The Great Conspiracy - Part # 16

STONING THE PROPHET The very last deception of Satan will be to make of none effect the testimony of the Spirit of God. SM, Bk. 2, p. 78 he very last deception of Satan” will be to disregard the Testimonies of the Spirit of Prophecy by the leadership and laity of the Seventh-day Adventist Church. Do we see this “last deception of Satan” today? Yes. The Testimonies are sadly “disregarded” by the Church. How is this, you ask? The Testimonies are “disregarded” by the laity because Spirit of Prophecy books lay unread upon the shelves in most Adventist homes while many hours are spent in front of the television or with other worldly amusements. The Testimonies then are made of “none effect” because the counsel given in the Spirit of Prophecy goes unheeded. The extent of most Adventists’ exposure to the writings of Ellen White is in the form of a one-page “morning watch” compilation, or when the minister quotes a line or two from the Spirit of Prophecy in his Sabbath morning sermon. It is not easy to be completely focused and committed to Christ and the third angel’s message in this modern world. But this is one of the signs of the very end of time. We must, dear Adventist friend, through the power of the Holy Spirit, stay focused and committed to Christ and His lastday message to a perishing world. The Testimonies are “disregarded” by the leadership of the Seventh-day Adventist Church in the worldly policies voted by the General Conference. They are made of “none effect” by leadership choosing the opposite course given by the Spirit of God in those Testimonies. (See below). This sign of the times, a “disregarding” of the Testimonies, establishes the fact that we are living in the last remnant of time. We are living in the time of great deception spoken of by the apostle Paul when Satan works “with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.” (2 Thessalonians 2:10, emphasis supplied). Why must this be so? Because today Adventists do not love the truth more than they love the pleasures of the world. Indeed, most contemporary Adventists know not what the truth really is. Most Adventists today could not give a Bible study and present the truth to others if their very life depended on it, and it does. For this reason, “God shall send them strong delusion, T Stoning the Prophet -325- that they should believe a lie.” (2 Thess. 2:11, emphasis supplied). It is a serious thing to regard the truth lightly and to reject knowledge. “My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge; because thou hast rejected knowledge, I will also reject thee,” the Lord warns all generations, “that thou shalt be no priest to me: seeing thou hast forgotten the law of thy God, I will also forget thy children.” (Hosea 4:6). The Testimonies Slighted and Disregarded The church has turned back from following Christ her Leader and is steadily retreating toward Egypt. Yet few are alarmed or astonished at their want of spiritual power. Doubt, and even disbelief of the testimonies of the Spirit of God, is leavening our churches everywhere. Satan would have it thus. Ministers who preach self instead of Christ would have it thus. The testimonies are unread and unappreciated. God has spoken to you. Light has been shining from His word and from the testimonies, and both have been slighted and disregarded. The result is apparent in the lack of purity and devotion and earnest faith among us. Ellen G. White, Testimonies for the Church, Vol. 5, page 217. (emphasis supplied). Notice that the “church. . .is steadily retreating toward Egypt.” Why is this? Because “doubt, and even disbelief of the testimonies of the Spirit of God, is leavening our churches everywhere,” Ellen White replies. This is Satan’s last great deception. And even, “Ministers who preach self instead of Christ would have it thus.” But the contemporary Adventist leadership believes they are preaching a “Christ-centered” message. However, “Very adroitly [skillfully] some have been working to make of no effect the Testimonies of warning and reproof that have stood the test for half a century,” and, “At the same time, they deny doing any such thing.” (A Message to Our Physicians, page 10, emphasis supplied). Moreover, “Light has been shining from His word and from the testimonies, and both have been slighted and disregarded.” And therefore, “The result is apparent in the lack of purity and devotion and earnest faith among us.” (ibid., 5T, p. 217, emphasis supplied). Examples Of Disregarding the Testimonies The following are several examples of how the official policies of the Seventh-day Adventist Church are in direct opposition to the counsels given in the Spirit of Prophecy. Many more examples could be given. However, a large book manuscript would be required to present all of the undeniable evidence. Only a few clear examples will suffice to prove that the contemporary SDA Church leadership has “disregarded” the Testimonies of the Spirit, and thus have made the writings of Ellen G. White of “none effect.” Example #1 – Medical Institutions Too Large “Years ago message after message was given, pointing out that the Sanitarium in Battle Creek was too large,” Ellen White wrote, “that plants should be made in different places, that memorials should be established in many places, so that the light of present truth might shine forth.” (Testimonies to the Church Regarding our Youth Going to Battle Creek To Obtain An Education, page 26, emphasis supplied). I have been instructed that in building so large a sanitarium in Battle Creek, men have followed their own devising. They have not been led by the Lord, but have done directly contrary to the light that He has given. I write these words in order that the example that has been set in Battle Creek shall not be followed in Chapter 17 Stoning the Prophet -326- other places; for it is not in accordance with God’s plan. Instead of so large an institution being built in one place, plants should have been made in many cities in which there is nothing to represent the truth. Ellen G. White, Testimonies for the Church Containing Letters to Instruction to Seventh-day Adventists, page 23. (emphasis supplied). Notice the important points. (1) “I have been instructed.” (2) “Men have followed their own devising.” (3) “They have not been led by the Lord, but have done directly contrary to the light that He has given.” (4) “The example that has been set in Battle Creek shall not be followed in other places; for it is not in accordance with God’s plan.” (5) “Instead of so large an institution being built in one place, plants should have been made in many cities.” (6) And the most important point of all is that Adventists were to build “sanitariums,” not hospitals, and these sanitariums were to be built in many places – not “to better serve the community,” as has been often stated, but “to represent the truth.” “It is not the Lord’s will for His people to erect a mammoth sanitarium in Battle Creek or in any other place,” Ellen White stated. “In many places in America, sanitariums are to be established. These sanitariums are not to be large institutions, but are to be of sufficient size to enable the work to be carried forward successfully.” (Battle Creek Letters, page 48, emphasis supplied). Just how large was the Battle Creek Sanitarium? How did the size of that institution compare to modern Seventh-day Adventist hospitals? Let us note the evidence and compare the results. Battle Creek Sanitarium “Late in the spring of 1877 construction began on a four-story brick veneer building 136 feet in length. . . ,” the SDA Encyclopedia states. “By the end of the century the sanitarium employed more than 900 workers, not only to provide health care, but also to operate the farms that supplied produce, milk, and eggs for the patients.” (Seventh-day Adventist Encyclopedia, Second Revised Edition, Art. “Battle Creek Sanitarium,” emphasis supplied). White Memorial Medical Center “With approximately 1,600 employees, 200 volunteers, and 450 physicians representing all major medical specialties, White Memorial Medical Center provides a full range of inpatient, outpatient, and home-care services,” the SDA Encyclopedia states. “It has grown into a fullservice hospital encompassing nine city blocks.” (ibid., Seventh-day Adventist Encyclopedia, Second Revised Edition, Art. “White Memorial Medical Center”). Notice that when Adventist “sanitariums” moved into the large cities and became “hospitals,” there was no longer a need to employ personnel “to operate the farms that supplied produce, milk, and eggs for the patients.” Why? Because with hospitals located in large cities there was no longer “farms that supplied produce, milk, and eggs for the patients.” Now the Adventist Health Systems must provide food from commercial markets of the world, filled with toxic chemicals and preservatives. Was this God’s plan for last-day health reform? Note carefully the following contrast between the number of employees and size of the two institutions, keeping in mind that the counsel from our Lord was “pointing out that the Sanitarium in Battle Creek was too large.” Size Battle Creek White Memorial Four-story building Nine city blocks Chapter 17 Stoning the Prophet -327- 136 feet in length. Personnel Battle Creek White Memorial 900 employees 1,600 employees including farm 200 volunteers workers 450 physicians Total 900 2,250 Disregarding the Testimonies “I have been instructed that in building so large a sanitarium in Battle Creek, men have followed their own devising,” Ellen White wrote. “They have not been led by the Lord, but have done directly contrary to the light that He has given.” (Testimonies for the Church Containing Letters to Instruction to Seventh-day Adventists, page 23, emphasis supplied). Battle Creek Sanitarium Before and After the Fire The 900 Battle Creek employees included personnel to operate the farms. In addition to the 1,600 employees at White Memorial are “200 volunteers, and 450 physicians,” a grand total of 2,250 workers. These additional workers and physicians represent “all major medical specialties.” White Memorial employs 1,350 more personnel than did Battle Creek Sanitarium at the turn of the century! Even the much larger five story, 550 by 500 feet, Battle Creek Sanitarium, constructed by Dr. Kellogg after the fire, was tiny in comparison to the nine city blocks of the White Memorial Hospital. “But when the building was actually put under construction,” the SDA Encyclopedia states, “it became apparent that Dr. Kellogg had proceeded independently and had ordered an elaborately equipped building five stories in height and 550 feet in length, with extensions aggregating another 500 feet on the sides. . ..” (ibid., SDA Encyclopedia, Art. “Battle Creek Sanitarium”). This new Battle Creek Sanitarium, “five stories in height and 550 feet in length, with extensions aggregating another 500 feet on the sides,” proposed by John Harvey Kellogg was not the Sanitarium Ellen White stated was “too large.” The testimony she gave was that the previous Battle Creek Sanitarium was too large. That was the reason why the angels burned the former institution to the ground. Yet, this new, larger sanitarium proposed by Kellogg was tiny in comparison to contemporary Seventh-day Adventist medical institutions. Disregarding the Testimonies Then “When the Lord swept the large Sanitarium out of the way at Battle Creek, He did not design that it should ever be built there again,” the SDA Encyclopedia quotes Ellen White. “But in their blindness men went ahead and rebuilt the institution where it now stands.” (ibid., Seventh-day Adventist Encyclopedia, Second Revised Edition, Art. “Battle Creek Sanitarium;” op. sit., Testimonies to the Church, Regarding our Youth Going to Battle Creek To Obtain An Education, page 26). Disregarding the Testimonies Now This testimony plainly states that the Lord did not design that the Battle Creek Sanitarium “should ever be built there again. But in their blindness men went ahead and rebuilt the Chapter 17 Stoning the Prophet -328- institution where it now stands.” Yet after quoting this clear testimony, SDA Church leadership “in their blindness,” now owns and operates “the institution where it now stands.” Note carefully the following documented evidence: “On Oct. 1, 1974—for the first time in its 108 years of service—the Battle Creek Sanitarium Hospital’s constituency voted to come under the ownership of the SDA Church,” the SDA Encyclopedia states. “Thus, this institution, which was the forerunner of the medical work of Seventh-day Adventists, became the church’s 394th medical facility.” (ibid., Seventh-day Adventist Encyclopedia, Second Revised Edition, Art. “Battle Creek Sanitarium,” emphasis supplied). This statement is not completely correct. “This institution” was not “the forerunner of the medical work of Seventh-day Adventists.” This was the institution rebuilt by John Harvey Kellogg. The institution that was “the forerunner of the medical work of Seventh-day Adventists,” was burned to the ground Tuesday morning, February 18, 1902. Loma Linda University Hospital How does the Loma Linda University Hospital compare in size to the Battle Creek Sanitarium’s four story building, 136 feet in length, and 900 “workers?” Let us examine the facts as stated by the Seventh-day Adventist Encyclopedia. “The construction of a new 500-bed medical center, including a research wing, made this consolidation possible. . . ,” the SDA Encyclopedia states. “In addition, affiliations with other medical institutions in the vicinity of Loma Linda have been utilized.” (ibid., SDA Encyclopedia, Art. “Loma Linda University Hospital”). “In late 1962. . .they launched plans to erect a new, larger hospital-medical center complex. . . ,” the SDA Encyclopedia states. “Actual construction of the nine-story structure, with two levels underground, was begun soon after formal groundbreaking ceremonies on June 6, 1964. In July 1967 it was completed and occupied.” (ibid., SDA Encyclopedia, Art. “Loma Linda University Hospital”). “Loma Linda University Medical Center is staffed by 4,500 employees. . . ,” the SDA Encyclopedia states. “In 1993 the medical center was licensed for more than 700 beds.” (ibid., SDA Encyclopedia, Art. “Loma Linda University Hospital”). “After negotiations the clinic located on the [Norton Air Force] base was donated to Loma Linda, along with a lot of clinic equipment,” the SDA Encyclopedia states. “The Social Action Community Health System (SACHS) is centered in the 42,300 square feet (4,000 square meters) of clinic space.” (ibid., SDA Encyclopedia, Art. “Loma Linda University Hospital”). Battle Creek and Loma Linda Compared Size Battle Creek Loma Linda Medical Center Four-story structure Nine-story structure, 136 feet in length two levels underground 700 beds Personnel Battle Creek Loma Linda University Medical Center 900 employees 4,500 employees including farm Chapter 17 Stoning the Prophet -329- workers Total 900 4,500 Disregarding the Testimonies “It is not the Lord’s will for His people to erect a mammoth sanitarium in Battle Creek or in any other place. . . ,” Ellen White wrote. “These sanitariums are not to be large institutions. . ..” (ibid., Battle Creek Letters, page 48, emphasis supplied). Other current Adventist hospitals, such as Glendale Adventist Medical Center, Porter Memorial (Denver, Colorado), Portland (Oregon) Adventist Hospital, Hinsdale Hospital (Chicago, Illinois), and Kettering Medical Center (Ohio), to name a few, are many times larger than the Battle Creek Sanatarium which Ellen White strongly condemned. The Seventh-day Adventist movement was not to be drawn into competition with Protestant and Roman Catholic large city hospital systems. The counsel was that Adventists were to establish many smaller Sanitariums in the country, utilizing hydrotherapy and other methods of natural healing. Patients would come to these small Sanitariums and stay several weeks, rather than in and out overnight. They would learn how to eat properly and care for their bodies, but more important, they would be taught the three angel’s messages. Over one hundred and fifty years have passed since the Lord gave this people special messages on health and natural healing. The world is just now learning the values of alternative medicine. We as a people have failed miserably in educating the world to these methods of healing. We have been duped into investing time and millions of dollars in the world’s method of healing. Why? Because billions and billions can be realized in the modern hospital systems. What has been the result? Adventist medical facilities are on the verge of bankruptcy. Why else would the Adventist Health Systems merge with those of the Papacy? (See, Judith Graham, “Hospital Alliance Explored,” Denver Post, January 13, 1995). Large Medical Centers Not God’s Will “I write these words in order that the example that has been set in Battle Creek shall not be followed in other places,” Ellen White counseled, “for it is not in accordance with God’s plan.” (ibid., Testimonies for the Church Containing Letters to Instruction to Seventh-day Adventists, page 23, emphasis supplied). “It is not the Lord’s will for His people to erect a mammoth sanitarium in Battle Creek or in any other place.” (ibid., Battle Creek Letters, p. 48, emphasis supplied). Sanitariums Established Out Of the Cities Ellen White received much light from heaven that Seventh-day Adventist institutions should be established out of the cities. Indeed, the following testimony was titled, “No Large Business Firms in the Cities.” “God has sent warning after warning that our schools and publishing houses and sanitariums are to be established out of the city, in places where the youth may be taught most effectively what is truth,” Ellen White wrote. “Let no one attempt to use the Testimonies to vindicate the establishment of large business interests in the cities. Do not make of no effect the light that has been given upon this subject.” (The Publishing Ministry, page 185, emphasis supplied). Chapter 17 Stoning the Prophet -330- Disregarding the Testimonies By Establishing In the Cities White Memorial Medical Center “is located at 1720 Cesar E. Chavez Avenue in Los Angeles, California.” The hospital encompasses “nine city blocks in East Los Angeles, one of the fastestgrowing inner-city communities in the United States.” (ibid., SDA Encyclopedia, emphasis supplied). Glendale Adventist Medical Center is “situated on a 32-acre tract in Glendale, California.” (ibid., SDA Encyclopedia, Art. “Glendale Adventist Medical Center”). “Porter Memorial Hospital is, “An acute general 368-bed hospital located at 2525 South Downing Street, Denver, Colorado.” (ibid., SDA Encyclopedia, emphasis supplied). “Portland Adventist Medical Center “is located in Portland, Oregon’s east side, at 10123 SE. Market Street, just off Interstate 205 and close to Interstate 84,” so states the SDA Encyclopedia. “More than 1.5 million people live in the metropolitan area.” (ibid., SDA Encyclopedia, emphasis supplied). E. G. White Could Not Approve Plans For Building In Los Angeles The following testimony was titled, “Could not Approve Plans for Building in Los Angeles.” An Ellen G. White Estate “Note” at the beginning of this statement declared that the “Statement [was] made by E. G. White, September 15, 1902, at a council meeting called in Los Angeles to consider plans for the erection of a building on Hill Street to be used for restaurant and sanitarium work.” (Manuscript Releases, Vol. 1, page 248, emphasis supplied). The Seventh-day Adventist Encyclopedia stated that the White Memorial Medical Center is “an institution that began as a clinic that opened in a rented store building at 941 East First Street on Sept. 29, 1913.” This was eleven years after Ellen White’s objection to a health food “restaurant and sanitarium work” established in the city of Los Angeles. Why would Ellen White object to such a fine project? Because she knew from the counsel she had received that in time this project in the heart of Los Angeles would grow “into a full-service hospital encompassing nine city blocks in East Los Angeles, one of the fastest-growing inner-city communities in the United States.” (ibid., SDA Encyclopedia, emphasis supplied). Do Not Establish A Sanitarium In Cities “With the light that I have had in regard to sanitariums where the sick are to be treated I cannot give one word of counsel about huddling in the city [Los Angeles]. . . ,” Ellen White stated. “I could not do it, because it has been so distinctly laid before me that when a sanitarium is built, it must be located where it can accomplish the end in view--the object for which it is established.” (ibid., Manuscript Releases, Vol. 1, page 248, emphasis supplied). Disregarding the Testimonies By Building In the City Of Los Angeles “White Memorial Medical Center. . .is located at 1720 Cesar E. Chavez Avenue in Los Angeles, California. . .encompassing nine city blocks in East Los Angeles.” (ibid., SDA Encyclopedia). Justifying Policy By Naming the Institution After Ellen White Ellen White was against establishing a sanitarium (what would she say about a hospital?) in Los Angeles. SDA Church leadership disregarded her testimony and established one there. Three years after her death they named the institution after her. Chapter 17 Stoning the Prophet -331- “On the afternoon of Apr. 21, 1918, the clinic’s name was changed to White Memorial Hospital, and was formally dedicated in memory of Ellen G. White.” (ibid., SDA Encyclopedia, emphasis supplied). Repercussion Of Disregarding the Testimonies In 1984 a surgical team at Loma Linda University Medical Center transplanted a baboon heart into an infant child. The operation was followed closely by the media around the world, and became quickly known as “the Baby Fae Case.” The infant did not live. The funeral was held at the Loma Linda University Church. A Roman Catholic Priest presided at the service. Immediately following the service, people released helium-filled balloons into the air in the front of the church. The news media cameras followed the rise of the balloons as if they were the infant’s soul or spirit rising toward heaven. On November 10, 1984, the Los Angeles Times reported in the religion section, “Adventists See No Conflict Of Belief In Baby Fae Case.” The following are a few heretical excerpts from that article: “Transplanting a baboon’s heart into the body of an infant human in a medical center run by the Seventh-day Adventist Church may seem an oddity for a denomination that teaches creationism and recommends vegetarianism.” John Dart, Times Religion Writer reported. (Los Angeles Times, Saturday, November 10, 1984, Part II, emphasis supplied). “But a range of church members say that there is no religious conflict or discomfort in their minds about the Oct. 26 operation on Baby Fae by Adventist surgeon Dr. Leonard Bailey at Loma Linda University Medical Center,” Dart added further. “Rather, they say, the cherishing of life is an overriding view in their health-conscious church.” (ibid., LA Times, 11/10/84, emphasis supplied). “Cherishing of Life” in their “health-conscious church?” One only has to review the documents of “Project Whitecoat,” the joint United States Army/Seventh-day Adventist Church germ warfare experiments, to see that this statement is a total contradiction. (See, Martin D. Turner, “Project Whitecoat,” Spectrum, Summer, 1970). “Contrary to evolutionary theory, a literal reading of the Creation in the Bible makes animals and humans unrelated,” Dart stated. “But the creationist tradition seemed to present no religious basis for objection, and in fact, Adventist scholars who were interviewed said that evolutionary theory today is winning more adherents among church members– particularly scientists and intellectuals.” (ibid., LA Times, 11/10/84, emphasis supplied). “Human inventions, called education, have been counter-working the infinite counsels of Heaven,” Ellen White would say to contemporary Adventist scholars, scientists and intellectuals. “This is called higher education; but it is an insult to God.” (Manuscript Releases, Vol. 3, page 321, emphasis supplied). John Dart quoted one Loma Linda professor as stating that “The amalgam of man and beast has proved to be no problem and perhaps testifies to long-standing, increasingly sophisticated approach to health and medicine in Adventism since its founding in the mid-19th century.” (ibid., LA Times, 11/10/84, emphasis supplied). Evidently, a “long-standing, increasingly sophisticated approach to health and medicine in Chapter 17 Stoning the Prophet -332- [contemporary] Adventism” allows for young boys in the Church to become guinea pigs in the germ warfare experiments of Project Whitecoat. (See above). Such thinking on the part of SDA Church leadership is a travesty indeed. And to think that they would boldly express such heresy openly to one of the largest newspapers in America is astonishing to say the least. “The guardians of the Adventist Church. . . are content with a morality of form without substance,” Rose magazine stated, “one in which the arts of disease can be presented as the healing arts, and in which germ warfare can be embraced in pious obedience to divine injunction against death.” (Rose, pages 179, 180; op sit., Martin D. Turner, “Project Whitecoat,” Spectrum, Summer, 1970, emphasis supplied). “A creationism-vs-evolution debate has come into the open recently in the church,” the Loma Linda professor stated further to Times reporter John Dart, “an indication in one sense of how medical training could proceed on a pragmatic level while religious ideology remained in the hands of pastors and church theologians.” (ibid., LA Times, 11/10/84, emphasis supplied). “I would say a majority of Adventist scientists would have difficulty accepting at face value the church’s traditional seven-day Creation occurring 6,000 years ago,” James Walters, Assistant Professor of Christian Ethics at Loma Linda University, told Times reporter John Dart. (ibid., LA Times, 11/10/84, emphasis supplied). To comment on this statement would be redundant. A person who does not believe in the seven-day creation week recorded in Scripture is not a Seventh-day Adventist. What in the world do they think the words Seventh-day Adventist mean? The name was chosen by pioneer Adventists to honor the seventh day Sabbath and the Lord of all creation – that the Lord created the earth in six days and rested on the seventh. (Genesis 2:1-3). At this point it is obvious that the Professors of contemporary Adventist colleges and universities no longer believe in the Spirit of Prophecy. Could it be that they also no longer believe in Scripture? “Man’s learning may be considered supreme, but it is not that higher education which he can take with him into the kingdom of heaven,” Ellen White comments. “The learned men of the world, notwithstanding all their intellectual studies, know not the truth as it is in Jesus.” (Advent Review and Sabbath Herald, July 18, 1899, emphasis supplied). “In his epistle to the Ephesians,” Ellen White added further, “Paul brings to view a kind of education which these supposed intellectual stars have not.” (ibid., R&H, 7/18/99 [Ephesians 1:3-6 quoted.]. “For the first time in [Adventist] history, a whole generation of scholars with doctorates from secular universities became active in church institutions,” Edward Lugenbeal wrote. “Probing, open to change, skeptical of tradition, imbued with the valued and culture of higher education, this new breed of `progressive’ Adventist intellectual soon began to reevaluate Adventist traditions.” (op sit., John Dart, LA Times, 11/10/84, emphasis supplied). “There will be an effort made on the part of many pretended friends of education to divorce religion from the sciences, in our schools,” Ellen White stated. “They would spare no pains or expense to impart secular knowledge; but they would not mingle with it a knowledge of what God has revealed as constituting perfection of character. . . .” (Christian Education, page 113, emphasis supplied). Chapter 17 Stoning the Prophet -333- Adventist Intellectuals – Conceited Philosophers “There are men among us in responsible positions who hold that the opinions of a few conceited philosophers, so called, are more to be trusted than the truth of the Bible, or the testimonies of the Holy Spirit,” Ellen White wrote. “Such a faith as that of Paul, Peter, or John is considered old-fashioned and insufferable at the present day. It is pronounced absurd, mystical, and unworthy of an intelligent mind.” (Testimonies for the Church, Vol. 5, page 79, emphasis supplied). Removing “Seventh-day” From Periodicals and Institutions “A company was presented before me under the name of Seventh-day Adventists,” Ellen White wrote, “who were advising that the banner, or sign, which makes us a distinct people should not be held out so strikingly; for they claimed that this was not the best policy in order to secure success to our institutions.” (Testimonies for the Church, Vol. 6, page 144,.emphasis supplied). “I was told,” Ellen White stated, “that men will employ every policy to make less prominent the difference between the faith of Seventh-day Adventists and those who observe the first day of the week. . . .” (Manuscript Releases, Vol. 13, “Counsel to those in Authority,” page 69, emphasis supplied). Notice that “men will employ every policy to make less prominent the difference between the faith of Seventh-day Adventists and those who observe the first day of the week.” And who are these men of apostasy? From the title of the article, “Counsel to those in Authority,” we have the clear answer. “But this is not a time to haul down our colors, to be ashamed of our faith,” Ellen White counseled. “This distinctive banner, described in the words, `Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus,’ is to be borne through the world to the close of probation.” (ibid., 6T, p. 144, emphasis supplied). Notice that this sign that has made us a distinct people, “the Seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God,” and the banner upon which is inscribed, “the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus,” is not to be altered, but “is to be borne through the world to the close of probation.” The words “Seventh-day” or the word “Adventist” is not to be removed from our flag by the leadership of the denomination. “The Sabbath is God’s memorial to His creative work, and it is a sign that is to be kept before the world,” Ellen White wrote. “There is to be no compromise with those who are worshiping an idol sabbath.” (ibid., MR, Vol. 13, p. 69, emphasis supplied). Disregarding the Testimonies On the Name “Seventh-day Adventist” The contemporary “Adventist” Church has dropped the name “Seventh-day” from all institutions and periodicals, and has simply employed the name “Adventist.” Adventist Book Center, Adventist Media Center, Adventist Community Center, etc. Moreover, today many churches and book centers have even dropped the name Adventist, and call themselves simply, “Christian Book Center,” or “Community Church,” or “Community Worship Center.” A Seventh-day Adventist church in Bothel, Washington call themselves, “North Creek Fellowship.” This group met in the local Conference office until funds were raised to construct a church building. Another church in Spokane, Washington changed the name from “Lynnwood Chapter 17 Stoning the Prophet -334- Seventh-day Adventist Church,” to simply, “Lynnwood Worship Center.” The pastor is referred to by the Upper Columbia Conference as an “Alternative Worship Specialist.” He is authorized to hold seminars throughout the Conference promoting alternative styles of worship. The name “Seventh-day” has been dropped from hospitals and clinics world-wide. (See above, “Portland Adventist Medical Center”). Indeed, the name Seventh-day has been dropped from the Church’s welfare system. Remember when the Church’s welfare system was called SAWS, which stood for the title, “Seventh-day Adventist Welfare System?” What is the title of this entity today, friend? ADRA, “Adventist Development and Relief Agency.” The words “Seventh-day” are missing. How about the periodicals? We now have the Adventist Review. What was the name of our Church paper in the days of the pioneers? It was called, The Advent Review and Sabbath Herald! As Ellen White asked, Why haul down our flag at this critical hour? The name “Missionary” has been removed from the title of colleges and schools. The name “Emmanuel Missionary College” was changed to “Andrews University” on April 7, 1960. (ibid., SDA Encyclopedia, Art. “Andrews University”). Original Size Of Emmanuel Missionary College. “The plan was that the college would not be allowed to exceed 250,” the SDA Encyclopedia states, “beyond that figure a new college would be started.” (ibid., SDA Encyclopedia, Art. “Andrews University”). This was always the policy of pioneer Seventh-day Adventists. Keep institutions small so that there could be many more established throughout the world. Our commission from God was to take the three angel’s messages to all the world. The Lord, through the Spirit of Prophecy, counseled time and time again not to centralize in one place with large institutions. But what has been the response of SDA Church leadership to the plain testimonies of the Spirit of Prophecy? “The university [today] comprises seven schools: the College of Arts and Sciences, the College of Technology, the School of Business, the School of Education, the School of Graduate Studies, the SDA Theological Seminary, and the University School,” the SDA Encyclopedia boasts. “It is situated on a 1,600-acre campus.” (ibid., SDA Encyclopedia, Art. “Andrews University”). Disregarding the Testimonies “The plan was that the college would not be allowed to exceed 250; beyond that figure a new college would be started,” the SDA Encyclopedia states. However, “By the 1991–1992 school year, enrollment had increased to 3,057, with 988 enrolled at the graduate level,” and the University has grown to encompass a “1,600-acre campus.” (ibid., SDA Encyclopedia, Art. “Andrews University,” emphasis supplied). At Loma Linda, the “School of Medical Evangelism” is no longer emphasized. No doubt the reader can think of many more examples. Other Examples Of Removing the Name “Seventh-day” The reason why the Seventh-day Sabbath is not held out so prominently is because “a majority of Adventist scientists would have difficulty accepting at face value the church’s traditional sevenChapter 17 Stoning the Prophet -335- day Creation occurring 6,000 years ago.” (James Walters, assistant professor of Christian Ethics, Loma Linda University; Quoted in the Los Angeles Times, 11/10/84, emphasis supplied). Testimonies On SDA Leadership’s Claim To Be the Voice Of God “Evil does not result because of organization,” Ellen White cautioned, “but because of making organization everything, and vital godliness of little moment.” (Fundamentals of Christian Education, page 253, emphasis supplied). “The people have lost confidence in those who have the management of the work,” Ellen White wrote. “Yet we hear that the voice of the Conference is the voice of God. Every time I have heard this, I have thought it was almost blasphemy.” (Manuscript 37, 1901, page 8; Manuscript Release 365, emphasis supplied). The Lord declares that His church is not to be governed by human rules or precedents. Men are not capable of ruling the church. God is our Ruler. I am oppressed with the thought of the objectionable human management seen in our work. God says, Hands off. Rule yourselves before you attempt to rule others. Strange things have been done, things that God abhors. For men to claim that the voice of their councils in their past management is the voice of God seems to me to be almost blasphemy. Ellen G. White, Manuscript 35, 1901 (emphasis supplied). “As for the voice of the General Conference,” Ellen White stated, “there is no voice from God through that body that is reliable.” (Manuscript Releases, Vol. 17, page 178, emphasis supplied). In a Letter to E. J. Waggoner; written August 26, 1898, from “Sunnyside,” Cooranbong, New South Wales, Australia, Ellen White stated that “it has been some years since I have considered the General Conference as the voice of God.” (Manuscript Releases, Vol. 17, page 216, emphasis supplied). General Conference Could Have Been “As” the Voice Of God “During the night season has been presented before me the unfaithfulness of men who have occupied positions of responsibility at the great heart of the work,” Ellen White wrote. “The councils at this great center, if kept pure and uncorrupted, would have been as the voice of God; but men have worked upon principles that are condemned by the word of God, and they have not heard nor obeyed the voice of God.” (Manuscript Releases, Vol. 17, page 209, emphasis supplied). The Bible Is the Voice Of God To Seventh-day Adentists “We are not to turn from One Mighty in counsel to ask guidance of men,” Ellen White warned. “Let those who are inclined to do this read and receive the Bible as the word of God to them. The Bible is the voice of God to His people.” (Review and Herald, Vol. 5, page 224, emphasis supplied). Disregarding the Testimonies On the Voice Of God “The General Conference, while in session, is the voice of God to Seventh-day Adventists.” (William G. Johnsson, Editor in Chief, Adventist Review; statement to Dr. Walter Martin on the John Ankerberg television program). Testimonies On the Wedding Ring Some have had a burden in regard to the wearing of a marriage ring, feeling that the wives of our ministers Chapter 17 Stoning the Prophet -336- should conform to this custom. All this is unnecessary. Let the ministers’ wives have the golden link which binds their souls to Jesus Christ, a pure and holy character, the true love and meekness and godliness that are the fruit borne upon the Christian tree, and their influence will be secure anywhere. The fact that a disregard of the custom occasions remark is no good reason for adopting it. Americans can make their position understood by plainly stating that the custom is not regarded as obligatory in our country. We need not wear the sign, for we are not untrue to our marriage vow, and the wearing of the ring would be no evidence that we were true. I feel deeply over this leavening process which seems to be going on among us, in the conformity to custom and fashion. Not one penny should be spent for a circlet of gold to testify that we are married. In countries where the custom is imperative, we have no burden to condemn those who have their marriage ring; let them wear it if they can do so conscientiously; but let not our missionaries feel that the wearing of the ring will increase their influence one jot or tittle. If they are Christians, it will be manifest in their Christlikeness of character, in their words, in their works, in the home, in association with others; it will be evinced by their patience and long-suffering and kindliness. They will manifest the spirit of the Master, they will possess His beauty of character, His loveliness of disposition, His sympathetic heart. Ellen G. White, Testimonies to Ministers, pages.180, 181. (emphasis supplied).. I feel deeply over this leavening process which seems to be going on among us, in the conformity to custom and fashion. Not one penny should be spent for a circlet of gold to testify that we are married. In countries where the custom is imperative, we have no burden to condemn those who have their marriage ring; let them wear it if they can do so conscientiously, but let not our missionaries feel that the wearing of the ring will increase their influence one jot or tittle.-- Special Testimonies to Ministers and Workers, No. 3, p. 6. Ellen G. White, Testimonies to Ministers, pages.180, 181. (emphasis supplied).. Disregarding the Testimonies On the Wedding Ring The General Conference voted to allow the wearing of wedding rings. Today it is not only used in the wedding ceremony, but leadership, ministry, and laity alike wear wedding rings. This Pagan practice flies directly in the face of the Spirit of Prophecy. Testimonies On Trips To the Holy Land “How many there are that feel that it would be a good thing to tread the soil of old Jerusalem,” Ellen White wrote. “Do we want to walk in the footsteps of Jesus? We need not seek out the paths in Nazareth, Bethany, and Jerusalem.” (Review and Herald, June 9, 1896). If we cannot find the footsteps of Jesus in “Nazareth, Bethany, and Jerusalem,” where then will we find them? “We shall find the footprints of Jesus by the sick-bed, by the side of suffering humanity, in the hovels of the poverty-stricken and distressed,” Ellen White replies. (ibid., Review and Herald, 6/9/1896). “Among our workers are some who feel that a great object would be gained if their feet could tread the soil of old Jerusalem,” Ellen White counseled. “But God’s cause and way will never be advanced by His workers wandering about to find where Jesus traveled and wrought His miracles.” (Advent Review and Sabbath Herald, July 30, 1901, emphasis supplied). I have not one word of encouragement for any person, neither have I money to impart to any person, to visit Jerusalem. As it now is, it would be a picture I would never wish to hang in memory’s hall. Brethren, do you believe that you will soon see Jesus? Then do not needlessly expend means that is of so great value to save precious souls; they need never get a sight of Jerusalem under the curse, but with inspired words you can point them to the New Jerusalem, to Jesus the Mediator of the better covenant, who ever liveth to make intercession for us, and whose intercession is wholly efficacious in our behalf. I know that Christ looks with sadness upon those who are searching for the places He passed over while in the flesh, but who fail to recognize Him as a living Saviour, on any ground, in any place. He says, “Lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the world.” Men may search in vain for the foot-prints of Christ in Jerusalem. I care more for Chapter 17 Stoning the Prophet -337- where He is now, in heaven, and for what He is doing in my behalf. Ellen G. White, The Paulson Collection, page 138. (emphasis supplied). Disregarding Testimony On Trips To the Holy Land In many contemporary Seventh-day Adventist journals are found advertisements on tours to the holy land. One recent advertisement was captioned, “15 Day Holy Land Tour,” (North Pacific Union Gleaner, March 17, 1997). There are similar advertisements in almost all monthly SDA Union magazines. Testimonies On the Dangers Of Psychology “This entering in of Satan through the sciences is well devised,” Ellen White warned. “Through the channel of phrenology, psychology, and mesmerism [hypnosis], he [Satan] comes more directly to the people of this generation and works with that power which is to characterize his efforts near the close of probation. The minds of thousands have thus been poisoned, and led into infidelity.” (Mind, Character, and Personality, Vol. 1, page 19; Vol. 2, page 711, emphasis supplied). Same Statement With Three Added Sentences (1) While it is believed that one human mind so wonderfully affects another, Satan, who is ready to press every advantage, insinuates himself, and works on the right hand and on the left. (2) And while those who are devoted to these sciences laud them to the heavens because of the great and good works which they affirm are wrought by them, they little know what a power for evil they are cherishing; but it is a power which will yet work with all signs and lying wonders–with all deceivableness of unrighteousness. (3) Mark the influence of these sciences, dear reader, for the conflict between Christ and Satan is not yet ended. . . . Ellen G. White, “The Perils of Hypnosis,” Selected Messages, Bk. 2, pages 351, 352; See also, “Science Falsely So Called,” The Signs of the Times, November 6, 1884. (emphasis supplied). Disregarding the Testimonies On Psychology In the statements from Mind, Character, and Personality, immediately following the word “psychology,” a Compilers’s note is inserted which endeavors to establish that the science of “modern” psychology is now Christian. “Times have changed,” the Compiler’s note infers, and thus it is now proper to study and practice “Christian” Psychology. Compiler’s Note: In this statement as published in the Signs of the Times, Nov. 6, 1884, Mrs. White drew heavily from, and somewhat clarified a statement published originally in, the Review and Herald of Feb. 18, 1862, now in Testimonies for the Church, Vol. 1, pp. 290-302. The reference to Phrenology, Psychology, and Mesmerism, as here combined, describing the manner in which Satan takes advantage of the human mind, may seem a bit obscure to one not familiar with the literature of the time and its emphasis. Scientific works devoted to Physiology and the care of the sick carried advertising lists at the back informing the public of literature available. . . . Thus Ellen White was writing of matters which at that time were very much before the public.–Compilers. Compiler’s Note, Ellen G. White, Mind, Character, and Personality, Vol. 1, page 19; Vol. 2, page 711. (emphasis supplied). In this Compilers’s Note there are three subtle deceptions in one sentence. Note carefully the following three points: (1) “The reference to Phrenology, Psychology, and Mesmerism, as here combined.” The Chapter 17 Stoning the Prophet -338- Compilers’s imply that because Ellen White “combined” the mind sciences of Phrenology, Psychology, and Mesmerism, that she was not referring to Psychology as it is taught and practiced today. Yet she stated that all three of these “sciences” would be used by Satan “with that power which is to characterize his efforts near the close of probation.” (2) The Compilers’s Note infers that Ellen White was “describing the manner in which Satan takes advantage of the human mind” in the past century. They emphasized the portion of the Testimony which states that Satan “comes more directly to the people of this generation (1872),” but they neglect the last portion of the sentence which warns that Satan will work through these three mind sciences, which includes Psychology, “near the close of probation.” We are living in that time, near the close of probation. Anyone who does not believe that we are living near the end cannot be considered an Adventist. “An Adventist is one who believes in the soon return of Jesus Christ .” (Webster). (3) The Compilers’s suggest that this statement by Ellen White on Psychology “may seem a bit obscure to one not familiar with the literature of the time and its emphasis.” Again, the subtle suggestion is that the whole Testimony refers only to the past century and that “times have changed.” The science of contemporary psychology is now taught in most Seventh-day Adventist colleges and universities. Indeed, almost all conference Presidents and Pastors of large Seventh-day Adventist Churches hold masters and doctorate degrees in Psychology. The mind sciences of “Neuro Linguistic Programing” (NLP) is practiced and taught extensively throughout the leadership of contemporary Adventism. Testimonies On Celebration Music and Drums In the Worship Service “The things you have described as taking place in Indiana, the Lord has shown me would take place just before the close of probation,” Ellen White warned. “There will be shouting, with drums, music, and dancing.” (Last Day Events, p. 159, emphasis supplied). In the book Maranatha, article, “Drums, Dancing and Noise,” page 234, the sentence is added: “And this is called the moving of the Holy Spirit.” Disregarding the Testimonies On Celebration Music and Drums Notice that this satanic phenomena “would take place just before the close of probation” in the Seventh-day Adventist Church. All the practices of the Holy Flesh Movement of Indiana will be, and is being, repeated in the SDA Church “just before the close of probation.” (See, Last Day Deceptions, pp. 159, 160; Maranatha, p. 226: Selected Messages, Bk. 2, pp. 36-39; The Voice in Speech and Song, pp. 417,418; Manuscript Releases, Vol. 5, pp. 107-109; EGW, The Early Elmshaven Years, pp. 100-107). A contemporary Adventist can now attend any large church and see plainly the disregard for this Testimony from the Spirit of Prophecy. Testimonies On the Danger Of Applause “Wealth or high position, costly equipment, architecture or furnishings, are not essential to the advancement of the work of God;” Ellen White wrote, “neither are achievements that win applause from men and administer to vanity.” (Ministry of Healing, page 36, emphasis supplied). “In marked contrast to all this was the life of Jesus,” Ellen White stated. “In that life no noisy Chapter 17 Stoning the Prophet -339- disputation, no ostentatious [showy] worship, no act to gain applause, was ever witnessed.” (The Desire of Ages, page 261, emphasis supplied). “Jesus did not seek the admiration or the applause of men.” (Ministry of Healing, page 197, emphasis supplied). “They are forever trying to secure position, to gain applause, to obtain credit for doing some great work that others cannot do.” (Testimonies for the Church, Vol. 2, page 466). “Some ministers of ability who are now preaching present truth, love approbation,” Ellen White wrote. “Applause stimulates them, as the glass of wine does the inebriate.” (Testimonies for the Church, Vol. 3, page 185, emphasis supplied). “Self-esteem and self-flattery will be sure to stir up in the heart resentment against any who venture to question one’s course of action,” Ellen White warned. “Self-sufficiency must be overcome. Love of applause, must be seen as a snare.” (Testimonies to Ministers, page 250, emphasis supplied). Disregarding Testimonies On Applause Again, a contemporary Adventist can now attend any large church and see plainly the disregard for this Testimony on applause from the Spirit of Prophecy. Testimonies On Theatrical Performances In the Church “There is an abundance of theatrical performances in our world,” Ellen White wrote, “but in its highest order it is without God.” “The deceptive temptation that they [Adventists] can be a blessing to the world while serving as actresses is a delusion and a snare, not only to themselves, but to your own soul,” Ellen White counseled. “Can the Lord Jesus Christ accept these theatrical exhibitions as service done for Him? No. All this kind of work is done in the service of another leader.” (Letter 58a, 1898; Manuscript Release #909, emphasis supplied). I am instructed that we shall meet with all kinds of experiences and that men will try to bring strange performances into the work of God. We have met such things in many places. In my very first labors the message was given that all theatrical performances in connection with the preaching of present truth were to be discouraged and forbidden. Men who thought they had a wonderful work to do sought to adopt a strange deportment and manifested oddities in bodily exercise. The light given me was, “Give this no sanction.” These performances, which savored of the theatrical, were to have no place in the proclamation of the solemn messages entrusted to us. Ellen G. White, Evangelism, page 137 (emphasis supplied). “Satan’s ruling passion is to pervert the intellect and cause men to long for shows and theatrical performances,” Ellen White counseled. “The experience and character of all who engage in this work will be in accordance with the food given to the mind.” (Evangelism, page 266, emphasis supplied). Death, clad in the livery of heaven, lurks in the pathway of the young. Sin is gilded over by church sanctity. These various forms of amusement in the churches of our day have ruined thousands who, but for them, might have remained upright and become the followers of Christ. Wrecks of character have been made by these fashionable church festivals and theatrical performances, and thousands more will be destroyed; yet people will not be aware of the danger, nor of the fearful influences exerted. Many young men and women have lost their souls through these corrupting influences. Ellen G. White, Review and Herald, November 21, 1878. (emphasis supplied). Chapter 17 Stoning the Prophet -340- “Ministers are not to preach men’s opinions, not to relate anecdotes, get up theatrical performances,” Ellen White wrote, “not to exhibit self; but as though they were in the presence of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, they are to preach the Word.” (Evangelism, page 207, emphasis supplied). Disregarding Testimonies On Theatrical Performances In the Church “The Seventh-day Adventist Church in Tacoma Park celebrated 90 years of ministry to the community with a weekend of fellowship and spiritual renewal September 30 - October 2 [1995],” Bernadine Delafield, wife of the assistant pastor reported. “Friday evening [September 30, 1995] Francisco de Araujo’s production of St. Ellen reaffirmed the role of the Spirit of Prophecy in our denomination.” (Columbia Union Visitor, 12/15/95, p. 20, emphasis supplied). At the 1995 session, the General Conference presented a skit of the popular television program “Jeopardy” to entertain the people, and to convey a Biblical point in a humorous format. The program featured the usual moderator and two contestants, a General Conference vice-president (who in an earlier television interview had stated that the Church needed a Church Manual in order to establish unity and to enforce discipline throughout the Church body). The other contestant was a woman dressed in the full habit of a Roman Catholic nun. The moderator stated that the nun was from the “happy, happy, convent.” The General Conference evidently thought this would be an amusing way to present doctrinal points and be entertaining at the same time. But what had the pen of inspiration warned about using humor in presenting the truth? “There is too much gesticulation and relation of humorous anecdotes in the pulpit,” Ellen White wrote, “and too little said of the love and compassion of Jesus Christ.” (Evangelism, page 640, emphasis supplied). Again, a contemporary Adventist can now attend any large church and see plainly the disregard for these Testimonies on applause from the Spirit of Prophecy. Many contemporary Adventist ministers use “humorous anecdotes” in their sermons. C. M. Maxwell stated in a “week of prayer” sermon in Oregon, “My wife is an angel – she’s always up in the air with nothing to wear.” The humorous statement brought roaring laughter from the crowd. Testimonies On Publishing Daniel and Revelation In One Volume In many testimonies Ellen White counseled against publishing the prophecies of Daniel and Revelation in two separate volumes. The counsel was that commentaries on Daniel and Revelation were always to be published in one volume – “Revelation following Daniel.” “The books of Daniel and the Revelation should be bound together and published,” Ellen White wrote in the Advent Review, and Sabbath Herald, February 18, 1890. (See also, The Publishing Ministry, pages 98, 313; Testimonies to Ministers, 117). This is the suggestion that I made to Elder Haskell which resulted in the book he published. The need is not filled by this book. [why?] It was my idea to have the two books bound together, Revelation following Daniel, as giving fuller light on the subjects dealt with in Daniel. The object is to bring these books together, showing that they both relate to the same subjects. Ellen G. White, Testimonies to Ministers, page 117; The Publishing Ministry, pages 98, 313. (emphasis supplied). In Testimonies to Ministers, page 117, the reader is referred to an Appendix Note for an Chapter 17 Stoning the Prophet -341- explanation of this statement. On the Ellen G. White CD-ROM disk the Appendix Note is inserted immediately following the first sentence. The Note reads as follows: Page 117. Book published by Elder Haskell: The reference here is to a book entitled The Story of Daniel the Prophet, published in 1901 by Elder S. N. Haskell. It is a volume of 340 pages presenting a brief comment on the prophecies of Daniel. This statement by Mrs. White was penned in the year 1902. Three years later Elder Haskell published a companion volume entitled, The Story of the Seer of Patmos, commenting on the book of Revelation. Ellen G. White, Testimonies to Ministers, page 526. (emphasis supplied). Explaining Away the Testimony Notice how the Compiler’s of the Ellen G. White Estate suggest that Ellen White’s objection to the publication of separate books on Daniel and the Revelation by Haskell had been penned three years before “Elder Haskell published a companion volume entitled, The Story of the Seer of Patmos.” Evidently, the Board of the White Estate is of the opinion that, because Elder Haskell had later published a book on Revelation, that it was perfectly proper to continue to publish the books in two separate volumes. However, Ellen White had stated plainly that, “The books of Daniel and the Revelation should be bound together.” Again, she stated that, “It was my idea to have the two books bound together, Revelation following Daniel, as giving fuller light on the subjects dealt with in Daniel.” It is abundantly clear from these statements that Ellen White advocated (which means Heaven also advocated) that the two books should always be published together in one volume! Disregarding Testimonies On Publishing Daniel and Revelation In One Volume In 1953 the Pacific Press Publishing Association published a commentary on the book of Revelation in one volume titled, Unfolding the Revelation. The book was authored by Roy Allen Anderson, then Secretary of the General Conference Ministerial Association. Elder Anderson was also editor of Ministry magazine. The publishing information stated that the volume was reprinted in “1953, 1961, and 1974.” Also it states that the volume was in its “tenth printing [in] 1985.” Roy Allen Anderson later penned a commentary on the book of Daniel titled, Unfolding Daniel’s Prophecies, with a preface by H. M. S. Richards, Sr., Speaker Emeritus for The Voice of Prophecy radio broadcast. Again, the volume was published by Pacific Press Publishing Association. The publishing page stated that the volume was in its “sixth printing [in] 1984.” The two books were never published together in one volume as our Lord through Ellen White counseled! Desmond Ford authored a book titled, Daniel. The book was published in one volume. A companion volume commenting on the book of Revelation was never published. Today the Church promotes two separate volumes on Daniel and Revelation titled, God Cares, Volumes I and II. Volume I is a commentary on the book of Daniel, Volume II on Revelation. The books were authored by C. Mervyn Maxwell, at that time a Professor of History at Andrews University. The two books, God Cares, were never published bound together in one volume as Ellen White counseled. Today, the two books, God Cares, Volume I and II, can be purchased separately at any Adventist Book Center. Not only that, but today it is difficult to find Uriah Smith’s book, Daniel and the Revelation, published in one volume. However, the reader can purchase Uriah Smith’s Daniel and the Revelation in two separate volumes, published in the Christian Home Library series, at any Adventist Book Center! Chapter 17 Stoning the Prophet -342- Altering the Words Of the Prophet It is a sad thing that SDA Church leadership has disregarded the Testimonies of the Spirit. Yet worse than that is that leadership has omitted and changed words in the writings of the Spirit of Prophecy. One must be very careful when reading Ellen White books that are a compilation. A compilation is a book, with statements from various original sources, that have been put together by the Compilers’s of The Ellen G. White Estate since the death of the messenger. In these compilations you will find statements with ellipse signs designated as. . . . . Many times words have been altered intentionally to convey a totally different meaning to the text. One must look to the original published works to find the real message from God. “I said, `If any of the citizens of Battle Creek wish to know what Mrs. White believes and teaches, let them read her published books,’” Ellen White wrote. “My labors would be naught should I preach another gospel.” (Advent Review and Sabbath Herald, January 26, 1905, emphasis supplied). What is the problem? Can we not trust SDA Church leadership and the Ellen G. White Estate to preserve the integrity of the Testimonies? No. Ellen White stated that if anyone wishes to know what Mrs. White believes and teaches, “let them read her published books.” The time has come for God’s people to read the Scriptures for themselves, rather than the commentaries of men. In this late hour in the history of the great second Advent movement it is time to read and reread the books of the Spirit of Prophecy in the context in which they were first written. “The great danger with our people has been that of depending upon men and making flesh their arm,” Ellen White cautioned. “Those who have not been in the habit of searching the Bible [or Spirit of Prophecy] for themselves, or weighing evidence, have confidence in the leading men and accept the decisions they make; and thus many will reject the very messages God sends to His people, if these leading brethren do not accept them.” (Testimonies to Ministers, pages 106, 107, emphasis supplied). Can the Messenger Of the Lord Be Trusted? “That which I have written is what the Lord has bidden me write,” Ellen White added further. “I have not been instructed to change that which I have sent out. I stand firm in the Adventist faith; for I have been warned in regard to the seducing sophistries that will seek for entrance among us as a people.” (ibid., R&H, 1/26/05, emphasis supplied). “I present before our people the danger of being led astray as were the angels in the heavenly courts,” Ellen White warned. “The straight line of truth presented to me when I was but a girl is just as clearly presented to me now.” (ibid., R&H, 1/26/05, emphasis supplied). This statement tells us that the original published works of Ellen White are, “The straight line of truth.” Thus we can have confidence in the published books as written by Ellen White. Again, in this late hour we should beware of the Compilations and Commentaries of men. Examples Of Tampering In the Compilations Of Men On page 265 of the daily devotional book Lift Him Up, the word “into” was replaced by the word “in.” First we will examine the original statement from the Signs of the Times, second the copy from the compilation Lift Him Up. Note carefully the reading of the two statements how the one Chapter 17 Stoning the Prophet -343- tiny word changes the message of the testimony: The Original Statement (1) Enoch “walked with God;” but how did he gain this sweet intimacy? It was by having thoughts of God continually before him. As he went out and as he came in, his meditations were upon the goodness, the perfection, and the loveliness of the divinecharacter. And as he was thus engaged, he became changed into the glorious image of his Lord; for it is by beholding that we become changed. Ellen G. White, The Signs of the Times, August 18, 1887. (emphasis supplied). The Altered Copy In the Compilation (2) Enoch “walked with God”; but how did he gain this sweet intimacy? It was by having thoughts of God continually before him. As he went out and as he came in, his meditations were upon the goodness, the perfection, and the loveliness of the divine character. And as he was thus engaged, he became changed in the glorious image of his Lord; for it is by beholding that we become changed. (Signs of the Times, Aug. 18, 1887). Ellen G. White, Lift Him Up, page 265. (emphasis supplied). Notice that the word “in” was substituted for the word “into.” The Ellen G. White Estate says that Enoch was changed “in the glorious image of his Lord.” This rendering of the passage suggests that Enoch’s character was changed by the Lord at his translation. The new theology teaches that the Lord will change the character of the living at the Second Advent. The Scriptures and historic Adventism teaches that our character must be changed now. In the original testimony Ellen White stated that Enoch, “As he went out and as he came in his meditations were upon the goodness, the perfection, and the loveliness of the divine character.” It was for this reason that Enoch’s character was changed into the character of his Lord. “ And as he was thus engaged, he became changed into the glorious image of his Lord. Ellen White then states “for it is by beholding that we become changed.” This statement is in perfect harmony with 2 Corinthians 3:18: “But we all, with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord.” (emphasis supplied). Yes, Enoch’s character was changed “into” the glorious image of his Lord. Enoch walked with God, he overcame sin in human flesh as Christ overcame sin in human flesh. For this reason Enoch was translated to heaven without seeing death. (Hebrews 11:5). For this same reason God will translate His faithful remnant people. “For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent [precede] them which are asleep [dead],” the apostle Paul said. “Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.” (1 Thessalonians 4:15,17). A Word Inserted To Soften Condemnation Of the Papacy Commenting on “the man of sin” spoken of by the apostle Paul, 2 Thessalonians 2:3, Ellen White stated, “Here comes a power under the control of Satan that puts up the first day to be observed. God calls him the man of sin because he has perpetuated transgression.” (Manuscript Releases, Vol. 5, page 45, emphasis supplied). Then in the next sentence, the White Estate inserted the word “Satan” to change the original emphasis from the Papacy to Satan. “He [Satan] has taken his side to be on the right hand of the first sinner who ever existed.” (ibid., Chapter 17 Stoning the Prophet -344- Manuscript Releases, Vol. 5, page 45). Observe that in this last sentence, the word Satan is in brackets [ ]. This means that someone at the White Estate inserted the word [Satan] in the sentence. If we were to take this rendering by the White Estate, the sentence would imply that Satan is the man of sin, and Adam was the first sinner that ever existed. The sentence would then read, “He [Satan] has taken his side to be on the right hand of [Adam] the first sinner who ever existed.” However, the context of the three sentences when read together unquestionably identifies the Papacy. “Here comes a power under the control of Satan,” and this power would put “up the first day to be observed. God calls him [the Papacy] the man of sin.” How do we know this rendering is correct? Compare the above statement with the inserted word by the White Estate from MR, Vol. 5, p. 45, with the following statement from An Appeal to Our Ministers and Conference Committees: Protestantism is now reaching hands across the gulf to clasp hands with the Papacy, and a confederacy is being formed to trample out of sight the Sabbath of the fourth commandment; and the man of sin, who, at the instigation of Satan, instituted the spurious sabbath, this child of the Papacy, will be exalted to take the place of God. Ellen G. White, An Appeal to Our Ministers and Conference Committees. (page 38) (emphasis supplied). So, what Ellen White was saying is simply that, “He [the man of sin, the Papacy, that puts up the first day to be observed] has taken his side to be on the right hand of [Satan] the first sinner who ever existed.” This power that puts up the first day to be observed is not Satan, but the Papacy. This power, the Papacy, is “under the control of Satan.” (ibid., MR. Vol. 5, p. 45). This power, the Papacy, “at the instigation of Satan, instituted the spurious sabbath.” Indeed, in the last statement Ellen White calls this spurious sabbath, “the child of the Papacy.” (ibid., An Appeal to Our Ministers and Conference Committees, page 38). Upon reading the whole statement in context from Manuscript Releases, Vol. 5, page 45, one can see clearly that Ellen White is here referring to the Papacy and not Satan. In the two preceding sentences she stated, “Here comes a power. . . He [God, who created the heavens and the earth – who has given us a Sabbath memorial] calls him [the Papacy] the man of sin because he has perpetuated transgression.” Yet in their desire to soften the third angel’s message, the White Estate inserted the word “Satan” into the testimony. Once again SDA Church leadership disregards the testimony that, “The truth must not be hid, it must not be denied or disguised, but fully avowed, and boldly proclaimed.” (Selected Messages, Bk. 2, page 370, emphasis supplied). The Man Of Sin Identified “Says Daniel, of the little horn, the Papacy, `He shall think to change the times and the law.’ [Dan. 7:25, Revised Version.] And Paul styled the same power the `man of sin,’ who was to exalt himself above God.” (Great Controversy, page 446, emphasis supplied). “The man of sin has instituted a false sabbath, and the professed Christian world has adopted this child of the Papacy, refusing to obey God.” (Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary, Vol. 4, page 1172, emphasis supplied). But the man of sin, exalting himself above God, sitting in the temple of God, and showing himself to be God, thought to change times and laws. This power, thinking to prove that it was not only equal to God, but above God, changed the rest day, placing the first day of the week where the seventh should be. And the Protestant world has taken this child of the Papacy to be regarded as sacred. In the Word of God this is called her fornication. Ellen G. White, Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary, Vol. 7, page 979. (emphasis supplied). Chapter 17 Stoning the Prophet -345- One Word Omitted From E. G. White Statement In SDA Bible Commentary Commenting on Matthew 27:50, Section #6 titled, “Satan Overcome by Christ’s Human Nature,” the Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary omits a word from an Ellen White statement that changes the message given. The original statement quoted is from an article titled, “After the Crucifixion,” The Youth’s Instructor, April 25, 1901. In the second sentence quoted, there is one word missing from the original Youth’s Instructor statement made by Ellen White. This one word expunged from the original statement changes the understanding of whether Christ came in the human nature of Adam before the fall or after the fall of man. With this one word omitted the statement by Ellen White is changed to support the current position of SDA Church leadership that Christ came to earth in the nature of Adam before he fell in the Garden of Eden. The current reading that is changed states, “He vanquished Satan in the same nature over which in Eden Satan obtained the victory (EGW YI April 25, 1901).” (Matthew 27:50, Section #6, “Satan Overcome by Christ’s Human Nature,” Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary, Second Revised Edition). The following is the original statement as it appeared in the Youth’s Instructor, with the expunged word “had” in the second sentence highlighted by double underline typeface: When Christ bowed his head and died, he bore the pillars of satan’s kingdom with him to the earth. He vanquished satan in the same nature over which in Eden satan had obtained the victory. The enemy was overcome by Christ in his human nature. The power of the Saviour’s Godhead was hidden. He overcame in human nature, relying upon God for power. This is the privilege of all. In proportion to our faith will be our victory. Ellen G. White, “After the Crucifixion,” The Youth’s Instructor, April 25, 1901. (emphasis supplied). The word “had” was omitted from the text sometime in the middle or late 1950's. How do we know this? In the first edition of the Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary, Vol. 7, page 924, the text reads correctly, “He vanquished satan in the same nature over which in Eden satan had obtained the victory.” In the First and Second Revised Editions of the Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary the word “had” is expunged. The April 25, 1901 issue of The Youth’s Instructor cannot be found in the photocopy reprints of The Youth’s Instructor books currently published by the Review and Herald Publishing Association. Nor can that issue of The Youth’s Instructor be found on the Ellen G. White CD-Rom disk. Elder William Grotheer contacted the Ellen G. White Estate asking to see the original autographed copy of The Youth’s Instructor, April 25, 1901. In a reply Letter he was told that “the original was destroyed in the Review fire in 1905.” If this statement is correct, then where did the editors of the first edition of the Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary get the reading “had obtained the victory?” The editors of the first edition obviously saw an original copy of The Youth’s Instructor issue of April 25, 1901 that was supposedly “destroyed in the Review fire.” Four Sentences Omitted From the Book Last Day Events The following are two separate statements by Ellen G. White from Manuscript Releases, Vol. 13, pages 379 and 381, of which portions were placed together in one statement by the Compilers’s of the Ellen G. White Estate. This fragmented statement appears in the compiled book, Last Day Events, pages 178, 179. In this compiled statement four sentences are omitted from the original source. Apparently the Compilers’s of the White Estate feared these four omitted sentences Chapter 17 Stoning the Prophet -346- might be used against the leadership of the Church because of their betrayal of trust in the Evangelical Conferences of 1955-56. The first three sentences of the original statement #1, and the first sentence of the original statement #2 were omitted, and what was left of the two statements was put together to read as one. Very clever indeed! The four omitted sentences in the original statement are underscored so the reader can identify them readily. Statement #1, Manuscript Releases In His Word the Lord declared what He would do for Israel if they would obey His voice. But the leaders of the people yielded to the temptations of Satan, and God could not give them the blessings He designed them to have, because they did not obey His voice but listened to the voice and policy of Lucifer. This experience will be repeated in the last years of the history of the people of God, who have been established by His grace and power. Men whom He has greatly honored will in the closing scenes of this earth’s history pattern after ancient Israel. Ellen G. White, Manuscript Releases, Vol. 13, page 379. (emphasis supplied). Statement #2, Manuscript Releases Unless we give the most earnest heed to the Word of God, human minds will work up theories according to their own deficient practices, and will misrepresent and misapply a “Thus saith the Lord.” A departure from the great principles Christ has laid down in His teachings, a working out [of] human projects, using the Scriptures to justify a wrong course of action, will confirm men in misunderstanding, and the truth that they need, to keep them from wrong practices, will leak out of the soul like water from a leaky vessel. Ellen G. White, Manuscript Releases, Vol. 13, page 381. (emphasis supplied). First consider statement #1 on page 379. Notice that the Compilers’s of the White Estate omitted the first three sentences of statement #1 (underscored sentences). Then the Compilers’s lifted the last sentence from statement #2 on page 381 and presented this last sentence as the last sentence in their compilation in Last Day Events. Ellipses . . . . were placed after the first sentence in the compilation. Thus the Compilers’s of the White Estate were able to omit the first three sentences of statement #1, Manuscript Releases, Vol. 13, page 379, and the first sentence of statement #2, page 381. To demonstrate, the Compilers’s statement in the book, Last Day Events, reads as follows: Men whom He has greatly honored will, in the closing scenes of this earth’s history, pattern after ancient Israel. . . . A departure from the great principles Christ has laid down in His teachings, a working out of human projects, using the Scriptures to justify a wrong course of action under the perverse working of Lucifer, will confirm men in misunderstanding, and the truth that they need to keep them from wrong practices will leak out of the soul like water from a leaky vessel.--13MR 379, 381 (1904). Ellen G. White, “The Shaking,” Last Day Events, pages 178, 179. Often lay persons are accused of taking the Testimonies out of context. Now let us take the part of the Compilers’s and place the four omitted sentences together and see the testimony Ellen White was endeavoring to give to the leadership of the Church: (1) In His Word the Lord declared what He would do for Israel if they would obey His voice. (2) But the leaders of the people yielded to the temptations of Satan, and God could not give them the blessings He designed them to have, because they did not obey His voice but listened to the voice and policy of Lucifer. (3) This experience will be repeated in the last years of the history of the people of God, who have been established by His grace and power. (4) Unless we give the most earnest heed to the Word of God, human minds will work up theories according to their own deficient practices, and will misrepresent and misapply a “Thus saith the Lord.” Ellen G. White, Manuscript Releases, Vol. 13, pages 379, 381. (emphasis supplied). Notice carefully Ellen White’s statements that were omitted by the White Estate, “This experience will be repeated in the last years of the history of the people of God.” This experience Chapter 17 Stoning the Prophet -347- will be repeated in the last years of the history of the Seventh-day Adventist Church. Astounding! Again, “Unless we give the most earnest heed to the Word of God, human minds will work up theories according to their own deficient practices, and will misrepresent and misapply a `Thus saith the Lord.’” A good practice would be to always research the original material, rather than put one’s faith in the compilations of men. Satan’s snares are laid for us as verily as they were laid for the children of Israel just prior to their entrance into the land of Canaan. We are repeating the history of that people. 5T, p. 160 Chapter 17 Stoning the Prophet

The Great Conspiracy - Part 15

SECRET PROJECT WHITECOAT Seventh-day Adventist Germ Warfare Concessions The guardians of the Adventist Church . . . are content with a morality of form without substance, one in which the arts of disease can be presented as the healing arts, and in which germ warfare can be embraced in pious obedience to divine injunction against death. Rose, pages 179, 180, op sit., Martin D. Turner, “Project Whitecoat,” Spectrum, Summer, 1970. idney Katz reports on the most secret weapon in the arsenals of both East and West – `the mind poisons,’” Maclean’s stated in A Report to Canada. “Their purpose is conquest without slaughter, and already some military leaders are calling them `humane.’” (Maclean’s, April 21, 1962). “Using human volunteers to test new chemical and biological agents is not without risk,” Katz stated. “The English experiments have resulted in at least one death which was discussed in the house of Commons.” (ibid., Sidney Katz, Maclean’s, April 21, 1962). The American Program “During the past ten years, in the American program, it is reported that there have been at least three deaths, and some 715 cases of illness and injury of `varying intensity,’” Katz stated. “The American volunteers are recruited from the penitentiaries and the armed forces.” (ibid., Maclean’s, April 21, 1962). The official name of the American germ warfare research program was United States Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases or USAMRIID. The headquarters for this United States Army unit was at Fort Detrick, Maryland. What did USAMRIID and this Canadian report on germ warfare have to do with Seventh-day Adventists? Surely Adventists, who have always believed and taught the principles of healthful living, and the dangers of drugs, were not involved in the development of the most horrid S Chapter 16 Secret Project Whitecoat -300- weapons ever known to mankind? “Many of the human guinea pigs in the latter group [American] have been young Seventh-Day Adventists,” Sidney Katz reported. “Pacifists by conviction, they prefer to engage in nonmilitant activities while in the army.” (ibid., Maclean’s, April 21, 1962, emphasis supplied). Could this report be true? If so, how and when did Seventh-day Adventists become involved in germ warfare experiments? On March 20, 1969, the Review and Herald reported on a special secret project of USAMRIID called “Project Whitecoat.” Adventist Involvement In Project Whitecoat “Adventist medical servicemen were known to be highly motivated for humanitarian service,” the Review and Herald reported. “Thus the Seventh-day Adventist Church was approached to ascertain whether this would be considered something an Adventist serviceman might be able to volunteer for.” (ibid., Review and Herald, March 20, 1969, emphasis supplied). And what was the response of the “sane” Adventist leadership to this request of the United States government to use young Adventist boys, barely out of academy, as human guinea pigs? Did the leadership agree to put Adventist young men in harms way? “After thorough study, the Medical Department of the General Conference and the General Conference Committee agreed that this was humanitarian service of the highest type,” the article stated, “and that any Adventist serviceman might feel free to volunteer.” (ibid., Review and Herald, March 20, 1969, emphasis supplied). “Since that time [1954-1969] almost 1,400 American Adventist servicemen already in the Army Medical Service as noncombatants have volunteered for Project Whitecoat,” the article continued. “They have volunteered as subjects to evaluate mature medical studies in the relentless search for defense against diseases.” (ibid., Review and Herald, March 20, 1969, emphasis supplied). Was it possible that the experiments of the United States Army on the reaction of Adventist young men to dangerous germ warfare substances be considered “mature?” This is a question that should be carefully and prayerfully reconsidered. As the name implies, USAMRIID carries on research in infectious diseases. The particular focus probably could be stated as research in the field of defense against biological weapons or more familiarly known as biological warfare. Volunteers for research in human subjects are needed. These volunteers are recruited from military personnel with a 1-A-O (noncombatant conscientious objector) classification during basic and Advanced Individual Training at the U.S. Army Medical Training Center, Fort Sam Houston, Texas. Seventh-day Adventists compose more than half those taking the 1-A-O basic training, and are strongly oriented toward humanitarian ideals. The volunteer unit at USAMRIID is composed mostly of Seventhday Adventists. Chapter 16 Secret Project Whitecoat -301- Clark Smith, Director of the National Service Organization, General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, Review and Herald, November 27, 1969. (emphasis supplied). The words “infectious diseases,” “biological weapons,” “biological warfare,” and “human subjects” are totally foreign to pioneer Adventist thinking. It is incredible that the leadership of the Seventh-day Adventist Church would even consider a remote connection with germ warfare experiments in light of the message from God to the Church in regard to the use of natural foods, healthful living, and against the use of drugs, tobacco, and other harmful substances. “I was shown that more deaths have been caused by drug-taking than from all other causes combined,” Ellen White wrote. “Multitudes of physicians and multitudes of drugs have cursed the inhabitants of the earth, and have carried thousands and tens of thousands to untimely graves.” (Spiritual Gifts, Vol. 4, pages 51, 52, emphasis supplied). The Beginning Of the American Germ Warfare Experiments For one thing this research goes back to the 1953-1954 period with the original concept for study to determine the vulnerability of man to attack with biological weapons and to test the efficacy of Q fever and tularemia vaccines. Volunteer subjects were needed for the study. With the known humanitarian ideals of Seventh-day Adventists, the Army Surgeon General at the time, Major General George E. Armstrong, approached the General Conference officers to ask if there would be any objection by the church if some of its members were to volunteer for such study. The [GC] officers investigated the matter and replied that inasmuch as the results of such studies would benefit all mankind, church members could feel free to volunteer if after understanding the program they wished to do so. ibid., Clark Smith, Director, National Service Organization of the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, Review and Herald, November 27, 1969. (emphasis supplied). This report by Clark Smith reveals that the original purpose of Project Whitecoat was to “determine the vulnerability of man to attack with biological weapons.” This statement also discloses how the Seventh-day Adventist Church became involved. The Army needed human subjects (guinea pigs) so the Surgeon General (Major General George E. Armstrong) “approached the General Conference officers.” The date for the beginning of SDA involvement (1954) is significant. Smith stated that the germ warfare experiments “goes back to the 1953- 1954 period.” What was taking place in SDA history at that time? Not only was SDA Church leadership reaching out to the world for recognition and acceptance, but the following year, 1955, SDA Church leadership would reach out the hand of fellowship and brotherhood to churches of Babylon in the Evangelical conferences of 1955-56. Later statements in the Review and Herald article reveal that Major Armstrong flattered the General Conference leadership by telling them how wonderful Seventh-day Adventists are because they believe in “the benefit of all mankind.” If ever there was a snow job, this was it. Let us face facts for once. The Bible states that all true Christians will be despised by the nations of earth. “And ye shall be hated of all nations for my name’s sake,” Jesus said. (Matthew 24:9b). “Yea, and all that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution,” the apostle Paul stated. (2 Timothy 3:12). The realistic opinion of the United States Army toward Seventh-day Adventists was that Adventists were the only ones dumb enough to volunteer their young men, just recently out of academy, for such a dangerous health risk project! The proof in this statement is the fact that only Seventh-day Adventist young men volunteered for Project Whitecoat. Adventist Draftees and Project Whitecoat Chapter 16 Secret Project Whitecoat -302- “Today [1963], after eight consecutive years of continuous work, Operation Whitecoat is still going,” Don Roth, stated. “And it has been manned exclusively by Seventh-day Adventist volunteers.” (Don A. Roth, The Youth’s Instructor, “Operation Whitecoat,” Part 2, October 15, 1963, emphasis supplied). “At this writing the number of Seventh-day Adventist servicemen who have participated in Operation Whitecoat totals in the hundreds,” Roth stated. “New men are brought into the program every year.” (ibid., Roth, The Youth’s Instructor, 10/15/63, emphasis supplied). Actually there were about two thousand Adventist boys who participated in Project Whitecoat. According to Colonel Dan Crozier, head of Whitecoat, the project ended in 1973 with the end of the draft. (See below). “Headquarters for the project is at Fort Detrick, near Frederick, Maryland, but auxiliary branches of the operation are maintained at nearby Walter Reed Medical Center,” Roth stated. “Today [1963] a large contingent of Seventh-day Adventist servicemen continue to participate in this type of volunteer work.” (ibid., Roth, The Youth’s Instructor, 10/15/63, emphasis supplied). “During this period of training the Adventist draftees are given information concerning Operation Whitecoat,” Don Roth continued. “Two or three times each year the director of the project, Colonel Dan Crozier, of Frederick, Maryland, and Elder J. R. Nelson, secretary of the National Service Organization of the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists travel to [Fort Sam Houston] Texas to interview possible volunteers for the project.” (ibid., Roth, The Youth’s Instructor, 10/15/63, emphasis supplied). Notice first that at Fort Sam Houston, Texas, the Adventist draftees were “given information concerning Operation Whitecoat.” Note carefully what the SDA draftees had to say about this information given to them: “I remember believing the Q-fever project (Queensland fever) was designed to save lives of troops who might be exposed to this in the future as they were said to have been in WWII,” Harry Wiant wrote. “We were not told this was a `germ warfare’ project as I understand it really was. I for one, thought I was a modern `Walter Reed.’” (Harry V. Wiant, Jr., Letter to the author, dated at Morgantown, West Virginia, November 15, 1989, emphasis supplied). “My primary objection to the Q-fever project was that it was misrepresented to us as a humanitarian undertaking, not germ warfare,” Wiant stated. “The present political climate would never allow such studies, I suspect.” ibid., Wiant, Letter, 11/15/89, emphasis supplied). “Why I did it I still don’t know,” Cesar Vega wrote. “I’m sure it was mostly peer pressure and good old Adventist salesmanship.” (Cesar Vega, Letter to the author, dated at Riverside, California, October 12, 1989, emphasis supplied). First I would like to say that in my particular case I participated in the experiment with my eyes open and with the feeling that I was contributing to the advance of medical knowledge. From the beginning I was told I would be taking part in a “Q” [Queensland] fever project. At that time I had never heard of “Q” fever, anyway, so I thought it was just another simple fever, never stopping to think of any extra pains or illness connected with it. How wrong I was. ibid., Cesar Vega, Letter to the author, dated at Riverside, California, October 12, 1989. “We were told that if we did not volunteer we would receive combat duty overseas.” (Telephone Interview with an anonymous Whitecoat volunteer from the state of Michigan). “I volunteered for this experiment so I would not be sent overseas,” Wilson Wynn stated. (Wilson Chapter 16 Secret Project Whitecoat -303- Wynn, Letter to the author, dated at Hendersonville, North Carolina, October 12, 1989, emphasis supplied). “Most of the men who took part were draftees who chose Whitecoat rather than go to Korea or Vietnam.” (John E. Keplinger, Chaplain (COL.) AUS, Ret. Letter to the author, dated, October 12, 1989). “The Whitecoat project was terminated in January 1973 with the end of the draft.” (Colonel Dan Crozier, USA MC, Ret., Commanding Officer, USAMRIID [Project Whitecoat], Letter, to the author, dated at Frederick, Maryland, November 7, 1989, emphasis supplied). The Whitecoat experiments ended with the draft because without the draft there would be no provocation to entice SDA servicemen to volunteer as human guinea pigs. If the United States decides to implement the draft again, then more “volunteers” would be available for germ warfare experimental programs. If the draft is again activated, would the new volunteers again be Seventh-day Adventists? Recruited or Not Recruited? In 1989, Elder Charles E. Bracebridge, then Director of the National Service Organization of the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, stated in a telephone interview that, “I went to Fort Sam Houston several times with Clark Smith and we simply put up a poster telling about Project Whitecoat. We did not recruit the men who volunteered for the Whitecoat experiments.” However, this statement by Bracebridge was not in harmony with the following statement made by Clark Smith in the Review and Herald interview: Volunteers for research in human subjects are needed. These volunteers are recruited from military personnel with a 1-A-O (noncombatant conscientious objector) classification during basic and Advanced Individual Training at the U.S. Army Medical Training Center, Fort Sam Houston, Texas. Seventh-day Adventists compose more than half those taking the 1-A-O basic training, and are strongly oriented toward humanitarian ideals. The volunteer unit at USAMRIID [United States Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases, i.e., Whitecoat] is composed mostly of Seventh-day Adventists. Clark Smith, National Service Organization, Review and Herald, “Project Whitecoat” (November 27, 1969) (emphasis supplied). Notice that in this statement Project Whitecoat is admitted to be a joint U.S. Army/Seventh-day Adventist Church effort to recruit “volunteers” for Project Whitecoat. “Two or three times each year” Colonel Dan Crozier of the U.S. Army and Elder J. R. Nelson of the General Conference went to Fort Sam Houston to interview Seventh-day Adventist young men into Project Whitecoat. Also observe that the “volunteers” were “recruited from military personnel with a 1-A-O (noncombatant/conscientious objector) classification,” and this recruiting was done “at the U.S. Army Medical Training Center, Fort Sam Houston, Texas.” A personal friend of the author stated that, at the time of his graduation [1957] from Mount Ellis Academy, Bozeman, Montana, he was “recruited” by General Conference NSO representatives. Adventist young boys were “recruited” at the high school and college level. Cesar Vega stated that while at La Sierra College, “I was told of the experiments for the first time (it wasn’t called the Whitecoat Project yet).” (Cesar Vega, Letter to the author, dated at Riverside, California, October 12, 1989). “I don’t recall how they recruited us,” G. R. Bietz recalled. “I remember a man from the conference, I can still see his face, but I don’t recall his name.” (G. R. Bietz, Associate Director Chapter 16 Secret Project Whitecoat -304- and Treasurer, Home Health Education Service, Telephone Interview, November 9, 1989. Proving the Recruiting Allegation Clark Smith, the Director of the National Service Organization of the Seventh-day Adventist Church, the one man in charge of Whitecoat volunteers, stated in the Review and Herald interview that, “Seventh-day Adventists compose more than half those taking the 1-A-O basic training.” Don Roth stated that, “Operation Whitecoat is still going [1963]. . . and it has been manned exclusively by Seventh-day Adventist volunteers.” (Don A Roth, The Youth’s Instructor, 10/15/63). Robert L. Mole, Chief, Chaplain Service of the Jerry L. Pettis MEMORIAL VETERANS HOSPITAL at Loma Linda, California, and Chaplain of the Whitecoat project stated, “Incidentally one-half of all Conscientious Objectors in American Military Service. . .were Seventh-day Adventists.” (ibid., Letter, 11/2./89, emphasis supplied). “Another example of noncombatant heroism while in the service of their country is “Operation Whitecoat,’” the SDA Encyclopedia states, “a project involving medical experimentation, staffed entirely by SDA volunteers. . . .” (Seventh-day Adventist Encyclopedia, Second Revised Edition, Art. “Noncombatancy,” emphasis supplied). Our questions are these. If Seventh-day Adventists compose half of those taking the 1-A-O basic training, why was Project Whitecoat “manned exclusively by Seventh-day Adventist volunteers?” Whitecoat volunteers stated that they volunteered because they did not want to serve in Korea or Vietnam. They were told that if they “volunteered they would not have to serve overseas.” Did not the other fifty percent of noncombatants, non-Seventh-day Adventists training at Fort Sam Houston, also wish not to serve in Korea or Vietnam? Germ Warfare Experiments At Fort Dugway, Utah On March 24, 1968, sixteen years after the germ warfare experiments began, the Newark Sunday News published an Associated Press report that came over the wire from Salt Lake City, Utah. The article stated in part: “State officials are convinced that a mist of lethal nerve gas was blown 30 miles from a top-secret Army chemical warfare test area [Fort Dugway, Utah] on March 13, killing 6,400 sheep in western Utah’s Skull Valley.”(Newark Sunday News, March 24, 1968). The Army said yesterday that its investigation will continue in the remote region 50 miles southwest of Salt Lake City and that “no definite cause of death” has yet been determined. “We are as positive as medical science can ever be that the Army tests caused the deaths,” said Dr. D. A. Osguthorpe, a special adviser to Gov. Calvin L. Rampton. . .. “We have narrowed the cause of death to an organic phosphate compound – the kind that is a component of nerve gas,” Osguthorpe said yesterday. “Since the Army has admitted conducting the nerve gas test the day before the sheep began dying, that would seem to clear the matter up.” ibid., Newark Sunday News, March 24, 1968 “The Army at first denied any connection when the deaths were first reported in midweek,” the Newark News reported further. “Friday, a high-level Army team was flown to Salt Lake City from Washington to investigate.” (ibid.). Skull Valley is rough, semi-desert country, inhabited by a few Basque sheep herders and about 30 Indians. The area is a wind-carved series of peaks, valleys and canyons. It is primarily used for livestock grazing, some alfalfa and small fields of grain. No people, or livestock other than sheep, were affected. The area hit was described by Osguthorpe as about five miles wide and 20 miles long. The sheep were first stricken with paralysis, then died. . .. Chapter 16 Secret Project Whitecoat -305- ibid., Newark Sunday News, March 24, 1968 “He [Osguthorpe] described the suspect compounds as `one of the newer phosphate compounds, some of which are quite beneficial to veterinary medicine,’” the article continued. “However he said others `in the family’ of compounds `are among the most toxic known to science.’” (ibid., emphasis supplied). The Army’s Dugway Proving Grounds is used for chemical and biological warfare testing. It is located 15 to 35 miles from where the sheep were found dead or dying. The Army acknowledged that “routine operations” involving aircraft were conducted [in] March at Dugway. Sen. Frank Moss, D-Utah, said he learned earlier in the week that the Army had fired 55mm shells packing nerve gas that day, while 320 gallons of the substance was reported released from a high-speed aircraft in the area. ibid., Newark Sunday News, March 24, 1968. (emphasis supplied). United Press International Follow-up Report Two months later the Newark Sunday News published a United Press International follow-up report titled, “Utah Sheep Deaths Spark Nerve Gas Probe.” The article stated in part: “A great deal has been learned. . . from laboratory experiments to solve the mysterious fate of the sheep,” the report stated. “It has been discovered, for example, that death can result from extremely minute quantities of the chemical in a way never suspected before.” (Newark Sunday News, May 26, 1968, emphasis supplied). The phrase “nerve gas” is misleading, army authorities told UPI in a series of interviews. The chemical is un-aerosol spray, about the consistency of crankcase oil, rather than a gas. Though it affects the nerves, the result is almost instant death, rather than mere incapacitation. The army describes the agent as an “organo-phosphorous compound.” The exact composition is classified. Death may occur within a few minutes if the agent is inhaled, or within an hour if only a drop of it gets on the skin of any part of the body. ibid., Newark Sunday News, May 26, 1968. “The usual symptoms are a blackout. (The agent causes the pupils of the eyes to close or narrow to slits),” the article stated, “extremely labored breathing–because the nerves controlling the muscles of the heart and lungs have gone wild–and fatal spasms and convulsions.” (ibid.). The death of the sheep was originally mysterious because they exhibited none of these symptoms. They merely lost coordination in their legs, and became weak and languid. After they had gone down they often lived for a day or two and remained sufficiently alert to struggle when a stranger approached. ibid., Newark Sunday News, May 26, 1968. Adventist Leadership Responds To Adverse Media Reports The following February the NBC television program, “First Tuesday,” presented a program on germ warfare experiments. On this program several Whitecoat participants were interviewed. In response to this program, and to the adverse news of the sheep deaths at the Whitecoat proving grounds at Fort Dugway, Utah, the Review and Herald published an article in defense of the Seventh-day Adventist involvement in Project Whitecoat. The sub-title of the article was, “Adventist Medics in America Volunteer to Serve Humanity by Assisting in Disease Research in Project Whitecoat.” The article appeared in the “North American News” section of the Review and Herald. Many North American readers of the Review saw the NBC television program February 4 entitled “First Tuesday.” As a result, some church members have wondered about the participation of Seventh-day Chapter 16 Secret Project Whitecoat -306- Adventist noncombatant medics as volunteers in the U.S. Army’s Project Whitecoat. This television program dealt with the efforts of the United States to prepare for chemical and biological warfare (CBW) as it exists in the world today. The question is, How can Adventist servicemen participate in such preparation and still be truly noncombatant? “Project Whitecoat,” Review and Herald, March 20, 1969. (emphasis supplied). “As a result [of the television program], some church members have wondered about the participation.” This problem came about because of SDA Church leadership’s policy of keeping the laity in the dark. Indeed, most SDA Church members, even to this day, know nothing about the Seventh-day Adventist involvement in the germ warfare experiments of Project Whitecoat. Why were some Seventh-day Adventist Church members concerned? Because, “This television program dealt with the efforts of the United States to prepare for chemical and biological warfare.” After watching the “First Tuesday” television interviews, SDA Church members were asking, “How can Adventist servicemen participate in such preparation [for war] and still be truly noncombatant?” “A viewer with no background information of Project Whitecoat could easily have wondered how an Adventist noncombatant could be involved in such activity.” the Review and Herald article stated. (ibid.). And who is responsible for the laity not having a background on Seventh-day Adventist participation in Project Whitecoat? This has always been a problem with Church leadership. This whole episode with Project Whitecoat proves that the laity of the Church never do have enough “background information” of the devious policies implemented by the leadership. The laity, in most cases, are not properly informed of Church involvement in worldly policies. Again, most Seventh-day Adventists have never heard of Project Whitecoat. If the Adventist people knew the truth about Project Whitecoat they would be appalled. Leadership’s statement that, “A viewer. . . could easily have wondered how an Adventist noncombatant could be involved in such activity,” just about says it all. “In order to effectively evaluate vaccines, drugs, or methods of treatment, it was necessary to secure a group of volunteers who would submit themselves as subjects [guinea pigs] to evaluate the mature findings [?] of the research group developing this defense against disease,” the Review and Herald article continued. “For convenience the group should be small enough to be screened easily, yet large enough to yield the number necessary for the study. . ..” (ibid., Review and Herald, March 20, 1969). This statement reveals that SDA Church leadership considered the findings of the research group to be “mature” and just. With this “maturity” in mind please review the news story of how the nerve gas experiments conducted at Fort Dugway, Utah, got away from the “mature” study group and killed over six thousand sheep! “It is of more than passing interest that the safeguards to the health of those in the program are such that not one participant has had any permanent adverse effects because of the studies.” (ibid., Review and Herald, March 20, 1969, emphasis supplied). Notice that the readers of the Review and Herald were told that “not one participant has had any permanent adverse effects because of the studies.” And yet, it has come to light that indeed one Seventh-day Adventist boy died directly from the effects of an injection of what the Army called Chapter 16 Secret Project Whitecoat -307- Q-Fever vaccine. Many Whitecoat volunteers stated that they were deathly sick from the experiments. (See below). The church has reason to join those in the medical profession who acclaim the selfless courage of these volunteers. Though some have served with Project Whitecoat without participating in studies involving exposure to infectious micro-organisms, there have been hundreds of the participants in various studies who have undergone the rigors of a disease so that clinical knowledge of it might be obtained. Though no human subject is ever knowingly exposed to an infectious disease producing agent unless it is known that the vaccine drug, or method of treatment under study is adequate to effect a cure or that the disease is selflimiting, nevertheless it requires courage of a high type to accept willingly such disease producing agents into one’s body. ibid., Review and Herald, March 20, 1969. Does the SDA Church have reason to join the world in worldly policies and experiments? Notice the following four important points in this statement: (1) “The church has reason to join,” leadership justifies their position. The truth is that the Church has no place in politics or government projects. This is especially true concerning experiments with deadly drugs and germ warfare development. Have not Seventh-day Adventists always been champions of the separation of Church and State? (2) “There have been hundreds of the participants in various studies who have undergone the rigors of a disease. . . .” Actually there have been over two thousand. (3) “No human subject is ever knowingly exposed to an infectious disease producing agent unless it is known that the vaccine drug, or method of treatment under study is adequate to effect a cure or that the disease is self-limiting.” In response to this statement, note again the news report in which over 6,400 sheep died from the nerve gas experiments at Fort Dugway, Utah. These Associated Press and United Press International reports speak for themselves. (4) “To accept willingly such disease producing agents into one’s body.” This statement should be considered in the light of the Ellen White statements on the use of drugs, “I was shown that more deaths have been caused by drug-taking than from all other causes combined.” (Spiritual Gifts, Vol. 4, page 51). What more could be said! To introduce a disease into the body from a germ warfare substance is much worse than a legal drug in the context of which Ellen White was referring to. Over a period of years the descriptions of volunteer studies and their findings have been and continue to be published in top professional journals and distributed throughout the world. Knowing that this medical information for the benefit of mankind can be obtained in no other way has been sufficient reason for their participation. ibid., Review and Herald, March 20, 1969. Evidently this is leadership’s justification for endorsing Project Whitecoat. But, consider these questions. Did the children of Israel need to experiment with disease and drugs for the benefit of heathen nations surrounding them? Did God require them to surrender their bodies for dangerous experiments for the development of any kind of warfare? How about the Church in the days of Elijah? Were the people of God to submit their bodies for experiments to Baal worshipers? I think not. Times have not changed! “For I am the Lord, I change not.” (Malachi 3:6). “The Father of lights, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning.” (James 1:17b). Chapter 16 Secret Project Whitecoat -308- GC Committee Appointed To Investigate Project Whitecoat Six months later the Review and Herald published a second article on Project Whitecoat. This article was written in response to allegations that Seventh-day Adventists were involved in the “development” of germ warfare weapons. In this article the leadership stated emphatically that the Church’s involvement in germ warfare research was “defensive only,” and because the research was “defensive” and not “offensive,” the Church was justified in recommending that young Adventist boys volunteer for Whitecoat experiments. “Some reports have implied that Adventist men are connected with research work directed toward improving biological weapons,” Clark Smith, General Conference Director of the National Service Organization stated. “To bring this issue into the open and to clarify it, the National Service Organization Committee of the General Conference requested the General Conference officers to set up a study committee to bring in a report on the matter.” (Clark Smith, Review and Herald, November 27, 1969, emphasis supplied). The first step was to meet and set down questions that should be asked to obtain the information needed to make an evaluation of the matter. Because many of these questions would involve detailed research to supply the answers, these questions were passed on to the commanding officer of USAMRIID, Col. Dan Crozier, USA MC. Then a subcommittee of eight was chosen by the committee chairman, Neal C. Wilson, to go to Fort Detrick and interview Colonel Crozier and ask further questions. This group of eight had two physicians, two educators, and departmental leaders. This subcommittee reported its findings to the larger committee which reported to the Autumn Council. ibid., Clark Smith, Review and Herald, November 27, 1969. (emphasis supplied). Notice the eight steps taken by the General Conference when seeking important information. (1) A large subcommittee is chosen. (2) A small subcommittee of eight is chosen by the chairman of the larger committee, in this case, Neal C. Wilson. Wilson would later become General Conference President. (3) The small subcommittee of eight traveled to Fort Detrick, Maryland, to talk with the commanding officer of USAMRIID, Col. Dan Crozier. (4) The small subcommittee believes everything told to them by one man, the commanding officer, Colonel Dan Crozier. Remember, this is the same man who stated that: “no serviceman has ever received any vaccine until he and some of his staff of researchers had tried it in their own bodies for any untoward effects.” (See below). (5) The small subcommittee reports what they were told by Colonel Crozier to the large subcommittee. (6) The large committee, chaired by Neal C. Wilson, reports to the General Conference Autumn Council. This report to the Autumn Council is based on the report of the eight-man subcommittee which, in turn, is based on the testimony of one man, Colonel Dan Crozier, the man in charge of Project Whitecoat. (8) The General Conference Autumn Council then makes a supposed rational decision on the testimony of the one man at the head of Project Whitecoat. “The United States and all other strong powers in the world are keeping abreast of knowledge in biological warfare,” Clark Smith stated. “This could be designated as being in the field of offensive warfare and is under the direction of other commands in the Army [rather] than the medical service ]alone], which funds and controls the research in defense against infectious disease agents engaged in by USAMRIID.” (ibid., Smith, Review and Herald, 11/27/69, emphasis supplied). Notice that Clark Smith, director of the National Service Organization of the General Conference, admits that, “This could be designated as being in the field of offensive warfare,” and Chapter 16 Secret Project Whitecoat -309- that the Army “medical service. . . funds and controls the research.” This statement forever settles the question of whether the experiments of Project Whitecoat were offensive or defensive! “The fact that these two research programs are situated on the same Army post, Fort Detrick, has led many people to unwarranted conclusions as to their connection,” Clark Smith stated. “About the only connection is a piece of experimental equipment costing in excess of a million dollars.” (ibid., Smith, Review and Herald, 11/27/69, emphasis supplied). “It should be pointed out that since the published work of USAMRIID is freely available,” Clark Smith added, “those working in the offensive field may utilize this information as any other interested party might do.” (ibid., Smith, Review and Herald, 11/27/69, emphasis supplied). These two statements reveal that no matter how you look at it, Seventh-day Adventist participation in Whitecoat was “utilized” for both “offensive” and “defensive” germ warfare development. Still, SDA Church leadership must justify their position. “However, in the opinion of this study committee the work of the Adventist volunteers in USAMRIID [Whitecoat] is entirely in the defensive area of biological warfare and thus humanitarian in nature,” Clark Smith stated. “The committee feels that the efforts and sacrifices of these volunteers are perfectly proper for the Christian who wishes to enter this field.” (ibid., Smith, Review and Herald, 11/27/69, emphasis supplied). This paragraph amplifies the fact that this program was primarily concerned with “biological warfare.” The statements are made over and over again that the involvement of Seventh-day Adventists was limited to the “defensive area of biological warfare.” Should a Christian be involved in any kind of biological germ warfare – offensive or defensive? More important, should a Seventh-day Adventist, who supposedly believes in health reform and healthful living, be involved in biological germ warfare? We are soldiers of the cross. Is not our warfare as Seventhday Adventist Christians between Christ and Satan, and not between the nations of earth? In a rebuttal to this self-justifying position of SDA Church leadership, Martin Turner stated, “A conscience that is sensitive to the dangers of coffee and wedding rings, but fails to be concerned with the moral implications of participation in biological warfare research, and in war itself, must seem paradoxical to a great many thinking people.” (Martin D. Turner, “Project Whitecoat,” Spectrum, Summer, 1970, emphasis supplied). “A small note of human interest was the remark of Colonel Crozier that no serviceman has ever received any vaccine until he and some of his staff of researchers had tried it in their own bodies for any untoward effects,” Clark Smith added. “But every advance in the knowledge of medicine must ultimately be tested in the human volunteer [Adventist] before it can be passed on to the world. Some risk is always involved.” (ibid., Clark Smith, Review and Herald, 11/27/69, emphasis supplied). “No serviceman has ever received any vaccine until he [Colonel Crozier] and some of his staff of researchers had tried it in their own bodies.” Anyone who would believe this statement is completely out of touch with reality. How could the General Conference officers be so naive as to believe such a statement. When the author brought this statement to the attention of one of the Whitecoat volunteers and asked if he believed that Colonel Crozier actually injected himself with the Q-Fever serum, he laughed long and loud. “To depend upon the opinions of Commanders and NSO Officials would be an injustice to every Chapter 16 Secret Project Whitecoat -310- Whitecoat Volunteer,” Robert Mole stated. “I do not know or never met any officer who actually risked his life by injections, etc., in the Whitecoat project.” (Robert L. Mole, DS, Chief, Chaplain Service, Jerry L. Pettis MEMORIAL VETERANS HOSPITAL, Department of Veterans Affairs, Letter to the author, dated at Loma Linda, California, November 2, 1989, emphasis supplied). “The Hot Zone” The Startling Report Of A Whitecoat Volunteer The third Whitecoat reunion was held at the Frederick, Maryland, SDA Church in September, 1998. In response to this reunion the Adventist Review, September 24, 1998, published an article entitled, “A Coat Of Many Colors – Looking Back at Operation Whitecoat.” The article was penned by Bill Knott, associate editor. In this article the author alluded that there were still “critics” of the Church’s endorsement of Project Whitecoat. One endnote to his article referred the reader to this author’s unpublished manuscript, The Greatest Conspiracy. In response to the Adventist Review article placed on the Internet, September 24, 1998, David Dishneau of the Associated Press, penned an article entitled, “Adventist Debate Church Role in Vietnam Era Germ Warfare Research.” Before preparing his article for the news service, Dishneau contacted this author for a comment. When the article hit the Associated Press news network the article quoted this author as stating: “Pioneer Adventists would turn in their graves if they knew of the Seventh-day Adventist Church’s involvement in Project Whitecoat.” This was an accurate quote and is, in fact, true. Indeed, pioneer Adventists would be abhorred of any involvement in a project like Whitecoat that would put Adventist young men in grave danger. Many newspapers carried the article. To name a few in which the article appeared were: Star Telegram, Dallas - Fort Worth, Texas, Oct. 8, 1998; Washington Post, Washington DC “Religion Today,” Oct. 8, 1998; San Jose Mercury News, Oct. 17, 1998; and Chicago Sun Times, Ernest Tucker, Religion Editor. After reading this article in his local newspaper, Lester Bartholomew (a Whitecoat participant) called from his wilderness home in the northwest. The shocking story of this Whitecoat volunteer must be recorded here: “I learned about Project Whitecoat while I was at boot-camp at Fort Sam Houston in 1966,” Lester recalled. “I volunteered and participated in three projects. I think I was the only one who did three projects.” “On my first project I was injected with `Tularemia,’ pronounced, `Tu–la-reem-ee-ah,’” Lester stated. “It was also known as, `Black Plague.’ Another name for the virus was `Rabbit Fever,’ a virus found in rabbits in Tulare County, California. They were working on diseases that could be transferred from animals to humans.”. “There were forty-five Seventh-day Adventist young men on the first project I participated in,” Lester recalled. “All forty-five became very ill with a high fever.”: “Before they injected us with the virus they tested our motor skills with a mechanical device,” Lester stated. “It was their intention to test our motor skills again after we came down with the fever. However, I lost consciousness for several days and awoke with a high fever of 106 degrees. They had me packed in ice and were attempting to draw blood from my toes because my veins had collapsed.” “After thirty-two years I still suffer adverse reactions from the `Tularemia’ virus,” Lester stated. Chapter 16 Secret Project Whitecoat -311- “I attended the first Whitecoat Reunion held at the Frederick, Maryland SDA Church, October 10, 1989, and they were still trying to find a cure for the `Tularemia’ virus at that time.” Project Whitecoat – Offensive Or Defensive “When we were not `on project’ we were given other jobs,” Lester stated. “I was chosen to work in the `Hot Zone’ in the offensive Germ Warfare area behind the big fence. My code name was `Two Geese.’ They told me that if anyone asked what I was doing, I was to answer that I was taking care of two geese.” “My job was to package and ship dangerous germ warfare chemicals,” Lester recalled. “There was one other Whitecoat boy from Tennessee working with me. We did not have the packing materials that we have today, so we packed the stuff in cotton and then surrounded it with dry ice. They told us that if we broke one of the two vials in each package it would wipe out the state of Maryland.” [Maybe Washington D.C., or even Seventh-day Adventist headquarters in Silver Spring, Maryland!] “At the 1989 Whitecoat Reunion I visited Building 427 where I worked when I was not on a project,” Lester stated. “The building behind 427 is all boarded up now. That is where they kept the `hot stuff.’ They said they cannot destroy the building because whatever is left in there would wipe out Maryland.” “It was I who sent the chemicals to Fort Dugway, Utah that killed 6,400 sheep in 1968,” Lester added remorsefully. “Later, it was revealed that two shepherd boys were killed by the dangerous substance. I also shipped germ warfare chemicals to Guam for use in Vietnam.” “At the time I believed I was doing a service for God and Country,” Lester stated regretfully. “At the 1989 Whitecoat reunion there was a banner across the front of the Frederick, Maryland Church which stated: `For God and Country – For the Army and the Church.` Now I feel that I was lied to by the Army, and also SDA Church leaders.” This duty performed by Lester Bartholomew most definitely could be considered as offensive duty by a Whitecoat volunteer. There is no way that a program like Project Whitecoat could be separated from offensive germ warfare development. More Justification By SDA Church Leadership “Of the more than 1,500 Adventist servicemen who have participated in Project Whitecoat, hundreds have been sick while engaged in the studies,” Clark Smith, Seventh-day Adventist Service Organization stated. “But there has been no documented medical proof of any permanent damage to anyone. . . .” (ibid., Smith, Review and Herald, 11/27/69, emphasis supplied). To have to comment on this statement is totally redundant. The truth is that, not hundreds, but thousands of Adventist young men have been sick. According to their figures, “more than 1,500" had volunteered for Whitecoat from its beginning in 1954 through 1969 at the writing of this article. However, “The Whitecoat Project was terminated in 1973 with the ending of the draft.” (Colonel Dan Crozier, Letter to the author, dated, November 7, 1989). Project Whitecoat continued four more years beyond 1969. It is not unreasonable to believe that 500 more Adventist servicemen volunteered during the four additional years. That would bring the total number of Whitecoat volunteers to approximately 2,000, rather than 1,500. Evidently the General Conference officers were convinced that, because “there has been no Chapter 16 Secret Project Whitecoat -312- documented medical proof of any permanent damage” at that time (1969), it was perfectly acceptable that Adventist boys would become sick from the experiments as long as they recovered. Only a fool would take such a position. No one could predict what the long term effects would be. The whole program was experimental, was it not? A good example of this would be the devastating health problems servicemen have suffered from the military’s use of “Agent Orange” in Vietnam, and the medical problems suffered by those who were exposed to germ warfare substances in the more recent “Gulf War.” In response to the question, “Did the committee members feel that they had adequate information on which to evaluate Adventist participation in Project Whitecoat?” Clark Smith replied as follows: Yes. I questioned each member of the subcommittee of eight before we left the office of Colonel Crozier to see if any of them had further questions they wanted to ask. All stated that they were fully satisfied with the answers they had received. Their report provided solid evidence that the General Conference officers gave sound counsel 15 years ago, when Project Whitecoat was initiated [1954], when they ruled that any Adventist serviceman who was given an opportunity to volunteer for the program could feel free to do so inasmuch as humanitarian, rather than destructive, purposes were being served. ibid., Clark Smith, Review and Herald, November 27, 1969. (emphasis supplied). “All stated that they were fully satisfied with the answers they had received.” This statement proves that the committee was satisfied with what they were told in Colonel Dan Crozier’s office. They had accepted the testimony of one man for their report on Project Whitecoat, the commanding officer of USAMRIID. “Their report provided solid evidence that the General Conference officers gave sound counsel 15 years ago.” Seldom, if ever, has the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists ever admitted to making a mistake. Again, the General Conference officers made their decision on a report that was the testimony of one man, Colonel Dan Crozier, the man in charge of Project Whitecoat. This decision by the General Conference officers in 1969 could in no way justify the decision fifteen years previous by SDA Church leadership that placed immature Adventist boys in harms way. Yet the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists never passes up an opportunity to justify their actions and policies. “I would like to say that the current [1969] agitation over Project Whitecoat illustrates anew the importance of getting the facts and getting them straight,” Clark Smith concluded. “People should be extremely slow to believe rumors or `information’ that has not been well authenticated.” (ibid., Smith, Review and Herald, 11/27/69, emphasis supplied). “Our church program can bear examination,” Smith added. “There is nothing to hide. Leaders are always glad to answer questions and provide information.” (ibid., Smith, Review and Herald, 11/27/69, emphasis supplied). “Getting the facts and getting them straight.” That is the purpose of this research. One Whitecoat volunteer, calling from Michigan asked, “What is the purpose of writing about Project Whitecoat?” The answer is, “getting the facts and getting them straight.” However, the General Conference officers have had a long standing policy, i.e. whenever anyone tries to get the facts and get them straight, it is considered to be a “current agitation.” There was indeed something to hide. (See below). Eyewitness Reports Of Fort Dugway Whitecoat Experiments Chapter 16 Secret Project Whitecoat -313- In 1963 The Youth’s Instructor published a two-part report titled, “Operation Whitecoat.” The author was Don A. Roth. The first part covered the story of Whitecoat germ warfare experiments conducted at Fort Dugway, Utah. The article was based primarily on the eyewitness experience of Thomas Kopco, a Whitecoat volunteer. Twenty-six years later, in 1989, Thomas Kopco was interviewed by this author. Also at this time a written account of what actually took place during the Whitecoat experiments at the Fort Dugway proving grounds was submitted to this author by Thomas Kopco. Portions of the Youth’s Instructor article are quoted below with commentary on the event from Thomas Kopco himself. Youth’s Instructor Story of Dugway Proving Ground “Two hours earlier Tom [Kopco] and his fellow soldiers, all young Seventh-day Adventists, had left Walter Reed Hospital on the outskirts of Washington, D.C.,” the Youth’s Instructor Whitecoat article began. “They were told that they would be taking a trip, and that it would be necessary for them to go to a distant area [Fort Dugway, Utah]. The project would involve field study, and thus give information that could not be readily obtainable in laboratory studies.” (Don A. Roth, The Youth’s Instructor, “Operation Whitecoat,” Part One, October 8, 1963). [Note:– In the “laboratory studies” the Q-Fever virus was inhaled directly from a canister. In the “field studies” the substance was either dropped onto the “Adventist volunteers” from an aircraft, or released and spread throughout the testing area with large fans to “thus give information that could not be readily obtainable in laboratory studies.”] Thomas Kopco’s Story of Dugway Proving Ground “I volunteered for Project Whitecoat and the following year, 1955, I was among the first group of Seventh-day Adventist servicemen to serve in a highly classified experimental germ warfare project conducted at Fort Dugway, Utah,” Tom Kopco commented later. “This project consisted of experiments with a substance called Q fever.” (Thomas Kopco, Document Statement, signed, October 10, 1989, emphasis supplied). [Note:– This statement by an eyewitness reveals three most important facts. (1) That there was more than one Whitecoat experiment conducted at Fort Dugway, Utah. Kopco was among the first group. (2) The experiments were “highly classified.” (3) The experiments involved Adventists in research in a “germ warfare project.” All three of these facts have been categorically denied by both the United States Army and the Seventh-day Adventist Church.] Youth’s Instructor Story of Dugway Proving Ground “[At] Fort Sam Houston, Texas. . . he [Kopco] had nearly completed his post induction basic training,” Don Roth continued “A colonel [Dan Croizer] and a representative of the General Conference National Service Organization [Elder J. R. Nelson] appeared at a special meeting and talked about an unusual medical research project and asked for volunteers. . ..” (ibid., Roth, The Youth’s Instructor, 10/8/63). Thomas Kopco’s Story of Dugway Proving Ground “In 1954 I was drafted into the armed services,” Kopco stated thirty-six years later. “Although I was not a good Seventh-day Adventist at the time, my mother convinced me to register as a “consciencious objector.” I was stationed at Fort Sam Houston, an army base where all Seventhday Adventist and all other 1-A-O inductees were sent by the army for special training.” (ibid., Kopco, Document Statement, 10/10/89). “A General Conference man , along with a high official of the army, came to Fort Sam Houston to seek volunteers for a secret government program called Project Whitecoat,” Tom Kopco Chapter 16 Secret Project Whitecoat -314- continued. “During this period of training the Adventist draftees are given information concerning Operation Whitecoat.” (ibid., Kopco, Document Statement, 10/10/89). [Note:– This statement again reaffirms that Adventist young men at Fort Sam Houston were recruited by high officials of the Army and the SDA Church. It does reaffirm that Project Whitecoat was a “secret government program.”] “It sounded like a good way to serve my country, and, after all, the program was endorsed by the Seventh-day Adventist Church,” Kopco recalled. “Because my older brother had served his country in World War II, and my next two brothers during the Korean War, I was convinced that I, too, should do something for my country.” (ibid., Kopco, Document Statement, 10/10/89). At the Dugway Germ Warfare Proving Grounds Youth’s Instructor Story of Dugway Proving Ground “The very next day they were given physical examinations,” Don Roth stated. “Each soldier was issued special clothing and was told to appear at a certain time and place for further orders.” (ibid., Roth, The Youth’s Instructor, 10/8/63). Thomas Kopco’s Story of Dugway Proving Ground “Colonel [W. D.] Tigertt was in charge of Operation Whitecoat at the time these experiments were conducted at Fort Dugway, Utah,” Tom Kopco wrote thirty six years later. “The military doctors told us that we needed good kidneys for the Q fever project. So far, so good.” (ibid., Kopco, Document Statement, 10/10/89, emphasis supplied). Youth’s Instructor Story of Dugway Proving Ground At the next command center the soldiers were divided into eight small groups. Each group was assigned to a station located several miles away from the center of the camp. The station consisted of a wooden platform, eight feet square and more than ten feet high, with seats built at various levels. Tom thought it was a strange-looking contraption. Each team found that they had several “mascots” – cages of monkeys and live guinea pigs. ibid., Don A. Roth, The Youth’s Instructor, “Operation Whitecoat,” Part One, October 8, 1963. (emphasis supplied). [Note:– The fact that the test was “located several miles away from the center of the camp” was not a good sign for the Adventist young boys. It is obvious from this statement that the Adventist volunteers were the real guinea pigs in this experiment.] “The colonel in charge [W. D. Tigertt] readily admitted certain dangers in the experiment that was about to begin,” Don Roth continued. “He gave in detail the safeguards that had been incorporated into the project, which would make it just as safe as the bus ride they had taken from the nearby city.” (ibid., Roth, The Youth’s Instructor, 10/8/63). [Note:– Colonel Tigertt “admitted certain dangers in the experiment?” This was an absurd overstatement to the first magnitude. The Colonel’s statement that the experiment would be “just as safe as the bus ride they had taken from the nearby city,” was a total misconception, if not an out and out lie.] “The presence of the animals at the test site indicated that additional information was desired, which could only be determined through certain experimental procedures.” Don Roth stated further. (ibid., Roth, The Youth’s Instructor, 10/8/63). [Note:– It was obvious that the U.S. Army was testing to determine the effect of dangerous substances on both humans and animals. From the testimony of those who participated in the experiments, many animals died immediately from the experiment. Many human volunteers were deathly sick. No one knows the long-term effect of the highly toxic substances. See below.] “This particular test was being held away from civilization,” Don Roth stated. “When the wind Chapter 16 Secret Project Whitecoat -315- was blowing in the right direction and at the right velocity, the project would be under way.” (ibid., Roth, The Youth’s Instructor, 10/8/63, emphasis supplied). [Note:– In another experiment the Army made a miscalculation of wind directions. The result was that the wind carried the toxic substance over a mountain range and killed over 6,400 sheep. See above.] “Each team and each person at a different ground location and at different altitudes from ground level,” Roth added further, “would respond differently to the situation [Q Fever gas].” (ibid., Roth, The Youth’s Instructor, 10/8/63). “The Adventist volunteers [which were all of the above],” Roth continued, “were about to participate in a project called Operation Whitecoat [A Q-Fever experiment].” (ibid., Roth, The Youth’s Instructor, 10/8/63). “When the group arrived at the experimental station area it was dark, but as the evening wore on, the air grew cold, even though the season was late June,” Don Roth wrote. “Only the eerie light from a lone lantern at the command station penetrated the darkness.” (ibid., Roth, The Youth’s Instructor, 10/8/63). “Several times the experiment was about to begin,” Roth stated, “but each time the wind shifted in another direction and the countdown was started all over again.” (ibid., Roth, The Youth’s Instructor, 10/8/63, emphasis supplied). “At nearly one o’clock in the morning conditions were just right and the experiment was begun,” Roth concluded. “There was a great deal of activity – vehicles moving, two-way radios blaring, and officers dashing hither and yon. The volunteers knew that this was it. Then it was all over.” (ibid., Roth, The Youth’s Instructor, 10/8/63, emphasis supplied). What Really Happened At Station Zero “The individuals who volunteered to serve in Whitecoat were as brave as any American, and in some ways even more courageous than many including officers,” Robert Mole stated. “So please tell the stories of the individual soldier rather than opinions of officers not present nor having served as human experimental beings.” (Robert L. Mole, DS, Chief, Chaplain Service, Jerry L. Pettis MEMORIAL VETERANS HOSPITAL, Department of Veterans Affairs, Letter to the author, dated at Loma Linda, California, November 2, 1989, emphasis supplied). Thomas Kopco’s Story of Dugway Proving Ground “As we sat on the wooden stations 20 feet high, along with real mice and monkeys, a cool mist came over us,” Tom Kopco recalled. “Just before that the officers had put on their gas masks. [again, not a good sign.] After we were exposed and on the way to decontamination, I overheard an officer say, `Those _______ Russians already know what we are doing here tonight.’” (ibid., Kopco, Document Statement, 10/10/89, emphasis supplied). [Note:– The fact that Army personnel used “gas masks” proves the Q Fever substance was very toxic and dangerous. The fact that the Army was worried about the Russians learning of the Whitecoat experiments again proves Seventh-day Adventist involvement in germ warfare development.] “Soldier Thomas Kopco, now youth pastor of the Tacoma Park, Maryland, Seventh-day Adventist church [1963], remembers what happened next,” the Youth’s Instructor article quoted. “‘Back at the center we were told to remove our clothing as quickly as possible. A warm shower came next, which was met with enthusiasm by the chilled soldiers.’” (ibid., Roth, The Youth’s Instructor, 10/8/63). Chapter 16 Secret Project Whitecoat -316- “‘We then went through an ultra-violet-light area and found ourselves in a room where our regular Army clothes were waiting for us,’” the Youth’s Instructor quoted Kopco. “‘At the door of the building a bus was waiting to whisk us to the airport nearby. Within thirty-five minutes of “zero” hour we were airborne and heading back to Washington.’” (ibid., Roth, The Youth’s Instructor, 10/8/63). Thomas Kopco’s Story of Dugway Proving Ground “Some of the volunteers did not participate in the bomb experiment, but breathed the gas directly from a hose or canister,” Kopco wrote thirty-six years later. “The gas affected the volunteers in different ways. Some of us got deathly sick, others like myself, mildly sick, and were released after 30 days at Fort Detrick, Maryland.” (ibid., Kopco, Document Statement, 10/10/89, emphasis supplied). Cesar Vega’s Story of Dugway Proving Ground “That morning at 3:25 they took us in a covered van to a site in the desert about twenty-five miles from the base where we were staying (Fort Dugway, Utah),” Cesar Vega recalled. “They told us that the wind conditions had to be just right for the experiment. They told us we were going to be exposed to the “Q” virus by breathing the air around us.” (Cesar Vega, Letter to the author, dated at Riverside, California, October 12, 1989). “The air would be generated by six fan-looking devices that would be spaced evenly and about forty feet from us,” Vega continued. “We were sitting on field chairs next to four cages each containing a monkey.” (ibid., Vega, Letter, 10/12/89). “The monkey that was next to me kept sticking his hand out like he wanted to shake hands,” Vega recalled. “I was told by the attending physician not to touch the monkey or do anything to come in contact with it. The Doctor was Colonel [W. D.] Tigertt.” (ibid., Vega, Letter, 10/12/89). “The ten of us sat evenly spaced with a monkey next to us for about forty minutes while the test was in progress,” Vega stated. “We went back to our barracks and slept all that day.” (ibid., Vega, Letter, 10/12/89). “The trip to the site was repeated again that evening,” Vega recalled. “The test was conducted at about eleven or midnight.” (ibid., Vega, Letter, 10/12/89). “This time my monkey and three more were missing,” Vega stated. “We laughed when one of the boys suggested that the monkeys were probably A.W.O.L.” (ibid., Vega, Letter, 10/12/89, emphasis supplied). “Coming back to Detrick on the plane the sergeant next to me told me that my monkey, along with the other three, had died that morning of `unknown causes,’” Vega stated. “I thought that was strange, because the monkeys didn’t seem to be sick that evening.” (ibid., Vega, Letter, 10/12/89, emphasis supplied). “I have no first-hand knowledge of the Dugway experiments, although I concluded that Dugway was where the Whitecoats were taken in the flight described in the Youth’s Instructor article,” Michael Scofield wrote. “Research I have done in the files of the Utah State Historical Society tend to confirm what was going on at Dugway.” (Michael Scofield, Letter to the author, dated, October 14, 1989, emphasis supplied). Chapter 16 Secret Project Whitecoat -317- Whitecoat Experiments At Fort Detrick, Maryland “I was in the (Q) fever experiment at Fort Detrick, MD,” G. R. Bietz wrote. “Some of us didn’t receive this gas and I was one of them, but I did not know that until four to six weeks later. I had no ill effects but those that received the gas were very sick.” (G. R. Bietz, Associate Director and Treasurer, HOME HEALTH EDUCATION SERVICE, Letter to the author, dated at Decatur, Georgia, October 31, 1989. (emphasis supplied). “They put us in a large building [Fort Detrick, Maryland] where they gave us the Q-Fever gas through a mask type of device over our faces,” G. R. Bietz stated. “Some of us did not receive the gas.” (G. R. Bietz, Associate Director and Treasurer, Home Health Education Service, Telephone Interview, November 9, 1989). “Several of us were taken to Fort Detrick, MD.,” Harry Wiant recalled. “We were taken to a large tank and told to breath from a tube which would expose us to the disease. Then we were confined to a barracks for over a month as I remember.” (Harry V. Wiant, Jr., Letter to the author, dated at Morgan town, West Virginia, November 15, 1989, emphasis supplied). “We were treated very well, provided with hobby material and games, and treated with antibiotics,” Harry Wiant wrote. “Some fellows got very sick. . . I have heard, perhaps 10th handed, that some have died from effects of the project, but I know of none personally.” (ibid., Wiant, Letter, 11/15/89, emphasis supplied). Physical Reactions To the Q-Fever Virus “It is of more than passing interest that the safeguards to the health of those in the [Whitecoat] program are such that not one participant has had any permanent adverse effects because of the studies.” (ibid., Review and Herald, March 20, 1969, emphasis supplied). This statement is just not true. Many cases have been documented. In response to this false statement see documentation below. When the thirty [Seventh-day Adventist] soldiers arrived at their own base they were immediately put into isolation wards. Some boys stayed for only a month, while others remained under care and observation for from four to six months. The care was constant. Tests of many kinds were given nearly every day. Some of the men [Seventh-day Adventists] reacted mildly, others ran high fevers, and others had no reaction. ibid., Don A. Roth, The Youth’s Instructor, “Operation Whitecoat, Part 2,” November 8, 1963. “For the next week we were examined several times and given blood tests every four hours,” Cesar Vega recalled. “From the monkey incident, which was on a Wednesday, until Thursday of the next week I felt normal, that is except for the darn needles.” (ibid., Cesar Vega, Letter to the author, dated at Riverside, California, October 12, 1989). “That Thursday afternoon I came down with a fever, a fever like I had never experienced in my life,” Vega wrote. “I felt dizzy and had to go to bed. My temperature went up to a hundred and four degrees. Everything went black and I was unconscious until Saturday evening.” (ibid., Vega, Letter, 10/12/89, emphasis supplied). “When I awoke I felt terrible and discovered that they had covered my whole body with ice to bring the fever down,” Vega stated. “They kept me covered with ice all that night and part of the next day.” (ibid., Vega, Letter, 10/12/89). “My fever finally subsided and I felt better,” Vega concluded. “I was sick for the next three Chapter 16 Secret Project Whitecoat -318- weeks, “I was ill with a high fever for a few days, 105 degrees I believe, from an experiment,” Wilson Wynn wrote. (Wilson Wynn, Letter to the author, dated at Hendersonville, North Carolina, October 12, 1989, emphasis supplied). “Although I recovered myself, many volunteers were very sick,” Thomas Kopco recalled thirty-six years later. “We had to pass by their rooms very quietly because the slightest noise would drive them crazy.” (ibid., Kopco, Document Statement, 10/10/89, emphasis supplied). “I was in Whitecoat, but never went `on project,’” Michael Scofield wrote. “Before, and since, I have heard of problems with projects, and know one individual (whom I have not seen now for several years) who claimed to be suffering long-term effects from the treatment he received.” (Michael Scofield, Letter, dated, October 14, 1989, emphasis supplied). “While Ben [Garcia] was in Germany during his tour of duty he heard reports of the dangers of the Whitecoat experiments,” Cesar Vega wrote. “He had also heard about participants who had not recovered fully from the experiments conducted by Whitecoat.” (Cesar Vega, Letter to the author, dated at Riverside, California, October 12, 1989 “No one really knows how many Seventh-day Adventist servicemen have died from aftereffects of the experiments conducted by Project Whitecoat,” Thomas Kopco stated. (ibid., Kopco, Document Statement, 10/10/89). [Note:– The Pentagon, United States Army, and the Seventh-day Adventist Church are not revealing any information on individual experiments of Project Whitecoat. The National Service Organization of the General Conference states that the Whitecoat Project itself was and is “Classified” and sealed. (See below). The Pentagon states that the Whitecoat Project itself is not Classified or sealed, but that the individual records of the experiment are “Classified” and therefore sealed. See below, Letter; Thomas A. Foley, Speaker of the House, United States Congress, Washington State.] “We were ordered not to say anything for 10 years,” Thomas Kopco stated. “After the ten years were up, our Seventh-day Adventist youth magazine, The Youth’s Instructor, interviewed me about my experiences at Camp Dugway in 1955.” (ibid., Kopco, Document Statement, 10/10/89, emphasis supplied). In 1957 I received a letter from a widow of one of the soldiers who had died during the experiments of Project Whitecoat. She told me another soldier had died as well. She said his last name was Long. She said that she wanted a list of all the men who served on the project with her husband because the Government was denying his death was service connected. Well, after you take the time to read the two articles from the Newark News, about nerve gas killing over 6,400 sheep near the experimental sight at Fort Dugway, Utah, you might believe that it was possible for two soldiers to die from a nerve gas experiment! ibid., Thomas Kopco, Document Statement, signed, October 10, 1989. (emphasis supplied). “Upon my return from mission service in Lebanon and Cyprus in 1952, I went several times to the then Mt. Etna Academy now known as Highland Academy,” Robert Mole stated. “There I became acquainted with a man and wife who were involved in the classified Chemical [and] Biological Warfare [CBW] experimentation involving Whitecoat.” (Robert L. Mole, DS, Chief, Chaplain Service, Jerry L. Pettis MEMORIAL VETERANS HOSPITAL, Department of Veterans Affairs, Letter to the author, dated at Loma Linda, California, November 2, 1989). “I think he died of something contracted in these experiments,” Mole stated. “His widow eventually moved to California and remarried. Incidentally she is an excellent pianist. Her name (now) and address is ________.” (ibid., Mole, Letter, 11/2/89, emphasis supplied). Chapter 16 Secret Project Whitecoat -319- “Although some individuals have felt that their ill health was due to participation in a research project, I know of only one that was certified by the Veterans Administration,” Colonel Dan Crozier, past Directory of Project Whitecoat admitted. “In this case the [U. S. Army] medical authorities were not at all sure that the individual’s illness was due to participation in the research program at USAMRIID, but they could not say beyond a doubt that it was not due to the illness he contracted while participating in a project.” (Colonel Dan Crozier, USA MC, Ret., Commanding Officer, USAMRIID [Project Whitecoat], Letter, to the author, dated at Frederick, Maryland, November 7, 1989, emphasis supplied). This was the very scenario that took place between veterans of the “Gulf War” and the United States Army. The Army emphatically denied the allegations of veterans and insisted that Pentagon “authorities were not at all sure that the individual’s illness was due to participation” in the Gulf War. “A close record was kept on each soldier, and every reaction was tallied,” Don Roth stated. “When each man was discharged from the hospital he had the right to choose a hospital where he preferred to be stationed for the duration of his service in the United States Army Medical Corps.” (ibid., Roth, The Youth’s Instructor, 10/8/63). After “his service in the United States Army” the Adventist young man was on his own. As in the recent “Gulf War” exposure to chemical substances, neither the United States Army, nor the Seventh-day Adventist Church would ever admit that the lingering effects of exposure to QFever, Black Plague, and Tularemia vaccines were related to the Whitecoat experiments. “Two weeks ago [October 9, 1989] my very best friend, a fellow Whitecoat participant, was cremated,” Cesar Vega wrote. “His name was Roy Rell. He participated in Whitecoat experiments during 1955.” (Cesar Vega, Letter to the author, dated at Riverside, California, October 23, 1989). “When he came back to La Sierra after his tour of duty he was a sick man and he knew it,” Vega recalled. “He would get real sick every so often with a very high fever and developed small tumors in many parts of his body” (ibid., Vega, Letter, 9/12/89). “Finally after about two years he went to Norton [Air Force Base] to get some treatment, but was refused because they determined that his sickness was not service connected,” Vega concluded. “He was fifty-five when he died.” (ibid., Vega, Letter, 9/12/89). Is it merely a coincidence that the most famous Seventh-day Adventist hospital, Loma Linda Medical Center, is now in complete charge of the “Norton Air Force Base medical facility? Is it also a mere coincidence that this Adventist facility would not treat Roy Rell, the young Whitecoat volunteer? “The closing of the Norton Air Force Base in the early 1990's turned into a great opportunity for Loma Linda,” so states the SDA Encyclopedia. “After negotiations the clinic located on the base was donated to Loma Linda, along with a lot of clinic equipment. The Social Action Community Health System (SACHS) is centered in the 42,300 square feet of clinic space.” (Seventh-day Adventist Encyclopedia, Second Revised Edition, Art. “Loma Linda University Hospital”). “I heard that Frank Knight passed away a few years later, after he went through this experiment, which may have had a connection to the program,” G. R. Bietz wrote. “To the best of my knowledge he lived in Oregon.” (G. R. Bietz, Associate Director and Treasurer, Home Health Chapter 16 Secret Project Whitecoat -320- Education Service, Telephone Interview, November 9, 1989, emphasis supplied). “Frank Knight, the man who passed away, was in my group,” Bietz added further. (ibid., Bietz, Letter, 10/31/89, emphasis supplied). Project Whitecoat – Classified Or Not Classified In a Telephone Interview, November 2, 1989, Elder Charles E. Bracebridge, Secretary of the National Service Organization, NSO, General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, advised that I should forget researching Project Whitecoat, “because Project Whitecoat was Classified and sealed by an act of Congress.” In a Letter to the author, dated November 7, 1989, Colonel Dan Crozier had stated that, “The field study itself is not classified but the individual results are.” In response to the statement by Elder Bracebridge, I wrote to Congressman Thomas S. Foley, at that time Speaker of the House of Representatives. Foley’s office forwarded a copy of the letter to the Department of the Army at the Pentagon. A reply was forwarded to this author dated December 1, 1989. “According to our records, `Project Whitecoat,’ in and of itself, is neither classified nor has it been `sealed’ by an act of the Congress,” Richard Parry wrote. “What may explain Mr. Curtis’s inquiry is that the research projects, for which `Project Whitecoat’ provided volunteers, are classified.” (Richard B. Parry, Jr. Lieutenant Colonel, Medical Service Corps., Secretary of the General Staff, emphasis supplied). “I think that Elder Bracebridge’s assertion that Whitecoat was “highly classified” is probably a smoke screen,” Michael Scofield wrote. “Yet, it is quite understandable that the General Conference would want to discourage you from continuing your investigation.” (Michael Scofield, Letter to the author, dated November 28, 1989). Pioneer Adventist Position On Military Service Adventists acknowledge the justice of rendering tribute, custom, honor, and reverence to the civil power, as enjoined in the New Testament. While we thus cheerfully render to Caesar the things which the Scriptures show to be his, we are compelled to decline all participation in acts of war and bloodshed, as being inconsistent with the duties enjoined upon us by our divine Master toward our enemies and toward all mankind. General Conference Committee, Resolution, General Conference Session, 1865. (emphasis supplied). (See General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, National Service Organization, Why Seventh-day Adventists Are Noncombatants, Washington D.C. 1943, page 3). “Even during World War I, with its nationalistic excesses, official statements by the [SDA] Church did not say specifically that Adventists were willing to serve in the army,” Martin Turner wrote. “No doubt many did, but a 1917 statement reaffirmed the 1865 declaration and requested that `we be required to serve our country only in such a capacity as will not violate our conscientious obedience to the law of God as contained in the Decalogue, interpreted in the teachings of Christ, and exemplified in His life.’” (Martin D. Turner, “Project Whitecoat,” Spectrum, Summer, 1970; op sit., Why Seventh-day Adventists Are Noncombatants, Washington D.C. 1943, page 3, emphasis supplied). Contemporary Adventist Position On Military Service “A two-page definition of noncombatancy given in a statement authorized in 1940 makes it plain that `noncombatancy is not pacifism,’” Martin Turner wrote. “It `is not conscientious objection Chapter 16 Secret Project Whitecoat -321- to war service,’ and therefore the `Christian noncombatant will not refuse to participate in the military establishment.’” (ibid., Turner, Spectrum, Summer, 1970; op sit., Why Seventh-day Adventists Are Noncombatants, 1943, page 3). “Current church literature still quotes the 1865 statement, apparently oblivious to the contradiction between it and the present position,” Martin Turner concluded. “It would seem that the best method of resolving the inconsistency would be to re-revise the definition of noncombatancy to conform to the original usage, and to initiate in the churches an active program of education that emphasizes `the duties enjoined upon us by our divine Master toward our enemies and toward all mankind,’ and that makes it clear why these are inconsistent with `all participation in acts of war and bloodshed.’” (ibid., Turner, Spectrum, Summer, 1970). “Whether this is done or not, it should be clear that we can no longer have it both ways,” Turner stated further. “A narrowly defined morality that claims to object to `the spirit and practice of war’ but that does not believe in `conscientious objection to war service’ will no longer suffice.” (ibid., Turner, Spectrum, Summer, 1970). Conclusions Of A Whitecoat Volunteer “With regard to Elder Bracebridge’s comments about the church’s position [on bearing weapons], I believe you quote him correctly, and that is a correct reflection of the official posture of the denomination with regard to members entering the military service,” Scofield stated. “The denomination will allow a variety of personal positions, and supports them all. Does that surprise you?” (ibid., Scofield, Letter, 11/28/89, emphasis supplied). “I know several Adventist church members who are police officers,” Scofield added further. “They definitely carry weapons. Are they to be disfellowshipped? One is a deacon.” (ibid., Scofield, Letter, 11/28/89, emphasis supplied). Was the police officer converted to Seventh-day Adventism, or was the Seventh-day Adventist converted to the police force? Many people who are converted to the Seventh-day Adventist message do indeed give up their former occupation. For example, a night club performer must give up his activity to become a true Adventist. Do we accept all professions into the Church, like the Church of Rome did during the time of the Emperor Constantine in the fourth century? In this case, Elder C. E. Bracebridge, Secretary of the National Service Organization of the SDA Church, had stated that “the commandment that states `thou shalt not kill’ does not apply to service to government. It only means thou shalt not murder.” The Purpose Of Historical Whitecoat Research Who cares about the experiments of Project Whitecoat today? The project ended with the draft over twenty years ago. Should we worry about new germ warfare experiments in the future that might use young Seventh-day Adventist boys as human guinea pigs? “What if even 10 or 20 men died because of the experiments? What does one do with that kind of information?” Scofield asked. “There are an awful lot of people in the Adventist Church who would not believe you.” (ibid., Scofield, Letter, 11/28/89, emphasis supplied). “Others would nod their heads, `hear’ what you tell them,” Scofield added further, “but conveniently forget it because it upsets them and because it undermines the myth they cling to that the Adventist church can do no wrong.” (ibid., Scofield, Letter, 11/28/89, emphasis supplied). In response to the above statement by Scofield, I would like to quote from a Whitecoat Chapter 16 Secret Project Whitecoat -322- volunteer: My next reaction to your letter was: This thing is very dirty – I don’t want to get involved. But I realize that I have had my head buried in the sand for too long now. Thank you for the eye opening. I am now offering any assistance I can to your research. Cesar Vega, Letter to the author, dated at La Sierra, California, October 23, 1989. “Well, I hope I don’t sound too bitter. I am not,” Vega added further. “I just hope I can keep up with the things that are happening in the Church these days. I hope I do not make the same mistake of being an ostrich with my head buried in the sand.” (ibid., Vega, Letter, 10/23/89). “Do you expect current Church leadership to issue any type of apology?” Scofield asked. “I seriously doubt if they would. For several reasons. And even if they did print an apology in small print buried deep inside the Adventist Review, I don’t think there would be a collective learning from past mistakes.” (ibid., Scofield, Letter, 11/28/89, emphasis supplied). Personal Observations On Bearing Arms The theme for the 1989 Project Whitecoat reunion was, “For God and Country – for the Army and the Church.” (See program paper; “Whitecoat Reunion,” Fredrick, Maryland Seventh-day Adventist Church [1989]. See also: North Pacific Union Gleaner, “Whitecoat Reunion,” June 19, 1989, emphasis supplied). To the true Christian the Church and the State are forever separate. There is no way government projects can be introduced into the Church and make them harmonize with Christian doctrine and principles. For example, there is no way a true Christian can harmonize Rock and Roll music with Christian music. There is no such thing as “Christian Rock and Roll.” The phrase “Rock and Roll” came from the counter-culture life style of the 1960's and referred to sexual intercourse. The phrase “Christian Rock and Roll” would then mean, “Christian sexual intercourse music.” That, of course, would be totally unacceptable to any true Christian. The phrase: “For God and Country – for the Army and the Church” is also unacceptable to a true Christian. There is no way a secular Army can be integrated into God’s remnant Church. The Christian soldier is a soldier of the cross. A secular soldier is a soldier of an earthly government. A true Christian cannot espouse the Army to the Church. This is a Roman Catholic principle of the Dark Ages. On March 5, 1991, a letter arrived enclosed in the official Veterans Administration envelope. The letter was from Robert L. Mole, D. Minister, of the Jerry L. Pettis Memorial Veterans Hospital, Loma Linda, California. The purpose of the letter was to gather information from Whitecoat volunteers for the possible publication of a book on Project Whitecoat. The letter stated: (1) “It’s time the story be told positively,.” and (2) “The General Conference through the Adventist Chaplaincy Ministries Board has approved this research and the publication of findings.” The letter stated further that the Seventh-day Adventist Church, which “permitted, allowed, or encouraged participation” in Project Whitecoat, (3) “should be vindicated,” and that the book would, (4) “Set the record straight once and for all.” The letter also stated that the book theme would, (5) “Form an educated basis for such future medical research projects,” and (6), correct the illusion that, “Far too many people believe the [Whitecoat] studies were secret and most likely evil in purpose.” Chapter 16 Secret Project Whitecoat -323- With these six points as a basis for the research, the General Conference, through the Adventist Chaplaincy Ministries Board, has approved the research and publication of a “positive” history of the Whitecoat experiments. The mind-set is to “vindicate” the Seventh-day Adventist Church’s “permission, allowance, or encouraged participation” in Project Whitecoat.