By Reinder Bruinsma … Dutch Adventists are often described as rather liberal, but eating out on Sabbath has always been a no-no.
Great was their amazement when in 1995, tens of thousands of fellow believers descended upon the city of Utrecht for the General Conference session, and great numbers were seen to spread out all over the city on Sabbath in search of a restaurant. Those Adventists who have done a fair bit of traveling and have been in contact with church members in countries with different cultures have noticed that the praxis of Adventists varies considerably from place to place.
Nowadays, in most places, my wedding ring no longer causes offense, but when preaching in a rural church in Costa Rica, the pastor implored me not to create a problem in his church by wearing my ring. When I occasionally preach in the Ghanaian Adventist Church
in Amsterdam, my wedding band is no problem, but my wife’s simple necklace is frowned upon. To the dismay of many visiting fellow believers in Scandinavia, Adventists usually equate “low-alcoholic” with “non-alcoholic,” and the way some Australian pastors are dressed when they enter the pulpit would not go over well with most Adventist audiences elsewhere in the world. When serving for several years in tropical Africa, I learned that I must wear a tie and a jacket in church even when the temperature is in the upper eighties. This is what our African brothers and sisters were taught by western missionaries (from whom they also learned the still popular song: Whiter than snow, o Lord would I be!).
A world church must expect diversity
I could cite numerous other examples of how Adventist practices around the world vary, not just from country to country, but often from region to region within a country, and between population segments with different ethnic origins and cultures.
In her e-book From Sundown to Sundown, Dr. May-Ellen Colón, an assistant director of the Sabbath School and Personal Ministries department of the General Conference, compares Sabbath-keeping practices in fifty-one different countries. She concludes that, if you make a composite list of all things that in some places are deemed inappropriate to do on the Sabbath, and adopt that list, you can do virtually nothing, and if you make a similar list of all things that somewhere are considered okay, virtually nothing seems taboo!
Often people, when first confronted with practices elsewhere that would be frowned upon in their own Adventist milieu or when hearing and reading about customs that differ considerably from what they have grown up with and are used to, wonder how the church can remain united if we practice our faith in so many ways. Admittedly, there may be practices that are questionable in the light of some of the church’s teachings. But in most cases, we are dealing with culture and tradition rather than principle. In a church that has become truly global and has spread to almost all countries of the world, with countless differ- ent ethnicities and cultures represented, we must expect significant diversity in the way people translate their faith into everyday life. It means, in fact, that the church is alive. Enforcing total uniformity in the way people express their beliefs would not only be impossible, but also an unnatural sign of rigidity!
The reality of doctrinal differences
Some readers may react with a “so far, so good,” but would be adamant that diversity in the church must be restricted to practices and customs. They may agree that ethnic and cultural differences are acceptable in a global denomination such as ours, or maybe even enriching our community if we remain united in our theology. Adventists around the world should share, they say, the same approach to Scripture and the theology that results from this, as is expressed in the 28 Fundamental Beliefs. Well, the reality is quite different. Whether we like it or not, there is plenty of theological diversity in our church. In fact, this is not a recent development, but despite a growing consensus over time regarding our main teachings, diversity has existed from the beginning.
To say that the membership of the church is divided between conservatives and liberals is not very helpful. There are many shades of conservatism and many degrees of liberalism. Moreover, some are conservative in their theology, but not so in their lifestyle. And vice-versa. It may be better to speak of different streams or modalities. This is not unique to Adventists. As time has passed, most denominations have experienced the development
of different theological streams. This often led to schisms in faith communities, when the gaps between the various groups of believers became so wide that people felt they had no option but to go different ways. The Adventist Church is, in fact, quite an exception in that it has stayed together without many major secessions. Perhaps we could say that some of the independent ministries provide a haven for individuals and groups which feel that the denomination allows for too many voices which defend or even promote ideas that do not fit with traditional Adventist orthodox views.
What are some of the areas in which we see a diversity of theological opinion? In the first place, we do not all read the Bible in the same way. On the one hand, there are those who maintain that a “plain” reading of the Scriptures is the only safe way to find Truth, whereas others have a totally different view of inspiration. For many, it means that everything was created by God in “recent” times within a period of six literal days. But an increasing number of church members, while firmly believing that God is the Creator, argue that the Bible is not a book of science, but a book of faith and theology and that it does not inform us about the “how” of creation but about the meaning of creation.
It does not take much effort to detect that the relationship between faith and works is approached in different ways. There are those who are sure that sinful people, such as we admittedly are, can reach a state of sinless perfection, while others consider this a blasphemous idea. Much discussion (and, unfortunately, much controversy) divides Adventists about such topics as the true human nature of Christ, and the issue of the Trinity. Views about the prophecies which, together with the input of Ellen G. White, have shaped the traditional Adventist end-time scenario, are widely divergent. For some, the old-time views are as valid as ever, while others feel that a re-evaluation is a matter of urgency. Aspects of our sanctuary doctrine, about the ordination of female ministers, and about gender identity, are other hotly debated issues.
What to do?
Unfortunately, we often find that people have come to a particular conclusion and are no longer willing (or able?) to listen with an open mind to the standpoints of others. The doctrinal positions have led to a serious degree of polarization, dividing (in many minds) the members into “genuine” Adventists, who are loyal to the Truth, and “apostate” Adventists, who undermine the Adventist message and mission.
It would be unrealistic to deny that this doctrinal diversity does not pose a challenge for the denomination. Understandably, church leaders want to keep us all together; they want peace and emphasize that unity in our thinking and in the way we present our message is a prerequisite for maintaining a vigorous mission outreach. However, they must also face the sad reality that members (young and not so young) leave the church in droves, because they feel that their church has left them and no longer answers their questions and fails, to a large extent, to connect the Adventist faith with 21st-century life.
A faith community will inevitably become a museum if its major concern is to conserve the past. Instead, while traditional ways of understanding the Bible remain an important source of inspiration, in a living community, there must be an ever-ongoing search for a deeper understanding of what believing in Christ, and being an Adventist, means today and tomorrow. This process can create unrest and even a sense of uncertainty. Not all members will at any given time be on the same page and share in identical developments—including doctrinal development—and the church will not everywhere proceed in the same manner and at the same pace. Yes, a living community will be characterized by an underlying unity but will, at the same time, also exhibit diversity. The existence of different modalities in the church is not a sure sign of confusion and theological decay, but an inevitable, and even healthy, indication that the church is alive.
An acknowledgment that not all doctrines are equally important and that, perhaps, we should have fewer, rather than more, fundamental beliefs would reflect the thinking of a large number of (or possibly most) Adventists. Allowing for a responsible degree of academic freedom
for our theologians and for a measure of diversity in denominational publications, and for experimenting with non-traditional ways of being church, and with new ways of “translating” our message to reach new kinds of audiences—all these things certainly carry risks. But enforcing a one-and-only correct interpretation of what we consider to be biblical truth is no option—simply because experience has shown that this can never work!
Finally, one aspect must be highlighted. It is time to take another good look at global Adventism. We see strengths and weaknesses. We discern polarization and much theological diversity. However, if we analyze what is happening within the various “modalities,” we continue to see, behind all diversity, an underlying unity. We may think differently about the nature of Christ, but for all of us, Christ is the Lord and the “Author” of our salvation. We may keep the Sabbath in different ways, but we all continue to believe that the seventh-day Sabbath is a precious gift to mankind. We may disagree on aspects of end-time prophecies, but we are united in our conviction that “a great controversy” continues to rage and that history moves, maybe slowly, but surely, towards the climactic Coming of Christ. And this applies to most doctrines: we can gratefully acknowledge of a fundamental unity behind the significant diversity. Moreover, we must give one another the time and the space to grow in our understanding of biblical truth and be willing to learn from others as we prayerfully seek answers to our questions.
Keeping this in mind, we do not have to be obsessed— or even concerned—by the existence of modalities, but we can see the various theological streams as expressions of the rich Christian-Adventist experience that we want to share with people around us.
–Reinder Bruinsma, PhD, has served the Seventh-day Adventist Church in publishing, education, and church administration on three continents. He writes from the Netherlands where he lives with his wife Aafie. Among his latest books is I Have a Future: Christ’s Resurrection and Mine. Email him at: [email protected]