The Church Manual states as first reason for which members shall be subject to discipline the following:
Denial of faith in the fundamentals of the gospel and in the fundamental beliefs of the Church or teaching doctrines contrary to the same.
We have a big problem in Italy.
What would you do in your local SDA Church if the elder is a retired pastor with credentials from the Seventh day Adventist Church, and for 20 years he has written books and articles teachings that are against the fundamental beliefs of the same church he represents?
Adelio Pellegrini, on his website promotes many theories that conflict with SDA fundamental beliefs and yet the Italian Union of Seventh Day Adventist for 20 years appears to have not taken disciplinary action by removing his credentials.
In 2016 Adelio asked the EUD (Inter-European Division) for changes in the fundamental beliefs 9, 10 and 24.
In 2019 the EUD answered to him with the following file that we find on his website.
I believe the following errors are the most prominent in his website, bibliography and public talks:
Spirit of prophecy = unreliable. As is generally Ellen White's opinion on theology, lifestyle ect. She is occasionally inspired where she gets it right. And in any case she is much less inspired than the biblical prophets.
Biblical prophets = they present an opinion about God, circumstantial to their time, but is not always the opinion of God about Himself.
Death of Christ = not substitutionary or vicarious, but an expression of God's grace for His goodness.
God = is only good and grace, therefore he sends only "good" and never allows or administers death or destruction or anything we would call bad. All biblical cases or explicit biblical verses where it is said that God sends both punishment and blessing are just the author's interpretation.
Book of Job = subjective opinion of God by the author but not truthful, historical nor objective.
Sanctuary = does not literally exist, and the doctrine should be changed.
OT sacrifices = used as a pedagogical form from God because the surrounding peoples were use to them, and they never had substitutionary value. Much less the Lamb slain since the foundation of the world never had any substitutionary value.
Law = Christ did not die to atone for our wages of sin and the doctrine should be changed.
Salvation = we are saved by the goodness of God, and not by a faith that needs to incarnate the life and works of Christ in us that we might walk in the works prepared for us (Eph 2:8-10).
There may be other points that I haven't had a chance to hear from him yet and I do not want to point out and add to the already disastrous situation.
In this case the doctrinal points directly and indirectly affected are 7, unlike the 3 that Adelio indicates in his document to the EUD. That is not a surprise for many of our beliefs are interlinked.
The Holy Scriptures
4) The Son of God
9) The Death of Christ
10) The Plan of Salvation
12) The Church
18) The Spirit of Prophecy
19) The Law
24) The Sanctuary
Other themes that we find on his website are not in alignment with:
6) Creation
8) The great controversy
13) The Remnant
23) Marriage
These themes are Adelio's recommended agenda for internal Church reform and not just his private doubts.
In fact, he believes that the following quote found in Spirit of Prophecy which refers to revival and reformation does not speak of changes in the lifestyle and thought of the member by departing from human nature paradigms, but of doctrinal points.
A revival and a reformation must take place under the ministration of the Holy Spirit. Revival and reformation are two different things. Revival signifies a renewal of spiritual life, a quickening of the powers of mind and heart, a resurrection from spiritual death. Reformation signifies a reorganization, a change in ideas and theories, habits and practices. Reformation will not bring forth the good fruit of righteousness unless it is connected with the revival of the Spirit. Revival and reformation are to do their appointed work, and in doing this work they must blend (The Review and Herald, February 25, 1902).
The push for a doctrinal reform in the Church at all levels, is evident given his request for doctrinal changes. He believes that in the 170-year history of the church there have been no major doctrinal reforms and essentially we believe almost totally the same things that the pioneers believed.
Here is what Ellen White condemns:
The enemy of souls has sought to bring in the supposition that a great reformation was to take place among Seventh-day Adventists, and that this reformation would consist in giving up the doctrines which stand as the pillars of our faith, and engaging in a process of reorganization. Were this reformation to take place, what would result? The principles of truth that God in His wisdom has given to the remnant church, would be discarded. Our religion would be changed. The fundamental principles that have sustained the work for the last fifty years would be accounted as error. A new organization would be established. Books of a new order would be written. A system of intellectual philosophy would be introduced. The founders of this system would go into the cities, and do a wonderful work. The Sabbath of course, would be lightly regarded, as also the God who created it. Nothing would be allowed to stand in the way of the new movement. The leaders would teach that virtue is better than vice, but God being removed, they would place their dependence on human power, which, without God, is worthless. Their foundation would be built on the sand… 204.2
Adelio believes that this quote where EGW claims that new truths will be discovered refers as well to his ideas about the non vicarious death, and therefore it is irrelevant whether such new truths are at odds with the linear progressive truth from Adam to Ellen White.
We must not for a moment think that there is no more light, no more truth, to be given us. We are in danger of becoming careless, by our indifference losing the sanctifying power of truth, and composing ourselves with the thought, “I am rich, and increased with goods, and have need of nothing.” [Revelation 3:17.] While we must hold fast to the truths which we have already received, we must not look with suspicion upon any new light that God may send. GW310
Although he does not recognize White's authority as expressed in doctrinal point 18, he uses her quotations when they can be interpreted in his favor. This situation creates a cognitive dissonance, where the criticized source becomes a sporadically inspired source. A cross-research in White's writings with the White Estate App would be enough to refute this interpretation if one really believes in the Prophet to the Remnant.
All this is causing a stalemate in his local Church. There is no possibility of carrying out Sabbath School regularly and serenely since almost all the themes presented in the lessons, intersect with the vicarious death of Christ, with the authority of the Spirit of prophecy, and with the concept that in several biblical cases God punishes his people.
Observe the sequence indicated by White of the path of spiritual decadence in which Adelio has been, in my opinion, and of others, for at least 20 years:
“It is Satan's plan to weaken the faith of God's people in the Testimonies. (SPIRIT OF PROPHECY) Next follows skepticism in regard to the vital points of our faith, the pillars of our position, then doubt as to the Holy Scriptures, and then the downward march to perdition. When the Testimonies, (Spirit of prophecy) which were once believed, are doubted and given up, Satan knows the deceived ones will not stop at this; and he redoubles his efforts till he launches them into open rebellion, which becomes incurable and ends in destruction" (Testimonies for the Church 4:211).
Pellegrini's case does not fit the camouflaged tares of which Ellen White talks about in Christ Object lessons p.71, where she warns against removing people that are so linked to the grain that their removal would damage the grain. The minimum requirements to be a Seventh-day Adventist are that the 28 points of faith observed at least in nominal form. Because in motive only God is able to judge exactly.
In addition, Pellegrini’s beliefs are in conflict with the minimum requirements to consider oneself Christian—at least on a doctrinal level: the vicarious death of Christ, who died instead of us.
When will the human administrators of God’s people find the courage to stand against the destruction of Truth? If His people do not do it, God will do it, but they will be in the group of the punished.
God holds His people, as a body, responsible for the sins existing in individuals among them. If the leaders of the church neglect to diligently search out the sins which bring the displeasure of God upon the body, they become responsible for these sins (3T 269.2).
God bids us speak, and we will not be silent. If wrongs are apparent among His people, and if the servants of God pass on indifferent to them, they virtually sustain and justify the sinner, and are alike guilty and will just as surely receive the displeasure of God; for they will be made responsible for the sins of the guilty. In vision I have been pointed to many instances where the displeasure of God has been incurred by a neglect on the part of His servants to deal with the wrongs and sins existing among them. Those who have excused these wrongs have been thought by the people to be very amiable and lovely in disposition, simply because they shunned to discharge a plain Scriptural duty. The task was not agreeable to their feelings; therefore they avoided it. T3 265
Ministry magazine, article titled: When should a Church discipline members?
Who Should Be Disciplined?
The New Testament makes it clear that a person must be disciplined if he is guilty of: unrepentant moral delinquency. "Root out the evil-doer from your community," advised the apostle Paul (1 Cor. 5:13).
The apostles required the same stern treatment for one guilty of teaching heresy:
"If anyone preaches a gospel at variance with the gospel which you received, let him be outcast!" (Gal. 1:9). John went so far as to say of promoters of heresy, "If anyone comes to you who does not bring this doctrine, do not welcome him into your house or give him a greeting; for anyone who gives him a greeting is an accomplice in his wicked deeds" (2 John 11).
It should be noted that the discipline recommended on these two counts makes allowance for the one who fails in some sin of the spirit or who sins and repents (see 1 John 5:13-18).
However, the strictest discipline is to be meted out to one who sins deliberately and continues unrepentantly in open violation of the law of God.
It is also important to notice that discipline in matters of faith is not for one whose weakness is limited to personal questionings and doubts.
Wrote Jude on this point:
"There are some doubting souls who need your pity; snatch them from the flames and save them" (Jude 22).
But when personal doubts are nurtured and articulated to the point that public teachings contrary to fundamentals of the gospel are proclaimed, church discipline is needed.
When the church fails to discipline in cases of unrepentant, overt moral delinquency and the teaching of heresy, it becomes guilty of the sin of impurity and unholy unity, and stands under the judgment of God.
Points to keep in mind when dealing with similar situations:
The Test of New Light—Our brethren should be willing to investigate in a candid way every point of controversy. If a brother is teaching error, those who are in responsible positions ought to know it; and if he is teaching truth, they ought to take their stand at his side. We should all know what is being taught among us; for if it is truth, we need it. We are all under obligation to God to know what He sends us. He has given directions by which we may test every doctrine,—“To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.” If the light presented meets this test, we are not to refuse to accept it because it does not agree with our ideas.—Gospel Workers, 300, 301.
Different opinions - If a brother differ with you on some points of truth, do not stoop to ridicule, do not place him in a false light, or misconstrue his words, making sport of them; do not misinterpret his words and wrest them of their true meaning. This is not conscientious argument. Do not present him before others as a heretic, when you have not with him investigated his positions, taking the Scriptures text by text in the spirit of Christ to show him what is truth. You do not yourself really know the evidence he has for his faith, and you cannot really clearly define your own position. Take your Bible, and in a kindly spirit weigh every argument that he presents and show him by the Scriptures if he is in error. When you do this without unkind feelings, you will do only that which is your duty and the duty of every minister of Jesus Christ.—Letter 21, 1888.
Stay tuned for Part 2…
Zoran Veleski is a self supporting missionary in Italy. After studying at the European Bible School in Norway, him and his wife have been assisting different ministries in Australia, Africa and Europe.
Zoran was a co-founder and director of Light Channel Italy from 2013—2018. He was co-founder and administrator of Menorah Mission School from 2015—2018. Today, Zoran is a real estate entrepreneur. He spends his days studying and researching spiritual topics to make videos on YouTube for the Italian SDA community. His videos on YouTube call for revival and reformation to accelerate Christ's coming; his videos on Tiktok are for the Italian secular people.