After the Alamo and back Again

by Pastor Mark A. McCleary, August 2, 2015: The Alamo is a Texas state shrine. Numerous non-fictional works have been produced concerning its historical impact—Disney’s Davy Crockett (1955) and The Alamo, starring John Wayne (1960), and a 2004 version starring Dennis Quaid and Billy Bob Thornton. July 1-11, 2015, the 60th Session of the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventist (SDA) was held around the corner from the shrine where the final epic battle of the Alamo was fought between President General Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna’s governmental forces and the revolutionary Texan army. SDA delegates,from around the world (over 2,600) deliberated and voted on various agenda items, chief among them being “whether to allow SDA Divisions to ordain women as pastors as they felt led by God on a per Division basis.” The final vote was 1,381 (No), 997 (Yes), and 5 (Abstained). Like the pivotal Battle of the Alamo when the future land determination of Texas was decided, the SDA decision of women’s ordination and intra-church social relations will be pivotal for Church faith, practice, and unity. I believe it will be pivotal because it reflects the deep pathologies that fester in our church around race and gender.
The background to the Texas Alamo event is compelling. The fact that Santa Anna was president indicates that San Antonio was Mexican territory at the time of the infamous siege (February 23—March 6, 1836). Texas had been largely populated by immigrants from the USA. These immigrants were familiar with a federalist form of government and revolted against Mexico’s centralist approach to governance. It is recorded that Santa Anna wrote to US President Andrew Jackson concerning immigrant non-adaptation to and interference in Mexican cultural affairs.[1] I reference this episode in US history not as a strict designation of anyone or anything today being the replication of the parties involved then. Rather, this conflict is gripping because it provides a bridge for viewing what occurred at San Antonio among SDA’s in light of its own history and as it moves into its future. In my view, the SDA Church has been under siege beyond the issue of women’s ordination. My observations concern SDA dysfunctionality around social disunity while proclaiming its version of speaking for God in these last days. The following situations are evidence which, I believe, takes us [SDA’s] back to the Alamo and finds us coming away with the same ‘hidden underbelly’ of structural racism, marginalization, male supremacy, and social disunity.
First of all, at the close of business near the Session’s end, a “Question of Privilege” was offered by a delegate who serves as a Vice President of the North American Division (NAD) of SDA. His commentary concerned taking a moment of silence in respect and solidarity in the aftermath of the tragedy at the Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal (AME) church in Charleston, South Carolina. Nine unarmed people who were attending a Wednesday night Bible study had been murdered. The day before the women’s ordination vote, South Carolina Governor Haley stated, “This flag [Confederate], while an integral part of our past, does not represent the future of our great state.” A “Question of Privilege” comes under parliamentary rules as a privileged motion and interrupts everything except a vote in process. However, it requires admission by the chair, who in this instance asked, “Didn’t someone say something about that this morning?” The Chair’s casual response to this motion and thus to events that have shocked and polarized our nation is emblematic of “SDA upper-level administrator attitudes” in my opinion. On a previous occasion, the newly elected President of a regional [black] conference asked the previous NAD President if they [morning worship gathering] could pray for the newly elected 44th President of the USA, Barack Obama. The request was denied with the retort, “You pray for him.”
Some will say I’m overly sensitive, but I respond that when I see similar Church actions, I sense a “Red Flag.” An example of such is that the now former Vice President for the General Conference, Delbert Baker, who has served the SDA Church with distinction that made him worthy of the position – such service including editor of Message Magazine and President of Oakwood University, which attained university status during his tenure – was not reelected. I hear some saying, “It was God’s will,” and “the Church must be more fiscally sound by merging responsibilities at its upper administrative levels.” I respect those opinions, but wonder why, in an increasingly diverse global Church, would we not reelect at least one of the two Black male VP’s, one of whom was Baker? I am amazed, but not surprised that there must have been much struggle with God’s will when the incumbent President Ted Wilson’s name was taken back to the nominating committee three times before it was decided to reelect him. From my Conference level experiences, presidents use their influence to effect the future downline membership of their cabinet. Perhaps Baker was not retained because of a philosophical disconnect between him and Wilson. Maybe Baker’s non-reelection also had to do with his attending the South Carolina funeral of the Emmanuel AME Nine as an “unofficial representative of the SDA Church.” Whatever it is exactly, it reminds me of Elijah Muhammad’s censor of Malcom X, when against organization restrictions, Malcolm explained to a reporter his interpretation of the John F Kennedy (JFK) assassination—“It is a matter of chickens coming home to roost.” Perhaps the recent vote against Division enablement around women’s ordination and my “red flag” observations above can be viewed as being similar to the struggle between the Mexican government and Texan immigrants that led to the Alamo showdown or to Malcolm’s editorial statement concerning JFK’s assassination.
I am “Adventist-born, Adventist-nurtured, and probably Adventist till I die.” But the stand-offish behavior of SDA’s, particularly Whites, as demonstrated in the C Hall concession area, where on several occasions I was asked, in spite of a large backdrop picture and caption that read “Pastor Dr. Mark McCleary,” if I was SDA. My sister and those who helped in our booth all described the body language of mostly Whites who avoided my concession booth at the 2015 GC. Some of the avoiders distributed materials to our next-door neighbor Spectrum and then went past us to the next manned booth. It happened too often to be an aberration. These experiences and observations give me pause that my church continues to maintain a “good old boys” or segregationist spirit. Such spirit is often ineffable yet expresses motivations and intentions that are unctuous and swim in the depths of human subconsciousness as forgotten sea monsters. These monsters have prevented the unity President Wilson called for in his message as a delegate before the women’s ordination vote and in his final Sabbath sermon. It is more like the game Simon Says, as in Missionary Volunteer Society being changed to Adventist Youth, and then I read the Valuegenesis study subsequently because “their” youth were not attending AY or are leaving the Church. “Simon says, “Lay activities should become personal ministry, while very little White-led personal ministry takes place. In reality, there is a White flight phenomenon and a shrinking urban presence of White congregations. “Simon says,” Dorcas and Adventist men should morph into Community Services, and Ingathering should be altered so our SDA White segment’s preference for reaching the community can be addressed largely by ADRA. In other words, Adventism has been under siege before the 60th Session in the shadow of San Antonio’s memorial of the Alamo. Our climactic vote against women’s ordination cannot hide its deep-seated trouble of intra-Church disharmony that stems from insensitivity, an exclusive mindset, and deafness to both its internal voices and external friends who want the SDA Church to succeed.
Re-elected President Ted Wilson made a stoic plea for unity before the “big” vote. In order for that not to end up being merely a case of political rhetoric, I suggest he speak to and seek to implement unity holistically at the grass-roots level of SDA social life. AME, AME Zion, and Christian Methodist Episcopal members could teach us a thing or two about dealing with what W. E. B. Dubois described as the “problem in America is the color line,” as they struggled with the same troubles within their former parent affiliation—the White-led Methodist Church. It was once the leading Protestant denomination in America, growing out of the developmental leadership of George Whitefield, Jonathan Edwards, and primarily the ministry of John and Charles Wesley, but it has subsequently struggled with intra-church unity and performed as bad stewards in the vein which gave rise to ecclesiastical revolutionaries such as Richard Allen (AME, Philadelphia, 1794); John Jamison Moore (AME Zion, New York, 1796); and the founding of the Christian (aka Colored) Methodist Episcopal Church in Jackson, Tennessee in 1870.[2] Why bring race into this? Because I definitely see a correlation with the women’s ordination vote, the promotion of GC hegemony, and the lingering matter of disharmony among us that will continue to undermine President Wilson’s public call for unity even as he winks at historic SDA intra-church social disharmony. The same spirit that laid siege to the Methodist Church is eating away at any real unity in the Adventist Church. It seems to me to be similar to Santa Anna calling for centralist Mexican control and Texan revolutionaries acting to appropriate their rights. The women’s ordination vote is over, but Wilson’s call for unity is still not being realized. It is sad to affirm the statement of the President of the Lake Region Conference of SDA, R. Clifford Jones, who in his book Utopia Park, Utopian Church: James K. Humphrey and the Emergence of Sabbath-Day Adventist states, “The denomination has struggled with the issue [equitable treatment of all people] as it relates to people of African descent, and on occasion has reflected the contradictory racial tendencies and practices of the American society in which it was born and weaned.”[3]
The church is one body with many members, called from every nation, kindred, tongue, and people. In Christ, we are a new creation; distinctions of race, culture, learning, and nationality, and differences between high and low, rich and poor, male and female, must not be divisive among us. We are all equal in Christ, who by one Spirit has bonded us into one fellowship with Him and with one another; we are to serve and be served without partiality or reservation. Through the revelation of Jesus Christ in the Scriptures we share the same faith and hope, and reach out in one witness to all. This unity has its source in the oneness of the triune God, who has adopted us as His children (Rom. 12:4, 5; 1 Cor. 12:12-14; Matt. 28:19, 20; Ps. 133:1; 2 Cor.5:16, 17; Acts 17:26, 27; Gal. 3:27, 29; Col. 3:10-15; Eph. 4:2-6, 14-16; John 17:20-23).[4]
In 1987, I attended the Norman Road SDA Church in Newark, New Jersey [a predominantly White SDA congregation], after assuming the pastorate at the First Church of SDA in Montclair, New Jersey. Whites made up 90% of the attendance the day that I preached. Before being reassigned in 1992, I preached there again, around 1991. There were five White elderly ladies attending that day and the remaining attendees looked about 45% Afro-Caribbean; 20% Asian; 30% Hispanic, and 5% other. Since then, I have observed the same phenomenon in Philadelphia, Washington, D.C., and Maryland, where Whites have left their former church homes for rural spaces. In my opinion, these trends are not an aberration or collective action in behalf of unity, but reflect the historic attitude and behavior of disconnection and disassociation. Our church has been under siege with this negative attitude and action for decades. A graphic example of this happened to the brother of the former mayor of Philadelphia. In a test-case effort, he went out to the then-White Boulevard Church in the mid 1960’s, when I was in my middle teens, and was “threatened” to keep him from entering the church on that Sabbath. I recall my experience at Andrews University (AU), during my matriculation there (1969-1972), when a meeting took place among the Michigan Conference President and NAD and GC personalities, convened by AU President, Richard Hammill, to discuss with a sample of Black students their apparent disconnect with the majority White students and school social life in general. This meeting included former GC President Neal Wilson, father of our current President, who was either in Communications or a GC VP (1971). When my turn came, I explained how I greeted White students daily, but was most frequently ignored. I continued to state that, “Such greetings were a part of my neighbor upbringing.” The next day, while I was approaching the Student Hall, Elder Wilson yelled, “Hey, Brother McCleary.” I was told years later that he was famous for remembering faces. In reflection, I truly believe that in his greeting he was trying to effect a change in my deportment in light of my comments the day before. However, in order for the SDA church to be responsive to President Ted Wilson’s call for unity and move beyond what are valid observations of deep pathology, he will have to focus on helping us remember and practice respecting that each of our faces are different and we come from diverse spaces. This is the unity I hope he is calling for and not uniformity to a White standard of being in Christ. The recent women’s ordination vote and our historically poor intra-Church social misbehavior makes me concerned that President Wilson and SDA White voices speak about sola scriptura while they say little about interpersonal and intragroup disharmony among us.
We seem more like the White Methodist Church, who did not respond productively by including its Black members fully, or the Assemblies of God denomination which developed (1914) around a segregationist discourse after formerly receiving its ecclesiastical endorsement from its Holiness movement parent, The Church of God in Christ (COGIC), which had been led by a Black man, Charles Mason (1907).[5] What does this have to do with the recent vote, the GC, or the President’s appeal for unity? As I see it, everything, because it relates to the siege of Adventism at the social level. This is what the “Elephant in the Room” is. It is what early Black SDA pioneers such as John Mann, J. K. Humphrey, and Louis Sheafe battled with—embracing this message while struggling against White SDA leadership insensitivity, non-inclusion, and Jim Crowism. The specious nature of this siege is that SDA discourse and policy-making is more like Santa Anna’s centralist vision, whereas Blacks, women, and non-Whites are the Texans seeking their right for expression and acceptance in the face of old boy White male leader’s reluctance to share power.
Mann, Humphrey, and Sheafe all left after long battles around social issues and incidents concerning Black SDA member marginalization.[6] The late E. E. Cleveland, a giant of Adventist evangelism, reported segregated lunch rooms at the old GC building on Eastern Avenue, NW, in Washington, DC. Andrews University Pastor Dwight Nelson’s score-long pulpit-platform calling for unity or “come back home” sounds strangely like Pope John the XXIII’s call for Protestant “separated brethren’ to return to the mother Catholic Church during the historic Vatican II Council (opening, 1962). Why do Black Regional Conference SDA’s have to come at all or initiate organizational reform? Black SDA’s have never been at the table in sufficient numbers to affect structural transformation. Furthermore, why do we have to come back when we have already been here? Unless we picket as was done at the 1970 GC Session in Atlantic City, New Jersey, or threaten to go to the media concerning social injustice as initiated by Black SDA Ohioans (the late Doctor Frank Hale and Mr. Silas Martin) at the GC Session in San Francisco, California, in 1962, it seems that SDA upper leadership will react in acts of appeasement or tokenism.[7] [8] It is these types of reactions that, I believe, help explain White leadership’s approval of the Regional Conference Proposal after the “straw that broke the organization’s racial pathology’s back,” when the Washington Adventist Hospital refused to treat SDA patient Lucy Bayard after reading on her intake form that she was Black.[9]
So what are my suggestions to address this pathological siege of race and gender around the matter of unity that our President seeks? The vote concerning women’s ordination enabling a Division to decide independently is over. However, if we can learn anything from the interactions that led to the Battle of the Alamo, it is that honest communication that includes all of our diverse voices must be encouraged, listened to and responded to according to the principles of “It is lawful to do good” on Sabbath or at any other time. The Mexican and Texan people of 1836 missed an opportunity for unity. And unless we enter the Spirit of unity, like patrons do as they enter the Alamo Shrine to see that it was a mission for peace and not a fort for fighting, we will miss the signs of the times and not know that every SDA gender and ethnic group should be encouraged to express the three angels’ messages in their own medium of expression. Let not our top Church leader hint or ‘demand’ that people stop clapping or involving their body in affirmation or worship (Psalms 150). Let not marginalization be the norm for diverse ways for using one’s gifts for or praising God in the congregation. The substratum for unity is humility; and the substratum for humility is love; a love that embraces me as I am and invests in me to be all I can be in Christ and not just as I adapt to a White Euro-centric model of behavior and worship. Research informs us that Black men and woman were observing Sabbath in Africa long before SDA’s showed up in the presence of their missionaries. Whites have not invented nor been the exclusive arbiters of biblically grounded religious expression. In fact, Africans were shocked when White European missionaries came with Sunday.[10]
The first suggestion for us is not to retreat or succumb to non-Kingdom egalitarianism that is the obverse of Paul’s Kingdom unity (Galatians 3:27-29), but push forward together in the spirit of the Sixteen Points Program[11] and empower rather than exclude our members from leadership positions. In my opinion, the women’s ordination matter is coming back. The increase of votes in agreement, from 41 (1990) to 997 (2015) indicates the issue is not over and is more organic in nature than many recognize. We have lingering matters that are related to it and in many ways supersede it that demand immediate attention if the President’s appeal for unity is to be realized. My second suggestion is that our dear President Wilson not travel with bodyguards or wear a bullet proof vest. I pray these rumors are just mischievous gossip. If it is true, however, please remove the vest and let the guards go—“He shall give His angels charge over thee” (Ps. 34:7). As our President or spiritual high priest, stand like a tree planted by the rivers of righteousness and social justice and speak against the inertia of White flight by challenging the White descendants of our founding pioneers to practice Jesus’ prayer “That we be one even as He and His Father are one” (John 17:22)—in the city and the suburbs; in all thirteen SDA Divisions; in the lives of men and women, young and old. Remind the descendants of our organizational pioneers that to be the head of this diverse bridal Church means to lead according to Paul’s model (Eph. 5:22-33). If you focus on this, I believe true unity will be nurtured—a unity that respects the gifts of women and ethnic others; a unity borne from active and reflexive listening and negotiations that produce practical relationships in the Northeast/South/Midwest/West areas of the NAD and around the globe within SDA social life.
May we occupy together, in the true sense of unity, but not uniformity, until Jesus comes to take us to eternal bliss. This will take President Wilson, like the Pope, encouraging every Conference ministry person and pastoral leader to preach, teach, and exhort unity of the John and Jane Doe members of every nation, kindred and tongue, while not winking at or tacitly supporting behaviors of disharmony, disparity, and disassociation. “Blessed are the meek for they shall inherit the earth” (Psalms 37:11). Not an earth for men over women (Gen.1:26-28) or ghettoized and depreciated from a heavenly uptown section; or a new earth with a lower class and an upper class; or racial, ethnic or gender enclaves; nor one where White SDA leaders are going to “come over to your side [of heaven] to hear you [Black] folk sing,” but an earth where there will be justice for all as far as the sea. Maranatha! Even so, come, Lord of Unity, and help us make the unity our President appealed for a reality, where we stop fighting as if we are at the Alamo again.
Bibliography
Bradford, Charles E. (1999). Sabbath Roots: The African Connection, L. Brown and Sons Printing, 1999.
Dodson, Joseph T. (1944). Chair, “Shall the Four Freedoms Function among Seventh-day Adventists?” Committee for the Advancement of a Worldwide Work among Colored Seventh-day Adventists. Washington, DC: General Conference Archives, 1944.
Fordham, Walter w. (1990). Righteous Rebel, Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald Publishing).
Fusllier, Anqunnet, ed., “The Divine Origins of Church of God in Christ,” The Corner stone (1985): 32-33.
Jones, R. Clifford (2007). Utopia Park, Utopian Church: James K. Humphrey and the Emergence of Sabbath-Day Adventist (Jackson, University Press of Mississippi, 2007), 6
Justice, Jacob (1975). Angels in Ebony, Toledo, OH: Jet Printing Service.
Morgan, Doug (2010). Lewis Sheafe: Apostle to Black America. Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald.
Norwood, Fredrick A. The Story of American Methodism: A History of the United Methodist andtheir Relations. Nashville, Abingdon Press, 1974.
Reynold, Louis, B. (1984). We Have Tomorrow: The Story of American Seventh-day Adventists with an African Heritage. Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald Publishing Association.
Scott, Robert (2000). After the Alamo. Plano, TX: Republic of Texas Press.
Sweet, William W. (1933). Methodism in American History. New York: Methodist Book Concerns.
[1] Scott (2000), pp.74-75.
[2] William W. Sweet, Methodism in American History (New York: Methodist Book Concerns), 31-34; Frederick A. Norwood, The Story of American Methodism (Nashville, Abingdon Press, 1974), 20-21.
[3] R. Clifford Jones, Utopia Park, Utopian Church: James K. Humphrey and the Emergence of Sabbath-Day Adventist (Jackson, University Press of Mississippi, 2007), 6.
[4] Seventh-day Adventist, 28 Fundamentals Beliefs, #14. This was copied from the General Conference website, www.adventist.org/beleifs/.
[5] Anqunnet Fusllier, ed., “The Divine Origins of Church of God in Christ,” The Corner stone (1985), 32-33.
[6] Doug Morgan, Lewis Sheafe: Apostle to Black America, (Review and Herald, 2010), 291-303, 393-400.
[7] Jacob Justice, Angels in Ebony, (Toledo, OH: Jet Printing Service, 1975), 43-46; Joseph T. Dodson, Chair, “Shall the Four Freedoms Function among Seventh-day Adventists?” Committee for the Advancement of a Worldwide Work among Colored Seventh-day Adventists (Washington, DC: General Conference Archives, 1944), 2.
[8] Walter W. Fordham, Righteous Rebel, (Hagerstown, MD, Review and Herald Publishing, 1990), 76.
[9] Louis B. Reynolds, We Have Tomorrow: The Story of American Seventh-day Adventists with an African Heritage, (Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald Publishing Association, 1984), 293-294.
[10] Charles E. Bradford, Sabbath Roots: The African Connection, L. Brown and Sons Printing, 1999), 87-119.
[11] Jacob Justice, 150-151. This action grew out of discussion around Division Presidential structuration in the early 1900’s. Such deliberations prompted further discussion concerning Union and Regional [Black] Conference authority determination, particularly, a proposal for Black Unions. Eventually, this Affirmative Action plan was voted as a two-year experimental-period and compromise for dealing with racial injustice in the church.
Pastor Doctor Mark A. McCleary began serving the Seventh-day Adventist Church in 1974 (Kansas City, Missouri). His Allegheny East Conference career includes the First Church of Montclair, NJ; SW Philadelphia; The First Church of Washington, DC; and Liberty Church, Windsor Mill, MD (January, 2014).
He has been married to the former Queenie P. Bryant for over 40 years. In his opinion, she is a role model for every First Lady. They have three adult children, Brian, Michael (married to Andrenee and two children, Micah and Miles, and Michelle.
Pastor McCleary has completed the following degrees: B. A. (1974); Master of Divinity (1978); Doctor of Ministry, “Congregational Renewal” (1998); and Ph. D. “Conflict Analysis and Resolution” (2013).
Pastor McCleary has published—The Gospel Presentation; Back to Basics Bible Study; Reflections on Daniel workbook; A Guide to Discovering Your Spiritual Gifts; and Assurance, Insurance, and Reassurance: Pre-Marital and Marriage Information Series; “A Conflict Resolution Manual for Resolving Intra Church Social Conflict” is pending.
His personal vision and objective statements are: “To be recognized as a good pastor by my members and a helpful and accessible chaplain to their various communities”, and “To be a role model of Christian values, in order to inspire positive life-style transformation in others.”
I hear the pain and anguish of your journey. For me these lyrics say what you have said. Thank you for your gift…
“Greater”
Bring your tired
Bring your shame
Bring your guilt
Bring your pain
Don’t you know that’s not your name
You will always be much more to me
Everyday I wrestle with the voices
That keep telling me I’m not right
But that’s alright
Cause I hear a voice and he calls me redeemed
When others say I’ll never be enough
And greater is the One living inside of me
Than he who is living in the world
In the world
In the world
And greater is the One living inside of me
Than he who is living in the world
Bring your doubts
Bring your fears
Bring your hurt
Bring your tears
There’ll be no condemnation here
You are holy, righteous and redeemed
Every time I fall
There’ll be those who will call me
A mistake
Well that’s ok
Cause I hear a voice and he calls me redeemed
When others say I’ll never be enough
And greater is the One living inside of me
Than he who is living in the world
In the world
In the world
And greater is the One living inside of me
Than he who is living in the world
Woah ohhh ohhhh ohhh
Woah ohhh ohhhh ohhh
He’s Greater
He’s Greater
Woah ohhh ohhhh ohhh
Woah ohhh ohhhh ohhh
He’s Greater
He’s Greater
There’ll be days I lose the battle
Grace says that it doesn’t matter
Cause the cross already won the war
He’s Greater
He’s Greater
I am learning to run freely
Understanding just…
Part two-cont.
how he sees me
And it makes me love him more and more
He’s Greater
He’s Greater
He who is living the world
May God’s peace be with you. I hope the healing can begin. What you have described and documented (thank you for the footnotes)in your article. I too desire as you so eloquently pit it:
“May we occupy together, in the true sense of unity, but not uniformity, until Jesus comes to take us to eternal bliss.”
God bless you Pastor McCleary!
Thanks for the encouragement. Remember to do some structural work while you do your personal thing. I path of the just involves the micro and macro dimensions. Randall Collins posits the query that is hard to pinpoint, where and how are they linked. While I write and we ponder it and other things, I/you and our social world continues to move on. So glad He promised to never leave or forsake me, so that “Through it all….”
Is God’s purpose for the church to rectify perceived racial inequities in society, or to proclaim the Gospel so people will be ready to meet Jesus? I think the author has confused the former for the latter.
Brother Noel why not do both?
There are several divisions that exist in our society: the rich and the poor, those who dine sumptuously and those who go hungry, gay and straight, whites and people of color, men and women, children and adults. Christians and other religions like Islam. Our brothers and sisters in and out of the church are the marginalized or those who are disadvantaged because of the side of the divide where they find themselves. In our society, these are the poor, the hungry, gays, people of color, and Muslims. These are the least of our brothers and sisters that Jesus Christ expects Christians to care for. We cannot ignore them, deride them or pretend that they do not exist. Christians not only have a responsibility to help them, but they must fight to tear down the structures of inequality in our society. Christians cannot sit passively when the rights of Blacks or Women are being violated They must act because we all have a common origin. The same God created Women, Men, and Christians (and people of other faiths). I was not created by a black God or a white God.. When Christians fail to address these inequalities or when they promote these inequalities no matter their religious reasons, they are widening the gulf in our society, thereby casting themselves on the wrong side . Jesus Christ was a healer and not a divider.
The problem with focusing on resolving all the problems around us is quickly becoming lost in the concepts of political correctness instead of immersed in the principles of God’s kingdom. Yes, God wants us ministering to the needs around us but what He teaches in scripture is very different from the politically-correct concepts being promoted today. For example, you mentioned “income inequality” which is not a scritpural issue but a Marxist-Socialist idea used to legitimize disregarding the 10th Commandment and justify the expansion of oppressive, faith-suppressing government.
In the book of Philemon, Paul gives us a great example of ministering God’s love in spite of a problem. Slavery was the law and condemning it risked bringing the force of the state down on him and shortening his ministry by ending his life much sooner. He didn’t confront the issue of slavery but instead appealed to Philemon to accept Onesimus back in brotherly love because they were both believers.
Jesus never asked us to eliminate the inequalities around us but to minister His love in spite of them. You can waste your energies trying to change the perceived ills in society and the church. Or, you can focus on loving others in God’s power regardless of what the politically correct claim needs fixing. Stay focused on your mission. Don’t let the politically correct distract you.
William, Ellen and James White later saw that Paul’s example had been passed up by God’s end-time mission; the Remnant Church from its beginning took a clear stance against slavery and worked to end it. Revelation 14 specifically describes the Remnant Church as coming from all ethnic groups and the Fundamental Beliefs (and the Baptismal Vow) clearly take a position on the topic. Adventist faith is officially committed to an understanding of the Gospel that includes social justice. The “principles of the Kingdom” is the same thing as “political correctness” in this regard.
Monte,
I think you’re overlooking something important. It was possible for the church to take a stand against slavery in America because it had become an issue leading to the Civil War and the times demanded that both individuals and groups take a stand on the issue. It was the opposite in Paul’s time and any opposition from the church would have risked their destruction as enemies of Roman power. Also, the slavery in that time and the stereotype from pre-Civil War America were very different because Roman slaves were treated with civility and could vote. At least one even served in the Roman Senate.
The “principles of the kingdom” and “social justice” only sound the same. Any attempt to define “social justice” quickly takes you into the depths of political correctness where right and wrong are defined by what is popular and concepts that are continually changing. At the core of “social justice” is Marxist redistribution of wealth which legitimizes and institutionalizes violation of the 8th, 9th and 10th Commandments. It is also what the Pope has declared will bring the Roman Catholic Church and governments into union, so we must be very careful to remain clear of it while doing the works Jesus told us to do.
At the root of the issue is how to effect change in the church to correct what some see as inequities, which may be only one’s perception fueled by socially popular concepts of discrimination. If recent history in America has made something very clear it is that attempts to address and “correct” racial discrimination only make things worse by dividing society instead of unifying and bringing greater suffering on those for whom their leaders claim to be advocating. The most effective way to overcome that is to avoid getting distracted in the fighting and focus our energies on actually ministering God’s love in the ways Jesus modeled for us.
Unfortunately, we have three primary groups in the church in the US: the large majority for whom the claimed inequities are meaningless or irrelevant, the small number who are vocal in their advocation for correction of what they see as wrongs, and the probably smaller number who are actually trying to minister as Jesus taught us to. The problem for the second group is they are increasingly alienating the first group or deceiving them into allegiance with them. But real change that lasts comes from the grassroots level when people actually practice the principles of Jesus and overcome strife with God’s love. So if we want to overcome perceived inequities, that is the solution we should be pursuing.
It should have been one of the fundamental beliefs and in the baptismal vows that all are created equal and to be treated equally. This from the very first (and later when the 28 fb were created) would have helped keep the church from some of its worse mistakes (like the separation in the GC cafe–hard to believe!).
This was made clear by EGW at first until she had to unfortunately backtrack because of southern hostility to integrated churches. In my opinion that was a mistake of the era in which she lived.
Having her as a female leader, I believe, was a sign from God that women should be incorporated in leadership. William Foy was part of the plan as well.
“The “principles of the Kingdom” is the same thing as “political correctness” in this regard.”
That’s a stretch Monte, unless you have a different concept of PC. PC baloney forced a Mozilla executive out of his position because of a small donation years ago to a cause not to the liking of the PC crowd.
In my view it was inappropriate for Delbert Baker to bring that female Congresswoman to the podium at the Session. I wonder about the characterization of her as “devoted SDA.”
All of that. The Church comprises individuals and their developed organizations and institutions. “Perception is 9/10 of the law,” according to some. From a phenomenological perspective, all I have is mine. In closing, it is ironic that God uses subjective perspective to preach the gospel to every nation… and your conclusion is your perspective. Thanks for commenting.
Unfortunately inequities and injustice are real, and not just perceived. Inequity and injustice may conceptually seem amorphous or ephemeral to certain segments of a given society who constitute a ruling class; wherein discussion of such concepts—and activism against such realities—may seem meaningless or irrelevant; at the least represent a nuisance, if not a clear and present danger to the status quo.
Some have (and perceive) the luxury to dismiss as “political correctness” the contemporary inequities in legal application and law enforcement, and the legacies of an historic slave economy and systemic (and continuing) exploitation in labor, and institutionally disparate educational and economic opportunities, which have resulted in the entitlement sense that accompanies much of the relatively privileged economic and/or demographic class—not to mention endemic intergenerational poverty—and enables the labeling of injustice as “perceived” or “politically correct” or “victimhood” or “race card” or “envy.” It’s designed, of course to preserve, protect, and defend institutions and philosophies upon which the socioeconomic stratification were built and remain.
I am pleased that the Christian denomination with which I am affiliated has a legacy of speaking out against the evil that the Civil War was fought by some to preserve. Many of our members continue to speak out against the same mindset that rationalized that evil. Doing so has never been universally popular; too bad.
My Dear Bro Noel, I hope your personal life experience of being treated unfairly because of your race will only remain in the “perceived” realm. However, if at possible, you can allow yourself to believe that these inequities can, and do exist in the lives of others, please, at the very least, try to convince yourself that rectifying inequities and preaching the Gospel are not mutually exclusive.
Life is filled with inequities. One that I have encountered several times is being denied jobs because my skin is not dark enough. Yes, that was a real inequity that I have encountered several times. But I have learned we can become consumed with the inequities of life, or we can become consumed with the love of God and the ministries to which He calls us so we can share that love. God does not call us to correct the inequities of society but to be empowered by the Holy Spirit. What is your choice? Which path will you pursue? The one dominated by what is racially divisive and politically correct? Or, the one led and empowered by God?
My Dear Brother Noel, are you suggesting that you would rather have darker skin because you live in a world where darker skin is an advantage in the world of work? I wonder what kind of jobs you were denied because you were not dark enough. If this is your experience I would not be presumptuous to deny your unfair treatment and conclude that it is only your perception. While I am glad that you did not become consumed with this terrible experience, I am still not sure why you choose to believe that rectifying inequities and preaching the Gospel are mutually exclusive. In addition, I trust that you would fight to ensure that a person’s ability to do a job would be based on competence and not color of skin. This benefits all of God’s children
“…perceived racial inequilities in society. .”and the church? I echo a line from Dr McCleary’s reflections for emphasis: “it happened too often to be an aberration”. And adds, “He who feels it knows it. “
Perspective is important, but can also be inaccurate and something happening “too often to be an aberration” simply reveals the author’s perception of priorities. If we are looking for equity in the church, or anywhere on this planet, we are taking our eyes off the purpose which God has given to us: ministering His love to build the Kingdom of God. The ministry of God’s love does not bring equality in anything other than the promise of salvation.
Your response seems reductionist and dismissive. How else can one express themselves or their hurts except how they best view or feel it. The article describes my view of a problem that I believe has historic and personal evidence. Your theology of purpose and salvation offers me no hope of social salvation now, but in your projection of something in the future. I am practical enough to think a world w/o inequities is not going to happen in this life. The paradox to this observation is that I am compelled to talk about them and perhaps we might fix them. The salvation you infer doesn’t seem to be rooted in God’s message, via Moses to Pharaoh, “Let my people go.” Your response seems to say save them w/o concerning yourself with their social condition. Clarify if I’m wrong.
Thank you. The current drive for unity through uniformity, centralisation, control, hierarchical structures that commentators and commenters aplenty have discerned were the driving influences behind SA2015 have interestingly failed to have the outcome desired or hoped for. Instead of moving on in ‘unity’ and focussing on mission, the underlying complexity that some seek to subvert has been provoked into reacting if not rebelling. Different facets of Adventism, including the one narrated by the author, seem to have been stirred by events at the GC. Whilst some may question some of what has been written, to hear an alternative perspective is enlightening. How the church will embrace alternative perspectives will be fascinating.
Bravo. Your comments are example that the human mind is more capable to process past, present, and future better than any artificial machine. This is the beauty and absurdity of intelligence (Paul Sartre)–we have to make decision w/o all the information. This multidimensional project is to vast for this “expert”. That’s the amazing thing about our creation, God gave us brains, neurological systems (minds) that have the capacity learn from tabulas rosa and yet we are products of history and society in which we are born (Hegel; Durkheim). I am a different facet in that I was born and nurtured in a unique time and space from another human being, yet I am a apart and my voice will be heard if not received.
The recent vote on WO has fractured the church and been the catalyst that promotes disunity rather than the unity that was supposed to occur. One cannot force either love or unity. Pitting one group against another has done more than anything to disrupt harmony even more. And that was the decision made by the leaders.
That’s your view and you are entitled to it as you stated. Unity is a fractured process because people and groups have diverse ways of seeing, interpreting, and developing solutions. I trust you aren’t saying that I am pitting my group (Black) against another (ice White). What I described, is what I observed and in many ways has been. I suggest you read W. E. B. Dubois, Carter G. Woodson, Tim Wise, and Joseph Barndt for a start. As far as our leaders making a decision, should we not hold them accountable or wait til they do something you have a direct personal investment in?
My intent was not at all to focus on the racial inequities in society and the church, but the inequities between genders when ordination is discussed. This affects all ethnicities.
Fine. That’s a part of dialogue, particular a heuristic approach. It seems that order comes out of chaos, so our [yours, mine, and others] differing opinions seem chaotic, but as we continue to dialogue, a win-win solution can be developed (Isa.1:18). Our church has been slow on including others from its primarily White male pioneers. The recent vote reflects our slow evolution on the issue (1990–TBD). I’m committed to united order as we discuss from our chaotic and biased reference points. Stay in the discussion.
I am more than gratified that my friend and schoolmate Dr. McCleary has shared this underrepresented perspective with the Atoday blogosphere.
I would also like to associate myself with the comments thus far of Sam Geli on this issue (and sincerely hope that these gentlemen are neither injured nor offended by an(y) association with your truly).
Watch out my fellow OU alumnus or someone might think you ghost wrote this article. Keep talking, somebody is listening and maybe learning as we from them.
I am honored Stephen…thanks for the affirmation. There should be a “fellowship of bloggers” with a “secret salute” and an electronic “handshake?”
We bloggers have to stand together!
Thank you Atoday for the opportunity to express the inner thoughts of our hearts, laying out for all to see, the diverse disunity that exists in the SDA Church. God’s desire for His people is “ONENESS”, as HE and the GODHEAD ARE “one”. Yet, the Church is more fractured today as never before. Stephen Foster, has endlessly expressed this differential racial and cultural division on Atoday. Many have suggested it just a notional perception, only, while in essence it is truly “REALITY”.
The issues of “Racism”, and the issue of “Women’s Ordination”, both, have been a thorn in the side not only of SDA’S existence but of world-wide turmoil and persecution of both.
The cultural divisions of white/black, and male/female are so indelibly imprinted in mankind’s psyche as to never, no never to be solved in the Earth, without the return of Jesus Christ, and all receive His Spirit, and His heavenly body style.
Knowing this for a certainty, let those of us, black/white, and male/female, who live in the GODHEAD, by grace and faith in the Lord Jesus,
support and uphold this “ONENESS” of the GODHEAD. My Bother McCleary, we as Brothers and Sisters in Jesus Christ must uphold and honor all mankind, except those associated with the enemy of OUR GOD.
SDA Divisions to ordain women as Pastors as they felt led by God.
asked to pray for President Obama, request was denied with the retort, “you pray for him”
The first statement, When and how will a Pastor know, FELT LED BY GOD?
Those that are against WO will still be against it even if God hits them over their head. What is God to do to get through to them. A Pastor told us to pray that WO would not go through and then another person is for WO and they pray let it go through. This has nothing to do with prayer it has to do with people and their way of thinking.
And this leads me to the second statement, We are so called (SDA) THE REMNANT CHURCH. We have a LONG ways to go to be the remnant. How can we call ourselves the remnant church when we have still have these problems? How rude is it that the man would not stop and pray for President Obama. We have so many issues, Black and White, we think we are better, and many more.
I like the way the writer says about going out and helping, feeding, and so on. Does not Jesus say if you do these things you are doing to Me. I don’t want to say we but Lot of us don’t want to go out and help others, but look at other churches, they have food kitchens, helping where the need it. We are so busy, are aim is to let others know that we are the right church they are wrong. We give them all the prophecy, our doctrines but we do not help them where it hurts. We need to be out there working to help people where it hurts LIKE…
Seem overwhelmed? Join the rat race. A local solution might be open such a blog where you are. Socrates demonstrated that by asking questions one could get closer to truth. The issues I raised help support my theme that pathologies around gender and race exist in our midst. It is not hopeless however. The fact is that God came to save ungodly humans. Those of us who stand on the sea of glass will have overcome all I talk about and more. What a testimony period that first Prayer Meeting will and beyond. Make your reservation.
The stated intent of the G.C. was unity. But the actions taken resulted in both sides becoming more divisive instead of the desired unity.
Delegates votes do not change the church manual but only indicates personal opinions, and cannot change policy.
Elaine, and others on this on-going analysis of what took place at the GC meeting.We messed up in San Antonio. If we could for a moment come out of our comfort zones and barricades and objectively look at the results of this $40 million exercise and extrapolate to the medical field, where mistakes are also opportunities for learning we might learn a lot from our mistakes. Marianne Paget’s The Unity of Mistakes has long been considered a landmark text on the nature of medical error. We can learn from what she says occurs in the medical field and apply it to what happened in San Antonio. Paget—who herself died because of a medical error—argued that mistakes are “an intrinsic part of the clinical process. The main lesson in her book for current GC administration and those in need of healing after San Antonio is how to remedy and learn from the often muddled concepts of mistake, fault, negligence, and blame. Paget crystallizes the temporal and moral ambiguities of actions that become wrong as they develop, of understandable choices and irreparable harms, of knowing too late. There are so many similarities where narrow thinking, bad timing, and lack of ethics all merge into a tragedy of misunderstanding. I recently spoke to a local conference official who was there and told me that “…the ordination problem is finally settled, and should never rise to the crescendo that it did at least for another five years. We settled it once and for all” Really?
Thank you, Pastor McCleary, for again reminding us of the uncomfortable truth we need to face and change.
“The substratum for unity is humility; and the substratum for humility is love; a love that embraces me as I am and invests in me to be all I can be in Christ and not just as I adapt to a White Euro-centric model of behavior and worship.”
Yes, it is only through love and humility that we can become the church God wants us to be.
I was educated on the need to become more aware of various cultures and their differences when we first went to Singapore as missionaries. I had ignorantly assumed that Canadians, British, Irish, and Australians were no different from me – an American. But I was quickly disabused of that notion, and have tried, since, to learn more fully about the different viewpoints and needs of others – probably an unending quest!
From childhood I read and studied other countries and peoples as an only child living in a rural area. I came to love them and be attracted to them when I left home, thus my friends included Asian and Hispanic–I sought them out. I never had the opportunity in the 60s to know many African-Americans but when I later did, they too were among my friends and are today.
Like Carol I tended to treat them and see them as I did myself and I did find more in common than not. I was truly color-blind. Now I am seeing that attitude put down. I don’t understand it. Now we seem to be majoring on all the things that divide. We seem to want to talk about these things endlessly. How is it helping our relationships.
However, there was a time to stand up against discrimination and I did. Things have changed tremendously since that time, but we are still fighting the same war as if it hadn’t. I don’t understand that. I see African-Americans at church (mostly from he Carribean who have a different outlook). I also see a change in women’s opportunities (only kept back in the church due to cultures outside of the west), yet worldly politicians keep the up the war.
What happens in the world does influence the church, and the race/gender issue has worsened in both due, I believe, to the constant war-mongering.
Of course, there are problems and I haven’t experienced being stopped by police and other insults that exist. They have deeper roots than skin color, I believe, that…
con’t
include isolation, poor education, and a myriad of other things, many government sponsored. A person raised in the urban environment has to fight very hard to get out, and too many don’t know how and accept peer pressure–it’s all they know. I don’t think, if I were in such a situation I could either!
Dr. McCleary is an intellectual and has analyzed the situation well and the gender connection. Now we need solutions and changed hearts and minds that will move us forward not contemplating the past until it squelches our relationships to the point where more will feel uncomfortable with each other.
Pastor Doctor McCleary,
I realize you may have spent your life in NJ and back East, but you would do well to study a little Texas history before using it as a launch-pad for an analysis of GC2015 that is remarkable for its ability to see so much of what transpired there and throughout the church through a single lens, that of racial injustice.
Early Texans were indeed multiethnic and relatively united in their opposition to Santa Anna. But the Alamo was not the “final epic battle” between Santa Anna and the Texan revolutionaries. No, it was closer to the beginning. Afterwards was a long series of rearward actions and retreat as Texas settlers evacuated ahead of Santa Anna’s army, and Texas general Sam Houston endeavored to hold his army together, burn supplies and shelter to deprive Santa Anna of supplies, and strategically retreat until a more favorable opportunity presented itself. That occurred near what is now called Houston. It was at THAT place that the Texans surprised the Mexican encampment, charging in crying, “Remember the Alamo!” (and Goliad). Santa Anna was captured, and the Battle of San Jacinto became the final epic battle.
Maybe there is a lesson there for the church as well. A strategic retreat, followed by a strike using the element of surprise. A good battle cry doesn’t hurt either. I’m not sure that, “Remember Utrecht!” or “Remember Washington Adventist Hospital!” will work as well as, “Remember the Alamo” but one can always…
Which brings to mind the one about that fateful day at the Alamo…
Q. What did Davy Crockett say to Colonel Travis when he looked over the wall of the Alamo and saw all those Mexican men surrounding it?
A. “We pourin’ concrete today?”
That this joke could be told to me by a 4th generation Mexican-American whose ancestors were on Santa Anna’s side but whose great-grandmother was strapped to a burro as a young child and sent unaccompanied across the Rio Grande in hopes that someone would find her and give her a better life, speaks volumes about how much generational change can occur, even when prejudices seem to persist so long. It also says how much difference there can be between new immigrants and their multignerational offspring.
I think that, too, was mirrored in San Antonio. There, we saw the inter-regional conflict between “old” Adventist regions of the North and their “offspring” in the global South. But more serious than that, we also saw the conflict between “old” Adventists and “new” converts with their fundamentalist zeal. It may in fact be that, as with racial division, time and patience will yield the greatest change simply through the inevitable evolution and mingling of generations.
I appreciate your last observation because I also am seeing it happen in a lot of ways. Though the ways of the older generations are driving a tragically large number of our youth out of the church, a growing number of them and others of all ages are embracing personal ministry as Jesus wants and are discovering the power of God that is waiting to work through each of us. The sooner we let these youth and those who have chosen to link-up with the Holy Spirit take over, the better it will be for the church.
Well, I took a “long” in my article to tell my views. If I included your details, you’d probably just finished reading it. I trust you noticed my use of the historical event was a metaphorical bridge and not a history lesson on Texian and Mexican interactions. Your comments further prove “Let every man be persuaded…”
This topic for discussion will continue and I am up to the long journey. I hope you are building unity where you are so God can say to you, “Well done…”
…try. (Why does this software show that you still have several characters left but theen when you post, it gets truncated with ellipses?!).
At the time of this battle Mexico had abolished slavery and the Texans were still mostly slave holders.
Not to defend Santa Ana who was a smalltime bully and tyrant, but the Texas rebellion was very much about slavery and race relations between Anglos and Afros and Hispanics.
Dear Pastor McCleary,
If you have read my comments on previous articles of Adventist Today (or other comments on SSNET), I suspect that you may have had as much trouble understanding my comments as I had understanding your article, After the Alamo and Back Again.
We both use the English language and, presumably, are both dedicated to the advent movement. Those similarities, however, only partly mitigate the differences in the WAYS we use language and the differing assumptions that influence the WAYS we promote present truth.
When we moved to Salt Lake City in 1982, we attended the services of three or four congregations before deciding where to ask that our membership be transferred. One of the congregations met near downtown SLC and consisted of mostly “black” and Tongan members. We liked some of the things about that congregation’s ways of doing things but decided to request that our membership be transferred to a congregation that was predominately Caucasian. Our reason was that the members of the downtown congregation failed to supervise the children. We didn’t want our children (who were three and two at that time) to get in the habit of running in the church building and walking back and forth on the pews during the worship services.
Anyone COULD attribute our decision to racism.
They would be mistaken.
It would be equally a mistake to assume anything about people walking past a booth during the General Conference session.
As you infer that is a mistake for someone to attribute racism to you for your mentioned reasons, so I think you are mistaken for dismissing my reasons. To take a line out of its context is similar to the multiple instances of what I observed during my recent GC experience. Perhaps, you might ask a question of explanation, but to conclude that I am mistaken is beyond your pay grade and ability to navigate my mind and feelings in real time or reflective moments. Your comments make me think of Freud and Adler and Jung who posit theories of unconscious and repressed desires, but not that you are mistaken about your experience. The incarnation of Christ is the best methodology for understanding and solving subjective and social problems–Heb 2. Until I or you or anyone walks in another’s shoes, it is a mistake to override their conclusions about their experience. Michel Foucault and “othering” would be good reading for those of us who truly want to learn about the pain, hurts, and desires for individuals and collectives who too often experience negative differance and differing.
When will we ever learn? Possibly never …
When will we ever learn? Possibly never..
Inequities of Earth creatures. Yes, we all could cite how we each and everyone have been hustled and used by majorities who wield power on Earth, and of being born in the hostile areas of Earth. To some, with a greater degree of life long and continued burden of daily dealing with the lack of love, equality, opportunity, food, covering, shelter, medicines, the basic needs of human creatures. No hope in sight. In what seems a GODLESS world. Yes, there are some humans existing on Earth, in such “actual never ending seemingly God forsaken hellish conditions”, who would perhaps welcome being instantly tossed into an inferno of fire, to escape tomorrows repeat of today. And then there are others of us, many others of us, for reasons of perceived inequality, or of real and perceived persecution, in the world of opportunity, even though blessed with the basics of daily bread, and opportunity, fail to exercise our abilities to participate and “work” for
the lifestyle we desire, but rather refuse to climb out of the darkness that envelops our minds, opts out of the accepted norms of feeding ourselves and ours, and live on the labor of others, of which we will never be satisfied, and must, of desire, resort to crime against those who are providing the daily dole. This does provide opportunity for those willing to opt out, and accept the consequences of the
destruction it brings, but what a legacy for the innocents.
“I believe it will be pivotal because it reflects the deep pathologies that fester in our church around race and gender.”
I have been around a long time and it is not pleasant to see how many are playing the race card. It is the game of the day in numerous venues.
http://jewishworldreview.com/cols/sowell071415.php3
Rich Leon’s take on what The Alamo is all about and how we remember the lessons of that battle
This reaction to San Antonio’s “The Alamo” as a metaphor for the GC meetings and the WO vote, is to be sung to the tune of “The Yellow Rose of Texas”;
There’s that fellow Schwartz in Texas, yes, Michelangelo
And with him comes some trouble, and things you may not know
Now you may think you’re schooled well, on Texas history
But left is right and up is down, in this grand mystery
The story is a so well known, ‘bout that old Alamo
Where brave men gave their last breath, resisting Mexico
But what if Schwartz uncovered, the whole thing was not true
What would Texas justice, consider then to do
The Yellow Rose of Texas, so famous is that song
If it were up to Schwartzy, he’d prove the lyrics wrong
That clown, he has a way with, arriving at the truth
How can this man be so smart, and yet be so uncouth?
—–You can smile, at least a little, it is not a sin!