Replies

“No missing sentence changed the fact that he was romantically attached to a teenage girl - WHICH IS EXACTLY WHAT HE ADMITTED TO.”

Romantically “attached”? Like going out with her? He mentions no attachment, only that he was getting too close and his Bishop shipped him off when he heard of it. Nor did he commit statutory rape, like you speculated. That’s what you get for quoting one sentence, without bothering to read the entire context.

I find his honesty compelling, since there was no reason for him to admit that he was falling in love with a high school girl while yet a Priest.

All the more reason why requiring such vows are demonic to begin with:

“Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron; Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth.” (1Ti 4:1-3)

1Ti_3:2 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;

“He was a liar. He lied, for instance, about his understanding of Seventh Day Adventism even though he was an SDA minister at one point.”

Brewer did not lie about his involvement with the SDA, and his reason for leaving them due to their reliance on the teachings of their founder. This is a pure invention on your part, trying your best to paint a good man with deceit.

It’s not working:

“‘My first sermon emphasized the need for every pastor to preach the good news of salvation and growth in the Lord…Holy Scripture was my anchor, and His salvation was my message… the call came for my ordination to take place in the Vallejo Drive Seventh-day Adventist Church in Glendale… I admired the Adventists greatly… As time passed, there was only one thing that dampened our joy and caused some unrest in my heart. That was the heavy reliance of many Adventists on the writings and teachings of Mrs Ellen G White… I wanted to be sure that our little flock would look only to the Scriptures as the final authority for their faith… at the seminar (an annual SDA “Testimony Countdown” conference) I learned that leading Adventist elders regard them (Mrs White’s writings) as equal in authority to the writings of the prophets… She (Mrs White) came to regard herself as a sovereign authority on everything to which she put her mind… I knew that her teachings had become central doctrines of the Seventh-day Adventist church but I could not accept them as being equal with Scripture… I was summoned to a meeting one day and certain complaints were brought to my attention… Even my critics admitted that I was faithful to the Bible. I saw that as long as I questioned Mrs White’s predictions and interpretations I was headed for repeated confrontations with the church’s leaders… I would not submit to another pope or modern prophetess… Christianity is a personal walk with Jesus as Lord and Saviour, not a keeping of the laws as prescribed by Mrs White and the church hierarchy… My last sermon in the Adventist church came from Hebrews 1:3 “Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high”. These words had brought me solace and comfort as I prepared my last message there.” (‘Pilgrimage from Rome’, Chapter 11 pg. 95-100)

Nice try though. Maybe you should rename yourself “Satan,” since you are quite the accuser.

I asked you if you had the book. I guess the answer is no.

You are - apparently - digging your hole deeper by cutting and pasting from more websites without admitting you used a banned one.

You posted this (oddly with double quotes):

Apparently you lifted that from here: http://www.takeheed.net/Take_Heed_2010/Current_Concerns/May_2010/Seventh_day_Adventist_pastor_resigns.htm The parenthetical comments might be a give away. The exact same ellipses. Imagine that. Here is what the website I just mentioned says:

After leaving the Roman Catholic priesthood Bart trained and became an SDA pastor but in chapter 11 of his book [pp 95-100] ‘Pilgrimage from Rome’ he wrote the following –

‘My first sermon emphasized the need for every pastor to preach the good news of salvation and growth in the Lord…Holy Scripture was my anchor, and His salvation was my message… the call came for my ordination to take place in the Vallejo Drive Seventh-day Adventist Church in Glendale… I admired the Adventists greatly… As time passed, there was only one thing that dampened our joy and caused some unrest in my heart. That was the heavy reliance of many Adventists on the writings and teachings of Mrs Ellen G White… I wanted to be sure that our little flock would look only to the Scriptures as the final authority for their faith… at the seminar (an annual SDA “Testimony Countdown” conference) I learned that leading Adventist elders regard them (Mrs White’s writings) as equal in authority to the writings of the prophets… She (Mrs White) came to regard herself as a sovereign authority on everything to which she put her mind… I knew that her teachings had become central doctrines of the Seventh-day Adventist church but I could not accept them as being equal with Scripture… I was summoned to a meeting one day and certain complaints were brought to my attention… Even my critics admitted that I was faithful to the Bible. I saw that as long as I questioned Mrs White’s predictions and interpretations I was headed for repeated confrontations with the church’s leaders… I would not submit to another pope or modern prophetess… Christianity is a personal walk with Jesus as Lord and Saviour, not a keeping of the laws as prescribed by Mrs White and the church hierarchy… My last sermon in the Adventist church came from Hebrews 1:3 “Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high”. These words had brought me solace and comfort as I prepared my last message there.

You wrote: “Romantically “attached”?”

Yep, and I bet if it was your teenage daughter you would see it exactly that way - just before you punched Brewer in the face.

“Like going out with her? He mentions no attachment, only that he was getting too close and his Bishop shipped him off when he heard of it.”

Getting too close? Uh, try this: “After a while though, my attention was drawn to one of the more diligent students who thoroughly captivated my interest...She was lovely and shyly responded as we stole moments talking alone after class. This was a new adventure, and I soon interpreted our newly discovered affection as love.”

HE WAS IN LOVE WITH HER AND YOU THINK THERE WAS NO ROMANTIC ATTACHMENT? The lengths you Protestant anti-Catholics will go to to cover for your Protestant anti-Catholic heroes is astounding. Then Brewer continues:

“It is not surprising that soon the bishop learned of this,”

Oops! That means it was obvious to others who reported on the young lovers (remember, he said they were in love).

“The embarrassment of this discipline was difficult for both of us, but life always moves on.”

So, you say there was no romantic attachment, but he says he “interpreted” their “affection as love” and their separation was “difficult”.

“Nor did he commit statutory rape, like you speculated.”

Look up “speculate”. You clearly do not know the meaning of it. I never speculated. Also, how do you know he did not commit statutory rape? What is your evidence for that.

“That’s what you get for quoting one sentence, without bothering to read the entire context.”

I read the entire context and nothing I quoted went against it. Everything you posted has shown that what I posted in the first place was correct. You need to learn what the word “speculate” means. Work on that.

Now, on to your next bad attempt at an argument:

“Brewer did not lie about his involvement with the SDA,”

I never said he did lie about his involvement. Do you read much?

“and his reason for leaving them due to their reliance on the teachings of their founder. This is a pure invention on your part, trying your best to paint a good man with deceit.”

No. This is what Brewer wrote (and I am using now the same banned website you apparently used but won’t own up to):

“Not long after I was ordained as a Seventh Day Adventist minister,....”

WHOA! Did you see that? He was ALREADY ordained as an SDA minister. He had already gone through the SDA ministerial training by this point. That takes MONTHS AND MONTHS! And yet, he then wrote this:

“The one that became a turning point in my life was that the writings of Ellen G. White are “equally inspired as Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.” Disturbed, I counseled with a highly respected leader, but could in no way reconcile this in my conscience.”

There’s no way Brewer could go through all of THOSE MONTHS of ministry training for the SDA and only discover sometime afterward what they really teach about E. G. White when it is plain from their publically accessible literature at the time.

Now, from where did you get the first Brewer quote you posted in post 10? Will you admit where you got it from? I’m still betting no at this point. To admit the truth is hard for an anti-Catholic Protestant. Lies and deception come to them so easily.