Submission? A Reaction to Recent
Statements by President Wilson II
(Revised from a posting two days ago.)
Occasionally, I come across accusations
that there are Jesuits at the General Conference. I am alternately
amused by the silliness of these charges and saddened by the
spiritual sickness they evince. Then I read President Ted Wilson's
(President Wilson II) repeated calls for submission to the authority
of the church, and I recognize a theme that has characterized
Catholic spirituality for a thousand years.
Anyone who has known President Wilson
II for decades finds accusations that he is a closet Jesuit so
preposterous it's difficult to give a coherent response. On the other
hand, he is following a trajectory described by his father in the
Merikay case of movement away from anti-hierarchicalism toward a form
of church governance reminiscent of the papacy. A primary reason for
this movement is its effectiveness. If your objective is a global,
coherent, long-lasting organization, the papacy is by far the most
compelling exemplar. President Wilson II's commitment to the
Adventist ideal of the remnant—not merely as a spiritual movement
but as a recognizable, ordered church—requires the imposition of a
discipline that can only be achieved through an authoritative
hierarchy.
When Wilson urges people to submit to
the church, by “church” he means the top clergy, more
specifically he means the General Conference Executive Committee.*
President Wilson II acknowledges people may have sincere, individual
differences of conviction regarding women's ordination. They may
believe their respective views are supported by the Bible. Still, he
insists, they must subordinate their individual consciences to the
decisions of the church (i.e. the GC Executive Committee which Wilson
dominates). This is another baby step toward the establishment of an
Adventist papacy. Two hundred years from now historians will be
writing about the efforts (successful or unsuccessful) of Wilson II
to secure the unchallenged primacy of the Bishop of Columbia in the
hierarchy of the Seventh-day Adventist Church (a.k.a. American
Universal (catholic) Church).
The teaching of submission as a virtue
has a long and venerable history in Judaism and Christianity.
Passages in the Bible advocate submission. Certainly, we are warned
about the folly we can get into when we reject wisdom from outside
ourselves. However, the great heroes of the Bible were not mildly
submissive.
Abraham directly challenged God's
announced plans for Sodom. Moses twice flatly rejected God's stated
judgment on Israel. The Syro-Phonecian woman blithely dismissed
Jesus' explicit statement that she was asking him to operate outside
God's template for his ministry. In each of these cases, God bent to
the will of his challengers.
Jesus repeatedly rejected the authority
of the church of his day. He gently chided Peter for acquiescing to
the Jewish leaders' claims of authority over Jesus in the matter of
paying the temple tax. (This would be the equivalent of messing with
tithe policy in the Adventist Church.)
The great revivals in Israel were led
not by the high priest but by the kings--Hezekiah, Josiah,
Jehoshaphat. On the other hand, Elijah and Elisha modeled principled,
sustained opposition to the authority of King Ahab. The high priest
Azariah with eighty of his fellow priests confronted King Uzziah when
he overstepped his prerogatives and went into the temple to offer a
sacrifice. In Israel God never consolidated authority into a single
person or institution. The monarchy and the priesthood each traced
its roots back to an independent inauguration by God. Neither was the
"final word." Then there were the prophets--wild cards in
the authority structure of Israel. Their role is filled in our day by
bold preachers of the left and right who call for the radical
application of principles that are deeply rooted in our heritage.
Ellen White celebrates the intervention
of Frederick of Saxony to protect Luther from the authority of the
church of his day. She repeatedly delights in the refusal of the
reformers to submit to formally constituted church authority.
When President Wilson II orders people
in the church to submit, he is voicing his sincere convictions about
what people ought to do. He is fulfilling his divine mandate as he
understands it. He is seeking to defend the institution of the
church. This is the normal (and I would argue, appropriate) role for
a church bureaucrat. Reformers ought to respect the sincerity of
President Wilson's convictions.
On the other hand, reformers—other
church bureaucrats, pastors, laity—who oppose President Wilson II,
are also acting out of sincere conviction. Their commitment to God
and justice requires them to exercise all available means compatible
with integrity to shape the church according to the vision God has
given them.
The Bible offers no tidy formula for
resolving this conflict. Passages can be cited in support of both
institutional primacy and prophetic (individual) primacy. Frequently
in the Bible the formal structure of religion is shown to be opposed
to the will of God as voiced by minorities and individuals. Other
times dissident individuals are portrayed as mere rebels.
I look for the bottom line by measuring
ideas and practices with the yardsticks of the Two Great Commandments
and Micah 6:8. Neither mentions institutional conformity as a primary
virtue.
*Wilson writes: “The General
Conference Executive Committee, the highest deliberative authority of
the worldwide church between General Conference Sessions, includes
nearly 120 union conference and union mission presidents as voting
delegates, along with elected officers, departmental directors,
pastors, frontline employees and numerous laypersons.” The
inclusion of "laypersons" in this list is disingenuous.
This committee is dominated by clergy, primarily the higher ranking
clergy.
Posts
7 comments:
Thank you for writing this. My heart is heavy as I witness the direction the "head" of the Adventist Church is trying to move the church I have loved all my life. Perhaps the Holy Spirit has been leading me in another direction - where I don't yet fully know. But as I attempt to balance the negative things I perceive inside Adventism these days with the amazingly freeing, joyous Christ and His model that I see revealed elsewhere, I pray constantly that I be given discernment between truth and error.
Although this isn't the only issue that finds me at odds with the GC, WO is taking center stage right now. I really think the PUC will vote in favor of WO, and I think Elder Wilson knows this. My take is the GC talking heads are hoping for spin control within the other Unions in the NAD. Saddens and sickens me.
Hmmm... Being "appropriately" submissive almost cost me and my kids our lives. In other situations "submissiveness" covers horrible sexual abuse and rape.... So I wonder if these MEN who continue to think they know what is best for me - even if they do it "prayerfully" - would they rather have me dead and so many others wounded?
For anonymous - I tried once to find an alternative church. Yes, there are some out there that preach wonderful things, but they lack something vital that true Adventism has within it.
Hopefully Women's Ordination will bring into the inner circle of our denomination not only women who can prove they are competitive in the male arena of theology - but those (like EGW) who fully embrace the female life experience in ALL of its aspects and bring balance into our upper echelons. Otherwise - there probably is not a future for our denomination. The kids will leave if they ar honest. But EGW prophesied that the church would seem like it was about to fall... Maybe this is part of it. What honest person can stay in a denomination that practices so much power and control.
I don't see this as a negative. I think it is time for a wake-up to keep an open mind and not to judge. Elder Wilson has more than just the United States with which to be concerned. Does he not have to think of Seventh day Adventists in other parts of the world? Many of them do not see things the way we do in the USA. I love the fact that the Adventist church has come so far from the 1950's and early '60's. We need to preach Jesus and keep our eyes fixed on Him. Pray always.
Lois, yes - maybe it is also wrong for the rest of the world? - There is argument for that. Definitely Wilson is not doing what is best for the health of the church in our country. We need to be willing to open our eyes and be willing to wrestle with the hard issues of reality and, yes, prayerfully, be willing to change as change is needed.
OK - right now the issue is Ordination of Women. The debate and decision will be made by "old" men - The main issue is the unity and structure of the world wide church - which is male dominated. ...If there were a representation of women included in the discussion it would be revealed that the role of women world-wide is a very real issue. Not only are women more educated and do not have umpteen children to raise so that they have more time to "have a life" - so they want more inclusion in the greater world - but in so many places (even in the USA) so many women and children are still treated less than animals - I do believe that the next great revival (and I understand the Arab Spring) will largely be inspired by the need for women and children and others who are socially devalued to find Jesus love and purpose and respect in their lives. So - I would think that the argument (as i understand it) that, perhaps, in the US there is reason to ordain women but not in the other countries because that would be unhealthy for the church there... so the US should also wait - this argument is unsound because I believe that the moving of The Holy Spirit is to uplift the downtrodden - and in so many countries this includes the women. I do believe that the church would be closer to doing "God's Will" if they endorsed full ministry and participation of women in the politics and actions of the world wide church.
But I do believe that old men who have lived their lives as part of a hierarchy have little clue what I am talking about and less chance that they would hear the voices of us... more likely they would excuse their deafness by explaining we are just emotional and angry "women's libbers". I have seen this so often in the past decades when women have spoke to what is really true.
OK - Bureaucrats - administrators - there are many different styles. I suspect that the leaders of the GC are 60 years old and above... The generation where things were extremely hierarchical, male dominated, conformist. The younger generations are more into the kind of administration where differences are encouraged - creative thinking us encouraged - people are unified as to the corporate goal but diversity and autonomy are valued as assets to the creation of the product. We lose the younger kids because we insist they be conformist when they live in a world full of diversity.
I am largely in agreement except on this wise... EGW has been, for many Adventists, the de facto posthumous pope of Adventism, speaking infallibly ex cathedra, ex sepulchra... as such Ted Wilson's kabuki theater is not so much his trying to set up an Adventist papacy as it is his setting up an Adventist version of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith... the question is whether he sees himself as more closely aligned with Cardinal Ratzinger or Grand Inquisitor Torquemada when he takes up the mantle of Fidei Defensor...
Post a Comment