ILLEGAL:
The Wedding Ring Ruling
The recent
North American Division vote to require Adventist pastors to baptize
prospective members with their wedding rings-has
become a firing order in the hands of some conference presidents. They are
using it to demand that the faithful pastors in their conferences lay
aside their scruples instead of having the Bible-study interests lay
aside their rings -and
baptize them anyway-or
else be discharged from the ministry.
One of
these pastors recently spoke with this writer by phone. Because of his
refusal to baptize some interests before they remove their rings, his
conference president has threatened to kick him out of the ministry.
After that
telephone call, this writer prayed most earnestly about the entire
matter for some time-and then the following fact flashed vividly to his
mind:
The NAD
change in jewelry standards-is in flagrant violation of one of the most
basic denominational policies: Matters affecting the local churches must
be printed in the "Church Manual,"-and all changes affecting the
local churches can only be voted by the local churches or by a majority of
the delegates at a General Conference Session.
This was
not done in the matter of the new wedding ring ruling. Directly affected
are the standards whereby new members are taken into the local churches
in North America-and yet both the local churches and the General
Conference delegates were by-passed in making this important change that
will affect the beliefs of Seventh-day Adventists for years to come.
You see, a
small group of men, meeting in Washington D.C, in November 1986 at the
"Year-end NAD Meeting," do not have the constitutional right to
change Seventh-day Adventist beliefs or standards.
By its very
nature, a standard is a type of belief. It is part of our tenets of faith.
And a North American Division small committee tried to change it. Now,
until very recently, no significant NAO meetings were held-for it is
widely known that, unlike the other world divisions, the North American
Division
is only an extension of the General Conference itself. And neither the
North American Division headquarters, nor its committee meetings, counts
for much-for both are merely a rubber-stamp of General Conference wishes.
But now certain men have decided that they will try to use such meetings,
far removed from interference by the local churches-to
restructure the beliefs and patterns of those local churches.
And yet
neither the General Conference, nor any world division, nor any local
union, or conference committee has been endowed with the authority to
define or change Seventh day Adventist beliefs or standards.
Indeed, -the
truth is that, in the eyes of God, not even the local church nor the
General Conference in Session has a right to change our beliefs or
standards! When the Bible and Spirit, of Prophecy clearly speak in regard
to any religious matter, the issue is settle thereafter and is not
subject to change by any group of men anywhere in the world field. Only
the God of heaven has such authority.
Very
obvious and plainly-stated Spirit of Prophecy statements (quoted in our
earlier tract, "The Adventist Wedding Ring" (WM-156]) reveal
that this decision made in November by the NAD was wrong. That the NAD
would enact such a doctrinal change was both wrong in principle and
illegal according to their policy books.
History has
often shown that it is far better to live according to God's Word than
by policy books. For those who begin placing policy above God's
Word-eventually reach the point where they violate their own policies in
order to achieve their coveted ends. He who will not revere Scripture will
not be honest even with his own policies.
This NAD
action was carefully worded. Several friends of ours, who read the first
paragraph or so of it in the "Adventist Review" for December
4, 1986 (page 9), then skipped over the rest and said, "Well, it
looks like the Church is tightening its standards on the wearing of
jewelry." But not so. Under what appears on the surface to be an
appeal for higher standards in the wearing of jewelry, this action
states-for the first time in Seventh-day Adventist history-that wedding
rings do not come under that category, and that those wearing them must
henceforth be accepted into the Church without question by all our
evangelists, Bible workers, pastors, and church members.
According
to the book, "The History and Poetry of Finger Rings" (a
condensed copy of which is obtainable from this publisher-,
Roman Catholic priests made the sign of the cross over the wedding rings
in order to dedicate them to the Church, Now the Seventh-day Adventist
Church is baptizing those sacred circlets, bequeathed us by ancient
paganism, along with the incoming members!
Pastors in
North America are being threatened with discipline and firing-because
they refuse to go along with this high-handed violation of a fundamental
steno of historic Adventism and a clear-cut Spirit of Prophecy standard.
Ten or
fifteen years of such lowered standards will mean the ruin of the Church.
If administrators wish to enforce a non-Adventist requirement on those of
our pastors that are still faithful,-then some of the members need to
write those administrators and tell them that they will henceforth send
their funds elsewhere as long as that conference requires allegiance to
the NAD marriage ring ruling. For that ruling stands in violation of God's
Written Word and submission to it is a sign of rebellion to His authority.
Giving is a
two-way street. If religious leaders desire support, they in turn must
give also. They must give their support to Inspired Writings that form the
foundation of our Church. They must uphold the historic standards and
beliefs that constitute us the people of God (for a church organization
separated from those standards and beliefs is separated from Him), and,
of course, never are they to forbid pastors or laymen who are trying to
uphold those standards or beliefs.
Sounds too
strong? If we let them kick out the faithful ministers, who will we have
left? Repeatedly, our Church is entering upon new avenues that violate
clear Bible-Spirit of Prophecy principles. Every time we do this, we are
moving a decided step closer to total apostasy. We can know this: The
faithful will have to protest - because no one else will. And those who
have left the Church don't bother to. They forget about it and turn their
eyes to other things.
Call sin by
its right name, even though it may sound better to call it "a
church decision."
Only last
week this writer learned that over a year ago a meeting at the highest
level of the General Conference commissioned a certain General
Conference research writer to prepare a study on why the Seventh-day
Adventist Church should now reconsider and accept the wedding ring as a
fine Christian principle. Having completed his pre-concluded study, that
writer was then sent on a speaking tour to a number of the local
conference ministerial retreat: in North America to prepare the way for
the forthcoming NAD rubber-stamp action. At those meetings, in which
conference officers discussed the urgent need of increasing our membership
rolls in order to achieve the "Harvest '90" numerical baptismal
goals outlined by Elder N.C. Wilson at the 1985 New Orleans General Conference
Session, the research writer then explained to the assembled pastors that
wedding rings were all right after all,-for
the very reason that the people emotionally needed them and it would be
inconsiderate to deprive them of something that they felt that they could
not seemingly live without.
The
conclusions drawn by that General Conference researcher, form the basic
arguments for wedding rings as stated in the November 1986 NAD ruling, as
it is written.
Ellen White
has written that it is a fearful thing when people are buried alive. She
is referring to instances in which individuals were baptized into the
Church without having first died to sin and the worldliness they should
have left behind them.
Thus, there
was a lengthy period of preparation that preceded this November 1986
North American Division vote in regard to the wearing of wedding rings by
church members and new converts.
But the
surprising news that a softening-up action was taken for over a year to
prepare the Adventist ministry of North America for this change in one of
our Church standards,dovetails into a larger, more startling picture.
Many of our readers will not remember a news disclosure we made in the
June 20, 1985 issue of "Checkpoints." At the time when we made
it, none of us clearly understood what it meant. But now we are beginning
to understand.
All
changes that affect the local churches can only be enacted by the
delegates in attendance at a full General Conference Session. It is of
interest that a similar illegal action was approved by the Annual
Council which met in South America last October: They voted to restrict
those permitted to preach in local church pulpits to only those
specifically approved by the local conference office. But such a
decision, changing as it does another pattern in the local churches, can
only be enacted by the delegates at a General Conference Session.
The
long-range objective has been in operation at least since 1981.
First, I
will reprint the nine paragraphs in this "Checkpoints" report,
and then we shall discuss it:
VERY
IMPORTANT! -The
issue is simple enough-but ominous: Our Church has doctrines and it has
standards. The following letter indicates that in 1981 the standards were
moved out of the body of the "Church Manual" to an appendix in
the back. Now the plan is to eliminate the appendix! As you may know, the
governing code of our local churches is supposed to be the Bible or the
Spirit of Prophecy,-but
in reality it is the "Church Manual." This forthcoming scissors-work
will remove all standards requirements from our local churches!
("Doctrines"
= concepts such as the Second Advent, the Sanctuary Service, Conditional
Immortality, "Doctrinal standards" = Seventh-day Adventist
members should refrain from jewelry, theater attendance, dancing,
card-playing, liquor drinking, cigarette smoking, gambling, etc.)
Read this
letter:
"Dear Vance: I wonder if you are aware
of an important change in the "Church Manual' that is being
contemplated. It will be voted on at General Conference Session in New
Orleans.
I feel that the best way to make it known is to let YOU know, but I am
afraid it will be too late to get the word out. I would appreciate your
not using my name.
"Until 1981 there was a doctrinal,
instruction section in the main body of the "Manual. " When the
"Manual" was revised the last time, that section was moved to
the Appendix. In its place, there is a paragraph referring to
"Fundamental Beliefs of Seventh-day Adventists" to use as
instruction for candidates for baptism. There is also a statement
referring pastors, etc., to the Appendix for more information for
doctrinal instruction.
"The problem lies in the fact that the
Christian standards we have believed and taught for years-such as
theater attendance, jewelry, movies, dancing, etc.-are only in the
Appendix now. But this places it outside the basic beliefs in the main
part, which is used as the official standard.
But the
plan is to remove this Appendix from the "Manual" at this
coming General Conference Session! By doing this, they will effectively
eliminate the doctrines that deal with our standards. This would certainly
accelerate the liberalization of our Church.
"I
understand that there are memoranda at the General Conference that
indicated this is the plan. I hope it can be stopped in time.
"-Somewhere in the United States.
We are told
that it will be the Constitution and By-laws Committee at the General
Conference Session, which will be in charge of making sure that this
agenda item comes to the floor of the Session for a yes-vote.
The letter
(quoted in italics) in the above "Checkpoints" reprint, was
written by a top-flight Seventh-day Adventist denominational worker
whose name nearly all of you are familiar with. It was written to this
writer prior to the 1985 New Orleans General Conference Session, so that
we could alert others to what might take place at that Session. Whether or
not our alert helped, we cannot say, but the fact remains that the removal
of the "standards" section from the "Church Manual"
was not approved at New Orleans.
Now, why
did certain leaders want the standards removed from the "Church
Manual'? Well, back in 1985, it seemed to us that the objective was to get
them out of the way in order to cause less friction among members in our
local churches. With no more standards, there would be no more problems.
At least that is how the worldlings in the Church of God down through the
ages have always viewed the matter.
But there
was another issue that we did not recognize at the time, one that is now
coming closer to fruition: By eliminating the standards it will be
easier to bring in new church members almost as easily as do the other
denominations! And do note that the long-range objective is to remove BOTH
the standards AND and the doctrines from the "Church Manual"!
That fact is of crucial importance. Please do not forget it. Keep thinking
about it in the days ahead. Cling to our precious Bible-Spirit of Prophecy
standards and beliefs. Stand for them. Be willing to die for them. And you
will be safe in the days ahead. Men may dislike you for it; they may cast
you out for it. But fear not, the God of heaven approves of your faithfulness
to His Written Word.
(But
please, I would personally urge you: Misguided men may cast you out for
obeying God's Word, but do not just walk away from the defense of
truth-and ask that your name be removed. Let them do the removing. When
they do it, you can say, "This is your hour, and the power of
darkness" (Luke 22:53), but let them initiate the action.)
The Word of
God, nothing more, nothing less, nothing else. Let this be your motto from
now unto death or translation.
But with
that, make sure you are personally obeying that Word. Not only defend the
Word, live it in your daily life. And whatever comes, keep sharing your
faith and the printed truth with those who do not know the Third Angel's
Message. Do not become a dried-up prune by crawling off into a corner and
living unto yourself. God has a special work for you to do until the close
of human probation-in giving the last-day messages to a dying world.
For two
pages of Spirit of Prophecy quotations, see WM-156 ("The Adventist
Wedding Ring"), pages 3-4. The following is excerpted from that
compilation:
"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 [and remove
her ornaments] . Will Mrs. D, and others who follow a similar course [in
continuing to wear them] 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? . .
"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, pages 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 ring encircling your finger may be very plain, but
it is useless, and the wearing of it has a wrong influence upon
others."-4 Testimonies, page 630.
Ornamentation:
Bracelets (Gen 24:22; 38:18; Ex 35:22; Num 31:50; 2 Sam 1:10),
Ornaments: (Ex 33:4; Isa 3:18; Jer 2:32; 4:30; Ezek 16:11; 23:40),
Chains (Gen 41:42; Prov.1:9; Ezek 16:11; Dan 5:29), Earrings (Gen 24:22;
35:4; Ex 32:2; Num 31:50; Judg 8:24; Job 42:11; Prov 25:22; Num 31:50;
Judges 8:24; Job 42:11; Prov 25:12; Ezek 16:12; Hos 2:13), Rings (Gen
41:42; Ex 35:22; Esther 3:10; 8:8; Isa 3:21; Lk 15:22), Jewels (Gen
24:53; Ex 3:22; 35:22; Num 31:50; Isa 61:10). Jewels discarded (Gen
35:4; Ex 33:4; 1 Pet 3:3), Jewels brought as an offering to God (Ex
35:22; Num 31:50). -From
'Modest and Healthful Clothing-Part 3" (RS-7I, p. 3.
WEDDING
RINGS-The following letter came from an Adventist wife in California:
"A good question to ask ministers,
those who formerly asked their people to take their rings off at baptism:
Will these ministers now go back to those earlier candidates and members
and tell them it is now okay to wear them?
"When
I became an Adventist 18 years ago, I was asked to remove my rings and to
SELL them. They [the rings] meant a lot to me, but I took them off and
sold them. Now this change of standard by the North American Division-that
wedding rings are now okay even in the baptismal pool, says that the
former instruction was only the will of some church leaders and not the
'will of God'!
"At the time of our wedding, I was not
affiliated with any church, and we spent $1,500 on our set. They were sold
for $350. However, I say that when an individual joins a church, and the
standard for 150 years has been, 'no jewelry,' then that person should
know what is expected of him before he joins the club! And now it's
different.
"To
fire pastors for upholding an official standard that leadership no longer
wants to abide by-is
unchristian and unethical. Many would defend pastors who follow their
convictions and uphold what have always been the historic teachings of
the church."--California.
MORE
ON THE WEDDING RING-The recent North American Division Committee
action okaying the wearing of wedding rings by all our church members is
creating far more problems than it is attempting to solve.
"The
wedding ring is a problem in our little church, and since, because of this
new ruling, some are now boldly displaying theirs, others are beginning
to put theirs back on. We are studying with a lady who recognizes this as
a problem to be resolved before baptism. What are our people to
do?"-Oklahoma.
There are
church leaders among us who are faithful in trying to find ways to bring
in more members into the Church, but are far less interested in upholding
the historic beliefs of our people. This is not as it should be. Fifteen
years of that kind of leadership attitude can ruin the North American Division
as it 1962-1977 ruined the Australian and New Zealand part of the
Australasian (now South Pacific) Division.
The whole scheme is paradoxical, for the
underlying objective is to increase membership in order to increase
offerings; but such a course of action is resulting in bringing into the
Church a class of people who have little interest in paying offerings-and
offending those who formerly paid them devotedly.
"NOW
WE CAN WEAR RINGS!"-The following letter comes from a location
east of the Mississippi:
"Praise
the Lord, I finally found someone who agrees that the new law about
wedding rings is a big mess-and
really from the devil.
"I
want your tracts, 'The Power and Magic of Finger Rings,' and also 'The
Adventist Wedding Ring,'-and anything else you have on this subject. [The
most recent tract, before this one, is "Illegal: the Wedding Ring
Ruling"] .
"I
have two precious grand-daughters at --- Academy. They came on a home
leave and said, 'Oh, we can now wear wedding rings!' I was shocked. They
have not been wearing ANY jewelry at all. Their mother has talked against
it all these years. Now all that she has worked so hard to impress on
their minds will be broken down. What a pity.
"Some
of our supposed-to-be leaders are sure following Satan's ways and leading
many in the ditch. I was baptized in the early '40's and they wouldn't
baptize with rings then. I took mine off and never wore them since. I have
no desire to and never will wear them again.
"If I
had a weakness for it though, I could now say, 'Just think: all those
years I could have worn my rings.' I could sue them for false teachings.
I'm thoroughly disgusted (righteous indignation). Mainly concerned for my
grand-daughters, for I'm afraid as they SEE others wearing rings (not just
the wedding ring), they will be wearing the engagement ring too (many
already are).
"Another
girl in school has a weakness for ear rings, so now she thinks a ring is a
ring; 'I can wear them anywhere even to church-and
she really is right. Jewelry is jewelry, no matter what kind.
"Please send several copies of the ring
tracts."-Eastern U.S.A.
TELEPHONE
CALL FROM A GENERAL CONFERENCE-LEADER-Last week a high-ranking
General Conference leader decided on an impulse to telephone this writer
and plead with him to stop writing in protest about our falling church
standards and doctrines. In response, he was told that we would be deeply
happy to stop doing so. Preparing missionary tracts and books for
distribution to non-Adventists is far more satisfying. -But
warnings have to be given; pleadings have to be made. Members and workers
must be aroused by some means before it is forever too late and probation
has forever closed.
"For
example, there is this matter of wedding rings," I said. "Our
faithful members and pastors have for years upheld clear, God-given Spirit
of Prophecy statements on this point. The Inspired counsels teach that no
matter how plain the wedding band may be, it is still a wrong influence
and should not be worn."
To this,
the General Conference representative solemnly replied with deep-toned
authority: "Brother Ferrell, you do not understand the situation. We
here at the General Conference must deal with many perplexities, and
this new wedding ring ruling was very much needed. Our people needed it.
We studied the matter at great length, and this was a wise decision. If
you only could be there on the committees as we wrestle with these weighty
problems, you would understand. Brother Ferrell, please, you do not have
the understanding of this that the brethren here in Washington D.C. have.
Lacking this understanding, you should yield your judgment and abide by
their decisions."
At this, I
thought, "Well, what is this deep problem that only approval of
wedding rings for all of North America could solve?"
I then
spoke to this kind gentlemen about the importance of upholding our
historic Bible-Spirit of Prophecy standards, no matter what perplexities
might arise.
To this,
the General Conference officer was adamant that I simply lacked a clear
understanding of the weighty issues at stake in such matters, and if I had
that understanding, I would be able to see why the brethren who lead out
in the work must vote as they do.
"What
was the reason underlying this; why did they vote to approve wedding
rings?" I inquired, expecting him to respond with what I consider
to be the real reason: the need to increase the number of baptisms into
the Church throughout the United States and Canada.
"My
dear brother, we wrestle with the weightiest of problems and we have
dedicated men who are deeply concerned that our Church adhere to the
standards. That which you do not understand is that we have workers who
come here to North America from Europe. Please understand: Over there they
have worn wedding rings all their lives, and when they come here they are
confused. They have always worn wedding rings in Europe, and yet here they
are not permitted to do so. And this has brought great perplexity to our
European workers. This was a serious problem; it had to be dealt with in
the right way, and our leaders here in Washington did so. They voted to
approve the wearing of wedding rings so that these faithful workers would
no longer have to be embarrassed. Brother, if you had been there, you
could have seen how serious this matter was."
At such a
reply, I nearly fell off my chair. A handful of workers from Europe
entering the United States or Canada, and we must lower the standard-no,
eliminate the standard in regard to wedding rings, in order to assuage
the feelings of some denominational immigrant workers from Europe!
"But,
my brother," I protested, "Why were they wearing those wedding
rings in Europe!"
"Oh,
it is the custom there; everybody does it. And they did it also. You must
understand, Brother Ferrell, the feelings of our workers in Europe. They
are used to wearing wedding rings there. It is expected of them. If you
were there, you would understand. And we studied this problem for some
time, and this solution was__."
"But,
brother, the solution is not to lower the standard in America, but to
raise it in Europe. The standards given by Heaven to our people are for
our people everywhere, not just here or there."
"Oh,
but they must wear the rings over there; it is the custom, you know. It is
expected of them."
"But
they did not need to wear those rings in Europe. I personally know a
couple that has lived in Europe for nearly seven years now. On a recent
visit to America, they stopped by here,-and
I asked them about wedding rings in Europe. The husband said, 'Vance, over
there nearly all the Adventists wear wedding rings. Because the workers do
it, the members do it also. But some do not, and they experience no
difficulty in their own communities or when traveling. My wife and I have
never worn wedding rings and we have traveled all over Europe because of
the type of work I do.'
" 'But
have you ever met with any kind of trouble for not wearing them?' I asked
him. 'European workers at the Seminary back in the '50's told me that
they thought it necessary to wear wedding rings on the Continent and in
England in order to give a good appearance. They thought they had to have
them; at least that is what they said.'
"And
he answered, 'No, my wife and l have traveled together all over Europe,
and I have gone alone to France, England, Holland, Germany, Switzerland,
Italy, and the Scandinavian countries. Never did any hotelkeeper
question why we were not wearing rings. And no one else ever questioned it
either. It is NOT necessary to wear rings in Europe!' "
At this,
the General Conference officer seemed somewhat taken aback by my words,
but spoke resignedly, determined that he must take his stand in defense
of the action.
"Brother
Ferrell, this action was necessary for the best interests of the work;
that is all I can say. You just don't understand, and because you don't-you
really shouldn't have written what you did about the matter. I appeal to
you, brother, to realized the gravity of what you are doing."
My reply
may have seemed simplistic to any reader well versed in high-level
committee action, but speaking directly to the point, basing one's
thoughts on obvious cause-effect relationships, is what life is all
about on the practical every-day level that common folk live on.
"Elder
__, in relation to the number of Seventh-day Adventists in the U.S. and
Canada, the number of incoming European workers is few. Few; very few. The
embarrassment of removing their rings over here is the pain of moving up
to a higher Scriptural standard. This is what our baptismal candidates
have undergone for decades. We used to call it 'sacrifice for Jesus'
sake,' but now when it applies to incoming foreign workers, we term it
'embarrassment.'
"But
the ramifications of this action are more far-reaching than I believe
you grasp, our people in North America are experiencing it right now. And
in the long-term it will have a devastating effect on the jewelry and
adornment standards of Adventist churches, small and large, all over
America and Canada.
"We
have received letters from church members that are suffering as a result
of this problem. And pastors have contacted us also. For example, one
pastor that I personally know to be a very faithful Adventist minister
telephoned me. That man is an earnest Bible student, and one who loves the
Spirit of Prophecy writings. There is no television set in his home. He
studies the books and gives powerful Scripture-filled sermons. His members
respect him and follow his lead. Wherever he goes, local churches are
helped by his personal example.
"And
so he calls me on the phone, depressed. 'What's wrong?' I ask.
"'My
conference president told me this past week that my job is on the line.'
'Why?' 'Because I won't baptize three interests till they take their rings
off.' He [the conference president] told me that that "Church
Manual" standard had been recently rewritten by the North American
Division Committee-and
I wasn't to urge it any more.'
"'He
told me to shape up or ship out. He said he can get all the men he wants
from Andrews, and that he's found that some of the new ones coming in seem
more willing to adapt.'
"Now,
Elder __, the brethren in Washington may have the best of intentions, but,
personally, I think that this new action was more concerned with
increasing North American church members than with appeasing some European
workers. But, either way, the result is going to be termination of employment
for some godly pastors, and confusion and disgust by a lot of church
members-the very church members who in the past had been the most faithful
in paying in their tithes and offerings."
A long
silence and then a sigh.
"Brother
Ferrell, I did not know that it was affecting our faithful pastors in this
way." Another pause, and then, "But you brought up the wedding
rings; I didn't."
With that
he turned to another topic, but the tone of his voice seemed more
purposeless now. And soon the conversation ended.
There are
solutions, but they lie in humbling our hearts before God, confessing our
sins, studying His Word as carefully as though we had never read it
before,-and
then resolutely obeying it.
There is no
other workable solution to the problems in our individual lives, our
homes, and our churches.
And there
is no other way to be saved.
-Vance
Ferrell |