An Open Letter to My Pastoral and Academic Colleagues
by Lawrence Downing
by Lawrence Downing, August 31, 2014
My purpose in writing this open letter to you, my theological and academic colleagues, is to thank you for the dedication and care you have shown to students and parishioners. The contributions you have made to the Seventh-day Adventist church are significant.
When I read General Conference president Ted Wilson’s speech addressed to the theologians and teachers who attended the ten-day Bible and Science Conference in Las Vegas, Nevada, and St. George, Utah, as reported in the Adventist News Network (ANN) Bulletin of August 19, 2014, I could not help but wonder what thoughts his statements generated. (The GC News Network Bulletin for the same date has a link to the transcript of his speech.)
What thoughts surfaced when you heard Wilson say that if you, an employee of a Seventh-day Adventist institution, do not believe in a recent creation, meaning 6,000 years, that took place in six literal 24-hour days followed by the seventh day Sabbath rest, you should resign? He claimed the Bible and Ellen White as the authorities that led to his conclusions. The same books you read, but with very different interpretations and conclusions!
In explicit language, Wilson throws down the gauntlet: Believe as I say Seventh-day Adventists believe or do the honorable thing. Resign!
I thought how Wilson’s statements impact you scientists. How unfortunate, if not unreasonable, for a church administrator to demand that you ignore or deny the evidence that leads to a conclusion on the earth that is far removed from what the GC president stated. What are you anthropologists to do when when the evidence you’ve seen in your field of study leads to conclusions that exceed the model that Wilson demands? Resign? Ignore? Be patient—take a “this too shall pass” attitude?
I ponder how scholars, trained to pursue where evidence leads, will respond when a person who has potential to impact careers makes demands upon those who spend their lives examining data he knows little to nothing about.
Little surprise that some will question who gave this man authority to define a “genuine” Adventist. Where is it written that the president of the General Conference is empowered to be the judge of who is and who is not a “true” Seventh-day Adventist? He is certainly aware that only one entity within the Seventh-day Adventist structure has authority to define who is and who is not a Seventh-day Adventist, and that is the local Seventh-day Adventist congregation!
My theological colleagues, our scientists are not the only ones under threat. You theologians have not escaped Wilson’s demands. The devil’s work, he said, is evidenced in the methods associated with the historical-critical method. There is no place in the Adventist church, he declares, for this demonic practice, nor are those welcome who make use of this heinous method. (Is he unaware that Adventists have for decades employed the methods of textual criticism to support and promote Ellen White and her writings? When the GC “baptizes” a demonic source, is it then exorcised?) A similar question: When the GC president invites non-Seventh-day Adventists to address a conference he sponsors, it is acceptable. When others invite non-Seventh-day Adventists to address their meetings, it is not. How so?
Some may wonder how it is that this man is so free to make such sweeping pronouncements about a system he apparently little understands. Does he, with limited theological expertise, have the gift of defining what is and what is not a tool of the devil? Will this man’s mandate force some of our responsible theologians, like the Waldenses of old, to practice their craft in secret places? I join you in asking who bestowed upon this man authority to remove an important tool that is part of the theologian’s trade?
When Wilson’s remarks are considered in a package, why does not one of his peers look him in the eye and say, “Sir, enough of this!” Surely there are others than “Yes” men who occupy administrative posts. Or is what he said reflective of what church administrators believe?
The concern I have for our biblical scholars and science teachers reaches beyond one man’s statements. He, in fact, cannot terminate any scholar. What he can do is use his Bully Pulpit as GC president to proclaim his opinions. In the statements he made to those assembled at the Bible Science conference he has opened the door and given a welcome to those who will make it their work to report, and at times persecute, loyal and honorable Seventh-day Adventists whom they perceive deviate from the “Truth,” as they understand it. When this occurs, and it will, who will stand to support our scholars? Pastors have some insulation from the darts church administrators and others may toss their way. A congregation in their corner gives a pastor some security. There is recognition, however reluctant, among church administrators that there is only one goose in this denomination that lays the Golden Eggs—the local parish! Fry that goose and the denomination’s goose is cooked, too. Who is in the teachers’ corner? Do church administrators give a hoot when in-debt students protest because a favorite science or religion teacher is terminated? As the military responds when armament directed toward the enemy takes out civilians, including women and children, “It is collateral damage.” An educational organization’s governing board may offer some protection, although church administrators have significant presence and influence on college and university boards.
In the process of exploring how various Seventh-day Adventist professionals are affected by Wilson’s mandates, give some thought to the parish minister. Not every Seventh-day Adventist church member shouts Amen when, in their view, a bureaucrat in Silver Spring, Maryland, tells them what to believe about creation, the age of the earth and what theological tools are and are not acceptable. Be assured, there will be people, no one knows how many, who will say, “That’s what I must believe to be a Seventh-day Adventist? Not a problem. I’m out-a-here!” The pastor is left holding the bag. The pastor is the one responsible to struggle with the fall-out created by someone geographically, theologically and logically far removed. The pastor attempts to calm the distressed alienated members. The pastor’s best efforts to bring some solution to a problem she/he did not create do not make for a pleasant experience.
President Wilson’s statements that threaten and intimidate honorable men and women cause one to contemplate whether his chosen methods to purify the church have some antecedent in the Inquisition. History informs us that the Inquisition was intended to bring unity to the True Church, save men’s souls and assure a unified and purified body. It failed. Church employees and others are confronted, not with physical threat, but threats of another kind. “Believe as I say or find other employment and another church.” The years of service given? Let them go! Financial responsibilities and career decisions? Let them go! We who look from the outside cannot imagine the negative impact this statement has had on the families of those under threat. Suddenly, spouses and children face an uncertain economic future. The established social and spiritual lives may end. Questions multiply: “Shall I resign or continue?” “How will this decision affect our marriage and our children?” It is unfortunate you are confronted with this unnecessary trauma. May the Almighty One be with you and guide you as you seek a satisfactory response. We can but pray a better day awaits.
The abuse of spiritual power is one attribute by which Adventists identify the Beast Power. Spiritual intimidation and manipulation is a common trait cult leaders use to impose their will on their followers.
My hope for you, my valued and respected colleagues, is that life will not be made more difficult by Wilson’s pronouncements. There is sufficient challenge that comes through the ordinary run of your respective professions. Once, from a more ancient time than ours, it is reported that a man said something to this effect: “If you are attempting to carry the world on your shoulders, come to me. I will help you and give you rest.” He it is who is quoted as saying, “I will in no way cast you out.” These revolutionary statements, some suggest, apply even to Adventist scientists, theologians and pastors. And so they do!
Shalom aleichem,
Larry Downing
Colleague in Ministry
Hi Larry,
If this were my church, I would circulate a contrary statement over the signatures of as many colleagues as possible. Would Elder Wilson have you all fired and/or excommunicated? And if so, who would want to belong to such an organization anyway?
Joe and Larry,
The Seventh-day Adventist seminary has issued a statement over their collective signature with regard to 'headship' theology. It is not so much the contents of the document, as the endorsement of the document by the seminary as a faculty that attracts my attention.
This document in effect puts the full weight of the seminary behind the defense of any of its faculty with regard to possible witch hunts by those across the church who hold minority or even majority points of view with regard to a theological matter that fails to meet consensus status. Headship being the most calamitous such matter at the moment.
It would not be unexpected for the faculties in Seventh-day Adventist colleges and universities to collectively rise to the opportunity before them, as the Seminary appears to have risen.
This opportunity is to make clear their position in support of scripture as it is written and in support of the climate of Holy Spirit-led collegiality and community that has supported and continues to support the Seventh-day Adventist church.
It is in the context of this community that the faculty can state that they fully support the continuing historical practice of reviewing, exploring, modifying, and even replacing of Seventh-day Adventist historical beliefs.
And the faculties may be more specific by noting that for change to occur, for beliefs to be expanded or constrained or left to history, as they have so often been to the benefit of the church and in full harmony with God’s revealed will, it is necessary for the church to continue to embrace those who see beyond the insights the Holy Spirit allowed to be embraced once but may no longer be expected to support in the present. Indeed, this is but the continuation by the church of embracing the advice and practice of its founding prophet, Ellen White.
… appropriate passages regarding her support of a professor at Battle Creek college teaching what she herself confirmed that she did not hold as truth at that time for this very reason, and her confidence that no belief is at risk by being re-measured by a new generation of believers.
It is important that the colleges and universities are clear about their rightful confirmation of interdependence with the church and their right under God to be supported by the church in fully, openly and even arduously exploring how the beliefs and practices of the church can be made more to harmonize with God’s present and future will and revelation for Seventh-day Adventists. It is appropriate for the faculties to affirm that present truth in 1850 was not baby steps to where we are today, but rather was the full and complete truth for the time as God was willing to reveal it, though it was proven to be insufficient for today. And as such, today’s beliefs stand in that same position and must be open to the same Spirit of revelation that has safely and continuously moved Seventh-day Adventist understanding of God’s truth.
There may not be a rush, though getting out in front of the matter as the Seminary seems to have done, seems wise from a distance.
It appears the GC Pres. is his own coach and sounding board. On one hand he talks "UNITY", and yet he is currently the most powerful cause of "DISUNITY" in the SDA CHURCH!!!!
He has the audacity, to accuse the SDA Theological Schools of Religion, professors and scholars, of
persuing Scholarship research, that is providing knowledge that is opposed to his own personal 19th century positions. And stating they are not Adventists in good standing with his GOD ordained views, and should resign…… Does this man have a cancer in his brain???? First of all, i believe the staff of the SDA Schools of Religion to be employees of the individual Schools, not the GC.
Ted Wilson is certainly not a professional leader, with his expressed contempt of the most learned Scholars of the SDA Schools, and also every teacher in the SDA School system, and every pastor in Conference churches.
This Ted Wilson, employee of the SDA CHURCH AT LARGE, should be recalled by the constituacy immediately, and replaced. He is ill. He should be given an ultimatum to resign, immediately, because he is a threat to the UNITY demanded by God's church, his people. If the different parts of the church do not rise at this time, and together recall Ted Wilson, this dictator will cause a terrible schism, and many heads will roll.
The so-called “shaking” as I’ve always understood it has long been underway within Adventism. Personally, I applauded Ted Wilson’s election in 2010 because, as I said at the time, “at least he is an SDA” (meaning that at least he is a historic Adventist in terms of his outlook).
Wilson is serving at a tumultuous time. Times were tumultuous when he was elected. His statements are reflective of an existential schism. They are not the cause thereof.
Frankly, anyone would be hard pressed to encapsulate the situation we’re in any better than Larry “Bugs” has on another thread. He and others have taken the intellectually honest course with regard to their beliefs. Bugs wrote, “My question is, what right do you have to compel the club to adjust its doctrines to meet your criteria? Those critics are correct who say a church with your viewpoints would no longer be SDA. Start your own version of a church with your rules. I left the Adventist church about forty years ago because of a whole range of mental gymnastics I could no longer stomach. I realized I was no longer SDA. You really aren't either.” Wilson may agree.
So why should Wilson’s position as GC president inhibit his freedom to express opinion? He knows he can’t personally excommunicate anyone; and isn’t lobbying for any such power. On the other hand, I would think he is an ex officio board member of General Conference operated institutions and organizations. As such he would and should have a vote with regard to some personnel.
As an aside, in fairness, whenever Ted Wilson’s statements are referenced, they should be quoted and not paraphrased (or otherwise summarized). Actually, this should apply to anyone’s statements.
Lawrence,
Issues of science vs. scripture will not be resolved by furthering endless debate. But that is not the issue we need to be addressing. Instead, we should be focusing our energies on deepening our relationship with God. He is capable of redeeming, renewing and regenerating us. So He is equally capable of dealing with this issue by keeping us focused on Him and our relationship with Him. There is no need for us to know what is fact or fiction about creation or for us to debate the issue. There is massive need for us to be knowing Him first and foremost.
William, you will not successfully dismiss the issue disclosed herein with the Pablum, marshmallows, feel-good solution you offer. The legitimacy of the SDA church is at stake. Your solution doesn't need a church (in that sense I agree with you).
There is truth and falsehood in regard to the reality of the six day creation.
And there is a need to know if the cosmology presently learned by the scientific world can be accepted as fact by the church because on that issue rests the future membership of thinking Adventists. If the church continues on the present course, which it has the right to do, the intellectuals will become the goats partitioned from the sheep. They will have to confess their "error," exercise massive mental reservations, or exit. (Does sound a bit like that darned papacy where correct thinking was the order of the day, albeit with more dire consequences!)
Help me out, but isn't it the General Conference that raised the issue of the need to edit and tighten the latitude for Adventist belief in creation? I don't think Adventist Today inaugurated this theme, nor do I believe our readers should be unconcerned about the direction the General Conference is trending. It is my humble opinion that young people, in particular, often take a long time these days to actually come to terms with creationism, and may actually join the Church while somewhat ambiguous on this question. To seriously set the boundaries in a much more restrictive manner could seriously stand in the way of dialogue with young people who wish to follow Jesus, but find acceptance of literal creationism too much to swallow at the onset.
Yes, we all accept that God is the Creator, but God is also a Spirit and moves in mysterious ways. Much about the power and working of the Holy Spirit is not well understood, even by those who read the Bible very carefully. Surely God does not require us all to interpret those chapters in identical ways for the Church to move forward. We do not all agree, for example, on the nature and purpose of the 144,000, but the Church moves onward nonetheless. No harm is done (it appears) by not insisting that the 144,000 is a literal number, as the JWs do.
What elder Wilson stated in regards to creation of the earth is not his original individual opinion. He just was reflecting what the SDA Church held since its foundation. No sir this is not an imposition of “a bureaucrat in Silver Springs, MD, about creation”. The association to the SDA church is a voluntary one. I concur with Stephen when he wrote: “Frankly, anyone would be hard pressed to encapsulate the situation we’re in any better than Larry “Bugs” has on another thread. He and others have taken the intellectually honest course with regard to their beliefs. Bugs wrote, “My question is, what right do you have to compel the club to adjust its doctrines to meet your criteria? Those critics are correct who say a church with your viewpoints would no longer be SDA. Start your own version of a church with your rules. I left the Adventist church about forty years ago because of a whole range of mental gymnastics I could no longer stomach. I realized I was no longer SDA. You really aren't either.” Wilson may agree.”
Are there any Glaciers to be Viewed from Las Vegas? That question may be a bit premature. No identified heretic is on trial there at this conference. Rather, an idea is on trial.
I gather that the implications this time around are that a large number of employees are threatened with loss of job, etc. Is this now a case of suffering for one's beliefs? It was ever thus. Sadly. As one who was given his marching orders last time around, there actually are greener pastures out there, if the Lord is your Shepherd. Be not afraid.
Mormonism wouldn't exist without Brigham Young. Adventist can't exist without Ellen White. And that is where the problem is. And that kept me from being SDA.
The investigative judgment, the 144,000, the age of the earth, the close of probation, the great controversy, the remnant, the three angels message, the Sabbath, to name a few, were doctrines she supported as the core of Adventism. Where she is concerned, perception is reality. Regardless of her view of her role, which isn't entirely clear, she was adopted as a prophet. With that elevation came authority.
As a minister years ago, when I was analyzing doctrines and reviewing my relationship to them, I had thoughts that maybe I could be a nice force for change if I stayed in. I soon realized that wasn't possible because to do so was to go against the prophet. I would have been a toy hammer pounding on an anvil. Change wasn't/isn't possible. I couldn't effect change for the unchangeable. I sensed the ethical issue of being paid to promote a view I couldn't reflect.
Other denominations, without this central "prophet" have made adjustments to the distress of a few. Even Catholicism has allowed itself to be reluctantly aligned with science, with some modifications. You can be Catholic, for instance, and believe that the human body is a result of evolution, but not the soul. No such accommodations are allowed in Adventism because the prophet has spoken.
Ellen is the doctrinal soul of the Adventist Church. Even the pope doesn't have power equal to her. She purchased and resold Ussher. Therefore, you can't have a fourteen billion old universe with her in charge. Ellen is the issue the intellectual modifiers don't seem to recognize.
So, I add to my statement quoted above. Not only what right exists for the modifiers to rearrange Adventist theology. What chance do you really have under the scenario I have outlined.
Ellen White herself is quoted as telling us that her purpose in publishing is to draw readers back to the Bible . I think all is not gloom, if we recognize that elevating her writings to canonical status and beyond is in fact the most blatant act of desecrating her writings, and making them as nothing. Many very careful and purposeful Adventists imagine that ignoring Ellen White's writings is the nadir of apostasy, when in fact a much stronger case can be made that giving too much authority to her corpus of writing is undoubtedly the most ungodly and destructive act we can perpetrate on her and on her beloved legacy and church. By contrast, Brigham Young and Joseph Smith clearly taught that the latter-day writings from their inspired pens and the lips of Moroni superseded the authority of the traditional Bible. In that sense, the Mormons are caught in a much deadlier bind than we are as we work to understand how Ellen White's writings should be regarded in our continuing pursuit of Present Truth…. Sister White never says (or at least I have not found any citation) that her writings are to become more and more important and saliant as time elapses. She says this of the Bible and of the lovely Jesus, but not of her own writings. Perhaps there's a serious lesson here for our church…it certainly has guided my thoughts through the years, and I am a great admirer of Ellen White as a leader, writer and exhorter of the Little Flock.
I should have cited Joeseph Smith, not Brigham Young in my post. He's the guy that found the gold plates and is considered the prophet.
Elder Wilson ignores Ellen White when she speaks against some of his pronouncements. She hits the nail on the head in the following statement.
In Manuscript Release #898 printed in Ellen G. White Manuscript Releases, Vol. II , pp. 261-9, we find a whole
series of interesting thoughts from EGW. She writes,
"Christ prayed that His disciples might be one even as He and His Father are one. In what does this unity consist? This oneness does not exist because everyone has the same disposition, the same temperament, and thinks in the very same channel. All do not possess the same degree of intelligence. In a church there are different gifts and varied experiences. In temporal matters there are a great variety of ways of management, and yet these variations in manner of labor, in the exercise of gifts, do not create dissension, discord, and disunion.
One man may be conversant with the Scriptures, and some particular portion of the Scripture may be especially appreciated by him; another sees another portion as very important, and thus one may present one point, and another, another point, and both may be of highest value. This is all in the order of God. But if a man makes a mistake in his interpretation of some portion of the Scripture, shall this cause diversity and disunion? God forbid. We cannot then take a position that the unity of the church consists of viewing every text of Scripture in the very same light. The church may pass resolution upon resolution to put down all disagreement of opinion, but we cannot force the mind and will, and thus root out disagreement. These resolutions may
conceal the discord, but they cannot quench it and establish perfect agreement. Nothing can perfect unity in the church but the spirit of Christlike forbearance. Satan can sow discord; Christ alone can harmonize the disagreeing element. Then let every soul sit down in Christ's school and learn of Christ, who declares Himself to be meek and lowly of heart. Christ says that if we learn of Him, worries will cease and we shall find rest to our souls.
Bugs surely has pointed to the core issue here, how to see Ellen White in the church today. I’m glad Bugs is still with us.
Edwin makes the point that ‘many very careful and purposeful Adventists imagine that ignoring Ellen White’s writings is the nadir of apostasy.’ Bugs surely has found this to be his experience, too. And with Edwin and others, still. Let me note, though, I would prefer the verb, feel rather than imagine.
David brings Ellen White to her own rescue. “Satan can sow discord; Christ alone can harmonize the disagreeing element. … Christ says that if we learn of Him, worries will cease and we shall find rest to our souls.”
Isn’t this beautiful. Settling disagreements is not how disagreements are harmonized. Turning to Jesus is how we find common ground. Oh, and this is not an isolated experience. Indeed, isolation is the growing medium of discord.
Edwin Markham found the metaphor in his memorable lines …
He drew a circle that shut me out—
Heretic, rebel, a thing to flout.
But love and I had the wit to win:
We drew a circle and took him In!
This poem was published just two years before Ellen White’s death, and no doubt long after she wrote the manuscript David references.
Bill missed the point I was trying to make
We cannot then take a position that the unity of the church consists of viewing every text of Scripture in the very same light. The church may pass resolution upon resolution to put down all disagreement of opinion, but we cannot force the mind and will, and thus root out disagreement. These resolutions may
conceal the discord, but they cannot quench it and establish perfect agreement.
David, your point is surely right in terms Ellen White's conviction regarding he futility of votes as a means of settling disagreements. What I am attracted to is her willingness to move toward and then with Jesus, disagreements and all. I may well be taking a few liberties with her passage, though not many do you think?
Bill. You are doing great. I always come back to John 13:35 where Jesus defines who is a true disciple. "By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another." This is why I enjoy dialoging with Joe so much. He and I disagree in some important areas but he is never disagreeable and I hope that I am the same.
Wilson is correct in inviting those who do not believe in Creation as depicted in the Bible and accepted by the SDA church to find employment in another venue. That is the only honorable action to take. Wilson is only emphasizing what the SDA church has taught for decades. To disparage him for accepting and commenting on church doctrine is an egregious response to his exhortations.
Maranatha
For in the last days…
Thanks David,
A prominent measure of AToday that I so appreciate is the sense of community that sustains the comment threads. This surely is the result of intent as well as example by those leading at AToday.
Many thanks, again!
To All concerned:
I don't have the priviledge of attending our church as the Texico Conf closed our small church in Alpine, TX – So the article and responses weighs heavy on me.
I'm sure the devil is delighted at the arguing amonst ourselves which takes focus away from moving forward and growing as Christians. If I am understanding the discussion = "it would appear to me" that some are taking issue with the Genesis Creation stance of our "Once Church", and other selected established stands.
Would all of you like for example: for me to put down Union College in Lincoln, NE for not having Robert Leiske (now deceased) stand good for his commitment to the school for my educational expenses; when in-fact after he refused to stand good on his commitment to Union College, they sued me for tuition and fees. I lost a career to that decision – should I hold the whole church is distain for that? I make the choice not to, as it advances nothing.
When people of other beliefs see this bickering amonst ourselves – they go the other way. So haven't we hurt our own cause?
I pray for God's intervention by blessing us with guidance from the Holy Spirit.
Thanks. Rob