9 November 2000 Editorial:
Echo

Pr. Larry Kirkpatrick

For some time now I have been an observer in Adventism. The present spectacle of the United States Presidential election, with one party refusing to admit the victory of the other and the furious spasm of rabble-rousing and the barrage of legal challenges, seems to hold some sad parallels to our beloved Adventist Church.

A calm gaze at the electoral map of this country on election night showed a very divided America. Expected liberal margins in the northeast, California, Florida, and Illinois regions of the country voted almost as a block for the acknowledged liberal candidate, while the less-urbanized regions of the nation predictably lined up in favor of the more conservative one. What's interesting is that there is an echo to this in NAD Adventism today. The "Adventism" in the "Adventist-Ghettos," the handful of small Adventist towns surrounding various institutions (hospitals, colleges, universities, printing presses), echoes in a sense the mindset of urbanized America, while the remainder of less-urbanized Adventism in our nation somewhat parallels those less-urbanized Americans. The whining of one candidate and his refusal to accept the reality of his failure to win the electoral vote until it comes out the way he wants reminds us of the incessant push by some among us who never can seem to take "no" for an answer, whether it is divorce and remarriage issues or the ordination of women. They just keep pushing and pushing. There seems no end of it.

I have become essentially convinced that a large group among us is so destructive to the church that we would be better off were they to leave. Some of the "liberals" among us really are among the most poisonous forces in our midst.

Like some of our liberal Americans, convinced that big government and pluralism have the answer, there are those certain that our carrying on in the same way is necessary. Well do I remember my year at Walla Walla College when we (the theology club) sought to attain faculty approval to have Elder Joe Crews (President of Amazing facts previous to Doug Batchelor) come and speak to us. The very liberal faculty there said that was fine, sure Joe could come. But when we had worked out the details save for a date, and they saw that they were truly in danger of actually having Joe Crews come onto their campus, suddenly permission as withdrawn. There was a similar occurrence when we sought to arrange to bring in Bob Gentry to speak regarding creation. They said we could do it if the science department of the college agreed. The science department said, "No, no, no. Not unless we get equal time!" (to present a "longer chronology" view of the age of the earth).

Again I remember a case in my first year Greek class where the instructor insisted that everyone in the class had to go see such and such a movie. Myself and one other student objected. We refused. We said that this was against the standard of the church, and we absolutely would not go. The rest of the class (who went to the movie) received a free day (no Greek assignment for the next day). Myself and my colleague were assigned to translate a portion of Matthew chapter six from Greek to English. While they were at the movie that night, we were holed-up in the psych. building translating Greek. Over and over again the unspoken message pounded our ears: Being open minded is fine as long as you are liberal. Other open-mindedness isn't allowed. It was like the standards in so much of Adventism.

Looks good on paper.

I cannot help but see a parallel between this attitude and the attitude so shamelessly on display today in Florida. One group tries to play by the rules; the other uses them to advance its immovable agenda. They will go by the rules as long as they think they have a chance of prevailing. But they are not committed to those rules or principles. They are committed to their own toxic agenda. They are agents of destruction, lurking in the midst; wolves among sheep; respectable terrorists with the bright, shiney sheen and glitter of academia surrounding. A combination of intelligentsia and KGB, the guardians of the mainstream, the steerers of the ship, who, for the church's own good, will take the wheel and steer us on the course they have marked out for us. They won't stop until they get the result they want.

No. To them, such as we are the backwaters, the fly-over country, the painful reminder of an embarrassing heritage, the Neanderthals and cro-magnons, the relics, standing in the way of progress. Pluralism is fine as long as conservatives are not included. Or so it goes.

No. I think I am ready to say that the liberals among us are a net loss. They are agents of destruction within the church. Here of course, a fine distinction must be made. Some are reasoned and lucid about what they are; others are probably not clear nor committed. Its just all they've ever known; that's all. They are recoverable to what Adventism should be. But those who are not, are not. They are entrenched. They will in plain sight advocate some of their agenda while they pursue the remainder in stealth-mode.

If the same Spirit animates the friendly and adroit liberals as animates us, well. Now that is beyond swallowing. So what can we do?

Go straight on. Work to produce solid, conservative SDAs within the body. Go straight forward, upholding the Adventist message. But we need to be wary and aware. We need to keep in mind these lessons about liberals. They will destroy as they have opportunity, full-well convinced that they are helping the church. But we are running on different principles. The disdain with which some in liberal Adventism look upon the rest of the church is unchanged. In the fever-pitch of the election and Florida we see the echo. We see more and more readily who is interested in litigation and who is interested in the principles for which it is claimed they stand. And it is one we'd rather not view. It portends ill for the days ahead. Just as the country would be better off without those not subscribing to the ideals for which it stands, so in the church. We would be better off without the liberals. But that won't make them leave.

And God forbid that we leave.

So it is destined to be. Both remain for now. Neither prevails for now. Is then heaven as appalled as it looks on us, as some of us are as we look on at the debacle in Florida? However we've come to this pass, will we have the courage to take steps to get out of it? If we truly called for and insisted upon an enforcement of the standards to which we claim as a church to subscribe, how many would take their stand on the Lord's side of the question and truly covenant anew to keep His commandments? I pray that somehow we will find a way to do better than we have and better than this nation presently is.