What if the Pope wanted to visit the GC

[Woody]

Quote:

As to who else was given one, I can only guess why you think that would be somehow significant in the grand conspiracy theory that you are helping to perpetuate by cutting and pasting from those anti-SDA Church websites. But given the nature of the medallion, I seriously doubt any record is kept of who is given one. The fact that a PARL office assistant was free to give me one without clearing it with anyone should tell you how significant an "honor" it is supposed to be. It is a nice give-away item.

Well Tom ... it must be an honor for you to be in the same catagory as the Pope !! I wonder if your name is going to be on the Anti- SDA sites that were quoted.??

[Woody]

There seems to be a repeated theme of referring to the use of 'Holy Father'. I don't like this title. I would not wish others to call me that. But this is the title HE uses.

Many people call him this like GWB ... but GWB does not believe he is the Holy Father. The use of it does not mean that you agree.

I've called Christian ministers Reverand so in so. This is there title and it is what they expect. Do I believe in the use of this title? No. But it is like calling someone Dr. so in so. That is their title that THEY use.

Personally .... I would not make a big deal out of it. I don't believe by use of this title that our church was doing or saying anything contrary to our beliefs.

I am just tired of all the Anti- SDA this and that. We don't need to nit-pick each and every minor action of our church.

[Taylor]

At the same time, looking at the medal, I see the Ten Commandments on one side, with the Sabbath as the FOURTH commandment (not the Catholic/Lutheran version), and the first sentence of the Fourth Commandment as it appears in the King James Bible (no room for more on the medal.) The Bible is depicted--thus showing the supremacy of the Bible over church tradition. The words, 'Christ Our Righteousness' certainly do NOT go along with Catholic teaching on penance and indulgences. On the other side is a depiction of Christ's second coming, Rev. 1:7 quoted. Doesn't look to me like Christ is standing on a mountain. He is standing on clouds. The bottom of the medal has a space for Rev. 1:7. As for stars . . . this is the second coming, not the seven churches vision. Jesus' pose is indeed medieval, but I see nothing wrong with that. As for the absence of a crown, I just don't see some dark significance to that. The Catholic church certainly acknowledges that Christ will wear a crown. Looks to me like the medal is a witnessing tool. It certainly does NOT appear to be in harmony with the Catholic church's teaching! Sabbath, Bible, Second Advent. I am not saying that I would have honored the papacy with a medal, but at the same time I don't see this medallion as honoring the papacy. Quite the opposite. Looks like Bert Beach may have had a similar agenda to JPII in a sense--bring him back to the fold--to the Adventist church.

Dave

Well said Dave. While giving a "medal" might not have been the "only idea of how to go about it", it certainly is a creative way of giving the pope something he will actualy look at. He would not read an EGW book or an exposition on the Sabbath written by anyone, but he will likely keep this small medal and maybe it will cause him to think.

[David Koot]

Yes, that's a good point, Taylor. 'A picture is worth a thousand words.' One thing I wouldn't have done is refer to him as the 'holy father.' I think I understand the diplomatic considerations, its just that there are some lines I wouldn't cross. In the past, I have addressed Christian ministers as 'pastor,' rather than 'reverend' or 'father' (Episcopalians refer to the rector as 'father') I might have spoken of this individual as 'pope John Paul II or something similar, but not 'the holy father.' That seems to be supporting the claims of the papacy and could be perceived as a recognition of special status.

Dave

[Taylor]

I can understand that and I can respect that. I sincerely see it as Mr. Beach using the pope's recognized "title" as a title, certainly not as a "worship" type of thing. However, I agree, it probably would have been better to refer to him as "Pope John Paul the II" as you say.

[Woody]

Did Beach have approval to call the Pope 'Holy Father' ? Was this a conspiracy from the Adventist Church? Or did Beach act on his own to address him as Holy Father?

[John317]

Do CA members believe what Ellen White wrote below?

Romanism is now regarded by Protestants with far greater favor than in former years. In those countries where Catholicism is not in the ascendancy, and the papists are taking a conciliatory course in order to gain influence, there is an increasing indifference concerning the doctrines that separate the reformed churches from the papal hierarchy; the opinion is gaining ground that, after all, we do not differ so widely upon vital points as has been supposed, and that a little concession on our part will bring us into a better understanding with Rome. The time was when Protestants placed a high value upon the liberty of conscience which had been so dearly purchased. They taught their children to abhor popery and held that to seek harmony with Rome would be disloyalty to God. But how widely different are the sentiments now expressed!

The defenders of the papacy declare that the church has been maligned, and the Protestant world are inclined to accept the statement. Many urge that it is unjust to judge the church of today by the abominations and absurdities that marked her reign during the centuries of ignorance and darkness. They excuse her horrible cruelty as the result of the barbarism of the times and plead that the influence of modern civilization has changed her sentiments.

Have these persons forgotten the claim of infallibility put forth for eight hundred years by this haughty power? So far from being relinquished, this claim was affirmed in the nineteenth century with greater positiveness than ever before. As Rome asserts that the "church never erred; nor will it, according to the Scriptures, ever err" (John L. von Mosheim, Institutes of Ecclesiastical History, book 3, century II, part 2, chapter 2, section 9, note 17), how can she renounce the principles which governed her course in past ages?

The papal church will never relinquish her claim to infallibility. All that she has done in her persecution of those who reject her dogmas she holds to be right; and would she not repeat the same acts, should the opportunity be presented? Let the restraints now imposed by secular governments be removed and Rome be reinstated in her former power, and there would speedily be a revival of her tyranny and persecution....

But Romanism as a system is no more in harmony with the gospel of Christ now than at any former period in her history. The Protestant churches are in great darkness, or they would discern the signs of the times. The Roman Church is far-reaching in her plans and modes of operation. She is employing every device to extend her influence and increase her power in preparation for a fierce and determined conflict to regain control of the world, to re-establish persecution, and to undo all that Protestantism has done. Catholicism is gaining ground upon every side. See the increasing number of her churches and chapels in Protestant countries. Look at the popularity of her colleges and seminaries in America, so widely patronized by Protestants. Look at the growth of ritualism in England and the frequent defections to the ranks of the Catholics. These things should awaken the anxiety of all who prize the pure principles of the gospel.

Protestants have tampered with and patronized popery; they have made compromises and concessions which papists themselves are surprised to see and fail to understand. Men are closing their eyes to the real character of Romanism and the dangers to be apprehended from her supremacy. The people need to be aroused to resist the advances of this most dangerous foe to civil and religious liberty.

Great Controversy, pp. 563-566

[John317]

Did Beach have approval to call the Pope 'Holy Father' ? Was this a conspiracy from the Adventist Church? Or did Beach act on his own to address him as Holy Father?

What evidence do we have BB Beach did what he did at the request or planning of the General Conference? Did they know ahead of time that He would be giving him a medal and calling him "The Holy Father"?

In any case, the Vatican certainly viewed B.B. Beach's actions and words as representing all SDAs.

[Taylor]

Some here believe in EGW and some do not, I happen to believe in EGW's writings. However, I do not see giving a medal, which will show the pope in a pictoral form many of the truths of Adventism is somehow "joining hands with the papacy" or "failing to realize the prophecies" or anything of the sort.

I just think that when we are jumping to conclusions when we think that:

1. That giving the medal meant we are somehow lowering our standards or forgetting the past or forgetting prophecy or disagreeing with EGW's writings...

2. Or that the medal is somehow all purposfully "wrong" when the purpose for the medal was to give a gift and to give a visual of many of the elements of what SDA's believe.

3. Or that we are somehow paying homage by giving it....

What we need to realize that:

1. We had nothing to do with giving of the metal.

2. We didn't create the metal.

3. We do not personally know the person who gave the metal and even if we did we can not read his mind and know his motivations.

4. If we can only imagine or believe "evil" about the motivation, or the lowering of standards, or some consipacy as to why it was given, and we can't ever see that there might be another side we had never considered before....

....Then we have no business judging the motivation, intent, theology etc behind those who in good faith gave the metal.

Just my 2 cents.

What I do think is that often we spend lots of precious time debating such issues when there is a world that is dying without a knowledge of Jesus and that is where our time is better spent. Lets let God do the judging. God calls us to fish...but he cleans the fish.

(And BTW John, I think you are honestly concerned. I agree that we must be distinctively SDA not "linking up with any other "powers". But I think that maybe some also aren't considering that there might be a totally different reason behind all of it than what you are thinking. That is something to consider. One can't judge someone till they've walked in the person's shoes...and since none of us can read hearts or minds then we have no real idea as to all the reasons why it was given. However, from what I can see, it was given in good faith, as a medal that the pope will likely keep and that he will have a visual reminder of many key SDA doctrines. In some ways, a picture is worth a thousand words and thus it might have just been a very brilliant way to wittness to "The Pope" since the church will never get the chance to give him a Bible study on those key doctrines. I think we should reach out to leadership in every church and try to help them understand the truths in God's word.)

[olger]

"The defenders of the papacy declare that the church has been maligned, and the Protestant world are inclined to accept the statement. Many urge that it is unjust to judge the church of today by the abominations and absurdities that marked her reign during the centuries of ignorance and darkness. They excuse her horrible cruelty as the result of the barbarism of the times and plead that the influence of modern civilization has changed her sentiments."

That's certainly true !

[olger]

As to the Beach overture to JP II, it could come back to haunt us someday (and no doubt will).

Koot's description of the "Vatican rottweiler" is right on par with what we know of him.

oG

[John317]

The way I see it, many SDAs, who ought to know better, are in danger of ignoring or not paying attention to the following warnings of the prophet of God, Ellen White:

A day of great intellectual darkness has been shown to be favorable to the success of popery. It will yet be demonstrated that a day of great intellectual light is equally favorable for its success....

In the movements now in progress in this country [the United States] to secure for the institutions and usages of the church the support of the State, Protestants are following in the steps of papists. Nay, more, they are opening the door for popery to regain in Protestant America the supremacy which she has lost in the Old World. And that which gives greater significance to the movement is the fact that the principal object contemplated is the enforcement of Sunday observance-- a custom which originated with Rome, and which she claims as the sign of her authority. The Spirit of Prophecy, Vol. 4, p. 390.

How the Roman Church can clear herself from the charge of idolatry we cannot see... And this is the religion which Protestants are beginning to look upon with so much favor, and which will eventually be united with Protestantism. This union will not, however, be effected by a change in Catholicism; for Rome never changes. She claims infallibility. It is Protestantism that will change. The adoption of liberal ideas on its part will bring it where it can clasp the hand of Catholicism. Review and Herald, June 1, 1886. (Quoted in Dramatic Prophecies of Ellen White, Herbert Edgar Douglass, p.78.)

NOTICE THAT THIS INCREDIBLE UNION WILL OCCUR, NOT BECAUSE THE PAPACY WILL CONCEDE ANYTHING, BUT BECAUSE PROTESTANTISM WILL CHANGE DUE TO ITS "ADOPTION OF LIBERAL IDEAS."

Protestants little know what they are doing when they propose to accept the aid of Rome in the work of Sunday exaltation. While they are bent upon the accomplishment of their purpose, Rome is aiming to re-establish her power, to recover her lost supremacy. Let the principle once be established in the United States that the church may employ or control the power of the state; that religious observances may be enforced by secular laws; in short, that the authority of church and state is to dominate the conscience, and the triumph of Rome in this country is assured.

God's word has given warning of the impending danger; let this be unheeded, and the Protestant world will learn what the purposes of Rome really are, only when it is too late to escape the snare. She is silently growing into power. Her doctrines are exerting their influence in legislative halls, in the churches, and in the hearts of men. She is piling up her lofty and massive structures in the secret recesses of which her former persecutions will be repeated. Stealthily and unsuspectedly she is strengthening her forces to further her own ends when the time shall come for her to strike. All that she desires is vantage ground, and this is already being given her. We shall soon see and shall feel what the purpose of the Roman element is. Whoever shall believe and obey the word of God will thereby incur reproach and persecution. GC 581

[John317]

There seems to be a repeated theme of referring to the use of 'Holy Father'. I don't like this title. I would not wish others to call me that. But this is the title HE uses.

Many people call him this like GWB ... but GWB does not believe he is the Holy Father. The use of it does not mean that you agree.

I've called Christian ministers Reverand so in so. This is there title and it is what they expect.

Do I believe in the use of this title? No. But it is like calling someone Dr. so in so.

I don't agree that calling a human being "reverend" is like calling someone Dr. So what if their titled is "God,' do we call them that too just because it is their title and they expect you to call them "God"?

Words having meaning.

Quote:

That is their title that THEY use.

So let THEM use it. We shouldn't.

Quote:

Personally .... I would not make a big deal out of it.

I don't believe by use of this title that our church was doing or saying anything contrary to our beliefs.

Yes, calling the Pope, "Holy Father," is contrary to SDA beliefs, at least it used to be.

Quote:

I am just tired of all the Anti- SDA this and that. We don't need to nit-pick each and every minor action of our church.

Do you believe the following statement?--

"The Papacy is well adapted to meet the wants of all these [i.e., those who are ignorant both of the Scriptures and of the power of God]. It is prepared for two classes of mankind, embracing nearly the whole world-- those who would be saved by their merits, and those who would be saved in their sins. Here is the secret of its power." GC 572.

Ellen White, as well as the Bible, says that we are NOT saved in our sins. You have often contradicted this and maintained that we ARE saved in our sins. Ellen White here states clearly that the Papacy teaches also that we are saved in our sins, and this false teaching is one of the secrets of its power.

What do you think of this?

[Taylor]

John, no one is arguing that the Pope is somehow someone we should follow. We recognize the problems both historically, prophetically, and currently.

I also don't like calling someone the "Holy Father" however it is the title he is called and just maybe people can consider that the one giving the "medal" wasn't trying to "worship" the pope but was simply being respectful. I also wouldn't be comfortable using it ever for a human, but I don't think we can judge people's motivation.

I have met many people named Jesus as that is a very common name in Hispanic cultures. I feel a bit uncomfortable calling any human Jesus but it is simply their name and it doesn't mean I am worshiping them if I call them by their name.

Just because there are some who don't see the "giving of the medal" as a grave sin, doesn't mean they want to change religions, don't realize the past, don't believe the Bible or EGW.

[Neil D]

I look at it this way....

That site is a site that wants to inflame adventists into doing something, anything against the pope....

And we have shown that it's information on the coin given to the pope was interpreted wrong....SDA cow-towing to the pope is really rediculous.....

How do we know that the information from this site is accurate regarding what our rep said to the pope?

The site has already shown that it is out to manipulate OUR feelings into some sort of action against the pope... What are we to do, sell our homes now, and set up camp in the mountains?

I question the site before I will critize the actions of our representative. There are too many jerks, SDA jerks at that, who want the main body of people to rashly influence our leadership for racial/fearful bias's.....

John, I will tell you again....rethink what you are posting...You are reacting to a supposed argument that is supposed to happen.... I don't know about you, but I prefer not to repeat an "Ox Bow incident"....That is, hang a man on hearsay...

[Taylor]

Wow...who is Josie and Anna? Never heard of them before. I think you have your forums or threads mixed up.

[John317]

I

John, I will tell you again....rethink what you are posting...You are reacting to a supposed argument that is supposed to happen.... I don't know about you, but I prefer not to repeat an "Ox Bow incident"....That is, hang a man on hearsay...

What is it exactly that you are objecting to in what I actually posted? I did not, of course, post the link to the website in order to suggest that I believe everything on that website. The context of my posting the link is to show the medal that was given to the pope, as well as the exchange that took place between him and the SDA representative. That information is very relevant to this thread. For instance, should the SDA church give the pope a medal or call the pope by his expected "title," "The Holy Father"? This is a very important question. It is not irrelevant at all.

Neither is it irrelevant what Ellen White wrote on the topic in the Great Controversy.

All of this is apropos to the topic under discussion. I have said that I am in favor of accepting a visit by the pope to the GC. However, it is very important that we not do what other protestants are doing, which is to forget why they are protestants. I believe that we are in danger of rejecting or ignoring what Ellen White was inspired to write on this subject in books such as The Great Controversy.

Consider this important paragraph:

God's word has given warning of the impending danger; let this be unheeded, and the Protestant world will learn what the purposes of Rome really are, only when it is too late to escape the snare. She is silently growing into power. Her doctrines are exerting their influence in legislative halls, in the churches, and in the hearts of men. She is piling up her lofty and massive structures in the secret recesses of which her former persecutions will be repeated. Stealthily and unsuspectedly she is strengthening her forces to further her own ends when the time shall come for her to strike. All that she desires is vantage ground, and this is already being given her. We shall soon see and shall feel what the purpose of the Roman element is. Whoever shall believe and obey the word of God will thereby incur reproach and persecution.

[David Koot]

Yeah, I have to say, trying to read some mysterious meaning into some of that stuff on the medallion is really pushing the envelope IMO. For example, Jesus standing on a mountain. If you look carefully, you will see that the angels surrounding Jesus are cut off by the bottom section of the coin, where the inscription Rev. 1:7 appears. That's no mountain. But aside from that, I--I myself, if I were trying to reach someone--and I do that frequently--would try to make my presentation as appealing as possible to that person. Like Paul said, I am all things to all people. If depicting Christ etc in a certain way will make the man more inclined to take the message on the medallion more seriously, I would be all for it. We don't to use an 'in your face' approach. We're trying to win people, I would think.

At the same time, I sure wouldn't invite the guy over for a public meeting or reception. After all, he is out there with an agenda. If he wanted to visit the GC, it would be for the purpose of trying to influence the GC to accept the domination of Rome. And I don't think it would be a good witness.

I don't waste time with 'conspiracy' web sites--totally hokey. I'm way too pragmatic for that. But there is enough credible info out there to make things pretty clear, I think.

Dave

[John317]

Do you know of any other site on the web, or book, that shows the medal that was given to the pope or reports the exchange that took place between the pope and the SDA representative?

[David Koot]

I would think that could be verified independently. Personally, I stay away from 'yellow journalism,' sensationalism, conspiracy theories, all that stuff. I don't even give it the time of day. Let's see evidence from a credible source. Photographic evidence would be fine, a transcript of the meeting would be fine, etc. Secondary evidence would include eyewitness accounts of the meeting, as reported in reputable media. I won't go beyond that.

At any rate, I personally think the whole thing is blown out of proportion. What's going to happen, will happen. I want to take care of my patch of garden. I trust the Master Gardener to oversee the whole vineyard. I'm a little fish.

Dave

[John317]

I posted a link to the medal and to the exchange that took place between the pope and BB Beach, the only source I know of for that information. That information is relevant to the thread. If anyone has good evidence that this information is inaccurate, then let them present it. The fact that the information came from that particular website is really irrelevant. Since when do those on CA limit their sources exclusively to those websites which post only views they find agreeable or "credible"?

I believe that the following quotes from Ellen White make it essential for us as Adventists to wake up and pay close attention to the relationship developing between the papacy and the protestant churches, including our own beloved church:

"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 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." Series B No. 2 54,55, or 1 SM 204, 205

"The sin of ancient Israel was in disregarding the expressed will of God and following their own way according to the leadings of unsanctified hearts. Modern Israel are fast following in their footsteps, and the displeasure of the Lord is as surely resting upon them." 5T 94

"If when the Lord reveals your errors you do not repent or make confession, His providence will bring you over the ground again and again. You will be left to make mistakes of a similar character, you will continue to lack wisdom, and will call sin righteousness. The multitude of deceptions that will prevail in these last days will encircle you, and you will change leaders, and not know that you have done so." RH 12/6/90

"We are in danger of becoming a sister to fallen Babylon, of allowing our churches to become corrupted, and filled with every foul spirit, a cage for every unclean and hateful bird....I tell you the truth, Elder Butler, that unless there is a cleansing of the soul temple on the part of many who claim to believe and to preach the truth, God's judgments, long deferred, will come." Letter 51, 1886.

"We are not to spend our time in controversy with those who know the truth, and upon whom the light of truth has been shining, when they turn away their ear from the truth to turn to fables. I was told that men will employ every policy to make less prominent the differences between the faith of Seventh-day Adventists and those who observe the first day of the week. In this controversy the whole world will be engaged, and the time is short. This is no time to haul down our colors. A company was presented before me under the name of Seventh-day Adventists, who were advising that the banner or sign which makes us a distinctive people should not be held out so strikingly, for they claimed it was not the best policy in securing success to our institutions....I saw some reaching out their hands to remove the banner, and obscure its significance." 2SM 385

[Taylor]

I would think that could be verified independently. Personally, I stay away from 'yellow journalism,' sensationalism, conspiracy theories, all that stuff. I don't even give it the time of day. Let's see evidence from a credible source. Photographic evidence would be fine, a transcript of the meeting would be fine, etc. Secondary evidence would include eyewitness accounts of the meeting, as reported in reputable media. I won't go beyond that.

At any rate, I personally think the whole thing is blown out of proportion. What's going to happen, will happen. I want to take care of my patch of garden. I trust the Master Gardener to oversee the whole vineyard. I'm a little fish.

Dave

I couldn't agree more.

[John317]

...You are reacting to a supposed argument that is supposed to happen.... I don't know about you, but I prefer not to repeat an "Ox Bow incident"....That is, hang a man on hearsay...

What "supposed argument that is supposed to happen" do you have reference to?

[Woody]

Quote:

I did not, of course, post the link to the website in order to suggest that I believe everything on that website.

I can relate to what you are saying here John317.

I get accused of needing to believe ALL of Ellen White when I quote her. Just because I quote some of her does not mean that I have to agree with ALL of her. So, the same with the link you posted .... just because you posted some of the source does not mean that you have to agree with ALL of that source.

Good Point. I am glad to have company with this belief.

[Woody]

I would think that could be verified independently. Personally, I stay away from 'yellow journalism,' sensationalism, conspiracy theories, all that stuff. I don't even give it the time of day. Let's see evidence from a credible source. Photographic evidence would be fine, a transcript of the meeting would be fine, etc. Secondary evidence would include eyewitness accounts of the meeting, as reported in reputable media. I won't go beyond that.

At any rate, I personally think the whole thing is blown out of proportion. What's going to happen, will happen. I want to take care of my patch of garden. I trust the Master Gardener to oversee the whole vineyard. I'm a little fish.

Dave

Dave ... you've made a very good point here. Well said ....