Pastors' Blog

So is she a hero or a villain? Rowan County (Kentucky) clerk Kim Davis was welcomed by adulating throngs this Tuesday, when U.S. District Court Judge David Bunning, who had incarcerated her last week for contempt of court, released her from jail. At issue is Ms. Davis’ contention that as an Apostolic Christian her conscience forbids her from complying with the Supreme Court’s summer decision declaring same sex marriages legal across this nation. Citing her understanding of biblical injunctions against same sex sexual relations, the Rowan County clerk refused to issue marriage licenses to same sex couples applying for the Supreme Court mandated provision.

So if you were the county clerk, how would you have responded to that dilemma, caught between the highest court in the land’s ruling and a growing que of applicants for same sex marriage licenses?

The issue isn’t so neatly resolved, is it? On the one hand the Bible commands Christians: “Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God” (Romans 13:1). That seems clear enough. For this fallen planet, God has ordained governmental authority and civil power to preserve a semblance of law and order for the human race. “Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also as a matter of conscience” (v 5).

But of course, “conscience” was and remains the rub. Simply because Ms. Davis cited her conscience as reason for disobeying the court order to issue marriage licenses to same sex couples. The same Bible that commands obedience to governing authorities also declares: “‘We must obey God rather than man’” (Acts 5:29). Those were Peter’s words to the Sanhedrin when he and his fellow apostles were charged not to publicly teach “in this name” of Jesus (v 28). Clearly there are instances when governmental authority is overruled (at least in the divine tribunal) by conscientious loyalty to one’s understanding of God’s Word and His will. Furthermore, even if you have misunderstood a biblical position, you are still enjoined by Scripture to be obedient to your conscience, “for whatever is not from faith [i.e., whatever violates what the conscience believes is right] is sin” (Romans 14:23). Simply put—it is dangerous to disobey your conscience, for through the conscience the Creator communicates with His sentient earth children.

Thus Kim Davis made the decision to honor her conscientious objection to the law of the land and refused to sign the same sex marriage applications. For her act of civil disobedience she was subsequently jailed. Again, what would you have done? Is there a proscribed Christian pathway through the minefield that our national debate over same sex marriage is taking us? What would Jesus do?

On October 3, as a final piece in our mini-series “The Pugwash Factor,” we will grapple with culture, conscience and Scripture in “How to Respond to the Supreme Court’s Same Sex Marriage Decision.” But we must not expect a neat and tidy resolution to the dilemma. Yes, obedience to conscience is in the end a simple matter—just do it—simply obey. But it is hard work to seek an informed conscience that intelligently discerns the issues swirling at Scripture's intersection with our third millennial complexity. Fortunately Christ will guide His followers. What remains for us then is to “take up [your] cross daily and follow Me” (Luke 9:23).

Ever heard of Pugwash? I hadn’t either, until we ended up there this summer after a very long northeasterly drive from Berrien Springs (1500+ miles). Turns out Pugwash is a small town in Nova Scotia, on the far eastern side of Canada and perched on the red clay shores of the Northumberland Strait. Its more famous neighbor across the strait is Prince Edward Island, the home of the fabled “Anne of Green Gables” (that’s “Anne with an e”)—Lucy Maud Montgomery’s heart-tugging story of a spunky red-headed orphan who for a century now has captured the hearts of women young and old (and, not a few men as well). After spending a few days on that beautiful island province, Karen and I drove to Pugwash for the Maritime Conference camp meeting at their picturesque summer camp along the strait. The old timers told us about the time the evangelist Ron Halvorsen visited that camp meeting. Asked at the Canadian border where he was headed, he replied, “Hogwash, Nova Scotia” (an unfortunate turn of a word!).

But what really put the obscure village of Pugwash on the global map was a series of conversations by the world’s scientific community in the early 1950s. The horrific nuclear destruction—unleashed by the twin atomic bombs that obliterated the Japanese cites of Hiroshima and Nagasaki and hastened the end to World War II in August, 1945—raised a deeply troubling angst among thinkers in both the West and East. Was human civilization poised on the brink of nuclear self-annihilation? What guarantees could governments provide to contain nuclear proliferation? Knowing what they now knew, should this community of thinkers remain silent in the face of the end?

Three days before his death on April 18, 1955, American scientist Albert Einstein joined British philosopher Bertrand Russell in signing the Russell-Einstein Manifesto: “The prospect for the human race is sombre beyond all precedent. Mankind are faced with a clear-cut alternative: either we shall all perish, or we shall have to acquire some slight degree of common sense. A great deal of new political thinking will be necessary if utter disaster is to be averted.” (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell%E2%80%93Einstein_Manifesto)

Two years later in July, 1957, at the village of Pugwash 22 scientists, including ten Nobel Laureates, gathered to ponder how to avert the Cold War’s threat of nuclear obliteration and forge a plan for global peace. But more than a half century later peace is still illusive. And the Pugwash Conferences continue.

Given the escalating turmoil of this age, how shall the followers of Christ live? Knowing what they know about the future and His return, how should they communicate to their world? What should they say? Should this community of thinkers remain silent in the face of the end?
Call it the “Pugwash Factor”*—a series of reflections this fall at Andrews University’s Pioneer Memorial Church, Saturday mornings. Because if those who know do not act or speak up, the planet is doomed.  

*For a list of “The Pugwash Factor” titles/subjects and dates see the back cover of the August 29 worship bulletin.

Sunday morning while still lying in bed, I decided to do the arithmetic. Perhaps it was the simple pleasure of sleeping in our own bed that triggered the notion. And so I counted the number of summer nights we slept in a bed not our own. I was surprised and so recalculated the number. It’s true. The total nights away from our favorite bed (from the last week of May to the last week of July) added up to forty. Brazil, Collegedale, West Virginia, Austin, San Antonio, Pugwash Nova Scotia, Vermont. (That three of those 40 nights were spent with our nearing-the-age-of-two-and-talking-up-a-storm granddaughter Ella certainly made the 40 more palatable!) And if you spent even more nights this summer on the road—and you have my condolences.

Speaking of San Antonio, the 60th Session of the General Conference, with its 2500 delegates and 50,000 attendees on the two Sabbaths, filled the Alamodome with a ten-day event unique in that city’s history. And while a GC session is much more than doing the business of the global Seventh-day Adventist Church—who doesn't enjoy the family reunions and friendship renewals—it was the daily business sessions that turned out to be highly instructive.

Perhaps the most commented on dramatic take-home-truth bears repeating. From the first vote of the business session, it was vividly clear that San Antonio would represent a major sea change in the life of our global faith community. In my memory (and I’ve attended the quinquennial GC sessions since New Orleans in 1985), this was the most marked shift of the locus of church influence—from the long-held dominance of the North to the rapidly growing influence of the South. Clearly the church below the equator has by its sheer numbers of burgeoning membership achieved a global influence it has not had before.

Is that a demographic reality we should bemoan? Hardly. While it was disappointing for those of us who have long believed the Bible does not close the door to the ordination of women to the gospel ministry, but in fact opens that door through the expanding revelation of God’s inclusive love eloquently championed by Scripture itself—nevertheless, decision-making in the healthiest families has always been a shared endeavor. The North has enjoyed its day in the gospel sun. Now the flourishing millions of the South bask in that light. And truth be told, we the church are better for it.

Look at Andrews University. The demographic and geographic shifts of the world and the church are manifested in youthful energy right here on this campus. “Engage globally” is our theme for Fall Fellowship this weekend. How appropriate. Because if we refuse to engage globally, it is now more than clear—both the rest of the church and the world will move on. We must move with them.

No wonder the compelling prayer of Psalm 67 combines a heart cry for God’s blessing with a prayer for the world’s salvation. Apparently in the mind and heart of God, the one is for the sake of the other. His manifold blessings upon His people are to propel them with His saving grace to the world. The one is for the sake of the other. Which surely means that to plead for the one without praying for the other simply misses His point. And our purpose.

“May God bless us still, so that all the ends of the earth will fear him” (Psalm 67:7). I.e., engage globally.

My heart is burdened for my homeland today. With the rest of the nation we await the Supreme Court decision on gay marriages—do gays and lesbians have a constitutional right to marry and can state bans against same-sex marriage remain in place? Thus far 37 states in our nation have legal provision for same sex marriage, with the other 13 states banning gay marriage (although in 8 of these states [including Michigan] gay marriage bans have been overturned and appeals are in process). What will the Supreme Court decide? While most prognosticators are predicting that the Court will rule in favor of same sex marriage, past reality is that the nine justices have shown the capacity to surprise the nation.

And so we as Adventists, as American Christians, intercede before God on behalf of our homeland. Does the course of this nation matter to God? Someone gave me a recent book by the Messianic rabbi Jonathan Cahn, The Harbinger, in which he builds a startling case (through a fascinating narrative), claiming Isaiah 9:10 predicts God’s judgment on this nation. And while I don’t subscribe to his premise that America today (like Israel of old) is God’s chosen nation and thus the inheritor of the ancient divine promises for Israel, I do concur with the thoughtful notion that America is morally accountable as a recipient of Heaven’s unprecedented blessing. Jesus declared, “Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given” (Luke 12:48 NLT). Ellen White herself once observed, “The Lord has done more for the United States than for any other country upon which the sun shines” (Maranatha 193). In God’s judgment much will be required of this nation abundantly blessed—that is clear enough.

And while we are not a constitutionally-defined Christian nation, I came across this observation while reading the Great Controversy on this day of special prayer for our nation and the Supreme Court. In the chapter, “The Pilgrim Fathers,” our early history reveals: “The Bible was held as the foundation of faith, the source of wisdom, and the charter of liberty. Its principles were diligently taught in the home, in the school, and in the church, and its fruits were manifest in thrift, intelligence, purity, and temperance. . . . It was demonstrated that the principles of the Bible are the surest safeguards of national greatness. The feeble and isolated colonies grew to a confederation of powerful states, and the world marked with wonder the peace and prosperity of ‘a church without a pope, and a state without a king’” (296 emphasis supplied). The point isn’t that America must be declared a Christian nation—too many well-meaning but mistaken evangelicals have resorted to that sort of revisionist history. But Ellen White is clear that the principles of the Bible—its foundational ethics and morality—were the catalyst for “national greatness.”

But I fear that those Bible principles are now being abandoned across this nation. Yes, we must continue to stand for the constitutional principle of minority protection and thus defend the personal rights of the LGBT community to enjoy every constitutional provision possible. But does that require our faith community to reject the biblical definition of marriage as a covenant between a man and a woman?

On October 17, 2012, the Executive Committee of the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists voted the document, “Same Sex Unions,” that included this statement: “We reaffirm, without hesitation, our long-standing position as expressed in the Church's Fundamental Beliefs: ‘Marriage was divinely established in Eden and affirmed by Jesus to be a lifelong union between a man and a woman in loving companionship.’ Though ‘sin has perverted God's ideals for marriage and family,’ ‘the family tie is the closest, the most tender and sacred of any human relationship,’ and thus ‘families need to experience renewal and reformation in their relationships’ (An Affirmation of Family, 1990).  God instituted ‘marriage, a covenant-based union of two genders [male and female] physically, emotionally, and spiritually, spoken of in Scripture as “one flesh.”’ ‘The monogamous union in marriage of a man and a woman is . . . the only morally appropriate locus of genital or related intimate sexual expression.’ ‘Any lowering of this high view is to that extent a lowering of the heavenly ideal’ (An Affirmation of Marriage, 1996).”

Interestingly enough, yesterday in Columbus, Ohio, the Southern Baptist Convention voted: “What the Bible says about marriage is clear, definitive and unchanging. We affirm biblical, traditional, natural marriage as the uniting of one man and one woman in covenant commitment for a lifetime. The Scriptures’ teaching on marriage is not negotiable. We stake our lives upon the Word of God and the testimony of Jesus. Consequently, we will not accept, nor adhere to, any legal redefinition of marriage issued by any political or judicial body including the United States Supreme Court. We will not recognize same-sex ‘marriages’, our churches will not host same-sex ceremonies, and we will not perform such ceremonies. . . . We also believe religious freedom is at stake within this critical issue – that our first duty is to love and obey God, not man.” (http://www.ajc.com/news/news/local/southern-baptists-statement-opposing-gay-marriage/nmfLH/).

Neither statement abandons the church’s commitment to be a loving, healing community for all, irrespective of sexual orientation. But both statements clearly define the church’s stand on the biblical foundation and precedent for marriage. As we await the decision of the nation’s highest court, let us all “watch and pray.” For hasn’t God promised: “If My people who are called by My name will humble themselves, and pray and seek My face, and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin and heal their land” (2 Chronicles 7:14)?