The new book - Omega - written by a practicing attorney in Bakersfield, California, can best, be understood when viewed as the summation before the jury by the counsel for the defense. It is always the objective of a good lawyer to place his client in the best possible light if it is a criminal case, or to secure for his client the best possible decision if it is a civil case. In such a summation, a lawyer is not bound by the same rules that govern direct questioning, or cross examination. Then all rumor, or hearsay is ruled as inadmissible evidence. But not so in a summation before the jury. Here innuendo to influence the emotional reaction of the jurors can be suggested. This device is used by Lewis Walton in his book - Omega. When referring to "dissidents" and "able minds" who came to be associated with John Harvey Kellogg he suggested "it was rumored" they were financed from "the rich cash flow in the sanitarium." (pp. 15, 39) Yet this brilliant defense counsel - he "graduated first in his class from the University of San Diego Law School" (Back Cover) - in summing up the objective evidence states - "As 1902 waned, the expensive sanitarium construction was threatening a full-blown financial crisis." (p. 26) The time of the "rumored" "cash flow" was in 1905, just three years later. In just three years had a serious financial crisis been so resolved that money was flowing freely to buy "gifted men, trained in theology or medicine" (Jones and Waggoner), and an Adventist "song writer" ( Belden )? Such are some of the legal techniques used by lawyers to secure a favorable decision from the jury. These devices Walton uses to the fullest extent in behalf of his client. But you are the jury before whom he is making his summation. How will you be influenced?

But who is Walton's client? In the book, Omega, he uses such expressions as "the organized church" (p. 29); "an ark of safety called the Seventh-day Adventist Church" ( p . 76); and "loyalty to the organized church" (p. 80), as suggestive that the jury and his client are one and the same person. But remember this is a book published at a time when the hierarchy in Washington are on the defensive. It carries a foreword by the Editor of the official organ of the hierarchy, the Adventist Review. (Pp. 6-7) It was edited by the wife of one of the associate editors of that organ. (p. 2) Thus the term - church - as used by Walton, must be understood as defined by his client.

Pierson, former president of the General Conference, while still in office, declared under oath: "I am Robert H. Pierson, an ordained minister of the gospel, and president of the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, which is the Seventh-day Adventist Church,. . ." (EEOC vs PPPA, US District Court, Northern California, CIV #742025 CBP) In the same case, Elder Neal C. Wilson in a sworn affidavit affirmed that it is "necessary for the Church to establish its authority in the community of believers." (Ibid, Affidavit, p . 6) Thus one can readily see that the "organized church" which Walton is representing before the "jury" is not "the community of believers" but rather the hierarchy - "the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists." He is seeking to establish unequivocally the authority of the General Conference in "the community of believers," and in so doing, much is left unstated. Such a biased presentation should send shock waves through the entire jury - you the laity.

No where in the book - Omega - are the names of Desmond Ford, or Walter Rea mentioned, but as one reads, it becomes very transparent that the objective of the book is to mitigate the force of

Page 2

the schism developing because of Ford, and to blunt the effect of the forth coming release of Rea's book - The White Lie. 1 Attorney Walton even suggests that the best procedure to follow in either case is to take the avenue pursued by Ellen G. White in her relationship to Dr. Kellogg - not to even have a conversation with him. (Omega, p. 75) All who question the authority or position of the hierarchy are classed with Canright, Kellogg, Ballenger, and Conradi, whether they believe the true faith committed by God to the Advent Movement or not. This makes little difference to Walton - it is loyalty to organization that must be of paramount concern. This is papalism operating under a guise which purports to sustain the spiritual heritage received from our fathers.

Lest the position of "Watchman, What of the Night?" be misunderstood, let it be clearly stated that we hold no brief for Ford's theology which seeks to destroy the very foundation of the Advent Movement, which movement rests on the hermeneutic which sees in the ancient sanctuary service a type of the heavenly ministry of our Great High Priest. (See - "This We Believe," WWN, XIII, 12) As for the place and authority of the writings of Ellen G. White, Dr. Fred Veltman, General Conference appointed Director of the Ellen G. White Life of Christ Research Project has stated our position very succinctly when he gave his personal testimony in a "Report to PREXAD" on Rea's book. He wrote:

In my ministry I have stressed the fundamental authority of Scripture in harmony with the pre-Dallas statements of Adventist beliefs. It is well known by most of those in this committee that I take Scripture over Ellen G. White, and judge her writings by Scripture. This is not done to by-pass Ellen G. White. This is in harmony with what she herself has clearly stated and with what the church has taught. (p. 24, Emphasis ours)

When we come to a discussion of the Alpha and Omega, we are discussing a subject which lies wholly within the province and scope of the Spirit of Prophecy. It is the descriptive terminology which Ellen G. White applied to a single incident in our past history, and to an overwhelming apostasy which in her day was still future. This needs to be clearly understood, for herein Walton makes his first attempt to mislead "the jury." Ellen G. White wrote - "In the book, Living Temple, there is presented the alpha of deadly heresies. The omega will follow, and will be received by those who are not willing to heed the warning God has given." (Special Testimonies, Series B, #2, p. 50)

The context of this statement places the alpha and the omega to follow - as a doctrinal apostasy. In the paragraph previous to this sentence, she wrote, "We must firmly refuse to be drawn away from the platform of eternal truth, which since 1844 has stood the test." In the paragraph itself, she declares there is no need to "investigate doctrine and points of difference" which do not harmonize with the eternal platform of truth. This doctrinal apostasy which Ellen G. White termed the "alpha" involved only the book - Living Temple - not Canright, nor Ballenger, as Walton seeks to do in his summation before "the jury." Not a single statement in the Spirit of Prophecy where the term - alpha - is found referring to the Kellogg incident, is applied to any other aspect than the doctrinal deviations and where such deviations would lead. To mingle the doctrinal heresy with the organizational controversy which took place at the turn of the Century is to confuse the mind of "the jury" so as to deceive.

A "BLUE BOOK"

Let us now turn our attention to a specific charge made by Walton which he associates with the rumor referred to in the first paragraph - remember not admissible evidence! He writes:

Some of these dissidents - financed, it was rumored, from the rich cash flow in the sanitarium - would begin to put together a book denouncing Mrs. White as a fraud. (p. 15)

What is the background story of this "book" to which Walton alludes? Dr. D. R. McAdams, President of Southwestern Adventist College, has given the origin of this book in his yet unpublished research - Ellen G. White and the Protestant Historians: The Evidence from an Unpublished Manuscript on John Huss. (This manuscript is unpublished because of the White Estate's unwillingness to release the evidence upon which McAdams' manuscript rests.)

Dr. Charles E. Stewart, a physician on the staff of the Battle Creek Sanitarium in response to a Testimony which Sister White wrote dated, March 30, 1906, 2 penned a long letter to her. This letter was shown to Dr. Kellogg. His response was:

"Dr. Stewart, that is a very smart document, but anybody reading that would say that Sister White must be a very mean, contemptible kind a woman. Don't you see they would?" [Stewart replied] "Well, yes, I think they would." "Now," I said, "you want

Page 3

to be very careful you don't ever print that and if you ever let that get out of your hands at all, you should certainly add a statement to it that you believe Mrs. White was a woman God had inspired and led, and that these things were only flaws that you have found, but that the main effect and tenor of her life had been wonderfully good and helpful, that she had stood for principles that were straight and right, and that her work had been a good work, and that you believe in that thing. But," I said, "You ought never to publish such a thing, such a thing should never be circulated..." ("An Authentic Interview ..." p. 28)

But it did get out. Who let it out? - Elder A. G. Daniells himself. Daniells obtained a copy from Elder Willie White, and publically talked about it at the dedication of the Washington Sanitarium. This caused a number of people to approach Dr. Stewart asking about the letter. The result was that someone obtaining a copy caused a "blue book" to be published. The preface contained the following information:

The major portion of this pamphlet was sent May 8, 1907, to W. C. White with the following request: "I am sending this to you so that you can give it personally to your mother if you think best. I do not wish to burden her with these things, but since she has said that the Lord wished them sent and that He would help her to answer them, I shall leave the responsibility and results with her."

The author of this letter informs us that he has written three letters on this subject to W. C. White, but nearly five months have elapsed and he has not even received the courtesy of a reply. However, the registration properly signed was returned.

We have no means of knowing whether or not Mrs. White received the letters, but we do know that Elder A. G. Daniells was duly informed about them and that he took occasion in a public meeting to severely criticize the author for doing exactly what Mrs. White wrote in the name of the Lord asking him to do....

The undue and unwise publicity given this matter has created such a demand for the letter that the author has been entreated by many to publish it, but he has steadfastly refused to do so, maintaining that he never intended that it should be made public only in so far as those who were desirous of knowing his views with reference to the matter, they would be allowed to read it. In this we have reason to believe he kept his promise to the letter. In this connection we wish to state that neither the author nor any person or persons connected with the Battle Creek Sanitarium are responsible for the appearance of this letter in print.

Naturally, a lawyer in his summation before "the jury" would not give this side of the story which damages his client's case.

HARVEY J. KELLOGG

Within the book - Omega - there is a strange emphasis. Dr. Kellogg is painted as a scheming manipulator grasping for power and control. (pp. 14, 31) A specific idea of Kellogg's is mentioned - "It was the proposition that every church-affiliated sanitarium in America, wherever located, be tied completely to the control of Battle Creek." (p. 14) But we are not told of the Regional Systems - such as the Sunbelt System - of hospital control which is operating within the Church. Kellogg is scored for rebuilding the Battle Creek Sanitarium as a mammoth institution, instead of working toward the construction of "a number of smaller institutions." (Pp. 19-20) Yet Walton makes no attempt to associate such counsel with present day policies of the hierarchy in regard to large medical facilities.

Kellogg is portrayed as having a personal vendetta against W. C. White, referring to him as "Weeping Willie." ( p. 59) But Walton does not tell "the jury" that while Kellogg was away finishing his medical studies in New York, his fiance, Mary Kelsey, responded to a call to go to the West Coast to work in the newly opened Pacific Press. While there arrangements were made for her to marry, Willie who had also gone there with his parents, James and Ellen White. As Schwarz states in his book, Harvey J. Kellogg, "from that time on relationships between the doctor and Willie White were never quite as cordial as before." (p. 149)

In Walton's presentation of his case against Kellogg, he links Elders Jones and Waggoner in such a way that the whole of the 1888 Message is called into question. Weigh carefully the impact of these words on the casual reader: "John Kellogg had been helped through medical school financially by the Whites: now he turned on his old friends [Elder White was dead and no documentation is given to

Page 4

support this assertion] with cutting attacks. A. T. Jones and E. J. Waggoner, who had traveled and preached with Ellen White, forsook old associations in favor of the new theology." (p. 65) No account is taken of the Wieland and Short research on "Why Did Jones and Waggoner Apostatize?" (See 1888 Re-Examined, Chapter 9) No differentiation is made between Jones' final position on truth, and Waggoner's refutation. Where can it be shown that Jones repudiated the truth he preached in 1888 and onward? In fact, if one really wants a possible explanation of the close affinity and concern on the part Jones for Kellogg, an Ellen G. White testimony gives an interesting insight. She stated that "after the meeting at Minneapolis, Dr. Kellogg was a converted man, and we all knew it." (Schwarz, op. Cit., p. 174) How would Kellogg feel towards the ones who brought him "to the foot of the cross"? Would there not be an empathy - right or wrong - between men who had been, and who were being made to feel overbearing hierarchical authority?

SPIRIT OF PROPHECY CRISIS

The book - Omega - suggests that in the time of the "alpha" apostasy, there were two main issues: "Thus the issues, according to Mrs. White were two: belief in the Spirit of Prophecy and support for the ministry of the organized church." ( p. 33) The reference upon which Walton bases his conclusion doesn't say just what he says it says. Ellen G. White stated that at the Battle Creek College, the youth would be "leavened by misrepresentations and falsehoods regarding the testimonies, and the work and character of the ministers of God." (Special Test., Series B, #2, p. 22) The word - support - as used by Walton could infer much more than stated in Series B in the light of her counsel on the flow of means.

Let us first consider the attitude toward the Spirit of Prophecy. The picture is left in the mind of the reader that all those who were associated with Kellogg were against the testimonies, while those connected with "the organized church" were accepting Ellen G. White as infallibly inspired. Again Walton in his appeal to "the jury" is overlooking all the documentary evidence available to the contrary so as to obtain a favorable decision for his "client" - the General Conference - who having boxed themselves in by the adoption of a new position at the Dallas Session on the writings of Ellen G. White must come face to face with the forthcoming book by Walter Rea. Thus they are hanging on the horns of a dilemma, and Walton is trying his best to get them off.

Since Elder A. T. Jones is accused by Walton as joining the attack on Sister White (See Section above), let us bring his own statements to light on this accusation. In a pamphlet entitled - The Final Word and A Confession - Jones cites a letter sent to him dated, Dec. 18, 1905, written by "a brother, who, I repeat, moves today [1906] in General Conference circles, and has the confidence of the General Conference administration." (This would include A. G. Daniells) This brother wrote:

You know that the Testimonies of Sister White are from the Lord. You know, too, how to distinguish between men's manipulation of these Testimonies, and what these Testimonies themselves actually teach. (p. 24)

After noting two more statements from men who enjoyed the favor of Daniells, he quotes from a sermon delivered in the Battle Creek Tabernacle, Sabbath, May 19, 1906, by a member of the General Conference with A. G. Daniells present. This man said 1) "There never was a prophet whose every word was inspiration." And 2) "There is hardly an instance of a prophet that does not make mistakes." Then he adds:

Now when these brethren hold the very views regarding the Testimonies which I have found myself compelled to accept, why must I be cast out and condemned as hardly worthy of even the recognition of a brother, while they occupy positions of trust and high responsibilities; and are held in full confidence by the General Conference administration.? (Pp. 25-26)

What was the position of A. T. Jones? He wrote after citing an address given by Ellen G. White in the Battle Creek College Library, April 1, 1901, (See Spalding & Magan Collection, pp. 162-174) as the source of his position:

When the writings of the Spirit of Prophecy are given to bring us to the Bible and then we study these writings to know only what is in them, and not by them to know what is in the Bible, we frustrate the purpose of these writings, and do, in effect make these a second Bible and thus do certainly make them an addition to the Bible. And when we thus use them, instead of using the Bible, we do put them in the place of the Bible. And there is no question at all but that many people have done and are doing

Page 5

just this thing.'' (pp. 4-5)

In regards to Daniells, Walton presents him as seeking advice and counsel from Ellen G. White, albeit through Willie White. (p. 42) He is pictured as unquestioning in his acceptance of the Testimonies sent forth. No where has Walton presented a single letter or testimony that he did not accept and follow. And there are such testimonies. (See Spalding and Magan Collection, "The Regular Lines," p. 174) The book - Omega - sees the relationship between "messenger" and "president" as one of unity in contending with the forces arrayed against them. Such language as "toward summer both Daniells and Ellen White were jolted" - and - "whether A. G. Daniells and Ellen White liked it or not" (pp. 31, 64) - were used to convey this unanimity. However, within four years of her death, Daniells at the 1919 Bible Conference emphatically stated his assessment of the inspiration of Ellen White. And he gave this evaluation in the context of "the controversy at Battle Creek." From a transcript of that Conference, we read:

I am sure there has been advocated an idea of infallibility in Sister White and verbal inspiration in the Testimonies that has led people to expect too much and to make too great claims, and so we have gotten into difficulty.

Now I have studied it these years since I was thrown into the controversy at Battle Creek, I have endeavored to ascertain the truth and then be true to the truth. I do not know how to do except that way. It will never help me, or help the people, to make a false claim to evade some trouble. I know we have difficulties here, but let us dispose of some of the main things first. Brethren, are we going to evade difficulties or help out the difficulties by taking a false position? Well, then let us take an honest, true position, and reach our end somehow, because I never will put up a false claim to evade something that will come up a little later on. That is not honest and it is not Christian, and so I take my stand there.

In Australia I saw The Desire of the Ages being made up, and I saw the rewriting of chapters, some of them written over and over again. I saw that, and when I talked with Sister Davis about it, I tell you I had to square up to this thing and begin to settle things about the spirit of prophecy. If these false positions had never been taken, the thing would be much plainer than it is today. What was charged as plagiarism would all have been simplified, and I believe men would have been saved to the cause if from the start we had understood this thing as it should have been. With those false views held, we face difficulties in straightening up. We will not meet those difficulties by resorting to a false claim....

There is no use of our claiming anything more on the verbal inspiration of the Testimonies, because she never claimed it, and James White 3 never claimed it, and W. C. White never claimed it; and all the persons who helped to prepare those Testimonies knew they were not verbally inspired. I will say no more along that line....

Now on infallibility. I suppose Sister White used Paul's text, "We have this treasure in earthen vessels," as much as any other scripture. She used to repeat that often, "We have this treasure in earthen vessels," with the idea that she was a poor, feeble woman, a messenger of the Lord trying to do her duty and meet the mind of God in this work. When you take the position that she was not infallible, and that her writings were not verbally inspired, isn't there a chance for the manifestation of the human? If there isn't, then what is infallibility? And should we be surprised when we know that the instrument was fallible, and that the general truths, as she says, were revealed, then aren't we prepared to see mistakes? (Spectrum, Vol. 10, #1, pp. 50-51)

With the letter Jones received in 1905 from one who moved "in General Conference circles," and with the admissions of Daniell's four years after the death of Ellen G. White, you "the jury" should be sensing something of what is now taking place. Daniells knew while still in Australia what was taking place, but during the Battle Creek crisis he chose to ignore it; and use the messenger of the Lord through Willie White to sustain his power by cutting down those who were a "threat" to his own position. In retrospect, he can say "that men would have been saved to the cause if from the start we had understood this thing as it should have been." But by 1919 it was too late to reclaim anyone from the carnage. Kellogg had passed beyond reach; Waggoner was dead; and Jones had been fully ostracized. There is no record available to this researcher where Daniells made any effort to alter the situation in line with his above convictions which were basic in the Battle Creek problem.

Page 6

Today we see the whole situation again being re-lived. The Spirit of Prophecy is again being "manipulated" to serve the ends of the hierarchy in Washington; the Editorship of the Adventist Review has become the "cutting edge" in this thrust to rewrite history and distort truth. You can no longer remain an innocent onlooker - YOU ARE THE JURY!

1 Dr. Fred Veltman, who served as head of the Religion Department of PUC during the time that, Dr. Desmond Ford taught there, and who is now Director of a special Ellen G. White Research Project created by General Conference action submitted a report to PREXAD, an advisory group to the President of the General Conference. In this report, Dr. Veltman, after reading the manuscript for the book, - The White Lie - wrote:

3) I do firmly believe that Walter's [Rea] tapes, his public presentations, and his book will have a tremendous negative effect in the lives of our church members. Walter had the advantage of coming to grip with the problem in stages and even so it was shattering to him. What will happen when the church member gets the whole load in one sitting?

4) The book has many weaknesses in terms of presentation of both sides of the argument, the qualification of the evidence, the polemics, and the style. But the book is for the public not the scholar and many will either not recognize such problems or discount them. The book will sell and the money is there to finance it. Many will no doubt give copies away to spread the word.

5) There are some errors in the book but there is also truth. He had evidence which appears quite convincing for his major points. This evidence with or without the interpretations of Walter will "blow the mind" of many an Adventist. (p. 24)

2 The following is the testimony which prompted Dr. Charles Stewart's letter which became the "Blue Book." - "Recently in the visions of the night I stood in a large company of people. There were present Dr. Kellogg, Elders Jones, Tenny, and Taylor, Dr. Paulson, Elder Sadler, Judge Arthur, and many of their associates. I was directed by the Lord to request them, and any others who had perplexities and grievous things in their minds regarding the testimonies that I have borne, to specify what their objections and criticisms are. The Lord will help me to answer these objections, and make plain that which seems intricate. Let those who are troubled now place upon paper a statement of the difficulties that perplex their minds, and let us see if we cannot throw some light upon the matter that will relieve their perplexities... Let it be all written out, and submitted to those who desire to remove the perplexities. I ask that the leaders in the medical work at Battle Creek, and those who have been associated with them in gathering criticism and objections to the testimonies that I have borne, shall open to me the things that they have been opening to others." (Quoted in the McAdams' Research, op. cit.)

"Every Christian is therefore in duty bound to take the Bible as a perfect rule of faith and duty. He should pray fervently to be aided by the Holy Spirit in searching the Scriptures for the whole truth, and for his whole duty. He is not at liberty to turn from them to learn his duty through any of the gifts. We say that the very moment he does, he places the gifts in the wrong place, and takes an extremely dangerous position. The Word should be in front, the eye of the church should be placed upon it, as the rule to walk by, and the fountain of wisdom, from which to learn duty in 'all good works.' But if a portion of the church err from the truths of the Bible, and become weak and sickly and the flock become scattered, so that it seems

Page 7

necessary for God to employ the gifts of the Spirit to correct, revive, and heal the errin we should let Him work. Yea, more we should pray for him to work, and plead earnestly that He would work by the Spirit's power, and bring the scattered sheep to His fold. Praise the Lord, He will work. Amen." (Review and Herald of April 21, 1851)

The position that the Bible, and the Bible alone, is the rule of faith and duty, does not shut out the gifts which God set in the church. To reject them is shutting out that part of the Bible which presents them. We say, Let us have the whole Bible, and let that, and that alone, be our rule of faith and duty. Place the gifts where they belong, and all is harmony. (Review and Herald, October 3, 1854)