| Seventh-day Adventists and the Ecumenical Movement |
|
 |
 |
The General Conference Executive Committee has never voted an official statement
regarding the Seventh-day Adventist relationship to the ecumenical movement
as such. A book has been written dealing at length with the subject (B. B.
Beach, Ecumenism-Boon or Bane? [Review and Herald, 1974]) and a number
of articles have appeared over the years in Adventist publications, including
the Adventist Review. Thus, while there is not exactly an official position,
there are plenty of clear indications regarding the Seventh-day Adventist viewpoint.
Generally, it can be said that while the Seventh-day Adventist Church does
not completely condemn the ecumenical movement and its main organizational
manifestation, the World Council of Churches, she has been critical of various
aspects and activities. Few would wish to deny that ecumenism has had laudable
aims and some positive influences. Its great goal is visible Christian unity. No
Adventist can be opposed to the unity Christ Himself prayed for. The ecumenical
movement has promoted kinder interchurch relations with more dialogue and less
diatribe and helped remove unfounded prejudices.
Through its various organizations and activities, the ecumenical movement
has provided more accurate and updated information on churches, spoken for
religious liberty and human rights, combated against the evils of racism, and
drawn attention to socioeconomic implications of the gospel. In all this the
intentions have been good and some of the fruit palatable. However, in the
total picture, the banes tend to outweigh the boons. We shall examine some
of these.
Adventism a Prophetic Movement
The Seventh-day Adventist Church stepped upon the stage of history-so Adventists
firmly believe-in response to God's call. Adventists believe, it is hoped
without pride or arrogance, that the Advent Movement represents the divinely
appointed instrument for the organized proclamation of the "eternal gospel," God's
last message, discerned from the prophetic vantage point of Revelation 14 and
18. In the focalized light of its prophetic understanding, the Seventh-day
Adventist Church sees herself as the eschatologically oriented "ecumenical" movement
of the Apocalypse. She begins by "calling out" God's children from "fallen" ecclesial
bodies that will increasingly form organized religious opposition to the purposes
of God. Together with the "calling out" there is a positive "calling
in" to a united, worldwide-that is, ecumenical-movement characterized
by "faith of Jesus" and keeping "the commandments of God" (Rev.
14:12). In the World Council of Churches the emphasis is first of all on "coming
in" to a fellowship of churches and then hopefully and gradually "coming
out" of corporate disunity. In the Advent Movement the accent is first
on "coming out" of Babylonian disunity and confusion and then immediately "coming
in" to a fellowship of unity, truth, and love within the globe-encircling
Advent family.
In understanding the Adventist attitude toward ecumenism and other mainline
churches, it is helpful to remember that the early-Advent movement (characterized
by the Millerites) had ecumenical aspects: it arose in many churches. Thus,
Adventists came from many denominations. However, the churches generally
rejected the Advent message. Adventists were not infrequently disfellowshipped. Sometimes
Adventists took with them portions of congregations. Relations became embittered. False
stories were circulated, some of which unfortunately still persist today. The
pioneers had strong views, and their opponents were no less dogmatic. They
tended to look more for what separates than what unites. That was an understandable
development. Today, of course, the interchurch climate tends to be more
irenic and benign.
What are some of the problems Adventists have with ecumenism? Before we
endeavor to give a summary answer to this question, it needs to be pointed
out that the ecumenical movement is not monolithic in its thinking, and one
can find all kinds of views represented in its ranks (that in itself, of
course, is a problem!). We will try to make reference to what can be considered
mainstream thinking within the World Council of Churches (WCC), an organization
now representing more than three hundred different churches and denominations.
Ecumenical Understanding of Unity
The New Testament presents a qualified church unity in truth, characterized
by holiness, joy, faithfulness, and obedience (see John 17:6,
13, 17, 19, 23, 26). "Ecumenthusiasts" (to coin a word) seem to
take for granted the eventual organic unity and communion of the great majority
of the churches. They emphasize the "scandal of division," as
if this were really the unpardonable sin. Heresy and apostasy are largely
ignored. However, the New Testament shows the threat of anti-Christian penetration
within "the temple of God" (2 Thess. 2:3, 4). The eschatological
picture of God's church prior to the Second Coming is not one of a megachurch
gathering all humankind together, but of a "remnant" of Christendom,
those keeping the commandments of God and having the faith of Jesus (see
Rev. 12:17).
There is clearly a point at which unorthodoxy and un-Christian lifestyle
justify separation. The WCC misses this point. Separation and division
in order to protect and uphold that purity and integrity of the church and
her message are more desirable than unity in worldliness and error.
Furthermore, Adventists are uncomfortable with the fact that the WCC leaders
seem to give little emphasis to personal sanctification and revival. There
are indications that some may view such emphasis as a quaint pietistic hangover,
not a vital ingredient of a dynamic Christian life. They prefer to soft-pedal
personal piety in favor of social morality. However, in Adventist understanding,
personal holiness of life is such stuff as the morality of society is made
(with apologies to Shakespeare). Without genuinely converted Christians,
any formal organizational unity is really of a plastic nature and of little
relevance.
Ecumenical Understanding of Belief
In many church circles broad-mindedness is seen as an ecumenical virtue. The
ideal ecumenist, it is suggested, is not dogmatic in belief and is somewhat
fluid in doctrinal views. He greatly respects the beliefs of others, but
is less than rigid about his own belief. He appears humble and not assertive
about doctrinal beliefs-except those regarding ecumenical unity. He has
a sense of partial knowing. To show religious doctrinal arrogance is, ecumenically,
especially sinful.
All this has a laudable side. Humility and meekness are Christian virtues. Indeed,
Peter tells us to always be ready to answer and give a reason for our faith,
but this must be done with humility, respect, and a good conscience (1 Peter
3:15, 16). However, there is in ecumenical ranks an almost inbuilt danger
of softness and relativization of belief. The whole concept of heresy is
questioned. Lately, questions are even raised regarding the idea of "paganism."
Typical of some ecumenical presuppositions is the idea that all denominational
formulations of truth are time-conditioned and relative, and therefore partial
and inadequate. Some ecumenists would even go so far as to advocate the
need of doctrinal synthesis, bringing together various Christian beliefs
in a kind of cocktail approach. We are told that each church is imbalanced
and it is the task of ecumenism to restore balance and harmony. Within the
reconciled diversity of the ecumenical movement, presumably everyone, in
the words of Frederick the Great, "will be saved in his own way."
Adventists believe that without strong convictions, a church has little
spiritual power. There is the danger that ecumenical quicksands of doctrinal
softness will suck churches into denominational death. Of course, this is
precisely what ecumenical enthusiasts hope for. However, Adventists feel
that such doctrinal irresolutions must be vigorously resisted, otherwise
spiritual self-disarmament will be the result and a truly post-Christian
age would be upon us.
Ecumenical Understanding of Scripture
Adventists see the Bible as the infallible revelation of God's will, the
authoritative revealer of doctrinal truth, and the trustworthy record of
the mighty acts of God in salvation history (see Fundamental Beliefs of Seventh-day
Adventists: 1. The Holy Scriptures). Adventists see the Bible as a unity. For
many WCC leaders the Bible is not normative and authoritative in itself. The
emphasis is on Biblical diversity, including at times demythologization of
the Gospels. For a large number of ecumenists, as is the case for liberal
Christianity in general, inspiration lies not in the Biblical text but in
the experience of the reader. Propositional revelation is out; experience
is in.
Apocalyptic prophecy is given practically no time-of-the-end role. Pro
forma references to the Parousia are made, but have no implications for urgency
and make little measurable impact on the ecumenical concept of evangelistic
mission. There is here the danger of eschatological blindness.
Seventh-day Adventists see the Biblical picture of sin and redemption within
the framework of the "great controversy" between good and evil,
between Christ and Satan, between God's Word and the lies of the impostor,
between the faithful remnant and Babylon, between the "seal of God" and
the "mark of the beast."
Adventists are, first and foremost, people of the Word. While believing
in the unconditional authority of the Scriptures, Adventists recognize that
the Bible was "written by inspired men, but it is not God's mode of
thought and expression. It is that of humanity. God, as a writer, it not
represented. . . . The writers of the Bible were God's penmen, not His pen.Selected
Messages, book 1, p. 21. Many ecumenists would say that the Biblical
text is not the word of God but contains this word as men respond
and accept it. In contrast, Adventists would say that the utterances
of the Bible writers "are the word of God" (ibid.). God
is not on trial; neither is His Word, form criticism notwithstanding. It
is man vis-à-vis the Bible who is on trial.
Ecumenical Understanding of Mission and Evangelism
The traditional understanding of mission highlights evangelism, that is,
the verbal proclamation of the gospel. The ecumenical approach sees mission
as involving the establishment of shalom, a kind of social peace and
harmony. Adventists have problems with any tendency to downplay the primary
importance of announcing the good news of redemption from the stranglehold
of sin. In fact, the traditional, including Adventist, view of salvation
has always been the saving of individuals from sin and for eternity. Ecumenical
evangelism sees salvation as primarily saving society from oppressive regimes,
from the ravages of hunger, from the curse of racism, and from the exploitation
of injustice.
The Adventist understanding of conversion means for a person to experience
radical changes through spiritual rebirth. The majority emphasis in WCC
circles appears to be on changing-converting-the unjust structures of society.
As we see it, in the area of evangelism and foreign missionary work the
fruits (or maybe we should say lack of fruits) of ecumenism have often been
less evangelism (as we understand it-from Paul to Billy Graham), less growth
and more membership decline, fewer missionaries sent out, proportionally
less financial support coming in. In fact, the missionary outreach has shifted
away from mainline "ecumenical" churches to conservative evangelicals. It
is sad to see such a large evangelistic potential lost to the missionary
movement, especially at a time of increasingly active and militant Islamic
outreach and the awakening of Eastern and indigenous religions.
The recent and successful Seventh-day Adventist One Thousand Days of Reaping
campaign ran counter to the ecumenical low-key "joint mission" approach. The
latter may sound good in an ecumenical study paper, but soul-winning results
are really not there. The paraphrase of an old saying has some relevance
here: "The proof of the ecumenical pudding lies in the evangelistic
eating."
Ecumenical Understanding of Sociopolitical Responsibility
Admittedly, the whole question of Christian social and political responsibility
is a complicated one. The WCC and other councils of churches (such as the
National Council of Churches in the United States) are heavily involved in
what are usually seen as political questions. The Seventh-day Adventist
Church is very much more circumspect in this area (in comparison to evangelism,
where the tables are turned!).
Much ecumenical thinking in the area of political responsibility includes
or involves: (1) a secularization of salvation; (2) a postmillennial view
advocating the gradual political improvement and social betterment of humankind
and the establishment through human effort, as divine agents, of God's kingdom
on earth; (3) adaptation of Christianity to the modern world; (4) evolutionary
utopian faith in progress; and (5) socialistic collectivism, favoring some
form of egalitarianism and the welfare state, but not Communist materialism.
Presumably, ecumenical social activists consider Adventism as a utopian
vision of pie in the apocalyptic sky by and by; this is wrong. Faced with
the many problems of society, Adventists cannot be, and generally are not,
apathetic or indifferent. Witness this: extensive hospital-clinic-health
institutions serving millions of people every year; a large educational system
circling the globe with nearly five thousand schools; Adventist Development
and Relief Agency-a rapidly expanding worldwide service of the church in
areas of acute and chronic need. Several other service activities could
be referred to.
The Seventh-day Adventist Church believes it is necessary to distinguish
between sociopolitical activity of individual Christians as citizens and
involvement on the corporate church level. It is the church's task to deal
with moral principles and to point in a Biblical direction, not to
advocate political directives. The WCC has at times been involved
in political power plays. While Adventism will sow seeds that will inevitably influence society
and politics, it does not wish to be entangled in political controversies. The
church's Lord did state: "My kingdom is not of this world" (John
18:36), and like her Lord the church wishes to go "about doing good" (Acts
10:38). She does not wish to run the government, either directly or indirectly.
Ecumenical Understanding of Religious Liberty
In the early years of the WCC, beginning with its first assembly at Amsterdam
in 1948, religious liberty was placed on the ecumenical agenda. Religious
liberty was seen as a vital prerequisite for ecumenical unity. In 1968 a
religious liberty secretariat was set up at WCC headquarters. However, in
more recent years, the WCC religious liberty stance has been somewhat ambiguous. In
1978 the secretariat was closed down, mainly for what was seen as a lack
of funds. This, of course, in itself speaks regarding the priority given
to religious liberty in the organized ecumenical movement.
Today the ecumenical tendency is to view religious liberty as simply one
of the human rights instead of the fundamental right that undergirds all
other human rights. This is, of course, the approach used by the secular
mind. Secularists or humanists refuse to recognize religious belief as something
apart or above other human activities. There is here the danger that religious
liberty will lose its unique character that makes it the guardian of all
true freedoms.
It must not be forgotten that historically it has been the balance of power
and denominationalism that have neutralized religious intolerance and worked
for religious liberty. Formal religious unity has existed only with force. There
is thus in society an inbuilt tension between unity and religious liberty. In
fact, the eschatological picture of the final events is a dramatic tableau
of religious persecution, as the massive forces of apocalyptic Babylon try
to squeeze the church of the remnant into the mold of united apostasy.
Finally, the religious liberty outlook becomes increasingly clouded when
it is realized that certain ecumenical activists accept fairly easily religious
liberty restrictions affecting believers of a different religiopolitical
stamp, who are exerting what is perceived to be a negative social stance. Furthermore,
some ecumenical leaders are quite willing, in revolutionary situations, to
see religious liberty interfered with and "temporarily shut down," in
order to promote unity, nation building, and the "good" of society
as a whole.
The Influence of Prophetic Understanding
What we have written so far highlights some of the reservations Adventists
have regarding involvement in the organized ecumenical movement. The general
attitude of the Seventh-day Adventist Church toward other churches and the
ecumenical movement is decisively influenced by the above considerations
and determined by prophetic understanding. Looking back, Adventists
see centuries of persecution and anti-Christian manifestations of the papal
power. They see discrimination and much intolerance by state or established
churches. Looking forward, they see the danger of Catholicism and
Protestantism linking hands and exerting religiopolitical power in a domineering
and potentially persecuting way. They see the faithful church of God not
as a jumbo church, but as a remnant. They see themselves as the nucleus
of that remnant and as not willing to be linked with the expanding Christian
apostasy of the last days.
Looking to the present, Adventists see their task as preaching the
everlasting gospel to all men, calling for worship of the Creator, obedient
adherence to the faith of Jesus, and proclaiming that the hour of God's judgment
has come. Some aspects of this message are not popular. How can Adventists
best succeed in fulfilling the prophetic mandate? It is our view that the
Seventh-day Adventist Church can best accomplish her divine mandate by keeping
her own identity, her own motivation, her own feeling of urgency, her own
working methods.
Ecumenical Cooperation?
Should Adventists cooperate ecumenically? Adventists should cooperate insofar
as the authentic gospel is proclaimed and crying human needs are being met. The
Seventh-day Adventist Church wants no entangling memberships and refuses
any compromising relationships that might tend to water down her distinct
witness. However, Adventists wish to be "conscientious cooperators." The
ecumenical movement as an agency of cooperation has acceptable aspects; as
an agency for organic unity of churches, it is much more suspect.
Relationships With Other Religious Bodies
Back in 1926, long before ecumenism was in vogue, the General Conference
Executive Committee adopted an important statement that is now a part of
the General Conference Working Policy (O 75). This declaration has
significant ecumenical implications. The concern of the statement was for
the mission field and relationships with other "missionary societies." However,
the statement has now been broadened to deal with other "religious organizations" in
general. It affirms that Seventh-day Adventists "recognize every agency
that lifts up Christ before men as a part of the divine plan for the evangelization
of the world, and . . . hold in high esteem the Christian men and women
in other communions who are engaged in winning souls to Christ." In
the church's dealings with other churches, "Christian courtesy, friendliness,
and fairness" are to prevail. Some practical suggestions are made in
order to avoid misunderstandings and occasion for friction. The statement
makes it very clear, however, that the "Seventh-day Adventist people" have
received the special "burden" to emphasize the Second Coming as
an event "even at the door," preparing "the way of the Lord
as revealed in Holy Scripture." This divine "commission" makes
it, therefore, impossible for Adventists to restrict their witness "to
any limited area" and impels them to call the gospel "to the attention
of all peoples everywhere."
In 1980 the General Conference set up a Council on Interchurch Relations
in order to give overall guidance and supervision to the church's relations
with other religious bodies. This council has from time to time authorized
conversations with other religious organizations where it was felt this could
prove helpful.
Adventist leaders should be known as bridge builders. This is not an easy
task. It is much simpler to blow up ecclesiastical bridges and serve as
irresponsible "Christian commandos." Ellen White has said: "It
requires much wisdom to reach ministers and men of influence. Evangelism,
p. 562. Adventists have not been called to live in a walled-in ghetto, talking
only to themselves, publishing mainly for themselves, showing a sectarian
spirit of isolationism. It is, of course, more comfortable and secure to
live in a Seventh-day Adventist fortress, with the communication drawbridges
all drawn up. In this setting one ventures from time to time into the neighborhood
for a quick evangelistic campaign, capturing as many "prisoners" as
possible, and then disappearing with them back into the fortress. Ellen
White did not believe in the isolationist mentality: "Our ministers
should seek to come near to the ministers of other denominations. Pray for
and with these men, for whom Christ is interceding. A solemn responsibility
is theirs. As Christ's messengers we should manifest a deep, earnest interest
in these shepherds of the flock.Testimonies, vol. 6, p. 78.
Usefulness of Observer Relationships
Experience has taught that the best relationship to the various councils
of churches (national, regional, world) is that of observer-consultant status. This
helps the church to keep informed and to understand trends and developments. It
helps to know Christian thinkers and leaders. Adventists are provided the
opportunity to exert a presence and make the church's viewpoint known. Membership
is not advisable. Those ecumenical organizations are usually not "neutral." They
often have quite specific goals and policies and play sociopolitical advocacy
roles. There would be little point in being halfhearted members (at best)
or pro forma members (as many member churches are) or often in opposition
(as inevitably would be the case).
On local levels, dealing with more practical and less theological issues,
one could envision some forms of Seventh-day Adventist membership, with caution,
however. We are thinking of such organized relationships as ministerial
associations/fraternals, local church organizations, Bible study groups,
specific groups or networks to study community needs and help solve local
problems. Adventists must not be perceived as simply opting out of any Christian
responsibility for the local community.
In recent years, Adventist leaders and theologians have had opportunities
for dialogue with other church representatives. These experiences have been
beneficial. Mutual respect has been engendered. Worn-out stereotypes and
inaccurate and untrue doctrinal perceptions have been removed. Prejudices
have been unceremoniously laid to rest. Theological tools and understandings
have been sharpened. New dimensions have been recognized and new vistas
of outreach opened up. First of all, however, their faith in the Advent
message has been enhanced. There is no reason for Adventists to have an
inferiority complex. It is a wonderful privilege to be a Seventh-day Adventist
and to know that the theological and organizational foundation of the church
are sure and secure.
Heralds of the True Oikoumene
Adventists are heralds of the only true and lasting oikoumene. In
Hebrews reference is made to "the world [Greek: oikoumene] to
come" (chap. 2:5, N.E.B.), the coming universal kingdom of God. In the
final analysis, it is this "ecumenism" Adventists are working for. Every
other ecumenical movement is ephemeral. In the meantime, it is a Christian
duty to "concentrate on being completely devoted to Christ" in one's
heart. "Be ready at any time to give a quiet and reverent answer to any
man who wants a reason for the hope that you have within you. Make sure that
your conscience is perfectly clear" (1 Peter 3:15, 16, Phillips).
_______________
This study document, intended for internal church use, first appeared in
Pattern for Progress, The Role and Function of Church Organization by Walter
Raymond Beach and Bert Beverly Beach, was authored by Bert B. Beach, and
was released in connection with the General Conference Session New Orleans,
Louisiana, June 1985. It is available from the office of Public Affairs and
Religious Liberty of the General Conference
|