Saturday, November 23, 2013

Getting It So Right . . . And So Wrong by Andy McDonald

My denomination gets it so right sometimes and then sometimes gets it so wrong.

Before we debated the ordination of women or were troubled by people using the term “spiritual formation,” we wrestled with harder issues.  One of those was how a Seventh-day Adventist should relate to military service. 

Our earliest position was voiced by one of our denominational founders, James White.  He wrote, “The fourth precept of that law says ‘Remember the Sabbath to keep it holy’; the sixth says ‘Thou shalt not kill.’ But in the case of drafting, the government assumes the responsibility of the violation of the law of God, and it would be madness to resist. He who would resist until, in the administration of military law, he was shot down, goes too far, we think, in taking the responsibility of suicide.” (Review and Herald, August 2, 1862, vol. 20, page 84). 

Our church leadership was advising those drafted to not worry about what might be required on Sabbath or even taking another person’s life. No worry because the guilt of this “law breaking” would not fall to the soldier, but to the state.

In 1864 some Adventist leaders appealed successfully to the governor of Michigan and received recognition as being conscientiously opposed to bearing arms.  Decades later in 1918, President Woodrow Wilson issued an executive order allowing for religious conscientious objectors to serve in the US Military.

I grew up idolizing heroes like medic Desmond Doss who won the Congressional Medal of Honor for his part in saving over 70 lives while under enemy fire in 1945. I remember admiring the bravery of soldiers who faced severe hardship because they refused certain assignments on Sabbath.

In 1954, our official denominational position was noncombatant, and that is how were registered with the United States Government. When the war in Vietnam came along, a number of young Seventh-day Adventists who had been drafted wished to opt out.  They were not conscientious objectors, but instead identified themselves as pacifists who wished to have nothing to do with any war. Unfortunately, they could not be recognized by the government as pacifist because, as  Seventh-day Adventists, they were part of a denomination which was officially registered as noncombatant.  In 1969, the wording of our official position was voted in Annual Council to be, “the church advocates noncombatancy, but allows members to elect to be pacifists as well.”

Then in 1972, the Annual Council did something amazing. They decided the question was a personal matter of conscience for each member and that the church would support members regardless of the type of service their individual consciences allowed.  So today, even with a volunteer army, we “allow” and “support” the noncombatant, the pacifist, and the full combatant!  Why? Because our denomination believes the choice is a matter of individual conscience!

It is terribly interesting that these three very divergent positions can be held by members who are all equally considered to be members in good and regular standing.  Unfortunately, denominational leadership has a much less accepting stance for those who might wish to “redirect” their tithe, ordain women, or not follow denominational dietary directives.  Do you catch the irony? On an issue as huge as war, resistance, pacifism, and combatant service, the denomination has the foresight and wisdom to recognize and affirm the value of the individual member’s conscience (and these are matters spoken to directly in the Decalogue). However, that trusted individual conscience somehow becomes less trustworthy on those non-life-and-death issues. In ecclesiological organizational matters, it seems only the “official” word can be a safe guide!

I applaud the courage of Local Conference and Union and Division leadership who determined that to continue the blatant discrimination mandated by the organization would be a violation of their conscious. In order for them to be “as true to duty as the needle is to the pole,” it became essential to take the necessary action to ordain women as a matter of standing for truth and against injustice and discrimination.

Our unity as Christians and our unity as Seventh-day Adventists are found in exactly the same place—Jesus Christ.  In Jesus we are one, with no division. We may divide over politics, economics, theological interpretations, and whose soccer team is best, but we are still able to share in complete and total unity that there is no other source for anyone’s salvation than Jesus.  

So I say, have different opinions. Allow, if not encourage, appropriate and different applications of policy and practice that matches various cultures, while continuing to share our unity in Christ.

 Some of you would be fine carrying and using an AK47 in battle.  Some of you would never even consider such, but you would have no problem patching up the gunner so he or she might resume their killing. And some of you can’t believe that any war is just, and you choose to be a pacifist.  And regardless of where you fall in just those three categories, if you are a Seventh-day Adventist, your church has determined it is your choice and our unity isn’t in a shared position, our unity is in Jesus our Savior. 

Let’s be patient with one another, forgiving, long suffering.  My denomination gets it so right sometimes and then sometimes gets it so wrong, and still our unity is in Jesus our Savior.

Andy McDonald


No comments:

Post a Comment