"The enemy of souls has sought to bring in the
supposition that a great reformation was to take place among Seventh-day
Adventists, and that this reformation would consist in giving up the doctrines
which stand as the pillars of our faith, and engaging in a process of
reorganization. Were this reformation to take place,
what would result? The principles of truth that God in His wisdom has given to
the remnant church, would be discarded. Our religion
would be changed. The fundamental principles that have sustained the work for
the last fifty years would be accounted as error. A NEW ORGANIZATION would be
established. Books of a NEW ORDER would be written. A system of intellectual
philosophy would be introduced. The founders of this system would go into the
cities, and do a wonderful work. The Sabbath of course, would be lightly
regarded, as also the God who created it. Nothing would be
allowed to stand in the way of the NEW MOVEMENT. The leaders would teach that
virtue is better than vice, but GOD BEING REMOVED, they would place their
dependence on human power, which, without God, is worthless. Their foundation
would be built on the sand, and storm and tempest would sweep away the
structure.
Who has authority to begin such a [NEW] movement?
We have our Bibles, we have our experience, attested
to by the miraculous working of the Holy Spirit. We have a truth that admits of
no compromise. Shall we not repudiate everything that is not in harmony with
this truth? E.G. White, Selected Messages, Bk. 1, 204, 205.
We
see from the following link that the surname Veith is
of Jewish extraction. rwb
http://amazingdiscoveries.org/12.12.06-walter-veith-responds-to-eud-banned-in-german-churches
An inquiry is currently underway in Germany
concerning Walter Veith and anti-semitism
charges. In our previously published report,
the circumstances and dialogue that took place in this incident are outlined.
On December 4, 2012, the EUD made the decision 45 in favour,
1 opposed, and 4 undecided to ban Walter Veith from
speaking in German SDA Churches for the second time. The previous ban took
place in 2004 due to his lectures on Bible translations and what was termed as
"conspiracy theories" which were highly disapproved of by German
leaders. The ban was lifted in 2010, but now has been reinstated.
Readers should note that there have been no
complaints from Jews in regards to Walter's comments, nor have any non-SDAs had
issue with the contents of his series. All complaints and disapproval
originated from fellow SDA brethren, specifically those associated with the
private news agency EANN (similar to Spectrum), and from Church leadership that
sided with the accusers. The ban from speaking in German SDA Churches stems not
from any public offence actually made, but rather from leadership so desperate
to be politically correct that they rather sacrifice truth. Or is there a more
sinister reason for their strong opposition to this message??
The following letter was sent on December
5, 2012 by Walter Veith to Bruno Vertallier
in response to his November 30, 2012 letter of disapproval and request to meet.
Dear Brother Vertallier
Thank you for your letter to which I would
like to respond. Firstly, I never received any e-mails from you as you might
have sent them to an old address and our telephone lines have been stolen so
you would not have been able to reach me on the land line. Secondly, from the
tone of your letter it is obvious that you did not accept my explanation of the
‘small yellow cloth’ phrase and I therefore assume that you suppose that it was
intentionally derogatory towards the Jews as a people. It seems as though some
people are bent on assuming evil intent because that is what they want to hear.
The fact of the matter is that my lectures are too close to home for some and
therefore every word is placed on the gold scale to find something
objectionable and they refuse to accept my explanation that it was an issue of
language barrier and nothing else.
Let me spell it out for you: In my home
language (Afrikaans) all diminutives are endearing and express empathy and we
even have double diminutives and triple diminutives to express feelings. In
German diminutives are often deemed derogatory and since German and Afrikaans
share phrases it is natural for me to use Afrikaans nuances when speaking
German. In fact I got into trouble before in Germany for saying that someone
had a ‘small heart’ (kleines Herz)
as opposed to ‘large heart’ (groβes Herz). In Afrikaans someone with a small heart (klein hartjie
–which by the way is a double diminutive) is kind, full of empathy, gentle,
easily hurt, or endearing, but in German it means ‘hard-hearted’ or ‘stingy’.
In Afrikaans one would use the phrase ‘small cloth’ to distinguish it from the
opposite extreme such as a large cloth like a bed sheet and no one would even
think to interpret it otherwise. I therefore reiterate that I did not mean it
in a derogatory sense and that I harbor no anti-Semitic sentiments. Moreover,
having grown up in Africa and not in Germany, I was never associated with
discrimination against the Jews nor did I ever side with or share any
sentiments with those who did. On the contrary, discriminatory ideologies are
abhorrent to me.
My statements have been wrenched out of all
proportions and since the actions of the SDA leadership in German-speaking
Europe during the war were not exactly exemplary (as is clear from their
apology in the 2005 declaration on anti-Semitism and also the recent reiteration of that declaration) I assume that you overreacted for fear that the past
should haunt you. In line with that declaration, I too am against all forms of
discrimination on the grounds of race or religion and stand firmly for
religious liberty but I draw a clear line of distinction between the
theological issues and the racial issues involved. It seems to me that some
find it difficult to distinguish between the two because they carry this burden
of guilt. The fact that the SDA church in Germany shares this guilt does,
however, not give them the right to transfer this baggage onto me and to swing
to the opposite extreme of discriminating against the ‘antitypical Jews’ who
preach the Three Angels’ Messages. If they do this, then their confession
becomes a repentance of King Saul without the change of heart, because they demonstrate
by their action that they are just as willing now to repeat their folly as they
were then.
As Seventh-day Adventists we have been
called to present a particular message – the Three Angels’ Messages - which
will end in the clarion call to all who are trapped in Babylon to ‘Come out of
her, My people’. The false ideologies must be laid bare and Babylon will be
exposed or else no one will know what they are to come out of. The trumpet must
give a certain sound so the people can rally under the Lord’s banner. This is
the aim of my lectures and this should be the aim of every SDA evangelist as we
are admonished ‘not to let anything else occupy our minds’. Modern Babylonian
ideologies are closely associated with a literal state of Israel and must therefore
be exposed as false and this alone is the aim of my lectures. The preaching of
the Three Angels’ Messages is uncomfortable to those within our ranks who wish
to be so politically correct that they are willing to sacrifice truth for
worldly acceptance.
The German leaders never consulted me
before issuing a public statement to the churches and thereby did not follow
the Biblical process as outlined in Matthew 18:15-20, thereby aligning
themselves with the accusers. Furthermore, the legal procedures that have been
initiated against me are also out of harmony with Scripture and since the
leadership has not distanced itself from this process, they too are in breach
of the Biblical admonition in this regard. Your letter to me clearly shows that
the EUD position is no different from the above and therefore I now have no
choice other than to place this response and some concerns of my own in the
public domain as well.
1. The modern ecumenical tendencies in our midst becloud the
presentation of the Three Angels’ Messages and it seems that our
representatives in Europe (as published recently in a German SDA journal)
cannot even give a reason as to why we believe that the papacy is the
antichrist or why we as a church deem it necessary to hand out the ‘Great
Controversy’. Are we not admonished against ecumenical associations and will
this not be a stumbling block to the propagation of
our message?
2. Why is it that not a word of
remonstrance is heard when false practices are brought into the church?
Most of leadership seems unconcerned when Spiritual Formation comes into our
ranks like a flood in spite of the fact that it has its roots in Jesuitical
spirituality (as dealt with extensively in my lecture ‘The Jesuits and the
Counterreformation’). We go even further and advertise books with these
sentiments in official church publications. Why was there no public rebuke when a speaker
at one of our institutes in Europe advocated blessings by Wiccan witches and
why was this speaker even permitted to speak at other SDA institutes? Were
those involved ever given letters of rebuke? I am aware that this is not only a
European problem and that other institutes have permitted Jesuits and other
such speakers to speak at Adventist forums.
3.
Why is it that
our youth is led astray at official gatherings with music and performances that
have no semblance of heaven? I have
watched shocking videos of youth and church leaders in Europe engaging in
events that would even make other denominations blush. Are we so bent on
apostasy that concerned brethren are driven to cry between the porch and the
altar for all the evil that is done in Israel? Even Conference Presidents have
expressed their deep sadness with regard to this issue to me personally. Again,
I acknowledge that this is a worldwide problem, but that the leadership should lead the way in this apostasy, is indeed
astounding.
4. Why is it that we willingly adopt the practices of
non-SDA mega churches and emerging church theologies that change our message
and our outreach to one of ‘correction of social injustices’ rather than a
message of salvation? It seems this is
the new wave. Did those who teach these things ever receive letters of
rebuke? Is it right that these new methods should be drummed into our students
and that we should embrace these practices when we are not only admonished by
the Spirit of Prophecy that we should steer clear of such things but are even
warned that they would come in like a flood. Do we really want to be part of
this fulfillment of prophecy or should we do all in our power to stop it?
5. Why is it that there was no official letter of rebuke
from Europe when most of the delegates of that territory voted against the
clarification of our position regarding the literal Six-day Creation? Why are evolutionary ideologies not only
embraced in our ranks, but the ‘princes of Israel’, who are supposed to lead
the flock in the ancient paths align themselves publicly with this apostasy?
When the testimonies that were once believed are marginalized and relegated to
the ‘trash heap of nineteenth century literature’, then the road to perdition
is sure to follow. Why are leading figures allowed to
slight and ridicule the testimonies and no action is taken against them? Does
the Spirit of Prophecy not form part of our fundamental beliefs?
6.
Where does Europe
stand when it comes to the ordination issue? Irrespective of where we stand on
the issue personally, why are there rumblings of secession from the ranks
because pet theories are placed above church unity? Did Christ pray in vain for
unity? Is it necessary to print an additional watered-down evangelically-minded
Sabbath School lesson book just to avoid the sentiments expressed in the Spirit
of Prophecy and hereby cause divisions in the church in Europe and indeed in
the world?
The list could go on and on but I will
leave it there. There are many voices of concern regarding these issues, not
least of which is that of Elder Ted Wilson who stands out like a beacon of hope
and I believe that God has placed him there for a time like this. It is shameful
how he was and still is treated by some in our ranks. We can no longer remain
silent in the face of these things or else we will be found wanting. We will
have to meet these challenges head on (“Iceberg ahead – meet it!”) and may God
be gracious to us during the shaking which must come.
Regarding the issue of Freemasonry and the
Jesuits, these matters are clearly outlined in the Spirit of Prophecy and I
feel that further discussions would not be fruitful. If we disregard the Spirit
of Prophecy, how will we ever understand our SDA mission? Therefore nothing
that I could say would change your perceptions. I have stated my case in the
past and up to date have never received any reply regarding these
documents and I append them again for your
clarification.
I wish to assure you that I love Christ and
His truth, as given to our pioneers, with all my heart. I believe that this
church will go through to the Kingdom and I will continue to do all in my power
to call people into its ranks and it is my prayer that the church will unify on
the true Advent message as it was preached from 1842 to 1846 {GCB, April 6,
1903 par. 35; 1 MR 52.2}. I thank God for the pioneers and godly Adventists who
as late as 1952 published our first declaration of fundamental beliefs under
the official auspices of the General Conference in the book “Principles of
Life”. I stand by this Adventism and by the grace of God
will not be moved.
I wish to make an appeal to you in the words
of the Spirit of prophecy:
Seventh-day
Adventists are now to stand forth separate and distinct, a people denominated
by the Lord as His own. Until they do this, He cannot be glorified in them.
Truth and error cannot stand in copartnership. Let us
now place ourselves where God has said that we should stand.... We are to strive for unity
but not on the low level of conformity to worldly policy and union with the
popular churches.--Lt
113, 1903. {2MCP 559.2} (bold emphasis added by Ron)
Your Brother in Christ
Walter Veith