By David Mould: Updated February 14th, 2020
Sometimes on our journey toward Armageddon, incredibly tough decisions are thrust upon us.
For example: in the aftermath of America’s freshly minted impeachment debacle, the only safe course for ministries like ours (i.e., ministries that depend on donations for survival) is to keep our mouths shut, isn’t it?
How do I know who’s a Democrat on our list of subscribers, or who’s Republican? And therein is the dilemma. Whatever my views, if I say anything about the fracturing of our Constitution, I’m bound to offend some who support us. Yet if I say nothing, I’m bound to offend God.
In the midst of our current financial pinch, what I’m about to do is the last thing I should be doing. It’s bound to come back and bite our ministry — seriously bite us — but this impeachment crisis is bigger than a fall-off in donations, bigger than personal loss. In fact, in a sense it isn’t about politics at all. It’s not even about the here and now. It’s much more complex than that.
Make no mistake, eternal issues are at stake here. Which is why I’m opening my mouth today.
No, I won’t be intimidated by Adventist norms. To my mind, silence now is bold-faced treason. To see a truck barreling down the road toward an unsuspecting pedestrian and to remain silent would make me an unwitting accomplice to whatever tragedy unfolds, wouldn’t it?
Well this truck isn’t just barreling toward one pedestrian, it’s headed toward Madison, Washington, Adams and Jefferson and it’s loaded with explosives.
The Lesson: there’s a time for silence, yes, but there’s also a time to shout!
In light of the prolonged beating recently endured by our Constitution, what lover of liberty (civil or religious) can remain silent now? In light of Senator Mitt Romney’s impassioned reasoning in defense of the oath he took before God to defend our Constitution, who can remain on the sidelines now?
Senator Romney took an oath?
Every Senator did.
So did you and I when we enlisted under the banner of Christ.
God bless you, Senator Romney, in no doubt leading millions watching the unfolding of this drama into deep introspection … if not to tears. In summoning us before a higher tribunal — even the throne-room of God — you did your country well. And I? Shaking as though standing before the Eternal as I listened to you, it almost felt like the impending judgment would be upon me.
You put all America in your shoes as you spoke. You explained your dilemma. We felt your pain, your perplexity, your confidence. Well done!
No, silence now is unthinkable. Silence now would be identical to what was on shameless parade at the 60th session of the General Conference, held in San Antonio, Texas, from July 2nd to the 11th, 2015.
What happened then?
Correct, on both counts.
Yet In an amazing display of studied compliance, and with the largest possible audience of Seventh-day Adventists gathered to hear his every word, our General Conference President, Ted N. C. Wilson, said nothing — nothing — absolutely nothing about the impending high-stakes invasion of Congress and what it meant insofar as the fulfillment of prophecy was concerned.
Do you think that happened by chance?
Whose orders was Elder Wilson following, and what more gut-wrenching blow could he have delivered to admirers like myself who rejoiced when he was first voted in (on the platform, mind you, of being a lover and defender of The Great Controversy)?
Sad to say, upon reflection I’ve concluded that Elder Wilson’s silence wasn’t just compliance, or prudence; rather it signified abject cowardice — if not personal cowardice, then certainly corporate cowardice — it signified a pathetic example of just how muzzled and tied to the committees that control him he really is, and how compromised and emasculated the church he represents has become.
Today there’s but one question fluttering around in my mind — and I never thought I’d ever say this. In the wake of President Trump’s acquittal (and all it took to get there), should we follow Elder Wilson’s example and pretend we’re not seeing Bible prophecy being fulfilled before our eyes?
What would such silence make us?
Would we not be, like the leadership of this church, dumb dogs refusing to bark?
“His watchmen are blind,” Isaiah declared, “they are all ignorant, they are all dumb dogs, they cannot bark, sleeping, lying down, loving to slumber. Yea they are greedy dogs that can never have enough, and they are shepherds that cannot understand. They all look to their own way, every one for his gain, from his quarter. Come ye, say they, I will fetch wine, and we will fill ourselves with strong drink; and tomorrow shall be as this day, and much more abundant.” Isaiah 56: 10 – 12.
If we’re actually witnessing the emergence of an Imperial Presidency — possible precursor to the predicted assault upon our First Amendment — how can we pretend? How can we pretend, when warnings like the following stare us in our faces?
“ … our country shall repudiate every principle of its Constitution as a Protestant and republican government …” Testimonies for the Church, Volume 5, page 451.
Think of that insight. Think of that warning … suggesting an incremental repudiation of our Constitution, no doubt. What other group on earth has such foresight in their literary repertoire? Do not insights like these make us doubly responsible for our contemporaries, fellow travelers on this road to Armageddon?
“Every principle,” she said.
In hindsight, it’s evident that on our way to a theocracy these would be among the first principles to be repudiated. In anticipation of numerous legal battles, through her bishops Rome has already stacked the deck at the Supreme Court, but she’s also always favored a strongman, fascists like Benito Mussolini, who by the stroke of a pen could restore to the Vatican her lost territories.
Enter Donald Trump.
As with Solicitor General Robert Bork doing the bidding of President Nixon in firing Special Prosecutor Archibald Cox in what became known as the Saturday Night Massacre in 1973, does it surprise anyone that President Trump’s Roman Catholic Attorney General, William Barr (described in Wikipedia as “a longtime proponent of the unitary executive theory of nearly unfettered presidential authority over the executive branch of the U.S. government”) is doing everything possible to defend President Trump’s embattled allies (Roger Stone, Michael Flynn, etc.) and shield President Trump from further charges?
Of course there are strong policy differences between President Trump and the Vatican, chief among them being climate change and the perceived existential threat to our planet posed by this phenomenon, but even a strongman can be persuaded to change his position … if the incentives are right.
In short, let’s not count on this breach as being a permanent one. And let’s not forget the Sunday legislation embedded in Laudato si' (the encyclical outlining the Vatican’s proposed response to climate change). It’s no joke.
I could go on, but I think I’d like to turn the spotlight now upon one more comment from the pen of inspiration. It has to do with political corruption. Here’s the statement.
“Political corruption is destroying love of justice and regard for truth; and even in free America, rulers and legislators, in order to secure public favor, will yield to the popular demand for a law enforcing Sunday observance.” The Great Controversy, page 592.
Note the sequence, please. Political Corruption first, then Sunday legislation.
If, as we fear, our First Amendment is to be repudiated, not in some de facto manner, but overtly and officially before the Lord returns, then it would seem to me that the venues in which this repudiation is to be accomplished — i.e., the courts and legislature — would have to be incredibly corrupt if they’re to render such a decidedly un-Christian and un-American verdict.
Is this what we’re witnessing today — the corruption of these institutions to an extent that will render them irretrievable, incapable of dispensing justice? If it is, then what’s next? “The final movements,” we’re told by the pen of inspiration, “will be rapid ones.” Testimonies for the Church, Volume 9, page 11.
How long before Jefferson’s wall of separation between church and state finally crumbles? Here it is as expressed in a letter to the Danbury Baptist Association on January 1, 1802:
“Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church & State.”
How long before that wall finally crumbles, I ask.
And how much more time does this impeachment hearing give it?
“Oh, but Sir D, that’s a major leap, is it not?”
No, it isn’t. Let me put it another way:
With Dominionists and Evangelicals rapidly building their own wall around President Trump — with them waiting in the wings, awaiting their moment to reshape America into their image, where God’s laws prevail, and God’s agents rule — how much longer should the rank and file of the Seventh-day Adventist Church sit like cute little puppy dogs in their master’s laps, blind, obedient and loyal to the counterfeit clergy currently pulling the strings in God’s Church?
Ellen White wasn’t blind. Back in 1867 (in Volume 1 of the Testimonies, page 578), she saw the infiltration of God’s church for what it was and tried to warn us, but how many of us took heed? Drowned out by those yelling “conspiracy theory,” the church has blithely sailed on, seemingly oblivious to the treachery in our midst.
No, we dare not follow Elder Wilson’s example. It’s not just Catholicism that we have to fear. Dominionism is real. A potent political force, it may appear to slumber now, but when it shall strike, what then?
“The Sunday movement is now making its way in darkness. The leaders are concealing the true issue, and many who unite in the movement do not themselves see whither the undercurrent is tending. Its professions are mild and apparently Christian, but when it shall speak it will reveal the spirit of the dragon. It is our duty to do all in our power to avert the threatened danger. We should endeavor to disarm prejudice by placing ourselves in a proper light before the people. We should bring before them the real question at issue, thus interposing the most effectual protest against measures to restrict liberty of conscience.” Testimonies for the Church, Volume 5, page 452.
Q. So how do we place ourselves in a proper light before the people?
A. One sure way is advertising. Politicians use it all the time. Just ask Michael Bloomberg, who jumped from a 1% to a 15% approval rating almost overnight (after pouring over $300,000,000 into an advertising campaign calculated to bring him the Democratic nomination).
Yes, advertising works.
“But it costs, Brother Mould, and Michael Bloomberg has the money to do it,” some may say.
Well, make no mistake, God’s church has the money too.
Having published in the Review on September 17th, 1981, that if the Seventh-day Adventist Church were put in the Fortune 500 (the 500 richest companies listed on the world’s largest stock exchange, the New York Stock Exchange) it would rank in the top 50 (see article written by Attorney Warren Johns) … and having subsequently cracked the billion dollar mark in annual tithe decades ago, I daresay the wealth of the Seventh-day Adventist Church is far greater than that of Mr. Bloomberg.
Bottom line, no matter how the Brethren might cry “poor mouse, poor mouse” every Sabbath morning, and coax the last dime out of its members, God’s church is swimming in money. Swimming in hoarded tithe! Running national ads that would rival Toyota, or Microsoft, or Apple — or Michael Bloomberg — is something we could do with ease. Instead of piling up money, as though we want to give Christ a check when He comes, we could warn this entire planet, if we really had half an interest in doing so.
Bottom line: here at our ministry we’ll do everything we can to stir the rank and file before it’s too late. With impeachment barely behind us — and with nerves still raw — it shouldn’t take much to run a few ads in the Nation’s newspapers and social media.
Q. What would these ads do?
A. They’d warn the nation of what’s ahead after the incredible dose of political corruption to which we’ve just been subjected.
Look at that graphic above. By itself I believe it could catch the attention of this nation. I’m sure of it.
Nationwide ads — print, audio, video, internet! Oozing out of my pores, these could be designed in a heartbeat. But this isn’t about David Mould. Brighter minds than mine are out there too. Good designers. Marketing geniuses, geniuses, I say, some locked up in excellent careers in the world (but who’d leave these careers in a heartbeat to pour out their talents before God) some locked up in jobs at the local Conference, Union, or Division, no doubt.
Why not assign these some real work?
Tragically, the General Conference will never do it!
Short of some major catastrophe, Ted Wilson will never open his mouth to let you know what’s really going on in God’s church. He’ll never let you know, for example, why he came out in support of the piece of trash entitled The Great Hope! He’ll never tell you, because, in part, he knows, and those manipulating the cult of silence know, that we’ve been well and truly infiltrated, that’s why. Elder Wilson may be fearing for his life, for all I know. Trust me, unless a plague of lice (or leprosy) breaks out at the General Conference, it is going to be up to the laity to warn this planet.
Until the predicted revival comes, I’m not expecting the Brethren to lift a finger.
Sorry, but that’s where I stand.
“That night I dreamed that I was in Battle Creek looking out from the side glass at the door and saw a company marching up to the house, two and two. They looked stern and determined. I knew them well and turned to open the parlor door to receive them, but thought I would look again. The scene was changed. The company now presented the appearance of a Catholic procession. One bore in his hand a cross, another a reed. And as they approached, the one carrying a reed made a circle around the house, saying three times: “This house is proscribed. The goods must be confiscated. They have spoken against our holy order.” Terror seized me, and I ran through the house, out of the north door, and found myself in the midst of a company, some of whom I knew, but I dared not speak a word to them for fear of being betrayed. I tried to seek a retired spot where I might weep and pray without meeting eager, inquisitive eyes wherever I turned. I repeated frequently: “If I could only understand this! If they will tell me what I have said or what I have done!”
“I wept and prayed much as I saw our goods confiscated. I tried to read sympathy or pity for me in the looks of those around me, and marked the countenances of several whom I thought would speak to me and comfort me if they did not fear that they would be observed by others. I made one attempt to escape from the crowd, but seeing that I was watched, I concealed my intentions. I commenced weeping aloud, and saying: “If they would only tell me what I have done or what I have said!” My husband, who was sleeping in a bed in the same room, heard me weeping aloud and awoke me. My pillow was wet with tears, and a sad depression of spirits was upon me.” Testimonies for the Church, Volume 1, page 578.
THE GREAT CONTROVERSY
"I've Got One Book On My Mind."
Ellen White's The Great Controversy