Modified from the book Rubes Bible Cartoons, by Leigh Rubin.
(click for enlarged image)
Thursday, October 11, 2007
Wednesday, October 10, 2007
The Free Folks vs. the Orcs
The Lord of the Rings trilogy parallels Western Civilization's current fight against radical Islamic terrorists
By Gene Edward Veith
EACH EPISODE OF THE LORD OF THE RINGS, AS IT came out year by year, resonated in an eerie way with current events. The Fellowship of the Ring showed terrifying Dark Riders breaking into the peaceful, complacent world of the Shire only a few months after Sept. 11, 2001, when ordinary hobbit-like Americans had to face up to the reality of terrorism.
The next year, The Two Towers showed the battle joined between the "free folks" and the forces of the Shadow, just as Americans were reacting to the destruction of their Two Towers by fighting the war in Afghanistan. This year, The Return of the King portrays a victory, in the aftermath of our own overwhelming but incomplete victory in Iraq, opening only a few days after the capture of the Dark Lord, Saddam Hussein. The movie even features a "spider hole."
A major theme of the trilogy, as the actor who played Gimli, John Rhy-Davies, told WORLD (Dec. 20, 2003), is the defense of Western civilization.
One of the reasons the novels and movies have the impact they do is that The Lord of the Rings is a compendium of Western culture. Its author, J.R.R. Tolkien, a professor of ancient literature, combined elements from the whole range of Western legends, epics, and heroic sagas old and new. The trilogy is filled with the images and atmosphere of Beowulf and King Arthur, with the cursed ring borrowed from the Germanic epic The Song of the Niebelungs and the character of Sam from Charles Dickens's The Pickwick Papers.
Audiences can relate to the heroism—including the theme of ordinary folks having to assume the mantle of heroism—and to the clash between good and evil and to the Christian symbolism because Tolkien is drawing from a deep and rich cultural heritage. Many people vaguely recognize it, though they may have forgotten what it is.
But the models are not just literary. The trilogy taps into cultural memories, evoking a history that many of our ancestors actually experienced. A massacring army outside the walls was commonplace from the time of the Old Testament, through the Middle Ages, to the 19th-century Napoleonic wars. The movie captured the wonder and the fear of the Roman legions when they were attacked by Hannibal's elephants, which were dealt with in similar ways. By far the most disturbing cultural memory, from both the movie and history, was the image of barbarian hordes sweeping through peaceful villages, with parents holding their children and running away from the slaughter as their homes were plundered and burned.
There was a time when Western civilization did collapse, when Rome fell, and barbaric tribes swept through Europe, raping and killing and destroying. During these Dark Ages, civilization—literacy, education, the arts, the preservation of the past, the further development of culture—was kept alive in and by the Christian church, which continued to copy out manuscripts, educate those who were interested, and promote a moral order to life.
The Dark Ages were ended not by war, though wars against the invaders were necessary, but by evangelism. When the church finally converted the barbarian tribes to Christianity, Western civilization came back to life.
Today, the "free folks" of the West are having to confront the violence and the worldview of the radical terrorists. The battle, though, is not just a military one.
In The Lord of the Rings, the civilization of the Elves and Men is exhausted. The Elves are weary, preferring to escape into their own reveries and to leave the world behind. The lands of Rohan and of Gondor have their glory years behind them and are now preoccupied with achieving political power and avoiding conflicts.
What makes Sauron so deadly is not only the Orcs but the way he has seduced into his service both "the wild men" and Saruman, the intellectual, the scientist and theologian, the head of Gandalf's order.
Similarly, the civilization that is under attack by the terrorists is also under attack from within, from its own intellectuals and its own seemingly liberal and cultured citizens who have come to hate their own heritage.
In The Return of the King, the tide of a major battle turns when Aragorn persuades the "army of the dead"—those who "have no beliefs"—to join the fray. These were traitors who refused to fight in the previous war against the Shadow and so were cursed. Aragorn gave them the chance to regain their honor, and this time they came through.
Perhaps those who refused to fight the Communists, the last threat to Western civilization, might be persuaded to abandon their current opposition to the war on terror. More importantly, perhaps the West will recover its nerve and its values. But this will require returning to the King.
*********************
Dear Mr. Veith,
As a fan of the Lord of the Rings, and a believer in both Christian and democratic virtues, I enjoyed your skillful and wide-ranging application of this epic story to current events. I use aspects of this story to teach certain psychological principles to the students that attend my college classes. Being a university lecturer may qualify me as one of the intellectuals or liberals you mention in this piece. I don’t think so, although I do admit denial is a constant force in much of human behavior, including mine. Still, regardless of what label I bear, I want to address what I see to be a deficit in your analogy.
There is a time when terrorism and tyranny must be squarely faced, no matter the cost. And Sauron-like seductions can be widespread, from the brute to the intelligentsia. But criticism, input and oversight are virtues of democratic society. I don’t like it when you and others generalize those who perform this vital function as fools who have been seduced into hating their heritage. I do think it is likely that you are closer to the reality of those who have the privilege of hating their country out loud. But I personally don’t know any America haters. I do know a lot of people who mix up loyalty and freedom with blustery and rigidly held opinions, which are then seasoned with a mixture of fact and hate. In this vein, the only thing I see separating some liberals from some conservatives is, well, nothing.
I personally believe that Saddam was as a bad as they come, and that the Iraqi people, for the moment, are better off. But I don’t hear anyone admitting that America was complicit in Saddam’s butchery. Every mass grave, rape, torture and murder under Hussein bears America’s fingerprint. America was Hussein’s accomplice. He paid us off with some acceptable semblance of military and economic stability abroad, and more disposable income and peace of mind at home. I think that you have to hate America to stay silent about all that.
I don’t think it’s accurate to always look at the evil “out there.” You must also look at the evil inside. So there are several other ways I apply the Lord of the Rings to this American/Iraqi matter. Sauron persists because Isildur allowed himself to be seduced by the Ring, and wouldn’t let it go when it was time. He let his own self-interest stand in the way of what would have been best for the world. He imagined his victory to be complete, his power to remain unchallenged, and his foes to always remain weak. But he fails miserably and sets the world up to fight another version of the same battle.
So Tolkien’s Ring symbolizes national security, oil, weapons, stock prices, GNP, elected office, vanity, personal opinion, and being too lazy or too beleaguered by the demands of chasing various American dreams, all of which can be corrupted into wraiths ringing in our collective ears, particularly when denial is spewing from Mt. Media.
Finally, it’s not true that the undead in the story have no beliefs. In fact, they believe they are the ultimate judge, jury and executioner of the realm they have claimed to be their own. Deep in the mountains of their self-interests, they are very powerful, and utterly entitled, at least until a truth teller like Aragorn shows up. They shift then from being predators to being servants, which is something I think some Americans need to learn as much as some Iraqis. The consequence in the story is much bigger than victory; it is redemption, which, according to my reading of Scripture, is something we all need.
I believe there are ways that America can learn to safeguard its security and prosperity without making dark deals with evil people. In order for America to mature and evolve in this way, matters like these have to be part of the national examination of conscience. And owning up is part of the process of being a good American, a good conservative, and a good Christian. Right now I don’t hear any of those people owning up about bedding down with a butcher. Instead, I hear Americans boasting that first we whipped Saddam’s ass, second we’ve captured it, and third we’re going to punish it. This boasting is punctuated with arguments about the importance of American interests and the beauty of American might.
You end your essay by claiming that our courage and values require turning back to the King, who I take to be Christ. I end my message to you by claiming that, as our relationship with Saddam has shown, American life has a dark side. I say be brave enough to take that to the King.
Respectfully,
Robert A. Howard
EDITOR’S NOTE
I’m trying to picture Christ as a machine gunner on an Abrams tank in Iraq, “returning to the King” all those Iraqis who get in the way of US foreign policy. It’s not easy.
Rob Howard sent me his response to this editorial way back on January 17, 2004. At the time, this blog was the last thing on my mind. Is Rob “way cool” or what?
Andy
By Gene Edward Veith
EACH EPISODE OF THE LORD OF THE RINGS, AS IT came out year by year, resonated in an eerie way with current events. The Fellowship of the Ring showed terrifying Dark Riders breaking into the peaceful, complacent world of the Shire only a few months after Sept. 11, 2001, when ordinary hobbit-like Americans had to face up to the reality of terrorism.
The next year, The Two Towers showed the battle joined between the "free folks" and the forces of the Shadow, just as Americans were reacting to the destruction of their Two Towers by fighting the war in Afghanistan. This year, The Return of the King portrays a victory, in the aftermath of our own overwhelming but incomplete victory in Iraq, opening only a few days after the capture of the Dark Lord, Saddam Hussein. The movie even features a "spider hole."
A major theme of the trilogy, as the actor who played Gimli, John Rhy-Davies, told WORLD (Dec. 20, 2003), is the defense of Western civilization.
One of the reasons the novels and movies have the impact they do is that The Lord of the Rings is a compendium of Western culture. Its author, J.R.R. Tolkien, a professor of ancient literature, combined elements from the whole range of Western legends, epics, and heroic sagas old and new. The trilogy is filled with the images and atmosphere of Beowulf and King Arthur, with the cursed ring borrowed from the Germanic epic The Song of the Niebelungs and the character of Sam from Charles Dickens's The Pickwick Papers.
Audiences can relate to the heroism—including the theme of ordinary folks having to assume the mantle of heroism—and to the clash between good and evil and to the Christian symbolism because Tolkien is drawing from a deep and rich cultural heritage. Many people vaguely recognize it, though they may have forgotten what it is.
But the models are not just literary. The trilogy taps into cultural memories, evoking a history that many of our ancestors actually experienced. A massacring army outside the walls was commonplace from the time of the Old Testament, through the Middle Ages, to the 19th-century Napoleonic wars. The movie captured the wonder and the fear of the Roman legions when they were attacked by Hannibal's elephants, which were dealt with in similar ways. By far the most disturbing cultural memory, from both the movie and history, was the image of barbarian hordes sweeping through peaceful villages, with parents holding their children and running away from the slaughter as their homes were plundered and burned.
There was a time when Western civilization did collapse, when Rome fell, and barbaric tribes swept through Europe, raping and killing and destroying. During these Dark Ages, civilization—literacy, education, the arts, the preservation of the past, the further development of culture—was kept alive in and by the Christian church, which continued to copy out manuscripts, educate those who were interested, and promote a moral order to life.
The Dark Ages were ended not by war, though wars against the invaders were necessary, but by evangelism. When the church finally converted the barbarian tribes to Christianity, Western civilization came back to life.
Today, the "free folks" of the West are having to confront the violence and the worldview of the radical terrorists. The battle, though, is not just a military one.
In The Lord of the Rings, the civilization of the Elves and Men is exhausted. The Elves are weary, preferring to escape into their own reveries and to leave the world behind. The lands of Rohan and of Gondor have their glory years behind them and are now preoccupied with achieving political power and avoiding conflicts.
What makes Sauron so deadly is not only the Orcs but the way he has seduced into his service both "the wild men" and Saruman, the intellectual, the scientist and theologian, the head of Gandalf's order.
Similarly, the civilization that is under attack by the terrorists is also under attack from within, from its own intellectuals and its own seemingly liberal and cultured citizens who have come to hate their own heritage.
In The Return of the King, the tide of a major battle turns when Aragorn persuades the "army of the dead"—those who "have no beliefs"—to join the fray. These were traitors who refused to fight in the previous war against the Shadow and so were cursed. Aragorn gave them the chance to regain their honor, and this time they came through.
Perhaps those who refused to fight the Communists, the last threat to Western civilization, might be persuaded to abandon their current opposition to the war on terror. More importantly, perhaps the West will recover its nerve and its values. But this will require returning to the King.
*********************
Dear Mr. Veith,
As a fan of the Lord of the Rings, and a believer in both Christian and democratic virtues, I enjoyed your skillful and wide-ranging application of this epic story to current events. I use aspects of this story to teach certain psychological principles to the students that attend my college classes. Being a university lecturer may qualify me as one of the intellectuals or liberals you mention in this piece. I don’t think so, although I do admit denial is a constant force in much of human behavior, including mine. Still, regardless of what label I bear, I want to address what I see to be a deficit in your analogy.
There is a time when terrorism and tyranny must be squarely faced, no matter the cost. And Sauron-like seductions can be widespread, from the brute to the intelligentsia. But criticism, input and oversight are virtues of democratic society. I don’t like it when you and others generalize those who perform this vital function as fools who have been seduced into hating their heritage. I do think it is likely that you are closer to the reality of those who have the privilege of hating their country out loud. But I personally don’t know any America haters. I do know a lot of people who mix up loyalty and freedom with blustery and rigidly held opinions, which are then seasoned with a mixture of fact and hate. In this vein, the only thing I see separating some liberals from some conservatives is, well, nothing.
I personally believe that Saddam was as a bad as they come, and that the Iraqi people, for the moment, are better off. But I don’t hear anyone admitting that America was complicit in Saddam’s butchery. Every mass grave, rape, torture and murder under Hussein bears America’s fingerprint. America was Hussein’s accomplice. He paid us off with some acceptable semblance of military and economic stability abroad, and more disposable income and peace of mind at home. I think that you have to hate America to stay silent about all that.
I don’t think it’s accurate to always look at the evil “out there.” You must also look at the evil inside. So there are several other ways I apply the Lord of the Rings to this American/Iraqi matter. Sauron persists because Isildur allowed himself to be seduced by the Ring, and wouldn’t let it go when it was time. He let his own self-interest stand in the way of what would have been best for the world. He imagined his victory to be complete, his power to remain unchallenged, and his foes to always remain weak. But he fails miserably and sets the world up to fight another version of the same battle.
So Tolkien’s Ring symbolizes national security, oil, weapons, stock prices, GNP, elected office, vanity, personal opinion, and being too lazy or too beleaguered by the demands of chasing various American dreams, all of which can be corrupted into wraiths ringing in our collective ears, particularly when denial is spewing from Mt. Media.
Finally, it’s not true that the undead in the story have no beliefs. In fact, they believe they are the ultimate judge, jury and executioner of the realm they have claimed to be their own. Deep in the mountains of their self-interests, they are very powerful, and utterly entitled, at least until a truth teller like Aragorn shows up. They shift then from being predators to being servants, which is something I think some Americans need to learn as much as some Iraqis. The consequence in the story is much bigger than victory; it is redemption, which, according to my reading of Scripture, is something we all need.
I believe there are ways that America can learn to safeguard its security and prosperity without making dark deals with evil people. In order for America to mature and evolve in this way, matters like these have to be part of the national examination of conscience. And owning up is part of the process of being a good American, a good conservative, and a good Christian. Right now I don’t hear any of those people owning up about bedding down with a butcher. Instead, I hear Americans boasting that first we whipped Saddam’s ass, second we’ve captured it, and third we’re going to punish it. This boasting is punctuated with arguments about the importance of American interests and the beauty of American might.
You end your essay by claiming that our courage and values require turning back to the King, who I take to be Christ. I end my message to you by claiming that, as our relationship with Saddam has shown, American life has a dark side. I say be brave enough to take that to the King.
Respectfully,
Robert A. Howard
EDITOR’S NOTE
I’m trying to picture Christ as a machine gunner on an Abrams tank in Iraq, “returning to the King” all those Iraqis who get in the way of US foreign policy. It’s not easy.
Rob Howard sent me his response to this editorial way back on January 17, 2004. At the time, this blog was the last thing on my mind. Is Rob “way cool” or what?
Andy
Sunday, October 7, 2007
Reviewing Adventist World
October, 2007
The “Church Works” segment was informative and interesting. For the first time in 48 years, Adventist young people were allowed to travel outside Cuba. Their destination was a convention in Medellin, Colombia.
Jan Paulsen’s essay, “The Healthy Church”, was doctrinally inclusive and encouragingly progressive in substance and tone.
Drs. Handysides and Landless’ “World Health” alert regarding XDR Tuberculosis was, as usual, timely and informative.
“Celebrity Culture” by David N. Marshall was insightful and a MUST READ.
Boonstra’s “It Is Written’s” full-page advert was tasteful and Gospel oriented! Hopefully this signals a permanent change in both his evangelistic emphasis and advertising.
References to the “remnant church” and “the last days” seem to me to confuse rather than clarify the Gospel Message. The excerpt from Arthur G. Daniells’ book, “The Abiding Gift of Prophecy”, was cliché-riddled and almost unreadable.
Angel M. Rodriguez in his essay, “God of the Undeserving”, told me more than I cared to know about eunuchs.
Editors, what on earth inspired you to include Mark Finley’s Bible studies in your magazine? His evangelistic efforts trivialize the Gospel message and seriously damage the credibility of your magazine. In his current “study”, Jesus’ current location in Heaven is assumed to be of worldwide importance. That notion boggles the mind.
The “Church Works” segment was informative and interesting. For the first time in 48 years, Adventist young people were allowed to travel outside Cuba. Their destination was a convention in Medellin, Colombia.
Jan Paulsen’s essay, “The Healthy Church”, was doctrinally inclusive and encouragingly progressive in substance and tone.
Drs. Handysides and Landless’ “World Health” alert regarding XDR Tuberculosis was, as usual, timely and informative.
“Celebrity Culture” by David N. Marshall was insightful and a MUST READ.
Boonstra’s “It Is Written’s” full-page advert was tasteful and Gospel oriented! Hopefully this signals a permanent change in both his evangelistic emphasis and advertising.
References to the “remnant church” and “the last days” seem to me to confuse rather than clarify the Gospel Message. The excerpt from Arthur G. Daniells’ book, “The Abiding Gift of Prophecy”, was cliché-riddled and almost unreadable.
Angel M. Rodriguez in his essay, “God of the Undeserving”, told me more than I cared to know about eunuchs.
Editors, what on earth inspired you to include Mark Finley’s Bible studies in your magazine? His evangelistic efforts trivialize the Gospel message and seriously damage the credibility of your magazine. In his current “study”, Jesus’ current location in Heaven is assumed to be of worldwide importance. That notion boggles the mind.
Saturday, October 6, 2007
What Happened to the Class of '59: A Religious Survey
A Survey of the 1959 Monterey Bay Academy Graduating Class
By Lawrence Downing
The 109 graduates of Monterey Bay Academy class of 1959 were probably not much different from any other class who graduated from academies across America that year. We prided ourselves on the fact that we were the largest class to graduate from MBA. We assured one another that we were the “best”, the “most loyal”, and pledged to always remain close.
What we did not know is that those of us who continued in our educational pursuits were some of the first academy graduates to receive instruction from newly minted PhDs. Nor did we know that the Adventist Church was on the cusp of change that would transform the church.
Ours is the generation that saw the Adventist church become a global religion. When we started our education beyond high school, our church was a North American denomination. By the time we completed graduate school, the majority of our fellow believers lived outside North America.
Our generation also witnessed a loss of innocence. We experienced the fallout that followed from the publication of Questions on Doctrine, when the church moved from a legalistic based approach to salvation to an affirmation of righteousness by faith. We saw the rise of independent ministries, and we experienced the profound influence of Des Ford and Walter Rae. Classmates and others of our generation struggled to apply our new understanding of what scripture appeared to teach. We experienced a drastic change of demographics as the Adventist church in the United States transformed itself into a multi-cultural denomination as immigrants from other countries joined our congregations.
Our generation began to ask questions. We were not satisfied with denominational organization and polity. We were not content to support the Church with our money without knowing how it was spent. Tithe paying for many was no longer considered a moral issue. Adventist education was an option, but not the only one. Many Adventist sent their children to public schools or other parochial schools.
How all of these factors influenced my classmates is unknown. What is known is that a strong majority of my classmates have positive memories of the time they spent at MBA. However, almost half of those who completed my survey no longer consider themselves to be Seventh-day Adventists. I wanted to take a look at what factors may have influenced this decision. The following is a brief summary of what I found.
Number of Graduates 109
Classmates Contacted 75
Responses 63
Are Adventists 33
Are Not Adventists 30
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS FROM THE THIRTY-THREE WHO REMAIN SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTISTS
Thirty-three of us continue to have a strong and meaningful relationship with the Adventist Church. We found it difficult to understand how anyone could leave the Church. Several of us strongly affirmed the importance of Ellen White's role in the Adventist Church history and expressed appreciation for her prophetic guidance.
Several classmates left the Adventist church for a time but have come back. These and others who have remained Adventists, stated that they are still disappointed that the Adventist church expresses its central beliefs “legalistically” rather than in terms that reflect the spirit-filled joy that comes from the assurance of salvation. Many who attend an Adventist church regularly, expressed the feeling their church is not a "good fit" for them, theologically or socially. They are Adventists and have never left the church, but they are not satisfied with how the church operates or what they hear on Sabbath morning. In their view there is too much emphasis on the Twenty-eight Fundamental Beliefs and not enough on what it means to be a vibrant Christian.
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS FROM THE THIRTY WHO ARE NON-ADVENTISTS
Classmates who do not consider themselves Seventh-day Adventists gave a variety of explanations for their break with the Church. Several mentioned that people in the Church were not there to support them when they went through a personal crisis. One person said that when they could no longer continue as a church officer, they never heard from anyone in the Church again. Others stated that in divorce situations the church members and leaders were judgmental and did not express care or concern.
Others stated that they now believed that what we were taught about the Bible and Ellen White was not correct, and that as students they did not receive information that helped them understand and apply the gospel to their lives. Legalism rather than God's grace and salvation through faith in Christ had been preached from the pulpit and in Bible classes. They reported that there was more emphasis on Adventist life-style than a personal commitment to Jesus as Savior.
These classmates have come to question the spiritual and communal benefits the Adventist church offers. The internal strife and criticism have interfered with their spiritual development. At times the demands on Church members exceeded reasonable expectations. The nuts and bolts activity necessary to keep a church going was overwhelming.
Some have had unpleasant experiences with Church politics at the local conference and union level. They report that they found people very impersonal, aloof, and sometimes greedy in dealing with members. Said one person, "The childhood perceptions of the church--nurturing, caring, accepting--have faded into an adult reality that I'm O.K. with the church if I 'dance to its music' or 'walk the walk.' If not, 'Come and see us when you can.’" One classmate said, "It (the church) is not unlike any other organization--meet the expectations or take a walk."
Some have found more caring, nurturing, and acceptance in secular organizations. They believe that the Church does not have anything better to offer than its secular counterparts, and they claim that the Church’s ability to meet their spiritual needs is weak or absent. They believe that other religious organizations are not really different from the Adventist Church, so changing "brands" is not a solution. They meet their spiritual needs through reading, meditation and prayer. This frees them from having to deal with the extra distractions of organized religion. One of my classmates decided early on that God didn’t exist. Academy did not change that belief nor has time and experience caused that person to modify this belief.
PERSONAL OBSERVATIONS
After reading the responses that came from my classmates who no longer attend the Adventist church, I have concluded that one of the major areas where the Church can improve is in its response to people in crisis situations. In other words Adventist church members should be sympathetic listeners rather than suppliers of inappropriate and unasked for advice. The judgmental attitudes of pastors and church members resulted in hurt feelings and withdrawal from the Church. Several classmates stated that when they stopped going to church no one called or made contact with them to see how they were doing.
Generally speaking, my classmates believe that it is important for the Adventist
Church and its leaders to understand and proclaim the gospel. However, they report that the Church has not made a clear presentation of salvation by faith through Jesus Christ alone. There was unanimous agreement that it is important that people learn to depend upon God and not a church.
Some revealed that their children or grandchildren do not find the church relevant and do not attend. They also believe that it is important to define the role of Ellen White within the Adventist Church. There are questions about Ellen’s role, credibility and authority.
IN SUMMARY
The above is not an exhaustive study, nor should it be interpreted as a final statement that expresses what we as a class think. What did come through loud and clear is that many of our classmates are firmly committed to the Christian faith and many are firmly positioned in the Adventist church. Not every one attends the Adventist church and some may not count themselves traditional Christians, but they do have a firm hold on a spiritual dimension that serves as their guide on which they depend.
It should also be noted that the strongest negative statements came from non-Adventist classmates. This disparity in the responses is largely due to the questions I asked. I requested those who are no longer Adventists or who do not attend church to state their reasons. I did not ask those who are committed to the Adventist church to share why they continued in the church, nor did I ask them to share their spiritual journey.
We as a class evidence a wide diversity of thought. Some of us have gone through highly charged personal experiences. I learned that some of our classmates while students at MBA were experiencing stressful situations that most of us knew nothing about. In the years since graduation, some of us have experienced failure. Children and spouses have died. Marriages have broken up. Health problems have taken a heavy toll on some. Fortunately, for most of us, life has been less dramatic.
FINAL THOUGHTS
From that day in June, 1959, when the Class of '59 bade farewell to one another outside the auditorium, our paths have taken us in directions none of us could have imagined. This limited survey does not support the idea that a young person that receives an Adventist education will stay in the church. My guess is that our class is not unique in this regard.
Our generation witnessed the transition from a North American based Adventist church to a globally positioned church. When we were at MBA, North America was the center for Adventism. This is no longer the case. We also witnessed a theological shift. Adventist Church administrators made a decisive decision that they, rather than theologians, would be the keepers of the Adventist churches' theology. The implications of this decision were not apparent to my classmates and me, but this decision has had profound impact on the Adventist Church. Today Church administrators use their authority to define and defend traditional Adventist doctrines and practices, despite what theologians and more dissenting church members may say. This administration “power grab” turned the church from where it had been--an open, seeking church--to a church that demonstrates its need for security by promoting itself as “fundamental” in formal structure and “traditional” in Christian belief.
Finally, it is clear that our generation has come to have an understanding of righteousness by faith that had been missing or quiescent in doctrine and teaching. Today’s Christian emphasis on the gospel has changed our view of salvation and our understanding of Jesus. We found a new appreciation of what it means to experience God's grace.
By Lawrence Downing
The 109 graduates of Monterey Bay Academy class of 1959 were probably not much different from any other class who graduated from academies across America that year. We prided ourselves on the fact that we were the largest class to graduate from MBA. We assured one another that we were the “best”, the “most loyal”, and pledged to always remain close.
What we did not know is that those of us who continued in our educational pursuits were some of the first academy graduates to receive instruction from newly minted PhDs. Nor did we know that the Adventist Church was on the cusp of change that would transform the church.
Ours is the generation that saw the Adventist church become a global religion. When we started our education beyond high school, our church was a North American denomination. By the time we completed graduate school, the majority of our fellow believers lived outside North America.
Our generation also witnessed a loss of innocence. We experienced the fallout that followed from the publication of Questions on Doctrine, when the church moved from a legalistic based approach to salvation to an affirmation of righteousness by faith. We saw the rise of independent ministries, and we experienced the profound influence of Des Ford and Walter Rae. Classmates and others of our generation struggled to apply our new understanding of what scripture appeared to teach. We experienced a drastic change of demographics as the Adventist church in the United States transformed itself into a multi-cultural denomination as immigrants from other countries joined our congregations.
Our generation began to ask questions. We were not satisfied with denominational organization and polity. We were not content to support the Church with our money without knowing how it was spent. Tithe paying for many was no longer considered a moral issue. Adventist education was an option, but not the only one. Many Adventist sent their children to public schools or other parochial schools.
How all of these factors influenced my classmates is unknown. What is known is that a strong majority of my classmates have positive memories of the time they spent at MBA. However, almost half of those who completed my survey no longer consider themselves to be Seventh-day Adventists. I wanted to take a look at what factors may have influenced this decision. The following is a brief summary of what I found.
Number of Graduates 109
Classmates Contacted 75
Responses 63
Are Adventists 33
Are Not Adventists 30
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS FROM THE THIRTY-THREE WHO REMAIN SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTISTS
Thirty-three of us continue to have a strong and meaningful relationship with the Adventist Church. We found it difficult to understand how anyone could leave the Church. Several of us strongly affirmed the importance of Ellen White's role in the Adventist Church history and expressed appreciation for her prophetic guidance.
Several classmates left the Adventist church for a time but have come back. These and others who have remained Adventists, stated that they are still disappointed that the Adventist church expresses its central beliefs “legalistically” rather than in terms that reflect the spirit-filled joy that comes from the assurance of salvation. Many who attend an Adventist church regularly, expressed the feeling their church is not a "good fit" for them, theologically or socially. They are Adventists and have never left the church, but they are not satisfied with how the church operates or what they hear on Sabbath morning. In their view there is too much emphasis on the Twenty-eight Fundamental Beliefs and not enough on what it means to be a vibrant Christian.
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS FROM THE THIRTY WHO ARE NON-ADVENTISTS
Classmates who do not consider themselves Seventh-day Adventists gave a variety of explanations for their break with the Church. Several mentioned that people in the Church were not there to support them when they went through a personal crisis. One person said that when they could no longer continue as a church officer, they never heard from anyone in the Church again. Others stated that in divorce situations the church members and leaders were judgmental and did not express care or concern.
Others stated that they now believed that what we were taught about the Bible and Ellen White was not correct, and that as students they did not receive information that helped them understand and apply the gospel to their lives. Legalism rather than God's grace and salvation through faith in Christ had been preached from the pulpit and in Bible classes. They reported that there was more emphasis on Adventist life-style than a personal commitment to Jesus as Savior.
These classmates have come to question the spiritual and communal benefits the Adventist church offers. The internal strife and criticism have interfered with their spiritual development. At times the demands on Church members exceeded reasonable expectations. The nuts and bolts activity necessary to keep a church going was overwhelming.
Some have had unpleasant experiences with Church politics at the local conference and union level. They report that they found people very impersonal, aloof, and sometimes greedy in dealing with members. Said one person, "The childhood perceptions of the church--nurturing, caring, accepting--have faded into an adult reality that I'm O.K. with the church if I 'dance to its music' or 'walk the walk.' If not, 'Come and see us when you can.’" One classmate said, "It (the church) is not unlike any other organization--meet the expectations or take a walk."
Some have found more caring, nurturing, and acceptance in secular organizations. They believe that the Church does not have anything better to offer than its secular counterparts, and they claim that the Church’s ability to meet their spiritual needs is weak or absent. They believe that other religious organizations are not really different from the Adventist Church, so changing "brands" is not a solution. They meet their spiritual needs through reading, meditation and prayer. This frees them from having to deal with the extra distractions of organized religion. One of my classmates decided early on that God didn’t exist. Academy did not change that belief nor has time and experience caused that person to modify this belief.
PERSONAL OBSERVATIONS
After reading the responses that came from my classmates who no longer attend the Adventist church, I have concluded that one of the major areas where the Church can improve is in its response to people in crisis situations. In other words Adventist church members should be sympathetic listeners rather than suppliers of inappropriate and unasked for advice. The judgmental attitudes of pastors and church members resulted in hurt feelings and withdrawal from the Church. Several classmates stated that when they stopped going to church no one called or made contact with them to see how they were doing.
Generally speaking, my classmates believe that it is important for the Adventist
Church and its leaders to understand and proclaim the gospel. However, they report that the Church has not made a clear presentation of salvation by faith through Jesus Christ alone. There was unanimous agreement that it is important that people learn to depend upon God and not a church.
Some revealed that their children or grandchildren do not find the church relevant and do not attend. They also believe that it is important to define the role of Ellen White within the Adventist Church. There are questions about Ellen’s role, credibility and authority.
IN SUMMARY
The above is not an exhaustive study, nor should it be interpreted as a final statement that expresses what we as a class think. What did come through loud and clear is that many of our classmates are firmly committed to the Christian faith and many are firmly positioned in the Adventist church. Not every one attends the Adventist church and some may not count themselves traditional Christians, but they do have a firm hold on a spiritual dimension that serves as their guide on which they depend.
It should also be noted that the strongest negative statements came from non-Adventist classmates. This disparity in the responses is largely due to the questions I asked. I requested those who are no longer Adventists or who do not attend church to state their reasons. I did not ask those who are committed to the Adventist church to share why they continued in the church, nor did I ask them to share their spiritual journey.
We as a class evidence a wide diversity of thought. Some of us have gone through highly charged personal experiences. I learned that some of our classmates while students at MBA were experiencing stressful situations that most of us knew nothing about. In the years since graduation, some of us have experienced failure. Children and spouses have died. Marriages have broken up. Health problems have taken a heavy toll on some. Fortunately, for most of us, life has been less dramatic.
FINAL THOUGHTS
From that day in June, 1959, when the Class of '59 bade farewell to one another outside the auditorium, our paths have taken us in directions none of us could have imagined. This limited survey does not support the idea that a young person that receives an Adventist education will stay in the church. My guess is that our class is not unique in this regard.
Our generation witnessed the transition from a North American based Adventist church to a globally positioned church. When we were at MBA, North America was the center for Adventism. This is no longer the case. We also witnessed a theological shift. Adventist Church administrators made a decisive decision that they, rather than theologians, would be the keepers of the Adventist churches' theology. The implications of this decision were not apparent to my classmates and me, but this decision has had profound impact on the Adventist Church. Today Church administrators use their authority to define and defend traditional Adventist doctrines and practices, despite what theologians and more dissenting church members may say. This administration “power grab” turned the church from where it had been--an open, seeking church--to a church that demonstrates its need for security by promoting itself as “fundamental” in formal structure and “traditional” in Christian belief.
Finally, it is clear that our generation has come to have an understanding of righteousness by faith that had been missing or quiescent in doctrine and teaching. Today’s Christian emphasis on the gospel has changed our view of salvation and our understanding of Jesus. We found a new appreciation of what it means to experience God's grace.
Reviewing the Pacific Union Recorder
October, 2007
Lots of newsy, community relation pieces. Way to go!
Holbrook has a highly educated Native American principal! What an unselfish and admirable posting for someone universities all over the US would give their eyeteeth to employ at a top salary. Janet Claymore-Ross, you are my hero! I’ll suggest your name for Education Secretary when Hillary becomes the next President. No kidding!
Mark Carr’s essay, “What’s In It for Me?” is “good as gold”.
Way to go, PUC! For the fourteen consecutive year, you have been rated “as among the best educational institutions in the country". As an alumnus, Class of ’63, you continue to make me “proud as punch!”
(Note the expressions all you UK residents and former British colonial subjects. I’m an anglophile at heart.)
Good news! Our North American Religious Liberty Association has launched a blog that discusses Supreme Court Decisions, election campaigns, the war on terror, hate crimes, hate speech (No calling the Pope the Antichrist), and “several other topics”. Their blog address: religiousliberty.info
Finally, what’s up with the back cover? “100% Chance of ‘LATTER RAIN”? It’s predicted for October 12-14 when thousands of Adventists in the Pacific Union are going to pray at the same time, and by force of numbers will require God to bring it about. I’m sure God will do it. Just check the next Recorder for proof that I can forecast the future.
Lots of newsy, community relation pieces. Way to go!
Holbrook has a highly educated Native American principal! What an unselfish and admirable posting for someone universities all over the US would give their eyeteeth to employ at a top salary. Janet Claymore-Ross, you are my hero! I’ll suggest your name for Education Secretary when Hillary becomes the next President. No kidding!
Mark Carr’s essay, “What’s In It for Me?” is “good as gold”.
Way to go, PUC! For the fourteen consecutive year, you have been rated “as among the best educational institutions in the country". As an alumnus, Class of ’63, you continue to make me “proud as punch!”
(Note the expressions all you UK residents and former British colonial subjects. I’m an anglophile at heart.)
Good news! Our North American Religious Liberty Association has launched a blog that discusses Supreme Court Decisions, election campaigns, the war on terror, hate crimes, hate speech (No calling the Pope the Antichrist), and “several other topics”. Their blog address: religiousliberty.info
Finally, what’s up with the back cover? “100% Chance of ‘LATTER RAIN”? It’s predicted for October 12-14 when thousands of Adventists in the Pacific Union are going to pray at the same time, and by force of numbers will require God to bring it about. I’m sure God will do it. Just check the next Recorder for proof that I can forecast the future.
Reviewing the Review
September 27, 2007
Vol. 184, No. 27
This is the most discouraging Adventist Review I have read as an adult. One of the only bright spots was Pardon Mwansa's “Words of Hope”. The words were comforting and provided hope. I was reminded of the beautifully written and intelligent essay, “A Time for Silence” by Steven Chavez, in the Review of April 11, 2006. Chavez wrote, “Only God knows the mysteries of life on this part. Once we learn to admit that our knowledge about his activity is imperfect at best, we will be less likely to embarrass ourselves with outlandish and unsubstantiated assertions.” Unfortunately, outlandish and unsubstantiated assertions abound in this issue.
While this Review is designed to inspire hope and its readers, it fails miserably! I am troubled by the continual reference to Christ's death as sacrificial. The notion that God had to have his beloved Son killed so that His death could make it possible for God to love us and grant us salvation is ridiculous, given the words of Christ in the John:16. It's time that we as a Christian denomination emphasize the life and words of Christ and preach the Gospel, i.e. what is required to establish Christ’s Kingdom, the kingdom that will last forever.
The notion that Christians once converted will never be lonely again is ridiculous. I hope that Mr. Steger, the author of, In My Father's House are Many Rooms, would claim not to have written that title byline.
Daniel Duda's article is strange theologically and unsettling emotionally. He says things like, “My little head cannot be the ultimate source of truth and wisdom”. He goes on to assert that, “Every time God's word, as found in his inspired word (the Bible) is preached, something supernatural, mysterious takes place. People who respond positively cross the line from this world into God's kingdom.” It's disturbing to think the Duda is the Ministerial Secretary and Educational Director for the Trans European Division.
Lourdes E.Morales-Gudmundssom's theology is masochistic. Her quote, “What I find interesting about faith is its inevitable connection with suffering. As unpleasant as it may be, suffering has the capacity to strengthen our faith like nothing else. Here is yet another insight into the wisdom of God in allowing His Son to suffer--” She goes on to say, “It was that suffering during His life and His death that allowed Him to become the perfect sacrifice to meet the demands of the broken Law. And it will be our own suffering, taken in the right spirit, that will create an appropriate longing for that home with our Savior, one from which we will never have to leave.” Ms. Lourdes, stick to teaching Spanish language and literature.
Bill Huck, I’ll let you know why some react to the second coming as though it were a fable. The Adventist Church has been preaching Christ’s imminent return for a long long time. In 1905, my grandmother had to pry my mother out from under her bed with a broomstick after an Adventist evangelist declared the imminent “time of the end”.
Finally, Jan Paulson is to be congratulated for doing a pretty good job of keeping the leaky old Adventist ship afloat. Hang in there, Jan.
Vol. 184, No. 27
This is the most discouraging Adventist Review I have read as an adult. One of the only bright spots was Pardon Mwansa's “Words of Hope”. The words were comforting and provided hope. I was reminded of the beautifully written and intelligent essay, “A Time for Silence” by Steven Chavez, in the Review of April 11, 2006. Chavez wrote, “Only God knows the mysteries of life on this part. Once we learn to admit that our knowledge about his activity is imperfect at best, we will be less likely to embarrass ourselves with outlandish and unsubstantiated assertions.” Unfortunately, outlandish and unsubstantiated assertions abound in this issue.
While this Review is designed to inspire hope and its readers, it fails miserably! I am troubled by the continual reference to Christ's death as sacrificial. The notion that God had to have his beloved Son killed so that His death could make it possible for God to love us and grant us salvation is ridiculous, given the words of Christ in the John:16. It's time that we as a Christian denomination emphasize the life and words of Christ and preach the Gospel, i.e. what is required to establish Christ’s Kingdom, the kingdom that will last forever.
The notion that Christians once converted will never be lonely again is ridiculous. I hope that Mr. Steger, the author of, In My Father's House are Many Rooms, would claim not to have written that title byline.
Daniel Duda's article is strange theologically and unsettling emotionally. He says things like, “My little head cannot be the ultimate source of truth and wisdom”. He goes on to assert that, “Every time God's word, as found in his inspired word (the Bible) is preached, something supernatural, mysterious takes place. People who respond positively cross the line from this world into God's kingdom.” It's disturbing to think the Duda is the Ministerial Secretary and Educational Director for the Trans European Division.
Lourdes E.Morales-Gudmundssom's theology is masochistic. Her quote, “What I find interesting about faith is its inevitable connection with suffering. As unpleasant as it may be, suffering has the capacity to strengthen our faith like nothing else. Here is yet another insight into the wisdom of God in allowing His Son to suffer--” She goes on to say, “It was that suffering during His life and His death that allowed Him to become the perfect sacrifice to meet the demands of the broken Law. And it will be our own suffering, taken in the right spirit, that will create an appropriate longing for that home with our Savior, one from which we will never have to leave.” Ms. Lourdes, stick to teaching Spanish language and literature.
Bill Huck, I’ll let you know why some react to the second coming as though it were a fable. The Adventist Church has been preaching Christ’s imminent return for a long long time. In 1905, my grandmother had to pry my mother out from under her bed with a broomstick after an Adventist evangelist declared the imminent “time of the end”.
Finally, Jan Paulson is to be congratulated for doing a pretty good job of keeping the leaky old Adventist ship afloat. Hang in there, Jan.
Reviewing the Review
September 20, 2007
Vol. 184, N. 26
I have been a family member of the Education Department at California State University, Chico, for the past 37 years. Consequently, I was interested in a Jimmy Phillips article “The Invisible Majority”. It has been my experience that most Seventh-day Adventist students who attend this university do not wish to attend the local Adventist Church or wish to identify themselves to the local pastor. Perhaps they attend church when they go home, but when they are here, they seem to enjoy the freedom that anonymity grants them.
Two students referred to me by our local church did not belong here. They chose to take science and religion classes that allowed them to “witness” (noisily confront) their professors. They complained to me about “the godless faculty". Even these students, however, did not affiliate themselves with the local church or the Adventist outreach program, Sadaven House, that existed at that time. One former Adventist student was so anti-church that he complained loudly and emotionally when I mentioned Jesus, in the context of teaching as storytelling. He transferred out of my class!
Ron Pickle suggests that there are five things Adventist college students want: membership in a Christian community, the chance to get involved in that community, the opportunity to develop spiritual friendships (what I take to mean a social life with other Adventist young people), spiritual mentors, and a place where it's safe to be an Adventist college student. In our town we have a number of religious communities that meet these needs. They are not affiliated with or sponsored by an Adventist Church.
It has been my experience that the students, myself included, who attend a secular university are young people who can best be described as “Adventist survivors”. They are generally fed up with the dogmatic Adventism they have been exposed to and enjoy the freedom provided by a university campus where they are not constantly “ministered to” by well-meaning church members.
The Frederick A. Russell editorial, “The Death of the Movement?” is a brutally honest appraisal of where we are is an Adventist Church in North America, and I agree with him. The following comments are direct quotes.
"There are many things in life I'm uncertain about. But one thing I'm certain of is that our church in North America has ceased being a movement...If the movement as a movement is dying, it is not something happening only in administrative offices around the country. The most important decline happens in you and me."
I along with Juan Prestol am uneasy with the outcomes of constituency elections. I believe our shared unease stems from the fact that constituents are not psychologically prepared to function in a democratic environment and are uninformed as to the consequences of the decisions that are made. Consequently, they follow the suggestions of the administrators in charge of the meetings like sheep.
I think the following suggestions might be helpful in making constituency meetings real democratic decision-making bodies. First, inform delegates about the issues the same way we are informed when we cast our ballots in local, state, and national elections. Pro and con arguments are required if delegates are to make informed decisions. Next, with this information at hand, delegates from each church should be required to meet without the supervision of the pastor and thoroughly discuss each issue prior to the meeting. Finally, in the information sent to each delegate, there should be a request from the conference president to make informed decisions, regardless of personal loyalties or respect for existing church officials. The president should assure delegates that neither he nor members of his administrative team will address the assembled delegates as church authorities.
Vol. 184, N. 26
I have been a family member of the Education Department at California State University, Chico, for the past 37 years. Consequently, I was interested in a Jimmy Phillips article “The Invisible Majority”. It has been my experience that most Seventh-day Adventist students who attend this university do not wish to attend the local Adventist Church or wish to identify themselves to the local pastor. Perhaps they attend church when they go home, but when they are here, they seem to enjoy the freedom that anonymity grants them.
Two students referred to me by our local church did not belong here. They chose to take science and religion classes that allowed them to “witness” (noisily confront) their professors. They complained to me about “the godless faculty". Even these students, however, did not affiliate themselves with the local church or the Adventist outreach program, Sadaven House, that existed at that time. One former Adventist student was so anti-church that he complained loudly and emotionally when I mentioned Jesus, in the context of teaching as storytelling. He transferred out of my class!
Ron Pickle suggests that there are five things Adventist college students want: membership in a Christian community, the chance to get involved in that community, the opportunity to develop spiritual friendships (what I take to mean a social life with other Adventist young people), spiritual mentors, and a place where it's safe to be an Adventist college student. In our town we have a number of religious communities that meet these needs. They are not affiliated with or sponsored by an Adventist Church.
It has been my experience that the students, myself included, who attend a secular university are young people who can best be described as “Adventist survivors”. They are generally fed up with the dogmatic Adventism they have been exposed to and enjoy the freedom provided by a university campus where they are not constantly “ministered to” by well-meaning church members.
The Frederick A. Russell editorial, “The Death of the Movement?” is a brutally honest appraisal of where we are is an Adventist Church in North America, and I agree with him. The following comments are direct quotes.
"There are many things in life I'm uncertain about. But one thing I'm certain of is that our church in North America has ceased being a movement...If the movement as a movement is dying, it is not something happening only in administrative offices around the country. The most important decline happens in you and me."
I along with Juan Prestol am uneasy with the outcomes of constituency elections. I believe our shared unease stems from the fact that constituents are not psychologically prepared to function in a democratic environment and are uninformed as to the consequences of the decisions that are made. Consequently, they follow the suggestions of the administrators in charge of the meetings like sheep.
I think the following suggestions might be helpful in making constituency meetings real democratic decision-making bodies. First, inform delegates about the issues the same way we are informed when we cast our ballots in local, state, and national elections. Pro and con arguments are required if delegates are to make informed decisions. Next, with this information at hand, delegates from each church should be required to meet without the supervision of the pastor and thoroughly discuss each issue prior to the meeting. Finally, in the information sent to each delegate, there should be a request from the conference president to make informed decisions, regardless of personal loyalties or respect for existing church officials. The president should assure delegates that neither he nor members of his administrative team will address the assembled delegates as church authorities.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)