Adventist Alert Church History Study

1986 Apr -- XIX - 4(86) --THE CHURCH IN THE WORLD -- Compatible? OR Incompatible? -- Jesus declared "My kingdom is not of this world." (John 18:36) Pilate, to whom these words were addressed, caught the significance, and asked - "Art thou a king then?" To this Jesus replied - "To this end was I born, and for this cause came I into the world, that I should bear witness unto the truth." (verse 37) The kingdom of Jesus, over which He reigns as king, is a kingdom of truth. Such a kingdom is diametrically opposed to, and opposed by, "the prince of this world" who "abode not in the truth." (John 8:44)

The relationship that does exist between those who accept Jesus as Lord and King, and those who follow the prince of this world was defined clearly by Jesus Himself. As He walked with His disciples from the Upper Room to the Garden of Gethsemane, Jesus told them: If ye were of the world, the world would love its own: but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you. (John 15:19)

Then to the Father, in His great priestly prayer, Jesus addressed the words - I have given them thy word [which is truth]; and the world hath hated them, because they are not of the world, even as I am not of the world. (John 17:14 [17])

Jesus did not ask the Father to remove His followers from the world but that they be kept from the evil of the world. His desire was that God would "sanctify them [set them apart] through [His] truth."

The kingdom which Jesus established on this earth - called out from the world - was His church, "God's fortress, His city of refuge, which He holds in a revolted world." (AA, p. 11) This kingdom, this church, this city, has been under siege at all times since its establishment. So long as those in charge of "the city" realized that their sustenance came from Above, the city remained secure against the onslaught of the forces of the enemy. However, when those in charge of "the city" believed that the "gates" could be opened, and "commerce" could be carried on with those outside of "the city" for better relationships and that an era of peace could be achieved, the result was the devaluation of "the coin of the realm" - truth! This pattern has never varied. Loyalty to the Lord of the Kingdom of God means absolute and an uncompromising allegiance to truth, for He is truth. To achieve the acceptance of the world, always means a compromise of truth, for the prince of this world abode not in the truth.

An understanding of this issue becomes even more vital as we approach the final years of the end-time of human history. The forces of this world have begun their preparation for "the battle of the great day of God Almighty." (Rev. 16:14) It must never be

p 2 -- forgotten that behind the visible activities leading to this confrontation are "the spirits of devils." It must also be remembered that those found on God's side in this final conflict are "called,
and chosen, and faithful." (Rev. 17:14) These constitute "the church of the living God, the pillar and the ground of the truth." (I Tim. 3:15)

"The eternal God has drawn a line of distinction between the saints and the sinners, the converted and the unconverted. The two classes do not blend into each other imperceptibly, like the colors of the rainbow. They are as distinct as midday and midnight." (TM, p. 87) This distinction will become more and more pronounced as the battle lines continue to take shape for the final confrontation.

In the Adventist Review (January 23, 1986), the news editor, James Coffin, interviewed Elder Neal C. Wilson, president of the General Conference. Wilson told of his dream for the Seventh-day Adventist Church. Coffin commented and then asked - In the ADVENTIST REVIEW we have just run a series of articles about what the church might look like by the year 2000 if Christ has not returned. Obviously we hope that He will have come by then. But if He hasn't, what kind of a church do you want to see? What is your dream for how the church should look? (p.9)

To this Wilson replied: That's a wide open door! But most of all, I would hope that as we as a church grow numerically and financially, and in terms of world acceptance and influence, we would meet the Lord's expectation for His church. In other words, I dream of seeing a church that has been refined. A church that has clean hands and pure heart. A church that is foremost in exalting Christ and the cross and clothed in His righteousness. A church made up of loving and lovable Christians. A serving, caring, witnessing church. In short - a church empowered by the Holy Spirit. (Ibid.)

This dream is pure fantasy, merely echoing the "vain hope" (PK, p. 54) of those who through the ages have believed that God's kingdom can be made compatible to the world. A church clothed in Christ's righteousness, and empowered by the Holy Spirit could not achieve "world acceptance." To be accepted by the world, and to exert an influence in the world, would mean simply that the world's goals and aspirations had become the church's goals and aspirations.

Wilson has launched the Adventist Church on a course where the church will involve itself in world affairs and issues. Pronouncements were made just prior to the 1985 General Conference session in New Orleans on social and political issues. The Adventist ecumenist, B. B. Beach, reported to the annual meeting of the Secretaries of the World Confessional Families [Churches] that while there has been in the past "typical Adventist hesitancy to pass resolutions on social or political issues," that at the New Orleans session, "we found it essential to speak our Christian conscience on peace, nuclear armament, racism and drugs, three threats to civilization." (The Christian CENTURY, Dec. 11, 1985, p. 1143)

When the concept of the nearness of the coming of Christ receives only lip service, and time is spent in seeking to visualize the Adventist Church at 2000 A.D., and beyond, another Church with its P.R. created image with world acceptance becomes attractive as a model.

Thomas and Morgan-Witts in their book The Year of Armageddon - close their one year description of the Papacy with a chapter - "Towards Tomorrow." In it they write: For his part John Paul will continue to speak out for the basic rights of man. His will remain the authentic voice calling for true freedom of action and thought; it is his words which will highlight mankind's inexcusable inability to feed the starving and restrain the hostility between differing ideologies while at the same time trying to convey hope for a world now all too capable of destroying itself. In John Paul's mouth, words like "truth" and "justice" and "freedom" have not become debased. When he speaks of "salivation," it is not a tired noun but a reminder of the dignity of man ...

While clinging to its purely religious image, the Holy See, when it does so, will plunge ever deeper into international, politics - encouraged by forces without and within the Church. (pp. 383, 384)

B. B. Beach, who appears to have Wilson's confidence, 1 has revealed that he shares the same confidence as expressed in this book by Thomas and Morgan-Witts. At a meeting of the Adventist Forum in Worthington, Ohio, (Oct. 6, 1979) he said: This pope [John Paul II], I tell you, brethren, if you want to be open-minded, read his messages, and see how much of his message you can agree with, and I think you will find that you can probably agree with about 95%. He is one of the few voices in the world that actually speaks out strongly for morality. (From a taped recording)

When therefore, we analyze Wilson's dream, are we not seeing verily fulfilled the fact when men exult in their authority and position, Satan is able to inspire them with his own attributes, and they take the Church "in the track of Romanism"? (TM, pp. 362-363) Except in semantics with an Adventist "flavor" added, what difference is their basically between John Paul II's pronouncements and objectives, than Wilson's dream for the Adventist Church by 2000 A.D? When that final gathering is accomplished at "a place in the Hebrew tongue" called "the mount of the congregation," will the corporate Adventist Church be represented there? Perhaps by B. B. Beach, or maybe Wilson himself!

[Note - On page 3, we have produced a letter which we wrote to Elder Wilson over this issue of the Church and the world. It would be well for as many as possible to write to Elder Wilson asking him some of the same questions. If enough persons wrote, asking the same or similar questions, the laity might receive some kind of an explanation for too many unanswered questions still remain from Wilson's statements and actions.]

1 Prior to the General Conference session in New Orleans, B. B. Beach and his father, Elder W. R. Beach co-authored the book - Pattern for Progress. This book with a "Preface" by Neal C. Wilson was urged upon the delegates by Wilson himself. For its impact upon the Session, see WWN XVIII-11 - "'Beach Boys' Write Theme."

p 3 -- "Watchman, What of the Night?"
from the Editor's Desk
January 23, 1986

Elder Neal C. Wilson, President,
General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists
Washington DC 20012

Dear Elder Wilson:

In the current issue of the Adventist Review (January 23, p, 9) in answer to the question - "What kind of church do you want to see? What is your dream for how the church should look?" - you reply:

"That's a wide-open door! But most of all, I would hope that as we as a church grow numerically and financially, and in terms of world acceptance and influence, we would meet the Lord's expectation for His church."

Please reconcile your dream of "world acceptance and influence" and "the Lord's expectation"? How do you relate your dream with the word of our Lord Jesus Christ - "If you were of the world, the world would love his own: but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you." (John 15:19) Further Jesus prayed - "I pray not that Thou shouldest take them out of the world, but that Thou shouldest keep them from the evil. They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world. Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth." (John 17:15-17) It is obvious that "the Lord's expectation" is sanctification through truth. The only way for "world acceptance and influence" is to compromise truth. I guess that since you did that at the 1980 Session of the General Conference in Dallas, you can dream as you dream, in other words, dream on!

Is it because you desire "world acceptance and influence" that you hate the "sighing, and crying" for all the abominations done in the church?

Further while writing, let me ask some more questions. Why did you not appear at New Orleans on January 10, either personally or through legal representation to defend your arrest of those who cried out against the persecution of the brothers and sisters behind the "iron curtain"? It has been alleged that you were involved in ordering the arrests of these people on July 4, 1985. Is this true?

Prior to the New Orleans session, you in consultations with your "cardinals" - as you call them - issued statements on social and political issues. Why did you omit any mention of the violation of human rights in Communist dominated countries?

Looking forward to your reply, I remain,
WHG,
Respectfully yours.

AS of this date - March 9, 1986 - as we go to press, no reply or acknowledgment has been received.

p 4 -- LOOK UP! BE NOT AFRAID -- At some point in one's routine, the desk must be cleared, and accumulation of materials, either indexed or consigned to File #13. Letters, clippings, documents, copies of letters written by others to others, all must be evaluated. In recent weeks, I have noticed a sense of fear surfacing in some correspondence - fearful for themselves, and fearful for friends and relatives. The word - "scared" - has even been used.

True, we are living in the end-time of human history, even in the time of the judgment of the living, and we have a right to be concerned about ourselves, our friends and our loved ones - perhaps even to the point of being "scared" for them. If what is taking place, both within and without the church, does not awaken the individual Laodicean so that he will open to the knock on his door (Rev. 3:20), there is little hope, for corporate Laodicea has passed the unseen line of the limits of God's mercy.

As I read these letters of concern, I said to myself, "I am not fearful." True, I am deeply concerned for loved ones, and even for many who profess to know what is happening, and where we are on the "time" line. Then I asked myself - "Why am I not afraid? Should I be?" In myself I have no cause for confidence nor boasting. Then there came to my mind the text "Perfect love casteth out fear." (I John 4:18) It even gives "boldness in the day of judgment." (verse 17)

Now God is love, and that is perfect love! I love my God, and my Lord for what He has and is doing for me. Perfect love, on my part? No, but my God knows that I love Him, and that I would like to talk to Him face to face. He knows that I believe His promise that if I confess my sins, He forgives (I John 1:9), and that I can stand before Him as if I had never sinned! This is the confidence that I can have. Further, He has promised to keep me from falling. (Jude 24) Then He has also promised that if I walk in the light as He is in the light - light of truth coming from His throne, and not from the hellish torch of Satan - then He will cleanse me from all sin. (I John 1:7) If cleansed by Him through the blood of Jesus, I will pass, the judgment of the living. Then where is there cause to fear? Is not God able to perform what He has promised? Of Jesus, it is written - "He is able also to save them to the uttermost that come unto God by Him, seeing He ever liveth to make intercession for them." (Heb. 7:25)

I look forward to the end. Trouble, yes, when all faces gather paleness, but over and above is that circling bow of promise - "I will never leave thee, nor forsake thee."

The blessed hope does not produce fear, but awakens a confidence grounded in love - the love of God toward me. I even enjoy singing with my grandchildren, "Jesus Loves Me," especially the stanza which says:

Yes, Jesus loves me! He who died
Heaven's gate to open wide;
He will wash away my sin,
Let His little child come in.
(SDA Hymnal, # 190)

I know that He is able to keep that which I have committed unto Him against that day. (II Tim. 1:12) So as earthly governments evidence decay and foundations start cracking, and the corporate bodies of earth including the church - are found wanting, then there is the up-look - my redemption draweth nigh! (Luke 21:24-28)

LETTERS -- "My husband did not go to the End Events Seminar [St. Mary's Retreat Center] and requested that his name be removed. Would you be so kind to print this in your next newsletter?" -- Joe & Shirley Maniscalco, Inchelium, WA 99138

"I appreciate receiving the Watchman, What of the Night? thought paper... I thought the last paper XIX-2 was the best explanation of the subject, The Nature of Christ, that I have read so far. I don't always agree with you but you do stimulate thinking and discuss subjects that need to be discussed." Colorado

p 5 --"MANY OTHER CONTACTS" - BEACH -- Back in 1973, when B. B. Beach co-authored with Dr. Lukas Vischer of the Faith and Order Secretariat of the WCC, ~ the book. So Much in Common, he listed among the nine "definitely positive and useful" results of the Conversations between representatives of the WCC and the SDA's, -- the expanding contacts on national levels." Beach cited "the SDA contacts with the British Council of Churches, the Finnish Council of Churches and the office of the German Arbeitsgemeinschaft Christlicher Kirchen in Deutschland." (p. 101) Then he added - "There are many other contacts. " These contacts range from the SDA Conference level, to the local ministerial associations.

One example of the local conference involvement with the corresponding WCC and/or NCC
affiliate at the State level is the Pennsylvania Conference. The Pennsylvania News, which constitutes a report to the constituency of its activities and institutions, plus its financial standing and investments, listed among its donees for 1983, the Pennsylvania Council of Churches; and this, even though the conference was struggling with a large indebtedness.

In the Southern Union Conference, there is a very active ecumenist, Elder Robert Hunter. In 1975, he was pastor of the Morganton, North Carolina District, and a member of the local ministerial association. He joined in the project called, "PULPIT EXCHANGE DAY," exchanging pulpits with the priest, Thomas Burke, of the St. Charles Roman Catholic Church. "The theme of the citywide program was 'Blest Be the Tie. '" (Southern Tidings April , 1985, p. 12) Then last year, the Adventist Review reported this same Robert Hunter, now pastor of the Stone Mountain, Georgia Adventist Church as the speaker for the Easter sunrise service atop Stone Mountain. "The service which was covered by local TV stations, also was taped by church members to be aired on the church's TV program, Discovery." (Sept. 5, 1985, p-1 2)

The most recent of the "many other contacts" to reach our desk involves the Watsonville Seventh-day Adventist Church in the Central California Conference. The Register-Pajaronian a local newspaper under "Church Notes" for Saturday, January 11, 1986, carried this announcement: The Week of Prayer for Christian Unity will be observed at the Seventh-day Adventist Church tomorrow afternoon with an ecumenical service that will include scripture, prayer and music.

After listing the ministers taking part under the auspices of the Pajaro, Valley Minister's Association, the news item closed with the notation: The New Horizons, a choral group from Monterey Bay Academy, will lead the anthems.

The Church Bulletin for the occasion was supplied from the Graymoor Ecumenical Institute of New York. The front cover pictured faces in outline looking to a symbol of the cross, and the theme for 1983 - "You shall be my witnesses." Beneath the picture was a definition of "ecumenics." This read: Ta oikoumenika, (Ecumenics) "The things related the oikoumene; i.e., the inhabited earth - the science of the Church as the world Christian community, its nature, function, relations, and strategy."

We are reminded of a similar definition of "church" as found in the 1980 Statement of Beliefs voted at Dallas, Texas. This statement reads - "The church is the community of believers who confess Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour." (#11. The Church)

The back page names the pastors from the Christian, Presbyterian, Methodist, Episcopal, Seventh-day Adventist churches who participated besides representatives from the Catholic Social Services and the Pajaro Valley Shelter for Women and Children. The offering for the day went for the support of the Shelter.

The outline of this ecumenical service filled the two inside pages. It included a "Penitential Rite" which read: Leader: Before we can witness together we must repent of our divisions and seek mutual pardon of each other.
Leader: Lord we have sinned against you and against our sister and brothers.
All: Lord have mercy.
Leader: 0 Christ, our divisions are contrary to your

p 6 -- will, and have impeded our common witness to you.
All: Lord have mercy.
Leader: Lord, we have not loved you enough in our sisters and brothers, created in your image, but different from us.
All: Lord have mercy.
Leader: May the Lord have mercy on us, forgive us our sins and bring us to everlasting life.

Following the Scripture read in three languages Spanish, Japanese and English taken from Acts 1:8; 2:42-47, a Litany was conducted. These prayers and responses offered within the Seventh-day Adventist Church sanctuary are comparable to the strange fire of olden times offered by the prophets and priests of Baal. These read: Leader: Let us ask God for the gift of unity: God, our Father, who has created all things, we are your children. If it is your desire that we live together in peace and stand by one another as sisters and brothers.
All: Your will be done.
Leader: Jesus Christ, Son of God, you have prayed for the unity of all who are baptized in your name. It is your will, that the Church your body, be one.
All: Your will be done.
Leader: Holy Spirit of God, You have filled the Apostles with the fire of courage to proclaim the Good News. It is your will that we proclaim with one voice the great deeds of God and the Good News of Jesus Christ.
All: Your will be done.
(Silence)
Leader: Let us pray to God our Father, who has revealed his love to us in Jesus Christ.
Leader: Lord, our God, Creator of all things - From you we receive our life. You have blessed us with the gifts of your creation in endless fullness. We ask you: help us to be responsible stewards of your creation. Help us to protect life; where it is in danger and to heal where it is broken; let us pray to the Lord.
All: Lord have mercy. Christ have mercy. Lord have mercy.

In a recent exchange of letters with a Union Conference Religious Liberty Secretary concerning another ecumenical gathering at Windsor Castle in England which included B. B. Beach, he wrote - "If you were to ask B. B. Beach what he was doing, he was doing he would probably say that he was there witnessing." I suppose that Elder Robert Hunter could say that in the Pulpit Exchange Program with the parish priest, he was witnessing! And I suppose that the Watsonville Seventh-day Adventist Church perceived of the ecumenical service in their church as a witness. Could it have been, had Elijah joined the ministerial alliance of the prophets of Baal that he could have justified such an association as an opportunity for witnessing?

The question resolves itself down to a very simple proposition. . Would Jesus if He were to walk this earth again as the Son of man, attend and take part in such services? This is not an idle question, but one of eternal consequences. When Satan appears as Christ, he will take part in these services. If we believe that the Jesus of the Bible would have done so, we then are adding to our possible deception in that critical hour.

When Jesus left the temple after declaring - "Behold you house is left unto you desolate." He then stated - "Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say, 'Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.'" (Matt. 23:38-39) The glory of the Lord was departing from the temple and the Jewish Church never again to return.

Now the question is simply - Was the proclamation of the Second Angel's Message of Revelation 14 verily truth? Did Babylon fall? Then do you go into Babylon and witness by taking part in services that call for unity with Babylon? One may even have the opportunity to present what we like to call "the unique" message and calling of the Seventh-day Adventist Church. But do our actions declare any such uniqueness when we pray with them and ask that all may be one, and partake with them in their celebration of the Eucharist?

There is a very recent case in point. At the annual meeting of the Secretaries of the World Confessional Families, of which B. B. Beach is secretary, held in Windsor Castle in England in 1985, the Seventh-day Adventist Church was "the focus of special reflection." Spearheading this witness was the Editor of the Adventist Review

p 7 - Johnsson states of his presentation: The setting of my presentation at Windsor Castle was entirely different from the context of the John Ankerberg Show. In England I presented a paper, full and complete without interruption, outlining the history, doctrines, ethos, mission, and unique identity of the Seventh-day Adventist Church. (Letter, Feb. 27, 1986)

A number of Adventists were present besides B. B. Beach and Wm. G. Johnsson. The list reads - Dr., Jan Paulsen, President of the Trans-European Division; H. , L. Calkins, President of the British Union Conference; W. J. Arthur; Borge Schantz of Newbold College; and Lee Boothby, General Counsel for Church & State. The Conference commenced with a reception in Lambeth Palace hosted by the Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr. Robert Runcie." (British Union Messenger, December 6, 1985, p. 1)

Each morning during the session, the participants met together in St. George's Chapel for prayer and the celebration of the Eucharist. Whatever happened a special correspondent for The Christian Century could conclude his report by writing: Someday these world communions will move beyond their cordiality and begin to explore divisive issues. I foresaw that future when, each morning in St. George's Chapel, ... all of us prayed together and some of us shared in the Eucharist; and the divisions between Jew and gentile, male and female, rich and poor, Anglican and Seventh-day Adventist were, for a moment, overcome. (Dec. 11, 1985, p. 1143)

Johnsson writes forthrightly - "I did not partake of the Eucharist at the meeting." (Ibid.) However, Beach will neither affirm nor deny whether he took part, but responded to an inquiry with a very testy letter.

The report on the Ecumenical gathering at Windsor Castle remains open until all the facts are in. --- (1986 Apr) --- End --- TOP

1986 May-- XIX - 5(86) -- THE ECUMENICAL LABYRINTH -- SDAs - A Church Wandering in its Maze -- In the April issue of "Watchman, What of the Night?" (p. 5), we wrote about the ecumenical service held in the Watsonville, California, Seventh-day Adventist Church. This service was a part of the observance of the Week of Prayer for Christian Unity. The bulletin for the occasion was either supplied by, or purchased from the "Graymoor Ecumenical Institute." It is at this point we begin our attempt to "thread" our way through the ecumenical labyrinth in which the Seventh-day Adventist Church is wandering today.

On January 16, 1863, at Millington, Maryland, Lewis Thomas Wattson was born. As a young man, he prepared himself for the priesthood of the Episcopal Church. After his ordination in 1886, he began to work for the reunion of all Protestant bodies with the Holy See. To this end,"in 1898, with Mother Mary Lurana White, an Epicopal nun, [Wattson] founded at Graymoor, N.Y., the Society of the Atonement, comprising Franciscan friars and Franciscan sisters of the Atonement." (New Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. 14 : p. 828)

Having taken the name Paul James, Wattson in 1903 began editing a paper called The Lamp, "in which he defended papal infallibility and urged all Anglicans to return to Rome." Then as an experiment, "he inaugurated an 8-day period of prayer called the Church Unity Octave. Under Catholic auspices this became the Chair of Church Unity Octave, held each year January 18 to 25, and observed by non-Catholics as the Universal Week of Prayer for Christian Unity." (Ibid.) This is the annual service which the Watsonville Seventh-day Adventist Church hosted January 12, 1986.

In 1909, the Graymoor community of 17 friars, sisters, and laymen were received corporately into the Catholic Church through permission of Pius X transmitted via the Apostolic delegate to the United States. Shortly thereafter, the group was received into the Franciscan Order as the Third Order Regular of St. Francis of Assisi. In 1910, Wattson was ordained into the priesthood of the Roman Catholic Church as Paul James Francis Wattson. The remaining 30 years of his life were spent promoting Church unity with Rome from Graymoor.

"The Chair of Unity Apostolate office at Graymoor is the center of various activities for promoting Christian unity. As a development of the octave, the friars direct the League of Prayer for Unity under the patronage of Our Lady of the Atonement." (Ibid. , Vol 1, p. 1027) In fact, prior to his death, Wattson placed his whole work for unity "under the patronage of Our Lady of the Atonement. In 1920 the Faith and Order movement, an antecedent of the World Council of Churches, first called for a week of prayer during Pentecost. In 1940 it commended the January observance so as to coincide with the Catholic time of prayer. Since the formation of the World Council at Amsterdam in 1948, this period of prayer has been sponsored by its Faith and Order

p 2 -- Commission." (Ibid., Vol. 3, p. 422) Note it was not Rome who changed her date for the period of prayer, but it was Protestants who altered their date to coincide with Rome. It must also be kept in mind that this prayer period is to pray not for unity per se, but for unity with Rome! Further it must be remembered that since 1967, the Seventh-day Adventist Church is represented on the Faith and Order Commission, which sponsors in connection with Graymoor this "Week of Prayer for Christian Unity."

The work of the Graymoor Ecumenical Institute has the Papal blessing. When the group was received corporately into the Roman Catholic Church, Pius X approved the prayer, crusade for religious unity. In 1916, Benedict XV extended the crusade to the universal Church granting indulgences through the apostolic letter - Romanorum pontificum. In part it read: In every age the Roman Pontiffs, our predecessors, have had much at heart and in it is our very particular concern that Christians who have separated themselves from the Catholic religion should return to the Church as to a mother whom they have abandoned. (Ibid.)

Pius XI, who followed Benedict XV, "often offered Mass during the Octave for its development and success. Pope Pius XII renewed and increased the indulgences, and wrote a letter to commemorate the 50th anniversary of the beginning of the Octave. Pope John XXIII wrote a letter to the father general of the Atonement Friars to commend the observance of the Octave ever more widely throughout the world." In this letter he wrote: Prayer is the first and principle means to be used to bring about this yearned- for-unity, as your beloved Founder, Father Paul Wattson, so clearly saw; and he therefore promoted the Chair of Unity Octave, during which fervent supplications should be raised to the Almighty for the return to the one true Faith." (Ibid.) [Letter dated, October 28, 1959]

John XXIII had cause to highly recommend this Church Unity Octave. "In January of 1959, Pope John XXIII surprised the non-Catholic world by announcing his intention to convene a Council of the Roman Catholic Church. He made clear that his decision was not the result of long premeditated deliberation; the inspiration came during a time of prayer. The time was that period particularly devoted to prayers for the reunion of Christendom, the Christian Unity Octave of January 18-25." (Observer at Rome, p. 6)

"Vatican Council II was summoned by John XXIII to stimulate the movement toward unity, among other things." (New Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. 5, p. 98) In seeking to forward this objective he established the Secretariat for Promoting Christian Unity. Heading this secretariat was the ecumenical minded Jesuit, Augustin Cardinal Bea. Also appointed to this new secretariat of the Catholic Church was Msgr J. G. M. Willebrands who in 1952 founded the Catholic Conference for Ecumenical Questions. This Conference "has had impressive though unobtrusive influence and worked with the Faith and Order Commission of the WCC." (Ibid.)

Vatican Council II convened October 11, 1962, and ran through four sessions. John XXIII died in 1963, and his successor Paul VI announced his intention to pursue the policies of his predecessor. It was at the fourth and final session that contact was made between a SDA observer, and one from the WCC. (So Much in Common, p. 98)

Out of the Conversations which took place two distinct fellowships in the Ecumenical Movement followed. One was the participation in the annual meeting of the Secretaries of the World Confessional Families since 1968. This Conference not attached to the World Council of Churches is nevertheless served by the Faith and Order Commission "in a consultative manner." Religious News Service (May 19, 1977) quoted Bishop John Howe, then president of the Conference, as to the results of the 1977 annual meeting - "We have been able to decide how we shall work together more with the World Council of Churches in understanding the ecumenical role that all of us have." This was reporting a Vatican Radio interview, and Dr. B. B. Beach, now of the SDA General Conference, was there at the same time with Bishop Howe giving assent as the Secretary of the Conference. This same RNS release stated - "The Vatican Secretariat for Christian Unity and the Seventh-day Adventists became regular participants in the Conference in 1968." Also, it was at this annual meeting in Rome in 1977, that B. B. Beach presented to Pope

p 3 -- Paul VI , a medallion as "a gold-covered symbol of the Seventh-day Adventist Church." (Review, August 11, 1977, p. 23)

The second fellowship resulting from the Consultations between representatives of the Seventh-day Adventist Church and the appointees of the WCC was the selection of a SDA theologian to sit on the Faith and Order Commission. This took place in 1967, when the WCC Central Committee selected with General Conference approval, Dr. Earle Hilgert of Andrews University. After Dr. Hilgert left Andrews University and the Seventh-day Adventist Church to teach at the McCormick Theological Seminary in Chicago, his place on the Faith and Order Commission was filled by Dr. R. F. Dederen, also of Andrews University.

When in 1948 the World Council of Churches was formed, the Faith and Order Movement which had functioned since 1920 became a "commission" of the WCC. As a Commission of the World Council of Churches, its purposes and objectives need to be clearly understood in relationship to the overall objectives of the World Council.

Article I of the Constitution of the World Council of Churches reads: The World Council of Churches is a fellowship of churches which confess the Lord Jesus Christ as God and Saviour according to the Scriptures and therefore seek to fulfill together their common calling to the glory of the one God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit. (So Much in Common, p. 40)

While the World Council does not assume universal authority controlling what all Christians should believe and do, yet the member churches - now over three hundred - are all committed to close collaboration in Christian witness and service. Further, they are striving together to realize the goal of visible Church unity. Herein, enters the Faith and Order Commission. Its objective is stated - and keep in mind that the SDA Church is represented on this Commission: To assist the churches toward this goal, the Faith and Order Commission of the World Council provides theological support for the efforts the churches are making towards unity. Indeed the Commission has been charged by the Council members to keep always before them their obligation to work towards manifesting more visibly God's gift of Church unity. So it is that the stated aim of the Commission is "to proclaim the oneness of the Church of Jesus Christ and to call the churches to the goal of visible unity in one faith and one eucharistic fellowship, expressed in worship and common life in Christ, in order that the world might believe." (By-Laws) (Faith and Order Paper #11, pp. vii-viii)

Much has transpired toward the objective of the Faith and Order Commission since 1967, when a Seventh-day Adventist was appointed to the Commission. In January, 1982, in Lima, Peru, over 100 theologians met and "recommended unanimously" an agreed statement on Baptism, Eucharist and Ministry "for the common study and official response of the churches." These theologians "represented virtually all the major church traditions: Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, Roman Catholic, Old Catholic, Lutheran, Anglican, Reformed, Methodist, United, Disciples Baptist, Adventist and Pentecostal." (Back Cover, Faith and Order Paper #11, emphasis supplied)

The three statements on baptism, eucharist and ministry "are the fruit of a 50-year process of study stretching back to the first Faith and Order Conference at Lausanne [Switzerland], in 1927." (Ibid., p. viii)

Wm. H. Lazareth, Director of the Secretariat on Faith and Order and Nikos Nissiotis, Moderator of the Commission on Faith and Order have co-authored a Preface to the Lima Text as this paper on Baptism, Eucharist and Ministry is called. In it they state: The Lima Text represented the significant theological convergence which Faith and Order has discerned and formulated. Those who know how widely the churches have differed in doctrine and practice on baptism, eucharist and ministry, will appreciate the importance of the large measure of agreement registered here. Virtually all the confessional traditions are included in the Commission's membership. That theologians of such widely different traditions should be able to speak so harmoniously about baptism, Eucharist and ministry is unprecedented in the modern ecumenical movement. Particularly noteworthy is the fact that the Commission also includes among its full members theologians of the Roman Catholic and other churches which do not belong to the World Council of Churches itself. (Ibid., p. ix)

In 1980 when a new Statement of Beliefs was voted at the General Conference Session in Dallas, Texas, Article I of the World Council of Churches' Constitution was incorporated into the Statement. (Key Doctrinal Comparisons, p. 12)

The Seventh-day Adventist Church continues to wander in the ecumenical labyrinth. What the outcome will be, the future alone will reveal. However, the conclusion of the prophet about ancient Israel, likewise applies to modern spiritual Israel in its apostasy: "My God will cast them away; because they did not hearken unto Him; and they shall be wanderers among the nations." (Hosea 9:17; See also Rev. 3:16)

p 4 --WE WILL ALL BE THERE -- In our Foundation Elementary School program, I am teaching my grandson his Bible lesson each day that I am on campus. Presently, we are studying the doctrines of the Bible in preparation for his baptism. This week we have been focusing our attention on the 1000 years of Revelation 20, and the Second and Third Comings of Jesus.

Doctrines could be compared to steel girders around which we build the edifice of our spiritual life. Sometimes they seem just as rigid and matter of fact as a real steel girder in a large building. But when we put ourselves into the picture created by the doctrine, it comes to life with real force and challenge. Such is the doctrine of the 1000 Years of Revelation 20.

First let us catch the setting for the closing scenes connected with the 1000 years. Satan is "loosed out of his prison." (20:7) The "rest of dead" now come forth. (20:5) The "blessed and holy" have been with Christ a 1000 years. (20:4) These return with Him to earth with the Holy City which becomes "the camp of the saints." (20:9) The city has walls "of jasper," "clear as crystal." In fact the city is of "pure gold, like unto clear glass." (21:11,18) What army - numbering as "the sands of the sea" - would not like to overwhelm this city and possess its riches. So Satan inspires the "dead" - for that is how those who come up in the second resurrection are perceived in Scripture (20:12). They gather around the city and the saints are inside.

Here is where the picture begins. For one time and for one time only, all the family of Adam meet - and they can see each other through the clear wall. What a family reunion! Cain and Abel will be there. The last time they saw each other while perception was still vivid - Abel could see only the cruel hate in his brother's eyes. And Cain, he saw the first human's eyes close in death, death he caused. He who wouldn't shed the blood of an animal in recognition of his own sin, now sees his own brother's blood flow, as life ebbs away. Now their eyes meet once again. What will go through their minds? He who tried to satisfy God by offering to Him the works of his, own hands - setting the criterion for acceptance, rather than obeying the directives - will then see the price he paid.

Jacob and Esau will be there; Jacob inside, Esau outside. Will Esau remember the fateful day, he sold his "birthright" to spiritual blessings for a mere bowl of food? Yes, and he will realize the terrible cost of that bowl of food - for its actual price will be there before him - the city of God! What judgment, or should we say, lack of judgment, Esau exercised! Yet how many today are making similar decisions. The material which is seen has greater value than the unseen which must be perceived by faith; but then the unseen will be seen. As with all human perception, "works" are more real than "grace." Possessions and things have more meaning than the City of God which we have not seen, but must accept by faith in God's word. What a figure is written on the price tag of earthly things - eternity, life everlasting - and yet the vast majority will be willing to pay just that price for they are outside the city walls.

Paul and Agrippa will be there.. Paul inside the city close to Jesus for whom he counted the loss of all things as but dung. There will be Agrippa outside looking in - remembering the price of "almost." (Acts 26:28) "Almost but not wholly saved, means to be not almost but wholly lost." (COL, p. 118)

You and I will be there. The question is simple -Will we be looking in on what we missed, or looking out on what we missed. We have a heaven to win and a hell to shun. What we do with truth - and this is really the only issue - will determine where we will be at the time of the final family reunion of Adam. We will either be with him who abode not in the truth, or with Him who is the Truth.

The final time is upon us. We can either be caught up to meet the Lord in the air at His second coming, or we can be destroyed with the brightness of that coming. We can either be with the Lord a thousand years where He is, or we can lay as decaying corpses ungathered on the earth. We can either be inside the city looking out or outside the city, looking in.

It states that the "dead" must stand before God to be "judged out of those things which are written in the books according to their works." (Rev. 20:12) If we are absolutely honest with ourselves, we must admit that not one of us can face the record of our lives, and expect to be judged worthy of
being inside the city. We have no merit nor the means to accrue it. Our only hope is to have our "name" retained in the Lamb's Book of Life. He who became the Lamb pre- figured in Abel's offering alone can make the confession for us before His Father, and our angel. (Rev, 3:5) And only those who overcome - "by the blood of the Lamb, and the word of their testimony," and who "loved not their lives unto death," will Jesus confess. (Rev. 12:11) These are the ones inside the city. You, too, can be there. In the one-time family reunion of Adam, where will you be?

p 5 -- New Tapes- See Order Form: END-TIME LINE - RE-SURVEYED -- Presentation in Two Parts with Study Guides -- Study Exclusively from the Writings -- In recent months, directly and indirectly we have been informed of vicious rumors being circulated that we no longer believe that Ellen G. White has the spiritual gift known as the gift of prophecy. In 1982, I was asked to present a lengthy study at the first Redwood Retreat on Ellen G. White and her Writings. I did so :under the title - "Earthen Vessels." Before presenting the study, I read a prepared paper clearly setting forth in unequivocal terms my position, and from this I have not varied. [Both the statement were taped.] Concerning the writings and work of Ellen G. White, I stated: 1) I believe that in the life and ministry of Ellen G. White was manifest the spiritual gift known as the gift of prophecy, albeit the manifestation was in, as in the bestowal of all the gifts of the Spirit, an earthen vessel. ..."

Ellen G. White never claimed infallibility (SM, i, p. 37), neither was she impeccable. She as with all mortals, whether prophets or apostles, messengers of God, or men and women possessed by the Spirit, had "feet of clay."

Today apostasy is rampant whether coming from the right or the left in Adventism. Those on the extreme left are seeking an easy road to "heaven" by what is termed -"cheap grace" - in other words, live as you please, God will save you in your sins! However, those on the extreme right are seeking "easy answers" by elevating the writings of Ellen G. White to a "third canon" or a "last testament" of Scripture. Some are so bold to use one of these terms, while others but thinly veil their heresy. They write - "Use the sacred Scriptures the Bible and the Spirit of Prophecy - to test what is being said."

This is in absolute contradiction to what Ellen G. White herself has written. She stated: God will have a people upon the earth to maintain the Bible, and the Bible only, as the standard of all doctrine and the basis of all reforms. (SP, IV, p. 413. Emphasis supplied)

The question is simple - Do you want to be the people whom God will recognize in the final hour of human history, or do you want to set up your own standards and doctrines through the misinterpretation of the Writings? We have been warned on this point likewise. Ellen White warned: There will be those who will misinterpret the messages God has given, in accordance with their spiritual blindness. (SM. bk. i, p. 41)

We need an intelligent faith, not one based in spiritual blindness.

The terrible confusion in the right wing of Adventism today is traceable to these two factors - 1) The establishment of the Writings of Ellen G. White as a "third canon" of Scripture, and 2) the misinterpretation of what they have created.

Specific key interpretive principles have been given in the Writings as to how they are to be used and applied. Note the following: The testimonies themselves will be the key that will explain the messages given, as scripture is explained by scripture. (Ibid., p. 42)

As one compares scripture with scripture to arrive at Bible truth, so likewise must the testimonies be compared with testimonies to arrive at the truth set forth in the Writings. What Ellen G. White did not say is equally as important as to what she did

p 6 -- say in this statement just quoted. She did not say that scripture is to be explained by testimony, nor that testimony was to be explained by scripture. When the study of each is properly done, there will be two harmonious lines of truth side by side.

Then governing the first interpretive tool is a second: Regarding the testimonies, nothing is ignored, nothing is cast aside; but time and place must be considered. (Ibid., p. 57)

In the same counsel, Ellen G. White affirmed that "every jot and title is essential and must appear at an opportune time." The "time and place" of a counsel in the past are vital to a proper understanding of what was written. Likewise, "prophetic" testimonies, do not become understandable until their "opportune time" has arrived.

Booklets, paper's - printed and mimeographed, are coming through the postal service seeking to establish the "judgment of the living." The National Sunday Law is invoked as a "section corner." Graphs, diagrams and other supportive evidence are urged upon the reader. To find truth and to check the mass of material streaming through the postal service to the doors and boxes of Adventists - both concerned and unconcerned - we detailed a study of the end-time line exclusively from the writings of Ellen G. White in harmony with her counsel as to how her writings were to be studied. This has been placed on two tapes with a study guide for each.

When we followed the interpretive guidelines which Ellen G. White herself set forth by which her writings were to be studied, we discovered a "prophetic" testimony given at the height of the Righteousness by Faith presentations in the 1890's that cannot fit into the "time and place" rule until this very decade in which we are now living. Then when we considered the testimonies cast into the milieu following the rejection of the 1888 message by the leadership of the Church, and the apostasy in the organizational reform at the 1903 General Conference Session, the whole picture dropped into place.

There are those who are concerned with the present deviation from historical Adventism, and rightly so! For example, Hartland Institute sponsors the Firm Foundation Seminars. But Dr. Standish has not presented this "prophetic" testimony so far as I have been able to discover. Why? Perhaps he is not aware of it, but if he is, it jars his and his staff's positions.

A Committee of Five has been organized to present the 1888 Message, the chief speakers being Elders R. J. Wieland and Alexander Snyman. There can be no question but that the message of 1888 needs to be proclaimed. It is truth. But when it is presented in the setting of 1950, and not in the setting of 1986, and when the "prophetic" testimony is ignored - neither man at present will even tell their hearers about it; perhaps they do not know about it either - those who listen to the presentations are left on "enchanted ground" feeling good about the truth of "righteousness by faith," but totally unprepared to meet the issues outlined in the "prophetic" testimony.

The righteousness of Christ is declared to be "pure, unadulterated truth." (TM , p. 65) The omission of truth does not give the message its full strength, and thus a vital ingredient is missing. The whole truth is not being given by the speakers for The Committee of Five. It was to meet head-on this deficiency that these tapes have been carefully prepared by diligent study and research.

When we quote and use the Writings, let us use them according to the key interpretive principles set forth in the Writings, and stop adding to the confusion by either ignoring what has been written, or misinterpreting that which has been given. And let us give the whole truth in its proper setting as we present the righteousness of Christ. . This is not being done, in fact what is being done is a fulfillment of the "prophetic" testimony itself

The Church today defined - "A mild-mannered man standing before a group of mild-mannered people exhorting them to be more mild-mannered."

p 7 -- IN THE MAIL -- Recently from Australia, I received a picture postcard of the Coffs Harbour, N.S.W , Seventh-day Adventist Church with a large billboard type of sign in front advertising meetings at the Coffs Harbour Showground by Leighton Ford. I couldn't believe what I was seeing so I wrote to the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association, and they confirmed that Leighton Ford, Billy Graham's brother-in-law actually held meetings at that time in Coffs Harbour. The back of the card indicated that the Adventist Church was also promoting the same "Babylonian doctrines."

"I picked up "Watchman, What of the Night?" where I work from a fellow worker's rubbish bin! I have quietly read it through and realize what the paper said is very true. I would like you to send it to me so I can share it with my friends as I feel we must know what is going on." Australia

"I have received the first three issues of "Watchman, What of the Night?" for 1986. I f eel that the Lord is leading in this ministry. We are told that what God's people will need as the end draws near is 'straight testimony'. Too much of what we receive from the local church is watered down messages to appeal to the Laodicean condition instead of messages to arouse us from our slumber. We do not need the sensationalism of such speakers as Charles Wheeling and Lewis Walton. What we need is the Word of God. His word is powerful enough. It does not need the propaganda of the world to make it appealing." Illinois

Comment on Testimonies for the Church, Vol. 8, p. 247 -
"As of 1986, the Seventh-day Adventist Church as such
will not even take official cognizance of
this 'testimony' or discuss it."
- A. L. Hudson, Church Triumphant, #27, p.1.

--- (1986 May) ---End---- TOP

1986 Jun -- XIX - 6(86) -- A CONFIDENCE KEPT 25 YRS. -- Hudson Reveals a Promise Made -- Confirms Data Given Us -- In the aftermath of the Ankerberg Show (See WWN, XVIII-9) in which Johnsson, Editor of the Adventist Review, was completely routed, A. L. Hudson of Baker, Oregon, wrote a letter to six people: Elder Kenneth Wood, recent Editor of the Adventist Review, and now Chairman of the Board of Trustees of the Ellen G. White Estate; Dr. Wm. G. Johnsson; Robert Gerow, Manager of the Ankerberg Show; John Ankerberg; Dr. Walter Martin; and Douglas Hackleman, Editor of Adventist Currents. In this letter, Hudson revealed a telephone conversation with Dr. Walter Martin back in 1958. In that conversation, Martin gave to Hudson the following facts in regard to the SDA-Evangelical Conferences and the release of the book, Questions on Doctrine: 1. Adventists in the book, Questions on Doctrine had made serious changes from the script you [Martin] saw from [L. E.] Froom and [R. Allan] Anderson and the beliefs of Adventists today as portrayed by these brethren in hours of personal conversations. It was upon this information you [Martin] and Barnhouse had publicly declared Adventists were not a cult but brethren in Christ.

2. You told me you were asking these men for explanations which at the time of our conversation you had not received.

3. You told me that I was the first Adventist to contact you and tell you the whole thing would not fly, and you asked me not to say anything to upset the apple cart and the delicate relationship then existing. (Letter dated, December 7, 1985)

Now the questions will arise - Why after some 25 years has Hudson decided to reveal this conversation and what it means to Adventism? He explains: I said that I wouldn't and for some 25 years I've kept that promise and said or done virtually nothing to upset the apple cart; but the present situation is getting out of hand and past being funny. It is dishonoring to my God and counter-productive to His kingdom on earth.

What Martin told Hudson was simply that the answers the Adventist conferees gave to him and Barnhouse to the questions they asked were not the same answers as given in the published book - Questions on Doctrine - for the laity to read.

My acquaintance and friendship with Hudson began over the issues raised by the SDA-Evangelical Conferences. Soon after the publication of the book - Questions on Doctrine - Hudson prepared a Supporting Brief to a "Proposed Resolution" to be submitted to the Delegates of the 48th General Conference Session pertaining to the book Seventh-day Adventists Answer Questions on Doctrine. This Supporting Brief was distributed widely to Bible teachers in the Church's schools and to high ranking leaders of the hierarchy. I was given a copy to read which had been sent to the Bible Instructor at Indiana

p 2 -- Academy.

In reading this Supporting Brief, I discovered that Hudson had a copy of the manuscript which Wieland and Short had written in 1950 1888 Re-Examined. I had been trying to obtain a copy to read ever since it was first written. Elder Henry F Brown who at the time was connected with the General Conference had alerted me to its existence. I wrote to Hudson, and he sent me a copy to read.

From this contact there followed an exchange of correspondence which led to a meeting in Marion, Indiana, between Hudson, Wieland, Short and myself. Out of this meeting came the decision to publish - The Church Triumphant, by Hudson, which though irregular in its issues, is still being published. I wrote for this paper under the pen name, Ben Ezra II. But during all of these years, I was never aware of the conversation Hudson had had with Dr. Walter Martin nor its contents. Hudson kept his promise well.

However, I did learn of the fact that Questions on Doctrine as published for the laity of the Church was a revision of the script given to Walter Martin. On one occasion when both Wieland and I were in Takoma Park, we went to see Elder Don Neufeld, who at the time, as I recall, was a book editor for the Review & Herald. Wieland was desirous of getting Neufeld's opinion of the manuscript - 1888 Re-Examined. In the course of the conversation, the book, Questions on Doctrine, came into the discussion. Don Neufeld told us that he had in his desk at the time a copy of he original answers as given to Barnhouse and Martin. He commented that the published book was a revision of the original script. Naturally, I asked if we could see the copy of the original answers. He declined.

A number of years later, I wrote to him asking if he would please release this original copy for the sake of truth, and the clarification of the apostasy in the Church. To this request, Neufeld replied in a letter dated October 28, 1977:

Dear William:

Enclosed is my order form and a check.

I still feel it would be unethical to make available copies of those original answers sent to Martin and Barnhouse. I received them in confidence and would have to have the permission of the people involved before I could make them available to others. I hope you don't mind.

Very sincerely yours,
(Signed - Don)
Don F. Neufeld
Associate Editor

Hudson also had some contact with Neufeld. In his letter to the six men, after telling of his contact with Neufeld addressed a paragraph directly to Elder Kenneth Wood. Hudson wrote: Adventist leaders did alter, probably considerably, the original script of Froom and Anderson. We cannot get a copy of it. Don Neufeld, associate editor of the Adventist Review told me personally in Washington a few years later, "We (presumably the Review staff) knew what was going on but ethically we could not do anything."

Therefore, Kenneth, you know what I am saying is the truth, and you can fill in details that are not known to me. You served with Don as your letter to Gerow indicates. My letter is not intended to be minutely detailed but rather true in dealing with what actually happened in principle and is written by one whose God is being dishonored by both "sides" in the controversy through partial historical truth. (Hudson, op. cit. Emphasis his)

In 1980, Neufeld died suddenly. All Adventist contact for us to obtain a copy of the original answers ended. We knew that Martin must have a copy of these same answers but he would not release them. We were able to document a few changes by comparing page 30 in Questions on Doctrine with the article in Eternity, November, 1956, where Martin quoted from the original draft copy. (See our manuscript - The Seventh-day Adventist Evangelical Conferences of 1955-1956) Hudson also knows that Martin has such a copy, and in his letter appeals to Martin to release the same. He wrote: Brother Martin, I am appealing to you further to come out with a copy of the original script of your book and the original script of the Adventist book and say, "This was our honest attempt to reconcile Adventism and Evangelical Christianity." I believe it was an honest, if misguided attempt. (Ibid.. p. 5)

Now we know that the Adventist conferees T. E. Unruh, then president of the East Pennsylvania Conference; W. E. Reed, a Field Secretary of the General Conference; L. E. Froom, former Editor of Ministry; and R. Allan Anderson, then head of the Ministerial Association of the General Conference compromised the faith, denying the sanctuary truth, and the historic position of the Church on the Doctrine of the Incarnation as given in the 1888 Message. This is self evident as one reads Unruh's summary on the Conferences which he chaired. To what extent, no one can know until the original answers to the questions on doctrine as asked by Barnhouse and Martin are released. It is time that these answers be released. There is no doubt that somewhere in the Adventist secret "storage bins" copies are still extant. The Archives in Takoma Park may have such a copy. What ever the case, the Adventist laity should raise such a hue and cry that the hierarchy will have to release the document for all to read and see what was really said.

p 3 --Transcript of a recorded CONVERSATION between A. L. HUDSON and DR. DONALD BARNHOUSE May 16, 1958 Regarding the book QUESTIONS ON DOCTRINE (H) Good morning
(B) Good morning.
(H) This is Al Hudson, Baker, Oregon.
(B) Bob Hudson?
(H) A1 Hudson
(B) Al Hudson
(H) Yes
(B) Yes?
(H) On the 28th of last month I wrote you and Mr. Martin and Mr. Bryant a letter relative to some article which have appeared in your magazine on Seventh-day Adventists, etc.
(B) (To Secretary) Have we a letter from a Mr. Al Hudson, Baker, Oregon, concerning articles on the subject Adventists? All right, go ahead.
(H) The reason I mentioned that was to try to identify myself.
(B) Yes.
(H) Now, I'm in this letter ---
(B) What church are you connected with?
(H) I'm a Seventh-day Adventist.
(B) Yes.
(H) In my letter I stated what I'm calling you about. That's the reason I mentioned the letter. I thought if you might have caught it, why then you would know what -
(B) Well we get so many thousands of letters that it takes generally a long time to filter up to me.
(H) Sure, I appreciate that. Well, then I can give you just a brief resume of the situation. I'm writing a paper dealing with certain phases of developments in the Adventist church, particularly in the last decade. Of course this matter of our relationship to the Evangelicals has come along as part of the picture. And I've read your articles in Eternity, also Mr. Martin's articles, and articles that other Evangelicals have written. Now some time ago, I talked to Mr. Martin, oh, I guess it's been about a month ago. I was interested in when his book was coming out, and so on. I had talked to Mr. Bryant of Zondervan publishing, and Mr. Martin. Then I wrote up the result of our conversation as I understood it, and sent it to Mr. Martin, asking him to confirm it, or correct it as he might see fit, and I haven't heard from him. In fact, he seems unwilling to either confirm or deny the facts that we discussed in our conversation.
(B) Well, I tell you, I know this, that I know that his book has been cleared by our office, and it is on the way. I think that Zondervan doesn't want to publish it before September.
(H) I see.
(B) That's the situation. The book proposition. They don't want to break it out at this time of the year.
(H) I see. It's a matter of financial ---
(B) I don't know. It's a matter of hitting the trade at a certain time.
(H) I see.
(B) But what can I do for you?
(H) Well, now the question: there's quite a bit of controversy over this matter in the Evangelical press, and of course it is also appearing in our press. Now there seems to be one angle of the thing that I would like to get cleared up. Have, to your knowledge, either to you or to Mr. Martin, or anyone else, have Seventh-day Adventist leaders indicated formally or informally that they desire fellowship in the National Association of Evangelicals?
(B) I don't know anything about these things. My staff keeps me protected from all controversy so that I can sit here at my desk

p 4 -- and write, etc.
(H) I see.
(B) Now, I don't think there is any doubt of the fact that Seventh-day Adventists, that is the top leaders, understand that it is a very important thing for Seventh-day Adventists to be recognized as evangelical. But you see, the difficulty lies in the fact, that -- the one thing that I stated about Seventh-day Adventists, namely that they, are believers, has been overlooked by Talbot, and King's Business, and these people. The fact that I've said to thousands of people already, I said, "All I'm saying is that the Adventists are Christians." I still think that their doctrines are about the screwiest of any group of Christians in the world. I believe this beyond any question.

In fact, the doctrine of the investigative judgment is the most blatant, face-saving proposition that ever existed to cover up the debacle of the failure of Christ to come in 1844 as they said. When the two men walked through the cornfield, and suddenly one of them struck his head and said, "Why, Christ DID come." Why this is ridiculous, asinine nonsense. The whole of the investigative judgment is a face-saving thing, and now that a hundred years have gone by, if the Adventists had the courage -- because now the Adventists are becoming educated. A hundred years ago, the Adventists were practically all illiterate. And now they are becoming educated, and they know their doctrines will not hold the light of exegesis. Just simply cannot stand. There is no Greek, no Greek scholar in the world, that will fail to accept the fact that Christ died once and for all. And that He didn't go in and out, and that He hasn't been wandering around in the tabernacle. He has been seated, and that He has never gotten up to walk anywhere in 1844, or any other place else. Now failure to understand this is intellectual, ah, laziness or fear.

Now, you see, Seventh-day Adventist group was formed by three groups that came together, each holding a pet doctrine that was false. One group held Sabbatarianism, the others didn't at all. The second group held the investigative judgment, the other groups did not hold it at all. And the third group held the doctrine of conditional immortality, and the other groups didn't hold it at all. They were all united on the great truth of the second coming of Christ. And so, in order to come together in one union, they effected what is a compromise. Each accepted the folly of the other to get their own folly accepted. Because -- Now, if you drop a post card to my office, they'll send you my new booklet, "The Christian and the Sabbath," which has just been published about a week ago. You can get it free.
(H) The Christian and the Sabbath?
(B) Yes, Box 2000, Philadelphia. I have just made an exhaustive study of the folly of Sabbatarians preaching on "one man esteemeth one-day above another, another man esteems every day alike." And I have just published this, and it's on -- in fact if you listen next Sunday morning on National Broadcasting System, I'm on this subject, the Christian and the Sabbath, right now. I'm preaching six sermons on the Sabbath coast to coast on NBC, pointing out that the Adventists are wrong in keeping Saturday, the Protestant are wrong in keeping Sunday, and that the only thing to keep is, to have the attitude that every day is alike and that God not only is not entering into this day, but He HATES the Sabbath day. You see.
(H) Well, now, in your contact with Adventist leaders, which you mention in your magazine, and also Mr. Martin, do you feel that our top ranking leaders, who have as you say, become educated, are tending away from this concept of the investigative judgment as you have just mentioned it?
(B) You see, what we know is this. I cannot speak for any of these men, Roy Anderson and Froom, etc. - these are intelligent men. They'll speak for themselves. They'll tell you what they're believing and what they are doing. You wouldn't want anybody to call you up, or call somebody else up, and ask what the inside of your thinking was.
(H) No, except that you have had association with them, have talked with them.
(B) We have had great association; in fact I have a letter on my desk this minute. When I asked my secretary she just handed me a letter from L. E. Froom, and we are in correspondence right along, with the leaders of the Seventh-day Adventist Movement.

p 5 -- (H) Well then, that was the basis of my question. Now you have mentioned in your articles in Eternity that it seems to you that there is sort of a transition period, or a ---
(B) There has to be.
(H) Or a metamorphosis as it were out of the ---
(B) I mean there HAS to be. Take for example, we have discovered a book by Ellen G. White that nobody knows exists. The Seventh-day Adventists know that it exists, and they have a copy locked in their safe in Tacoma Park, Washington. And it is a book that does not exist any place else. There are only about three copies in the United States, that we know anything about. Well, they lock it up, to keep anybody from getting at it.
(H) Have you read it?
(B) Walter Martin has read it.
(H) Has he?
(B) Sure.
(H) Well, ah ---
(B) I mean, the Seventh-day Adventists themselves lock it up to keep people from getting at it because they realize that if anybody read that stuff, they would raise their hands in holy horror and say, "Now wait a minute. She was just a human being in the first place." Now, I recognize clearly that Mrs. White very frequently wrote some very spiritual things, but God Almighty NEVER spoke through a woman. Let's face it. You can't justify, a woman preaching and usurping authority over a man. It can't be done. Now, this is the position, psychologically we can understand the Seventh-day Adventist very well, and the fact that I took the lead in clearing them, in fact, I picked the Seventh-day Adventists out of the association of Christian Scientists and Jehovah's Witnesses, and have said, "These people are Christians." Seventh-day Adventists are immature Christians. I don't think there is any doubt of the fact that Seventh-day Adventists have a tremendous immaturity. And this immaturity rises from the psychological complex of their background. Because, I mean, have you read Froom's history?
(H) I have it here. I use it as a reference book. I haven't read it through, no.
(B) All right, well, if you go to the last volume of it and let him describe for you the whole Millerite proposition, he puts in capital letters, THE GREAT DISAPPOINTMENT, capital G, capital R, capital E, all capitals, THE GREAT DISAPPOINTMENT! Well, the great disappointment was that Jesus didn't come back on that day. Well, all of the people that were in that movement, were Presbyterians, Methodists, Episcopalians, - it was an evangelical movement in all the great churches, looking for the second coming of Christ. Miller was a Baptist, Miller wasn't a Seventh-day Adventist. He didn't believe in Saturday the Sabbath; he didn't believe in the investigative judgment; he didn't believe in conditional immortality.

Now you see, these men, as I say, I forget the name I of the man that went by the back way through the cornfield, you know who I mean. Well, let's face it. What happened to him that day was a great and terrible sin for what he was doing instead of getting down on his knees and saying, "Lord God, I've been a fool, and the Bible says that if any man makes a prophecy and it does not come to pass, you will know that I have not sent him." And there, I don't believe the Seventh-day Adventists are ever going to be any real witness unless the Seventh-day Adventist gets down on his knees and says, "Lord God, in the beginning we were founded on a lie," because you were founded on a lie.
(H) Well, of course those are moot points that ---
(B) Why, they're not even moot. I mean, if you take anybody that is not a Seventh-day Adventist, the five most honest men in the world, in fact if you take a Jew who is not a Christian, even, or a Roman Catholic, and put the thing up to them and say, "Now historically, judge!" why they're all going to say, "This is a face-saving proposition, at most; certainly it has nothing to do with the Bible."
(H) Well, I can see your line of reasoning.

(B) Now, I love all Christians. I love, and I have found - why, when these men came here to my home - I happen to have a nice place in the country - and these men came

p 6 -- to my home for days. And we were down on our knees together; we prayed together; we walked in the garden together. And let me tell you, Roy Anderson is one of the finest men I have ever met in my life and Unruh. We've prayed together. I know these men are brothers in Christ, you see, all that Talbot and the rest of them say -- I mean, you take the last copy of the magazine Evangelical Action, the organ of the National Association of Evangelicals. Brother, they came out in a big blast of Talbot and DeHaan against me and the Seventh-day Adventists, on the basis of the SDA book, but anybody who reads, have you read the big SDA book? [Questions on Doctrine]
(H) Yes, I have a copy here.
(B) Well, let's face it, in a very nice way, the leaders who have written this book, have moved from the traditional position of the SDA movement. They've come back toward the Bible.
(H) But they insist that they haven't. Now, that's the controversy, you see.
(B) What you fellows ought to do, now I don't know what your position is, but if you want to strike a blow for truth, write an article and come right out and say something like this, "Let's face the fact that we have error in our fundamental position. Let's abandon them and go forward with truth."
(H) Now you feel that Anderson and Froom are more or less of that disposition?
(B) Now I don't say that at all.
(H) You don't think so.
(B) No, I don't say that at all. They should be, but I think there are a lot of fellows that are holding sticks over them, and they don't dare to advance as much as they should.
(H) You think they would advance more if they weren't being held back?
(B) Look, I think you would advance more if you weren't being held back. If you follow the Holy Spirit, you would abandon the investigative judgment in one minute.
(H) Well, of course there is a lot of doctrinal controversy there, but on the practical end, as I said before, it seems to me this matter of fellowship -- Now, if Adventist leaders made overtures to the Association for recognition --
(B) I don't think they have.
(H) You don't think they have. Well, then the controversy in the Evangelical press to the effect that we are asking for fellowship has no foundation.
(B) I don't think it has any foundation. You see, in a large measure - let's face it, Mr. Hudson, in a large measure -- You see, most of the Fundamental Evangelicals in the United States are partially ignorant, and many, many of them are very jealous of me because I have had - I was a University professor, and have had a great education, and they know that if I say something that I have background for it. And they know what I've done in coming out in saying that Seventh-day Adventists are Christians. You see, Louie Talbot earned half of his living giving lectures against the cults, Christian Science, etc., and Walter Martin's rise has made Louie Talbot a has-been. Now this is the reason why he's attacking, and he's attacking me as much as he's attacking Seventh-day Adventists. You see, this we know.
(H) Well what is the basis of Mr. Martin's statement that there is no question, I think I have it here. "There is no doubt that Seventh-day Adventists desire to receive and to extend the hand of fellowship to all truly within the body of Christ, " meaning, at least in part, the members of the National Association of Evangelicals. -- To Be Continued

Comment - No doubt as you have read this conversation thus far, you have wondered - How could men who professed to be guardians of the spiritual interests of the people continue in dialogue, pray and find fellowship with one who believed as Barnhouse revealed himself in this telephone conversation with Brother A. L. Hudson. These Adventist leaders had to know early on how Barnhouse felt about the Sabbath and the priestly ministry of Christ in the Most Holy Place of the Heavenly Sanctuary. Was their "appetite" for human approbation so great that they would surrender truth to have it satiated? What a price to pay for such a "bowl of pottage"!

p 7 -- MORE FROM HUDSON'S LETTER -- When Froom, Anderson and company presented their script for publication responsible Adventist leadership could no longer stand by for "ethical" reasons. Machinery was set in operation to modify the "answers" of Froom, Anderson and company so that Adventism would not throw them out.

At the same time Barnhouse, Martin and company had stuck out their necks in calling us "brethren in Christ" and answers must be prepared that would enable them to save face also. So Questions on Doctrine was made sufficiently ambiguous as to serve the purpose of saving face for both Adventists and Evangelicals involved.

It appears both Questions on Doctrine and The Truth About Seventh-day Adventism [by Martin] were to hit the public simultaneously with Adventists selling Martin's book in our book stores.

But Martin had the same trouble as Froom and company.

Zondervan would not print Martin's book as the script was submitted. Bryant told me it "was too favorable to the Adventists." Apparently it took three years for Martin to work the script over so Zondervan would publish it. Questions on Doctrine bears a 1957 date and The Truth About Seventh-day Adventism bears a 1960 date.

As I see it from the information available to me what happened is quite simple and understandable. All parties concerned entered the project in good faith. Martin was the youngest of the men involved and had honest stars in his eyes. He was not experienced in the ways of organized religion. The rest of the men were. He was honestly taken in by Adventist leaders, and he sold Barnhouse.

Read my conversation with Barnhouse. 1 Froom did tell me what I alleged to Barnhouse. By saying Martin was honest I am not implying the other men were really dishonest - they were experienced clergymen in organized religion and professional clergymen and professional lawyers have ways somewhat mysterious to us laymen!

Froom, Anderson and company backed by General Conference president Figuhr honestly thought they drew enough water to swing Adventism their way. They honestly thought 2 their way was the right way and a service to Adventism. I believe Martin honestly thought he was doing the cause of Christ a service by "making peace with the Adventists," and it would be were it possible.

Everybody really acted in good faith - except in the cover-up. Everybody involved knew they were covering up to save face. (Barnhouse obtained permission from Figuhr to sue me for recording our conversation but when I said I would be glad to discuss the whole thing in open court as neither side would talk in private, I heard no more from him.) [pp. 2-3]

1 In this issue of the Thought Paper (p. 3) we will begin the publication of the conversation between Barnhouse and Hudson verbatim. In the July issue we will conclude the transcription of the conversation.

2 When other possible factors are considered, this conclusion is open to question. --- (1986 Jun) --- End ---- TOP 2002