NewsNuggets Page 58

Vanessa Alarcón – Aurora, Colorado … If you haven’t had the pleasure to meet my father-in-law, Pastor Jose Alarcón, here are a few words to describe him: joyful about evangelism. He has been in ministry for the last few decades and recently accepted a calling to pastor the Aurora First Seventh-day Adventist Church in Aurora. I recently had the chance to sit down and interview him.

When asked to describe himself, Jose describes himself as a pastor that loves the Lord. “I take the call that God has given me very seriously,” he remarked. “God called me for this.” Jose shared he hadn’t always accepted his call into ministry. Before studying theology, he studied to be a travel agent. When an airline would not accommodate Sabbath observance, he took that as the nudge he needed to accept God’s call. “I was being Jonah,” he chuckled as he reminisced.

Jose graduated from Atlantic Union College with two bachelor’s degrees: one in Theology and another in History. He began his ministry as the chaplain of Greater New York Academy where he taught History, Bible, and Spanish. Afterwards, he pastored in various conferences including the Northeastern Conference, Southern New England Conference, and the Central California Conference. In the midst of his pastoral ministry, he obtained his Master in Divinity from Andrews University and also served as the Hispanic coordinator and executive secretary of the Southern New England conference.

Reflecting on his time in ministry, he shared about the times he has seen the Holy Spirit work. “I can never forget how God wants his kingdom to be expanded.” While serving as a Bible worker at Atlantic Union College, Pastor Jose gave over 100 Bible Studies. “I got to see how God works through the Bible studies and see those who made decisions for baptism.”

Jose sees much value when a pastor and church work together in ministry. “To me, I see evangelism as the door to the kingdom. When members work with a pastor and create a plan to reach others, that to me is amazing to see how God uses everyone. Even the person who cleans the church, everything is geared towards [evangelism]. It’s like oil machinery.” He cited his late mentor, Pastor Francisco Ramos, who helped develop his desire for administration and evangelism. “If I have been able to help an individual stay connected or connect to Jesus, that is an amazing step. It doesn’t always have to end in a baptism, but, if they are connected with Christ, the Lord will connect that person.”

Jose is enthused about starting to work with the Aurora First church. He has an evangelism plan called EKG: Expanding the Kingdom of God, a multi-phase approach that puts in the church’s heart to expand the Kingdom of God. Future efforts include starting prayer teams, evangelism teams based on Numbers 11, and small groups. “Prayer is the launching pad for all of this; it’s like the head of the spear.”

A key characteristic of the Aurora First church is the diversity of culture among the membership. “It’s a church with people from so many different countries. I love cultures, and I’ve kept in mind how to integrate varying cultures into my sermons. The church seems excited to work, and I am here to help the church grow and expand.”

Jose has just as much enthusiasm for evangelism as he does his love for his family. Jose is married to Dina Alarcón, to whom he’s been married for the last 35 years and who he met in their hometown of Agudilla, Puerto Rico. “She’s my eighth-grade sweetheart!” Jose proudly shared. Together, they have two adult sons, Ricky, and Steven. “I had a very special and close relationship with my dad. I try to be the same kind of father for my kids. I think they recognize that I really love them.” During his free time, you could find Jose watching baseball, specifically cheering for the New York Yankees. “I have a prodigal son somewhere that’s a New York Mets fan.” I laughed, knowing he was talking about my husband, Ricky. My response was, “I know which son. I know him very well.”

While he is the newest addition to the RMC ministerial family, one thing is for sure, Jose’s warmth and enthusiasm for ministry is one I have witnessed since day one—a passion he has carried for decades of his ministry. I’m certain it will continue through his ministry at the Rocky Mountain Conference.

—Vanessa Alarcón is elder and church clerk at Boulder Adventist Church. Photo supplied.

RMCNews – Denver, Colorado … The Rocky Mountain Conference Executive Committee adopted policy guidelines for managing the relationship between RMC and organizations who are not of our brand (supportive ministries), entitled “Independent/Supporting Ministries: Guidance for Engaging in the Relationship.”

We asked Douglas Inglish, RMC vice president for administration, to explain the practical aspects of the policy.

NewsNuggets: The policy covers a need to protect your organization from those who are not of our brand. Which independent organizations is the policy talking about?

Douglas Inglish: The key point is ownership and control. We’re not talking about non-Adventists. These are Adventist people who have ministries that are designed to support the mission of the church, but they are not owned or governed by the church. They are owned or controlled by a member of the church but not by the Seventh-day Adventist Church or any of its entities like the Conference or a local church.

NN: Is this a new policy?

DI: It’s kind of new for everybody. It grew out of a fairly recent court case, and this policy comes with a strong recommendation from Adventist Risk Management. The entanglements between one of these ministries and the Conference were so thorough that the judge said, “you’re effectively one organization.” Every time they would go into one of our churches, they would raise money which was funneled through the local church accounts. They would come to camp meetings and not indicate they were a separate organization from the conference. The conference publications referred to them as an Adventist school in our territory. And then, when they got sued, of course they didn’t have the deep pockets. The church did. The attorney representing the plaintiff named the church in the suit, and the judge said, “you’re effectively the same organization and that’s been upheld.” The current settlement of the court case is in excess of $50M has a potential to top at $100M or more. This is serious.

NN: Since it was recently adopted in the Rocky Mountain Conference, you must have been getting questions. 

DI: Yes, a number of them. Let me give you an example or two. Some of them are based on a complete misunderstanding. “You mean I can no longer give to organization X, Y, Z?”  Of course, you can. You know, we don’t control who you give to or not, but you give to them on the same basis that you would give to a charitable organization that has nothing to do with our denomination. You give directly. But you can’t give a check made out to the local church and instruct the treasurer to send part or all of it to the supportive ministry.

Or “you mean I can’t invite this ministry to my church?” Yes, you can invite that ministry to your church if they are a part of ASI organization [Adventist-layman’s Services & Industries], or ASI eligible. ASI does a good job vetting supportive ministries, and we have confidence that, with rare exceptions, their members are trustworthy. Not all groups who are eligible choose to be ASI members, so, if they are not, we need to do some background checking.

But we must manage that event by making it clear to everybody this is not a part of the Rocky Mountain Conference. That is not a value judgment, it is just to protect the organization. There are a lot of fine organizations, some of them located within our territory, such as La Vida Mission. We just have to clarify, number one, it’s not the Rocky Mountain Conference. And number two, we can’t collect for them. And number three, we can’t endorse them. Endorsement can be something as simple as keeping their literature on hand. They can pass their literature out, but we don’t keep it around after they’re gone and continue to let it be out.

Technically, we can endorse a supportive ministry, but only if we thoroughly vet that organization ourselves to ensure that they meet the standards we have for ourselves. For example, we must ascertain that they’re paying all their workers appropriately, that all employees are eligible to work in the US, that their buildings meet local codes, that they are regularly audited, that they’re not practicing medicine or law without a license, etc. And we would have to keep checking on those matters.

We simply don’t have the resources to keep up with all of that, so we just don’t endorse supportive ministries. When they come to churches, schools, camp meetings, etc., it is to report on their own work on matter where they share a mutual interest with us, such as education, medical work, outreach, etc.

NN: Some may be wondering how to relate to an organization with an Adventist church on their premises. How do we manage such a relationship?

DI: There is a good way to manage that, really. Within RMC territory, we only have two of those entities. There are a couple others that have an interest in using our facilities, but that’s a really a different situation. What you’re referring to is when we have a congregation that meets on their property.

Both the La Vida Mission Church and the Eden Valley Church are congregations just like any other congregation. It’s like Boulder or Cheyenne or Grand Junction or Palisade. It’s a church. It’s one of the churches of the Rocky Mountain Conference. And it has a membership: church officers like a clerk and a treasurer and it has a budget, etc. They just happen to meet on the premises of one of these supportive ministries. The way that we manage that is that we have a contract, a lease agreement signed by both parties that recognizes we’re two different entities, and we have a contractual relationship.

I’m glad we’re making taking steps to protect both entities because it works the other way too. We don’t want some independent ministry getting sued for our actions. If we’re too closely entangled, that could happen.

Really, all of these efforts are to maintain a separation such that a court can’t hold one party responsible for the actions of the other. Some have raised the question of whether this is a religious liberty issue, but that’s not the case.

NN: A “religious liberty” issue? Please explain.

DI: Well, we can call anything we want a religious liberty issue, but that’s not the case because we also have to obey the traffic laws. That’s not a religious liberty issue. And it’s not that anybody wrote up a new law here. This is what we call case law; in that a court determined two entities were entangled so much that they effectively acted as one.

So, our reaction is to prevent that finding again. That’s why we’re doing it. It’s not a religious liberty issue. There is no law that says we can’t take up an offering and funnel it through our accounts and give it to a supportive ministry. However, it isn’t prudent to go out and do anything we want to just because it breaks no law. There may be a tort involved, meaning one entity or the other has caused harm to a person and the court is going to award the victim a settlement. Both entities could get dragged into it if they are so closely associated that the court sees them as one. That’s why we’re creating some distance.

But most of the reaction when people find out about the need for separation is at a more personal level. “I don’t really understand it. I used to be able to just write a check and drop it in the offering plate. Our treasurer would forward.” Or, “Why all the fuss to bring in a speaker who has been here before, and we never had a problem. Why does the Conference have to clear him first?” The short answer is that we can’t afford to lose a lawsuit, so we are finding ways you can still invite that speaker and still support his ministry while showing separation.

NN: By adopting this policy, the church is sending a message to our local churches. What, in particular, you would like to emphasize? 

DI: The message is not in any way meant to imply we don’t like certain groups. We do like them, and we recognize they’re doing the good work. We want to make sure that we manage our relationship with them in such a way that neither party is going to become liable for the actions of the other.

[The policy] is trying to protect everybody involved. And it is a lot of learning. It’s a new way of doing things. It’s not intuitive. The old way of doing things was not only familiar; it was intuitive. This isn’t, so we must learn a new way.

I would like to emphasize again, while it is possible to continue to have positive interactions with such ministries, it is necessary to guard against entanglements which courts can interpret as making us equally liable for the actions of other ministries. The policy states: “These guidelines are designed to help [RMC employees and institutions] assess whether access should be granted to an independent/supporting ministry, and if so, what safeguards must be in place to protect us from liability for their actions.”

—RMCNews

He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose.
– Jim Elliot

In all four gospel accounts, we read of Jesus calling and making disciples (see Matthew 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; Luke 5:1-11; John 1:40-45). Jesus never spoke of making stewards, yet many of his parables dealt with stewards and their faithfulness or faithlessness. We must examine why Jesus said so much about stewards and stewardship while making disciples, not stewards. Or did he?

Being a disciple (mathētēs) implied a close relationship between the teacher and student. Historically, the disciples chose their teacher; however, Jesus took the initiative and called some of his followers to be his disciples. He emphasized that the condition for discipleship is love: By this all will know that you are My disciples; if you have love for one another (John 13:35). He spoke of the sign of discipleship as obedience when he said, If you abide in My word, you are My disciples indeed (John 8:31). 

Furthermore, he spoke of the proof of discipleship when he stated, By this My Father is glorified, that you bear much fruit; so you will be My disciples (John 15:8). Ellen G. White expounds: Will every soul consider the fact that Christian discipleship includes self-denial, self-sacrifice, even to the laying down of life itself, if need be, for the sake of Him who has given His life for the life of the world? ¹

Every disciple would radiate his teacher’s and master’s character, aspirations, goals, and commitments, denying his autonomy of freedom and competence.² Stott saw the disciples being under the instructions of their teacher and their lord.³ The student had to submit to all the teacher’s influence, and so had to do the disciples of Jesus. Stott reminds us, since Jesus is Lord we have no right to pick and choose the areas in which we will submit to his authority.⁴ The language of lordship is tightly related to stewardship since there is no steward without a lord. 

When Jesus called someone to discipleship, he was doing what he was sent to do by his Father. Very early in his life, Jesus stated that he has to be about My Father’s business (Luke 2:49). Later in his ministry, Jesus claimed that all things have been delivered to Me by My Father (Luke 10:22). Jesus’ language of Him being a servant/steward is even more apparent when he says, I have come in My father’s name (John 5:43), and as My Father thought me I speak these things (John 8:28). Furthermore, he exclaimed, I have kept My Father’s commandments and abide in His love (John 15:10).

These, and many other verses, contain the steward language; however, the most apparent one is in John 17:4 when he declares to the Father, I have glorified You on the earth. I have finished the work which You have given Me to do. Only a steward would speak in this manner to his lord and master.

Hall affirms that our stewardship is exemplified by Jesus,⁵ making discipleship the entry vedge for stewardship. So Hall concludes, The steward exists not only to serve his or her master, but in doing so to serve as well those whose interests the master has at heart.⁶ While Jesus called and taught his disciples by his words, he was molding and shaping them to be stewards through his mission, life, relationships, and works because stewardship is an identity and a lifestyle.

In the following parts of this commentary, we will look more profoundly at the steward’s identity, his relation to the master, the setting where stewardship occurs, and the limitless impact of the steward’s lifestyle.

—Anton Kapusi is lead pastor of Pueblo First Seventh-day Adventist Church. Photo by Pexels.

¹  White E. G. Counsel on Stewardship. p. 288.
²  Thomson T. K. (1960). Stewardship in Contemporary Theology. Association Press, p. 47.
³  Stott J. (2010). The Radical Disciple. IVP, p. 14.
⁴  Ibid., p. 16.
⁵  Hall D. J. (1990). The Steward: a Biblical Symbol Come of Age. William B. Erdmans, p. 44.
⁶  Ibid., p. 45.

Toby Quillin – Loveland, Colorado … From the beginning of creation, laws have been a part of our life. We need to have most laws to function as a society. There are some, however, that aren’t useful at all. Silly and weird laws are everywhere including right here in Colorado. Let’s explore a few of these strange and seemingly unuseful laws.

The first strange law comes from the city of Pueblo. It says it’s illegal to allow dandelions to grow in city limits. The rule states that no pesky weed can be taller than ten inches. If you forget to pull them or let them grow without cutting them, then you can be fined $100 for the labor costs of removing them. A big fine for just one weed.

There is a very ironic law that says it is illegal to roll or throw boulders in the city of Boulder. This law goes on to say that you can’t even move or stack rocks in any Boulder public property. So just remember the next time you go to Boulder, no matter how big or small the rock is, don’t move it an inch.

The third weird and wacky law comes straight from our state’s capital city. In Denver, it is unlawful to lend your neighbor your vacuum cleaner. This rule came around because of the spread of pests caught up in the vacuum like ticks and bed bugs. A reasonable law, but still a strange one.

These laws don’t seem to have any purpose, but there’s always something we can learn from a seemingly useless thing.

When Jesus was asked what the greatest commandment was, he didn’t respond with one of the 613 laws of the Pharisees. He responded with his own two commandments that should be the basis of every law.

“Jesus replied: ‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: Love your neighbor as yourself.’” ( Matthew 22:37-39, NIV).

Jesus didn’t need hundreds of laws to make his point clear, he only needed two. The Pharisees tried to use works to get to salvation by implementing hundreds of laws that had nothing to do with God’s plan for salvation.

In today’s world, there are a lot of rules. Many exist to keep us safe even if they don’t make sense to us. Though we see the many laws in society, it is important to remember the greatest law: the law of love.

Christians are sometimes defined by the many rules they must keep. Let’s not get caught up in all the small stuff that we think will save us like the Pharisees did. Let’s try to change that definition today by focusing on how deep our love for God is and how much we care for our fellow humans.

Toby Quillin is a member of the Campion Student News Team. Photo by Pexels.