Power

The issue at Takoma Park is about adhering to the Church Manual. It's also about power. The pastors (though they would never admit it) want the power to be able to control the direction of the church. The conference wants the increased power of a larger tithe and offering base, and is so desperate that it is willing to empower pastors to take any steps they claim are necessary in order to bring in the money.

Then there is the other side. The union doesn't want to be credited with any power, because then it would be required to use it to rein in our rogue conference. The division and General Conference are afraid they have too much power, and are wary of using it for fear of overwhelming us. The pastors and conference leaders have been only too happy to keep the higher authorities at arms-length by forwarding the notion that only the conference can deal with matters in an individual congregation, and that even then it can only offer recommendations. In their view, the vote of a local congregation is absolute. (We might as well be dealing with the laws of the Persians and Medes the way they tell it.)

So where does that leave us? Where does the power rightfully belong?

The conference is partly right. (Don't die of shock on me, I only said "partly!") The organization of the SDA Church allows the local congregation a great deal of autonomy. This stems from the fear the church founders had of being part of a larger organization that had the power to dictate to individual members on matters on conscience (think Catholic Church during the Middle Ages). However, they were also divinely impressed that there could be no cohesive, effective world-wide effort without some "teeth" at the highest level of the organization.

As Ellen White put it, "I have often been instructed by the Lord that no man's judgment should be surrendered to the judgment of any other one man. Never should the mind of one man or the minds of a few men be regarded as sufficient in wisdom and power to control the work, and to say what plans should be followed. But when, in a General Conference, the judgment of the brethren assembled from all parts of the field, is exercised, private independence and private judgment must not be stubbornly maintained, but surrendered. Never should a laborer regard as a virtue the persistent maintenance of his position of independence, contrary to the decision of the general body . . . . God has ordained that the representatives of His church from all parts of the earth, when assembled in a General Conference, shall have authority. The error that some are in danger of committing, is in giving to the mind and judgment of one man, or of a small group of men, the full measure of authority and influence that God has vested in His church, in the judgment and voice of the General Conference assembled to plan for the prosperity and advancement of His work" (Testimonies to the Church, Vol. 9, pp. 260, 261).

To put it simply, in matters of church function there is only one power that God intends to be higher than the individual's personal judgment, and that is the action of the General Conference in session. The local congregation, then, is not absolute. Nor does the conference have absolute and exclusive power over congregations. It is true that in matters where the General Conference is silent the local church may act largely as it pleases - with the advice and review of the conference. In such "everyday matters" the union sticks to managing conferences and the division to managing unions, etc.

Determining which of these principles applies to the present situation requires only the determination of whether the situation involves a matter on which the General Conference has taken action. In this case the matter is proper adherence to the Church Manual, which is a product of the General Conference in session. It is, therefore, the right of the General Conference to weigh in on the matter, and the duty of the congregation and conference to accept their judgment.

The opinion of the General Conference on Takoma Park's situation has been expressed in five different letters. Two of these have already been described in the Epic, another will be dealt with shortly, and the final two will come along somewhat later. Unfortunately, our pastors and the conference leadership have chosen to thumb their noses at this rightful exercise of the General Conference's authority. It is now up to the General Conference to deal with this blatant disobedience (and we do have some reason to believe that they will - eventually).