Vote for Jack?
If you vote for Jack he promises to resign…
by Jack Hoehn, June 17, 2015: “Hello, I was thinking of running for the office of President of the General Conference next month in San Antonio, and was wondering if I could count on your support?”
Motivated by the excitement in American political parties for the office of President of the United States, including a Seventh-day Adventist (retired neurosurgeon Dr. Ben Carson) as one candidate, and another candidate with an Adventist wife (US Senator Ted Cruz’s wife, Heidi), at least 6 announced or likely candidates are going to ask for the Democratic party nomination, and 20 Republicans have or will thrown their hats into the ring. Ben Carson is African-American, Hillary Clinton is a woman, and Lindsay Graham has never married. Some, such as Senator Cruz, are Hispanic, Governor Bobby Jindal of Louisiana has east-Indian parents and there are lots of married white guys running for the job, so Americans can’t say they don’t have any choices.
But in addition to these 26 prominent souls from the dominant parties, there are literally hundreds of other candidates for the presidency of the USA from smaller third parties like the American Freedom Party, the Constitution Party, the Green Party, the Justice Party, the Libertarian Party, the Objectivist Party, the Peace and Freedom Party, the Reform Party USA, the Socialist Party USA, and then my personal favorites, the Independents of no party who number in the scores, usually as write-in candidates, but who have filed in one or more states to be on the ballot.
So after I form an exploratory committee of “Jack for President of the GC,” and set up an advisory board of senior politicians (whoops, I mean senior church administrators), and most important of all, when I start getting enough large cash donations from all of you to fund a major TV campaign promoting my virtues to be president of the General Conference of the Seventh-day Adventist church, I think it only wise that we have more than one candidate for this office.
If the mere presidency of only one of the 196 nations on the face of this earth (admittedly, one of the larger ones) is important enough to generate this much interest and so many choices, surely the administrative head of God’s work on earth deserves a little more interest than just a chance to live in the White House and fly around on Air Force One.
So why, dear fellow Adventists, should you vote for me?
Well, modesty and an unfortunate lack of necessary qualifications keep me from filling too many pages with the reasons to consider me as your next General Conference President, but here are a few things to consider as you decide who should lead God’s church on earth. I can think of a few minor virtues that might make you consider me, or perhaps another of the hundreds of other qualified candidates that I am sure could be worthy of the GC presidency:
- Firstly I am not a Bush, or a Kennedy, or a Clinton, or a Wilson. My father was not a President, so I don’t have to stand in my dad’s shadow and prove myself just as good a man as he.
- Second I don’t have any obligations to anyone in our church; I haven’t worked for anyone else; I haven’t even supported anyone else. No one owes me anything, and I don’t owe anyone anything.
- Thirdly I’m financially independent (family physicians don’t roll in the dough like other specialties, but I earn enough to pay taxes). So I am not overly impressed when people with lots of money from making and selling junk-food, cement mixers, mixed nuts, or garbage trucks try to tell me that things in the church have to be done their way or they will stop sending me their tithe. I’d point out to them that since I am self-supporting I don’t need their tithe. And if God does they’d better discuss this with Him and not me.
- I am not an American, although I live here. I am Canadian-born. I have lived in Austria and learned how to speak German. I lived in Lesotho and learned how to speak a little Sesotho, and also lived in Zambia for 9 years. I have lived in London, England. I love Americans, and married one, but I realize other points of view exist in this world than the American point of view. I consider this a virtue for the president of the General Conference.
- Sadly, although I lived in Africa for 13 years, I am not black or a woman; otherwise, I think I should be a shoo-in for the job in a church founded by a woman whose members are largely females of color.
- I am quite sure that God has not called me as His personal champion to defend truth, or to protect His doctrines from you. I am very willing to let all God-fearing Seventh-day Adventist people of good will have differences of interpretation, and would function as a facilitator and peace maker among different factions. I would let you decide if you want to drink Postum or coffee to keep awake during my sermons, and not drive all the coffee sellers out of the stadium to deprive you of your freedom of choice.
- I would get a large rubber stamp for my desk, and to all suggestions from different parts of the world, I would apply this stamp to your suggestion. The stamp would say:
YES, GREAT IDEA. NOW YOU FIGURE OUT HOW TO MAKE IT WORK!
- Finally, if elected, as my first executive action, I would immediately request the resignation of everyone over 50 from any top office, to step down into a service or pastoral ministry. I’d let the young and vigorous take God’s work forward for the 21st century and the advancement of truth. And I’d free up the older to care for children, visit the slums, help build houses for the homeless. I’d ask our children and their friends, to lead us forward into God’s will for today, instead of dragging Adventism backwards to the weakness and partial truths of our past.
So there you have my 8 point platform, dear fellow Adventists. Vote for me, and I will as my first executive action resign myself and take with me all the officers under my control who are older than God said should serve him. You do believe the Bible is inspired truth, don’t you? Then how could you be opposed to the implementation of Numbers 8:24-26:
“This applies to the Levites: Men twenty-five years old or more shall come to take part in the work at the tent of meeting, but at the age of fifty, they must retire from their regular service and work no longer. They may assist their brothers in performing their duties at the tent of meeting, but they themselves must not do the work. This, then, is how you are to assign the responsibilities of the Levites.”
God regulated the priestly office and limited the age of His church leaders to 25 to 50 years. Anyone younger or older was not eligible to have a leadership position, male headship or no. So why don’t we follow this plan? God said it, I believe it, that settles it, as far as my “exploratory candidacy” is concerned.
(By the way, shouldn’t all delegates to the General Conference adhere to that Biblical age requirement? The rest of us younger and older than that can go to work for them as support staff, but not as voting delegates or leaders.)
What’s that you say? You want to vote for me, but you can’t, since we don’t vote for our church president? You say this is all handled by a small group of delegates behind closed doors? Sounds like old-fashioned party politics to me.
Well, if you are on the GC Nominating Committee could you just nominate me as a surprise write-in-candidate? Or at least consider the five, twenty, or hundreds of other people who just might make an excellent president of the General Conference, given the chance? And please remember the age for leadership the Bible advises. No one under 25, no one over 50.
Well, couldn’t you at least send me a cash contribution for my “exploratory campaign”? Or better yet, perhaps you should send a donation to Adventist Today. https://atoday.org/product/gc-coverage-donation
That way, if I am ever elected, or perhaps someone is elected who is even more qualified for the job than me, you’d be the first to know….
Apparently Moses and Aaron and Caleb and Joshua were unaware of your proposed 50-and-out rule?
Unfortunately for your cause, the youngest GC President in recent history did not survive to complete his first term. And those who serve on the GC nominating committee have not forgotten. And they tend to be rather risk-averse people.
On a lighter note, in (1) you omitted the Adams and Roosevelt families from your list. Trading on the name recognition of a famous relative is really not that new in politics (secular or religious).
I think the age limit only applied to priests, not prophets. That explains Moses and Caleb being over 50. Not sure about Aaron (was it only his sons who were priests, not him personally)? Which sort are our GC leaders?
Jack,
Written with your tongue planted firmly in your cheek, I presume! I loved it. You have definitely given me a smile on a morning when I needed one.
About following Numbers 8:24-26, now that is some timely guidance we would do well to follow!
As I’ve remarked to people, the SDA Church likes to make fun of the monarchy of the RC Church. We like to think we’re democratic. But we’re about as democratic as the Chinese Government.
The Chinese government is much more democratic, and tolerant, than the SDA church.
Great satirist, Jack. We can certainly use more humor in the church politics as it is often so seriously deadly that if often seems on terminal life support. Should “assisted suicide” be suggested or simply let it fade into oblivion all unassisted? Many of its children are unwilling to continue the cost of maintaining it for what possible reason?
If there weren’t a minimum letter count for a comment I’d have just replied, Go Jack!
For the record “The General Conference president
shall be an ordained minister of experience.” http://www.ted-adventist.org/sites/default/files/(06)Gcwp-ConstitutionBylaws.pdf
Yes, I find it ironic that the site is: ted-adventist.org … and I know it is the Trans European Division site …
And it is also interesting that this is the site that Google first directs to that lists the GC Constitution when searching for: requirements for the office of president of the general conference of sda
And when searching for “CONSTITUTION OF THE GENERAL CONFERENCE OF SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTISTS” the TED site is the first listed. And adventist.org “The official site of the Seventh-day Adventist church” is not listed by Google, which means the official site of the church does not reference the constitution.
Amen, Jack! A great piece.
Now if you can just find a few capable 25- to 50-year-olds to run against you [to make it a fair contest], I’ll propose this at the San Antonio GC Session!
There is very serious aspect of what Jack has suggested.
It would be helpful for the credibility of the church at a time when its credibility is at a all time low, for some delegate to move that the floor be opened for nominations for President of the General Conference from the floor. The most powerful group at the GC session is the Nominating Committee and they have a strangle hold on all of the nominations. Everything has to go through them, which means that they control can be considered to be a GC president.
The “who” are members of the the clerical elites of the church. That system needs to be shaken up and the only way is one or two delegates with courage to stand up to the political machine.
By the way, I trust that everyone is aware that none of these suggestions assume anything on the part of the church leadership other than they are running a corporate, highly institutionalized church with a complex political system. These are not–repeat not–in any sense “bad people.” In fact, I suspect that are mostly fine, upstanding, very moral individuals.
“Complex political systems” can become corrupt political systems. The current system in the Adventist church is conducive to the old political systems of the U.S. in the past where the president was chosen by corporate and wealthy contributors in “smoke-filled” back rooms and then presented to the national delegates for their votes.
When the members have little or no influence in choosing their leaders, they lose interest in other participation when they are called to contribute their money or time.
Jack,
You’ve got my vote!
Ervin, let alone the floor of the GC. I wish some one delegate (and 2 of my former classmates at academy in Canada: Lowell Cooper and Dan Jackson) would have the fortitude to stand up in the NOMINATING COMMITTEE AT THE BEGINNING and make a speech saying, “we need a uniter not a divider for president” let us make sure Ted Wilson retires and we nominate a man or woman like former Elder Paulsen to be our next President. The problem is you are right, most of those on that committee are lapdogs for the top leadership. Who can break the endless cycle?
The established leaders have a DISincentive to upset the status-quo. Not that they are corrupt, but they believe that they themselves need to remain in power to keep out the ones who might be corrupt. The only way to clean the house is with a broom large enough to catch all the dust.
Hi, Jack
I seem to recall that:
1. None of the people chosen to be the first church leaders were pastors.
2. Moses was “let go” while still in excellent health and when he argued about it, he was told not to mention it again – though he did get a good retirement package!
Floyd Petersen (Rusangu, “69-’76)
Jack, my husband and I are 4th Gen. SDA and 77 yrs. old. We have lived it, seen it. SO—–you have our vote. I know a couple of younger pastors that would fit your running mate. The Auburn Calif. church and the Elmshaven Calif. church pastors. Wonderful upbeat and God’s Grace loving men.
Hey I’m all for an open contest, let these young whippersnappers have a go at it. After all how old was Jesus when he saved humanity? About 30, I think it says. So make the 25 year old’s vice presidents, and let the 30 year olds fight it out with me for the top office. 🙂
Virginia,
There is a (somewhat cynical?) case to be made that nothing impairs the work of the SDA church quite as much as taking able pastors in their prime years of service, and promoting them to become institutional bureaucrats who still like to think of themselves “pastors”.
The Pope is a “pastor” and the Bishops are his “congregation”.
May I suggest:
1.The Nominating Committee bring a list of seven (7) qualified names for the office of GC President?
2.Place those names in seven sealed envelopes, which are placed in a glass (see through) fish bowl and
3.at random choose three delegates (who are not on the payroll of the SDA Church) to come up to the platform, and
4.draw envelopes.
5.After drawing the envelopes, they stand in order with a sign clearly labeling each of them “One,” “Two” and “Three.”
6.Then ask the entire delegate body to electronically select one, two or three.
7.The one that gets the highest vote is asked to step up to the mic, open the envelope and read the name to the voting delegates. The proper phrasing would be, Mr. Chairman, the Nominating Committee in counsel with the delegates as a whole and under the direction of the Holy Spirit nominate Elder XXX to serve the church as the next General Conference President. Mr. Chairman I move the acceptance of this nomination.
Hard to come up with the seven names to choose from? Ask the nominating committee to nominate names, which are placed on the whiteboard. Discuss the names as to their qualifications. Take straw votes until the list is reduced to seven names.
Want to add some interest to the process and still be thoughtful? It could work and it would still get the job done, AND there would be more than a handful of delegates on the floor to receive the report.
What do you think?
Allen, if there may be hidden weaknesses your plan has that I don’t see right away, it sure sounds better that what is happening now! I like it.
Jack, I’ll vote for you. You can then move the GC office to Las Vegas where I live!!
Sorry, Lester, I’ve been to Las Vegas and couldn’t agree. But perhaps one of the 30 year olds might agree?
Where do all the big $$ go that we pay to family physicians? 🙂
Here is a statement about youthfulness:
“Many of today’s young people have special gifts and abilities. But giftedness in performing certain functions does not necessarily mean those abilities should be employed in spiritual worship or outreach. The fact that a person can play a set of drums, or dance, or even perform magical illusions and acrobatics does not mean we need gospel rock, gospel dancing, gospel magicians or gospel acrobats in church. If this were the case, we would have to insist that gospel footballers and gospel baseball pitchers should use their special gifts during worship services. Rather, we must seek to encourage young people who are truly converted to use their gifts in ways appropriate to the worship service of the Holy God, while not putting them in positions that expose them too early to the dangers of spiritual pride and arrogance(see 1 Tim3:6).”
Hey, Interested Old Friend, I didn’t make these rules up. If you think Paul’s advice to a problem in Corinth or Ephesus means women can never pastor, how do you wiggle out of God’s instructions about age of Priests? Let’s have a little consistency in our exegesis.
In all my years I have never seen those verses about priests over 50 stepping out of leadership and into assisting the new priests. Some might say this was mailed to the cross. So far in 2015 all the high powered camp meeting speakers are imploring the members to loosen up on legalism. Tougher to do with so many priests over 50. As someone over 50 it seems God has a principle worth exploring.
Yes Glen, I agree. What should have been nailed to the cross with Jesus is the human (may I also add male) pride that says, “only I with all my ‘experience’ am capable of leading this church. The younger and none male just don’t have my gifts.” That is what I think should have been nailed together with our young Savior on His precious cross. John the Baptist understood it: “He must increase, and I must decrease.” The Adventist church is obviously failing to meet the needs of the young and educated in this world. Why would we want 5 more years of the same old tired and ineffective plans?
Yes! You have my vote, Jack! 😀
Debbonnaire, that’s now at least 15 committed votes I have, only 18 million more Adventists left to convince!
Dear Jack,
What a great article. You have my vote. We have such a dearth of leaders created when Dr. Ford was dismissed. This has led to many unwanted and incompetent leaders who are not up to it.
We could do well to move the G.C. headquarters out of U.S.A.
The unwanted influence of Ellen white will never diminish while we remain in Washington.And because of our stubborness we cannot change.
Jack,
I enjoyed reading this; thank you for the smiles.
Good one Jack.
Loved the humor and politics and religion mixed together.
If you were president, would you, unlike Ted, remember your missionary roots and find a way to increase the Mission budget about 1.7%?
If you were president, would you change the symbol of the GCSA15? I do think it shows our wonderful support of the Supreme Court decision and thus makes me proud of the GC for making such a bold, courageous, and loving stand for equality and tolerance.
The advent MOVEMENT will continue until Jesus returns, regardless of what the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists does or fails to do. Christians need to to develop a new KIND of evangelism. My suggestion is that it be LAY evangelism funded through an organization that does not knowingly accept tithe funds and neither pays clergy nor has clergy making any of the decisions. If we could get back to the doctrine that spiritual authority is given to each Christian directly by God (aka the priesthood of all believers) and that the role of the clergy is serve as resource people to help the laity do what the laity believe the Lord is calling the laity (individually as well as corporately) to do, many protestants would suddenly find the advent movement to be much more attractive.
Try to imagine, inviting one each of your Baptist, Methodist and Presbyterian friends to your home to watch an LDS “General Conference. Thereafter, invite them to watch a Seventh-day Adventist “General Conference” with you. Ask your friends to be prepared, after watching both, to make a list of the similarities and differences between their impression of the LDS and SdA “General Conferences”.
If you will do that (or probably even if you just imagine doing it) and if you will pray for guidance about how to respond to the observations of your Baptist, Methodist and Presbyterian friends, I predict that you will know what needs to be done AND what needs to be NOT done.
Sorry….but I would never waste a vote for your platform…
This seems like politicizing our work
I be ok with using the 25 to 50 limitation. This call for having the young take over from the old has been going on for so long that those over 50 now, were the young that others begged to be let in. In 10, 20 years, we will hear the same rallying cry, and the young today, who will be old tomorrow, will not more be willing to let go of the reins then those there today.
I was looking at on the demographics on age among Adventist. The age group that represents the least % of Adventist members was 50 to 64 (17%). While 28% are in 18- 29 age range (the highest).
http://www.pewforum.org/religious-landscape-study/religious-denomination/seventh-day-adventist/
One wonders at how Adventism originated with such young, and obviously naive believers who founded Adventism. It would not be possible today when those of the same age or almost completely excluded from any leadership positions.
Maybe it will take the young people to initiate a new movement within, or without Adventism, that includes everyone and welcomes all who wish to worship together.
Then in less than 100 years another new movement will begin. This is the rapidity of the change in our culture today and cannot be stopped, whether we agree or not.
The march of progress in equality and fairness has never asked permission.
Yes, i only wonder when we will seek to truly be inclusive, and not exclude anyone, no matter their repentance status, gender identity, religion, political identity, philosophy or creed. To be inclusive we need more representation of all the voices in the world – not just those who hold to our narrow views about the Bible, or God. That is if we truly wish to be inclusive, otherwise our inclusivity is another’s exclusion, Seems to make the word a bit meaningless. The logical conclusion of inclusive, as commonly tossed around, is unversialism. If we don’t accept that everyone is saved, then we had to draw a line somewhere to exclude some one. Hence, the cry for inclusion is really only an argument on who decides who is excluded… Right? Yes, I agree only Christ ultimately decides, therefore, again, why exclude anyone if the argument is we have to inclusive…
Correction: “In 10, 20 years, we will hear the same rallying cry, and the young today, who will be old tomorrow, will not be anymore willing to let go of the reins then those there today.” (human nature).
28% of 18 – 29 as the highest was a statement about % of members in that age group as compared to other church groups.
Most of what I am reading is definitely not written tongue in cheek. The politics in our church makes me wonder at times do I really need to be a Seventh-day Adventist to be a follower of Christ? Are we any different from the rest of the world? “Dear God, please have mercy on me and direct my path along the way that you would have ALL your children go”.