No doubt most SDAs keeping up on things in the church, know by now that at the recent Annual Council, the General Conference presented a document to vote on to start procedures to take disciplinary action against Church entities that do not adhere to Church policy. Of course it is all about the women:s ordination issue, as several unions and conferences mostly in North America and Europe are openly flouting church policy in this area. They do not want to accept the church:s vote in San Antonio (and twice before in GC session) on this issue.
I see these unions and conferences that openly defy church direction on this issue as being rebels. They are wanting things to go their way, and will risk splitting up the church in order to get their way.
So a vote was taken, and the result was exactly the same as at San Antonio - 58% for and 42% against. So now the process to start the disciplinary action will go forward.
Now I believe this rebellion should have been nipped in the bud when it first appeared. By letting it fester for several years and taking no action, the GC was seen to either be weak and powerless, or just outright unconcerned that some unions/conferences were not following their rules. Can you imagine what would have happened if Moses had let Korah, Dathan, and Abiram go on infecting the camp for several years?
What is most troubling to me, is that neither side is relying on a *It is written* or anything like that. Of course there are Scriptural and SOP quotes given to support each side:s belief in either for or against women:s ordination, but in this disciplinary action, the word referred to most is *policy*. I see that as very troubling. Who knows but the tides of public opinion will change, and *policy* will change too? I don:t believe Jesus based his mission on *policy*, but on the truth.
So what scenarios do I see possible?
1. Maybe the unions/conferences in rebellion will get strong enough in the next two years to basically take over the GC
2. Maybe the unions/conferences in rebellion will decide to split off from the GC and take lots of money and stuff with them
3. Maybe this whole thing will be tied up in committees forever, and nothing will happen
4. Maybe the unions/conferences in rebellion will repent, and we will have a united church again
If disbanding has to be caused from unions and conferences to the entire NAD, the GC needs time to build reconstruction plans.
To fully identify all the sons of belial and their leaders a call goes forth to cause assembly of Baal's followers into their temple, before Jehu locks the doors and appoints keepers of the doors and applies due punishment to Baal's followers.
The wheels are starting to move, they may be massive and grind small, or not grind at all.
I'm not an advocate of WO or rebellious unions, but I think there are much deeper issues here.
As webmaster has said, a church cannot be based simply on policy, but must have an underpinning in grand truths like the sanctuary doctrine and the sealing message and the 144,000 and similar kinds of things. These truths have gotten buried, and replaced by spiritual error or a policy focus.
If we go even deeper, we come to the message found in the latter part of Revelation 3 -- there is a desperate need for heart change throughout the church, and it has to start at the very top.
It's also worth pointing out here that the GC's attempts to deal with rebellious unions are greatly hampered by the fact that the GC itself has previously rebelled, and those rebellions have been "digested" and worked into the overall culture of the church. QOD is a big example from 60 years ago, and more contemporary examples include ecumenism and trademark lawsuits.
May I add that the biggest rebellion against God that our SDA church does, is to support abortions.
There will never be the Holy Spirit poured out on a church that condones/provides the killing of developing humans.
So we must either look for repentance by church leaders on this, or else understand the Loud Cry will not come thru the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists.
I see where today Pastor Ted Wilson said "As president of the Seventh-day Adventist Church, I am duty bound with a sacred responsibility, as are all other officers of every level of organizations throughout the church as is indicated in Working Policy, to follow what the world church has voted in session (whether I agree with it or not)".
What he's saying, is that if the World Church votes to kill somebody or discard the Sabbath, he is "bound with a sacred responsibility" to do that.
I used to wonder what was meant when people used the phrase "corporate repentance".
After watching some of these situations play out over time, I think it's becoming more clear why such a thing matters.
There's an SOP quote that I often come back to, that discusses both individual and corporate accountability in the context of Achan's sin (Joshua 7). The quote is drawn from a long chapter titled "The Laodicean Church" that starts at 3T 252.
I was shown that the manner of Achan's confession was similar to the confessions that some among us have made and will make. They hide their wrongs and refuse to make a voluntary confession until God searches them out, and then they acknowledge their sins. A few persons pass on in a course of wrong until they become hardened. They may even know that the church is burdened, as Achan knew that Israel were made weak before their enemies because of his guilt. Yet their consciences do not condemn them. They will not relieve the church by humbling their proud, rebellious hearts before God and putting away their wrongs. God's displeasure is upon His people, and He will not manifest His power in the midst of them while sins exist among them and are fostered by those in responsible positions. {3T 270.2}
I can understand avoiding the unpleasant task of confronting sinners and telling them to forsake sin and repent, but many of our leaders are actually fostering sin. As long as our Church officially supports killing *the least of these* (Jesus Christ), how can they ever expect to receive the Holy Spirit?
I don't agree with the 4 scenarios you have outlined. I would rather be positive and hope rebellious unions/conferences will understand by adhering to the outcome of the voting and realize that there are many more other important areas to focus as an union/conference to finish off the work assigned to us.
On the other hand, I strong believe that we as a whole church starting from top need to repent in the case of abortion. Otherwise, we are going to have a tough time in receiving the outpouring of the latter rain.
So Anonymous, you don:t believe any of the 4 scenarios, including the one that projects a united church again, so please tell us what your take on these events is.
