Who Controls Our Theological Narrative?
by Reinder Bruinsma | 15 January 2025 |
Church authority is a complicated topic. Is it primarily about administrative oversight and personnel management, financial issues, the upkeep of buildings, and denominational strategies? Or is theology the most important role of ecclesial authority? Or perhaps it is about practical application of the church’s teachings, and it’s strategies for communicating the gospel to the various publics?
In recent times church authority in most Protestant denominations has undergone significant changes, in particular with respect to controlling their doctrinal tradition—and this is also the case in the Seventh-day Adventist Church.
The institutional church
In most denominations the official teachings of the church are based on creedal and confessional statements. The creeds have ancient credentials: they connect the churches of today with the Christendom of all ages. In Protestant churches with Lutheran or Reformed roots, but also Baptists, Methodists, and others, the main confessional documents date from around the seventeenth century.
The prominent church leaders in the early history of a denomination (Luther, Calvin, Wesley) continue to exert influence through their writings. Most denominations have also relied on trusted theologians, often connected with educational institutions. And, as a rule, denominations safeguard their theology with disciplinary actions. Thus, the authority in theological and related matters has been, to a large extent, vested in the institutional church with a major role for church leaders and professional theologians.
This is not to say that in all denominations the creation and protection of a particular theological tradition, with perhaps occasional revisions, has always been the exclusive domain of academics. In fact, in some traditions laypeople have played an important role. This happened, in particular, in the United States. Church historian Nathan O. Hatch (b. 1946) wrote a fascinating book, entitled The Democratization of American Christianity (Yale University Press, 1989), about “unschooled and unsophisticated” people . . . “who became powerful actors on the religious scene.”
In our own tradition, William Miller, a Baptist farmer with little formal education, refused to consult Bible commentaries. Miller claimed that he only used his concordance. Yet his unschooled prophetic interpretations are the roots of the Adventist Church.
Theological authority
Although the Adventist Church was relatively slow in developing a more or less definitive creedal statement, once it had done so this document became all-important. And, although changes in the Fundamental Beliefs remain possible—some adaptations were made in 2005 and 2015—that even the tiniest amendment must be voted during a General Conference (GC) session makes major changes in the foreseeable future unlikely.
In the early years of the denomination a professional ministry was still under development, and (to use the words of Nathan Hatch) some men with little formal education became “powerful actors.” But several of them—Uriah Smith, John N. Andrews, and James White—rose above the level of “unsophisticated” to become doctrinal authorities, and remained so until long after their deaths. Ellen G. White, though less gifted in research and writing skills than these pioneers, acquired nonetheless an even more authoritative role because of the prophetic gift that was ascribed to her.
As the Adventist Church went through the twentieth century, the theological professionals in the educational system in the United States and elsewhere played a major role in further developing and communicating the official version of Adventist theology to the church and to the outside world. Theological conferences targeting pastors and teachers were held to stimulate doctrinal unity, especially at times when this unity was threatened by serious dissent. A number of prominent theologians—Edward Heppenstall (1901-1994), Gerhard Hasel (1935-1994), Graham Maxwell (1921-2010), Hans K. LaRondelle (1929-2011), and others of similar stature—played an important role.
Denomination-wide procedures for screening theology professors were meant to ensure that the church would retain a firm grip on the formation of future ministers. Book committees in the official publishing houses policed the orthodoxy of the manuscripts that were submitted.
Today, in most denominations, the institutional control of their theology is no longer as solid as it has been. In the past, theologians were privileged in their access to theological materials in specialized libraries. Today, vast resources are online, which has made it quite easy for many people, including lay members, to directly engage with these materials. Now, social media, podcasts, and a variety of online platforms mean a plurality of voices contribute to the theological debate. Theologians must compete with pastors, bloggers, and other influencers for attention, thus reducing the authority of prominent academics and denominational leaders.
Today’s influencers
So what about our church? Who controls our theological narrative? Or, to put it another way, Who is trying to control that narrative?
The leadership of the church at the highest level (the General Conference), supported by many leaders at lower levels (divisions, unions, conferences), do their utmost to control the Adventist doctrinal tradition. They also attempt to control its implications for contemporary issues, such as the ordination of female pastors and the status of the LGBTQ+ community. They want to ensure that all university and college theology professors underwrite all twenty-eight Fundamental Beliefs. Where they can, they put “orthodox” people into important vacant positions. They control the publishing house boards and make sure that “liberal” manuscripts are not accepted. They enlist the Geoscience Research Institute and the Biblical Research Institute in the protection of what they recognize as the “truth.” They promote a campaign to distribute millions of free copies of The Great Controversy. The key sermons of the General Conference president, time and time again, emphasize the importance of accepting all Fundamental Beliefs, and urge those who cannot conscientiously do so to leave the church.
Before I try to answer the question of how successful this institutional attempt at theological control is, there are two rather worrying factors to consider.
- Unfortunately, nowadays the denomination does not value its professional theologians as highly as it did in the past. It appears that only a very select group of our university and college professors is consulted when the top-leaders face doctrinal issues, together with a few trusted advisors close to the GC president. But many of our theological experts are ignored by top leadership, and treated with a substantial dose of suspicion.
- On the other hand, a number of independent organizations appear to have gained a disproportionate amount of influence.
Independent ministries
Nobody knows how many independent organizations are operating in or around Adventism. There are at least several hundred—and probably even more. They vary from one-person enterprises with a laptop and a copying machine in a basement, to organizations with a hundred or more paid employees, large facilities, and multi-million-dollar budgets. Most of these organizations call themselves “supportive,” but quite a few are, in fact, extremely critical with regard to the church’s goals and strategies rather than supportive.
Independent ministries are, first and foremost, an American phenomenon (although they have also made their entry in other lands). They fit with the pragmatic American approach to things. When they see a challenge, American Christians do not first stop to think about the theological aspects, but they ask, “What does it take to deal with the issue? How many people will it require? How much money will it cost? How much time do we need?”
Not all independent ministries in Adventism are theologically conservative, but most are. Just look at some of the most prominent ones: 3ABN, Doug Batchelor’s Amazing Facts, Walter Veith’s ministry (until recently, Amazing Discoveries), Stephen Bohr’s Secrets Unsealed, AFM (Adventist Frontier Missions), GYC (Generation of Youth for Christ), and ASI (Adventist-laymen’s Services & Industries).
Further on the fringe of the church one finds extreme, but quite influential, websites such as Fulcrum7 and Advent Messenger. Others could be added.
It might go too far to say that the conglomerate of independent Adventist organizations now controls the theological narrative of the Adventist Church—but there is no doubt that they have a lot of influence, and tend to push a doctrinal agenda that is fundamentalist. In these circles we find much doubt regarding the doctrine of the Trinity, much enthusiasm for Last Generation Theology, strong resistance to the idea of full equality between men and women in ministry, a total unwillingness to accept people with a non-heterosexual preference, a naive and uncritical attitude toward the ministry of Ellen G. White, and the unshakable conviction that a world-wide Sunday law will soon be a reality.
The influence of these organizations is greatly enhanced by two factors: money and the internet. It is no secret that just a few very influential donors who are sympathetic to this conservative agenda help to finance several of these ministries. But the strong presence of these ministries on the web, and their impact through the social media, is also a highly effective element.
Other voices
I am glad to note that the theological narrative of Adventism is not totally dominated by the conservative administrative centers of our church organization, with the support of a range of independent voices that echo sentiments and views of the past. In the COVID period, all around the world groups of Adventists met via Skype or Zoom. Many of these groups have continued in a post-COVID format and still flourish as non-traditional forums for the kind of discussions that often are not welcome in regular church circles. A growing group of presenters from different countries rotates among this steadily growing web-based collection of discussion groups in the United States and other countries. The Adventist Today Sabbath Seminar (ATSS) is a splendid example of places where such fresh voices are increasingly being heard.
In the world of the print media, exciting developments have taken place. The printing-on-demand technology has ended the monopoly of denominationally controlled publishing houses. Today, authors whose manuscripts were rejected by the church’s publishing houses can easily self-publish their work, or use other channels to get their books on the market. And even within the organized church new ventures in print publishing are possible, as the emergence of Oak & Acorn has shown.
We should not underestimate the presence and activities in the digital world, through blogs and posts on the social media, of individual Adventists who question some of the traditional views and want to delve deeper into what “present truth” could mean in and beyond 2025. Moreover, independent communication channels such as Adventist Today and Spectrum have matured and are having an increasing impact on the church—a fact that is applauded by many, but also feared by those who do not want to lose control of the Adventist narrative.
I return to what I stated at the beginning of this piece: church authority is no longer what it once was. It is becoming increasingly difficult for denominations to maintain institutional control of their theological narrative. That is also true for the Adventist Church. Is that good or bad? I would like to see a greater openness toward the plurality of the theological professionals in our universities and colleges, and a more daring publishing program by our publishing house. I am committed to being among the voices that ask for enough space to explore new depths in the truths we have inherited, and for the courage to leave behind us what is no longer convincing or has become irrelevant.
And I pray that behind the cacophony of voices—vocal, in print, or digital—we can continue to hear the soft, small voice of God.
Reinder Bruinsma lives in the Netherlands with his wife, Aafje. He has served the Adventist Church in various assignments in publishing, education, and church administration on three continents. He still maintains a busy schedule of preaching, teaching, and writing. He writes at http://reinderbruinsma.com/.
His latest book is Adventists and Catholics: The History of a Turbulent Relationship.
