Online Petition
Share it!
Tell A friend OR
Inform Your Friends by: Importing Your Address Book from Email Or Community Site.
APPEAL TO THE GENERAL CONFERENCE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
To/Against/For: Seventh-day Adventist General Conference
APPEAL TO THE GENERAL CONFERENCE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
Objective of the Appeal: Intervention of the General Conference Executive Committee in the South American Division for the annulment of Vote 2010-117-DSA
Allegation: Usurpation of an Exclusive Jurisdiction of the Quinquennial General Conference Session
EXPLANATION OF THE PROBLEM
At a time when brethren from around the whole world are hopeful and joyous with the call to Revival and Reformation launched by the Executive Committee of the General Conference, in which members of the World Church are invited to put aside minor differences of opinion and unite in one purpose, that of receiving a new experience of true love for Jesus Christ and to consecrate themselves totally to Him, in all aspects of their lives, so as to be prepared to be clothed with power from on high, some leaders in South America are unfortunately going in the opposite direction, making differences of understanding on some points not defined globally as a test of fellowship, thus promoting division instead of unity among the brethren.
We refer particularly to the understanding about the human nature of Christ. Together with the World Church, we, who endorse this petition, believe that:
a) Jesus Christ is fully God, having existed with the Father and the Holy Spirit for all eternity;
b) Jesus Christ is not inferior to the Father or Holy Spirit in power, wisdom and other attributes;
c) Jesus Christ is God incarnate, being truly man, born of a woman by the Holy Spirit;
d) Jesus Christ never sinned, whether in thought, word or deed, being the only human being on planet Earth who has never transgressed the Divine Law;
e) Jesus Christ was victorious over sin through His fellowship with the Father, meditation of the Scriptures and contemplation of the works of creation;
f) Jesus Christ took upon himself the sins of all mankind, for which he suffered and died, hence removing man’s debt and enabling him to be declared righteous by faith.
g) Jesus Christ was resurrected and ascended to heaven, giving rise to his priestly ministry in the Heavenly Sanctuary; and
h) Jesus Christ left a perfect example of obedience, which, by the continual assistance of the Holy Spirit, man is capable of following.
Beyond these basic points, with which we all wholly agree, there are questions regarding Christ's nature that have not been established by the General Conference in Session and that, for this reason, are left to the discretion of each member. An example of this is the debate over whether Christ took upon Himself a human nature identical to that of Adam before the fall (Prelapsarianism) or a nature like ours, after the fall (Postlapsarianism). There are theologians, pastors and members that are inclined to the first position, as there are many others who support the latter view.
In a brief article published on the website of the Biblical Research Institute, Dr. Ángel Manuel Rodríguez explains that “the church has wisely not elucidated in a doctrinal statement the specific nature of Jesus' human nature” and that “the church has allowed diversity of views on this subject and encourages its study”[1].
We, who endorse this petition, believe that Jesus took a weakened human nature like our own, but that He, through communion with His Father, through meditation of the Scriptures and through the contemplation of the works of nature, was different then us as to the practice of sin, whether in thoughts, words or actions: since we have already sinned and, for this reason, need saving grace, Jesus never sinned, so His character never had a stain or spot. He was totally pure and sinless.
Since the World Church does not have a defined position on this specific point, we understand that both positions must presently be respected, so that the adoption or rejection of any one of these points of view cannot be used as proof of discipleship or test of fellowship among brethren.
Unfortunately, the Executive Committee of the South American Division of Seventh-day Adventists eventually gave way to pressure from some influential leaders in Brazil and made a vote that we understand to be irregular, by which one of the two interpretations prevailed as if it was the official position of the Seventh-day Adventist Church. Without in any way desiring to lack due respect for the Executive Committee of the South American Division, we understand that this vote violates the internal legislation of our denomination, since it is a usurpation of the authority of the General Conference in Session. This is what we will deal with now.
CONCERNING VOTE 117 OF 2010 OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITEE OF THE SOUTH AMERICAN DIVISION
By vote 2010-117-DSA, the Executive Committee of the South American Division approved the document “Unity in Doctrine and Mission”, with which we agree in general terms, but not the item concerning the nature of Christ. The document states:
We do not recommend the activities of any ministry, group or person that feels at liberty to:
(1) defame the Church in public or private; or
(2) promote doctrinal theories in disagreement with the 28 Fundamental Beliefs of the SDA church, such as antitrinitarianism and the negation of the personality of the Holy Spirit, perfectionism and the theory that Christ came with a fallen moral and spiritual human nature, doubts about the prophetic gift of Ellen G. White, eschatological speculations, unbalanced views in the area of health, etc.; or
(3) accept tithe; or
(4) practice their activities without the support of the leadership of the respective responsible organization in the territory (Union of churches/Conference/Local mission).
Because of the damage that they can cause to the unity of the church and the fulfillment of its mission, no person or ministry with one of these characteristics can be invited to participate in Church activities.
We agree with the transcript of the vote regarding antitrinitarianism and the denial of the personality of the Holy Spirit, since the condemnation of these ideas finds explicit support in Fundamental Belief 2, which affirms literally that “there is one God: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, a unity of three co-eternal Persons.”
In the same way, we understand as correct what the vote says regarding “doubts about the prophetic gift of Ellen G. White”, since, according to Fundamental Beliefs 18, the writings of Ellen G. White – being the fruit of authentic manifestation of the prophetic gift – “are a continuing and authoritative source of truth which provide for the church comfort, guidance, instruction, and correction.”
If by “perfectionism” the idea is understood that someone can attain a condition where they are incapable of sinning, we can also agree with the vote in this item, since we believe that, by the continued assistance of the Holy Spirit, we are capable of not sinning, though we never reach the state of being incapable of sinning.
The point with which we are unable of agreeing with is in reference to the human nature of Christ, since it lacks the support of the deliberations of the Quinquennial General Conference Session. This is what we will discuss next.
CONCERNING THE USURPATION OF AUTHORITY OF THE GENERAL CONFERENCE SESSION
a) Concerning the Exclusive Competency of the General Conference Session to Define the Official Doctrinal Positions of the Seventh-day Adventist Church
Since its beginnings the Seventh-day Adventist Organization, it is established and known that only the General Conference in Session, with representatives from the entire world field, has the authority to establish an official Church position on doctrinal issues. Regarding this, the Church Manual asserts:
Ministers or Churches Not to Establish Tests of Fellowship—A minister, an individual church, or a conference/mission/field does not have the authority to set up or establish tests of fellowship for the denomination. This authority rests with the entire church body and is exercised through the regularly constituted organization of the church in the General Conference. Anyone seeking to apply tests other than those herein set forth does not, therefore, properly represent the church.[2]
Following the same train of thought, the book Seventh-day Adventists Answer Questions on Doctrine, whose publication happened to unravel the ongoing internal division on the subject of the nature of Christ, clarifies:
But because of the very nature of the Seventh-day Adventist Church organization no statement of Seventh-day Adventist belief can be considered official unless it is adopted bv the General Conference in quadrennial session, when accredited delegates from the whole world field are present.[3]
It is for this very reason that the book Seventh-day Adventists Believe…, clarifying its status, comments:
The present volume, Seventh-day Adventists Believe..., is based on these short summaries. They appear at the beginning of each chapter. In this book we present for our members, friends, and other interested persons, in an expanded, readable, and practical manner, these doctrinal convictions and their significance for Adventist Christians in today's society. While this volume is not an officially voted statement—only a General Conference in world session could provide that—it may be viewed as representative of "the truth . . . in Jesus" (Eph. 4:21) that Seventh-day Adventists around the globe cherish and proclaim.[4]
As noted, the General Conference in Session alone has the authority to put an end to doctrinal discussions, embracing a particular point of view as the official position of the Seventh-day Adventist Church, and rejecting the other. It is then the exclusive jurisdiction of the Quinquennial Session of the General Conference, so that whatever definition of doctrinal milestones by other organizational bodies would be irregular and constitute a serious risk to the unity of our people as the Remnant Church.
b) Concerning the Nature of the South American Division as a Hierarchical Level Equivalent to the General Conference.
When often asked about the absence of competence of the Executive Committee of the South American Division to adopt an official position on the nature of Christ, as was done in vote 2010-117-DSA, some leaders in Brazil have affirmed to the members that the South American Division has, indeed, such authority, since it is not just any part of the World Church, but the very General Conference. Though it is true that the South American Division is nothing more than an arm of the General Conference, functioning directly in the territory of South America, we respectfully understand that it is a grave deviation of perspective. Though the South American Division represents the General Conference, it lacks the delegation of the Quinquennial General Conference Session to define on its own, separately, the official beliefs of the denomination.
The South American Division has indeed the authority of the General Conference in administrative matters and even in spiritual counseling, but not to establish as an official doctrinal position that which the World Church has not defined. Else, the Church would run a serious risk of losing its unity and doctrinal identity, since a Division could establish Prelapsarinism as official position, while another Division could adopt Postlapsarianism. It is not necessary to argue too much so as to prove the serious risk of such a situation.
The Constitution of the General Conference of the Seventh-day Adventists clearly established that each division “shall act in full harmony with the General Conference Constitution and By-laws, the General Conference Working Policy, and actions of the Executive Committee”:
The General Conference conducts much of its work through its divisions, which in turn are comprised of union conferences and union missions in specific areas of the world. Each division is an administrative unit of the General Conference with commensurate authority to carry out responsibilities in the territory assigned to it. It is not a separate constituent level of organization. It shall act in full harmony with the General Conference Constitution and Bylaws, the General Conference Working Policy, and actions of the Executive Committee.
In order to carry the authority of the General Conference, the actions of division committees shall, of necessity, be in harmony with and complementary to the decisions of the General Conference in session, and the actions of the Executive Committee between sessions.[5]
In the same way, the By-laws of the General Conference of the Seventh-day Adventists declares:
The actions taken by division executive committees pertaining to the administration of affairs in division territories shall be considered final, provided they are in harmony with the plans and policy of the General Conference as set forth in the Constitution and Bylaws and with its Executive Committee actions at Annual Councils.[6]
This means that, of a fact, the decision of the Division Executive Committee “pertaining to the administration of affairs” “shall be considered final”, as some Brazilian administrators have highlighted, “provided they are in harmony with the plans and policy of the General Conference as set forth in the Constitution and Bylaws and with its Executive Committee actions at Annual Councils”. In other words, the Executive Committee of a Division is not at liberty to make decisions out of harmony with the decisions of the General Conference in Session or with the Executive Committee in the interval between sessions.
Moreover, the B 40 25 of the General Conference Working Policy determines:
B 40 25 Divisions a Part of General Conference—The larger and more extensive the work of these divisions, and the less dependent any may become upon help from other divisions in the way of personnel or material support, the greater the necessity of holding closely together in mutual counsel and fellowship. It is ever to be held in mind that as the Church of Christ is one and undivided, so each division is a part of the General Conference. In the Church of Christ, which is His body, there can be no such thing as one part or member independent of the whole. No division, therefore, is free to pursue a course of action contrary to the will of the whole, or to appropriate to itself the authority of the General Conference in defense of such action. Between sessions of the General Conference, the General Conference Executive Committee is constitutionally the final authority throughout the world field.
The B 40 25 policy is emphatic: “No Division is free to pursue a course of action contrary to the will of the whole, or to appropriate to itself the authority of the General Conference in defense of such action”. It couldn’t be clearer!
Actually, this only presents in a more forcible way the following Church Manual policy:
The General Conference in session, and the Executive Committee between sessions, is the highest organization in the administration of the church’s worldwide work, and is authorized by its constitution to create subordinate organizations to promote specific interests in various sections of the world; it is therefore understood that all subordinate organizations and institutions throughout the world will recognize the General Conference as the highest authority, under God, among Seventh-day Adventists. When differences arise in or between organizations and institutions, appeal to the next higher organization is proper until it reaches the General Conference in session, or the Executive Committee at the Annual Council. During the interim between these sessions the Executive Committee shall constitute the body of final authority on all questions where a difference of viewpoint may develop. The committee’s decision may be reviewed at a session of the General Conference or at an Annual Council of the Executive Committee.[7]
Supported by these quotes from the internal legislation of our Church, with humility, yet also with firmness and conviction, we affirm our understanding that the condemnation of Postlapsarianism by the 2010-117-DSA vote is an usurpation of the authority of the General Conference. The South American Division can in no way have taken upon itself the power of marginalizing a possible interpretation on the subject of the human nature of Christ, that is, that He came with a post fall human nature, weakened intellectually, physically, and morally, which has nothing to do with His character, completely free from sin, developed through communion with His Father and by deeds of righteousness. This is a valid interpretation on the human nature of Christ, especially since we find support for this in many Spirit of Prophecy quotes.
According to the present policies, while there is not a definite position regarding this controversy established by the General Conference in Session, no possible interpretation on the human nature of Christ can be rejected by any instance of the Organization, as long as the minimum parameters established by Fundamental Beliefs 4 and 10 are respected. We, who endorse this petition, reaffirm that our convictions are in total harmony with all 28 Fundamental Beliefs, including those relevant to the nature of Christ.
PRESENT SITUATION IN BRAZIL
Unfortunately, those who adopt the postlapsarianism position here in Brazil are being the object of internal persecution and humiliation by various administrators who seem to not adequately understand the position of the World Church, which is defined by a few basic points about the divine and human nature of Jesus while leaving the controversy between Prelapsarianism and Postlapsarianism to the individual conscience. This unfortunate hostile attitude against those who adopt the postlapsarian position received incentive and apparent legitimacy with the 2010-117-DSA vote.
As a result of this vote, many sincere brethren, who wholeheartedly believe that the Seventh-day Adventist Church was raised by God, in the time indicate by prophecy (Dan. 8:14), to fulfill the mission outlined in Revelation 14:6-12 – who are desirous to contribute with the World Church in the proclamation of the Everlasting Gospel and that, for this very reason, are endeavoring to attend to the call for Revival and Reformation -, many of these brethren are being harassed, arbitrarily removed from their church responsibilities and subjected to disciplinary proceedings, being punished with censure and removal from membership. It is for this reason, in the most excellent Christian spirit and ecclesiastical order, that we appeal to the Executive Committee of the General Conference, the highest body of the World Church between the Quinquennial Sessions, to intervene in this matter.
In the territory of the South American Division, in order to justify the disciplinary measure towards those who adopt postlapsarianism, administrators have used the following assumptions based on the Church Manual:
1. Denial of faith in the fundamentals of the gospel and the basic doctrines of the church, or teaching doctrines contrary to them.
8. Adhesion or participation in a separatist or disloyal movement or organization. (see pages 242, 243).
9. Persistent refusal to recognize the authority of the Church duly constituted, or submission to the order and discipline of the Church.
Needless to say, the postlapsarian position is not a “denial of faith in the fundamentals of the gospel and the basic doctrines of the church”, since it is in perfect harmony with Fundamental Beliefs 4 and 10, so that invoking item 1 is exaggerated and unfair.
As for the accusations based on number 8, we affirm that, although many divisive and separatist movements have emerged and are still emerging in the Church, it is not fair to label as “heretics” those who adopt the postlapsarian position, as if they belonged to these movements, for the World Church does not have an official position on the human nature of Christ. In other words, it is not separatist or disloyal to defend a point of view that cannot conflict with the official belief of the denomination since it does not have a position on the matter. How can someone be separated from the body of the Church for personally adopting a certain position when the Church itself preferred to leave the matter at the discretion of the individual conscience? How can anyone be disloyal to a position that does not exist?
Lastly, as to the accusation concerning item 9, there are wise and foolish people both among those who adopt the postlapsarian or prelapsarian position. A person cannot be considered insubordinate and disorderly simply for exercising a liberty that the World Church gave him to adopt an interpretation that he deems more consistent with the testimony of the Bible and Spirit or Prophecy about the human nature of Christ. This definitely cannot be a criteria to separate those who should or shouldn’t participate in public activities of local churches, much less for applying ecclesiastical discipline.
We must remember that those who adopt a postlapsarian position are also human, souls for whom Christ died and for whom our God has a true paternal love. They do not deserve to be treated as they have been here in Brazil, being exposed to public humiliation, having their ties with brethren and friends weakened or even broken simply for not being prelapsarians.
We understand that the present moment is truly special, seeing that the World Church is focusing its attention and efforts to attend to the great call made by the Executive Committee and by the General Conference President to Revival and Reformation. It is the sincere desire of the brethren who are being misunderstood to unite in such efforts and, cooperating with the duly constituted denominational leaders, give their contribution for the preaching of the Gospel and the conclusion of the Work. However, they will only be able to do this if their consciences are not violated and, for this reason, supplicate the merciful assistance of the pastors responsible for the direction of the World Church, represented in the Executive committee of the General Conference, to intervene in this case. As sheep, we implore the leaders of the General Conference, as undershepherds of our Great Shepherd, Jesus Christ (1 Peter 5:1-4), that they may come to our help, so that together, prelapsarians and postlapsarians, may work together in favor of that which is really essential at the moment: the effective preaching of the three angel’s messages to the world.
CONCERNING THE PETITION
In light of the solid grounds here presented, and:
CONSIDERING that our sincere aim is to respect the duly appointed denomination leadership, thus honoring the covenant we made with the Church of God when we entered it by holy baptism; and
CONSIDERING that the definition of the official doctrinal positions of the Seventh-day Adventist Church is the exclusive responsibility of Quinquennial General Conference Session; and
CONSIDERING that Quinquennial General Conference Session has never positioned itself in a decisive manner on the controversy between Prelapsarianism and Postlapsarianism; and
CONSIDERING that the absence of a vote by the Quinquennial General Conference Session on this aspect of the human nature of Christ means that the World Church has chosen to leave the matter for the scope of individual conscience; and
CONSIDERING that no church order below the Quinquennial General Conference Session has authority to establish proof of discipleship or tests of fellowship for members, depriving them of their rights to not agree with doctrinal position not assumed by the World Church; and, finally;
CONSIDERING that vote 2010-117-DSA explicitly condemned Postlapsarianism, denying those who believe this way of participating in public activities of local churches, causing them serious spiritual, moral and psychological injury;
We, who endorse this petition, ask the President of the General Conference to submit this case to his Executive Committee, that its members, in the right Christian spirit, may intervene in the situation and promote the cancellation of vote 2010-117-DSA, on the basis of usurpation of the exclusive right of the Quinquennial General Conference Session.
Sincerely,
Rio de Janeiro – RJ, February 16 2011.
Endorsers of this Petition:
[1] Available at: http://biblicalresearch.gc.adventist.org/Biblequestions/christ's%20human%20nature.htm, accessed on: Feb. 16 2011.
Recent Comments
| Name | Comment | |
| There are no comment/signature. |
Sign the above petition