$5,00

A Limbless Iraqi Child p. 12 I Second Creationism Survey Results p. 15

For Such a Time as This:ADVENTIST POLITICS

Removing evil dictators is relatively easy.But where are the peaceful, productivesocieties we had hoped for in theBalkans, Afghanistan and Iraq? God is notsatisfied merely to be right.

of the United States declare that his NO.1 job issecurity, we demur. His first job is to uphold theConstitution and individual freedom. It is betterto be insecure and free than to have the high se-curity characteristic of a pol ice state.

4. Creation. Our understanding of the world asthe artistry of God has strong implications for en-vironmental ethics and law. Our belief that thematerial world originated in God has implica-tions for abortion and euthanasia (all of life isvaluable), and earth stewardship. On the otherhand, the Genesis portrayal of humans as "lordsof creation" has implications for human inter-vention in the natural world through legislation,medical practice, health advocacy and environ-mental practices.

It is easier to (ostensibly) eschew politics, butuntil our theology teaches us how to live in ourcommunities, even how to rule our communities,we may fall under Jesus' condemnation of thosewho would load people with obligations but notlift a finger to help carry the load. If we fail tobring our distinctive Adventist resources to the po-litical table, we are robbing the world of helpGod has placed in our church. Who knows butthat we are come to the kingdom for such a timeas this? •

inevitable, and society withers. This is glaringlyevident in Africa and Asia. It is a lesson we inthe American empire easily forget.

3. Freedom and personal responsibility. Adven-tists have long emphasized these twins. In ourevangelism we have urged people to break withecclesiastical and family tradition and make in-dividual commitments to keep the Sabbath. Inour religious liberty work, we have presented re-spect for individual choice as the paramountAmerican virtue. So when we hear the president

dventists have eschewed politics infavor of something far more important:salvation. Besides, this world is not ourhome. And Jesusdidn't challenge thepolitical status quo in his day. And,anyway, our church was too small tomake any real political difference.

Adventists have always been involved in poli-tics. During the Civil War, our church securedthe right of our young men to refuse combatantservice. Next, we actively promoted Prohibition.We have vigorously lobbied judges andlegislators on church-state issues.

In reality, theology always has politicalimplications. What we believe aboutGod's operation in the universe will affectour opinions about the proper role for hu-man authorities. Our convictions abouthuman nature, the activity of the HolySpirit and the work of the church all havepolitical implications. So what are somespecial Adventist flavors that should seasonour pol itics?

1.The Great Controversy. In this grand story, oneof God's salient characteristics is self-restraint.God could "do more," but he limits himself.Where is the language of self-restraint in thespeeches of the American president and his sec-retary of defense? God solves the problem of evilby allowing it to work itself out rather than bysurgical intervention. Given this picture of God,we are very leery of projects to impose law, de-mocracy, and stability on societies that are notclamoring for them. Removing evil dictators isrelatively easy. But where are the peaceful,productive societies we had hoped for in theBalkans, Afghanistan and Iraq? God is not satis-fied merely to be right. He will not rest untilthoughtful onlookers perceive him to be right.While we Americans know we are the goodguys, where is the concurrence of thoughtfulonlookers?

2. Law. An emphasis on law is central to theAdventist theological enterprise. Increasingly, thetroubles of the world demonstrate that there canbe no healthy society without a very high regardfor law. Commerce, political life, criminal jus-tice, all require an unshakable foundation of law.Without this foundation, corruption of all kinds is

JOHN MCLARTY

Advisor,y (ouncilKen and Diana BauerRobert and Kelli BlackGary and Jeanne BogleAntonius and Lilia BrandonTodd and Ginny BurleyJohn and Charlotte CassellRuth L.ChristensenKeith and Judy ColburnRonald and Patricia CopleJames and Kathryn DexterMerlyn and Rosemary DuerksenJames DunnH.O. EngenDouglass and Patricia EwingJack and Elsie FacundusGary and Sharon FraserGary and Annette FrykmanBrent and Karen GardnerRichard and Kathi GuthP.Edgar and Patricia HareLyndon and Linda HarderJim and Jackie HennebergDennis and Jolene HilliardRussell and Sally HoenesWayne and Susan JacobsenJohn and Judy JacobsonDonald and Virginia JeffriesBrian and Erika JohnsonElton and Marga KerrDean and Dolores KinseyFrank and Helen KnittelIrvin and Doreen KuhnYung LauBerryl and Ralph LongwayFelix LorenzKen and Florence LorenzAdele and James NelsonT.Clint and Elaine NelsonDavid T. Person, IIEugene PlattThaine PriceGary and Ruthe-Marina RainesJudith RauschPhil and Joyce ReisweigGordon and Judy RickJames and Maryan StirlingErvin and Marilynn TaylorJohn and Nancy VogtJames and Priscilla WaltersJames and Betty WebsterTim and Stephanie Welebir

21 adventist todayl volume 11 issue 3

newsPAGES

Response to Authority of Ellen White ArticleBy Mike Scofield

PAGE 6Adventist Schools Enrollment

By James Stirling

PAGE 7Audit Procedures Investigation

By James Stirling

featuresPAGE 10

With God on Our SideBy F. Lorenz

PAGE 12A Limbless Iraqi Child

By Glen Greenwalt

PAGElSRegarding Just WarBy David Reynolds

PAGE 16Adventist Faculty on Creationism

By Floyd Petersen

PAGE 19Lay Members and Church Reform

By Nicole Higgins

PAGESKenyan EntrepreneurBy Julio C. Munzo

PAGE 9Anti-Abortion Protesting on Local Church LevelBy James Stirling

booksPAGE 21Exploring Church Organizational ReformBy James Stirling

PAGE 22Belief Beyond Reason?By Ervin Taylor

adventist todayPublisher I Elwin Dunn

Co-Founding Editor I Raymond Cottrell, 1911 - 2003

Co-Founding Editor/Publisher I Jim Walters

Editor I John McLarty

Executive Editor I Ervin Taylor

Senior Associate Editor IJames H.Stirling

Managing Editor I Diana Fisher

Editorial Advisor I Steve Daily

Office Manager I Hanan Sadek

adventist today reports on contemporary issues of importance to Adventist church members. Following basic principles of ethics and canons of journal-ism, this publication strives for fairness, candor and good taste. Unsolicited submissions are encouraged. Payment is competitive. Send an e-mail toeditor@atoday.com for writer's guidelines. Annual subscriptions $29.50 ($50/2 years) for individuals, $18 for students, $40 for institutions. (Payment by check orcredit card. Add $10 for address outside North America.) Voice I (800) 236-3641 or (909) 785-1295 Fax I (909) 785-1595 E-mail I atoday@atoday.com Web site Iwww.atoday.com

adventist today (ISSN1079-5499) is published bimonthly for $29.50 per year ($18 for students, $40 for institutions) by adventist today Foundation,P.O.Box 8026 Riverside, CA 92515-8026. Periodical postage paid at Riverside,California, and additional mailing offices. POSTMASTER:Send address changes toAdventistToday, Box 8026, Riverside, CA 92515-8026. Copyright <Q 2003 by adventist today Foundation, a nonprofit organization dedicated to fostering opendialogue in the Adventist community. I

volume 11 issue3 adventist tOdayl3

Cooney on MolestersThank you for the outstanding article by Cheryl

Cooney describing how a very sick but shrewd minis-ter molested her. While of course very disturbing,Ms. Cooney's experiences show how predators arevery adept at methodically winning trust, blurringboundaries and grooming innocent youngsters, all insubtle, manipulative, nonviolent ways designed toconvince victims that they either "misunderstood" the

Hackleman on Cottrell HistoryFirst of all, congratulations on another excellent edi-

tion of AToday. I very much appreciated the timelytributes to Raymond F. Cottrell.

There is, however, an error to be corrected in DougHackleman's article, page 9, column 3, paragraph 1,where the author reports that [Cottrell] had made "aneven dozen" presentations to the San Diego AdventistForum. That number is incorrect. The number should

Ms. Cooney and your publication have done church members a tremendous service byeducating them about how sexual perpetrators go undetected and unpunished.

abusive acts or "consented" in them. Ms. Cooneyand your publication have done church members atremendous service by educating them about howsexual perpetrators go undetected and unpunished.David Clohessy, National Director, SNAPSurvivors Network of those Abused by Priests

Body TattooingThe act of piercing or tattooing one's body, as de-

scribed by Lawrence Downing in "WalkingSignboards" (AT Jan/Feb 2003), is regarded by manybiologists as a form of the "handicap principle." Hu-mans who abuse chemical substances, mutilate theirbodies and participate in extreme sports may be ad-vertising-perhaps subconsciously-to prospectivemates thei r abi Iity to tolerate such self destruction, asdo many animal species that have similarly handi-capped themselves through extreme ornamentation(a product of microevolution).

To give but one example, the iridescent male pea-cock fans its enormous, brilliantly patterned tail whilestrutting in front of a female. The gaudy display at-tracts not only potential mates but predators as well.Rather than advertisi ng its superior (or rather, inferior)ability to evade predators or provide food for its off-spri ng, the male conveys a sexy signal that it is aworthy mate simply because it can survive despite itshandicap. Rather than a ruse, it's an honest signal: thestrongest, healthiest, most fit individuals grow thelongest, most colorful tails.

The sports, entertainment and advertising industriesprovide a powerful testimony to the seductive charmof those humans who have proven their fitness despitehandicaps. But as Christians we have the privilege ofadorning ourselves instead with the righteousness ofChrist, which covers all our handicaps.Floyd Hayes, Wildlife BiologistU.S.Virgin Islands

4[ adventist today I volume 11 issue 3

have been 17. Just for the record, the dates and titlesare Iisted below. The titles, by the way, attest to therange of expertise this gentleman-scholar was able toshare with his church.10/80 View from Glacier View

3/82 1844: Message for Our Time3/84 The Sanctuary Problem3/86 What Do the Rocks Say?2/87 A Reliable Method of Bible Study9/88 The Future of Adventism

11/89 North American Division: Myth or Milestone?7/91 Current Trends in Adventist Theology7/92 The AdventistTheological Society: Diagnosis

and Prognosis9/93 The Waco Syndrome and Its Relation to

Adventism10/94 Whither Adventist Creationism?10/95 Biblical Hermeneutics: What Difference

Does It Make?8/96 The Adventist Church of Tomorrow9/97 Exegetical Anomalies in the SDA Traditional

Interpretation of Daniel 8:148/98 The Ethos of Adventism5/00 Adventism in the Twentieth Century2/02 The "Sanctuary Doctrine": Asset or Liability?

Each of the above, except for the first presentation(10/80), is available on audio cassettes from San DiegoAdventist Forum. Contact ak-jk@cox.net for further de-tai Is, and reference th is AToday issue.James J{aatz, San Diego, California

atoday@atodaycom orAdventist Today;po. Box 8026Riverside, CA 92515-8026

A Response to I{enneth Richardson the Authority of Ellen White

MICHAEL SCOFIELD

t is true that there has been a shift in the Adventistchurch from regarding the Bible as the only au-thority, to that of including the writings of Ellen G.White as holding nearly equal standing with it.But the Dallas (1980) statement onlyacknowledged (or reflected) what had been hap-pening for the previous 50 years.

There is a significant difference between what we sayand what we do. While she was alive, church leadersspoke, wrote and acted to promote Ellen White as iner-rant and authoritative, yet they denied that they weredoing so. One might describe this as inconsistent; somewould cry "hypocrisy." But we see here a useful ex-ample of where official policy slowly conformed topopular behavior in Adventism. (There are many more.)

After her death, the church continued to promote herwritings as authoritative, still denying in its official state-ments that she had equal standing with the Bible. Theydidn't want to appear too radical to other members ofthe Protestant community. The White Estate, from itsvery beginnings led by the enthusiasm of the Jemisons,further promoted the authoritative stance of her writings,

ers. This was a good thing.Another powerful mechanism of promoting the writ-

ings of Ellen White as not only authoritative and inerrant,but even dictated by God, were the painted illustrationsshowing her sitting, pen in hand, looking up towards thelight, as if taking dictation from the angel. These images,published widely, were very influential in molding popu-lar understanding of her role and authority, perhapsmore than any written description of the mechanisms ofinspiration (with any denial of that elevated status).

This assumption of authority and verbal inerrancy sopermeated institutional Adventist leadership that when,in the 1980s, revelations of her literary dependenciescame out, leaders were in denial. One conference presi-dent, after sitting through an official review of some ofWalter Rea's research, affirmed in the Pacific Union Re-corder that there was still no dependency upon othersources.

Why have generations of Adventists (particularly inNorth America) so readily accepted by implication andexample the writings of Ellen White as of equal standingwith the Bible? The average Adventist member (through

The average Adventist member (through Adventist education, or as a result of the kind of convertsattracted to our style of evangelism) has a strong need for security in their identity, and part of thatidentity is having the truth, not merely being on the journey of discovering truth.

and that view was reinforced in the church publications(particularly the style and content of the Sabbath Schoolquarterly which continues to this day) and through theschool system (particularly the design of textbooks andsyllabi).

A vivid example was Walter Specht's syllabus for reli-gion classes, Life and Teachings of Jesus, used on the LaSierra campus. The answers to the questions for eachlesson could be found, in precise sequence, in the ap-propriate chapters of The Desire of Ages. This taught (byimplication) the authority of White. Students soon dis-covered that all one needed to do to find the answerswas to go through The Desire of Ages; one didn't needto consult the Bible.

The authoritative stance of Ellen White (as equal toScripture) went on unchallenged for years. Indeed, earlyon it became an undocumented requirement of thefaith. It is a testament to his charisma and character thatH.M.S. Richards, Sr.'sreluctance to use her in hispreaching went unnoticed (it appears) by church lead-

Adventist education, or as a result of the kind of convertsattracted to our style of evangel ism) has a strong need forsecurity in their identity, and part of that identity is hav-ing the truth, not merely being on the journey ofdiscovering truth. Their understanding of "truth" (episte-mology was one of the three critical doctrines omittedfrom the Dallas statement) requires that it be detailedand specific, not merely general principles at a highlevel. So to feed this need for detailed instruction on ev-ery matter of life, the denomination printed, edited newcompilations, and provided detailed, multivolume indi-ces to the writings of Ellen White. This conformed with,and reinforced, the view of detailed inerrancy in herwritings.

So popular Adventism (in spite of institutional denials)does have two authorities. The Dallas statement thus re-flected multiple generations of ingrained supposition ofher authority and inerrancy .•

Mike Schofield is an associate professor of healthinformation management at Loma Linda University.

volume 11 issue 31 adventist today 15

Report on Adventist Colleges and UniversitiesJAMES STIRLING

ecause the Adventist educational enterprise issuch a significant part of the experience andhopes of the church, Adventist Today tries al-most every year to gauge the relative progressof the schools in North America, especiallythose offering college- and university-leveltraining. Enrollments of students at the begin-

Taken ning of the school year are often considered the bestmeasure.

together, This year our task of gathering figures on college en-rollments was made much simpler by the work of Dallas

the schools Kindopp, a researcher working with the department ofeducation of the North American Division. He kindly

showed sent us the table below, summarizing fall enrollment fig-ures for the past five years. Schools use different ways of

modest computing enrollments, but the full-time equivalency, orFTE, is a reasonably comparable measure. Florida Hospi-

gains; a tal College and Kettering College of Medical Arts havejoined the roster of schools for which this record is kept.

total of Though the Florida school is the smallest, it registeredthe greatest percentage gain through the five years-

17,063 132 percent. It had 383 more students in 2002 than in1998. The school with the most student gain overall was

students Southern Adventist University, which with 1,990 studentswas 459 registered students ahead of its 1998 figure,

enrolled in almost 30 percent.Other schools with appreciable gains were Canadian

the fall of Union College, with 39 percent; Union College, with33 percent; La Sierra University, with 26 percent; and

2002, an Walla Walla College and Columbia Union College, eachwith about 13 percent. The two largest schools, Andrews

increase of University and Loma Linda University, each with over

2,000 students, both showed modest declines of 6 percentand 9 percent, respectively. The figures from Southwest-ern Adventist University are a Iittle skewed because thelatest figure, unlike the previous four, does not includethe adult degree students.

Taken together, the schools showed modest gains; atotal of 17,063 students enrolled in the fall of 2002, anincrease of 6 percent over the five years.

The school year 2002-2003 was memorable for manyof these schools. At Atlantic Union College, in SouthLancaster, Mass., the tumultuous year saw a critical in-spection by the New England regional accreditingassociation; the resignation in March of the president,Dr. Sylvan Lashley; the installation of an interim presi-dent, Dr. N. Clifford Sorenson; then the appointment of anew president, Dr. George P. Babcock. Dr. Babcock wasthe senior vice-president for academic administration atSouthern Adventist University, in Collegedale, Tenn.

Walla Walla College, in College Place, Wash., saw achange of administration when Dr. Sorenson took thereins briefly, then turned them over to Dr. Jon Dybdahlat a ceremony last November. Andrews University, inBerrien Springs, Mich., is "holding its own" and rejoicesin the completion of a new performing arts complexutilizing advanced architectural design. La Sierra Univer-sity, in Riverside, Cal if., has completed the redesign of itscampus and is developing modern upscale residences inwhat used to be farmland. It is now constructing a newscience complex. Pacific Union College, in Angwin,Calif., has taken on a new president, Richard C. Osborn,formerly with the North American Division departmentof education .•

6 percent

over the

five years.

61adventist today I volume 11 issue 3

Fraud Prompts Review of Audit ProceduresJAMES STIRLING

hat can a local church or church schooldo when those who handle its money di-vert some of it for themselves? And whatcan the denomination do to correct theproblem?

A church in Northern California recentlydiscovered that its treasurer had embezzled

something between $170,000 and $200,000. Thechurch treasurer is now facing prosecution, according toa local conference official familiar with the situation.

While it's a small percentage of the nearly $1 billionthat congregations collect in the region each year-at arate of approximately $18 mill ion each week-thelosses are still troubling to Adventist church officials.Most of the lost money is recovered through insuranceafter a $2,500 deductible. Premiums for local churchcoverage are paid with church expense.

Most church thefts are reported to civil authorities, butsome are not. Rick Russell, treasurer for the church'sCarol ina Conference, with headquarters in Charlotte,N.C., says a local church sometimes may try to handle atheft without reporting it to civil authorities.

"Oftentimes the person is very well respected," saysRussell. "Sometimes the members go into denial that it'shappened to them and may not want to report it. Theymight try to handle it another way."

Karnik Doukmetzian, a vice president of AdventistRisk Management Inc. (ARM), the church's insuranceunit, says a church handling theft without reporting tolaw enforcement authorities fails to send the messagethat church theft will not be tolerated. He says the de-nomination has no consistent policy of mandatoryreporting to the authorities. He believes it's a significantenough issue that cases should be automatically re-ported. "It's not enough [for the offender] to makearrangements to pay it back and say, 'I'm sorry,'" he says.

"Doukmetzian may have a point," says Philip Palmer,church treasurer for the South Central Conference, withheadquarters in Nashville, Tenn. Palmer also points outthe filing of a police report doesn't mean the person isbeing charged. However, Palmer says, it's a delicate mat-ter, and whether or not to go to authorities is a toughdecision for churches.

Palmer says another issue is whether or not a pros-ecuted church member wi II stay in the church.

Kenneth Ladd, treasurer for the Adventist church inSouthern California, says the decision to report theft tothe authorities should be prompted by a "case-by-case"consideration, not a mandatory pol icy.

Lawrance Martin, treasurer of the church's Allegheny

East Conference in Pine Forge, Penn., agrees, saying amandatory policy might send the wrong message. "Itmight mean that we are more interested in getting themoney back than in saving the person," he says. "But theperson needs to realize it's a criminal act." Martin says itis the job of the church board and the pastor to notifythe conference, who should then notify authorities.

Conference treasurers say the best guard againstchurch theft is regular auditing, which is required ofeach church every two years by the working policy ofthe Adventist church in North America.

Two full-time auditors serve the Central CaliforniaConference, and each church and school there is au-dited annually. "We are not taking this responsibilityIightly," says Nelson Tabingo, treasurer for the church inCentral California. According to Tabingo, constant delaysin church remittances to the local conference could be asignal that something might be wrong. Tabingo is alsoleery of the excuse of a treasurer's computer crashingconstantly. "When they say, 'All the information is lost,' Iam suspicious."

Arthur Blinci, a vice president of ARM, says some localchurch conferences are more compliant with divisionworking policy than others. He cites one conference thatregularly prepares and distributes a listing of each churchand school and the date when it was last audited. "Tome that sends a big statement," says Blinci. "It also reaf-firms the work of the church treasurer."

"The strange ones we latch onto pretty quick," saysVictor Elliott, claims counsel for ARM. Large amounts ofmoney draw attention. What hurts, he says, is long-termlifting of small amounts. This usually occurs because ofa breakdown in auditing policy. "These are harder todetect," he says.

The Adventist church in North America is addressingthe issue by encouraging local audits, making peopleaware of the problem, and educating the local church andschool treasurers and accountants, according to JuanPrestol, treasurer for the Adventist church in NorthAmerica. He refers treasurers to a video with a guidebooktitled, Trustees of the Lord's Finances, (available throughAdventSource, www.adventsource.org) produced by theAdventist church in North America. It offers two hoursand 45 minutes of instruction about internal control.Adventist church officials advise that the local conferencetreasurer or auditor should be contacted if a concernarises about the use of church money .•

(Adapted from an article by Ansel Oliver, in the Adven-tist News Network.)

"Sometimes

the members

go into denial

that it's

happened to

them and may

not want to

report it.They

might try to

handle it

another

way"

volume 11 issue 31 adventist today 17

}7 E t JULIO C. MUNOZ,l.enyan n repreneur A D V E N TIS T NEW S NET W 0 R K

Develops Low-Cost Satellite Dishhe Kenyan young man with the bright, Iime-green shirt smiles proudly as he effortlesslyspins the bicycle pedals with his hands. Along steel rod emerges bent into a crescent-shaped semicircle from Enoch Mogusu'shandmade apparatus. The rods form theframework for ultra-low-cost satellite dishes

that are assembled in this small workshop cramped in themiddle of an entrepreneurial complex on a hill off a reddirt road in Kisii, Kenya.

Mogusu is the owner of Kistec Industries, which is dedi-cated to manufacturing low-cost satellite dishes that aremade with locally available materials. These dishes can besold to Adventist and other Christian churches at an af-fordable price so they may harness the power of satellites.

With the arrival of satellite technology, evangelism haschanged forever. Tens of thousands can now be reachedfrom a single location via satellite. It is now possible topresent sermons by some of the most renowned preachersin the most remote areas. That is, if satellite dishes are af-fordable.

When satellite dishes first started popping up inNairobi, the capital of Kenya, the cost was 150,000 to250,000 Kenyan shillings-a luxury in a country where,according to relief groups, the national per capita incomein 2001 was just under 23,000 shillings, or 340 U.S. dol-lars. Mogusu and his partners decided that was too muchto pay.

Kistec's dishes are not only inexpensive, they aredurable and accurate. Commercial satellite dishestypically have signal strength of 55 to 65 percent, whileEnoch's satellites receive a signal of 75 to 90 percent.

"1 said this price is relatively high," recalls Mogusu, ashe stands in front of his simple workshop. "Manychurches can't afford this, and the Adventist homes can'tafford this. So I went ahead to design a dish, which canbe used for the purpose of satellite evangelism."

Enoch and his associates started Kistec Industries in theoutskirts of Kisii, which is about a four-hour drive north-west of Nairobi. He developed his first low-cost dish in1996 using mosquito wire and other locally available ma-terials. It was a success.

Enoch and his colleagues continued to streamline theiroperation. In the early days, the Kistec crew spent sevendays to build one dish. "But I thought this time is toomuch," Mogusu recalls with a frown. "1 went down to

Sladventist today I volume 11 issue 3

design a machine that could make many dishes, plus savetime. So I set up a machine that can make a dish within aday-so one dish per day."

After a little tinkering, Enoch created his own equip-ment from spare bicycle parts and his imagination. Hedesigned a machine that could bend the steel rods intonearly perfect semicircles that formed the various parts ofthe dish frame.

Enoch has used part determination, part ingenuity,and dedication to create a satellite dish that is moreaffordable, with a price tag of 9,000 Kenyan shillings.Commercial dishes now can cost anywhere from 18,000shillings for a 1.8-meter dish to 50,000 for a 2.5-meterdish.

Kistec's dishes are not only inexpensive; they are du-rable and accurate. Commercial satellite dishes typicallyhave signal strength of 55 to 65 percent, while Enoch'ssatellites receive a signal of 75 to 90 percent.

The low-cost satellite dish has made the church's satel-lite outreach program much easier. "Since Enoch startedmaking cheaper equipment for satellite, more people are[able] to get satellite right in their homes," says SibiahMiyienda, satellite coordinator for the Adventist church inthe South Kenya region. "People can get the satellite intheir hotels, in guesthouses, in some schools and also inthe churches. It's cheap now for individuals and for orga-nizations."

The first Adventist church in rural Kenya bought and in-stalled one of Enoch's low-cost satellites in July 2002.Since then dozens of Adventist churches and schools havebegun receiving church programming via satellite.

Kistec suffered a setback recently when a fire destroyedsome of its equipment, forcing Mogusu to let some of hisworkers go. Today he has a staff of 10, in addition to histwo partners. With the mechanization of their equipment,they say it is possible to manufacture 72 satellite dishesper day using three machines. Enoch believes they willsoon be able to lower the price of their dishes even morebecause of the increase in sales they are anticipating.

Last October, Enoch had the opportunity to teach repre-sentatives from 25 African nations his technique forbuilding inexpensive dishes. By sharing the low-cost tech-nology he and his partners have developed, they hopemore homes and churches in Africa will have access to af-fordable church programming.

Not satisfied with their current success, Enoch has anew vision to reach the remote areas of Kenya: mobilesatellite downlink sites. It is his dream to take the dish,aim it, and with a television running off a generator,download AdventistTelevision Network programming forunreached rural communities .•

Abortion Protesting on the Local Church LevelJAMES STIRLING

Seventh-day Adventist pro-lifer dissatisfied withthe church's stand on abortion made headlinesin a local paper last April by demonstrating infront of a Washington Adventist church so oftenand so graphically that the church expelledhim from membership. Stephen R. Decker,

former member of the Redmond, Wash., church says he istrying to raise awareness among Adventists about theirchurch's "unbiblical" stand. He says the practice of abor-tion violates the commandment prohibiting killing.

Chad Carlton, pastor of the church, insists that thechurch's action against Decker is not a response to hisstand on abortion, but to his method of displaying goryimages of aborted fetuses and images of baby dolls withfake blood and daggers, and to his accosting of peoplegoing by. Decker has been keeping his vigil almost everyweek in front of various Adventist churches for the pastyear, along with fellow Adventist Benjamin K. Owen, amember of the Bellevue church. According to an articleby Janet I. Tu in the Seattle Times, the two belong to Posi-

tively Pro-Life, an informal local group of ahalf dozen people who' have recently concen-trated on demonstrating outside churches.

According to Gil Bahnsen, who has inter-viewed Decker and Owen, the church issueda statement disavowing their behavior, declar-ing to them that "you have overstepped thebounds of appropriate Christian behavior inyour zeal to further the cause of ending abor-tion .... We have been disappointed by youranger, resistance and refusal to reconcile withthe church. In addition, you have flatly denieda request. ..to not protest in front of our church again." Inanother statement the church said Decker was displayingthe spirit of antichrist and called on him to "discontinueyour demonstrations of public humiliation and join us inunity to utilize the biblical principles for resolution of sin."

But Decker and Owen remain unimpressed by thechurch's actions and are determined to continue theirefforts to promote the cause.•

PRO-CHOICE

Reporting and photosby Gil Bahnsen

.•• An Enumclaw police officerresponds to a call from thechurch. Ben Owen (far right) gets his video camera ready for use, if need be,

to document any negative interactions with law enforcement officials. Hedidn't need it on this occasion. The officer verified that they were performingtheir protest within the law and resumed his patrol. Owen said he had con-tacted the police department ahead of time about this demonstration.

A church member deliberately drove his vehicle close to Sarah Thompson(middle, with umbrella) as he turned into the parking lot. When asked abouthis actions he told the photographer, "If my wife hadn't been in the car withme, I would have driven this close." He indicated a distance of about twoinches with the thumb and index finger of his right hand. The officer returned

to the church after the photographer reported this incident and maintained apresence for about half an hour.

A number of the complaints against the protestors are based on the idea ofchildren being protected from the disturbing images displayed on the signs.

Three or four people known to the protestors stopped to talk. AnEnumclaw church elder had a conversation with Ben Owen when he arrivedthere, but that was the only verbal interaction between the church members

and protestors.

..•• The neighbor across the

street parked his pickup here toblock the view of the sign fromhis house. He said he disagreedwith their message, but agreedwith their right to protest. Hejust didn't want to have to lookat the signs. He and a womangot into the truck a little whilelater and drove away.

.., Decker stands displaying a sign.

.•• Decker offers copies ofthe Adventist Church's offi-cial abortion policies tomembers leaving the churchservice. No one took any.

volume 11 issue 31 adventist tOdayl9

With God on Our SideFELIX A. LORENZ, JR.

ith Tolstoy I am convinced that not to speak out in a time of

CriSISlike this would be "shameful and crimina!." The failure of many Chris-

tians to speak out for peace and justice from a Christian base-yea, they

even support the warmongers with military rhetoric-has embarrassed this

old former Fundamentalist (still a born-again, lower-case fundamentalist).

We are told that it is necessary to remove SaddamHussein. He is an evil dictator. Wasn't he an evil dicta-tor when we provided arms and intelligence andmoney for him while he was fighting Iran? And whenhe gassed Iranians and Kurds from American-madehelicopters?

We are determined to disarm him. Has he everthreatened us?We are told he has "weapons of massdestruction." If true, still a matter of question according

to the United Nations weapons inspec-tors, remember that Israel has 200nuclear bombs, the United States has10,000, and six other countries have anunknown number. We are the only coun-try to have used them!

I am an enthusiastic American who isembarrassed by what America has doneand is doing. What most distresses meabout the militant rhetoric of our leadersis history.

I remember when our leaders told us ofan attack in the Tonkin Gulf in 1964.Now we know it was pure fabrication, but

it stirred up our emotions enough to "justify" a war inVietnam, which JayTolson calls a "failed experiment innation-bu iIdi ng."

We all remember the pictures of a little girl runningdown the road, a victim of our napalm. And mothersholding their babies in the trenches as Gis pouredbullets into them. Of course, that's what war is allabout-killing the enemy.

When those scenes came to America, we began tosee the Vietnam War not as against communism, butagainst poor peasants, real people. Gruesome scenes.Gruesome memories.

That's when many of us became antiwar activists.Please, let's not wait until that happens again.

I remember when a president sabotaged Vietnampeace talks in 1968 to assure his election. It worked!

10 ladventist today Ivolume 11 issue 3

I remember when in 1980 a presidential candidatesabotaged the Iranian hostage negotiations to assure hiselection. It worked!

I don't remember, of course, the fictitious 1898Battleship Maine incident which "justified" our bloodyconquest of Cuba, the Philippines and Puerto Rico.

I do remember Marcos, a dictator on a par withSaddam. But he was our man! I do remember that weinstalled one dictator after another in Liberia. And I re-member that we supported Franco in Spain anddictators in Cuba. Ruthless dictators. But of course theywere cozy with American businessmen.

I remember that we talked democracy a lot. But whowas responsible for the overthrow of the democraticallyelected government in Iran and the installation of theShah?To use Biblical lingo, Saddam has killed his thou-sands, the Shah his tens of thousands. It was anothercase of helicopters made from U.S.-supplied parts.After the Shah was overthrown by his own people,CIA chief William Colby called installing him the CIA'sproudest achievement. "You may think he failed, butfor twenty-five years he served us well."

While we watched our televisions in horror onSept. 11,2001, citizens of Chile remembered thaton Sept. 11, 1973, their presidential palace wasbombed. Democratically elected president SalvadorAllende died in the attack. Pinochet, supported bycovert operations of the CIA and the American military,became dictator, then rounded up the "dissidents" andtortured and massacred them. As I write this, a Chileanman is talking on the Morning Show, answering thequestion, "Would you have wanted some other nationto come in and eliminate Pinochet?" His answer was,"No, he was our dictator and we overthrew himourselves."

History indeed should make us think seriously aboutour role in the world.

During World War II 120,000 Japanese-Americancitizens were rounded up and imprisoned, and their

property was confiscated. Senator Daniel Inouye said,liThe lessons learned must remain a grave reminder ofwhat we must not allow to happen again to any group."

Arabs and others in the Third World already resentAmerica. Our arrogant attitude and behavior haveangered millions allover the world. Why are we soresented? We have simply gone into other nations andpushed them around to suit our interests. These includeHaiti, Cuba, Grenada, Panama, Angola, Namibia,Ghana, Iran, Indonesia, El Salvador, the Congo, Cam-bodia, Laos, and Nicaragua.

What are the feelings of people who lost loved onesin the Trade Center attacks?

Amber Amundsen's husband, Craig, was killed whenFlight 77 crashed into the Pentagon. He was 28, fatherof two. Here is what Amber has to say: "I have heardangry rhetoric by some Americans, including many ofour nation's leaders, who advise a heavy dose of re-venge and punishment. To those leaders, I would like tomake clear that my family and I take no comfort fromyour words of rage. If you choose to respond to this in-comprehensible brutality by perpetuating violenceagainst other innocent human beings, you may not doso in the name of justice for my husband. Your wordsand imminent acts of revenge only amplify our family'ssuffering, deny us the dignity of remembering our loved

questions when God's on your side." "You don't countthe dead when God's on your side." "Accept it allgravely with God on your side." Is God on our side?

Abraham Lincoln was once assured that God was onthe side of the North. His response was, "I just want tobe sure we are on God's side."

Martin Luther King, jr.'s last Sunday sermon in 1968in the National Cathedral included an unmistakableantiwar theme: lilt is no longer a choice, my friends,between violence and nonviolence. It is either non-violence or nonexistence .... "

jeanne Morin Buell, former Catholic nun, wroteabout prayer and flags and war: "Christians throughoutthe centuries would pray that they would win the war,as though it were possible that you could win a war.When you wage a war and allow yourself to kill yourenemy, how could you hope to be heard in prayer?

"Instead of beating swords into plowshares, as theoft-quoted but ever-ignored Isaiah urged, the messagenow-with at least $20 billion instantly added to thewar chest-is beat swords into bigger swords."

As he left office, Dwight D. Eisenhower looked backover his years as president and supreme commanderof the allied forces. He noted that the Cold War broughta new status to America, a perpetual war supportedby a perpetual war industry. It was the confluence of

Bob Dylan is one ofmy favorite songwriters. He wrote "With God on Our Side," in which the eightverses trace pseudo-faith and militarism. "Younever ask questions when God's on your side." "Youdon't count the dead when God's on your side." "Accept it all gravely with God on your side." IsGod on our side?

one in a way that would make him proud, and mockhis vision of America as a peacemaker in the world."(Chicago Tribune, Sept. 25, 2001).

Lewis Mumford wrote, liThe point to be grasped hasbeen staring Western civilization in the face for thelast half-century, namely, that a predominately mega-technic economy can be kept in profitable operationonly by systematic and constant expansion. Instead of abalanced economy, dedicated to the enhancement oflife, mega-technics demands limitless expansion on acolossal scale, a feat that only war or mock-war rocketbuilding and space exploration can supply."

That is the preface to Derrick jensen's chapter, "War,"in his book, The Culture of Make Believe. The chapter,which begins, "We may as well admit that war is thebest possible thing for our economy," is primarily aboutpast wars, but it is nearly a word-far-word prophecy ofour current leadership!

Bob Dylan is one of my favorite songwriters. Hewrote "With God on Our Side," in which the eightverses trace pseudo-faith and militarism. "You never ask

industry and the military, which Thomas jefferson hadwarned against and tried to ban in the first version ofthe Bill of Rights. Eisenhower said, "Every gun that ismade, every warship launched, every rocket fired, sig-nifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hungerand are not fed, those who are cold and not clothed.The world in arms is not spending money alone. It isspending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its sci-entists, the hopes of its children.1I

We will continue to light our Peace Candle with aprayer for "peace on earth" each week. We will prayGod's forgiveness and guidance for all who are in-volved. God is not on our side nor on our enemy's side.God is on the side of peace and justice, truth and righ-teousness, for which Calvary became a reality, and forwhich we will continue to pray.•

FelixA. Lorenz, Jr., is a pastor in Dearbon, Mich., andwrote this essay at the beginning of the Lenten season,2003, while plans for the attack on Iraq were still beingformulated. This is a condensed version of his remarks.

volume 11 issue 31 adventist today 111

A. Limbless Iraqi ChildGLEN GREENWALT

f all the images that have come outof the Iraqi war, the one

that haunts me is that of a limbless Iraqi child. I am not a pacifist. I believe

that in a world of evil one should always pursue the course that results in

the least amount of suffering. At times pacifism is not this course. But at the

same time I can't escape the question that Alyosha poses to Ivan in The

Brothers Karamazov: "If you were God, and you had to create a world in

which only one child was to so suffer, would you create that world?"

Last Saturday night I went with friends to see a musi-cal adaptation of Voltaire's satirical comedy, Candide.For readers who are unfamiliar with Candide, it is a storytold to ridicule Gottfried Wilhelm von Leibniz's claimthat despite all of the evils we experience in life, thisworld is the best of all possible worlds, insofar that suffer-ing contributes to God's purpose of perfecting children inthe divine likeness. In the story, Candide and the othercharacters suffer one outrage after another, from loss ofhome, to impoverishment, enslavement, prostitution,scourging at the hands of the Inquisitor, petty rejections,and a host of other miseries-to each of which the char-acters respond cheerfully that they have no complaints,because this is after all the best of all possible worlds.

The problem with all attempts to justify God's permis-sion of undeserved hurt and suffering is that they saytoo much and too little.They say too much, because theymake evil reasonable from the viewpoint of God; but theone thing that evil never is, is reasonable.

Leibniz's point was not, of course, that the evils andsuffering of this world are something to cheer. He be-lieved that a great deal of evil existed in this world, butof all possible worlds, the goods of this world best out-weighed its evils. Still, this defense is inadequate. If Godcould imagine various possible worlds, and gave realityto this world rather than another, then even though Godis perhaps not accountable for the choices that lead tothe particular evils in this world, God is accountable forcreating the world that contained these particular evils.

, 21adventist today Ivolume 11 issue 3

In another world, the Iraqi boy may not have lost hislimbs, and perhaps you or I would have.

How can we come to terms with the possibility of evilin this world? More than free will must be at stake. Noneof us is fully free, after all, to make decisions. The op-tions available for us to choose are always limited atbest, and in many situations none exist. Our Iraqi boynever had a choice whether or not there would be a war.And seldom if ever do we see the full consequences ofour decisions. Even when we believe we are choosingthe best course of action, our actions often turn out tocause hurt to others and ourselves. The American coali-tion never set out to hurt this Iraqi boy. They set out tobring an end to Saddam Hussein's torture of innocentvictims.

The problem with all attempts to justify God's permis-sion of undeserved hurt and suffering is that they say toomuch and too Iittle. They say too much, because theymake evil reasonable from the viewpoint of God; but theone thing that evil never is, is reasonable. The very na-ture of evil is that it is irrational. Any attempt to explainit away is to somehow make allowance for it. On theother hand, every attempt to explain evil says too little,for no answer is ever given to the victim's cry, "Whyme?" Even Leibniz sidestepped this question, saying thatits answer lay in the providence of God, which of courseleaves the victim with no answer for his or her ownsuffering.

Rather than creating a theodicy or justification ofGod's handling of human suffering, examples such asthe limbless boy have driven me to conclude that weneed to take the side of victims in their complaintagainst God. This complaint, I believe, arises not from

outside of faith, but from the heart of faith. The very actof complaint, I also believe, is the best testimony toGod's goodness at a time when God appears silentand absent. I take my model for what I prefer to call atherapeutic of suffering, in contrast to a theodicy or justi-fication of evil, from Jesus' cry on the cross-"My God,my God, why hast thou forsaken me?"

I have set out in bold type the elements of the thera-peutic of suffering I find in Jesus' complaint. I do notmean thereby to suggest ordered steps or stages.The suf-ferer may not identify with each of the elements, buteach of these elements is a legitimate aspect of suffer-ing from a Christian perspective. Nor will the sufferernecessarily proceed from complaint to identificationwith suffering in an orderly fashion. One may, for ex-ample, accept one's suffering without complaint. WhatI learn from the cross is simply that complaint shouldnot be ruled out as a legitimate response to suffering.

ComplaintThe problem with all attempts to justify God's good-

ness in the face of the horrendous suffering of theinnocent is that they pacify complaint-the very thingunfairness and injustice deserve. Certainly Job, thepsalmists, the prophets, and even Jesushimself com-plained against their apparent abandonment by God atthe time of their suffering.

Elie Weisel encapsulates the darkness of the Holo-caust experience in the story of the hanging of a youngJewish boy, who was too emaciated to have weightenough to break his neck when he fell, and so strangledslowly before the watching prisoners. Weisel, in recall-ing that story, says that to this day he refuses to believethat an answer can be given for such cruelty. "I havenever renounced my faith in God," Weisel writes in hisMemoir, "I have risen against His justice, protested Hissilence and sometimes His absence, but my anger risesup within faith and not outside ... Abraham and Moses,Jeremiah and Rebbe Levi-Yitzhak of Berdichev teach usthat it is permissible for man to accuse God, provided itbe done in the name of faith in God. If that hurts, so beit. Sometimes we must accept the pain of faith so as notto lose it."

Weisel goes on to say, "I will never cease to rebelagainst those who committed or permitted Auschwitz,including God. The questions I once asked myself aboutGod's silence remain open. If they have an answer, I donot know it. More than that, I refuse to know it." It is thisrefusal to know that speaks most powerfully of Weisel'sfaith, for it expresses a confidence that the evil ofAuschwitz is incompatible with any notion ofThe Goodthat he finds acceptable. Weisel simply finds it unac-ceptable to connect God's name in any way with givingpermission for the torture and death of a single innocentchild. In the words of Scripture, better that a millstonewere tied around one's neck and that person be cast into

the sea than that one of God's children be hurt. Godmust live consistently with God's own teaching.

I{nowledgeThe complaint of faith is made in the name of God.

Interestingly enough, it is in our complaints against thesuffering of the innocent that God is truly defended, forall such complaints are made in God's name. Evil existsonly if the possibility of an alternative good exists. In aworld governed by chance and forces of natural selection,

I take my model for what I prefer to call a therapeuticof suffering, in contrast to a theodicy or justification ofevil, from Jesus' cry on the cross-' 'My God, my God,why hast thou forsaken me?"as the eminent British biologist, Richard Dawkins, hasnoted, such an assumed good that is free of accidentsand conflicts does not exist. Only by supposing thechildish myth of an omnipotent protector can a com-plaint against human suffering be made.

Yet we continue to complain, despite Dawkins' logic.And we might suppose that were Dawkins himself re-moved from his professorial sanctuary,and burned at a stake by religious fanat-ics, as happened to colleagues of anearlier century, he himself might com-plain. He already complains about thestupidity of religious fundamentals in hiswritings and the obstacle they pose toscience-yet by his own logic they toomust be selected for survival.

If we have any comfort at all that theuniverse is not finally meaningless, wecan find that comfort only in the exist-ence of some good that transcends whatwe see. This is a risk, not a proof. It is, asDavid Larson, professor of ethics atLoma Linda University, has written in anunpublished manuscript, "an informedwager that love is more pervasive thanindifference, beauty more enduring than ugliness, healthmore basic than illness, peace more normal than con-flict, anticipation more realistic than dread, truth morevictorious than falsehood and grace more abundant thansin." We have no proof that any of this is true. But nei-ther can we make any plan or undertake any endeavorwithout wagering that it is true.

Jesusin crying from the cross did not cry blindly.He cried out in the name of "my God." We have noother basis for crying out against the violation of aninnocent child.

Continued on page 14

volume 11 issue 31 adventist today 113

A Limbless Iraqi ChildContinued from page 13

AcceptanceComplaint gives way to acceptance only in the tran-

scending of complaint in the knowledge of a higher good-not in the removal of grounds for complaint. This highergood is in part, as we have already seen, a realization thata radical complaint against undeserved hurt and injusticecan only be made in the name ofThe Good itself. Onlyon the grounds of what Anselm called "That Than WhichNothing Greater Can Be Conceived," can we establish afoundation to name undeserved hurt and injustice.

Perhaps, however, acceptance can go beyond eventhis knowledge to a kind of empathy for all sufferingcreatures. Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn commented that hewas never able to accept his suffering in the Gulag untila rabbi asked him why he believed he should be ex-

lot is not different from God's lot. It is for this reason thatwe can commend our spirit to God's Spirit.

IdentificationI am not sure all are called to identify their lives with

suffering. Certainly, not all are called to the same level ofsuffering. There is no virtue in suffering for suffering'ssake. Still, by viewing oneself as an agent in God's cre-ative suffering, one is able to move beyond victimhood.

Here the metaphor of an artist may be helpful. An art-ist knows that every creative act includes a struggle inwhich the artist attempts to form some medium such asclay, paint, words, notes, or whatever into some con-ceived shape, image, story, score, or other end. This taskis seldom easy and most often entails a great deal of an-guish and even pain. Yet the artist persists in his or herart, not in order to suffer, but to accomplish something ofbeauty and/or truth.

In a recent pottery class, I became convinced thatGod's attempts to mold us into works of beauty and truth

Here the metaphor of an artist may be helpful.An artist knows that every creative act includes astruggle in which the artist attempts to form some medium such as clay;paint, words, notes, orwhatever into some conceived shape, image, story; score, or other end. This task is seldom easyand most often entails a great deal of anguish and even pain.Yetthe artist persists in his or her art,not in order to suffer, but to accomplish something of beauty and/or truth.

empted from suffering. Did he believe that he was supe-rior to any other creature? From the momentSolzhenitsyn identified himself with the lot of all crea-tures, he says he was not afraid of his tormentors. Fromthat moment he was free of all fear.

And still there may be even a deeper empathy-empathy for God's own suffering. During the Alliedbombing of Germany, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, the Christianpastor who was imprisoned for plotting against Hitler,was taken from his cell and asked how he could believein God when God permitted such terror against the Ger-man people. To which Bonhoeffer replied by asking,"How can we do this to God?" Weisel expresses similarempathy for God's suffering in his Memoirs. He writes,"One can-and must-love God. One can challengehim and even be angry with him, but one must also pityhim." Weisel says that he came to this conclusion whenhis Talmudist master showed him a passage in theMidrash where God wept. "His tears fell upon hispeople and his creation, as if to say,What have youdone to my work?" Weisel concludes from this passagethat one may therefore invoke God's name "not only inindignation but also with sadness and compassion." Our

141adventist today Ivolume 11 issue 3

must involve a struggle similar to the human artisticstruggle. What I learned from my early attempts to throwa piece of clay and shape it into a vessel was that clayresists being manhandled into some intentional shape.Clay has a mind of its own. As one potter told me, onemust listen to what the clay is trying to tell you, or youwill never succeed as a potter.

In creating beings with their own autonomy, God cre-ated objects that could resist the divine shaping. We maybe clay in the potter's hand, but a good potter listens tothe clay. Taking the pottery analogy seriously, we mayagree with David Larson that "God rarely intervenesoverwhelmingly; God always participates helpfully." Toidentify with God's creative work means that we are notvictims but fellow servants with God in shaping theworld into a place where all complaints are finally re-solved. That world is not yet come. I am deeply troubledby the limbless Iraqi boy, and my complaint goes di-rectly to God. But I also hear the call to take up mycreative cross and follow God in the slow, arduous, andat times baffling and traumatic task of redeeming thisfallen, crumpled vessel of a world fit for destruction .•

Glen Greenwalt is a theologian and an artist.

Regarding ust WarDAVID REYNOLDS

mong the common

justifications for war used byChristians are the examples of

war in the Old Testament.If the Israelites could fight the Canaanites with God'sblessing, so the reasoning goes, we can fight the Nazis,Iraqis, Iranians, North Koreans, etc. with God's blessingnow. But those who argue from these ancient examplesdon't tell the whole story. When the early Israelites wentto war, they slaughtered every man, woman, child andbeast. Yet many Christians use this ancient war-makingto "prove" that war is acceptable to God.

Adventists have long taught that truth is progressive. Ifit is truly progressive, then we must allow the Old Testa-ment to be superseded by what Jesustaught in the NewTestament. (Didn't Jesussay, "you have heard it said inold times ...but I tell you ...?Matthew 5:21)

This concept of progressive truth applies to the NewTestament as well. In New Testament times slavery wasunquestioningly accepted. Jesusnever spoke a wordagainst slavery, and Paul sent Philemon back to hismaster. Paul never told his master to release him fromslavery. In today's world slavery is considered morallyoffensive. Should we go back to the "truth" of apostolictimes, or progress?

Ideas have consequences, and sometimes they takecenturies to reach their full potential. Jesuswas a libera-tor, but it was not until the 19th century that slavery wasabolished as an intolerable moral evil. Women were notgiven the vote in the United States until the 20th cen-tury, and it was not too long ago that they were liberatedfrom being property. In these areas, should we go backto "New Testament morality?" I don't think so.

If every man is your brother or neighbor, as Christ im-plied, then going out to kill him in war seems inherently

wrong. Jesusfurther strengthened this assumption bysaying that the peacemakers of this world are especiallyblessed.

For those who think that pacifism is not powerfulenough, consider three men who changed the world What do wethrough pacifism: Christ changed the whole course ofhistory with the power of his ideas. Gandhi brought do about thedown the mighty British Empire through passive resis-tance of evil. Martin Luther King, Jr. changed the entire Hitlers of thiscourse of American history and of bigotry through hispassive resistance of evil. world? There

What do we do about the Hitlers of this world? Thereisn't an easy answer. But it must be noted that Christian isn't an easypassivity (in contrast to pacifism) strengthened Hitler. If amajority of Christians had actively opposed Hitler early, answer. But iton the grounds that his entire doctrine was morally of-fensive, he never would have gained enough power to must be noteddo the evil he did. Christian inaction paved the way forHitler's undisputed sway over the German populace. that Christian

As Mark Carr pointed out, pacifism is not nonactivism.Christian pacifism is an active force against evil in the passivity (inworld. We must actively combat evil, but our methodsmust always be good. For a Christian pacifist there is no contrast tosuch thing as doing necessary evil. Perhaps part of thereason Janine Goffar objects to pacifistic Christians is pacifism)that too often they have stood back and hidden behindthose willing to actively fight evil with war, rather than strengthenedbeing active early enough to be effective. The key is torecognize evil early and actively oppose it from the start. Hitler.It is all well and good to stand up and oppose war, butfar more noble to devote ourselves to opposing the evilthat the war tries to address.

If Christians are going to be truly effective in opposingwar, we must proactively address the causes of war be-fore the saber-rattling becomes too loud. Then, perhaps,we can earn a solid reputation as peacemakers and pre-vent the carnage of more "just wars." •

Editors note: This article is a response to Janine Goffar'sarticle "War is Sometimes Moral," AT Mar/Apr 2003.

volume 11 issue 31 adventist today 115

Adventist Faculty SurveyedAgain on Creationism Views

FLOYD PETERSEN

ive years ago we surveyed the science faculty in North

American Division (NAD) Seventh-day Adventist educational institutions

of higher learning concerning their beliefs about the origins of life on

this earth. The results of that survey generated considerable interest.

The survey has been done again with some modificationsto the questionnaire. This time it was sent to religion fac-ulty as well as science teachers. Names of current facultywere abstracted by querying Web sites and by contactingthe academic departments within each institution. As be-fore, the survey was completely anonymous. 337 surveyswere sent out (205 to science faculty and 132 to reli-gion faculty). The response rate was 34.7%. An informaltally of postmarks indicated that everyone of thechurch's North American schools were represented by anumber of respondents.

ResultsOf the 117 returns, 116 indicated that they were cur-

rent faculty in an Adventist institution; with 65 in science(56 males,S females, 4 unknown) and 42 in religion(41 males, 0 females, 1 unknown). Of the 8 respondentswho did not state their academic discipline, 7 were maleand one was unknown. Academic science and religion inNAD Adventist institutions of higher education appears tobe very much a male world. In both science and religionfaculty over 80 percent came from a home where at leastone parent was Adventist. Seventy-eight percent of thosein science and 74 percent in religion had attended a non-Adventist graduate school. A number (28.1 percent scienceand 12.5 percent religion) of respondents indicated thatthey would not want revealed to their students or em-ployer how they had marked their survey. Over 70 percentof both science and religion faculty felt that publishing theresults of the survey would be useful and constructive inthe church's current dialog over these questions.

In Tables 1, 2 and 3 the responses on key questions fromthe science faculty in the 1994 survey are compared to the

161adventist today I volume 11 issue 3

science and religion faculty in the current 2003 survey.Several things stand out: (a) a smaller proportion of sciencefaculty are likely to hold traditional Seventh-day Adventistbeliefs on these questions than religion faculty; (b) fewerscience faculty hold traditional Adventist beliefs in 2003than in 1994; and (c) though almost 80 percent of religionfaculty hold to traditional Adventist beliefs concerning thetiming of the creation of humans, only 50 percent do soabout the creation of other living organisms.

Table 4 deals with attitudes toward the importance ofthese items. Faculty were asked to indicate on a scale of1 to 9 how important to their personal salvation (1 = notimportant, 9 = critically important) was their belief in thetiming of events surrounding the origins of our naturalworld. They were also asked to indicate on the same scalehow important to their salvation was their belief in who/what caused our natural world to come into existence. Theresults of these two items are summarized in Table 4. A mi-nority (17.3 percent, science; 32.5 percent, religion) feltthat their belief in when it happened was critical to theirsalvation. As would be expected, a much higher percent(48.4 percent, science; 64.3 percent, religion) felt that theirbelief in who/what caused it to happen was critical. It wasinteresting to note that a significant percent of both scienceand religion faculty (21.4 percent, and 33.8 percent) indi-cated that their belief in who/what was of little or noimportance for their salvation.

Have faculty changed their views? After each item the re-spondents were asked if they would have marked the sameresponse at the beginning of their professional career. Ontheir belief about the origin and development of living or-ganisms including humans (see bottom of tables 1 and 2)

Continued on page 18

Table 1.Origin of life Other Than •..•umans

1994Sciencefaculty(n=121 )"

2003Sciencefaculty(n=65)

2003Theologyfaculty(n=42)

All living organisms other than humans were createdby God over a literal six-day period:less than 10,000 years ago.less than 20,000 years ago.less than 50,000 years ago.less than 100,000 years ago.

God created all living organisms over an indeterminatelength of time over the last 100,000 years.

God created life millions of years ago and thenover this period guided its development.

Life as recorded in the fossil record has evolvedover several billion years by exclusively natural means.

Other

Those indicating that they would not have marked thesame statement at the start of their professional life

Table 2. Origin of •..•ulIlCU1 U~

I

43.0

19.0

6.6

18.2

3.3

27.7 50.010.8 9.51.5 2.49.2 4.8

7.7 4.8

I20.0 I 11.9

9.2 2.4

1 13.8 11.9

43.1 36.6

In both

science and

religion

faculty; over

80 percent

came from a

home where

at least one

parent was

Adventist.

Seventy-eight

God created the first humans:less than 10,000 years ago.less than 20,000 years ago.less than 50,000 years ago.less than 100,000 years ago.

No one knows when God created humans.

Humans have developed over millions of years fromless advanced forms of life, but God guided this process.

Humans have developed over millions of years from lessadvanced forms of life, but God had no part in this process.

Other

Those indicating that they would not have marked thesame statement at the start of their professional life

1994Sciencefaculty(n=121)"

44.6

26.4

16.5

6.6

3.3

2003 2003Science Theologyfaculty faculty(n=65) (n=42)

33.8 79.312.3 13.81.5 0.06.2 6.9

23.1 16.7

13.8 9.5

9.2 2.4

1.5 2.4

47.6 34.1

percent of

those in

science and

74 percent in

religion had

attended a

non-Adventist

graduate

school.

apetersen, FJoyd. "Science Faculty Vary in Views on Creationism," Adventist Today 2(6): 19 (November-December 1994). Total n=121, margin of error:::;:t9%

bThe 1994 Science Faculty survey did not include the "less than 20,000 years ago" and I/Iess than 50,000 year" categories.cMost included written comments describing a combination of the above choices.

Continuedon page 18

volume 11 issue 3 1adventist today 117

Continuedfrom page 17 Adventist Faculty Surveyed Again on Creationism Views

Table 3. The Biblical Flood

1994Sciencefaculty(n=121)a

2003Sciencefaculty(n=65)

2003Theologyfaculty(n=42)

o

73.8

19.0

14.6

46.2

41.5

5.0

21.5

The story of the Flood is a myth.

It was a local flood somewherein the Near East. The worldwidefossil record is not a result of this flood.

Which statement comes closest to describing your views about the biblical Flood?I 645 jMost of the fossils are a resultof the worldwide Flood.

Other

Those indicating that they would nothave marked the same statement atthe start of their professional life

7.7

32.3

1

7.1

17.9

apetersen, Floyd. /lScience Faculty Vary in Views on Creationism," Adventist Today 2(6): 19 (November-December 1994). Total n=121, margin of error=::!:9%

Table 4. Beliefs and Sal~i1tion

Scale* Not Important1,2,3 4,5,6

Critically Important7,8,9

With respect to your personal salvation:Belief in when it all happenedScience FacultyReligion Faculty

57.852.5

24.215

17.332.5

Belief in how it all happenedand Who/What caused itScience FacultyReligion Faculty

33.821.4

17.114.3

48.464.3

*Respondents were asked to circle a number on a scale of 1 to 9.

Continuedfrom page 16

a large minority (approximately 45 percent, science;35 percent, religion) of respondents indicated that theyhad changed their views on when it happened and who/what caused it to happen.

The results of this survey do indicate that there arewidely differing beliefs surrounding the origins of our natu-ral world among both religion and science faculty.

In the last paragraph of my article published in AT, Nov/Dec 1994, I suggested that we might be surprised to findout how it all happened when someday we hear it from theone who was there. I have thought about that statement alot since I first wrote it. I now hope that he does not tell us

but continues to let us struggle over this issue. I'm not sure Iwould enjoy an existence where there were no profoundquestions to ponder.

o God, CreatorPlease don't tell.Allow us to struggle

to learn, to grappleWith Ideas.o God, CreatorWe will searchWe will find the answersWe will find You.•

181adventist today I volume 11 issue 2

Lay Members and Church ReformNICOLE HIGGINS

uring all my years

at Adventist schools, first grade

through college, no one ever told

me how the Adventist church IS

put together.In civics classes I learned how the United States gov-

ernment is run and when our country's presidentialelections are held. Yet, as a young adult, I still did notknow when my local church conference elects its presi-dent. I never heard discussions, even rumors, aboutconference elections or constituency meetings. No oneelse seemed to know or care. My grandparents wereboth raised in the church and served as missionaries,yet my grandpa cou Idn't tell me how often constituencymeetings were held or when our conference presidentwas most recently elected. My grandma, who has beenon five conference committees and still carries outmany responsibilities on several, knew how often theconstituency meetings were held, but couldn't tell mewhen the next one was to meet. She also could nottell me how she was picked to be on the conferencecommittees. Something is noticeably wrong when veryactive members of an organization do not know howit functions.

According to Stanley Deetz's Critical Theory ofCommunication Approach to Organizations, there arefour main organizational practices available to anyenterprise-strategy, involvement, consent and partici-pation. Each company or organization employs one oranother, or even all, of these. Strategy is the overtpractice of managerial control, where a person's choiceis to comply or get out. Involvement allows employeesor members to speak freely and openly, but it givesthem no voice in decision making. Consent is practicedwhen someone actively, though unknowingly, accom-plishes the interests of others in a faulty attempt tofulfill his or her own interests, or sometimes the best in-terests of the whole group. Employees or members ofthe group consent to the managerial mental ity thatwants to expand control of the organization. Participa-tion happens when employees and employers alikehave meaningful, democratic discussion, which leads

to better choices in the organization, and this should bethe goal of every organization. The Adventist churchmakes use of all four of these approaches in its struc-ture and applications in one way or another.

The strategy approach unfortunately characterizesthe practice of almost all churches to some extent, in-cluding the Adventists. Alonzo 1. Jones, a churchpioneer and opponent of organization, claimed that thetendency to become more centralized and controllingwas "built into the very structures [of the churches]themselves." (Cited in Barry Oliver, SDA OrganizationalStructure: Past, Present, and Future.) Ellen White notedseveral factors leading the church to employ authoritar-ian principles of governance, and some of those arepresent even today. Pastorsoften manage two or threechurches. Conference officers sit on many committeesand have multiple positions of authority, sometimeslinking different institutions. Local conferences candominate churches and church schools. With no stiffterm limits, unpopular leaders stay in power for longperiods of time and perpetuate "authoritarian attitudes."

I never heard discussions, even rumors, about confer-ence elections or constituency meetings. No one elseseemed to know or care. My grandparents were bothraised in the church and served as missionaries, yet mygrandpa couldn't tell me how often constituency meet-ings were held or when our conference president wasmost recently elected.

The involvement approach is often used by thechurch, inviting people to express ideas, but never put-ting them into action. Conference constituencymeetings are held about every three to five years, at-tended by delegates chosen by local churches whomake representative votes. When the conference secre-tary, who arranges the constituency meetings, wasasked how often the delegates meet, she mentionedthat though their conference met every three years, itwould be easier if they met every four or five years.

Continued on page 20

volume 11 issue 31 adventist today 119

Lay Members and Church ReformContinued from page 19

Their voices have little effect on the organization'soperation.

The consent approach is represented by the fact thatthese local delegates give power to their designatedleaders, and thereby are supposed to achieve theirgoals. Unfortunately, consent only makes people"complicit in [their] own victimization," accordingto Deetz's theory. Consent leads church members tofind themselves with no power and in a position ofweakness.

The participation approach. The church does use thisapproach sometimes. It is policy that committees at alllevels of organization must include laymen. Within thelast 15 years, lay members' participation on committeeshas been on the rise. Dr. Skip Bell, associate professorof church leadership and administration at the Seventh-day Adventist Theological Seminary at AndrewsUniversity, estimated that about half the conferencecommittee members in most conferences are not em-

Why is this kind of information so hard to come by?How can church members not be indifferent when theycan't find out what the church is about? The fact that ittook me a couple of months of research to learn whatshould have been common knowledge by now shouldbe proof enough that something needs to change.

ployed by that conference. He also noted that the"stress on pastoral leadership has increased the need oflocal church participation. It causes people of faith toexercise their spiritual gifts and lead their church tochange." Constituency meetings are potentially an av-enue for participation by church members. Mostconferences send delegates the agenda (set by the ad-ministrators), with the conference's constitution andadditional reports, about a month ahead of meetings.The delegates may share the agenda with all the othermembers and discuss the topics with them. Thus, themembers can be said to have a say through some di-rect, and some indirect, representation even if they arenot delegates. Obviously, knowledgeable constituentscould give the the best kind of participation at thesemeetings.

When I tried to learn more about the church's

20 Iadventist today I volume 11 issue 3

organizational structure at my university's library,I found only three substantive articles and a doctoraldissertation. But in none of these did i find any infor-mation about how my conference president is elected.I looked on church-sponsored Web sites and askedmy father, a former pastor. Still no good information.I called a union conference office, and five other stateconferences.

In the end I spoke to one secretary who provided mewith information about her respective conference. Shesaid the conferences are required to publish the datesfor their constituency meetings in the union's publica-tions. She also informed me about how a president iselected to or kept in office.

Why is this kind of information so hard to come by?How can church members not be indifferent when theycan't find out what the church is about? The fact that ittook me a couple of months of research to learn whatshould have been common knowledge by now shouldbe proof enough that something needs to change.

Was Jones right in saying that organizational struc-tures will always have built-in problems? We needsome organization to accomplish the church's goals,but does it have to stand in the way of participation bymembers? I had to exert a lot of energy finally to beknowledgeable enough to feel that I could make adifference by my participation. Though Ellen Whitepushed for a decentralized administration, our basicorganizational structure has remained the same since1903. This centralization eliminates the effective voiceof the laymen. Though the local churches have thegreatest ability to do good, most of the power in thechurch resides in a limited number of administrators.

When it comes to making major changes in thechurch structure, it will probably not be lay membersbut leaders and administrators who will see the lightand decide to involve and educate the masses. Churchadministrators will have to look at themselves and theirdepartments to discover just how autocratic they havebecome. Self-aware and driven leaders are going to bethe ones to reinvent the church's structure. It will haveto be a structure that "flows from a careful examinationof Scripture," as Dr. Bell advocates. This will take hardwork and dedication. There is no over-the-countersolution. Fortunately, there are many people who aredevoted to this church. With some knowledge and theHoly Spirit's guiding, we can change the system to havefull participation. Without it, the worldwide church willnever be able to function at its full potential. •

Nicole Higgins is a schoolteacher in South Lyon, Mich.

Exploring Church Organizational ReformJAMES H. STIRLING

he need for organizational reform in theSeventh-day Adventist Church has been a pe-rennial concern for AT readers. The Adventistchurch has four levels of administration abovethe local church-local conference, unionconference, division, and General Conference.As historian George Knight, a faculty member

of Andrews University, points out here, we may be themost tightly knit worldwide ecclesiastical organizationin the history of Christianity, and certainly are the mosttop-heavy.

How we got that way is a curious story, the more sobecause in our beginnings in the 1830s, the pioneers de-clared they abhorred the suggestion of organizing at all;any structure beyond a local congregation was surely ofthe devil. In fact, followers of the Christian Connexion, ofwhich James White and Joseph Bates were members, dis-avowed any control over the individual believer in Christ.It was with reluctance that these early groups allowedcongregations to organize, primarily under the stimulus ofprotecting their movement from people and doctrinesthey considered heretical.

Knight says he sees the beginnjng of sus-tamed agitation for what may be a new cycleof reform. The real question is whether thedenomination is stillflexible enough tochange, or whether the onset of structuralrigor mortis willwin out. So he offers sug-gestion for a model consisting of three levels.

As the time approached for the predicted Second Ad-vent in 1843, followers of William Miller were thrust outof the Protestant and Catholic churches to which they hadbelonged, and Millerite preachers began to refer to allsuch churches as "Babylon." They quoted passages fromthe book of Revelation urging members to "come out ofher, my people." However, following the Great Disap-pointment of Oct. 23, 1844, there was so much confusionand even fanaticism in the ranks of the Millerite Adven-tists that Miller likened the anarchy and confusion amongtheir ranks to Babylon, and he participated in a confer-ence to bring order out of the chaos.

Knight outlines the steps by which the growing num-bers of Sabbath-keeping believers, recognizing the needto have legal status and ownership of meeting halls, aswell as defining boundaries for members and excludingfanatics and impostors, decided to take an official name

and become organized. In 1860 they debated severalpossible names and settled on "Seventh-day Adventists."Through the next three years they developed the idea of astate conference for Michigan, then a General Confer-ence for the region. By May of 1863 there were about3,500 members divided into 6 conferences and 125 con-gregations served by about 30 ministers. Its field of laborconsisted of northern states running from the Atlanticcoast to Iowa. But it was poised to extend its mission inseveral directions.

Through the next 40 years the growingchurch operated with this model of organiza-tion, adding state conferences and manyinstitutions, including health-care facilities,publishing houses, and more than 200schools. To manage its different lines of workthe church had "associations," as for medicalwork, schools, Sabbath Schools, publishing,and missions recruitment and support. It notonly spanned all of North America but alsohad missions in all parts of the world. How-ever, the model proved impractical for someof these missions and their leaders. In SouthAfrica and Australia the leaders experimentedwith other forms of structuring their work.They found that when they needed a decisionfrom General Conference officers in BattleCreek, Mich., the mail might take a month togo in each direction, and sometimes the deci-sion-makers might be out of town when themail did arrive. On top of this, the cumbersomeness ofthe structure was aggravated by financial problems; therewas little centralized control over what the "associations"spent money on and borrowed money for. Foreign mis-sion outreach was slowing down.

Thus by 1903 the times were ripe for change. Aftermany heated debates the delegates to a General Confer-ence voted to establish a system of union conferencesand missions with decision-making powers and to movethe work of associations into departments of the GeneralConference. A few years later, in 1918, they adopted theconcept of "world divisions" of the General Conference.

Under this organizational structure the church continuedto grow in membership and mission outreach. During thedepression years the church leaders began to look at thecost of the system, and they recommended that the unionconferences be either eliminated or at least reduced innumber. The proposal met with resistance, however.

Knight points out that the first two cycles of changewere prompted when the church was on the verge of

Continued on page 23

volume 11 issue 31 adventist today 121

Belief Beyond Reason?ERVIN TAYLOR

he jacket of Cod, Codel and Crace says it isClifford Goldstein's 15th book. Some of hisother books include 1844 Made Simple;Day of the Dragon: The Creat ControversyVindicated; and The Remnant: Biblical Real-ity or Wishful Thinking? These titles mightseem to hint at Goldstein's theological ori-

entation. His sermons on various topics are availablefor a small fee from American Cassette Ministries, thesame company that distributes the Adventist Theologi-cal Society tapes.

The author is also a regular contributorto the Adventist Review. A recent articledescribes his 1980 conversion from whathe characterizes himself to have been, a"hard-core naturalist" (his characterization)interested in the occult and spiritualism,to a hard-core Seventh-day Adventist (mywords). I would characterize him as a hard-core Adventist on the basis of one of hisprevious opinion pieces, "The PythagorasFactor." In this article he argued that Ad-ventist "leaders and administrators not onlymust define the parameters of our faith;they have the right-even the obligation-to enforce them."

Goldstein is known for not beinglukewarm about anything. He believeseverything he believes passionately. But heis also smart enough to be aware of thedownside of his enthusiasm. In a sermon

he once said, "People always say to me, Cliff...youare not ambiguous about what you believe, are you?"Then, in a partly reflective and partly humorous tone,he continues: "The only problem is that I havebeen ... dogmatic about things I have been wrong on."

Readers will certainly recognize the words "God"and "Grace" in the book's title. But who or what isGodel? Kurt Godel was the most influential math-ematical logician of the 20th century (he died in1978). A close friend and colleague of Albert Einsteinfor two decades at the Institute for Advanced Study inPrinceton, Godel is most widely known as the authorof a mathematical proof of two theorems first pub-lished in 1931 that bears his name. Those whounderstand the mathematics in them say that bothof Godel's Incompleteness Theorems state that withinthe confines of any logical mathematical system thereare propositions or arguments that cannot be provedor disproved using the axioms of that system. Godel'sproof has been characterized as one of the landmarks

221 adventist today Ivolume 11 issue 3

of 20th-century mathematics.What do God and Grace have to do with Godel and

his Incompleteness Theorems? Goldstein's take onGodel is that he "showed that no system of thought,even scientific, can be legitimized by anything withinthe system itself. You have to step outside the system... in order to appraise it." He concludes that "reason it-self-the foundation ... of modern thought-can't bevalidated." In fact, I am told by those possessing math-ematical sophistication that Godel's theorems concernonly mathematically delimited systems of reasoning.He never addressed scientific questions as such andcertainly was not commenting on the nature of ordinaryhuman reasoning. Any other use of Godel would in-volve "applications" or "implications" of his theorems,and this is what Goldstein has done.

As a reader proceeds through Goldstein's book, he orshe finds that the author quotes or refers to an impres-sive cross section of major Western figures-ancient,medieval, modern and postmodern, from literary, scien-tific, and philosophical fields and including (listed inalphabetical order) Aristotle, Augustine, Becket, Camus,Cicero, Darwin, Derrida, Dostoyevsky, Euripides, Fou-cault, Goethe, Heisenberg, Hobbes, Nietzsche, Pascal,Sartre, Sophocles, Tolstoy, Weinberg and Whitman. Be-cause Goldstein is such a master wordsmith and crafterof sonorous phrases, the book and its material does notcome across as stuffy or pretentious, despite this quot-ing and referring to these intellectual heavyweights.

Goldstein addresses the problem of exis-tential "meaninglessness" in modernthought and a scientific worldview limited"to rationalism, to materialism, and toscientific atheism ... ."He comments that"maybe truth is more poetic than geomet-ric, more hormonal than metaphysical,more like wind than rocks."

However, his impressive literary rhetorical skills are nosubstitute for a statement early in the book as to themain theme and purpose of writing it. A careful readeris forced to ferret this out in the manner of a detectivelooking for clues.

A hint is in the book's subtitle-"A philosophy offaith"-and in its dedication-"To all whose desire fortruth transcends the joy of seeking it." On the back

./

cover there are several questions posed: "Does any-thing matter?" and "Is faith a leap into the absurd, or aleap over it?" There are also several other back-coverstatements: "Belief has never made so much sense,""Why can Kurt Godel's incompleteness theorem [sic]be a powerful tool in the hands of believers?" and"Though one can never 'prove' what needs to be takenon faith, [this book] shows just how reasonable it canbe to believe in what goes beyond reason."

Goldstein addresses the problem of existential"meaninglessness" in modern thought and a scientificworldview limited "to rationalism, to materialism, andto scientific atheism .... " He comments that "maybetruth is more poetic than geometric, more hormonalthan metaphysical, more like wind than rocks."Goldstein states that "belief ultimately has no bearingupon the truth or the falsity of its object. No matterhow fervent,."belief can't make the false true or thetrue false." In the end, however, Goldstein cannotabide this possibility, asking whether there exists "someethical norm ... a value system independent of what'proves itself to every man and woman,' somethingeternal, unchanging ... even, perhaps, divine?"

He argues that the conclusions of modern quantumtheory in physics defy all that human logic and reasontell us about the world. On this basis, he concludes that

it is "arguably more 'rational' to believe in what theapostle Paul has called the 'foolishness' of the gospelthan in what physicists have called the 'absurdness' ofquantum theory." Faith, he insists, is a "little more logi-cal, a little more rational" than quantum physics. If"science can't explain everything," Goldstein argues,"perhaps there exists a dimension beyond the stubby,blunt reach of rationality and science alone-a spiritualdimension, a transcendent dimension, a dimension thatonly God could create."

In a recent piece by Goldstein in the Adventist Reviewtitled "The Problem of Knowledge," Goldstein ex-presses agreement with Stanley Fish, a contemporarypostmodern literary intellectual, that it is appropriateto assert and believe something without qualification(passionately?), without believing that it is possible to(quoting Fish) "demonstrate its truth to all rational per-sons." Goldstein then suggests that having many validreasons to believe something "doesn't necessarily makethat belief true." While, he says, one cannot say that one"knows" some distinctive Adventist beliefs to be true, hedeclares, "I can say I know that I believe them to betrue." This sophisticated apologetic distinction ofGoldstein could have been included as a thesis sentencein Cod, Code! and Crace, for that seems to be what thebook is basically about. •

Knight's book explores organizational reformContinued on page 21

financial disaster and organizational dysfunctionality.Now, he says, the church with its 12,000,000 members inhighly diverse world fields may again be approachingsuch a crisis. Increasingly local churches are turning toforms of congregationalism with minimal regard for theoverall structure.

Knight says he seesthe beginning of sustained agitationfor what may be a new cycle of reform.

The real question is whether the denomination is stillflexible enough to change, or whether the onset of struc-tural rigor mortis will win out. So he offers suggestion fora model consisting of three levels.

First would be the General Conference in a trimmed-down state, largely a coordinating, advising, andfacilitating body, providing general guidelines to help theworld field attain both unity and diversity. The secondlevel would be regional divisions, functioning not only asdo the present divisions but also assuming many of thecoordinating and supporting tasks being presentlyhandled by the union conferences. The number of divi-sions might be raised to about 20 from the current 12. Thethird level would be a kind of regional administrative con-ferences. North Americans have argued for years whetherit would be best to get rid of or combine some of their

58 local conferences or to disband their 9 union confer-ences. The best solution, Knight says, might be to do awaywith both levels, creating in their wake some 20 regionaladministrative units on one level that could serve constitu-encies that have moved out of the horse-and-buggy eraand now have access to modern means of communica-tion and transportation.

Although Knight acknowledges that such a move wouldcome only with much struggle, he says it would put moreAdventist tithe dollars back into the work of "real minis-try" and would redeploy large numbers of personnel.Many people, he says, believe the tithe has too long subsi-dized a massive "bureaucratic industry." If we could dothe same or better, with lessthan a third of the cost, wemight be able to do far more for ministry and mission.

Knight concludes his treatise with the solemn admoni-tion: "The time to dream dreams and make significantchange is now. Change will come. The only questions arewho will control that change and will it be toward morefunctionality or less in terms of Adventism's mission? It iswiser to take charge of the transformation process than itis to just let it happen. Perhaps the greatest question fac-ing Adventism in the next decade is whether significantchange will come about by accident or by Christian plan-ning and sanctified action." •

volume 11 issue 31 adventist today 123

SPECIAL E-MAIL REPORTS:Read the news as it happens

The next few years may well be critical ones for the future of the Seventh-day Adventist Church. Several major events may influence the direction ofour faith community for decades to come. The 2005 General Conference tobe held in St. Louis, Mo., may elect a new General Conference president.And right now, in 2003, another major event is already under way.

AT readers have been informed over the past year of an unprecedentedthree-year series of conferences initiated by the leadership of the GeneralConference to deal with controversial issues associated with the intersectionof faith and science. These are especially focused on our church's traditionaltheological and scientific understandings of the Genesis creation narratives.

The first conference, held in August, 2002 in Ogden, Utah, brought to-gether Adventist scientists, theologians, and church administrators fromaround the world. AT was there to report on the proceedings. This year thedivisions will hold separate sessions, and the North American Division willconvene its conference at Glacier View, Co., in August. A third and finalconference, another international one, will take place in 2004.

The North American Division 2003 Faith and Science conference is beingheld at the same location as the highly controversial conference in 1980convened by the General Conference to deal with the issuessurroundingour traditional understandings of the Investigative Judgment and Sanctuarydoctrine. In many ways, "Glacier View II" is shaping up to be even more im-portant than that first GlacierView conference, and perhaps even more sothan the 1919 Bible Conference, in its potential impact on how the church isgoing to address the diversity of theological views now represented withinour faith community.

If you are an AT subscriber, you will be able to receive periodic reportsthroughout the seven-day Glacier View conference. To send you these re-ports, all we need is your e-mail address. Just send us a brief note athanan@atoday.com asking for the reports. If you are not on our mailing list,you can become an AT subscriber by calling us toll free at 1-800-236-3641and asking to subscribe. At the same time you can ask for the reports. If yoursubscription is kept current for the next two years, you wi II also be on thelist for reports from the 2004 International Faith and Science Conference andthe 2005 General Conference session in St. Louis.

If you are interested in the future welfare of our church and want to knowabout these important events, we the editors look forward to providing youwith news as it happens. Please let us know your wishes .•

"Glacier View II"is shaping up to beeven more impor-tant than that firstGlacier Viewconference, andperhaps evenmore so than the1919 Bible Confer-ence, in its poten-tial impact on howthe church is goingto address thediversity oftheological viewsnow representedwithin our faithcommunity