NEWS • ANALYSIS • OPINION

Volume 1 Number 1

• History and Fatal Theology of BranchDavidians

RELIGION AND THE WACO CULT

• Ex-Adventists at Mount Carmel

FOUNDATION BOARD

Keith ColburnRaymond CottrellDonna EvansJohn JonesErvinTaylorJames Walters

ADVISORY COUNCIL

Antonius & Lilia BrandonTodd BurleyJohn & Charlotte CassellKeith & Judy ColburnAnonymousDonna EvansAnonymousDick & Kathy GuthDennis & Jolene HillidrdWayne & Susan JacobsenDon & Penny Mill~rThaine B.& WantJa A PriceGordon M. RickGlenn & Cherie RoUseAnonymous \Don ShaskyJames & Maryan StirlingErvin & Marilynn TaylorJames & Priscilla WaltersJames & Betty Webster

2

Welcome to ADVENTIST TODAY

THE PIONEERS OF THE SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTIST CHURCH were open-mindedmen and women, open to new vistas of the everlasting gospel appropriate for theirtime. Open-mindedness is a prime requisite for becoming a bona fide Seventh-dayAdventist, and no less for continuing growth as a dedicated admirer of Jesus Christ.Surely we do not want people to close their minds once they become members of thechurch. Closed minds will never complete the gospel commission.

ADVENTIST TODAY aspires to follow the open-minded tradition of the pioneers. Open-mindedness means openness toward.one ..another and willingness to listen to oneanother-attentively, perceptively, amenably. What a joy membership in the Seventh-day Adventist Church can be if there is full and complete openness in such matters as ourcorporate quest for an ever more perfect and complete understanding of God's Word,relationships between church leaders and the membership of the church, and the conductof church affairs!

ADVENTIST TODAY is a response to the widespread conviction that the church needs an openand straightforward medium of communication such as this journal aspires to be-aplace where all segments and age groups can fin<;icommon ground and share theiraspirations and concerns for the church in for;h.fight, responsible dialogue.

ADVENTIST TODAY is primarily a news journal that aspires to present the informationthoughtful members oHthe church need in order to form a mature, accurate, and equi-table 1.ll1<;i~r~t~~ing()t.~~ers of concern to the church in North America. There will

~alsobe.(1~esponsi81e~xPFe'$~iqnof opinion apout matters of current interest and concern.

sh~ltered our original plans for this, the first issue ofma,kero~l11 for the cluster of articles on this topic--eertainly

prieofmajorcqIl.cern.to '.. . .~htire chili it has been necessary to reschedule somefeattrre~ originallyintendedforc thisis~

~Othera.rticles;vill'.tqCl.lS9~c relatively new Adventist Theological Society and itsifuport;for,the£!lill:91ronllle issue of ordaining women to the gospel ministry, and onthe provocative billboarding crusade in Orlando, ..Florida, and saturation of the city witha sensational edition of The Great Controversy.

Proponents of alternative points of view on these subjects have been invited to sharetheir perspective of the facts. ADVENTIST TODAY will be the convenor and moderator, andour readers will be the jury.

Welcome aboard! I

Raymond Cottrell .i

Adventist Today May IJune 1993

ADVENTIST TODAY@1993Vol. 1, NO.1May/June 1993

Editor: Raymond F. Cottrell

Associate Editor: James W. Walters

Managing Editor: Duane Covrig

Editorial ConsultantsMark August

Tampa TribuneAntonius Brandon

Lorna Linda UniversityHaraldo S. Camacho

Colton, CaliforniaBarry Casey

Columbia Union CollegeGlenn Coe

South Windsor, ConnecticutDonna Evans

Lorna Linda AcademyFrank Knittel

La Sierra UniversityBeatrice Neall

Union CollegeJoel Sandefur

. La Sierra UniversityDeborah Vance

Walla Walla College

Art & DesignMarlin Dolinsky: Cover& PublicationDesignRaynardo Flinoz: Cover ArtDouglas Hackelman: Art Consultant

Copy EditorsCherie ,Rouse & Gayle Saxby

Published bimonthly by the AdventistToday Foundation, a non-profit organiza-tion dedicated to fostering open dialoguein the Adventist community.

The purpose of Adventist Today is to reporton and discuss contemporary issues ofimportance to Adventist church members.Following basic principles of ethics andcanons of journalism, this publicationstrives for fairness, candor, and good taste.

Unsolicited submissions are encouraged.Payment is competitive.Send a self-addressed stamped envelopefor writers' guidelines.

Annual subscriptions: $18.00 forindividuals, $12 for students, $29 forinstitutions. Add $10.00 for addressesoutside North America.

POSTMASTER: Send address changes to:Adventist TodayP.O. Box 1220Lorna Linda, CA 92354-1220

Telephone & Fax: (909) 799-6724

Adventist Today May /June 1993

Editorial Introduction 2

THEWACO CULT& RELIGION

Ex-Adventists at Mt. Carmel: PR Problem or Leaming Opportunity? .4

History and Fatal Theology of the Branch Davidians .5Raymond Cottrell

Interview with Pastor Charlie Liu 8

The Waco Syndrome 9Raymond Cottrell

David Koresh: Narcissistic Personality or Dysfunctional Religious Leader ..10Noel Gardner and Antonius Brandon

Experiences in Loma Linda 11Dalton Baldwin

Koresh on Ellen White 12Dennis Hokama

REPORT: LSU and LLU-AFTER THE DIVORCE .13

ADVENTISTS& ABORTION

Pro-life & Pro-choice: Can the Church Have It Both Ways? .16

1992 Annual Council Guidelines 17

A Higher Calling 18Ginger Hanks-Harwood

Myths and Maybes 19John and Millie Youngberg

Finding a Consensus 20Gerald Winslow

OPINION

Editorial: Let Freedom Ring 21James Walters

Guest Editorial: Inauguration. of a President... 22KitWatts .

Perspective: A Joyful Moan 23Alden Thompson

Mission Statement.. Back Cover

3

Ex-Adventists at Mt. CarmelPRProblem or Learning Opp~rtunity?

David Koresh, the notoriousBranch Davidian leader, was reared asa Seventh-day Adventist in Dallas andwas a baptized member before joiningthe self-named Branch DavidianSeventh-day Adventists. Ninety

-The Editors

The Seventh-day Adventistdenomination wisely disavowed theShepherd's Rod movement long ago.The denomination abhors the tragedyat Mt. Carmel. Nevertheless, severalquestions deserve serious attention inthe aftermath of Waco:

These are at least some of thequestions raised by the Mt. Carmelepisode. Because of the considerableAdventist connection we believe thatthe denomination would do well toappoint a high-level study commissionto examine the Koresh phenomenonand make recommendations. 0

-What type of Biblical interpretation(a "proof-text" approach or a historical-contextual perspective) is more or lesslikely to foster idiosyncratic beliefs?

-Are there elements in the popularAdventist belief system that lendthemselves to warped exploitation bycharismatic leaders?

-WHat is the relationship----.~.betweenpersonal psychol-

ogy and religious belief?

-How could committed, sometimeshighly educated, church members optfor Koresh's line of belief?

--.:..Doesthe church's emphasis on the"i.m.ntinence" of God's kingdom needto be re-evaluated?

-What concrete steps should thedenomination take to help its members

avoid the allure of anynumoer of Adventist"fundamentalisms" thatoffer simple answers tocomp,lex issues?

Many Branch Davidians continue toadhere to traditional Adventistemphases such as healthful livingand Sabbath observance.

David Koresh actively recruited inAdventist centers, including LomaLinda; Honolulu; Sidney, Australia;and Bracknell, England (see DaltonBaldwin's article). In England oneformer Adventist pastor and fourNewbold College theology studentsaccepted Koresh's perspective, claimsBreault.

percent of Koresh's followers areformer Seventh-day Adventists,according to Marc Breault, a recentmaster's graduate in religion fromLoma Linda University, and for a timea member of the Branch Davidians.

the i.m.ntinent ending of the world-ideas hardly alien to Adventism.

Before Koresh developed thereligious ideas for which he is nownotorious, he attracted the interest of anumber of traditional Adventistsprecisely because of his command ofextensive passages from the Bible andEllen White's writings (see DennisHokama's report). Unusual interpreta-tions of obscure Bible texts have ledKoresh to claim to be the modemDavid--even Jesus Christ-and tobelieve in a biblical warrant for activeand violent cleansing of the world(note the interview with Charlie Uu).

Many Branch Davidians continueto adhere to traditional Adventistemphase~, such as healthful living andSaturday Sabbath observance. Theirnotoriety ihas come from their interestin prophetic interpretation and belief in

II

Second, the church can seek t6learn from the Waco incident. Such aresponse may be more involved thanmerely shoring up public relations, butit is no less important. The followingcluster of essays offers perspectives thatmay help in this learning process.

THE ADVENTIST CHURCH cantake at least two approaches to theWaco incident. First, it can handle thesituation as a PR problem. Thisapproach is understandable and inmany ways appropriate-and wellunderway. The church hired a crisismanagement firm to devise a strategy.Officials from the church have spokenof damage control and the need to"play down the Adventist connection,"and the Southern Californip. Conferencehas attempted to restrict cnurch-member contact with the media bysending out a directive to all itscongregations.

Some will say that what happenedin Texas has nothing to do with theSeventh-day Adventist church sincethis Waco cult was merely a "branch"or an "offshoot" of a group that splitfrom the church over 60 years ago.True, the Branch Davidians developedout of the Shepherd's Rod move-ment-a movement started in the 1930sby relatively few Seventh-day Adven-tists. Ray Cottrell's article documentsthis development. However, inaddition to this historical connection,the Branch Davidians have had on-going connection to the Seventh-dayAdventist Church.

4 Adventist Today May jJune 1993

History and Fatal Theologyof the BRANCH DAVIDIANS

ON FEBRUARY 28 AND APRIL 19, 1993, theBranchDavidians of Waco,Texasproved beyond theshadow of a doubt that twisted theology can be fatal-bothto those who advocate it and to theologicallyinnocentbystanders-long before the great, final judgment day.

The story began March 2, 1885,with the birth ofVictor Tasho Houteff in Raikovo, Bulgaria. Persona nongrata to both church and state, he was expelled from hisnative land in 1907and migrated to the United States.On May 10,1919, he was baptized a Seventh-day

. Adventist in Rockford, Illinois, and in 1923moved to LosAngeles where he became a member of the ExpositionPark Church and served as a Sabbath School teacher.

In 1928 Houteff began to advocate views about lastday events incompatible with Adventist understandingof Bible prophecy. Matters came to a head the followingyear at the Tabernacle church in nearby Fullerton when,in defense of his views, he laid claim to the propheticgift. In a business meeting on November 4, 1929,thechurch formally requested P. E. Brodersen, president ofthe Southern California Conference, to examine histeachings. In January 1930,Brodersen, together with J. E.Fulton, president of the Pacific Union Conference, andothers, concluded that Houteffs views were so fancifulas not to be taken seriously, and dismissed the matter.

In 1930Houteff hectographed his views under thetitle The Shepherd's Rod, the name by which he and hiscoterie of followers were known over the next 12years.Persistent refusal on his part to cease promoting hisideas led the church, in a business meeting on November20,1930, to disfellowship him. In 1932a second volumeof The Shepherd's Rod appeared.

Relentless advocacy of his views led, in 1934,to amajor hearing that involved representatives from theGeneral Conference as well as the Pacific Union andSouthern California conferences. The result was apamphlet with the title A Warning Against Error,endorsed by the Autumn (now Annual) Council laterthat year as an official General Conference publication

Raymond Cottrell is retired after half a century ofwork as a pastor, foreign missionary, teacher, andeditor. He is editor of Adventist Today.

Adventist Today May IJune 1993

By Raymond Cottrell

and issued by the Pacific Press as A Reply to theShepherd's Rod.

In February, 1935,Houteff moved to Waco, Texas,and in May settled ten miles east of town on a farm henamed Mount Carmel Center. At various times asmany as 90 to 125people, including children, took upresidence there. On January 1, 1937,Houteff marriedMarcella Hermanson, daughter of the Center's treasurer,and later appointed Marcella, his wife, as his successor.Administration of the community was strictly theocratic.

With the outbreak of war in the Pacific, Shepherd'sRod "ministers" faced the draft, and as a result in 1942the Center formally organized as a church and adoptedthe name "Davidian Seventh-day Adventists." In1955 Victor Houteff died and his wife became president.

Bizarre Prophetic Interpretation Leads to Disaster

In order to understand what happened next, a briefsummary of Davidian interpretation is necessary.Houteff professed agreement with all fundamentalSeventh-day Adventist beliefs listed in the denomina-tional Yearbook and the Church Manual. He maintainedthat his teachings could be fully supported by the Bibleand the writings of Ellen White. He said that theSeventh-day Adventist Church was the true church, butthat it is in need of reforms based on his particularinterpretation of last-day events foretold in the OldTestament and in the book of Revelation.

He urged his followers to remain members of thechurch wherever possible and encouraged them to takeadvantage of every opportunity to advocate his views,even to the point of disrupting church services. Houteffidentified two principal goals of the Shepherd's Rod as:(1)purification of the Seventh-day Adventist Church bythe cleansing foretold in Ezekiel 9, through acceptance ofhis teachings and him as its leader, and (2) establishmentof the Davidians in Palestine as the nucleus of themessianic kingdom and as a base for proclaiming theloud cry of the third angel of Revelation 14 and 18.The Old Testament scenario for last-day events, he said,was soon to be literally fulfilled-by the Davidians,resident in Palestine.

5

David Koresh & Adventists:,

TheEarlyConnectionVernon Wayne Howell was born in 1959 to an

unmarried woman, Bonnie Haldeman of Hous-ton, Texas. However, Vernon grew up in Dallaswhere he was reared as 'a Seventh-day Adventist,says Newsweek (March 15,1993). As a childVernon was abused and repeatedly tqld that hewasn't worth anything, states former followerMarc Breault.

Howell's maternal grandmother said thatVernon was in many ways a "bright little boy."When he began school he was dyslexic and laterwent to a sgecial school for a year or so, but didn'tdo well. He also attended Dallas Academy, anAdventist school. He dropped out by ninthgrade.

He devoted himself to Bibl~study, possessingthe ability to memorize many passages and linkthem together to form unique religious perspec-tives. When 18 he moved to Jyler, Texas, wherehe joined the Seventh-day Adventist Church.Church members didn't appreciate the long hairand casual dress of this guitar-playing boy. Hisgrandmother reports that he became disillusionedwith the Tyler church and moved to the Wacoarea where he joined the Branch Davidian Sev-enth-day Adventists at their Mt. Carmel outpost.

-The Editors

In the hope of reclaiming as many of them as

On the basis of Revelation 11 Marcella Houteff pre-dicted that a series ofevents commencingApril 22, 1959, wouldresult in the expul-sion of Jews andArabs from Palestineand open the way forthe Davidians tomigrate there andmake Jerusalem theirheadquarters. Shespecifically identifiedthe fulfillment ofthis prediction as aconclusive "test" ofthe integrity of theirmovement. Shearrived at this date byidentifying Novem-ber 9,1955, as thecommencement ofthe" one thousandtwo hundred andsixty [presumablyliteral] days" ofRevelation 11 becausethis "light" had cometo her on that day.

the great battle foretold in Zechariah 14 and Ezekiel 38and 39. The Davidians would then lead out in establish-ing the eternal reign of Christ as Lord over all the earth.

Accordingly, sheset April 16 as the.time for the faithfulto assemble atMount CarmelCenter preparatory tomigrating to Pales-tine. The week ofApril 16 to 22witnessed the arrivalof 800 to 1,000people, includingchildren. Non-fulfillment of theanticipated eventsinevitably resulted inbitter disappointment

and the demoralization and fragmentation of theDavidians.

The fatal flaw in this system of interpretation is thatit ignores the setting to which the Old Testamentpassages were addressed and the numerous explicit Biblestatements identifying these prophecies as conditional onthe cooperation of Israel as the covenant people of OldTestament times.

According toHouteff, the

investigativejudgment andsealing of the livingbegan in 1929 whenhe received the giftof prophecy andbegan his ministry.The sealed saints,144,000 in number(including himself),would eventuallybe translatedwithout seeingdeath. Theirprobation, togetherwith that of unre-pentant Adventistsand Davidians,would close prior tothe close of humanprobation and thesecond coming ofChrist.

Separated thusfrom the "wheat,"Adventist andDavidian "tares"would perish in theslaughter foretold inEzekiel9. After thatthe 144,000Davidians, sealedfor eternity, wouldproclaim the loudcry of the thirdangel, generalprobation wouldclose~ and Christwould return.

In order toeffect this literal fulfillment of Old Testament prophecy,Houteff claimed it would be necessary for him and hisfollowers to migrate to Palestine in the near future.Unrepentant Jews, Arabs, and others would perish in

6 Adventist Today May /June 1993

possible, the General Conference sent Vice President A.V. Olson to preach in the Waco SDA church. Davidianleaders who attended the church service invited Olsonto conduct a series of meetings at Mount Carmel Centerfrom June 24 to July 7. At the close of the series,Marcella Houteff requested that the General Conferencearrange further meetings with Davidian leaders.

These joint meetings took place at General Confer-ence headquarters in Washington, D.C., from July 27 toAugust 7, with Vice Presidents W. E. Murray as chairand A. V. Olson as secretary. The other GeneralConference participants were H. W. Lowe, L. C. Evans(president of the Southwestern Union, which in-cludes Texas), A. C. Fearing, D. F. Neufeld, and R. L.Odom. The General Conference and the Davidians bothissued formal reports of the meeting, listed at the closeof this article.

On December 12, 1961, Marcella Houteff re-nounced the teachings of "the Rod," and on March 11,1962, resigned as president of the Davidians. BenjaminL. Roden assumed leadership of the largest remainingsplinter group, with his wife Lois as its prophet. UponRoden's death in 1978, his wife and his son Georgeassumed command. But not for long.

Enter David Koresh

In 1981 Vernon Howell joined the Mount CarmelCenter community near Waco, then led by GeorgeRoden. In 1983 he began claiming the gift of prophecy.On November~, 1987, animosity b~tween Howell andRoden erupted into a gun battle. Howell was chargedwith attempted murder but set free by a hung jury, andbecame leader of the Branch Davidians. In 1990 helegally changed his name to David Koresh, David beingthe name of the ideal king of Israel, and Koresh theHebrew name of Cyrus, who released the Jews fromBabylonian exile, both presumably types of Christ.

Koresh considered himself a new incarnation ofJesus Christ, th~ Lamb of Revelation 5. He claimedownership of everything and everyone, especially allwomen, and exemption from paying taxes. His malefollowers had to remain celibate, and he alone waspermitted to inseminate. He is said to have had 19wives, some of whom were 12 or 13 years old. He andhis followers assumed the right to steal, kill, or dowhatever necessary to silence critics and advance theirown cause. Howell maintained tight control of everyaspect of the lives of his followers, who were notallowed to think for themselves. Those who brokewith him, he warned, were certain to go to hell.

Adventist Today May IJune 1993

In Shepherd's Rod (Davidian) terminology the word"rod" is the" rod" or "shoot" from the" stem" of Jesse(David), and the "Branch" is Christ as the Son of David(Isaiah 11:1)-hence the name chosen by the Waco group,"Branch Davidians."

None of the other, relatively small, Davidiangroups across the country approve of Koresh or hispolicy and tactics. In the wake of recent events atWaco some of these groups have vigorously repudi-ated such behaviors. During the early decades ofShepherd's Rod history, its advocates made a practice ofdemonstrating publicly in the vicinity of churchgatherings and often disrupted church services, at timesresorting to somewhat bizarre tactics. Together with theDavidian interpretation of the slaughter foretold inEzekiel 9:1-11, these milder forms of force may in someway have predisposed Koresh to more drastic actions.

The stage was thus set for the tragic events ofFebruary 28,1993 that left 4 Federal agents dead and 15wounded, and April 19, 1993 when 87 Davidians per-ished in a mass suicide.

Primary Documentation

General Conference Committee, A Reply to theShepherd's Rod, 1934,32 pp.

The Committee on Defense Literature of the GeneralConference of Seventh-day Adventists, The History andTeachings of"The Shepherd's Rod," October 1955, 64 pp.

Research Committee of the General Conference ofSeventh-day Adventists, Report of a Meeting Between aGroup of "Shepherd's Rod" Leaders and a Group of GeneralConference Ministers, July 27-August 7, 1959, May 1960,16pp.

Universal Publishing Association (Davidian),Report and Analysis of the General Conference Committee'sClosed Hearing of "The Shepherd's Rod" July 27-August 7,1959,1959,64 pp.

Marc A. Breault, Letters to Dalton Baldwin, August1,1990, and September 18, 1991. Briefly associated with

.David Koresh prior to 1990, Breault describes theBranch Davidians as "a highly dangerous organizationled by satanic forces."

Marc A. Breault, "Some Background on the BranchDavidian Seventh-day Adventist Movement From 1955to the Early Part of 1991," unpublished manuscript. May27,1991.0

7

Interview with Pastor Charlie LiuAdventist Today: What was

your position previously?

Pastor Liu: I was the pastor atthe Diamond Head Seventh-day

Adventist church in Honolulu for fouryears.

It was there that you had someconnection with David Koresh?

Yes, back in 1986 David Koreshvisited at the request of a member andbegan holding home Bible studies andeventually took 14 of our membersback to Southern California and then toTexas.

Did he pose as an Adventist?

No, he never tried to gain mem-bership or parade as an Adventist.

Did your members see him as anAdventist?

As a former Adventist.

The group's formal name isBranch Davidian Seventh-day Adven-tists, is it not?

Right. They take the position thatthey are descendants of Adventists, butthey have further light: they are a"branch from" the Adventist commu-nity.

What sort of person is Mr. Koresh?

He came across initially as a meekperson. But when pressed abouttheology he could speak very fast andhad a sense of a prophetic mantle. Hewas a soft-spoken, intense person.

What sort of persons were yourmembers who defected to him?

They were a fairly broad spectrumof people in terms of education and

Charlie Uu is an associatepastor ofCampus Hill Church as well as chaplainand adjunct professor of religion at LornaLinda University.

8

income. Some were not high schoolgraduates, others had graduatedegrees. Some were rich and otherspoor. A number were newly convertedto Adventism. Most were younger andidealistic and the type to put them-selves on the line for some cause.

But nothing stands out as acharacteristic Unique to all 14. They justfelt that here was a fellow who wasputting together well a number ofscriptural texts. Koresh had a broadappeal.

You tried to keep your churchmembers from defecting. What wastheir response to your Christian andAdventist lines of reasoning?

A typical response was, "We havethe new messenger, the new light.What you are reasoning from is the oldlight. Ou~ leader is the only one whocan open the seven seals and lay beforeus the truth of the very last days." Ireasoned from Christian principles,pointing out the fallacy of playing topeople's ~ears and using threats andmanipulation.

They would say, "Christ'smethods were the old way: we havethe new." But in terms of Adventism, itwas more difficult to appeal to thembecause we are based on some apoca-lyptic thinking that can play into this.That was a little tough for me.

The imminent ending of the worldwas a key emphasis of this group?

It was over emphasized, becauseKoresh said to ignore the present, andtake no responsibility for family,friends or a world out there.

We now know that Mr. Koreshbelieves himself to be divine and thatall men and women belong to him-particularly the women. Did headvocate polygamy to your churchmembers?

He adamantly denied it at thetime, but there were rumors ofpolygamy. I confronted him on theissue once after church services. Iremember distinctly that we werestanding right outside the front door,and he called his wife over to him andasked me, "Do you think I would everbe unfaithful to this woman? No Iwouldn't." He also had his child therebeside him and he said, "Do you thinkthat I would shame this child by doingsuch a thing? No, t would never dothat." He liked to ask questions andanswer them himself.

When you cast doubt on Koresh'sclaims, what did your affected mem-bers say?

They would express a bit of doubt,but hedge. For instance, if I asked ifthey really believed Koresh was amessenger of God, they would reply, "1hope so." The manipulative methodol-ogy he used was fear. Church memberswere afraid to allow their rationalselves to disbelieve the new "truths."So they hedged their bets by stayingwith Koresh.

But why would an Adventistmember be attracted to a new beliefthat instilled fear? That seems aparadox.

It's clear to me that he offered avery black and white view of life.Koresh offered something that said:"Are you tired of thinking, of makingdecisions in your life? Come to me, Iwill do the thinking for you. Don'tworry any more." That is appealing toa lot of people.

How can a group that takes theBible so seriously end up in that Wacoshootout? Do you think there may be alink between a literalistic interpreta-tion of the Branch's key chapters,Ezekiel 9 and Revelation 14, which docontain some violent language, and therecent violence at Mr. Carmel?

Adventist Today May /June 1993

I believe there is a definite connec-tion. They believe they have a God-given call to bear arms, not only todefend themselves, but to bring aboutthe end-time scenario. They see Ezekiel9 as a call to cleanse the church-firstAdventism, then Christianity and theworld. In Revelation 14 they see sevenangels, not Adventism's traditionalthree angels. The additional four angelsare the prominent leaders of theShepherd's Rod-Branch DavidianSDAs, beginning with Victor Houteffand culminating in David Koresh.

What percentage of the IOO-pluspeople at Mt. Cannel, in your opinion,are fonner Adventists recruited byKoresh?

In Hawaii, the majority followinghim were Adventists. My guess is thatthe majority at Mt. Carmel are formerAdventists.

Your father, Sunny Liu, was a wellknown singing evangelist. What doyou make of our traditio~al evangelis-tic approaches? /

Commentary On

When I was a kid, following mydad around, it was the era in Adventistevangelism of large and gaudy beastsof Revelation. We did build on a fearfactor to some degree. At that time Ithought it was exciting, but afterstudying theology and being a pastor Iam bothered by our playing up a veryeccentric belief system.

We are pitching toward peoplewho may be unbalanced or who maybe just looking for the sensational. Idon't like to put it this way, but thepeople who may be attracted to a storyin the supermarket tabloids of a five-headed baby from Mars could well beattracted to some of our approaches. Isthis honoring God? Is this God's callthat I see in Scripture?

We've probably done some thingsin the past that have set us up for whatwe're seeing now. Probably a lot of thepeople connected with this cult hadsome fascination with that sort of stuff.They may have had a connection withthe Adventist church because of that,and then became disillusioned.

We Adventists see some of ourhistoric emphases, such as preparationfor an imminent ending of the world,taken to bizarre ends at Mt. Cannel,and we are appalled.

We have long had a remnanttheology. That has motivated usto highlight the unique aspects ofAdventism to the neglect ofrecognizing that first of all we areChristians. Our official creeds highlightthat the gospel of Jesus Christ is thefoundational belief. That belief in thegospel, if rightly highlighted, will keepus from bizarre, cultic behavior.

I think some followers of Koreshwill come out of this episode bruisedand damaged and in need of what thetrue gospel can do for them-to makethem whole persons again. That'swhere the church community must beready for them. I fear that we are notready. Sometimes we are so eager tominimize the damage to the image ofthe church that we are not ready to healpeople who have just gotten in overtheir heads in something like this. 0

The Waco SyndromeThe key ingredient of the Waco.syndrome that exploded in violence on February 28 is a naive lethal interpre-

tation of the Bible that does not discriminate between objective reality and fantasy. As the Branch Davidiansdemonstrated on February 28 and April 19, 1993, the proof-text method of interpreting the Bible can be dangerousnot only to a person's mental health but to his or her very life and that of theologically innocent bystanders as well.

As a literary document the Bible means what its divine Author and inspired writers intended it to mean, asdetermined by an objective, perceptive, competent reading of the text. Davidian interpretation ignores theintent of the Bible writers and the. historical circumstances to which they addressed their inspired preview of theway in which God would work out His divine purpose for the covenant people. My article "The Role of Israel inOld Testament Prophecy" on pages 25 to 38 of volume 4 of the SDA Bible Commentary provides an effectiveantidote to the proof-text method of interpreting the Old Testament prophets.

The Branch Davidians justify the violence that erupted at Mount Carmel Center by their interpretation ofEzekiel 9, where the prophet is told to summon six "executioners," each with his "destroying weapon," anddirects "a man clothed in linen" to "go through ... Jerusalem, and put a mark upon the foreheads of the men whosigh and groan over all the abominations that are committed in it." The six executioners are then told tofollow him and "smite" everyone without the mark. Davidians identify themselves as divinely commissioned tofulfill this prophecy. They also cite Christ's instruction to His disciples, on the night of His betrayal, to armthemselves (Luke 22:36-38). 0

-Raymond Coffrell

Adventist Today May /June 1993 9

David Koresh:Narcissistic Personality or...

By Noel Gardner

THOUGH IHAVE NOT been able to interview DavidKoresh and do not know more about him directly, I sensethat he is primarily a severe narcissistic personality. Narcis-sists are individuals who defend against a sense of deepinferiority by the creation of a grandiose fantasied self inwhich they see themselves as unusually powerful andsuperior. They may be very gifted and talented individuals,but they cannot tolerate any challenge to their grandiosity.They have a very inflated sense of self-importance.

My sense is that there was a kind of linkage whenKoresh was attracted to some of the self-understanding thatis in Adventism in terms of its uniqueness and specialness.The notion! of uniqueness, as being special, the only true andfinal people of God, is a kind of notion that is waiting fortrouble unless it is carefully understood. It is waiting for alinkage with some disturbed minds.

I am most struck that the formation of a cult like thisseems to spring from two fundamental vulnerabilities inpeople. One is a need for certitude-to feel that one hasabsolute answers in the context of a very complex world thatis filled with ambiguity and uncertainty. The need forcertitude makes people extremely vulnerable. Erich Frommtalks about the many ways! in which people cannot tolerateowning the responsibility of real choices in a world that'scomplex and filled with ambiguity-how they will flee fromfreedom because of the enormous anxiety and uncertainty itproduces. That is a reflection of a lot of people who needsome absolute answers. Often times they will take a l'funda-mentalist position. The need for certitude makes some verywell-meaning people highly vulnerable to being exploited inthis kind of way.

The other vulnerability is the need for specialness, thefeeling that one is unusually important, superior. When onehas a need to be better than, or greater than, or morerighteous than, or more filled with truth than anyone else,that need for specialness is a great vulnerability that can beexploited. The underlying core of "special" people oftencontains a great deal of doubt, and behind their apparentlysmug self-cormdence there is a lot of perceived inferiority.

Noel Gardner was an Adventist pastor before studyingmedicine. He is chief, Council Liaison Psychiatry, Universityof Utah and president of the Utah Psychiatric Association.This piece is an excerpt from a telephone interview.

10

Because of human vulnerability, a charismatic Koreshcan step in and claim a lot of absolute authority, usurpingscriptures to support his position and structuring anidealized view of the small group. 0

...Dysfunctional Religious LeaderA Response to Noel GardnerBy Antonius Brandon

Consistent with the medical model, Noel Gardnerfollows a linear argument. He labels David Koreshand then proceeds to explore possible religious causeswhich may underlie his pathology. David Koresh'spersonal history seems to bear out that he is a con-flicted •..person.

Thatdoes not, however, warrant a label ofNarcissistic Personality (Disorder). Many religiousleaders, out of personal corflict, have expressed acertain strength of character and focus, but in assign-ing them a personality disorder, we may miss thecomplex relationships involved in religious behavior.

Another way of looking at the Koresh phenom-enon is to explore the social context of the BranchDavidianS and recognize the interactions that requirethe type of1eadership they developed. This view doesnot separate Koresh from the group that has becomelike a large family, but sees him as a part of a systemthat requires tl1at individuals fulfill various roles.

With his background of abuse, anger andmistrust, he seems to fit in very well. With his abilityto respond to the emotional needs of the group andtheir.feedback to him, he is as much a creation of thegroup as its leader. As such, he may very wellpersonify the dysfunctions of his religious community,tying the fate of its members to his own life or death. 0

Antonius Brandon was an Adventist evangelistbefore earning his doctorate in clinical psychology.He is a professor of marriage and family therapy inthe Graduate School at Loma Linda University.

Adventist Today May /June 1993

Experiences in Lorna Linda

MARC BREAULT HAD JUST started graduate workin religious studies at Loma Linda University when atthe local market he met Perry Jones, a recruiter for theBranch Davidians. He Began Bible studies with thelocal Davidians and within four years Marc hadbecome the right hand man to Vi=!rnonHowell, nownamed David Koresh.

For several years as a teenage Roman Catholic,Mar.c ~ad attended a camp for the blind sponsored byChrIstian Record. He carefully studied Adventistteachings and became a member of the JapaneseSeventh-day Adventist Church in Honolulu in 1979.Two years later he registered at Pacific Union College'as a theology major. My son lived down the dormi-tory hall from Marc, and described him as "intelligent,thoughtful-a nice guy."

As he approached the completion of his collegiatestudies he was crushed when his faculty counselorst~ld him that they could not conscientiously encourage~ t~ become a pastor, No conferenc17.was willing tohire him as a pastoral intern and send him on to theAdventist seminary at Andrews. He was legally blind,with only 5 % vision in his left eye. (In order to focuswell enough to read he had to bring the print a fewinches from his eye.) He returned home to Hawaiibitterly disappointed. He felt that his'beloved churchdid not respect his civil rights as a handicappedperson.

A Loma Linda faculty member, after hearingMarc's story, hoped that his talent and commitmentc~uld be harnessed for the church and encouragedhim to apply for graduate studies in religion. Heemolled at Loma Linda in 1986. Although he hadsome difficulty with reading assignments, he was anexcellent student, asking thought-provoking questions,~howing analytical depth in his answers, and express-mg warm commitment.

I first became aware of Marc's contact with theBranch Davidians when he asked for permission tomiss class for a week to attend Passover at WacoTexas. I was not able to convince him that the OldTestament annual feasts had been fulfilled in Christ.

Dalton Baldwin teaches theology and biblical studies atLorna Linda University.

Adventist Today May /June 1993

By Dalton Baldwin

My contention that the Branch Davidians engagedin fanatical, unbiblical interpretation did not seemto register.

When Phil Donahue, on his national TV show,recently asked Marc how he got hooked by theDavidians, he answered, "1 was emotionally vulner-able. I had some bad experiences with my church. Iwanted something more."

Vernon Howell proposed a music ministry whichappealed to Marc. Marc was also caught up in theBranch's use of the destroying angels of Ezekiel 9 todescribe their mission to establish a literal kingdom inPalestine and to purify Seventh-day Adventists. WhenMarc completed his master's degree at Loma Linda~d did not receive a call for preaching or teaching, heJomed the Branch group in Texas. He marriedElisabeth Baranyai, whom he had met at the LomaLinda Branch Bible studies.

After leaving the Branch Davidians two yearslater, Marc described the group's theology as based"entirely on types." An early statement by VictorHouteff, in The Shepherd's Rod, Vol 2, p. 10 reads, "Hemakes wise the simple and confounds the prudent by

'showing that where there is no type there is no truth"(bold face in original).

The problem with using types to make predictionsabout future events is that the new predictive materialis not pres.ent in the type but is produced by personalhopes, fears, conclusions, or imaginations of theintefBreter. When there is a depreciation of "pru-den,ce" and an encouragement of inspirational feeling,faJ;.tasticand even dangerous ptedictions occur.

The fantastic element was demonstrated whenVernon Howell applied Song of Solomon 6:8 tohimself. "There are threescore queens and fourscoreconcubines, and virgins without number." Howelltaught that it had been predicted that he would have140 wives. Shortly after Vernon Howell introduced theteaching that all women belonged to him, Marc andElisabeth dropped out of the movement.

Since leaving the Branch Davidians, Marc Breaulthas been an active member of the Seventh-dayAdventist Church in Melbourne. He and his wife havehelped to deprogram 16 other former members. 0

11

Koresh on Ellen WhiteBy Dennis Hokama

Is IT JUST COINCIDENCE that many conservativeAdventists were uniquely vulnerable to the teachings ofDavid Koresh?

A videotape of a Bible study Koresh conducted for agroup of Los Angeles Seventh-day Adventists in 1987 givessome insights into this question. On February 28, 1987,exactly six years prior to the fatal shootout in Waco, Texas, Iattended this Bible study organized by my father, a veteranAdventist minister and missionary. He had insisted that Icome because I would get to meet someone who, he said,might be the next prophet of the church.

The speaker was David Koresh, then going by his birthname Vernon Howell. I waited impatiently for more thantwo tortuous hours for Koresh to come to his point, but henever quite did. At times, though, he came tantalizinglyclose. He spoke enigmatically and in riddles, usingscripture and Ellen White's writings in a fashion whichimplied and hinted that he was White's successor, but heshied away from making that claim explicit.

In the question and answer session, I expressed.skepticism regarding his interpretation of scripture, andthen I asked the burning question on everybody's mind:Was Howell actually claiming to be the successor t~ EllenWhite? After a brief preamble, true to form, he answeredwith another question:

Do you believe that it takes a living prophet to reveal to uspresent truth? That's the first question I have for you!

I replied rather lamely, quoting a familiar Adventistexplanation, "After she dies her books will speak fo~ her."Koresh ignored my reply and continued his counterattack:

Well, it's like this. She [EllenWhite] tells us, if [sic]someoneis to come in the spirit and power of Elijah,and when hecomes,men will say, 'You are too eamest. You do notinterpret scriptures properly. Let me show you how to teachyour message.' Wellnow, the commentatorssay point blank,that this was herself. They say to go to Selected Messages. Well,she makes it even plainer in Selected Messages.Much later, I discovered that Koresh was virtually

quoting Selected Messages, Book I, page 412. By using thisquote he effectively sought Ellen White's permission toengage in novel interpretations of scripture and impliedthat he was the one she had said would come with theElijah message.

Dennis Hokama teaches in the Los Angeles UnifiedSchool District.

12

David Koresh's monologue back in 1987 was anelaborate interpretation of the Old Testament prophets andRevelation that was interlaced with Adventist jargon.Although I now know that he was reportedlydisfellowshipped five years earlier, I took his Adventism forgranted. He used phrases like "We as Seventh-day Adven-tists," "As we were taught in Adventism," and "We knowas Adventists."

A further indication of his familiarity with EllenWhite's writings was a reference he made to The GreatControversy, citing a passage from a chapter he referred to as"The Bible: The Only Safeguard:"

She says, 'Contained in the Bibleis the revelationof eventswhich are to transpire prior to the judgment, the closingofhuman probation, but,' she says, 'people are as ignorant ofthese truths as if they had never been written.'

Koresh's paraphrase was remarkably accurate. EllenWhite had written: "The events connected with the close ofprobation and the work of preparation for the time oftrouble, are clearly presented. But multitudes have no moreunderstanding of these important truths than if they hadnever been revealed" (The Great Controversy, 1911 edition, p.594).

As to the attractiveness of Howell's theologicalexposition from an Adventist perspective, an index was myseminary-trained father's assessment at the end of the twoand a half hour session. He was enthusiastically support-ive, and only the most energetic and severe criticisms ofHowell's theology by his two skeptical sons dissuaded himfrom ac<;;.eptil,lgHowell's invitation for further Bible studies.

The church was founded on a doctrine of "presenttruth" which holds that God has special messages for today,or "new light" that was not necessarily apP'lrent in thescriptures nor essential for God's people in former times.As such, "present truth" is inherently dynamic rather thanstatic. And yet since Ellen White's death, Adventists havefrozen this concept.

In Howell's teaching, Adventism was presented withan opportunity to make good its claim to ongoing "presenttruth." He himself proclaims "present truth" and "newlight" to gullible church members. He was reviving ratherthan contradicting the original spirit of Adventist theology.

Howell's proclamation struck a responsive chord in thehearts of many traditional Adventists, and this may explainwhy they were uniquely vulnerable to Howell's theology. 0

Adventist Today May /June 1993

the School of Medicine as well asschool alumni continue to beconcerned about the administration'spast firing of George Grames andStewart Shankel. The tension is evidentin the ongoing letter writing in theSchool of Medicine Alumni Journal. Inthe September/October 1992 issue, Willrepeated the administration's defenseof their actions and called the on-goingdiscussion "more destructive thanhelpful to the mission of the School ofMedicine."

The alumni response was quickand severe. Many expressed concernover the administration's unwillingnessto listen to American Association ofUniversity Professors' (AAUP)criticism of administration heavy-handedness. Others were disgruntledabout the "defensive, superficial 'trustus, we are right' tone of formal printedresponses by LLU administration" that

would lead LLU to beknown in the academiccommunity "not only forits infant heart transplantprogram, the protonaccelerator, and itswoman president butalso for its cavaliertreatment of dedicated,

courageous members."

The AAUP criticized LLU for itsallegedly denying adjudicativehearings before the dismissals wereeffected and its placing the burden ofproof on the accused. Subsequently, ascientific polling of LLU faculty foundthat 93.4% agree that a predismissalhearing should be mandatory; 87.2%agree that in such a meeting the burdenof proof should rest on the administra-tion. Steps are being taken to changepolicies accordingly.

School of Medicine with the moststudents.

A major administrative push toenhance ethnic diversity in both thestudent body and faculty led to theappointment of DeljJert Baker, PhD.,former editor of Message Magazine, asthe new director of diversity.

Several major projects have alsobeen started. Ground brea)dng beganon a $16.2 million dollar recreation andwellness center, scheduled to becompleted in 1994. To aid in the LLUMedical Center's goal of developing alarge, multi-modality approach to thetreatment of cancer and other diseases,fund raising for a $20.3 millionResearch Institute has started, with theactual completion of the cOlflplexplanned for 1996. Fund raising forthese and other major projects hasgiven the university a hopeful financialbase for the future.

The alumni response was quick andsevere. Many expressed concern overthe administration's unwillingness tolisten to AAUP's criticisms.

After the DivorceLorna Linda and La Sierra Universities

Another setback continues todisrupt the University's School ofMedicine. Many dedicated faculty in

Setbacks have also plagued theUniversity. On February 10 the Boardof Trustees accepted 'by mutualagreement" the resignation of its newSchool of Medicine dean-DouglasWill. When appointed in July of 1991,Will became the youngest medicalschool dean ir1the nation. ,i His resigna-tion, effective June 30, 1993, comesamid allegations of conflict of interestover a research project in which he hasfinancial interest.

THE PAPERS OFFICIALLY divorc-ing the campuses of Lorna Linda:University (LLU) were signed in asolemn ceremony on Saturday night,August 25, 1990, in the student chapelof the Lorna Linda campus. Boardmembers and many interested facultyattended. Some cheered. Otherscried-or at least felt like it.

Just as in domestic splits, so incorporate divorce, both sides experi-ence painful adjustment. Although theLorna Linda camplls appears to havefared better financially than theRiverside campus (now La SierraUniversity-LSU) both have experi-enced setbacks as well as successessince the split.

The LLU president, B. LynBehrens, is embattled but is assertivelymoving ahead with strong boardsupport and an often acquiescentfaculty. Fritz Guy, the first president ofLSU, is a lame duck whose board andfaculty have been seeking his successor.

Lorna Linda University

One of LLU's greatest successesunder the leadership of PresidentBehrens has been the removal ofprobationary accreditation status. TheWestern Association of Schools andColleges (WASC) not only lifted LLD'sprobation status of 1989 but alsocommended LLU for its mammotheffort to reorganize itself as a healthscience university. In addition, the1992-3 school year began with recordenrollment-over 2200 students-theSchool of Allied Health eclipsing the

Gary. Bradley, LSDbiology professor, andChene Rouse, LLD employee, contributedto this article written by the editors.

Continued on the next page

Adventist Today May /June 1993 13

After the divorce, LSUfaced the Chal-lenge of assuming its own leader-ship...."We are stillstruggling to find outwho we are," stated one professor.

La Sierra University

Three years ~fter beihg divorced,La Sierra University finds itself stillsearching for an identity and againsearching for a president. After the

divorce, LSU faced the challenge ofassuming its own leadership inmatters from the most mundane to

the grand. A new administrativestructure had to be invented. "And weare still struggling to find out who weare," stated Gary Bradley, biologyprofessor.

In spite of these large challengesand the troubles of its first president,Fritz Guy, some achievements andimproving vital signs do raise hopesfor LSU. Although his presidency was'short, Guy took a junior campus fromthe throes of an unwanted divorce to auniversity boldly seeking its place inthe sun. He oversaw the successfullifting of probationary status inaccreditation by the WASC. He alsostrove to strengthen faculty pay scalesand pushed for a much more definitiverole for the faculty in the institution'sgovernance. At press time, a facultysenate with clear responsibilities andpowers was working directly with thetrustee Committee on AcademicPrograms to write a new facultyhandbook.

The university has made rigorousefforts toward high academic quality,last spring hiring Garland Dulan,Ph.D., as provost to coordinate andoversee all academic features of theinstitution. Dulan had been academicvice president at Oakwood College forfive years. Also, efforts have beenmade to improve standards for facultypromotions as well as for studentadmissions.

The results have not gone unno-ticed. In a fall 1992 issue, U. S. Newsand World Report ranked U. S. collegesand universities, including LSU (aswell as Andrews University) on its listof the top 300 national universities.The local newspaper, the Riverside Press-Enterprise, grading all Californiacolleges and universities in the fall of

1991, called LSU one of the top three"good buys" and gave LSU a B+. "Thereasons are probably our low student-teacher ratio and our high percent offaculty with doctoral degrees, 76%,"said Adeny Schmidt, dean of theCollege of Arts and Sciences.

Students have apparently noticed,too. For the '92-'93 school year,emollment was up 8% (120 students)from a year earlier. The freshman classwas especially large, and emollment inthe honors program increased by 40%."One attraction is our diverse studentbody and another is our uniquelocation, next to a major metropolis,"stated Ivan Rouse, chair of the Depart-ment of Physics. "We can and do havegood programs in the communitywhere students can apply what they'relearning in the classrooms." Rousestated that more students are needed,however, even to have a critical mass insome departments.

Rouse admitted that LSU hasalways been painfully dependent ontuition funds for survival, and this hasallowed little money for things likeequipment and faculty development.Rouse complained that fund raisingand development have not been doneat full speed in recent years.

LSU possesses a significant realestate asset-360 acres adjacent to thecampus. With highly regardedconsultants, the university has com-pleted a detailed plan to develop thisland. The board has approved theplan, and the development corporationis now pursuing the necessary cityapprovals, community acceptance, andalumni input. The corporation expectsto obtain final city approval and beginimplementation by September.

LSU enjoyed a big boost in self-esteem with the success of its GlobalVillage event last fall. Under the

leadership of religion professor CharlesTeel, Jr., students and faculty createdand occupied nine different examplesof third world housing on campus, andinvited the public to come and observe.More than 20,000 came.

The harmony in Teel'sGlobal Village has notcaught on among thefaculty, who havedescribed their ownrelations with words suchas "animosity" and

"fratricide." "Arts and Sciences isperceived by our other schools as theshark in the swimining pool," statedGary Bradley, biology professor. Thefaculty spent the winter heatedlydebating whether Fritz Guy, uponleaving, should be granted tenuredstatus as "University Professor" orshould simply be fired.

In the face of great need fordirection and leadership, the first LSDpresident, Fritz Guy, announced hisforthcoming resignation on September14, 1992, after the Board decided toperform an "administrative audit."This Board action was prompted by animpasse between the president and hisvice president for student affairs, DavidOsborne, yet this was only the mostprominent feature of a broaderdiscontent regarding Guy's administra-tion.

A number of senior faculty whowere interviewed spoke of the negativeside of Guy's administrative style.They say he micro-managed theinstitution, but then, in key decisionson personnel, he ineffectively utilizedfaculty input, vacillated, and procrasti-nated.

Even his critics, however, perceiveGuy's many admirable qualities as ascholar- administrator. He has a strongacademic orientation and speaks oftenof how the faculty are the heart of theuniversity. He brought an ethicalstance to his role. Guy is open to newideas, yet knows where he stands andarticulates a clear vision. Some facultyfeel that Guy's pastoral nature made

14 Adventist Today May /June 1993

him shy away from conflict situationsthat required decisive action. Further,not being a "political animal," Guy wasled by his honesty to step on'some toesof individuals with strong connectionsto church leaders. On the other hand,Guy has a keen sense of politicallycorrect procedures at a more theoreticallevel. This led him to establish asophisticated board of trustees,

According to Adeny Schmidt, theboard of 24 members is much smallerthan traditional SDA boards. Of these24, only 9 are church employees, Oneis not a church member but is a veryinfluential local businessman. Somehave special expertise in highereducation. The board also includesinterested, committed alumni. "Theboard used to be huge," said Schmidt,

As we go to press ...

"with a very large proportion of churchemployees included regardless of theircommitments or expertise."

Commenting that the board issuperior to that of any other Adventistcollege, one professor stated that theboard "matured rapidly, perhapsoutgrowing Fritz." However, FrankKnittel, professor of English noted, "Itis a travesty that our board chair alsochairs the board of our closest compet-ing college-one within our own union[Pacific Union College]. It is surprisingthat the board permits this; it is moresurprising that the chair would agree toserve under these conditions."

At press time, first choice tosucceed Fritz Guy was LawrenceGeraty, president at Atlantic Union

College. LSU was waiting for hisresponse to their offer of the presi-dency.

LLU has great challenges as itfaces an uncertain economics of healthcare and as it balances assertivecentral leadership with a core offaculty who are increasinglycommitted to due process andsignificant involvement in decisionmaking. LSU still wobbles uncertainlyon its baby legs. It is attracting goodstudents and looks forward to im-proved finances once its land begins tobe developed; however, to succeed,LSU must enroll significantly morestudents and must find a presidentwho can unite and lead a capable butcontentious faculty. 0

Lawrence T. Geraty, president of Atlantic Union College, on April 9 informed officials of La Sierra University of hisqualified acceptance of their offer.for him to become president of LSD. In a telephone interview, he expressed hisconviction that the trustees rather than the president should be primarily responsible for borrowing funds, as may benecessary, and that the Pacific Union Conference and the General Conference should forgive part of the university'spresent indebtedness. On a recent visit to the campus Geraty indicated thatthe possibility of productive fund raising bythe president was one factor that attracted him to LSU,in contrast to limited possibilities where he is now.

With Wilber Alexander's announced retirement, Lorna Linda University's Faculty of Religion will have a new deannext year. Gerald Winslow, chair of the religion faculty at Pacific Union College, has been invited to replace Alexanderand is giving the invitation careful study. Winslow is known for his superb academic and' administrative skills.

James Londis, another finalist Jor deanship oftheLLU Faculty of Religion, is said by knowledgeable persons to be alikely candidate for the presidency of Atlantic Union College should that post become vacant. Londis is known for hispersonal charisma and prophetic vision.

Arrangements have been completed for the Pacific Press Publishing Association in Nampa, Idaho, to print and mail28,000 copies of this, the first issue of Adventist Today, which are being sent gratis to a wide circle of prospective subscrib-ers. PPPA is printer but not publisher. Adventist Today is the publisher and solely responsible for content.

Recognizing that Adventist Today and. Spectrum are both committed to.open, responsible discussion of news and issuesof importance to Seventh-day Adventists, the Association of Adventist Forums, publisher of Spectrum, has offered to carrya complimentary advertisement forAdventist Today, welcome it editorially, and send the introductory issue to Spectrumsubscribers. The publisher of AdventistToday appreciates and will reflect this friendly spirit of cooperation.

Attorney General Janet Reno has just concluded a news conference in Washington,D.C. in which she lamented the tragicloss of more than eighty lives in the fire that destroyed the Branch Davidian compound near Waco,Texasa few hours ago.

She assumed full responsibility for the decision to increase pressure designed to end the siege that began fiftydays ago-peacefully, without further loss of life. The FBI took every possible precaution, she said, to do this responsi-bly, and President Clinton had given his approval.. There. is clear evidence, she emphasized, thatthe fire was deliberatelyset by persons within the compound, in what was planned as a mass suicide.

Adventist Today expresses deep sympathy with families that have lost loved ones in this holocaust. In our issue forJuly/August we will review the factors that contributed to this tragedy. 0

-The Editors

Adventist Today May /June 1993 15

-The Editors

section containing the phrase "serious jeopardy toher health," the guidelines were accepted, withonly five dissenting.

The abortion statement that follows is the church'sfirst official position on abortion. The statement waspurposely called" guidelines" in order to suggest theiropenness to revision and their non-dogmatic character.In keeping with this spirit of openness, the editorshave invited three authors to share their critiques ofthese guidelines. To conclude this discussion section,the ethicist who drafted the guidelines presents aresponse to the two critiques. 0

CAN THE CHURCH HAVE it both ways-pro-lifeand pro-choice? Through its newly adopted guide-lines, the church" affirms the sanctity of human life, inGod's image," and "respect for prenatal life." Yet italso acknowledges that "exceptional circumstances"can exist, and the "final decision whether to terminatethe pregnancy should be made by the pregnantwoman after appropriate consultation."

"The seeming ambivalence in this statement iseasily explained," according to Roland Hegstad, editorof the church's Liberty magazine. "On the one hand,we don't have a pope on the Potomac to tell us whatwe must do. On the other hand, we respect the Churchmember's right to make some very personal de~i-sions."

Pro-lifeand Pro-choice-Can the church have it both ways?

It is unusual for an official Adventist publicationto provide insight into high-level church politics, butLiberty (January IFebruaIy 1993) revealed what led tothe passage of the abortion guidelines:

A surprise awaited delegates on Friday, October 9,when the CVHLC [<£:hristianView of Human LifeCommittee] guidelines were brought to the noor[of the Annual Council, meeting last October inMaryland]. Former General Conference presidentNeal Wilson urged that no statement on ab~rtionbe made so close to the U.S. presidential election.In addition to being controversial, the proposedguidelines, he said, contained inconsistencies. The1971 hospital policy should be retained. Wilsonmoved to cut off debate and send the guidelinesback to CVHLC. Though vigorous, protests werefew; Wilson's motion carried.

However, Monday brought an unexpecteddevelopment. General Conference presidentRobert S. Folkenberg took the unusual step ofbringing the guidelines off the shelf and onto thefloor. The church, he said, must take a stand onprinciple. He urged the delegates to reconsidertheir vote and approve the guidelines. Afterspirited discussion, including moves to jettison the

FOR FURTHER STUDY

The editors recommend the recentlyreleased book Abortion: Ethical Issues andOptions edited by David R. Larson. Pub-lished by Loma qnda University Center forChristian Bioethics, this book is a compilationof 16 essays by Seventh-day Adventistsociologists, ethicists, theologians, physicians,and lay persons. The book is distributed bythe Review and Herald Publishing Associa-tion and is available in Adventist BookCenters. It is also available from:

Abortion BookLorna Linda University

Center for Christian BioethicsLorna Linda, CA 92350

The cost is $9.95 plus $3.00 for shipping andhandling. CA residents need to add 7.75%sales tax.

16 Adventist Today May IJune 1993

MANY CONTEMPORARY SOCIETIES have facedconflict over the morality of abortion. Such conflict also hasaffected large numbers within Christianity who want toaccept responsibility for the protection of prenatal humanlife while also preserving the personal liberty of women.The need for guidelines has become evident, as the churchattempts to follow Scripture, and to provide moral guid-ance while respecting individual conscience. Seventh-dayAdventists want to relate to the question of abortion inways that reveal faith in God as the Creator and Sustainerof all life and in ways that reflect Christian responsibilityand freedom. Though honest differences on the question ofabortion exist among Seventh-day Adventists, the followingrepresents an attempt to provide guidelines on a number ofprinciples and issues. The guidelines are based on broadbiblical principles.

1. Prenatal human life is a magnificent gift of God.God's ideal for human beings affirms the sanctity of humanlife, in God's image, and requires respect for prenatal life.However, decisions about life must be made in the contextof a fallen world. Abortion is never an action of little moralconsequence. Thus prenatal life must not be thoughtlesslydestroyed. Abortion should be performed only for themost serious reasons.

2. Abortion is one of the tragic dilemmas of humanfallenness. The church should offer gracious support tothose who personally face the decision concerning anabortion. Attitudes of condemnation are inappropriate inthose who have accepted the gospel. Christians arecommissioned to become a loving, caring community offaith that assists those in crisis as alternatives are consid-ered.

3. In practical, tangible ways the church as a support-ive community should express its commitment to the valueof human life. These ways should include: (a) strengthen-ing family relationships, (b) educating both gendersconcerning Christian principles of human sexuality, (c)emphasizing responsibility of both male and female forfamily planning, (d) calling both to be responsible for theconsequences of behaviors that are inconsistent withChristian principles, (e) creating a safe climate for ongoingdiscussion of the moral questions associated with abortion,

Adventist Today May IJune 1993

Abortion GuidelinesOfficial Statement approved by the Annual Council

October 1992

(f) offering support and assistance to women who choose tocomplete crisis pregnancies, and (g) encouraging andassisting fathers tei participate responsibly in the parentingof their children. The church also should commit itself toassist in alleviating the unfortunate social, economic, andpsychological factors that may lead to abortion and to careredemptively for those suffering the consequences ofindividual decisions on this issue.

4. The church does not serve as conscience forindividuals; however, it should provide moral guidance.Abortions for reasons of birth control, gender selection, orconvenience are not condoned by the church. Women, attimes however, may face exceptional circumstances thatpresent serious moral or medical dilemmas, such assignificant threats to the pregnant woman's life, seriousjeopardy to her health, severe congenital defects carefullydiagnosed in the fetus, and pregnancy resulting from rapeor incest. The final decision whether to terminate thepregnancy should be made by the pregnant woman afterappropriate consultation. She should be aided in herdecision by accurate information, biblical principles, andthe guidance of the Holy Spirit. Moreover, these decisionsare best made within the context of healthy family relation-ships.

5. Christians acknowledge as first and foremost theiraccountability to God. They seek balance between theexercise of individual liberty and their accountability to thefaith community and the larger society and its laws. Theymake their choices according to Scripture and the laws ofGod rather than the norms of society. Therefore, anyattempts to coerce women either to remain pregnant or toterminate pregnancy should be rejected as infringements of,personal freedom.

6. Church institutions should be provided withguidelines for developing their own institutional policies inharmony with this statement. Persons having a religious orethical objection to abortion should not be required toparticipate in the performance of abortions.

7. Church members should be encouraged toparticipate in the ongoing consideration of their moralresponsibilities with regard to abortion in light of theteaching of scripture. 0

17

A Higher CallingBy Ginger Hanks-Harwood

THE SHAPERS OF THE ABORTION statement havemade a laudable attempt to formulate a set of guidelines

informed by compassion and consistent with Adventisttheology, while acknowledging the importance of

individual decision-making.

The Guidelines helpfully highlight the principles of thesacredness of human life, individual moral agency,Christian accountability to God for personal choices andactions, and the church as a redemptive institution. Thework recognizes the gap between God's intentions forhumanity when the gift of procreation was given and thecircumstances in which women find themselves today.

The Guidelines also contribute significantly to thevision of the church as a vehicle of grace for those strug-gling with or recovering from crisis pregnancies. Despitethese strengths, the statement itself must be regarded aslacking in clarity and consistency, and fundamentallyflawed by its silence on certain principles and issues~Further, the document must be viewed as potentiallyoppressive to women.

The Guidelines are of very little assistance to a ';V0manwho must make a decision considering abortion. Thepertinent information is woven throughout the documentrather than presented in a straightforward way. This makesthe principles less accessible to a woman looking forguidance, obscures the ideological prejudices of thedocument, and shifts the center of the discussion away fromthe decision-maker.

I gleaned from the Guidelines the following cOf).ceptsintended to assist a woman: (a) Prenatal life is a sacred,magnificent gift from God. (b) Abortion is never an actionof little moral consequence. (c) "Abortion for birth control,gender selection or convenience are not condoned by thechurch" but "abortion should be performed only for themost serious reasons." (In other words, abortion is con-demned.) (d) The woman's decision should not be coercedbut should be guided by a commitment to biblical prin-ciples and the laws of God, her accountability to the faithcommunity, and consultation with her family.

These statements need to be more closely examinedand questioned. The only principle given to serve as aguideline for a woman trying to make her decision is thesacredness of life. The Guidelines do not invite a woman toconsider the principle of stewardship in deciding whetherto bring additional life into the world. Questions need to beasked: Does every decision for abortion have "moral

Ginger Hanks-Harwood teaches religion and ethics atPacific Union College.

18

consequences"? Are the "exceptional circumstances" listedthe only "most serious reasons"? On what basis mayabortion be considered even in these cases, as no theologicalframework has been established that would provide for adifferent decision?

The Guidelines undermine a principle they wish topromote-individual moral agency. "What liberty is thewoman given to explore the moral aspects of the decision?The only choice offered a God-fearing woman is whether ornot she will submit to God's pre-revealed will.

To speak generically of the necessity of conforming tothe laws of God and accounting to the faith communitymay be misleading and destructive. The sanctity of life isnot the only guideline for action given by God. To elevatethe principles of divine law and accountability withoutspeaking of grace does great disservice to women and thecommunity. It shows little respect for.the woman, littleappreciation for the limitations of the human condition, andlittle understanding of the radical call to discipleship whichallows us to make difficult decisions with confidence inGod's redemptive presence and activity.

When the Guidelines speak of the church's response toabortion, their efforts fall short. While exhorted to be acaring community that assists those "in crisis as alternativesare being considered," little mention is made of the church'sobligations to those same women after the decision hasbeen made. Can the church support those who decide toterminate their pregnancies? What are the responsibilitiesof a church which encourages women; to bring new life intothe world when that new lif!=will be neither welcomed norsupported by society?

The Guidelines appear most problematic when viewedas a whole, rather than considered point by point. They donot construct a vision of the faithful daughter of God as onewho takes seriously her responsibility to God, to her body-temple, and to her community. They contain little toencourage women to view their own lives and bodies assacred, nor do they clearly call for an ethic of reverencetoward life which respects the lives of women who arealready born. They do not acknowledge the unique role inthe universe given to women by God: to be the ones whomust say yes or no to new life.

The Christian woman does not find in the Guidelinesstrength for making difficult decisions. She does not findan invitation to testify to her community of God's presencewith her in her journey and her struggles. When we have astatement which appreciates a woman's high and difficultcalling, then we will be ready to say we have a useful set ofabortion guidelines based on biblical principles. 0

Adventist Today May /June 1993

THE 1992 ANNUAL COUNCIL vote taking a standconcerning abortion merits reflection. We praise God thatthe church has taken formal action, which is better than thelack of a statement which had left us rudderless. While thetenor of the document is positive, there are inconsistenciesand loopholes.

On the positive side, the church did take principledaction concerning the protection of human life at the end ofthe life cycle-euthanasia- and documented it well with abiblical rationale on the sanctity of life. Overt action cuttinglife short was rejected. A sick person is not justified in the"choice" of death by unnatural intervention. However, thissame principle was not consistently carried over into thearea of the beginning of the life cycle where people maychoose to terminate human life.

It is not appropriate to terminate human life for thosewho have the power of choice. Is it appropriate to termi-nate human life for the helpless and innocent who have nochoice-as in rape and incest? "Consistency, thou art ajewel." Yet we prefer to see the church inconsistent when itis partly right, than to be consistently wrong.

Myths

Many times we operate on the basis of myths that wewould like to believe, even though hard evidence indicatesotherwise. Here are myths relating to the abortionstatement.

Myth 1. That this statement was based on Scripture.The lack of a strong biblical rationale was the main concernof the minority report. The majority report was perfectedlargely from the viewpoint of ethical considerations, andalthough it finally offered a series of Bible references likebeads on a string, it was not born in Scripture.

Myth 2. That the statement represents a consensus. Tocharge a committee to come up with a consensus statementis illogical when members' views are in opposition, and to adegree represent differing authority sources. Pastor NealWilson said it well: "Whose consensus?" Later the word"consensus" was removed from the final document.

Myth 3. That the statement reflected a consensus fromthe world field. The world field was asked to give input tothe report; however, a large number of the world fieldreports had grave misgivings about the health clause andother areas of the report.

Millie Youngberg is Emeritus Professor and JohnYoungberg is Professor of Religious Education, both atAndrews University.

Adventist Today May /June 1993

Myths and MaybesBy Millie and John Youngberg

Myth 4. That these resolutions are going to stopabortion on demand. When some individuals decide tohave an abortion, they will obtain it under onecategory or another. Health and mental anguish maybe invoked. However, let them go to non-SDAinstitutions. We need not comply with their demands.

Myth 5. That we have to make a statement which isapplicable and practical to the whole unbelieving world.We cannot be all things to all people in all cultures. Ourbusiness is to restore the Edenic ideal among those whochoose voluntarily to come out of the world.

Myth 6. That because a mother may feel deeplydepressed over pregnancy at a given moment of time, thatshe will always feel that way should the little one live. Arewe sure that we want to leave the health loophole, whichwill be construed to include mental health and severedepression? Feelings are so changeable. Things may lookentirely different years later.

Maybes

The Annual Council has taken a stand, but this stillleaves unanswered questions:

Maybe 1. Maybe Adventists will take seriously theCouncil's stand against abortion as birth control. Only timewill tell. Only careful accounting, kept in our hospitals andhonestly reported to the church, will tell.

Maybe 2. Maybe the Council's resolutions are a firstalthough imperfect step, and maybe the church will movetoward a truly Bible-based, principled stand by the time ofthe 1995 General Conference.

Maybe 3. Maybe the one quarter of the delegates at theAnnual Council who voted against the resolutions wereright and maybe the three quarters who voted for theresolution were wrong. Truth isn't always decided by amajority vote.

Maybe 4. Maybe the resolutions will not be imple-mented. Some institutions consistently boycotted theformer "guidelines," and maybe some will not suddenlyhave a change of heart at this time.

Maybe 5. Maybe some of the resolutions will beoverturned (if not now, in the final judgment). "For everyplant that my heavenly Father hath not planted will beplucked up." We haven't heard the last word on this yet,and we won't until "the trumpet shall sound" at the finalday. 0

19

Abortion: Consensus and DialogueBy Gerald Winslow

WHEN THE GENERAL CONFERENCE appointed theChristian View of Human Life Commission, I wondered ifsuch a group could accomplish its mandate. Issues such as

euthanasia and abortion had produced deep rifts incultures around the world. How could a group of about

30 church members, mostly men, resolve these issues?Against the odds, however, we met in hope.

A sign that such hope might be justified was theCommission's decision, at its first meeting, that at least halfthe membership must be women. The group knew that itswork was bound to be incredible without appropriategender balance. (Care was also taken to seek ethnic, racial,and international balance.) i Another hopeful sign was thecommitment of the Commission's chair, Albert Whiting, toinvite participation from church members holding widelydivergent views. A final reason for hope was the .Commission's early agreement to aim for the widestpossible discussion of our work, as it progressed, through-out the worldwide church.

The Commission's first topic was abortion. Theaccepted goal was to produce a "consensus statement" thatwould represent the best thinking of the group, based onour understanding of biblical principles. After more thanthree years of work and eight drafts of the statement, it wasapproved by the Commission with only one dissentingvote. The statement was referred to the General Conferenceofficers and was adopted by a large majority of the partici-pants at the church's Autumn Council in 1992.

I was surprised by the Autumn Council's adop~on ofthe statement. The initially successful move to table ,thestatement, when it was first presented to the Council, waswhat I had expected. I am not surprised, however, byvigorous criticism of the statement now that it has beenadopted by the church.

Such criticism is presented by Professor Hanks-Harwood and the Professors Youngberg. Hanks-Harwoodis unhappy with the statement because, in her view, it is notadequately sensitive to the needs of women who may facecrisis pregnancies. She is concerned that some of theprinciples are aimed unfairly at pregnant women, effec-tively disrespect women's moral freedom, and ignore thecomplexity of decisions regarding procreation.

Hanks-Harwood's judgment will probably be adisappointment to women on the Commission who toiledto make the statement reflect the needs of women and whoprobably share many of Hanks-Harwood's generalconcerns about gender equity. Her charges of insensitivityto the personhood of women are difficult to understandwhen the Commission's statement on abortion makes itclear that the church should be committed to gracious

Gerald Winslow teaches ethics and chairs the ReligionDepart-ment at PacificUnion College.

20

support of women who face such difficult decisions. Thestatement also renounces all attempts to coerce women andis strongly supportive of their personal exercise of con-science. Nevertheless, the fact that a reader like Hanks-Harwood finds the statements to be inadequate is certainevidence that the discussion needs to continue.

The Youngbergs, on the other hand, are unhappy withthe Commission's work because it is not adequatelyprotective of the lives of fetuses. They find the statement onabortion not to be grounded in the Bible, not to be represen-tative of the views of most church members, and not to besufficiently rigorous in closing "loopholes" that could leadto "abortion on demand."

Millie Youngberg was the one member of the Commis-sion who voted against the statement on abortion. One ofher main objections was the fear that including threats to awoman's health as a possibly legitimate reason for abortionwould open a "loophole" for any number of illicit abor-tions. She was not convinced by arguments of health careprofessionals on the Commission that it is difficult, andsometimes impossible, to distinguish threats to a pregnantwoman's health from threats to her life.

She was also not apparently convinced by remindersfrom many Commission members that the Adventistcommitment to care for whole people includes care foremotional as well as physical and spiritual health. Herconcern about "loopholes," a word that shows up more

. than once in the Youngbergs' critique, appears to remain amajor factor in their rejection of the Commission's work onabortion.

However, the talk about "loopholes" does provide anopportunity to think more clearly about distinct realms ofmoral authority. For example, it would be a great gain forclarity if discussion about abortion distinguished among (1)individual integrity, (2) institutional practice, and (3) socialpolicy. The Commission's statement on abortion speaks toall three.

Is it coherent to call people to make personal decisionsthat protect God's gift of prenatal life, and ask Adventisthealth care institutions to do the same, while at the sametime urging the state to permit wide latitude for thepersonal conscience of pregnant women? I believe so. It is,as I see it, the moral high ground, based on Scripture, andnow adopted by our community of faith.

But I end this topic on this note: If we are wrong, if theCommission's statement on abortion is a poor reflection ofChristian ethics, now is the time to offer correction. Thefinal point in the statement invites all church members tojoin in the discussion. We should be grateful to ProfessorHanks-Harwood and the Professors Youngberg foraccepting this invitation. To enter such discussion on theside of biblical principles is to worship God with our earsand minds. 0

Adventist Today May IJune 1993

By James Walters

Letters for publicationmust be signed and brief.

Continued on the next page

Let Freedom Ring

Maturity. The so-calledbabybuster and babyboomer generations

in the church show considerable cultural maturity. They seethrough and lament religious cliches and formal posturing.Young Adventist professionals and many older membersdesire straightforward talk about the church's core beliefsand their relevance to workaday life. Candor is a given;honest grappling with the church's and society's problems isimportant, and new perspectives on spirituality are yearnedfor.

An educated constituency. Because the denominationhas stressed education, a large professional membershipdemands that the church appeal to head as well asheart. The development of human minds "akin to thatof the Creator." The unique human capacities aredefined by Ellen White as "individuality-the power tothink and to do." The spirit of such a statement is incom-patible with the restriction of inquiry into and discussion oftopics that are important to the church.

Truthfulness. The commandment "Thou shalt not bearfalse witness" has been drilled into the minds of everychurch school student. Now, adult members realize the

many facets of truthfulness and honesty.In American society we have reasonabletrust in the editorial judgments and thestories of a Los Angeles Times or Washing-ton Post. What is read in a goodAdventist news publication should be atleast equally believable. It is regrettablethat some ''big news" items are passed inbits and pieces along the denominationalgrapevine rather than being openly dealtwith by responsible writers.

Church governance. From its first Church Manual inthe 1800's to the current one Adventism has claimed to be"representative" in church, governance. Hence, churchmembers choose representatives to periodically convene in"constituency meetings." The representatives increasinglyvote on items of major importance. However, their vote is,only as good as their information on the issue at hand. Just

I as the free press performs an invaluable function in!America, so a responsible journalistic publication in.Adventism can help the general readership be moreadequately informed about news and views on issuesfacing the denomination.

A variety of reasons can be cited for why Adventismmay benefit from a free flow of information, but the mostpowerful impetus arises from Adventist history and ourbedrock commitment to religious freedom.

Lettersto the Editor

ADVENTIST TODAYPO Box 1220

Lorna linda, CA 92354-1220

An integral aspect of religious liberty is freedom ofinformation. Further, a free press is essential if Adventismis to remain true to itself-and if it is to retain the commit-ment of its increasingly eaucated membership. Thedenomination must recognize what the U. S. founders didin writing the First Amendment-that a free press isinseparable from religious liberty: "Congress shall make nolaw respecting an establishment of religion or abridging thefreedom of speech, or of the press." Church founder EllenWhite gave high praise to America for its constitutionalprotection of "liberal" principles that are the "genius of itsfree institutions." To praise a nation for principles that thechurch does not also prize would be incongruous.

Adventist Today is designed to fill the need for aresponsible journalistic publication in the denomination.The goal is to make good journalism a vital aspect ofmainstream Adventism. Adventist Today will have theprerogatives and responsibilities of all good news organs inAmerica-freedom, accuracy, and taste. And just as goodjournalism in the U.S. is rooted in American values, soAdventist Today works out of Adventism's core values.

The church needs a lively free press for at least four reasons:

James Walters is teaches ethics at Lorna Linda University, and isAssociate Editor ofAdventist Today.

ADVENTISM HAS SOME wonderful doctrines. Amongthe most precious is religious liberty or freedom. Thisdoctrine readily applies around the world, but the challengeis to allow freedom to inform life within the church.

A recent article in the Adventist Review celebrated the"surge" in religious liberty around the world. "Never hasthere been so much liberty in the world." Catholic Spainrecently ruled that Adventist students throughout thenation possess the right to observe their seventh-daySabbath rest. The article concludes by contrasting the"grandeur" of religious liberty with the "awfulness" of"ecclesiastical imperialism, and desolate religious unifor-mity enforced by government fiat."

Adventism founded its world-oriented Liberty magazine in 1906, atime when the entire denominationhad fewer members than now residein the greater Los Angeles area.Quite naturally this small churchwith unique doctrines soughtreligious freedom for its often-harassed Sabbath-keepers. But nowintegrity demands iliat this 7-millionmember denomination apply itsdoctrine of freedom to itself.

Adventist Today May /June 1993 21

Seize the DayBy Kit Watts

AFTER WASHINGTON D.C's cloudiest, mostdismal December on record, and with gray rain continuing

right into January, one sunny day would have been amiracle. We had four in a row.

Workers erected miles of bleachers along the streets,white tents mushroomed across the mall, and friendlycrowds, wearing backpacks and counting kids, flooded themetro stations. Bill Clinton was coming to town.

In fact, he was coming 'round the Virginia mountains.He may as well have been driving six white horses.Wending his way past graceful hills and white-fencedpastures, from Monticello through small towns filled withcheering crowds and along country lanes lined with wavingpeople, he was coming.

And we all went out to meet him. From Maryland andD.C., from Arkansas and across the continent, from theprairies and the mountains, from the ocean white withfoam ...the bands were playing and the liberty bells wereringing. To our amazement, Bill and Hillary, Tipper and Alhad connected with us.

And, despite ourselves, we all went out to meet him-even some who don't like Democrats, and some who don'tlike politics at all, and many, many who haven't waved aflag since the war in Vietnam drew the young to fill ~esesame streets with chants of protest. We went out to be partof history on a sunny winter day, and perhaps, as Bill wassoon to say, "to force the spring."

"It's the first squeak of patriotism I've felt in 30 years,"a forty-something friend of mine admitted on the telephone.She's writing a doctoral dissertation and teaching on; anAdventist campus.

Meanwhile, the media is making shredded cabbage ofthe new administration and its first missteps. Not even twoweeks after Inauguration Day some snorted, "It's all downhill from here."

Having lived with disillusionment before, most baby-boomers I know remain cautious but less caustic than thepress.

After all, Clinton has chosen a cabinet with moreAfrican-Americans and women than any two, maybe anyten, previous administrations put together. He has articu-lated a moderate position on abortion (available but rare,with a strong commitment to on-going education). He hasmoved to end discrimination against those who simplyadmit to the military that they are homosexual but whoagree to live up to specified codes of behavior.

Kit Watts is an Assistant Editor for the Adventist Review.

22

He has launched a can-do task force to assessAmerica's health care crisis and make proposals on how tomeet the costs, giving Hillary a chance to show her stuff.Risky as that may be politically, and as unlikely as it is thatanyone can unravel the nation from the terrible bind we'rein, "Why not give her a shot at it?" we say. And yes, wehope the debt will come down and more jobs will open up.

"But even if he fails at all of this," my forty-somethingfriend said, falling back to a worst-case scenario, "he's gotthe language right. And the language has power."

The ideals, the world view, the compassion, theequality, the inclusiveness we put into language can helpchange the world even when our own actions fall short.There's more to the phrase "In the beginning was theWord ..." than most of us ever knew.

And so as Maya Angelou voiced it for all of us whotoday may also be "arriving on a nightmare and praying fora dream," as we inaugurate a new president and pass thetorch to a new generation, "the horizon leans forward" andso do we. 0

Let Freedom Ring-Continued

The forbears of Adventism were cast out of their homechurches in the early 1840s. Why? They adhered to aforeign Advent truth that mainline congregations sum-marily rejected. Expulsion for belief in unpopular truthwas traumatic. But it contributed to Adventism's profoundrespect for personal liberty. Later, an entire department ofthe church was established to promote the conviction thatfreedom of individual conscience is inviolable. Thedenomination's most visible contribution in this area is therespected journal Liberty with its half million subscribers.

Religious liberty became a cornerstone of Adventismdue to others' religious intolerance. Because of earlyAmerican colonists' experience of religious intolerance inthe Old World, religious freedom became a central plank inAmerican thinking. Ellen White saw providence at work inthis new world of freedom: "The fundamental principle ofRoger Williams' colony was that every man [and woman]should have liberty to worship God according to the light ofhis [or her] own conscience."

As an American denomination Adventism has longpraised the U.S. constitution statement of religious liberty.Increasingly throughout the world the church has gained itsown right to religious liberty. The challenge is for ourdenomination to now see that freedom of speech andinformation-the underpinnings of religious liberty-characterize our own life together. 0

Adventist Today May /June 1993

"THE PEOPLE COULD NOT distinguish the sound ofthe joyful shout frorn the sound of the people's weeping,for the people shouted with a great shout, and the soundwas heard afar" (Ezra 3:13, RSV).

"We wept, and wept, till the day dawn," Hiram Edisonrecalled.

For those of us still on earth some 150 years later, whatis the meaning of his wrenching memory of October 23,1844? From wilderness enclaves to the halls of academia,the question persists, driven by powerful emotions: hope,deep longing, fear, embarrassment. And now a newAdventist publication!

A story in Scripture matches our mood. Let's listen.

Excitement rippled through the Jewish community inBabylon. Rumor had it that Cyrus, the new Persian em-peror, would let the Jews go home.

Could it be true? Or was it all a cruel hoax?

Some shrugged; others sneered. Still others, withglistening eyes, pleaded with God to make the rumor true.

And true it was.

Cyrus' decree was a generous one, too. He wasn't justsending the Jews back home, he was commanding them torebuild the temple. That's right. He commanded them torebuild the temple in Jerusalem.

And there was more. He was asking their neighbors tohelp with money, material, 'domestic animals---€ven free-will offerings for the house of Israel's God. God had heardthe prayers of the saints; now the saints responded to thestirrings of the Spirit.

Whether driven by the love of God or the fear of Cyrus,gifts poured in: silver goblets, gold, choice merchandise,animals. Finally, as the crowning gesture of the king's goodwill, the royal treasurer brought out the sacred vesselswhich Nebuchadnezzar had snatched from Yahweh'stemple in Jerusalem. Carefully he counted them out toSheshbazzar of the tribe of Judah: 5,469 vessels altogether.God was smiling on His people.

The handy band of loyalists struck out across thedesert: 42,360 plus 7,373 servants and 200 male and femalesingers. The numbers were impressive-unless one thought

Alden Thompson teaches in the School of Theology,Walla Walla College.

Adventist Today May IJune 1993

A Joyful MoanBy Alden Thompson

of the thousands of Jews who decided they liked it betterin Babylon after all. There were those who shrugged orsneered, the ones untouched by the moving of theSpirit.

But renewal doesn't have to start big. When the Spiritmoves, It moves with those who are moved.

Arriving in Jerusalem, the people went straight to thetemple ruins. They gave gifts of gold and silver andgarments to the priests. They built an altar. They kept theFeast of Booths. Kneeling in the rubble of the old, theydreamed of the new, a new temple for the King of theuniverse.

The returned exiles rolled up their tunics and set towork. Good money went to masons and carpenters; cedarscame from Lebanon. Yahweh would have a temple inJerusalem again.

Thirteen months later the exiles laid the first new stoneat the old temple site. As the foundation neared completion,a sense of exhilaration filled the air. A new temple was thego~l. But after 50 years with no temple at all, just a newfoundation was cause for joy. There would be a feast.

"

The priests and Levites did it up right. Vesqnents.Trumpets. Cymbals. "Yahweh is good," sang the people,"for his steadfast love endures forever." Such fun. Such joy.The hills of Jerusalem pricked up their ears and began tosing once again.

But it was a curious celebration. Sobs and moanspunctuated the shouts of joy. The broken hearts were theold ones, the ones that remembered Solomon's magnifi-cence, the hearts that almost died when the temple fell, thenlonged for years to see it rise again.

These faithful old saints wept when they saw the newfoundation. This renewal of their dreams was a merecottage, not a palace. They wept.

But the moans of the old could not restrain the young.This was their hope, their future. They shouted for joy. Theweeping and the joy mingled together in one massive din,not a death rattle, but an unmistakable sign of resurrectionand life.

In the turmoil of our life, some moments of startingagain are like that. A renewed foundation rises from therubble of the old-very different, yet much the same. Tearsof apprehension blend with tears of joy. The result is amortar blessed by God, bonding together His house of faithand our hope. 0

23

Mission Statement & Editorial Policy

It is the mission and objective of ADVENTIST TODAY to provide a medium of communication that will assistthoughtful Seventh-day Adventists in North America in forming accurate, balanced opinions with respect to currentevents and issues within the church.

ADVENTIST TODAY will focus on information not otherwise readily available, accurately, responsibly, and in anon-partisan way dedicated to the well-being of the church and the fulfillment of its mission. As an independentpublication it will not be under obligation to any person, special interest, or church entity.

ADVENTIST TODAY will endeavor to distinguish between news and opinion. Like everyone else in the church,writers and editors are entitled to their opinions. However, they will be responsible personally for what they write.The editors purpose to exercise reasonable editorial judgment in the selection of writers who will report the newsaccurately, fairly, and responsibly. We expect those who write for ADVENTIST TODAY to be open and straightforwardand to write with candor-to tell it like it is but always in harmony with Christian principles. If the church is toprosper, it is imperative that we face up to reality.

Where events and issues involve significant differences of opinion, ADVENTIST TODAY will invite the proponentsof the major points of view to present their differing perspectives. The first step in resolving differences is to estab-lish the facts, to provide each side an opportunity to present its understanding of the facts, and for each to listenattentively and perceptively to the other.

It is a major objective of ADVENTIST TODAY to provide thoughtful church members in North America with basicinformation on all sides of mf}tters of interest to the church at large.

In the certain knowledge that differences of opinion, even on matters of major importance, need not escalateinto barriers between mature members of the body of Christ, let us express ourselves honestly and constructively. Indialogue with one another we must speak plainly lest we be misunderstood, but we can do so with respect for oneanother. We must listen as attentively and perceptively as we want others to listen to us. The tree of silence, be itvoluntary or imposed, never bears the fruit of unity and peace.

In brief, ADVENTIST TODAY aspires to provide a place where church members and leaders alike can meet togetheron neutral ground as friends, share information, express their convictions, their concerns, and their hopes for thechurch constructively, think things through together, and develop a more mature consensus in areas of church lifethat affect all of us in one way or another.

To this end the editors of ADVENTIST TODAY dedicate themselves and this publication, which we hope, with God'sblessing, will make a positive, important, and valuable contribution to the church. 0

Thisisa complimentaryissue of Adventist Today.The editors hope you find itspiritually and intellectuallystimulating and will chooseto subscribe.

Adventist TodayP,O, Box 1220Loma Linda, CA 92354- 1220

BULK RATEU.S. POSTAGE

PAIDNampa,ID

Permit No. 392