0:01

Today, October 22

0:04

is a very

0:06

significant day in

0:09

the history of

0:11

our beginnings. Hey

0:14

friends, welcome back

0:17

to the Avenus

0:19

History Podcast. This

0:22

is Glacier View,

0:25

part three. Being

0:27

part three. of

0:29

the Gleech Review Series means this

0:31

is the end of this

0:33

particular trilogy. I have been

0:35

doing episodes on Desmond Ford

0:38

in one way shape or

0:40

another for almost a year now.

0:42

I apologize to everybody I've

0:44

had conversations with in the

0:46

last year because it feels like

0:49

at one point or another I'm

0:51

drawing a connection to Desmond

0:53

Ford's life as an example

0:55

of something could be anything.

0:57

Because it's just been on the

1:00

front of my brain for a long

1:02

time. I've not Dived into any

1:04

subject in Avonus history

1:07

as intensely as I have Dived

1:09

into this subject So it

1:11

has been very richly rewarding.

1:13

I hope to do more with

1:16

this Desmond Ford material

1:18

going forward I am also

1:20

very happy to move on to other

1:22

things. This is going to be The

1:25

final normal episode of season

1:27

two we will have another

1:29

episode next month called epilogue

1:31

and That's basically just gonna

1:33

kind of deal with some of

1:35

the issues and personalities that That

1:38

emerged after Glacier view all the

1:40

way until the relatively recent

1:42

past and so we're gonna tie

1:44

some things together like What happened

1:46

to Robert wheel in and a

1:48

little bit more of you know what

1:50

happened the Des Ford after Glacier view?

1:53

and these sort of things. So do stay

1:55

tuned, I want to repeat because I

1:57

think people have been prone to misunderstand

1:59

this point. The podcast is

2:01

not ending season two is going

2:03

to end. Season two is going

2:06

to end. And then I'm gonna

2:08

go back and redo season one.

2:10

It's a good idea for you

2:12

to get on to our website

2:15

and sign up for the newsletter

2:17

because you're gonna find out all

2:19

of the things that are going

2:22

on, all the plans, all the

2:24

projects, everything that we're looking forward

2:26

to doing. There you can find

2:28

out a little bit about what's

2:31

you know, what's going to happen

2:33

with season three bus tours Just

2:35

things that I've read in Avinous

2:38

history that I think are interesting

2:40

and more sharing It's totally free

2:42

and go sign up for that

2:44

newsletter at Avinous History podcast.org Okay

2:47

We are covering in this episode

2:49

recovering Thursday and Friday at Glacier

2:51

View the first episode covered Sunday

2:54

Monday second episode covered Tuesday and

2:56

Wednesday Now we're going to cover

2:58

Thursday and Friday Friday, of course,

3:00

being that really pivotal, pivotal day.

3:03

But let's start with Thursday. The

3:05

theme for Thursday morning study time

3:07

was the role of LNG White's

3:10

writings in doctrinal matters. The study

3:12

groups wrestled with what I thought

3:14

were some good questions, such as,

3:16

what is the authority of the

3:19

writings of LNG White in the

3:21

interpretation of the Bible? did something?

3:23

If she said the Jonah's, like

3:26

the fish was really a giant

3:28

salmon, is that what Avonus are

3:30

meant to take as the gospel

3:32

truth? Is that just her opinion?

3:35

You know, what do we do

3:37

with that information? How authoritative are

3:39

her writing? So, okay, that's one

3:42

question. Another one was, is the

3:44

authority of LNG White sufficient to

3:46

establish a doctrine in the church

3:48

if there is no explicit biblical

3:51

support for it? Okay, we're not.

3:53

The question is not about can

3:55

I only contradict the Bible, it's

3:58

saying if the Bible is silent

4:00

on a particular issue. Then can

4:02

Ellen White kind of establish a

4:04

doctrine, an official teaching of the

4:07

church, in that space that the

4:09

Bible is silent in? Anyways, like

4:11

I said, some good questions for

4:14

these study groups to discuss. Now,

4:16

not many people know about the

4:18

theological consultation, which took place right

4:20

after. The Sanctuary Review Committee was

4:23

done at Glacier View. This consultation

4:25

involved many of the same people

4:27

who were on the Sanctuary Review

4:30

Committee. And at these meetings, Ron

4:32

Graybill of the White Estate noted

4:34

that, quote, one of the most

4:37

important questions confronting the church today

4:39

is how much and what kind

4:41

of authority Ellen G. White should

4:43

have, end quote. At the theological

4:46

consultation, Neil Wilson was asked the

4:48

hypothetical question. What does one do

4:50

if 12 theologians? agree on a

4:53

biblical interpretation against Ellen White's interpretation

4:55

of the same biblical material. Wilson's

4:57

answer was that if the Bible

4:59

is not explicit and Ellen White

5:02

does not contradict scripture, then the

5:04

church should support Ellen White. If

5:06

the Bible was explicit and Ellen

5:09

White took a different stance, the

5:11

church must stand by scripture. Now

5:13

I don't know if that actually

5:15

answered the question because... It's not

5:18

always apparent what the scripture is

5:20

saying, right? So if the 12

5:22

scholars are saying, we believe the

5:25

Bible is saying this, and Illinois

5:27

is saying this, over here, it's

5:29

not as clear of like, well,

5:31

we need to go with what

5:34

scripture says. Well, you know, it's

5:36

about whose interpretation of scripture we're

5:38

going to side with. But anyways,

5:41

he took a stab at it.

5:43

In the survey that was given

5:45

out first at Sunday at the

5:47

sanctuary review committee meetings. 83% of

5:50

those who were present said that

5:52

Ella White's inspiration was equal to

5:54

that of the Bible. 83% says

5:57

she was equally inspired. as the

5:59

Bible is inspired, but only 41%

6:01

said that her authority was equal

6:03

to that of the Bible. So

6:06

this is a really interesting crevice,

6:08

an interesting little wrinkle. One is

6:10

about inspiration, one is about authority.

6:13

If you're equally inspired as the

6:15

Bible authors were inspired, do you

6:17

not have equal authority as the

6:19

Bible authors had authority? Does that

6:22

authority derive from one's inspiration? I

6:24

would love for them to flesh

6:26

that out a little bit more.

6:29

I'd love to hear their thoughts

6:31

on that. So basically a majority

6:33

believed Illinois was just as inspired

6:35

by as the Bible, but a

6:38

majority also believed she was not

6:40

as authoritative as the Bible. Clearly

6:42

this whole subject needed further study,

6:45

and I think Ron Graybill was

6:47

right that this is one of

6:49

the most important questions confronting the

6:51

church back then. Now, before the

6:54

groups could make their customary... report.

6:56

There was a surprise guest in

6:58

the early afternoon on Thursday at

7:01

Glacier View Ranch, and that was

7:03

Robert H. Pearson. Pearson wasn't there

7:05

in person, of course. I said

7:07

in an earlier episode that he

7:10

couldn't make it. And he was,

7:12

if you don't remember, Pearson was

7:14

Neil's predecessor as G.C. President, who

7:17

had stepped down due to health

7:19

issues. And while he was a

7:21

member of the Sanctuary Review Committee,

7:23

It seems that he declined to

7:26

attend due to his health and

7:28

how that altitude up there, he

7:30

wasn't the only one by the

7:33

way, right? There were several who

7:35

declined to attend because of how

7:37

it might affect their health to

7:39

be at such a high altitude.

7:42

Neil asked Clyde Franz, a retired

7:44

general conference secretary, to read Pearson's

7:46

letter. Now Wilson's choice to have

7:49

this letter read, was one of

7:51

the more controversial, perhaps consequential decisions

7:53

at Glacier View. Was Wilson in

7:55

having this letter read putting his

7:58

thumb on the scale? At a

8:00

critical moment when the pro-forward

8:02

camp was feeling pretty optimistic

8:04

about how things were going.

8:07

More on that in a little bit. Now

8:09

it should be clear why many people

8:11

would suspect that Pearson's letter

8:13

was an act of foul

8:15

play. Pearson hadn't been present.

8:17

He hadn't heard Desa's answers

8:20

during the Q&A or

8:22

participated in the study

8:24

group discussions. Pearson represented

8:26

a pre-glacierview voice. And so reading

8:29

this letter implied that his

8:31

voice, as a member of

8:33

this committee, was equal to

8:35

those who were actually in

8:37

the study groups, who had

8:39

thick discussions and earnest prayer,

8:42

and conducted serious Bible study

8:44

at Glacier View Ranch. What were

8:46

people hoping that Pearson would

8:48

be able to offer to the members

8:50

of the sanctuary review

8:53

committee who actually showed up

8:55

at Glacier View? Now, many assumed Wilson

8:57

wanted to read the letter in order

8:59

to support his own agenda at Glacier

9:01

View, but we have to at least

9:03

consider the possibility that if the letter

9:05

was a political move, it was

9:07

Pearson playing the politics. In the letter,

9:10

Pearson wrote, quote, I request that you

9:12

will accord me the privilege of making

9:14

just one speech in absentia, end quote.

9:16

This was a privilege, by the way,

9:18

not afforded to anyone else. If

9:20

Wilson refused to have the letter

9:23

read, Pearson likely would have seen

9:25

it as a personal affront, right?

9:27

From one former general conference president

9:29

to the current general conference president,

9:31

will you do me this favor?

9:34

And if Wilson said no, it's reasonable

9:36

to conclude that Pearson would

9:38

feel slighted by that. Someday, Wilson

9:40

would be a retired president. Wouldn't

9:43

he like to have his request treated

9:45

with some deference by the

9:47

next general conference president? So

9:49

not reading Pearson's letter might

9:51

have damaged the edifice of

9:54

respect among church leaders. Wilson

9:56

had preached unity on Sunday

9:58

night. He couldn't... turn around

10:00

and ignore his predecessor who wanted

10:02

to speak. Now, people may reasonably

10:04

disagree with this, but I don't

10:06

believe Wilson had a realistic option

10:09

here. Pearson expected his letter to

10:11

be read. He did have options

10:13

in terms of how or when

10:15

it was to be read. If

10:17

he didn't like the position that

10:19

Pearson had put him in, put

10:21

him in. Wilson could have had

10:23

it read maybe after the evening

10:25

meeting when fewer people might be

10:27

present. He could have offered a

10:29

disclaimer to let people know how

10:32

he feels about the letter saying

10:34

something like we respect Elder Pearson,

10:36

but we need to keep in

10:38

mind that he isn't present and

10:40

isn't up to date on everything

10:42

we've been discussing. Okay, he had

10:44

options. If he wanted to disagree

10:46

with the letter, there were gentle

10:48

ways of making that clear. If

10:50

he wanted to support the letter,

10:52

there were... Gentle ways of making

10:54

that clear as well. But I

10:57

don't believe that not reading the

10:59

letter was really an option for

11:01

for Neil Wilson. And then there's

11:03

the question of why didn't Neil

11:05

Wilson read the letter himself? Why

11:07

does he have Clyde Franz read

11:09

it? Was having someone else read

11:11

the letter a way of distancing

11:13

himself from it? Or were the

11:15

circumstances such that it made natural

11:17

sense for Clyde Franz to read

11:20

the letter? Perhaps there was an

11:22

accompanying letter asking France to read

11:24

it or it was sent to

11:26

France or Neil's credibility as chair

11:28

might be compromised by reading the

11:30

polarizing letter? I don't know. There's

11:32

a lot of different questions we

11:34

can ask here and I don't

11:36

have answers for all these questions,

11:38

not yet at least. And if

11:40

this were another episode, I might

11:42

spare you from having to hear

11:45

all of the possible declensions of

11:47

this situation. It would certainly be

11:49

easiest to look at the situation

11:51

and face value and say, yeah,

11:53

that's a dirty trick. And maybe

11:55

it was. I certainly don't have

11:57

any concrete evidence that Wilson disagreed

11:59

with the... in any way, but

12:01

in trying to understand the past,

12:03

you can't just grab the lowest

12:05

hanging fruit. You can't just grab

12:08

the easiest explanation. You have to

12:10

dig deep and try to understand

12:12

how different sides see things in

12:14

different ways. What would Pearson's perspective

12:16

be if Neil read the letter

12:18

versus if he didn't read the

12:20

letter? What might Neil's perspective have

12:22

been? What about the forward side

12:24

of things? Right, well, you have

12:26

to ask all of these questions.

12:28

It's easier to be like, yes,

12:31

that was a dirty trick, you

12:33

know, reading that letter from someone

12:35

who couldn't even be there, who

12:37

may not have even read the

12:39

materials that everyone was asked to

12:41

read, you know, Ford's manuscript, other

12:43

manuscripts. You know, what value was

12:45

that going to add? And instead,

12:47

it's just like, now we have

12:49

two general conference presidents, perhaps pressuring

12:51

us to go a certain way.

12:53

It does feel a little bit

12:56

like tipping the scales. Like it's

12:58

easy to go down that line

13:00

of thinking, okay? But you always

13:02

have to examine the other options

13:04

as maybe less likely as they

13:06

seem to see if maybe there's

13:08

something there to it, right? I

13:10

think, like I said, when you

13:12

think about it, I don't believe

13:14

Neil had a choice. He had

13:16

to read the letter, but how

13:19

and when the letter was read

13:21

was entirely up to him. On

13:23

to the letter itself, I've teased

13:25

you long enough. Pearson's letter isn't

13:27

going to surprise anyone. It's the

13:29

admonition of an old soul who

13:31

doesn't apparently understand what the Glacier

13:33

View meetings were about. And I

13:35

mean that in the nicest, fairest

13:37

way possible. Pearson doesn't mention Ford

13:39

by name, but he reduces the

13:41

issues Ford was raising to a

13:44

simple question of whether or not

13:46

the church is going to abandon

13:48

its distinctive truths as he put

13:50

it. and which he defines as,

13:52

quote, the sanctuary, the spirit of

13:54

prophecy, justification, sanctification, the judgment, interpretation

13:56

of prophecy, fulfillment of signs of

13:58

the advent. the second advent itself,

14:00

the nature of God, the nature

14:02

of man, even the nature of

14:04

salvation." These are apparently the distinctive

14:07

truths that make Adventists who they

14:09

are. Now I take Pearson to

14:11

be speaking in general here about

14:13

the threats that he saw the

14:15

church facing, and he goes on,

14:17

quote, apparently all of these basics

14:19

to our message are up for

14:21

reassessment and possible change, end quote.

14:23

And the question is by whom? Who was

14:25

trying to change all of these basics?

14:28

Ford had no problem aligning with

14:30

any other Adventists on topics like

14:32

Signs of the Times or the

14:34

Second Advent. He wasn't repudiating the

14:37

idea that Jesus was coming soon

14:39

at all. And Pearson just mentions

14:41

justification and sanctification as the basics

14:44

of our message without realizing that

14:46

the discussion over what those terms

14:48

means had never been settled since

14:50

1888. Even if they had

14:53

been settled, the issue at stake

14:55

was whether or not these teachings

14:57

were biblical. That's what Desmond Ford

14:59

was bringing up, is what we

15:01

believe biblical or not. It's not

15:04

about whether or not they're traditional.

15:06

But Pearson's argument is basically

15:08

that everything we have traditionally believed

15:10

is now being attacked and the

15:13

insinuation is that Desmond Ford is

15:15

the one attacking these. things, even

15:17

though, as I pointed out on

15:19

some of those issues he raised,

15:22

Desmond Ford very much agreed with

15:24

Pearson with any other Adventist on

15:26

these topics. So the issue isn't,

15:29

are we going to abandon our

15:31

historic teaching? The issue at Glacier

15:33

View, raised by Desmond Ford, was,

15:35

is what we have traditionally

15:38

believed biblical or

15:40

not? That's the issue. Pearson

15:42

went on, quote, we are

15:44

asked to change or repudiate

15:47

doctrines that have made us

15:49

a distinctive people, that God

15:51

has prospered and blessed, that

15:53

have been the foundation of

15:55

truth upon which a dynamic

15:58

world church has been built. Couldn't

16:00

the religious leaders in Jesus'

16:02

day said the same thing?

16:04

To be sure, it's worth

16:06

asking whether changing a tradition

16:08

is a good idea. But

16:10

Pearson's question presupposes the rightness

16:12

of that tradition. But if

16:14

we were going to assume

16:16

that our tradition is correct,

16:18

why is anyone at Glacier

16:20

View? What's the point of

16:22

these meetings if we're just

16:24

going to assume that their

16:26

tradition is correct? What's the

16:28

point of giving Desmond Ford

16:30

a hearing? What's the point

16:32

of evaluating his views if

16:34

we're going to show up

16:36

to such a meeting assuming

16:38

we are correct and that

16:40

we're not going to change?

16:42

Pearson's letter, I believe, was

16:44

corrosive to the very purpose

16:46

of Glacier View and to

16:48

read this letter on Thursday

16:50

just before the end sent

16:52

the message that all of

16:54

the work... that everyone had

16:56

done didn't really matter because

16:58

at the end of the

17:00

day this was about whether

17:03

or not we were going

17:05

to stand by our church

17:07

option A or destroy our

17:09

church option B but let's

17:11

get back to Pearson quote

17:13

may I ask in all

17:15

sincerity what are we offered

17:17

in exchange if I have

17:19

read some papers right we

17:21

are offered a new doctrine

17:23

of original sin a Calvinist

17:25

predestination a life of spiritual

17:27

defeat a sad conscience and

17:29

freedom from embarrassment among our

17:31

evangelical friends. We would exchange

17:33

James and Elowite, J.N. Andrews,

17:35

W.A. Spicer, F.M. Wilcox, and

17:37

a host of present-day Seventh-day

17:39

Avenist leaders for the balangers,

17:41

the Brinsmeads, Conradi, Canwright, in

17:43

a galaxy of non-avenist theologians,

17:45

and the Reverend Jeffrey Paxton.

17:47

Brethren, I protest. Are we

17:49

going back into Babylon from

17:51

whence we have been called?

17:53

This hand of mine will

17:55

never be raised to support

17:57

such an action." Note that

17:59

Pearson isn't just talking about

18:01

Ford's manuscript here, but other

18:03

people's papers as well. I

18:05

don't know which papers he's

18:07

precisely referring to, but to

18:09

characterize them all as offering

18:11

a life of spiritual defeat,

18:13

a sad conscience, freedom from

18:15

embarrassment among our evangelical friends,

18:17

etc. Suggested me that Pearson

18:19

didn't understand what he read.

18:21

Nor maybe was he constitutionally

18:23

capable of really contributing anything

18:25

to this committee. Because the

18:27

things he's saying, these slogans,

18:29

this sermon that he's giving

18:31

through this letter, are not

18:33

really speaking to any of

18:35

the points that are under

18:37

discussion at Gleacher View. No

18:39

one was talking about trading

18:41

in the White for DM

18:43

Canwright. No one was trying

18:45

to destroy the Adventist church.

18:48

No one was trying to...

18:50

Just be cozy with the

18:52

evangelicals at the expense of

18:54

everything Avonus held dear. I

18:56

can't even find my words.

18:58

This just isn't what was

19:00

happening at the meeting. So

19:02

what is the value of

19:04

this letter? Anyways, again, without

19:06

mentioning Dez by name, Pearson

19:08

nevertheless called out the author

19:10

of the largest manuscript. Gee,

19:12

I wonder who that could

19:14

be for teaching a version

19:16

of Adventism that was foreign

19:18

to him. Something is badly

19:20

wrong, Pearson wrote. Pearson was

19:22

rankled by Dez's claim that

19:24

many other teachers and preachers

19:26

had believed and taught as

19:28

he had on the investigative

19:30

judgment. Pearson wrote, quote, it's

19:32

morally and ethically dishonest to

19:34

accept financial support from a

19:36

seven-day avenues treasury while undermining

19:38

the faith held by our

19:40

church. If a person is

19:42

not in harmony with the

19:44

fundamental beliefs of this church,

19:46

he or she... needs to

19:48

be honest enough and honorable

19:50

enough to reveal this fact

19:52

in a fourth right Christian

19:54

manner and withdraw to a

19:56

climate in which he feels

19:58

comfortable. There is academic... freedom?

20:00

There is also academic responsibility,

20:03

but there must not

20:06

be academic license."

20:08

Incinuating that Ford was

20:10

morally and ethically dishonest must

20:12

have been a chilling accusation.

20:15

That once again beg the

20:17

question, if this were true, why

20:19

are we even here? Why would Robert

20:22

H. Pearson agree to even

20:24

be a member of this committee

20:26

if Ford were morally and

20:28

ethically dishonest. Why would the

20:30

church spend nearly a million dollars

20:32

on Glacier View if this was

20:35

a case of obvious ethical impairment

20:37

of moral failure in the case

20:39

of Desmond Ford? Like why are

20:41

we even here? Why spend the money?

20:44

Why would you even be a part

20:46

of this committee if you really felt

20:48

this way? The point that church employees

20:50

should be in harmony with the

20:52

basic tenets of the of the

20:54

of the faith is of course

20:56

a reasonable position to take. But so

20:59

is the position that the church's

21:01

basic tenets should be in harmony

21:03

with the Bible. In any event, Pearson's

21:05

letter was, I believe, a poison pill

21:07

as far as the proceedings of

21:10

Glacier View were concerned. In addressing

21:12

the members of the Sanctuary Review

21:14

Committee, Pearson undermined the very basis

21:16

for that committee. He didn't add

21:19

anything to the conversation. He used

21:21

the weight of his position as

21:23

a former general conference president to

21:25

impose his own thoughts. to privilege

21:27

his own thoughts, because again, other

21:30

people who weren't there were not

21:32

given the same opportunity. People could

21:34

only listen to his thoughts as

21:36

the letter was being read. They

21:39

couldn't respond to them. They couldn't

21:41

engage him in conversation or try

21:43

to persuade him about anything. The

21:45

Sanctuary Review Committee stopped their work

21:48

to listen to the opinion of

21:50

someone who believed his opinion should

21:52

matter, but who didn't have a

21:54

grasp of the specific issues involved.

21:57

Several people of course shouted Amen after the

21:59

letter was read because they're not going

22:01

to nitpick the letter like I

22:04

did. It's overall, it's a broad

22:06

support for Adventist tradition and the

22:08

unity of the church and so

22:10

you know people are going to

22:12

say amen to that. Neil Wilson

22:14

instructed people to ponder carefully what

22:17

Pearson had written but he didn't

22:19

otherwise engage with the contents of

22:21

the letter at least not in

22:23

the recording. After this letter it

22:25

was time for the regularly scheduled

22:28

group reports. Jillian Ford wrote that

22:30

quote, Dez could go down the

22:32

line almost 100% with them, end

22:34

quote. Jillian was there, and I

22:36

wasn't, of course, but it is

22:38

curious how many of these groups,

22:41

the reports contradicted Dez, at least

22:43

in small ways. Richard Hamel, speaking

22:45

for group five, said that Elowite's

22:47

position goes beyond the pastoral role.

22:49

Speaking for group three said that

22:52

Elowite's writers are, quote, a continuing

22:54

and authoritative source of truth, end

22:56

quote. Now, Dez may not have

22:58

disagreed with those two statements, but

23:00

I imagine he would likely have

23:03

disagreed with what those two men

23:05

meant by those two statements. Neil

23:07

Wilson expressed satisfaction that these groups...

23:09

reports all seem so similar to

23:11

one another, that was that consensus

23:13

he had always been searching for

23:16

this entire week and it seemed

23:18

to be forming before his very

23:20

eyes. Now until early afternoon on

23:22

Thursday, Ford's friends thought things were

23:24

going pretty well. Beatrice Neal had

23:27

raised a question, she was teacher

23:29

at union, about the interpretation of

23:31

the seven trumpets and revelations saying

23:33

that she comes quote, quote, face

23:35

to face with the Josiah Litch

23:38

problem and I cannot conscientiously teach

23:40

the trumpets, end quote, end quote.

23:42

along with his interpretation. Well, what's

23:44

the... why is this a problem?

23:46

You might wonder. Well, Elowite seems

23:48

to have endorsed Josiah Litch's interpretation

23:51

of the seven trumpets. Therefore, God

23:53

endorsed... those are Litch's interpretations, but

23:55

they don't seem to match what

23:57

the Bible is saying. It's not

23:59

pertinent that you and I go

24:02

through Litch's interpretation right now. The

24:04

point is that if Ellen White

24:06

endorses someone else's position and that

24:08

person is not exigentially sound, what

24:10

does that mean for Ellen White's

24:12

inspiration? As Neil put it, quote,

24:15

how can I admit that there

24:17

might be, should I call it

24:19

error? in the spirit of prophecy

24:21

in one place without making people

24:23

feel free to come in and

24:26

pick and choose what they want.

24:28

That's what I face as a

24:30

teacher and I'd really appreciate help

24:32

on that." And quote. Now Arthur

24:34

White responded by saying that Ella

24:37

White didn't actually endorse Litch's interpretation.

24:39

Robert Olson also the White Estate

24:41

agreed. Apparently Beatrice Neal's husband Ralph

24:43

raised his hand because Neil Wilson

24:45

called on him to come to

24:47

his wife's aid. Good times. Ralph

24:50

said that he and his wife

24:52

were more than half of the

24:54

theology department at Union College and

24:56

delicately stated that while he believed

24:58

Ellewhite was right in her conclusions,

25:01

but not always right in what

25:03

he calls her supporting arguments, which

25:05

quote, do not appear as strong

25:07

today as they would have a

25:09

hundred years ago, end quote. Robert

25:12

Carter, the newly elected Lake Union

25:14

president, said he is not so

25:16

quick to accept that Elowite made

25:18

an error. He told the story

25:20

of a seminary classmate back in

25:22

1946 who found a mistake, he

25:25

thought, in the great controversy. This

25:27

bothered Carter, who in 1960 began

25:29

his doctoral work and realized that

25:31

Elowite hadn't made a mistake at

25:33

all, at least in this particular

25:36

thing that his friend had studied.

25:38

And this is when Carter learned.

25:40

to not believe the first historian

25:42

that he meets. He jokes, quote,

25:44

historians are the kissing cousins of

25:47

novelists. I am a theologian, I

25:49

recognize my relatives, end quote. The

25:51

whole room erupted in laughter. Carter

25:53

mentioned that John F. Kennedy had

25:55

been shot and there was, you

25:57

know, all sorts of evidence, there's

26:00

eyewitness. accounts, studies been done, video

26:02

photographs, and still no one knows

26:04

exactly what happened to John F.

26:06

Kennedy. Quote, and so I would

26:08

say this for your comfort. Beware

26:11

historians. Study them very carefully and

26:13

hang on to the Bible in

26:15

the spirit of prophecy, end quote.

26:17

Again, there was a wave of

26:19

laughter and amends from across the room.

26:21

I agree, but historians are the

26:23

worst. Walter Scrag recalled that one

26:26

of the groups, this is Charles

26:28

Bradford's group, had... admitted that

26:30

Illinois expanded or added to Avonus doctrine

26:32

and he wanted the group to explain

26:35

a little bit more about what they

26:37

meant by that. So someone from the

26:39

group reread their statement which is the

26:41

only way we could get a verbatim

26:44

copy of it since the report wasn't

26:46

captured in the recording. This is this

26:48

is what they said. from their group.

26:50

Quote, inasmuch as Ellen G. White is

26:53

recognized as an inspired messenger, her writings

26:55

may be used authoritatively to achieve an

26:57

expanded understanding appropriate to our time of

26:59

a scriptural doctrine which may

27:02

go beyond the understanding or

27:04

immediate intent of the Bible

27:06

authors from which the doctrine is

27:08

derived. End quote. That is a mouthful.

27:10

I'm sure it's an earful as well.

27:12

I can't really expand on what

27:14

they meant by all of

27:16

that, but I think I

27:18

think it needs a little

27:20

bit of scrutiny. Ellen White's

27:22

writings can be used authoritatively

27:24

to achieve an expanded understanding

27:26

of a scriptural doctrine. What

27:28

are we meaning by that? Does this

27:31

mean that where the Bible is, you

27:33

know, it only goes so far in

27:35

outlining a doctrine that Ellen, her writings

27:37

can be used authoritatively to kind

27:40

of extend? that doctrine to

27:42

add on to that doctrine

27:44

and that this extension to

27:46

that doctrine will be

27:48

authoritative. This sounds a little bit

27:50

like we're making on the white equal

27:52

to the Bible, but again, it depends.

27:55

What do they mean by the words they

27:57

use? I don't want to draw any

27:59

hasty. conclusions based on this, just

28:01

one paragraph that they submitted, but

28:04

does raise some concerns. I checked

28:06

with a friend of mine, see

28:08

if it raised concerns with him

28:10

as well. It did. Okay, I'm

28:12

not the only one who was

28:14

reading it this way. Another interesting

28:17

point in the study group discussion

28:19

period was made by Norskov Olson

28:21

from Loma Linda, who lamented an

28:23

addiction to certainty. He was well

28:25

aware, well ahead of his time

28:28

in saying that. According to Olson,

28:30

the church should be able to

28:32

say that this is our best

28:34

understanding at this time on certain

28:36

issues. Olson decried the establishment of

28:39

what he called the Protestant Orthodoxy,

28:41

which became a measuring stick by

28:43

which everything else was to be

28:45

judged. If you will permit me

28:47

to try and develop his comments

28:50

a little more, it seems that

28:52

this Protestant Orthodoxy he speaks of

28:54

is something of an official or

28:56

unofficial consensus where... major Protestant leaders

28:58

come to agree that X, Y,

29:01

and Z is the orthodox position

29:03

and then they begin to hold

29:05

other people to that, even without

29:07

necessarily a formal statement. And to

29:09

Olson, this represents a kind of

29:12

creed and results in theological stagnation.

29:14

So to put this in an

29:16

avenues context, what are we talking

29:18

about here? It's when tradition kind

29:20

of becomes de facto codified. It

29:22

becomes credalized because enough church leaders,

29:25

maybe they grew up thinking X,

29:27

Y, or Z, and they get

29:29

into senior church leadership at some

29:31

point and they're like, yeah, I

29:33

grew up with that. This is

29:36

true, right? And they talk to

29:38

their colleague, yeah, I think that's

29:40

true. And this essentially becomes the

29:42

de facto position of the church,

29:44

whether a local church, a denomination,

29:47

whatever. And so he says that

29:49

the problem is this results in

29:51

theological stagnation. Not all creeds are

29:53

formal, codified, documents developed when a

29:55

bunch of people come together. Sometimes

29:58

these things just emerge naturally. through

30:00

the stream of tradition. Sometimes

30:02

that afternoon, the president of

30:04

the Pacific Union conference got up

30:06

to affirm the sentiments of Pearson's

30:08

letter, and he said, quote, I

30:11

see better today than ever before

30:13

that the meaning of the past

30:15

is correct. I accept what I

30:17

believe to be a divine communication

30:19

through Ellen White. It is our

30:22

privilege to improve the pillars of

30:24

the faith, but not to change

30:26

them. Dr. Ford's challenge has already

30:28

borne fruit in the Pacific Union.

30:31

split congregations, doubtless doubts in the

30:33

minds of pastors leading them to

30:35

give up their credentials, divided faculties,

30:37

anything that divides this church or

30:40

leads to doubt is wrong. Some

30:42

of our theologians are hotbeds of doubt.

30:44

Let us get our act together. We

30:46

have an obligation to go back and

30:49

get our churches moving for God.

30:51

We need each other today as never

30:53

before. We've got to forget

30:55

our suspicion of administrators. This is

30:58

where I stand. Hearing

31:00

that, Jack Bravancia then

31:02

spoke of the need of healing

31:04

as a medical doctor. He says,

31:06

I, you know, I'm here for

31:09

healing, not for hurting. And

31:11

he talked about how we

31:13

all stand on the shoulders of

31:15

our fathers, but that he could

31:17

not accept his own father's literalism

31:19

and how he read the

31:22

Bible. Quote, they would not be

31:24

happy with what I have to say.

31:26

But at the same time, I do

31:28

believe in continuity with her fathers

31:30

in what they believed." In other

31:32

words, saying, yes, I've come to

31:35

accept views that my father would

31:37

not have accepted, but at the same

31:39

time, I do believe it's important.

31:42

that we have continuity with those who have

31:44

come before. I won't just say fathers, we'll

31:46

say fathers and mothers, those who have come

31:48

before in our faith. We want some continuity

31:50

with them. We don't want to just throw

31:53

it all out and start over. But at

31:55

the same time, we're also not slaves to

31:57

believing what somebody else believed yesterday.

32:00

day, we have a responsibility with

32:02

our own individual conscience before God

32:04

to come to our own conclusions.

32:06

And so he's trying to juggle

32:08

these two, to hold these two

32:10

things in tension. He then turned

32:12

in Neil Wilson, had a little

32:14

bit of a role play exercise

32:16

here. And he says, quote, the

32:18

other day Dez stood on the

32:20

spot where I am now standing.

32:22

If you asked me to put

32:24

my convictions in my pocket, I

32:26

would have to reply. I'm sorry.

32:28

I can't do that. My personal

32:30

integrity is more valuable to me

32:32

than credentials or church membership. But

32:34

if you asked me not to

32:36

speak publicly on certain matters, I

32:38

could put them in my pocket.

32:40

I will do what I can

32:42

to overcome tensions, end quote. Jack

32:44

then asked Neil whether he could

32:46

accept such a position in good

32:48

faith. that I'm not going to

32:50

compromise my conscience and say things

32:52

I don't believe, but if you

32:54

tell me it's wise to not

32:56

stir people up on this subject,

32:58

then Jack Bravancia said I can

33:00

do that. Is that good enough?

33:02

Neil Wilson said it was. Jack

33:04

Bravancia then said that the reason

33:06

for tensions in the church is

33:08

that church leaders and scholars and

33:10

pastors have not been meeting together

33:12

like they were at Glacier View.

33:14

We need more meetings like this."

33:16

Then he added, quote, I must

33:18

agree with most of what Dez

33:20

Ford is saying, end quote. He

33:22

then turns to Keith Parmenter and

33:24

asked him the same question he

33:26

had asked Neil Wilson. Could you

33:28

accept me if I believed mostly

33:30

like Dez but agreed not to

33:32

agitate those views? Parmenter said, Provencha

33:34

must do more. He must... Also,

33:36

quote, affirm that you stand loyally

33:38

by the church, end quote. Hearing

33:41

that, right? Neil Wilson had accepted

33:43

him. And then Parmenter said, no,

33:45

it's not good enough. And then

33:47

Neil Wilson hears that and says,

33:49

yeah, it's not good enough. And

33:51

added that Provancia must affirm that

33:53

he stands by the position of

33:55

the church. Neil then added, quote,

33:57

Dr. Provancia has given us something

33:59

very important. is a man worth

34:01

saving." But Parmenter said that

34:03

he stood with the Pacific

34:05

Union president, quote, Dez,

34:07

if you are honest, you will

34:09

pass in your credentials and do

34:12

so without being asked, end quote.

34:14

Jack Bravantia then turned

34:16

to the audience. Quote, all of

34:18

you, would you do that? If you asked

34:20

the people in the room, in

34:23

this room, to turn in their

34:25

credentials, not a few. would have

34:27

to do so on the same

34:29

basis that Ford is being asked.

34:31

Integrity is more important than church

34:33

belief. The real question is, am

34:35

I a man of integrity? If you

34:38

brethren can't think more about healing, surely

34:40

there must be other ways of dealing

34:42

with this. I could not sell my

34:45

soul in order to be a member

34:47

of the Seventh-day Avenue

34:49

Church." End quote. Parminter

34:51

responded. quote, healing must be

34:53

on a wider basis. Our churches

34:55

in Australia are severely polarized, end

34:57

quote. In other words, let's stop

34:59

talking about what is it going

35:01

to take to heal this relationship

35:03

with Desmond Ford. Let's talk about

35:05

all the damage Dez has done,

35:07

particularly back in Australia. This is

35:09

always parmenter's concern that the growing

35:11

polarization and agitation taking place there

35:13

between people who support Ford, people

35:15

who support Brinsmede and people who,

35:17

you know, the various other ideas

35:20

and those who support the church. What

35:22

is it going to take to heal those

35:24

churches, right? This is what parmenters basically trying

35:27

to say, we have to deal with Ford

35:29

so they can be healed. Jack shot

35:31

back, quote, this meeting is bigger than

35:33

Dez Ford. We need to find a

35:35

way of keeping this broad spectrum of

35:38

thought together. We need something that will

35:40

keep us together, end quote. In other

35:42

words. Yeah, you know, we, this broad

35:44

spectrum of thought, like, we all have

35:46

various ideas. What is going to keep

35:49

us together so we don't just splinter

35:51

and everyone just becomes their own personal

35:53

denomination, right? Dez picked up on what

35:55

Jack was laying down and he said, no

35:57

one believes everything the church teaches. Greater...

36:00

all, everyone has a point in

36:02

which they disagree with what the

36:04

official teachings are. And so on

36:06

that basis, Dez said, everyone should

36:08

be excommunicated. Parmenter responded by saying

36:10

that, quote, the patient himself must

36:12

help in the healing process. I

36:14

agree with Neil Wilson, we will

36:17

work closely with the general conference

36:19

and accept their advice. Now what

36:21

does Parmenter mean by that? The

36:23

patient himself must help in the

36:25

healing process. This is the frustration

36:27

that church leaders, Parmenter, Neil Wilson,

36:29

expressed this in his Tuesday outburst

36:32

against Dez, that Dez needs to

36:34

do more to distance himself from

36:36

Robert Brinsmee, needs to do more

36:38

to calm some of his supporters

36:40

down. and keep them aligned with

36:42

what the church is trying to

36:44

do. And so, you know, parmen

36:47

are saying, if you guys want

36:49

healing, like, goodness, Des needs to

36:51

be somebody who helps calm the

36:53

situation down in Australia, not making

36:55

it worse. Now, Neil noted that

36:57

on Friday morning, they were going

36:59

to deal with two documents. One

37:02

would be a response to Ford,

37:04

and one, he said, was for

37:06

public consumption. So, let's get to

37:08

Friday morning. And Neil began Friday

37:10

morning with a devotional from the

37:12

story of Solomon about the need

37:14

for wisdom and largeness of heart.

37:17

He took some prayer requests. Of

37:19

course, there were no study groups

37:21

on Friday morning. And so we

37:23

had a little bit of the

37:25

time to deal with devotional and

37:27

some prayer requests and things like

37:29

that. Bert Heloviac raised his hand

37:32

and said, quote, I can't think

37:34

of a time in our past

37:36

history when the leaders of our

37:38

church will need greater wisdom than

37:40

they'll need in the next several

37:42

hours. end quote. We'll get to

37:44

what he's alluding to soon. Neil

37:47

also told members of the Sanctuary

37:49

Review Committee that some members got

37:51

little to no sleep last night.

37:53

Given that Friday was the final

37:55

day, the members of the small

37:57

subcommittee set up to draft documents

37:59

were up late. The screening committee

38:02

didn't finish until midnight. A couple

38:04

of others went until 2 a.m.

38:06

Perhaps members of the drafting committee.

38:08

I don't know. The screening committee

38:10

should have gone second, but whatever.

38:12

Duncaniva had to get the documents

38:14

printed, so he drove to the

38:17

Boulder Sanitarium at 440 a. Talk

38:19

about those documents here in a

38:21

couple of minutes. Neil also noted

38:23

that the results of the second

38:25

survey were interesting. This is the

38:27

same survey that had been handed

38:29

out Sunday evening when the Sanctuary

38:32

Review Committee was situated. And now

38:34

the same questions were asked on

38:36

Thursday to see if there are

38:38

any, been any shift in people's

38:40

views over a week after listening

38:42

the paper presentations, after attending study

38:44

groups, after hearing DESES, Q&As. conversations

38:47

in the hallway, you know, has

38:49

there been any change? And I

38:51

think this was a really interesting

38:53

instrument. I'm glad that they had

38:55

the foresight to set this up.

38:57

Richard Lesher got up to give

38:59

the results, cautioning people as usual.

39:02

You know, don't read too much

39:04

into this. We had a few

39:06

more people who filled out the

39:08

survey on Sunday rather than on

39:10

Thursday, and some people missed the

39:12

last page that dealt with Ellen

39:14

White questions on Sunday. So anyways,

39:17

you know, all that normal stuff

39:19

about... Don't put too much into

39:21

this. Don't read too much into

39:23

this. The bottom line with the

39:25

second survey, the results of the

39:27

second survey, was that on nearly

39:29

every question, the members of the

39:32

committee moved towards the traditional church

39:34

teachings and away from Desmond Ford.

39:36

To give you a few examples,

39:38

question four was about whether the

39:40

year day principle is supported by

39:42

the scriptures or not. On Sunday,

39:44

73% said it was biblical. Question

39:47

7 was about the 2,300-day prophecy

39:49

and when it ended on Sunday,

39:51

67% said it pointed only to

39:53

1844. You'll recall Dez had said

39:55

that 1844 was like a secondary

39:57

fulfillment, not the original. intent of

39:59

the prophecy. So 67% said it

40:02

only pointed to 1844 on Sunday.

40:04

On Thursday the number had climbed

40:06

to 79%. On question 11, 77%

40:08

of the committee members said

40:10

that the investigative judgment was supported

40:12

by scripture. By the end of

40:15

the week that number had climbed

40:17

to 85%. Neil Wilson was very

40:20

pleased by these results. This

40:22

is very very encouraging he

40:24

said characterizing the support for

40:26

Ella White's inspiration in particular

40:28

to be Almost unanimous.

40:31

Well, how do we account for this

40:33

shift throughout the week? What caused

40:35

the say, I don't know, 10

40:37

or 12 or 13% of committee

40:39

members who seem to have moved

40:42

towards the traditional

40:44

interpretation? Did Neil

40:46

Wilson's scolding of Desmond

40:48

Ford on Tuesday have any

40:51

effect here? Was it the Pearson

40:53

letter that had been read

40:55

Thursday afternoon? Was it the

40:57

time that they had to

40:59

consider Des's arguments and realize

41:01

that maybe his arguments weren't

41:03

persuasive? Or did this shift reflect

41:06

to the reality that nature doesn't

41:08

love a vacuum? That the longer

41:10

these questions lingered in the air

41:12

and with no chance of resolving any

41:14

of them, well, people don't like

41:16

a situation with less certainty and

41:18

less stability and so they closed

41:20

ranks to maintain the status quo

41:23

because at least order of any

41:25

kind is better. than chaos. It's

41:27

better than anarchy. Looking back, it's

41:29

clear that a shift in the survey

41:31

responses didn't mean that the hole

41:33

that Desmond Ford had torn open

41:35

in the Adventist universe had been

41:37

healed by the end of the

41:40

week. That hole was still there.

41:42

It's just that for whatever reason,

41:44

many of those undecided voters, people

41:46

who had chosen option C or

41:48

D, decided to ultimately get behind

41:50

the traditional views. And then

41:53

the documents were brought out. Okay,

41:55

we generally talk about two major documents

41:57

at Glacier View. There's the consensus state.

42:00

and the 10-point critique. Let's just

42:02

call them that. I'll probably use

42:04

synonyms, you know, statement, document, whatever.

42:06

Let's deal with the consensus statement

42:08

first. The consensus statement was really

42:10

two documents. One on the Ministry

42:12

of Jesus in the Heavenly Sanctuary

42:14

and one on Ellen White and

42:16

her inspiration. The consensus statement composed

42:19

of these two documents was meant

42:21

to be a synthesis of what

42:23

the study groups reported based on

42:25

their meetings and Monday, Wednesday, Tuesday.

42:27

Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday. There we go.

42:29

I'll eventually learn how to get

42:31

the days in order. Bill Johnson

42:33

and Fritz Guy were the main

42:36

authors of the Heavenly Sanctuary Doctrine

42:38

document, rather, not the doctrine, while

42:40

the Illinois One was written by

42:42

others. The Christ in the Heavenly

42:44

Sanctuary document presented itself as an

42:46

elaboration of the Dallas statement. That

42:48

is the fundamental belief voted at

42:50

the Dallas GC session four months

42:52

prior. It reaffirmed the 23rd day

42:55

prophecy ending in 1844 as well

42:57

as the year day principle. Nevertheless,

42:59

the document represents a subtle but

43:01

important change in how Avonus articulate

43:03

the sanctuary doctrine. In any theological

43:05

topic, you have these many little

43:07

crossroads at which you have to

43:09

choose a direction that will influence

43:12

your ultimate destination. In this case,

43:14

what does the phrase within the

43:16

veil mean in Hebrew 6? What

43:18

is the meaning of the word

43:20

Nitzdock? Daniel 8, we've talked about

43:22

that a little bit when we

43:24

dealt with the Ford guiding committee,

43:26

I believe, and earlier in these

43:29

Glacier View episodes. The Christ in

43:31

the Heavenly Sanctuary document interprets this

43:33

phrase to mean that is within

43:35

the veil, to mean the most

43:37

holy place as Desmond Ford did.

43:39

And when it dealt with Nitz-Dok,

43:41

it also makes the same interpretation

43:43

that Desmond Ford did, that the

43:45

word should most likely be translated

43:48

as restored, not cleansed. At another

43:50

crossroads, how was the sanctuary defiled?

43:52

Was it the sins of God's

43:54

people? As Avana said traditionally taught,

43:56

or was it the wicked... of

43:58

the little horn as Desmond Ford

44:00

said the document sides with the

44:02

little horn view. The fact that

44:05

this consensus document was almost unanimously

44:07

approved by the members of the

44:09

Sanctuary Review Committee makes the whole

44:11

Glacier View saga just more confusing.

44:13

The survey shift during the week

44:15

meant that those who believed the

44:17

little horn alone defiled the heavenly

44:19

sanctuary actually went down. Beginning of

44:22

the week 23% said it was

44:24

a little horn alone but the

44:26

end of the week 19% said

44:28

it was the little horn alone

44:30

and yet this is the view

44:32

in the consensus statement that I

44:34

don't know if it was absolutely

44:36

unanimous but you know almost everybody

44:38

adopted this statement saying this represents

44:41

my views. Now I say that

44:43

the consensus statement mostly pushed that

44:45

view because it had a tendency

44:47

of speaking out of both sides

44:49

of its mouth and I don't

44:51

necessarily mean that in the bad

44:53

way. When you're trying to draft

44:55

a consensus document, you're trying to

44:58

accommodate as many views as possible

45:00

and hope that you're not going

45:02

to have these internal contradictions. And

45:04

it tried. You know, it did

45:06

its best to pull in from

45:08

all different directions. And of course,

45:10

in doing that, you can't really

45:12

go into much detail because the

45:14

deeper you go into detail, the

45:17

less consensus you're going to have.

45:19

So, yes. So what I'm saying

45:21

is even though the consensus document...

45:23

prioritize this little horn interpretation of

45:26

or it prioritize restore instead of

45:28

clean and Daniel 8. It doesn't

45:30

mean it was the only option

45:32

it was it was pushing. There's

45:35

room for people to see their

45:37

views in this document. I guess

45:39

that's what I'm saying and that's

45:41

what made it a consensus document.

45:44

Still unbalanced the document. remains

45:46

an important and really ignored document

45:48

in the history of the Adventist

45:51

theology of the sanctuary. Bill Johnson

45:53

himself noted that how it handled

45:55

the phrase within the veil quote

45:57

marks a large shift from the

46:00

pioneers understanding." When it came to

46:02

the idea that the little horn

46:04

alone polluted God's sanctuary in Daniel

46:06

814, Johnson said this was the

46:08

first time in Avonus had officially

46:10

published this view. Go figure. The

46:13

second part of the consensus

46:15

statement was one entitled the

46:17

role of the LNG White Writings

46:19

and doctrinal matters. This document was

46:22

a few paragraphs long and it

46:24

likewise mixed traditional views with some...

46:26

maybe newer views or newer ways of

46:29

expressing those views. The innovation, if you

46:31

want to call it that, was to

46:33

recognize that Elwite grew over her

46:35

70-year literary career. This was one

46:38

of Des Ford's points, that we

46:40

should perhaps privilege her later more

46:42

developed thoughts when we interpret her,

46:44

and while the document doesn't say

46:46

that explicitly, it does lean in

46:49

that direction. Overall, it's a fairly

46:51

balanced statement. It's only a few

46:53

paragraphs long, so, you know, how

46:55

detailed could it get? And after being

46:58

read, these two documents comprising the consensus

47:00

statement were discussed, and the first question

47:02

was whether the consensus statement was an

47:04

official general conference document. Neil doesn't answer

47:07

this directly, but he does say that

47:09

you can be guided by this

47:11

document. Great. There was a lot

47:13

of haggling over specific language, lest the

47:15

Harding didn't like that the document

47:17

said that the Year Day principle

47:19

was not an explicit biblical teaching,

47:21

but it has biblical support. How

47:23

can a thing not be biblical

47:25

but be in the Bible? He

47:27

preferred the phrase not explicitly declared

47:29

but implicitly discoverable, which is okay. About an

47:32

hour was spent editing the consensus statement

47:34

in this way, and it was eventually

47:36

voted by the committee, you know, almost

47:38

unanimously. So like I said,

47:40

these documents form the consensus statement that

47:42

are on the internet, you can read

47:44

them if you want, and Dez had

47:47

no problem agreeing with the consensus

47:49

statement. Now if you want to get into

47:51

the weeds, I'm sure he'd find things to

47:53

disagree with but in general He says he

47:55

could live with the consensus statement So that

47:57

means everyone shook hands and went home, right? Glacier

48:00

he was over, we all agree

48:02

with the consensus statement, victory. Well,

48:04

as I said, there was a

48:06

second document, which is usually referred

48:08

to as the 10-point critique. At

48:10

Neil Wilson's discretion, he appointed six

48:12

people to study Dez's manuscript in

48:14

highlight areas where Dez's views stood

48:16

apart from the traditional Adventist views.

48:18

One of the authors of this

48:20

document was Jim Laundice, pastor at

48:22

Sligo Church, but he had no

48:24

idea it might be used against

48:26

Dez. The 10-point critique was read

48:28

to the Sanctuary Review Committee on

48:30

Friday, but Des wasn't present because

48:32

he and Jillian had been asked

48:34

to leave the room while the

48:36

document was read. And no one

48:38

was given a copy of this

48:41

document. It was considered to be

48:43

provisional, not final, and so it

48:45

was just read to them, just

48:47

letting them know. Here are 10

48:49

areas where we think Desmond Ford

48:51

disagrees with what the church teaches.

48:53

I'm not going to go through

48:55

the... 10-point document in detail because

48:57

at some point it just feels

48:59

like we're talking about the same

49:01

arguments and the same objections over

49:03

and over again in these episodes,

49:05

but it is worth summarizing a

49:07

part of it for you. The

49:09

document said some nice things about

49:11

Dez, but the first critique was

49:13

that he took things out of

49:15

context in his manuscript. No examples

49:17

of this were offered. The authors

49:19

objected to Ford's interpretation of Within

49:22

the Vale and his Apple teleismatic

49:24

principle. and in believing that entire

49:26

his epiphanies was a fulfillment of

49:28

prophecy and so on. The 10-point

49:30

document was never voted on by

49:32

the sanctuary committee, review committee, nor

49:34

does it reflect their work during

49:36

that week. What its role was

49:38

meant to be is, well, was

49:40

unclear. Fritz Guy asked if this

49:42

10-point document could be used as

49:44

the basis for determining orthodoxy. Neil

49:46

Wilson said no, the document would

49:48

not be used in that way.

49:50

The consensus statement had just been

49:52

adopted to which everyone could agree,

49:54

and you could say it was

49:56

the goal of the 10-point critique

49:58

to show where everyone couldn't agree.

50:00

Going forward. it was the 10-point

50:02

critique, not the consensus statement that

50:05

would stand out. Later on Friday

50:07

morning, the members of the committee

50:09

turned to talking about how this

50:11

whole thing was going to play

50:13

out when they get home. One

50:15

person asked Neil, how will the

50:17

tape recordings be made available to

50:19

us? How will the what? Neil

50:21

asks the tape recordings. Neil responds,

50:23

oh, you're not going to get

50:25

a copy of that. He goes

50:27

on to explain that the tape

50:29

recordings are not going to be

50:31

put in the archives where people,

50:33

like researchers, could access them. They're

50:35

going to be placed in the

50:37

president's office. And of course, if

50:39

anybody there wants to re-listen to

50:41

them, they're more than welcome to

50:43

do that. But clearly, the barrier

50:46

to getting access to them was

50:48

going to be one of the

50:50

most tightly guarded things that are

50:52

in the possession of the general

50:54

conference. Now, of course, I've listened

50:56

to them. Later on. They were.

50:58

They were. moved down to the

51:00

archives, but this is the status

51:02

these tapes had for quite some

51:04

time. The group voted to thank

51:06

the camp staff who served them

51:08

and who kept up the rooms

51:10

and all these sort of things,

51:12

and Neil pronounced that this has

51:14

been a wonderful meeting. He promised

51:16

that there will be more meetings

51:18

like this in the future on

51:20

an ongoing basis, and that made

51:22

me laugh because, well, he specifically

51:24

said... and you won't have to

51:27

wait 50 years. Fun fact, dear

51:29

listener, it's been 45 years at

51:31

the time of this recording, and

51:33

we haven't had another meeting quite

51:35

like Glacier View. Before, folks started

51:37

leaving Glacier View Ranch, Neil gave

51:39

them a timely reminder, quote, I

51:41

do want to remind you also

51:43

that the immunity that you were

51:45

granted at the first meeting is

51:47

soon to run out. From now

51:49

on, you will be held accountable

51:51

for your teaching and preaching and

51:53

writing, end quote. Everyone laughed which

51:55

means well, I guess I don't

51:57

know how nervous the laughter was

51:59

okay a little bit of Gallo's

52:01

humor. Then Neil asked for

52:04

prayer, for Dez, Jillian, and

52:06

Luke. They prayed for them

52:08

and for other things, and

52:10

the Sanctuary Review Committee

52:12

ended at 1 p.m. on Friday

52:14

afternoon. But that isn't the

52:17

end of the Glacier View

52:19

story. At 4 p.m. you

52:21

see, there was a fateful

52:23

meeting with Desmond Ford. There's

52:25

no recording. of this meeting,

52:27

but we do have notes

52:29

from several participants. Neil chaired

52:31

the meeting, and this was a meeting,

52:33

by the way, of Prexad plus

52:35

Australasian Division leaders. So we

52:37

had Neil Wilson sharing the

52:40

meeting. We also have Keith

52:42

Parmaner. Of course, like I

52:44

said, Australasian Division, President. I'm

52:46

going to give all their

52:48

titles, just not that I

52:50

expect you to remember them,

52:52

just to let you know

52:54

who they are. Ralph Thompson,

52:56

G. C. C. C. Secretary,

52:58

Arthur. Ministerial Association Secretary, Duncaniva,

53:00

retired G.C. Vice President, Charles

53:02

Hirsch, G.C. Education Director, Charles

53:04

Bradford, G.C. Vice President for

53:06

North America, which later became

53:08

the NAD president. That role eventually

53:11

became the NAD president, is what

53:13

I mean. Of course, Dez Ford

53:15

was there, Bob Spangler, who was

53:18

the G.C. Ministerial Association Secretary. and

53:20

Francis Wernick, who was a G.C.

53:22

vice president as well. They met

53:25

on the third floor assembly room,

53:27

Glacier View Lodge. Jillian initially came

53:29

to the meeting as well and left shortly

53:31

after it began. She'd come back with about

53:34

an hour left in the meeting, but she

53:36

missed, I think it was a two

53:38

and a half or three and a

53:40

half hour long meeting. I can't remember now

53:42

off the top of my head. But anyway,

53:45

she would eventually come back.

53:47

Curiously. And I loved this

53:49

detail. Before the meeting began,

53:51

everyone's pulse was checked. And

53:53

in case you're wondering, because I

53:55

know you're just dying to find

53:57

out, Dez's resting heart rate was...

54:00

64 beats per minute. I don't

54:02

know what that's supposed to tell

54:04

you, but thought I would just

54:06

pass that information along. Neil began

54:08

by saying that he regretted having

54:10

to have a meeting like this,

54:12

which is always a terrible sign.

54:14

If you're in a meeting where

54:16

the chair says, I regret that

54:18

we have to have this meeting,

54:21

this is not a good meeting

54:23

for you. He said that we

54:25

can't, the church that is, cannot

54:27

follow Dez in some of the

54:29

ways he wanted the church to

54:31

go. Charles Hirsch prayed that Neil

54:33

Wilson outlined three topics he wanted

54:35

to speak to Dez about Attitude

54:37

judgment and theology. So let's cover

54:40

those Attitude Neil repeated his complaint

54:42

that Dez was unyielding and unchanging

54:44

and that he cannot be wrong

54:46

You say you want to listen

54:48

Neil told him, but you never

54:50

yield at any point does his

54:52

attitude has caused many to be

54:54

hostile to the church Neil said

54:56

Dez had the riz I mean

54:59

he was charismatic and he compared

55:01

Dez to Jim Jones For those

55:03

who don't know anything about Jim

55:05

Jones, he persuaded a bunch of

55:07

people to follow him and to

55:09

eventually commit suicide with him. And

55:11

that comparison was certainly a thing

55:13

you could say. Next, Neil talked

55:15

about Dez's judgment. Neil noted how

55:17

Dez was gifted and that his

55:20

own father, Neil's own father, had

55:22

said Dez was brilliant back in

55:24

the days when Dez was going

55:26

to school in Michigan. And Neil's

55:28

dad was Michigan conference president. We've

55:30

shared that story in one of

55:32

the Dez Forde Ford episodes. Yet,

55:34

Wilson said, you lack judgment. The

55:36

case and point here for Neil

55:39

was Dez's October 27th forum presentation.

55:41

That was not a wise thing

55:43

to do with Neil's opinion. He

55:45

was also bothered by how the

55:47

tapes of Dez's meeting circulated so

55:49

freely, thousands of them. Neil also

55:51

asked Dez to tell people, especially

55:53

Brinsmeade's followers, to stop spreading the

55:55

tapes and Dez had apparently refused.

55:58

Now it turns out. This mystery

56:00

was solved sometime later that brings

56:02

me wasn't the one circulating the

56:04

tapes, and of course it wasn't

56:06

Dez, it turned out to be

56:08

in Avenist in New Mexico. Neil

56:10

confessed, I would have done everything

56:12

in the world to disassociate myself

56:14

from Brinsmead in your place. Neil

56:16

observed that Dez had a tendency

56:19

to say something and then step

56:21

back from it and say, well,

56:23

there's nothing I can do about

56:25

it, right? And this is how

56:27

he's characterizing. Dez's reaction to the

56:29

Avonus Forum meetings, right? If you're

56:31

going to go out there and

56:33

say something, and then people are

56:35

going to get worked up about

56:38

what you say, Neil expected that

56:40

Dez would be more proactive in,

56:42

I guess, cleaning up the mess

56:44

that he created. Then Neil came

56:46

to his third point, doctrine. Neil

56:48

mentioned that Dez must reconcile himself

56:50

to the objections raised by the

56:52

10-point critique, which Bob's Bangalore had

56:54

read for Dez there at the

56:57

meeting. encountered this document yet. After

56:59

Spangler made some progress in reading,

57:01

Dez interrupted to say, hey, you

57:03

know, we might save ourselves some

57:05

time if you just let me

57:07

read it to myself quietly. And

57:09

so he did. After reading it,

57:11

Dez only objected to what is

57:13

said about the year day principle.

57:15

He didn't feel like that characterized

57:18

his position well. And then he

57:20

said, quote, I find no major

57:22

fault and I look on this

57:24

document as a very fair and

57:26

representative statement of my position. End

57:28

quote. But then after a little

57:30

bit, Dez did quibble with point

57:32

number one, which is about how

57:34

Dez took things out of context.

57:37

Bob Spangler said that during the

57:39

Ford guiding committee days, the group

57:41

had offered several examples of things

57:43

that Dez had taken out of

57:45

context, and Ford repeated his usual

57:47

complaint that the guiding committee hadn't

57:49

really offered any substantial critiques, except

57:51

for one by Gerard Domsteet, which,

57:53

by the way, everybody... misspelled his

57:56

name. I think I've seen his

57:58

name misspelled more incorrectly, right? Then

58:00

I have seen it spelled correctly.

58:02

When I either in the guiding

58:04

committee days or at Glacier View,

58:06

it feels like nobody knows. how

58:08

to spell his name and Gerard

58:10

if you're listening to this. I'm

58:12

sorry I just want you to

58:14

know in my notes I have

58:17

spelled your name correctly for whatever

58:19

that's worth. Anyways Spangler repeated that

58:21

they had offered examples of Ford

58:23

pulling things out of context and

58:25

Ford hadn't addressed any other points

58:27

right this goes back to him

58:29

not listening or wanting to change

58:31

and perhaps this line of questioning

58:33

wasn't going anywhere Wilson said he

58:36

was also troubled that Ford didn't

58:38

distance himself from Prince Mead as

58:40

perhaps he ought to have. That

58:42

seemed to be Parmenter's cue to

58:44

pick up the argument, and so

58:46

Ford's deposition began. I mean, I

58:48

say it's a deposition, feels like

58:50

a deposition, where you've got people

58:52

sitting around the table just grilling

58:55

him. So here we go. Parmenter

58:57

said that Dez refused to reply

58:59

when asked where he differed with

59:01

Bob Brinsmeade, and to tightly paraphrase

59:03

Parmenter, the results of your ministry

59:05

had been to bring division and

59:07

tension in the church. Parmenter mentioned

59:09

that some out there believe that

59:11

Ford helped Brinsmee write his book,

59:13

1844 re-examined, that's the one that

59:16

caused Dez to give his forum

59:18

presentation. Brinsmeeans' next book, judged by

59:20

the gospel, was expected to come

59:22

out later that month, and Parmenter

59:24

wondered if Dez had worked with

59:26

Bob Brinsmee on this book, too.

59:28

This line of questioning just shows,

59:30

I think the complete erosion of

59:32

trust here, the lack of relationship

59:35

between these men, because I think

59:37

Why would you give voice to

59:39

the rumors and conspiracy theories that

59:41

are out there among the membership

59:43

when you have Dez's number on

59:45

speed dial? Right? Like how is

59:47

it that your relationship is so

59:49

poor? You're like, hey, some people

59:51

out in the field are saying

59:54

X, Y, and Z about you.

59:56

And I don't know if it's

59:58

true or not. Like how have

1:00:00

you not have an avenue to

1:00:02

check these things firsthand with Dez,

1:00:04

right? Well. That said he already

1:00:06

had Brinsmee's forthcoming new book and

1:00:08

denied that they were colluding together

1:00:10

to destroy the church. Then it

1:00:12

was Charles Bradford's turn. He said

1:00:15

he remembered some early meetings with

1:00:17

Bob and John Brin's meeting and

1:00:19

how their problem wasn't so much

1:00:21

theological as it was that they

1:00:23

refused to submit the church authority.

1:00:25

Bradford confessed that he had a

1:00:27

feeling of deja vu because his

1:00:29

own father had been treated shabbily

1:00:31

by the brethren but remained a

1:00:34

faithful avenues and didn't join a

1:00:36

separatist group led by James Humphrey

1:00:38

back in the late 1920s early

1:00:40

1930s. Francis Wernik then took a

1:00:42

turn and noted that Dez stands

1:00:44

apart from the church on these

1:00:46

10 points, right? Let's refocus our

1:00:48

conversation here. Dez agreed, but made

1:00:50

sure to note that the church

1:00:53

itself had changed in how it

1:00:55

understood the sanctuary since the early

1:00:57

days. For example, they had moved

1:00:59

from talking about Jesus' ministry in

1:01:01

the heavenly sanctuary as happening in

1:01:03

two rooms. to just talking about

1:01:05

two phases. In other words, right,

1:01:07

this idea that there's a literal

1:01:09

structure in heaven, Des is saying

1:01:12

the church has moved away from

1:01:14

that belief, just slowly, almost imperceptibly,

1:01:16

switching the language that they use

1:01:18

to reflect that new understanding. And

1:01:20

so accordingly, the church, Ford said,

1:01:22

has moved closer to me and

1:01:24

further from the pioneers. Or Nick

1:01:26

was sharp and realized that Ford

1:01:28

was alluding to the consensus statement.

1:01:30

which, we have noted, had taken

1:01:33

some turns not previously taken by

1:01:35

other generations of Adventists. And indeed,

1:01:37

in some ways it was a

1:01:39

little closer to Ford, even while

1:01:41

it still affirmed traditional Adventist importance

1:01:43

of the sanctuary doctrine. Well, Wernig

1:01:45

affirmed that the consensus statement was

1:01:47

no shift away from the church's

1:01:49

historic positions whatsoever, otherwise he said

1:01:52

he could not have voted for

1:01:54

it, and several others spoke up

1:01:56

and said the same. It just

1:01:58

makes me wonder what is the

1:02:00

value of a consensus statement when

1:02:02

everyone thinks it affirms their views?

1:02:04

It's telling me that all of

1:02:06

these folks are interpreting the consensus.

1:02:08

statement as agreeing with themselves and

1:02:11

critically disagreeing with the people they

1:02:13

disagree with. They didn't see this

1:02:15

document as supporting Desmond Ford at

1:02:17

all and Desmond Ford saw this

1:02:19

document as very much supporting him

1:02:21

and not supporting them at all

1:02:23

and so it just makes me

1:02:25

think that they didn't have enough

1:02:27

time with this document. The words

1:02:29

are there but it seems people

1:02:32

are walking away with different understanding

1:02:34

of what the words mean. Wilson

1:02:36

then passed the ball to Arthur

1:02:38

Duffy for a few questions. Now

1:02:40

Duffy picked up on something Des

1:02:42

had apparently said about Brinsmead. That

1:02:44

Brinsmead was a gadfly sent to

1:02:46

sting a complacent church into reassessing

1:02:48

some of its beliefs. In other

1:02:51

words, Des is not affirming that

1:02:53

Brinsmead is doing everything right, but

1:02:55

maybe God is using him to

1:02:57

push the church to do things

1:02:59

that they need to do. So

1:03:01

Duffy asked Dez if he saw

1:03:03

himself as a gadfly, too. Well,

1:03:05

Dez declined to own that label,

1:03:07

but he was blunt. Quote, prophets

1:03:10

make mistakes. Ellen White was mistaken

1:03:12

in many things. The pioneers were

1:03:14

wrong in many things. Church leaders

1:03:16

have failed to face up to

1:03:18

these wrongs, end quote. Duffy responded,

1:03:20

do you think that censure and

1:03:22

blame against church leaders is the

1:03:24

way to correct things. And Dez

1:03:26

backed off a little bit. He

1:03:28

conceded that, yes, you're quite right.

1:03:31

This isn't the way to the

1:03:33

right way to seek change. But

1:03:35

he did stick by his original

1:03:37

assessment that church leaders had failed

1:03:39

to honestly face reality, that the

1:03:41

reality that some of the things

1:03:43

the pioneers believed did not stand

1:03:45

the test of good biblical scholarship,

1:03:47

and that leaders had a responsibility

1:03:50

to lead to lead the church

1:03:52

towards a sure biblical foundation. Church

1:03:54

leaders did the best they can,

1:03:56

they could, given what they faced,

1:03:58

and then focused. on what Dez

1:04:00

was wanting the church to do,

1:04:02

to drop the investigative judgment and then

1:04:04

the 2,300 days and the cleansing of

1:04:06

the sanctuary in 1844. Once the church

1:04:09

does that, Duffy asked, will Avonus be

1:04:11

happier? Will all of our problems be fixed?

1:04:13

Are we going to go into the promised

1:04:15

land? And again, Dez conceded that this would

1:04:17

be a hard thing for the church to

1:04:20

accept. You can't just say, hey, as a

1:04:22

result of glacier view, we all agree now,

1:04:24

let's get rid of the sanctuary. It's not

1:04:26

going to work that way. So Dez

1:04:28

said, I think the most important thing

1:04:31

is to have a conversation about the

1:04:33

nature of inspiration regarding the sanctuary, nature

1:04:35

of inspiration as far as Ellewhite

1:04:37

is concerned especially. Duffy then noted

1:04:39

some Ellewhite quotes where she said

1:04:41

in one instance that the sanctuary

1:04:43

truth they had held for 50

1:04:46

years was the truth. These were prophetic

1:04:48

statements, Duffy argued. Why did Dez

1:04:50

not deal with these kinds of quotes

1:04:52

in his paper, in his manuscript?

1:04:54

In his manuscript. Well, Dez didn't get

1:04:57

into the details here, but he said

1:04:59

that Ellewhite changed her views on the

1:05:01

sanctuary over time and that the church

1:05:03

should always be prepared to change for

1:05:05

a better position. I think this highlights

1:05:07

kind of where the respective sides are

1:05:09

at, where Dez did try to wrestle

1:05:12

with some of these Ellewhite statements. Certainly

1:05:14

not all of them. But at the end of the day,

1:05:16

I don't know that Dez felt he needed

1:05:18

to wrestle with all of them because the

1:05:21

principle that Dez was operating by was that

1:05:23

the most important thing is that were

1:05:25

biblical. So, I don't know, you know, how to

1:05:27

reconcile all of her statements.

1:05:29

I'm speaking for him, of course, he didn't

1:05:32

say this. He may not know how to

1:05:34

reconcile all of her statements, but

1:05:36

the important thing is we've got

1:05:38

to be biblical, right? And then we

1:05:40

can figure out what to do with

1:05:42

her later. All right, next up with

1:05:44

Ralph Thompson. He asked Dez if he

1:05:47

was aware that a number of pastors

1:05:49

who had been trained by Ford, as

1:05:51

students at Avendel, said that he

1:05:53

had no intention of leaving the

1:05:55

church. maybe the ministry but not the

1:05:57

church. He said reports of these young

1:05:59

pastors wanting to leave makes him

1:06:01

sad and that he would write

1:06:03

an article urging them not to

1:06:05

adopt this position. Thompson then asked,

1:06:08

at what point does an individual

1:06:10

minister have the right to challenge

1:06:12

publicly the teachings of the church?

1:06:14

Ford responded by saying there are

1:06:16

a number of published articles out

1:06:18

there that do not align with

1:06:20

church teaching. So he's not the

1:06:22

one to break ground here, right?

1:06:24

Duncan Eva was next. He focused

1:06:27

on the effects of Dez's ministry,

1:06:29

that there is a greater mistrust,

1:06:31

greater tension that has existed before.

1:06:33

Dez surely has to be aware

1:06:35

of that and should help resolve

1:06:37

these problems rather than exacerbate them.

1:06:39

Eva mentioned the Pearson letter and

1:06:41

said that's just one of those

1:06:43

things you have to live with

1:06:46

for the sake of unity. Quote,

1:06:48

we must do all we can

1:06:50

to maintain confidence in our leaders,

1:06:52

end quote. Eva urged Ford to

1:06:54

find a way to distance himself

1:06:56

from Brinsmead for the sake of

1:06:58

church unity. He counseled Dez not

1:07:00

to be so intense because he

1:07:02

believed in Dez's ministry and instead

1:07:05

of solving real problems in the

1:07:07

church, church leaders had to come

1:07:09

here to deal with Dez. And

1:07:11

that's more or less his words.

1:07:13

Wilson noted that at this point

1:07:15

in the conversation, we're not on

1:07:17

the same page here. Well, Francis

1:07:19

Warwick then asked if Dez would

1:07:21

help us with the fallout, as

1:07:24

he put it, by which I

1:07:26

think he meant addressing the tension

1:07:28

in the church that arose after

1:07:30

Ford's forum speech, like who's going

1:07:32

to clean up this mess that

1:07:34

you created? Ford said that he

1:07:36

would write an article for the

1:07:38

review and that, quote, I am

1:07:40

sorry I have caused you so

1:07:43

much trouble, you have done the

1:07:45

right thing, and I don't blame

1:07:47

you, end quote. Keith Parmen then

1:07:49

read a letter he had written

1:07:51

to Dez. Now it might sound

1:07:53

a bit strange that everyone else

1:07:55

had questions for Dez while Parmenter

1:07:57

brought a letter. He had obviously

1:07:59

written earlier to read the Dez.

1:08:02

It was dated August 15th, the

1:08:04

day of this meeting, and this

1:08:06

was the first draft of this

1:08:08

letter. had, you know, unlike the

1:08:10

others, perhaps had maybe the most

1:08:12

responsibility in dealing with Dez going

1:08:14

forward. And so this letter outlines

1:08:16

several questions for Dez and Dez's

1:08:18

answers would presumably influence what Parmenter

1:08:21

and his division would do next.

1:08:23

It begins with Dear Dez, which

1:08:25

is kind of like a Dear

1:08:27

John letter, but instead of breaking

1:08:29

up with someone, you intend to

1:08:31

fire them instead. Parmenter admits his

1:08:33

own personal affection for Dez and

1:08:35

outlines a sequence of events that

1:08:37

led to this point. It's very

1:08:40

clear that this letter was written

1:08:42

with the anticipation that it would

1:08:44

be printed someday, right? So it's,

1:08:46

you know, I personally like you

1:08:48

and here's how we got to

1:08:50

this point. It's designed for people

1:08:52

to read who may be, who

1:08:54

weren't involved in the situation to

1:08:56

get them at the speed. And

1:08:59

anyways. The questions Dez must answer.

1:09:01

If he wants to remain employed

1:09:03

in the Seventh-day Avenist Church, certainly

1:09:05

in the Australian Division, he had

1:09:07

to deal with these four points

1:09:09

that Parmenter raised. First, quote, that

1:09:11

you are willing to acknowledge that

1:09:13

there are several points in your

1:09:15

present position on the doctrine of

1:09:18

the sanctuary and related areas and

1:09:20

the role of Ellen White that

1:09:22

are out of harmony with the

1:09:24

fundamental beliefs of the church, and

1:09:26

you are prepared to suspend these

1:09:28

views. end quote. Two, that Dez

1:09:30

pledges. All right, well I thought

1:09:32

I would cut the knocking out

1:09:34

of this thing, but it turns

1:09:37

out those are some of my

1:09:39

colleagues in the office knocking dressed

1:09:41

as a giant crow. I have

1:09:43

no explanation for it. All I

1:09:45

can offer my sincere, sincere condolences

1:09:47

to the crow community for this.

1:09:49

awful and insensitive impersonation that one

1:09:51

of my colleagues has perpetuated. I

1:09:53

am an ally of the Crow

1:09:56

community. Fly, Crow, fly. That is

1:09:58

the end of my prepared statement

1:10:00

on this matter. Anyways, back to

1:10:02

our episode. Where was I? Did

1:10:04

I say that Dez had to

1:10:06

uphold the fundamental beliefs in his

1:10:08

teachings? Okay, anyways, that was point

1:10:10

number two. Did I get to

1:10:12

point number three? That Dez accepts

1:10:15

that his forum talk expressed views

1:10:17

that were out of harmony with

1:10:19

church teachings? That he won't bring

1:10:21

up those subjects again unless, quote,

1:10:23

they might be found compatible with

1:10:25

the positions and beliefs of the

1:10:27

Seventh Day Avenue Church, end quote.

1:10:29

Does that mean he's not allowed

1:10:31

to talk about investigative judgment unless

1:10:34

the church ultimately decides that the

1:10:36

investigative judgment is not biblical and

1:10:38

then Dez can start talking about

1:10:40

it again? It's kind of weird

1:10:42

to leave the door open for

1:10:44

that one. Like you can't talk

1:10:46

about these views unless the church

1:10:48

decides these views are correct. Then

1:10:50

you can talk about these views.

1:10:53

I mean, the whole idea of

1:10:55

prohibiting him from talking about these

1:10:57

views indicates the church doesn't consider

1:10:59

these views correct, but it's like

1:11:01

later on we may change our

1:11:03

mind, so just FYI. Yeah, okay,

1:11:05

fine. Number four, last point, that

1:11:07

you will cooperate in restoring people's

1:11:09

confidence in the fundamental beliefs of

1:11:12

the church for the sake of

1:11:14

unity. Parmenor told Dez

1:11:16

to think about the letter and respond

1:11:18

later. If Ford were not willing to

1:11:20

agree to the terms of the letter,

1:11:22

the church would of course pay for

1:11:25

him to return to Australia, they give

1:11:27

him six months severance, and that would

1:11:29

be that, as far as his employment

1:11:31

in the church is concerned. And Wilson

1:11:34

backed Parmenner up, so don't feel any

1:11:36

pressure to respond today, Dez, just give

1:11:38

it some thought. Then Dez responded anyway.

1:11:41

I must be true to my conscience.

1:11:43

I cannot lie. My wife and I

1:11:45

do not need any time to think

1:11:47

over our response to the letter read

1:11:50

to us. I cannot conscientiously agree to

1:11:52

your request. I regret the trouble I

1:11:54

have brought you, and I am very

1:11:56

sorry for that. Our relationship is not

1:11:59

highly sundered. I will do what I

1:12:01

can to prevent a rupture, a rupture,

1:12:03

end quote. Wilson asked, how far can

1:12:05

you go? Ford replied, quote, I believe

1:12:08

I can still be a blessing to

1:12:10

this church. You have done the right

1:12:12

thing and I don't blame you for

1:12:14

doing what you are doing, end quote.

1:12:17

Wilson, quote, then your statements are more

1:12:19

than tentative. What Wilson was asking is

1:12:21

whether Dez's views expressed in his manuscript

1:12:23

and his Q&A times were his firm

1:12:26

convictions or did they represent his working

1:12:28

theory, right? So long as his views

1:12:30

were tentative, there was some wiggle room

1:12:32

to get out of them, but if

1:12:35

they were his settled convictions, then there

1:12:37

wasn't much else you can do. Dez,

1:12:39

quote, the brethren have made tremendous progress

1:12:42

these past few days. Your position is

1:12:44

closer to mine than ever before. If

1:12:46

we have come this far in our

1:12:48

four days, can you imagine how far

1:12:51

we will go in four years, end

1:12:53

quote. Gotta love the optimism. Wilson reminded

1:12:55

Dez that the supportive statement some people

1:12:57

made at Glacier View are not the

1:13:00

position of the church, so don't get

1:13:02

your hopes up. And Dez responded that

1:13:04

he could support the consensus statement in

1:13:06

essence. Now at this point Jillian Ford

1:13:09

had re-entered the chat and she spoke

1:13:11

up. She had stepped out earlier and

1:13:13

had come back and the notes say

1:13:15

she had been crying as she listened

1:13:18

to the conversation and you can imagine

1:13:20

this is a very difficult conversation to

1:13:22

hear knowing that your lives as you've

1:13:24

known them thus far are about to

1:13:27

be turned upside down. And she said

1:13:29

that everyone has been very fair, but

1:13:31

that she felt Dez had been prejudged

1:13:33

before arriving at Glacier View, like that

1:13:36

this was a foregone conclusion. She believed

1:13:38

Neil Wilson had set the tone against

1:13:40

Dez on Sunday night by defending Ken

1:13:43

Wood's review and Herald articles that had

1:13:45

criticized Dez's positions and, in her view,

1:13:47

prejudice people against Dez in the months

1:13:49

leading up to Glacier View. She also

1:13:52

said that she felt there might have

1:13:54

been a real breakthrough on Thursday and

1:13:56

a marginal comment in the meeting notes

1:13:58

indicate that the note takers thought she

1:14:01

was referring to Jack Pravanch's comment. that

1:14:03

the church needed to rethink 1844, that

1:14:05

he agreed with Dez, and he was

1:14:07

trying to figure out, you know, can

1:14:10

Neil Wilson, can Keith Parminor, can others

1:14:12

live with me, you know, if I

1:14:14

don't agitate. That whole conversation. Anyways, she

1:14:16

thought there might be a breakthrough. Had

1:14:19

Neel not scolded Dez on Tuesday or

1:14:21

read Pearson's letter? One gets the impression

1:14:23

that she thought that the natural course

1:14:25

of the week might have been favorable

1:14:28

to Dez, but at key points Wilson

1:14:30

had intervened to prevent that

1:14:32

outcome. He scolded Dez, he read Pearson's

1:14:35

letter, anything that he could do to

1:14:37

steer it away from Dez. Jillian named

1:14:39

specific people who said they would

1:14:41

step down if Dez were removed, like

1:14:44

Fred Veltman apparently did, and also

1:14:46

some of the other scholars who were

1:14:48

on Dez's side. Wilson and

1:14:50

Parmenner... said some of those scholars

1:14:52

she named had come to them and

1:14:54

said they don't agree with Dez. Jillian

1:14:57

went on narrating the struggle they had

1:14:59

with the Standish brothers with Erwin Gain

1:15:01

and others who had opposed Dez over

1:15:03

the years. Parmenor apparently read some

1:15:05

of his letter again and Ford

1:15:07

responded, I realize that in

1:15:09

your position you've got to do this.

1:15:12

He repeated that he would be happy. to

1:15:14

write an article for the review telling people

1:15:16

to stop following him, quote, I will feel

1:15:18

no bitterness, I will make no complaint, I

1:15:20

will never be angry, I know that what

1:15:22

I would do if I were in your

1:15:24

place, and I will not feel angry about

1:15:27

it, end quote. Again, the brethren asked

1:15:29

Dez not to make any final

1:15:31

decisions with respect to answering Parmenor's

1:15:34

letter just yet. Jillian joined her

1:15:36

husband urging them to stop telling

1:15:38

us that we can take time

1:15:40

to think about it. We've already

1:15:42

made up our minds about what

1:15:44

we believe. Ralph Thompson at

1:15:46

some point intervened and said, quote,

1:15:48

Brethren, I think we have pressured

1:15:51

them enough, end quote. After a

1:15:53

final prayer, Dez shook hands

1:15:55

with every individual. Several of

1:15:57

them were crying. And that was that.

1:16:01

Leaving the meeting, Fred Veltman asked

1:16:03

Jillian what happened. And Jillian told

1:16:05

him something to the effect that

1:16:07

Dez's credentials have been taken away,

1:16:09

been fired, it's all over. And

1:16:11

when Fred later found out that

1:16:13

none of those things have actually

1:16:15

been decided in that meeting, he

1:16:17

was upset. There were some rumors

1:16:19

going around that Jillian had lied.

1:16:22

But Jillian insisted that she had

1:16:24

only meant that the decision had

1:16:26

inevitably been made to take Dez's

1:16:28

credentials and fire him because they

1:16:30

weren't going to... changed their mind

1:16:32

in how they answered Parmenter's letter.

1:16:34

They knew they couldn't come to

1:16:36

terms with him. She knew that

1:16:38

Dez wasn't going to retreat from

1:16:40

his views at this point. And

1:16:42

she didn't want him to. She

1:16:44

said that the terms of Parmenter's

1:16:46

letter were harsh. And this is

1:16:48

a difficult thing because the letter

1:16:51

I quoted from is the later

1:16:53

typed version. Parmenter had read a

1:16:55

handwritten early draft, and to my

1:16:57

knowledge we don't have a copy

1:16:59

of that early draft. Some had

1:17:01

said that the terms in that

1:17:03

early draft were a lot harder

1:17:05

than were eventually written out in

1:17:07

the letter that we quoted. So

1:17:09

I can't say for sure, but

1:17:11

there are several people who say

1:17:13

that the first draft of that

1:17:15

had much more stringent requirements for

1:17:17

debts to return to employment. Ford.

1:17:20

also stated that the handwritten letter

1:17:22

was more demanding, and that the

1:17:24

Australasian Division, of course, was, as

1:17:26

I said, offering him a trip

1:17:28

to Australia in six-month severance if

1:17:30

Ford could not agree with the

1:17:32

terms. The Ford's remained at Glacier

1:17:34

View Ranch over the Sabbath left

1:17:36

Sunday for Washington DC, though not

1:17:38

before Parment or managed to get

1:17:40

forward that slightly revised type version

1:17:42

of the letter that he had

1:17:44

seen on Friday. So with that

1:17:46

in hand, They headed back to

1:17:49

Washington DC. Ford replied to Parmenter

1:17:51

on August 26th, saying he could

1:17:53

not comply with Parmenter's requirements in

1:17:55

order to stay employed. But for

1:17:57

whatever it's worth, he also said

1:17:59

that Dez did agree with the

1:18:01

27th fundamental... beliefs as they were

1:18:03

written that no not a single

1:18:05

one of them was was in

1:18:07

opposition to what he believed and

1:18:09

so that just kind of begged

1:18:11

the question so then what is

1:18:13

he being judged for if the

1:18:15

27 fundamentals are the are the

1:18:18

standard for employee employment I guess

1:18:20

I should say for employment then

1:18:22

what is he being judged on

1:18:24

okay now he says he agreed

1:18:26

with them but Let's not get

1:18:28

into the nitty gritty of going

1:18:30

through these things line by line.

1:18:32

Anyways, Duncan Eva continued to meet

1:18:34

with Ford to search for common

1:18:36

ground during these weeks after Glacier

1:18:38

View. Neil Wilson, too, met with

1:18:40

Ford on October 22. Things were

1:18:42

complicated because Ken Wood, editor of

1:18:44

the Avonus Review, got himself involved

1:18:47

again, and he ran a news

1:18:49

item in the August 28th edition

1:18:51

of the review stating that Glacier

1:18:53

View had rejected Ford's... variant views,

1:18:55

as he called them. Wood reported,

1:18:57

quote, the conclusions of the committee

1:18:59

while recognizing the need for continued

1:19:01

study in certain areas clearly affirmed

1:19:03

the doctrinal positions the church holds,

1:19:05

end quote. In the next issue,

1:19:07

Bill Johnson gave a pretty thorough

1:19:09

overview of Glacier View and noted

1:19:11

that the ten-points critique highlighted major

1:19:13

points of difference between what Dezford

1:19:16

believed and the consensus statement. But...

1:19:18

Ken Wood then added his own

1:19:20

postscript to Johnson's article about the

1:19:22

Friday afternoon meeting with Prexad. Wood's

1:19:24

postscript was terse compared to Johnson's

1:19:26

article. It clearly portrayed Dez as

1:19:28

vindicating the steps the church took,

1:19:30

you know, like I don't blame

1:19:32

you guys, and taking responsibility for

1:19:34

the trouble that he had created.

1:19:36

It's almost as if Dez was

1:19:38

just saying, I was wrong, you

1:19:40

guys are right. Wood also published

1:19:42

the consensus statement and the 10-point

1:19:45

critique, which drove Fred Veltman crazy.

1:19:47

Not so much the publication of

1:19:49

the consensus statement, but Wood's editorializing.

1:19:51

Veltman said that he had supported

1:19:53

church leaders throughout Glacier View. He

1:19:55

thought it was a reasonable course

1:19:57

of action they had taken. their

1:19:59

demands were reasonable of Desmond Ford.

1:20:01

But he noted, quote, as I

1:20:03

left the Denver area to take

1:20:05

a few weeks vacation, it became

1:20:07

more and more apparent to me

1:20:09

that I had evidently misinterpreted the

1:20:11

views of my brother in administration,

1:20:14

end quote. Belmont was incensed that

1:20:16

Kenwood said that the Sanctuary Review

1:20:18

Committee had repudiated Desmond Ford's views.

1:20:20

The only thing they voted on,

1:20:22

Belmont reminded church leaders, was the

1:20:24

consensus statement which Ford agreed with.

1:20:26

Belmont might have added that the

1:20:28

consensus statement was not a fulsome

1:20:30

support for the traditional view either,

1:20:32

right? Because Bill Johnson wrote it,

1:20:34

and he knew it was, in

1:20:36

some respects, the first time Avonus

1:20:38

had taken an official stance on

1:20:40

some of these positions. Dez Ford

1:20:43

had said it represented a movement

1:20:45

towards his views, so how could

1:20:47

Ken Wood write that the 10-point

1:20:49

document, 10-point critique represented where Dez

1:20:51

disagreed with the consensus statement when

1:20:53

Dez stated that he agreed with

1:20:55

the consensus statement. Belman was also

1:20:57

frustrated that Wood published that account

1:20:59

of the Friday afternoon meeting at

1:21:01

a time when church leaders were

1:21:03

still negotiating with Ford to find

1:21:05

a way forward. It, quote, seemed

1:21:07

to me and others not only

1:21:09

unwise, but totally uncalled for. The

1:21:12

printing of this information could only

1:21:14

make the success of the negotiations

1:21:16

less possible, end quote. Veltman noted

1:21:18

that the scholars at Southern, Andrews,

1:21:20

and PUC had grown increasingly unhappy

1:21:22

about how things were being handled

1:21:24

post Glacier View. Quote, I too

1:21:26

came to question whether I had

1:21:28

been duped at Glacier View. I

1:21:30

saw old doubts being raised on

1:21:32

the integrity of our church administrators."

1:21:34

Belmont informed church leaders that the

1:21:36

issues Ford raised were not Ford's

1:21:39

issues alone. A good number of

1:21:41

Avana's scholars shared these concerns. They

1:21:43

saw the same problem. Second, Ford

1:21:45

was promised a serious review of

1:21:47

his document at Glacier View and

1:21:49

he did not get it. We

1:21:51

did not need Glacier View to

1:21:53

tell us that Dez was presenting...

1:21:55

views that were not in agreement

1:21:57

with our historic positions." And quote,

1:21:59

beltman goes on and look I'm

1:22:01

gonna cover this in an upcoming

1:22:03

Avenist History extra episode because there's

1:22:05

a lot more to this letter

1:22:08

I want to talk about other

1:22:10

reactions people have. So go to

1:22:12

patron.com/Avonus History Podcasts or go to

1:22:14

the website and you can subscribe

1:22:16

to Avonus History Extra there as

1:22:18

well. But he does end his

1:22:20

letter with this line, quote, it

1:22:22

would be tragic for us as

1:22:24

scholars to be quiet now when

1:22:26

it appears that our quiet and

1:22:28

calm response at Glacier View was

1:22:30

erroneously interpreted as consent, end quote.

1:22:32

In other words, don't, don't gaslight

1:22:34

us on what we did at

1:22:37

Glacier View. We were there and

1:22:39

we're not just gonna sit by

1:22:41

and let. someone like Ken would

1:22:43

say, oh yeah, all those people

1:22:45

at Glacier View, they totally, you

1:22:47

know, disagreed with Ford and shot

1:22:49

him down and all that. He's

1:22:51

like, that's not what happened there.

1:22:53

Anyways, on September 1, Ford responded

1:22:55

to Parmenter again with an update

1:22:57

to his previous letter. He basically

1:22:59

pushed back from the idea that

1:23:01

he has any relationship to the

1:23:03

critics of the church, but he

1:23:06

stops short, once again, of naming

1:23:08

Brinsmead. He also

1:23:10

affirmed that he believed in Elowite's

1:23:12

gift of prophecy, and now Prexad,

1:23:14

the President's Executive Advisory Group, met

1:23:17

again on September 2nd, and voted

1:23:19

to recommend to the Australian Division

1:23:21

that Ford be given an opportunity

1:23:24

to voluntarily resign. If not, they

1:23:26

were encouraged to remove Desmond Ford's

1:23:28

ministerial credentials. Prexad argued that the

1:23:31

Sanctuary Review Committee had rejected Ford's

1:23:33

arguments at Glacier View and that

1:23:35

Ford had refused to accommodate himself

1:23:38

to the Council of Church Leaders.

1:23:40

Ford was notified two days after

1:23:42

Prexad's vote. And again, this is

1:23:44

the kind of thing that was

1:23:47

driving Fred Veltman nuts. No longer

1:23:49

needed in Washington, the Fords relocated

1:23:51

to Auburn, California, where friends had

1:23:54

gotten Dez a job as a

1:23:56

chaplain. On September 16th, the Australasian

1:23:58

Division Division Division. in the Board

1:24:01

of Avondale College took up Prexad's

1:24:03

recommendation and Desmond Ford's credentials were

1:24:05

removed. Des was notified on September

1:24:08

19th. The specific wording was, quote,

1:24:10

voted that with deep regret we

1:24:12

withdraw Dr. Desmond Ford's ministerial credentials,

1:24:14

noting that he does not, that

1:24:17

this does not annull his ordination,

1:24:19

and further to recommend to the

1:24:21

Avondale College board that he be

1:24:24

relieved of his responsibilities as a

1:24:26

minister and a teacher. End quote.

1:24:28

One person has called this procedure

1:24:31

a credentialectomy and that was that.

1:24:33

In 2000, Ray Cottrell spoke at

1:24:35

Loma Linda in Dez's honor saying,

1:24:38

quote, I have been waiting patiently

1:24:40

for the leaders in Jerusalem to

1:24:42

restore his ministerial credentials. I hope,

1:24:45

Dez, that you and I will

1:24:47

both live to witness that happy

1:24:49

climax to your ministry, end quote.

1:24:51

That happy climax, as Cottrell put

1:24:54

it, would never happen. But there

1:24:56

is so much more to Des's

1:24:58

life and future ministry as a

1:25:01

private member of the Avinous Church,

1:25:03

some of which we will talk

1:25:05

about in our final episode of

1:25:08

season 2, epilogue. Thanks for listening.

1:25:10

We'll talk again next month.