|
AND NOW IT
IS HERE
The
Adventist Wedding Ring
AN IMPORTANT NEW DOCTRINAL CHANGE
"Some
church members feel that the use of a simple marriage band is a symbol
of faithfulness to the marriage vow, and such persons should be fully
accepted in the fellowship and service of the church."-The new
wedding ring clause in the North American Division official statement,
approved November 1986.
This
statement presents a new doctrinal position for Seventh-day Adventists
in the United States and Canada. It says three things:
1
- The change has been made because some church members "feel"
it should be made.
2
- Ignoring clear Bible, Spirit of Prophecy statements (quoted elsewhere
in this tract), it is felt that the reason why marriage rings should be
accepted is because they "symbolize . . faithfulness."
Doctrines are being based on perceived symbols instead of Scriptural
statements.
3
- Everyone wearing wedding rings and requesting membership into the
Seventh-day Adventist Church MUST now be accepted by ministers and
members.
What
an example is now being given to our children by this new NAD
requirement!
I write
this as a solemn appeal to our church members, workers, and retired
personnel: Our beloved Church is entering a time of crisis on many fronts.
The tract you now have in hand details one of the latest: the November
decision by the North American Division year-end meeting-to officially
approve the wearing of wedding rings by church members-even when being
baptized!
Very
seriously, I plead with you to write our leaders to reverse this terrible
decision. For decades, our faithful pastors and evangelists-including
many of you-have stood firm on our historic belief that the
commandment-keeping people of God should not wear gold, jewels, or other
adornment.
I realize
what your thinking may be in regard to this matter: You also are deeply
concerned that such an action should be approved by the NAD, but at the
same time you have for years felt security in the thought that you should
remain silent when unfortunate decisions are made by leadership. We can
understand your feelings, but, please, let me point out to you,-that
your first duty is to the God of heaven and His Word, not to men.
The policy
that we will by our silence accept committee decisions that go counter
to the express Word of God, may appear to be favorable to unity, but in
reality that silence is an open declaration that we are taking our stand
with actions that are opposed to clear Bible-Spirit of Prophecy
statements, and thus, by default, uniting in opposition to those
statements. And that is not the kind of "unity" that you and I
want, is it?
Even though
we may be concerned for unity of spirit, yet if we stand on the side of
disobedience to Scripture, we are aligning ourselves with those who, for
sake of expediency, are rebelling against the teachings of God's Word.
I realize
that these may seem to be harsh judgments, but if you will consider this
in honesty of heart, you will recognize that I am only telling you the
truth. And "am I therefore become your enemy, because I tell you the
truth?" (Galatians 4:16)
I know how
your heart longs for unity and harmony among our people, But though we
long for it and seek it, our first duty must ever be to stand on the side
of God and His teachings. To remain silent in a time of widespread
compromise is, in actuality,
to stand with the men compromising-rather than with God! And, surely, you
and I do not want to be found opposing God.
And it was
over that very issue that we first came into this Church many years ago.
You and I individually determined that we would stand on the side of the
Inspired Word, and so we become Seventh-day Adventists. And we are
thankful that we did.
But now the
test comes to us again. It is not a test to leave the Church. It is rather
a test to stand true within the Church-true
to God and to the Bible and Spirit of Prophecy. For you and I well know
that any day that we are not knowingly in obedience to His Inspired Word,
we are not with God. He askes us;-
yea, it is our duty-to
speak up in a time of crisis and plead with men to do that which is right.
The curse of Meroz will not come upon us if we do that.
"Curse
ye Meroz, said the angel of the Lord, curse ye bitterly the inhabitants
thereof: because they came not to the help of the Lord, to the help of the
Lord against the mighty." (Judges 5:23)
"If
God abhors one sin above another, of which His people are guilty, it is
doing nothing in case of an emergency. Indifference and neutrality in a
religious
crisis is regarded of God as a grievous crime and equal to the very worst
type of hostility against God." (3 Testimonies, 281)
-Vance
Ferrell
This writer
recently received a telephone call from a high-placed friend with the
information that that very week the North American Division had just
approved wedding rings. "Tell the pastors they now have to baptize
them with their rings on," came the shocking news.
We could
not help wondering how our leaders would announce this startling doctrinal
change to the membership of the church. (Keep in mind that doctrinal
changes are supposed to be discussed and approved by the General
Conference in Session, but this wedding ring decision was made by a small
committee at General Conference headquarters.)
Then the
December 4, 1986 issue of the "Adventist Review" arrived
(reprinted here). The announcement was made in a very interesting way.
Friends have told this writer that they read the first paragraph or two of
the article and then skipped over to the next article, concluding that the
article must simply be about how church leadership is tightening up on our
standards. But not so, if you read the entire article. It is an
announcement that wedding rings are now very acceptable throughout the
North American Division.
Just at the
time when this issue of the "Review" came in the mail, a friend
arrived from Europe to see us. I asked him about this matter of wedding
rings in Europe, and he told me that he and his wife have lived there for
years and neither of them have ever worn a wedding ring, and no one in
Europe, no one-has ever complained or even remarked about the absence
of rings on their fingers. This includes friends, Adventists,
non-Adventists, various business contacts, and everyone else for that
matter. He also told me that he has extensively traveled throughout Europe
over the past several years with his wife-and
never once has any hotel or innkeeper questioned them about the fact that
they do not wear wedding bands.
"But,"
I asked him, "I have heard in our church circles that wedding rings
are a must for our people and workers in Europe. The customs of Europeans
are such that they must have them on at all times." He replied that
such was not true. He himself speaks two languages and continually makes
contacts with Adventists and non-Adventists in many more-and
wedding rings are in no way a necessity in Europe. I then inquired why our
European Adventists are so anxious to wear wedding rings, and he replied
that they do it because they want to, not because they have to.
And that's
the story of wedding rings in Europe and now in America. We are told in
the "Review" article that the European Adventists are accustomed
to wearing wedding rings, and so we need to approve of wearing of rings
here in North America to accommodate them. When the truth of the fact is
that the European Adventists do not have to wear wedding bands. There is
actually a far different reason why leadership is so anxious to approve
the use of wedding rings in North America: Many worldlings want to come
into the Church who are only half-converted. Our present ban on wedding
rings keeps them out of the Church: The new ruling will enable them to
come in.
The fact is
that this open door to wedding rings is more than a farce, it is a slap in
the face to our many pastors and evangelists, who for more than a hundred
years, have pled with baptismal candidates to give up their rings and
jewelry in order that they might come to Christ.
For if it
is all right to now baptize new church members with their wedding rings on
throughout North America,-then
it is all right for all the rest of the church members to wear them also,
at any time and in any place. For what place could be more sacred than the
baptismal font where you surrender all and die to the old life ..
surrender all, that is, but your wedding ring.
Here is the
article-and some very important quotations to carefully think about:
North America Adopts
Adornment Action
DECEMBER
4, 1986
A
newly written statement on jewelry spurred lively debate among delegates
to the North American Division year-end meeting. Discussion lasted so
long that NAD officers had to schedule an extra session. The document,
"Jewelry: A Clarification and Appeal," reaffirms and clarifies
a 1972 Annual Council action that counseled against the use of
necklaces, earrings, bracelets, and rings. That same action encouraged
the selection of watches, brooches, cuff links, and tie clasps, with
simplicity, modesty, and economy.
The
North American Division document also cites a 1972 General Conference
officers' statement that counseled ministers not to perform ring wedding
ceremonies-and
urged evangelists and pastors to encourage baptismal candidates to
examine their motives in deciding whether to wear a wedding band.
Although
the GC officers' statement spoke strongly against the use of jewelry,
it drew a distinction between ornaments and the simple wedding band,
providing for the baptism of converts who conscientiously felt they
should wear a simple ring.
The
current NAD document also appeals to members for a commitment to
simplicity in lifestyle and holds the wearing of jewelry as
unacceptable..
However,
one clause in the NAD statement differed from the actions in 1972-and
that difference sparked over two dozen speeches, remarks, and
declarations.
The
clause states: "Some church members feel that the use of a simple
marriage band is a symbol of faithfulness to the marriage vow, and such
persons should be fully accepted in the fellowship and service of the
church."
NAD
delegates approved the document by a substantial majority after a
three-hour debate.
Several
delegates, like Leonard Newton, Northeastern Conference President,
believed that the clause will lead to a greater use of jewelry among
Adventists. "We didn't have the problem of jewelry before the
Change in 1972," Newton said.
Other
delegates, like Herman Bauman, Montana Conference president, expressed
satisfaction because the document unifies the church position around the
world.
NAD
president Charles Bradford insisted that there is no change in the
church's stand on jewelry. He argued that the difference in attitudes
over the wedding band between native and foreign-born citizens has
actually' weakened the church's case against jewelry.
"The
increasing number of overseas church employees [who conscientiously
wear wedding bands] coming to the United States to work in various
church settings has caused conflicts with North American members [who
traditionally have not worn wedding bands]," Bradford explained.
"The 1972 statements [which tolerated the use of wedding bands]
were never read carefully enough. They were never widely
circulated."
"We
gave attention to this issue because of the repeated appeals from church
leaders for clarification," he said.
"We're
saying that there is a distinction. We can draw the line here and say,
'Take off the earrings. Take off the class rings. Take off all the
ostentatious brooches and tie clasps."'
"The
wedding band has never been an issue outside of North America. People
were wearing it all around the world-even back in 1892 when Ellen G.
White wrote on it," Bradford explained. "It was never an issue
in England, France, Italy, and Australia. They [members outside North
America] have been always persuaded that the wedding band was a symbol
of their marriage commitment."
Consider these Quotations
"A
sister who had spent some weeks at one of our institutions in ___, said
that she felt much disappointed in what she saw and heard there ... Before
accepting the truth, she had followed the fashions of the world in her
dress, and had worn costly jewelry and other ornaments; but upon
deciding to obey the Word of God, she felt that its teachings required her
to lay aside all extravagant and superfluous adorning. She was taught that
Seventh-day Adventists did not wear jewelry, gold, silver, or precious
stones, and that they did not conform to worldly fashions in their dress.
When she saw among those who profess the faith such a wide departure from
Bible simplicity, she felt bewildered. Had they not the same Bible, which
she had been studying, and to which she had endeavored to conform her
life? Had her past experience been mere fanaticism; Had she misinterpreted
the words of the apostle, 'The friendship of the world is enmity with God,
for whosoever will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God'?
"Mrs.
D, a lady occupying a position in the institution, was visiting at Sr.
___'s room one day, when the latter took out of her trunk a gold necklace
and chain, and said she wished to dispose of this jewelry and put the
proceeds into the Lord's treasury. Said the other, Why do you sell it? I
would wear it if it was mine.' 'Why,' replied Sr. ___, 'when I received
the truth, I was taught that all these things must be laid aside. Surely
they are contrary to the teachings of God's Word.' And she cited her
hearer to the words of the apostles, Paul and Peter, upon this point, 'In
like manner, also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with
shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broidered hair, or gold, or pearls,
or costly array; but, as becometh women professing godliness, with good
works.' Whose adorning let it not be that outward adorning of plaiting the
hair, and of wearing of gold, or of putting on of apparel. But let it be
the hidden man of the heart, in that which is not corruptible, even the
ornament of a meek and quiet spirit.'
"In
answer, the lady displayed a gold ring on her finger, given her by an
unbeliever, and said she thought it no harm to wear such ornaments. 'We
are not so particular,' said she, 'as formerly. Our people have been
over scrupulous in their opinions upon the subject of dress. The ladies of
this institution wear gold watches and gold chains, and dress like other
people. It is not good policy to be singular in our dress; for we cannot
exert so much influence.'
"We
inquire, is this in accordance with the teachings of Christ? Are we to
follow the Word of God, or the customs of the world? Our sister decided
that it was the safest to adhere to the Bible standard. Will Mrs. D and
others who pursue a similar course be pleased to meet the result of their
influence, in that day when every man shall receive according to his
works?
"God's
Word is plain. Its teachings cannot be mistaken. Shall we obey it, just as
He has given it to us, or shall we seek to find how far we can digress and
yet be saved? Would that all connected with our institutions would receive
and follow the divine light, and thus be enabled to transmit light to
those who walk in darkness.
"Conformity
to the world is a sin which is sapping the spirituality of our people, and
seriously interfering with their usefulness. It is idle to proclaim the
warning message to the world, while we deny it in the transactions of
daily life." Evangelism, 270-272,
"Have
not our sisters sufficient zeal and moral courage to place themselves
without excuse upon the Bible platform? The apostle has given most
explicit directions on this point: 'I will therefore . . that women adorn
themselves in modest apparel, with shamfacedness and sobriety; not with
broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array; but (which becometh
women professing godliness) with good works.' Here the Lord, through His
apostle, speaks expressly against the wearing of gold. Let those who have
had experience see to it that they do not lead others astray on this point
by their example. That right encircling your finger may be very plain, but
it is useless, and the wearing of it has a wrong influence upon
others."-4 Testimonies, 630.
"Sinners
are under a fearful deception. They despise and reject the Saviour. They
do not realize the value of the pearl offered to them, and cast it away,
rendering to their Redeemer only insult and mockery. Many a woman decks
herself with rings and bracelets, thinking to gain admiration, but she
refuses to accept the pearl of great price, which would secure for her
sanctification, honor, and eternal riches. What an infatuation is upon the
minds of many! They are more charmed with earthly baubles, which glitter
and shine, than with the crown of immortal life, God's reward for
loyalty. 'Can a maid forget her ornaments, or a bride her attire? yet my
people have forgotten me days without number.' (Jeremiah 2:32)"-1
Selected Messages, 400.
"The
Lord God of heaven calls upon man to put away their idols, to cut off
every extravagant desire, to indulge in nothing that is simply--for display
and parade, and to study economy in purchasing garments and furniture. Do
not expend one dollar of God's money in purchasing needless articles. Your
money means the salvation of souls. Then let it not be spent for gems, for
gold, or precious stones."-Welfare Ministry, 267.
"If we
allow our minds to be absorbed by worldly interests, the Lord may give us
time by removing from us our idols of gold, of houses, or of fertile
lands."-Great Controversy, 622.
"The
people of God, who have been blessed with great light in regard to the
truth for this time, should not forget that they are to be waiting and
watching for the coming of their Lord in the clouds of heaven. Let them
not forget that they are to put off the works of darkness, and put on the
armor of light. Let no man set up his idols of gold, or silver, or lands,
and give the service of his heart to this world, and to its interests."-Counsels
on Stewardship, 231.
"While
at Brother Harris's I had an interview with a sister who wore gold, and
yet professed to be looking for Christ's coming. We spoke of the express
declarations of Scripture against the wearing of gold. But she referred to
where Solomon was commanded to beautify the temple, and to the statement
that the streets of the city of God were pure gold. She said that if we
could improve our appearance by wearing gold, so as to have influence in
the world, it was right. I replied that we were poor fallen mortals, and
instead of decorating these bodies because Solomon's temple was gloriously
adorned, we should remember our fallen condition, and that it cost the
suffering and death of the Son of God to redeem us. This thought should
cause in us self-abasement. Jesus is our pattern. If He would lay aside
His humiliation and sufferings, and cry, 'If any man will come after Me,
let him please himself, and enjoy the world, and he shall be My disciple,'
the multitude would believe and follow Him. But Jesus will come to us in
no other character than that of the meek, crucified One. If we would be
with Him in heaven, we must be like Him on earth. The world will claim its
own; and whoever will overcome, must leave what belongs to
it."-Life Sketches, 113-114.
"Peter
gives valuable instruction concerning the dress of Christian women: 'Whose
adorning let it not be that outward adorning of plaiting the hair, and of
wearing of gold, or of putting on of apparel; but let it be the hidden
man of the heart, in that which is not corruptible, even the ornament of a
meek and quiet spirit, which is in the sight of God of great price. For
after this manner in the old time the holy women also, who trusted in God,
adorned themselves.' All that we urge is compliance with the injunctions
of God's word. Are we Bible readers and followers of Bible teachings? Will
we obey God, or conform to the customs of the world? Will we serve God or
mammon? Can we expect to enjoy peace of mind and the approval of God while
walking directly contrary to the teachings of His word?
"The
apostle Paul exhorts Christians not to be conformed to the world, but to
be transformed by the renewing of the mind, 'that ye may prove what is
that good, and acceptable and perfect, will of God.' But many who
profess to be children of God feel no scruples against conforming to the
customs of the world in the wearing of gold and pearls and costly array.
Those who are too conscientious to wear these things are regarded as
narrow-minded, superstitious, and even fanatical. But it is God who
condescends to give us these instructions; they are the declarations of
Infinite Wisdom, and those who disregard them do so at their own peril and
loss. Those who cling to the ornaments forbidden in God's word cherish
pride and vanity in the heart. They desire to attract attention. Their
dress says: Look at me; admire me. Thus the vanity inherent in human
nature is steadily increasing by indulgence. When the mind is fixed upon
pleasing God alone, all the needless embellishments of the person
disappear.
"The
apostle places the outward adorning in direct contrast with a meek and
quiet spirit and then testifies of the comparative value of the latter:
'In the sight of God of great price.' There is a decided contradiction
between the love of outward adorning and the grace of meekness, the quiet
spirit. It is only when we seek in all things to conform to the will of
God that peace and jay will reign in the soul."-4 Testimonies,
644-645.
Additional
quotations on this topic: 2 Bible Commentary, 1012; 3 Testimonies,
376-377; Counsels on Stewardship, 151.
Here are
some statements by historians that explain the pagan origins of the
wedding ring:
"Confiding
then in the power of Christianity to resist the infection of evil, and to
transmute the very instruments and appendages of demon-worship to an
evangelical use, and feeling also that these usages had originally come
from primitive revelations and from the instinct of nature, though they
had been corrupted; and that they must invent what they needed, if they
did not use what they found; and that they were moreover possessed of the
very archetypes, of which paganism attempted the shadows; the rulers of
the Church from early times were prepared, should the occasion arise, to
adopt, or imitate, or sanction the existing rites and customs of the
populace, as well as the philosophy of the educated class.
"In
the course of the fourth century two movements or developments spread over
the face of Christendom, with a rapidity characteristic of the Church; the
one ascetic, the other ritual or ceremonial. We are told in various ways
by Eusebius, that Constantine, in order to recommend the new religion to
the heathen, transferred into it the outward ornaments to which they had
been accustomed in their own. It is not necessary to go into a subject,
which the diligence of Protestant writers has made familiar to most of us.
The use of temples, and these dedicated to particular saints, and
ornamented on occasions with branches of trees; incense, lamps, and
candles; votive offerings on recovery from illness; holy water, asylums;
holydays and seasons, use of calendars, processions, blessings on the
fields; sacredotal vestments, the tonsure, the ring in marriage, turning
to the East, images at a later date, perhaps the ecclesiastical chant, and
the Kyrie Eleison, are all of pagan origin, and sanctified by their
adoption into the Church." John Henry Newman, "An Essay on the
Development of Christian--Doctrine,"- pp. 371-373. [This book was
written by Newman not long before he left his high-ranking position in the
Anglican Church in England and became a Roman Catholic. Later, in
appreciation of his many written defenses of Roman Catholicism, he was
made a cardinal.]
The early
church writer and theologian, Tertullian, mentions in his book, "On
Idolatry," that the "martial [marriage] ring" originated
from pagan idolatry practices. (See Turtullian, "On Idolatry,"
chapter 16).
"Among
the Romans .. there was a ceremony of betrothal, which sometimes took
place long before the wedding. On this occasion the prospective bridegroom
gave his fiancee a ring which she wore on the third finger of her left
hand. Sometimes guests were invited, and the bride-to-be received
presents." -Gordon J. Laing, "Survivals of Roman Religion, 29.
"While
civil marriage was an old institution among the Romans, the most ancient
marriage rite of the patricians (confarreatio) involved the
participation of religious functionaries .. Even after the confarreate
marriage rite had become obsolete many of its characteristics survived
in the form of wedding most frequently practiced by the Romans of the
republican and imperial periods. There was a ceremony of betrothal, which
sometimes took place long before the wedding. On this occasion the
prospective bridegroom gave his fiance a ring, which she wore on the
third finger of her left hand. Sometimes guests were invited, and the
bride-to-be received presents . .They both partook of the sacred cake,
libum farreum, .. The Church maintained the pagan contact of marriage with
religion, and though in the process of adaptation the content of the
service was materially changed, many of the old customs were retained.
Among the survivals may be mentioned the engagement-ring, still worn on
the third finger of the left hand . . In regard to the giving of a ring it
seems probable, in spite of Tertullian's comment on the pagan character of
the custom, that it was usual among most of the Christians even in his
time (about A.D. 200), and it is quite clear that it was a universal
practice from the fourth century."-Gordon J. Laing, "Survivals
of Roman Religion," 29-33.
CONTINUE
|