 2007
Children
1. Ethelda May “Ethel” Wallace b: 7 May 1869 in Windham Township, Norfolk Co. ONT CAN
2. Robert Bruce Wallace b: 30 Aug 1870 in Windham Township, Norfolk Co. ONT CAN
3. Mabel Ruth Wallace b: 3 Jan 1877 in Windham Township, Norfolk Co. ONT CAN
4. Margaret Lazelle Wallace b: 23 Aug 1878 in Windham Township, Norfolk Co. ONT CAN
5. Emma Wallace b: 23 Aug 1878 in Windham Township, Norfolk Co. ONT CAN
6. Grace Kneal Wallace b: 16 Nov 1879 in Windham Township, Norfolk Co. ONT CAN
7. John Alexander Wallace b: 3 Apr 1881 in Windham Township, Norfolk Co. ONT CAN
8. Sarah Muriel Wallace b: 30 Mar 1884 in Windham Township, Norfolk Co. ONT CAN
http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=gr&GRid=11061451

Birth: 
1909
Death: 
2009

Portia died Wednesday, January 7, 2009, following a brief illness, at Charter House, her home for the past 24 years.

She was born March 30, 1909, in Los Angeles, and spent her childhood years in Sierra Madre, California. After graduating from Pasadena High School in 1927, she earned degrees in childhood education from Occidental College in 1929 and the Froebel League School in Childhood Education in New York City in 1930. In 1931 she earned a degree in primary education from Broad Oaks School, Whittier College. In 1931, after teaching kindergarten in Phoenix, Ariz., she and her sister, Lucile, founded a nursery school, the “House at Pooh Corner,” in Palo Alto, Calif.

On Jan. 2, 1932, she married Kendall Brooks Corbin in Carmel, Calif. The couple moved to Rochester in 1946, where her husband entered clinical practice as a consultant in neurology at Mayo Clinic.

During the next nine years, Mrs. Corbin was affiliated with Aldrich Memorial Nursery School in Rochester, first as a board member and later as vice president and president. A second major activity was her long-term involvement with the Rochester Art Center, on whose board she served for nine years, and was its president in 1969 and 1970.

She was survived by two sons, Kendall Wallace (Susanne) Corbin of Eagan, Minn., and Edwin Malcolm Corbin of Eugene, Ore.; five grandsons, Kendall Bruce Corbin and Ian Andrew Corbin (and their mother, Jane Hammond Corbin) of Minneapolis, and Cosmos, Freeman and Eden (and their mother, Kathryn Corbin Parker) of Eugene; three great-grandchildren, Marcus, Sylvia Fay and Griffin Corbin; and a niece, Joan Popenoe. She was preceded in death by her husband on July 22, 1999; her parents, Emilie Susan (Cavenagh) Wallace and Robert Bruce Wallace; two sisters, Winifred (Barton) and Helen Lucile (Popenoe); a niece, Sydney Barton (Robinson); and a nephew, Frank Popenoe. 
 
Burial:
Greenwood Cemetery
La Pointe
Ashland County
Wisconsin, USA

Robert I (11 July 1274 – 7 June 1329), popularly known as Robert the Bruce (Medieval Gaelic: Roibert a Briuis; modern Scottish Gaelic: Raibeart Bruis; Norman French: Robert de Brus or Robert de Bruys), was King of Scots from 25 March 1306, until his death in 1329.
His paternal ancestors were of Scoto-Norman heritage (originating in Brix, Manche, Normandy), and his maternal of Franco-Gaelic.[3] He became one of Scotland’s greatest kings, as well as one of the most famous warriors of his generation, eventually leading Scotland during the Wars of Scottish Independence against the Kingdom of England. He claimed the Scottish throne as a fourth great-grandson of David I, and fought successfully during his reign to regain Scotland’s place as an independent nation. Today in Scotland, Bruce is remembered as a national hero
http://www.fayewest.ca/peterjones/p422.htm

Eryl Portia Wallace1
ID# 422, (1909-2009)
Eryl Portia Wallace|b. 30 Mar 1909\nd. 7 Jan 2009|p422.htm|Robert Bruce Wallace|b. 30 Aug 1870\nd. 7 Nov 1929|p405.htm|Emilie S. Cavanagh|b. 1870\nd. 1952|p406.htm|David B. Wallace|b. 26 Dec 1846\nd. 5 Mar 1930|p380.htm|Sarah C. Jones|b. 4 Sep 1843\nd. 11 May 1922|p378.htm|||||||
Charts
Descendants of Peter Jones (1801-1875)
     Eryl Portia Wallace was born on 30 March 1909.1 She was the daughter of Robert Bruce Wallace and Emilie S. Cavanagh.1 She married Kendall Brooks Corbin.1 She died on 7 January 2009 at age 99.2

Last Edited=21 Aug 2010
Children of Eryl Portia Wallace and Kendall Brooks Corbin
Kendall Wallace Corbin+1
Edwin Malcolm Corbin1
Citations
1. [S4] Donald Jones, 2006.
2. [S3] Ian Corbin, “Another Loyalist Family – Joan Hammond,” e-mail to Faye West, 20 Jan 2009.

Edwin Malcolm Corbin1
ID# 429
Edwin Malcolm Corbin||p429.htm|Kendall Brooks Corbin||p424.htm|Eryl Portia Wallace|b. 30 Mar 1909\nd. 7 Jan 2009|p422.htm|||||||Robert B. Wallace|b. 30 Aug 1870\nd. 7 Nov 1929|p405.htm|Emilie S. Cavanagh|b. 1870\nd. 1952|p406.htm|
Charts
Descendants of Peter Jones (1801-1875)
     Edwin Malcolm Corbin is the son of Kendall Brooks Corbin and Eryl Portia Wallace.1

Last Edited=22 Mar 2006
Citations

A brief history of the Clann Chaomhánach
 

 
The outstanding historical leaders of our illustrious Clan are, in chronological order, Diarmaid Mac Maol na mB?(early 1000s ?1072), Diarmaid McMurrough (MacMurchadha) (1110 ?1171), his son Domhnall (1128 ?1175), Art Óg McMurrough Caomhánach (1357 – 1417) and Domhnall Spáinneach Caomhánach (1550 – 1632).
The stronghold of the U?Cheinnsealaigh (Hy Kinsella) Clan which subsequently adopted the Caomhánach name was in South East Leinster, encompassing the modern counties of Wexford and Carlow, with parts of Counties Wicklow, Kilkenny and Laois.

The U?Cheinnsealaigh initially rose to power in Leinster under a chieftain called Diarmaid Mac Maol na mB?who became king of Leinster and also of Viking Dublin, in 1032. He subsequently ruled over the Isle of Man and exercised influence in Western Scotland and Wales, as well as assisting the future King Harold of England. Subsequent to Harold’s defeat by the Norman William the Conqueror his sons fled for help to Mac Maol namB? He was the most powerful King in Ireland of his time up until his death in battle in 1072.

Following Mac Maol na mBó’s death, the U?Cheinnsealaigh were embroiled in various conflicts involving the quest for overall power in Ireland initially by the by the O’Briens and subsequently by the O’Connors.
Mac Maol na mBó’s greatgrandson, Diarmaid McMurrough (1110 ?1171; see separate article under ‘Origin’ on Home Page) was no sooner elected chieftain of the clan at 16 years of age in 1126, than his territory was invaded and ravaged by the power-hungry O’Connor clan of Connacht together with the malevolent Tiarnan O’Ruairc, King of Breffni, who was thereafter Diarmaid’s bitter enemy. Some years later these enemies decided to destroy him and Diarmaid was forced to seek assistance from overseas in 1166.
Diarmaid hired Norman-Welsh mercenaries, under a leader known as Strongbow, Earl of Strigoil (and Pembroke). Strongbow was offered the hand of Diarmaid’s daughter Aoife and Diarmaid further promised the mercenaries territory in South Wexford, which belonged partly to the Norse and partly to an Irish clan which had betrayed him earlier.
The main body of these mercenaries arrived in 1169, and having recovered his ancestral territory with their assistance, Diarmaid was about to expand his conquests, probably with a view to replacing O’Connor as High King, when he was struck down by a mortal illness in 1171.
Following the death of Diarmaid McMurrough (MacMurchadha) the Norman barons began to strike out and seize Irish territories for themselves, whereupon the Norman King Henry II came over with a major army principally to ensure that his barons did not carve out an independent Norman kingdom.

Diarmaid’s son Domhnall succeeded him as elected King of Leinster, but he was assassinated at the behest of the Normans in 1175 as he was organizing resistance against them.  
Domhnall’s successors were recognized as the leading family in Leinster by the other Irish clans and continued to claim the Kingship of Leinster right up to the beginning of the 17 th century. However, their ancestral territories were under continual threat, initially from Norman, and later English, settler aggression. Preserving their hold on their birthright meant a struggle for survival over the succeeding centuries with varying degrees of success against a ruthless enemy who used every means possible, including regular resort to murder, in order to seize Caomhánach ancestral territory.
Art Óg Caomhánach (1357 – 1417) succeeded his father Art Mór (who died mysteriously in English custody) in 1377 and began a series of campaigns which enabled him to recapture Caomhánach ancestral territory which had been lost.
King Richard II of England, attempting to restore his control over the Caomhánachs and other Irish Clans, landed with one of the largest armies ever seen in Ireland at Waterford City in 1394.

After an initial display of defiance, including the burning of New Ross, Art Óg decided that a token submission was wisest path. King Richard returned to England a few months later. The Caomhánachs, however, immediately went on the offensive again, killing Roger Mortimer, the heir to the English throne at the Battle of Kellistown, Co.Carlow in 1398. A furious Richard II assembled another huge army and returned to Ireland in 1399, with the avowed intention of finally eliminating Art.

Art Óg, recognizing that his advantage lay in carrying on a campaign of guerilla tactics, devastated Richard’s army as he endeavoured to pursue the rebel Irish army into its natural fastness. This famous victory has become the stuff of Irish legend.

Art Óg now held complete sway over the U?Cheinnsealaigh territory, which he further enlarged, through which none travelled without his permission.

Finally, on January 1st, 1417 the great Art Óg was assassinated, allegedly with a cup of poisoned wine
Upon Art Óg’s death, his son Domhnall received the Carlow lands west of the Blackstairs mountain range, while his other son Gerald received the lands in Wexford, east of the mountains. The descendants of Gerald’s son, Domhnall Reagh, became the senior ruling line of the Caomhánach Clan. Domhnall Reagh’s son, Art Bui, and grandson Murtagh, succeeded in maintaining the Clan’s independence despite continuing settler encroachment.
 

The Kavanagh Charter Horn
This ceremonial drinking horn is one of only a handful of surviving relics that can be linked personally to an Irish king. The Horn dates from the early 12th century. Originally constructed from elephant ivory the brass mountings were added much later in the 15th century. Passed down through the MacMorrough Kavanagh line it now rests in the National Museum of Ireland.
 

The Chieftainship of the Clan continued in the senior line through the descendants of Domhnall Reagh. The protection of Clan lands was only achieved at the expense of continuous warfare, with Cahir Carach Caomhánach being killed in 1538 and his son Donnchadh executed in 1583. Donnchadh’s son, the famous Domhnall Spáinneach, was regularly in rebellion and was an ally of the Great Hugh O’Neill during the Nine Years War (1594 -1603). Though Domhnall was finally forced to come to terms with the English administration after the Battle of Kinsale in 1601, he retained a substantial part of his lands and was feared by the settler foes up until his death of old age in 1632.

The defeat at Kinsale, however, signalled the final destruction of the old Gaelic clan system.
Domhnall Spáinneach’s son, Sir Morgan, continued the fight for his ancestral territory as a leader in the 1641 Rebellion during the course of which he was slain in battle in1643. Sir Morgan’s sons, Domhnall Óg and Charles, continued the fight with their father’s regiment for the Catholic Confederacy until the rebellion was finally crushed by the armies of Oliver Cromwell in the early 1650s.

After a period of imprisonment, Domhnall Óg chose to go into exile to join the Spanish army, while his brother Charles remained on in Ireland in the hope of fighting another day. This opportunity came when Col. Charles raised a regiment for the Jacobite cause in 1689 but, following the defeat of the Jacobite cause, he was killed in an accidental explosion aboard a prison ship off Kinsale in 1691.

This effectively marked the end of the ancient Caomhánach leadership in Leinster. Subsequent Caomhánach military achievements were chiefly in exile in the service of the armies of Austria, France, Poland, Germany, and the Americas.

Those of the Clan who managed to remain in Ireland ended up as tenants of alien landlords for the most part.

http://www.kavanaghfamily.com/

 

 
The surname Kavanagh or Cavanaugh and the other variants of the name are derived from the adjectival Irish Gaelic name Caomhánach. This was the name applied to Domhnall, eldest son of the 12th century King of Leinster Diarmait mac Murchada (Dermot MacMurrough).
Domhnall was fostered, according to Irish custom, by the family attached to the monastery of St. Caomhan at Kilcavan in the Barony of Gorey, County Wexford. He thus became known as Caomhánach. His brother Eanna became known as Eanna Ceinnsealach, also an adjectival name derived from the Clan and its territory. Eanna became the progenitor of the Kinsella Clan.
The word Caomh signifies “gentle” or “comely” in Gaelic.
As an incentive to the Norman commander Richard de Clere, Earl of Strigoil (and previously Earl of Pembroke, a title which Henry II had deprived him of) Diarmaid McMurrough had given him his daughter Aoife in marriage. De Clere was commonly known as “Strongbow”
Despite the fact that under Irish (Brehon) law, the Kingship could not be passed on this manner via marriage, Strongbow subsequently used this marriage to attempt to establish a claim on the kingship of Leinster, following the death of King Dermot MacMurrough in 1171AD.
However the Irish chiefs adhered to the traditional Gaelic legal system and Domhnall Caomhanach was subsequently elected as King.
While the exact place and manner of Domhnall’s death is unclear, the general opinion of historians is that he was assassinated at the behest of the Normans as he was drumming up support for war against them.

In chief a lion passant, in base two crescents, surrounded by the words “Clann Chaomhánach” with the word ‘Clann’ over the lion and the word ‘Chaomhánach’ beneath the crescents, all in red on a silver background.
The lion represents courage and protection. The crescents represent two sickle type implements and signify abundance, giving rise to a 15th century personalised and individual family motto of ‘Peace and Plenty’. Other family mottoes were put together at this time and at later dates.
It is important to note that a coat of arms does not belong to a family or Clann – technically a coat of arms is granted to an individual, therefore there are many coats of arms associated with the Kavanagh / Cavanaugh family.
The design depicted above is generally referred to as the “Clann Coat of Arms” or “Clann Arms” but in fact, it is more appropriate to think of it as a corporate logo.

A religious cult has taken control of our Congress, and is attracting the votes of Orthodox Jews. Tonight I will be having dinner with my good friend, Mark Gall, who is a Jew. I used to take Mark’s mother to synagogue when she lived in Eugene. I may be the only Gentile at this dinner. Mark is in the bottom photo sitting next to our good friend, Ed Corbin, who married a Jew who was married to a member of the Rockefeller family. Ed and Mark attended Harvard at the same time, along with Tom Jones who was married to a Schlumberger. Ed’s ancestors on his mother’s side were important members of the Plymouth Brethren who gave birth the Evangelical cult who want to control the world.
Ed’s father suspected his daughter-in-law was a Cohen. If true, this would make Ed’s three sons, descendants of the priests of Israel. We are attending the showing of Cosmos Corbin’s film at the Hult Center with Bohemian types, some who were the Corbin’s homestead neighbors.
The Plymouth Brethren, John Darby & Francis Cavenagh
Three years ago I found the genealogy of Edward Corbin, the son of
Dr. Randal B. Corbin the head of the Mayo clinic. It was lying in a
decrepit box I had pulled from his storage room I was helping my
friend organize. Ed’s mother had sent it to him after his father
died. Ed’s mother’s maiden name was Wallace, she a descendant of this
famous and rebellious Scotsman.
As I glanced at it the name Plymouth Brethren caught my eye.
Engrossed I was reading about the Cavenagh family who were original
members of the Plymouth Brethren. This information was compiled by
Francis Cavenagh. I asked Ed if he knew what he had here? Being an
atheist he paid no attention to my excitement as I explained how
important this document was in regards to the founding of the
evangelical religion – and establishing a evangelical hegemony!
I told him Tim Lahaye was looking for all lost material on Plymouth
Brethren, and thus this might be a very valuable religious document –
especially when you know the evangelical took control of the
Congress, Senate, and White House. This is equivalent to a lost
Vatican document, a genealogy pf the founders of the Catholic church.
I told Ed;
“The Davinci Code is fiction, this is the real thing!”
I then tried to explain to him because his ex-wife was a Cohen, then
Ed’s three sons – who are Jewish – are candidates to serve in the
third temple the evangelicals say the Jews must rebuild so the
Rapture and End Times can take place. This is the teaching of John
Darby who was a Plymouth Brethren, and a good friend of John G.
Bellet.
When I got home I googled Cavanagh and Darby, and found a letter John
Darby addressed “My dear F Cavenagh,” I called up my good friend of
many years and told him about this letter Darby wrote that could make
his genealogy very valuable. Ed knew the nature of the book I was
authoring, that I claimed was “The real Davinci Code”. I asked him if
I could used this genealogy in my novel, and he said yes. Three days
later when I went to his house he said he could not find the
genealogy. I insisted he make a good search of his home – fearing he
might have thrown it out. When I returned several days later he told
me he may have given it one of his kids, or his ex-wife, Catrine. –
who as fate would have re-married a man who comes from a lineage of
Plymouth Brethren.
Today, October 27, 2007, I came upon my blog that discussed this
genealogy that was posted, and re-googled F. Cavenagh, and found gold
when this incredible information was revealed. Francis Cavenagh and
her husband were very close to J.B. Bellet and his niece who complied
the letters of her uncle, who tells of an incident he had just before
his death. Apparently Bellet had a vision of Satan with Francis
Cavenagh in the room;

http://peebs.net/tag/plymouth-brethren/

We have come into possession of a remarkable audio recording. It is a sound file dating from 2 or 3 years ago and is the complete recording of an Exclusive Brethren ‘Breaking of Bread’. You will find it at the end of this article.
It is remarkable for several reasons, not least of which is that this is today,  the cult’s most secret event – nobody is invited to attend this weekly 6am Sunday service unless they are a fully-established and credentialed member of the Exclusive Brethren.
It was not always so…
The Exclusive Brethren have changed radically from their early beginnings in Dublin, Ireland. The origins of the Plymouth Brethren are closely linked with one important spiritual event: Communion or, more coloquially known as ‘The Breaking of Bread’ or the ‘Lords Supper’.
Historically this was a simple service: here is an extract from a 19th century description of the weekly event. One fascinating observation is that in those days visitors were welcome to attend. There was even a place for them …
An extract from Unorthodox London (1874)
The Brethren have three principal places of meeting
in London, and to one of these, the Priory, 198,
Upper Street, Islington, I adjourned on a Sunday
morning at eleven o’clock, armed with a few of
the particulars above stated, and prepared to wit-
ness and report their exposition in public worship.
The room, which is a moderate-sized school, was filled
with a congregation of evident habitués, a very small
portion at the back being railed off “for those not in
communion.”
The service consisted principally of the
singing of a large number of hymns, without instru-
mental accompaniment of any kind, and the reading
of Scripture. There is nothing in the shape of pulpit
or reading-desk, nor any person occupying the posi-
tion of minister or president. There was, I suppose,
some preconcerted arrangement as to who should read,
pray, or give, out the hymn; but, to an outsider, it
appeared that any of the Brethren took part without
premeditation. Between each portion of the service
there was a long pause of several minutes, during
which the congregation sat with eyes closed, seemingly
engaged in private prayer.
The special object of the morning assembly was
“the breaking of bread.” This was done in the
most homely manner possible. A loaf of home—made
bread was placed, in common plates, on a table in the
centre of the room, divided into quarters, and passed
round the benches; each member helped himself or
herself to a portion, literally “breaking” it off the
quarter loaf. The wine was passed round in like
manner, in large common tumblers, the administra-
tion of each element being preceded by prayer. It
was a simple ceremony; but the idea could not fail to
strike one that its very homeliness made it a close
representation of the original supper in the long
upper room and the daily bread-breakings of Apostles.
After the Communion—as I suppose one may term
it-—followed another hymn, sung to the tune of ‘God
save the Queen.’ Whether this loyal melody was
designed to occupy anything like the position of our
Collect for the Queen I cannot say, but the effect was
slightly incongruous.
With this I imagined the proceedings would have closed,
as I had been told there would be no sermon; but a sort
of sermonette was introduced, it seemed — and, I believe,
really was – on the spur of the moment. It was delivered by a
very humble Brother indeed, in homely and not always
accurate English; but he displayed minute knowledge
of Scripture, and his sermon was intensely earnest—as
the whole service had been—consisting, I am sure, as
the preacher kept telling us, of “ thoughts that had been
pressing in upon his own soul.” The two concluding
prayers were offered by gentlemen of a very diiferent
mental calibre, and the congregation evidently num-
bered many persons of position and education. The
names of “ intending and accepted brethren ” were
then read, together with one who “sought restora-
tion”, and another who proposed to take to himself a
Sister; and so the proceedings terminated, without—-
as will be evident—anything having transpired to
inform one as to the special doctrines of the body.
Read the complete document in the peebs.net Archives
Over the years the Exclusive Brethren ‘Lord’s Supper’ has been altered so much it is virtually unrecognizable.
Today’s Lords Supper has a fixed format. First come the announcements (we have removed these from the recording for obvious reasons). Usually a random brother reads the announcements for the week, it’s a task carried out by someone that usually does not have another task within the assembly.
There is a period of several minutes between the giving of the announcements and the beginning of the service. In this recording it was 7 minutes. Following the wait, a brother goes to the table to give thanks for the loaf. He does not use the sound system so his first thanksgiving is a little hard to hear, but after that, the sound system clearly picks up every brother’s part, every sister giving out her number and the singing.
Remember, every individual is expected to take part in the Lord’s Supper. As soon as you can audibly voice a number, Exclusive Brethren mothers encourage their daughters to give out a hymn. The fathers coach the young boys at home as how to hold a microphone and what to say. There are  strict limits on what you can and cannot say at the Supper. Each segment of the time is highly regulated as to suitable words and participation.
Many ex-members remember the fear of going out of bounds and saying something unsuitable. The “Essential time” is not one remembered as one of liberty, more of making sure you crossed your t’s and dotted your i’s … and impressed everybody with what you knew about the rules and regulations of the Lord’s Supper. If you strayed, a faithful brother would likely seek you out  and help you with what these ‘great men have said’ so as to help you next time.
The early days of spiritual spontaneity have been replaced with yet more rules and regulations.

http://peebs.net/exclusive-brethren-archives/exclusive-brethren-communion-the-lords-supper-with-audio/#more-1869

May I join my hon. Friend the Member for Harlow (Robert Halfon) in pressing the Leader of the House on the appalling decision by the charity commissioners to revoke charitable status from the churches called Gospel halls of the Plymouth Brethren on the ground that they do not admit non-members to their holy communion, although they do admit non-members to all services, bible readings and all the rest?
These people are a small and completely harmless Christian community. For almost 200 years we have proclaimed in this Chamber the right to religious freedom. This is a vital and important issue, and we should proclaim it.”
~ Edward Leigh, MP (July 12th, 2012)

EARLY LEADERSHIP — Consider the caliber of leadership that entered these lowly expressions of Body life in England alone.  Nearly all ranked high amongst their peers: several were English Lords, one a cousin of Queen Victoria, many of the high nobility of England, others top-ranking Army and Navy officers (generals and admirals); still others were highly educated university men (one a Classic medallist–Darby, at 18).  Fine scholars, well versed in the classical languages, and not a few of them equal to the best linguists of their day

AMERICAN FRONTIER REVIVALISM — It is true that during the first part of the nineteenth century there were strong religious developments throughout the eastern half of America.   However, these were limited to the new birth, and revivalism.  There was no teaching of the identification truth for spiritual growth, nor the Dispensational, positional, or prophetic truths that were being brought into the open via Darby’s mind, heart, and pen.  The Calvinistic revivalists in America included such Covenant stalwarts as Nettleton, Beecher, and Edwards.  The chief Arminian revivalist at that time was the erratic extremist, Charles Finney.

THE FIRST BRETHREN FISSURE — Humanly speaking, we are now approaching stark tragedy in the history of the Brethren.  It was a development that constituted the beginning of the end of their brief but brilliant unity.
DARBY VERSUS NEWTON — Although Darby was ministering elsewhere most of the time, early in 1845 it was brought to his attention that all was not well in the Plymouth Ebrington Street assembly.  It was evident upon examination that Newton had been attempting to establish the large and influential group as an independent church with himself as pastor–and that with the blessing of co-workers Harris and Tregelles.
To the horrified Brethren, such action was not only schism in the Body, but also sectarianism and the dreaded “clericalism.”  To further complicate the catastrophe, Newton came out in the open as a postribulationalist, expressing disdain for Darby’s dispensationalism and distinction between Israel and the Church.
After many stormy sessions and writing of papers in an effort to heal the breach, Darby and a number of others withdrew from the Plymouth assembly to form a new one.  This move did not so much constitute a split as it did the excommunication of Newton and those who chose to remain with him at Ebrington Street.  The entire movement was badly shaken by this event, and many felt that Darby had been rash in his action.
HERESY! — Two years later (1847), however, Harris discovered what was considered heretical error in one of Newton’s unpublished manuscripts.   It had to do with the Lord Jesus as Man, and as an Israelite on earth.  When this was brought to light many of those who had previously questioned Darby’s move sided with him.  As far as the Plymouth Brethren movement was concerned, Newton and his group were off New Testament ground of gathering, and were considered to be a source of error.  A crippling stress-crack had appeared in the body of the Brethren!

THE EXCLUSIVE BRETHREN — The Brethren have always insisted that Matthew 18:20 is the New Testament ground of gathering: “For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.”   They deem it absolutely essential to gather in His Name, not that of a leader or denomination.  Darby held to this so tenaciously, and pushed it so far, that it began to produce division and error.  In 1845 he was to write:
United testimony to the truth is the greatest possible blessing from on high.   And I think that if anyone, through the flesh, separated from two or three gathering in a godly manner before the Lord in the unity of the whole body of Christ, it would not merely he an act of schism, but he would necessarily deprive himself of the blessing of God’s presence.
Such an extreme could only produce far-reaching tragedy.  If a tiny assembly in New Zealand made a certain decision concerning discipline in their midst, for instance, every other exclusive assembly from there to London and beyond was obliged to act in accordance with it, or else.  Their unity was to be strictly maintained in spite of the sad fact that it meant the continual heartbreak of severed fellowship, friendships, families, and even marriages!
Further, the closed Brethren insist that if all is not strictly observed according to their assembly protocol, the Lord will not favor them with His presence during worship.   Such is a powerful means of control, of keeping everyone in line. 
The inference is that if all in attendance are within the will of God, Hebrews 2:12 will be a reality for them: “I will declare thy name unto my brethren, in the midst of the church will I sing praise unto thee.”  The Lord Himself will lead their worship meeting.  Such is the Brethren ideal.  They insist that those who meet on the “erroneous” church or denominational ground cannot expect the same blessing and privilege, nor can other Brethren assemblies that may be under their discipline.
WINE — The Brethren still insist upon the use of wine in observance of the Lord’s Supper, every week.  And this in spite of the temptation and danger it presents, especially to anyone who has ever had, a drinking problem.  As a matter of fact and sorrow, some of the exclusives use wine in their homes–a “freedom” that has resulted in instances of actual alcoholism among both leaders and followers.
Because of their extreme strictness, the exclusive Brethren are slowly excluding themselves out of existence.  One exception is the Grantites, who are relatively moderate and continue to grow, mainly in the New Jersey area.
SPIRITUAL PATRICIDE — In moments of honest objectivity, Brethren have been known to refer to themselves as “the Lord’s grief, the saint’s sorrow, and the devils glee!”  Unbelievably, the exclusives actually went so far as to excommunicate one of the original leaders of the movement, the saintly Dr. Edward Cronin!
After sacrificial service on the mission field in Turkey, followed by fifty years of faithful leadership among the London assemblies, he was cast out on the charge of “independency”–at the age of 78.  Three years later, in 1882, he went to his reward in Glory with a broken heart.  (Never mind, dear brother Cronin: Matt. 25:21!)
http://withchrist.org/mjs/pbs.htm

http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/4085356?uid=3739856&uid=2129&uid=2&uid=70&uid=4&uid=3739256&sid=21101121674811

KENDALL W. CORBIN
Department of Ecology and Behavioral Biology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55455
BRADLEY C. LIVEZEY AND PHILIP S. HUMPHREY
Museum of Natural History and Department of Systematicsa nd Ecology, Universityo f Kansas,
Lawrence, KS 66045
Abstract. Electrophoretic and isoelectric focusing analyses of liver proteins of the steamer-
ducks, Tachyeresp atachonicus,T . pteneres,T . brachypterusa, nd T. leucocephaluss,h ow
these species to be distinct genetically, with the latter three species being more closely related
to one another than any one of them is to T. patachonicusT. here is also significant differentiation
among populations of T. patachonicus. Estimates of the average calculated heterozygosity
per species are high: 0.185, 0.160,O. 165, and 0.084, respectively, and observed
heterozygosities are 0.115 I 0.090, 0.202 f 0.118, 0.201 i- 0.085, and 0.080 f 0.069,
respectively. The genetic distances of Cavalli-Sforza and Edwards, Nei, and Rogers were
estimated and usedw ith a Wagner tree algorithm to preparea consensustr ee basedo n 1,000
subsets of allelic frequency data prepared by bootstrapping over loci. Estimates of F,, for
comparisons among populations of T. patachonicus and estimates of Nm based on the
distribution of private alleles indicate that gene flow between some pairs of populations is
significantly reduced. Values of F,, are much higher than those prev-iously found for other
pairs of avian populations. Genotypic distributions that deviate significantly from equilibrium
expectations are found for several of the polymorphic loci of one or more species.
Key words: Tachyeres; steamer-duckss; ubspeciesp;o pulationg enetics tructure;

Kendall W. Corbin, Ph.D.
Website: http://www.gvemporium.com
Kendall W. Corbin and his wife Susanne G. Corbin are the owners of Green Valley Emporium, LLC, an internet marketing company that specializes in eco-friendly products and information. Dr. Corbin received his BA from Carleton College and his Ph.D. from Cornell University. During a career as a university professor of ecology and genetics, he taught at Yale University and the University of Minnesota, Twin Cities campus.

http://pages.uoregon.edu/mgall/vita.htm

EDUCATION
University of California at Berkeley. Psychology. Ph.D., 1968.
Harvard School of Education. Developmental Psychology. Ed.M., 1963.
Harvard University. English. A.B., 1963.

AWARDS AND HONORS
Selected for inclusion in Who’s Who in America, 44th-50th editions (1986 to present). Chicago: Marquis.
Selected for inclusion in Who’s Who in the West, 20th-22nd editions (1986 to present). Chicago: Marquis.
Selected for inclusion in Who’s Who in American Education, 4th edition. Owings Mills, MD: National Reference Institute.
Selected for inclusion in Contemporary Authors, volumes 6 (1982) and 21 (1987).
Selected for inclusion in Who’s Who in Writers, Editors, and Poets, 3rd edition. Highland Park, IL: December Press, 1990.
Elected president of the Oregon Educational Research Association for 1985.
Elected to fellow status in Division 15 (Educational Psychology) of the American Psychological Association. 1983.
Phi Delta Kappa District I Meritorious Award for Contributions to Education through Activities in Evaluation, Development, and Research. 1978.
U.S. Public Health Fellowship. 1963-64.
DISSERTATION
An investigation of verbal style in creative and noncreative groups. (Doctoral dissertation, University of California at Berkeley.) Ann Arbor, Michigan: University Microfilms, 1968. No. 68-13, 905.

ID: I079020
Name: Kendall Brooks Corbin 1
Sex: M
Birth: 31 DEC 1907 in Oak Park, Cook Co., IL
Death: 22 JUL 1999 in Rochester, Olmsted Co., MN
Census: 1920 Oak Park, Cook Co., IL
Census: 1930 Beverly Hills, Los Angeles Co., CA / lives with his father
Note:
Minnesota Death Index, 1908-2002 Record
about Kendall Brooks Corbin
Name: Kendall Brooks Corbin
Birth Date: 31 Dec 1907
Birth City: Oak Park
Birth State or Country: Illinois
Death Date: 22 Jul 1999
Death County: Olmsted
Death City: Rochester
Mother’s Maiden Name: Haecock
State File Number: 1999-MN-021516

Social Security Death Index Record
about Kendall B. Corbin
Name: Kendall B. Corbin
SSN: 475-28-7594
Last Residence: 55901 Rochester, Olmsted, Minnesota, United States of America
Born: 31 Dec 1907
Died: 22 Jul 1999

MEDIAN NEURITIS (CARPAL TUNNEL SYNDROME) CAUSED BY GOUTY TOPHI
L. Emmerson Ward, M.D.; William H. Bickel, M.D.; Kendall B. Corbin, M.D.

About Royal Rosamond Press

I am an artist, a writer, and a theologian.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.