Denominational Tectonics: A Rejoinder

Luke Copeland recently published an article titled Denominational Tectonics in which he points out several fault lines or rifts in our network. I appreciate Luke’s observational abilities, even if I disagree wholeheartedly with his conclusions. Luke is a talented writer who expresses passion, humor, and wit that can sometimes cause a reader not to know when he is serious, playful, self-deprecating, or arrogant. This is a challenge I sympathize with, as I can often have the same flaws in my writing.

When Luke says “we” in his article, I wonder if I’m included in that pronoun. Is he speaking for me, to me, or about me? I’m unsure. Due to our shared friendship and close bond forged amid our mildly popular Facebook Live Show, Bible and Banter, I think it essential to share my personal opinions about his observations along with a critique. Further, I find it necessary to make one crucial desire that I hope you share as well; as a member of this younger generation, everyone needs to recognize that regardless of who caused the problems within our denomination, it is imperative that collectively, each person owns the issues and work together for a brighter future where Christ is glorified through our shared mission of making disciples of all nations.

Rift 1: Young(er) vs. Old(er)

When this observation is made, it is necessary to point out that in most professions, 65+ folks are retired or very close, and those between 30-50 are solidly moving up the corporate ladder. As one example, my sister, who is 42, is a C-level executive, a close friend of the same age is the VP of a bank, and my sister-in-law is a biology researcher. All three are highly sought after in their profession, and no one views them skeptically as “young guns.”

Luke failed to point out that in two of the panels that I can speak to, “Finding Leaders” and “Church Planting,” those discussions were led by individuals with three Doctor of Ministry Degrees and six Masters. One of the presenters has the most successful church plant in the last 20+ years by Advent Christians, and another is highly sought after in the world of Youth and Family Ministries across denominational lines.

Presenters were not chosen based on age to lecture to the older generation. These individuals were selected according to expertise and position. Is there something to learn about finding leaders from the older generation? Absolutely! Room was given for comments, ideas, and questions in that presentation. I drew much from my experience in discipling others that I learned from my eight years as an Army leader. Valuable lessons and opportunities were shared.

As I see it, the first rift primarily makes itself known through our struggles to find identity and chart a course that remains inclusive, Adventist, and doctrinally sound. As I mentioned above, we undoubtedly have issues preventing us from being as fruitful as possible. We can only achieve greater fruit with God’s blessing and by cooperating.

Rift 2: Complementarian vs. Egalitarian

Recent personal conversation with those of opposing views has caused me to explore how we can best work together while remaining functionally agnostic on whether or not women should be ordained for pastoral ministry. We can do it, but I need some help getting there. My thought has been to align conferences theologically so that we aren’t asking people to ordain those they believe are not biblically qualified and provide a clear path for women who seek ordination. At least two conferences are unlikely to ordain women in New England (ERA). As a complementarian, I could not in good conscience ordain a woman for pastoral ministry. However, I appreciate our heritage enough and understand our agnosticism on the issue. If this remains our denominational position, we should provide a more straightforward path for women seeking ordination.

Rift 3: Calvinist vs. Arminian

I haven’t seen this happen except for instances where pastors and congregations aren’t aligned. So I can’t speak much to this.

Rift 4: Creedal vs. Biblicist

I could be wrong, but I didn’t see this come up at Triennial. I might’ve been too busy brushing up on Robert’s Rule of Order. I primarily think that was dealt with in 2017 when we adopted the NAE Statement of Faith. I’m open to correction, but as Advent Christians, we agree and believe the DoP and SoF. It could be fruitful to adopt the Apostles, Nicene, Athanasian Creed, and the Chalcedonian Definition. But a man can dream.

Rift 5: Independent vs. Accountable

The term “covenantal” seems more appropriate than “accountable.” Although I appreciate the history of local church autonomy, I find a greater sense of responsibility from one church to another in the New Testament. Imagine the scathing letter Paul might write to a church that told him to buzz off. Could he write something about excommunicating them from the fellowship of all other believers and churches? I don’t think that’s a stretch. I have more questions than answers. How does this shake out? I’m unsure. However, I trust that it is something we can sort out together. I write as a student of ecclesiology, not an expert. 

As a denomination or network of churches, we must ask what binds us together. I pray it is Christ and the work of the Spirit. If so, we’ve entered into a New Covenant sealed with the blood of Christ, a seal that is not easily broken. Therefore, let us seek greater unity by covenanting together, which requires greater responsibility for one another. Assist one another in the mission that God has set before us.

Rift 6: Adventist vs. Conditionalist

I am a Conditionalist and an Adventist. Some wish to move conditionalism to the fore of our mission. I disagree. However, the imminent return of Christ is imminent. Adventism should drive missions where we put every resource on the table to seek the lost with the Gospel of Christ. This issue strikes at the heart of our identity. What brought such a hodgepodge mixing of early Adventists together? It was Adventism, not conditionalism. William Miller was a Reformed Baptist who rejected conditionalism, but his message of Christ’s imminent return brought us together. Let us retrieve this theological heritage and be spurred on in our fervor for missions.

Are These Really Fault Lines?

The rifts that Luke points out certainly exist, even if we might disagree on what to call them. As rift indicates a problem, I’m not sure that’s Luke’s intent. One author, Rev. Steve Brown, President Emeritus of BICS, has stated that we are theologically fragmented. In many areas, I agree. However, not all disagreement is fragmentation or a rift. The closer the doctrinal dispute gets to the heart of the Gospel, the closer it becomes to a problem in which we can no longer “agree to disagree.” As Tom Loghry points out in his recent article, “Some things we can’t compromise (the Trinity).”

Can our various perspectives aid us in our ministry to reach the lost with the Gospel? I think so. Can an egalitarian sister or brother point out blind spots in my thinking? Absolutely! Will a non-Trinitarian bring forward a better Christology? No way. I’m not saying I’ll compromise on my doctrinal convictions, and I’m not asking you to, but I am saying we can learn from one another if we are willing to engage charitably yet critically.

Poor Tact With Berkshire and Aurora

Sometimes, we say things for a laugh while not realizing who it might hurt. Luke, in an attempt at levity, used illustrations for the state of Berkshire Christian and Aurora University that likely hurt people closely associated with those institutions. Although it is correct that Associate Members, Berkshire Christian and Aurora University are no longer a Bible College or Christian University, respectively, referring to them as “zombified corpse” and “pregnant man” is unhelpful to the conversation.

Berkshire Christian has given much to our denomination and me personally. Having received a scholarship to Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary and my mentor as their President, I’m grateful for their service in the name of our Lord. Although the partnership with MTI (of which I’m employed) no longer exists, I pray for a renewed vision toward Kingdom work within that organization. Do I share his eye-rolling when I hear “Back at Berkshire?” Yes, but I understand that we all like to reminisce. How many Army stories have I told from the pulpit that someone has rolled their eyes? Too many! To Luke’s more significant point, we do need to live in the present while plotting forward and learning from the past, a commitment that I know President Dr. Glenn Rice shares.

From the floors at Triennial, I pointed out the problem that Aurora University continues to have Associate Membership status, which entitles them to two delegates while no longer being a Christian institution, never mind an Advent Christian one. This secular University has twice as many potential delegates as most Advent Christian churches. Make it make sense, please, because I’m at a loss for how this can pass muster. That isn’t a critique of alumi or the history of AU, nor the present ministry of my good friend, Dr. Mark Woolfington as Campus Chaplain. His ministry as a Chaplain is incredibly important and I’m grateful for his work. I appreciate Luke’s critique while not agreeing with his methods.

“We” Don’t Want To Fight!

One of my favorite shows is The Ultimate Fighter. My two children and I train in Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu; my son is an absolute assassin. Fighting is one of the oldest sports and a violent practice exercised in combat. After serving in the United States Army for eight years with two combat deployments, I’m tired of fighting. The old saying is the last one who wants a war is a warrior. I’m willing to fight over things I think are worth fighting over. However, in those things that pertain to Christ’s bride, I’d rather we hash things out with charity and passion. A lack of charity was expressed at Triennial when two opposing voices on the “Statement on Human Sexuality” maligned complimentarians. Charity was extended when Rev. Nathaniel Bickford graciously sought a resolution that all could agree to. Instead of angrily firing back, Nathaniel sought compromise on an important issue with those he disagreed with.

Conclusion

To be fully transparent, I read Luke’s article before publishing. There were parts I complimented and concerns I shared, but I did not advise him not to publish the article or my concerns about tone. I should have shared those concerns, and I’ve privately apologized to him. Luke is an excellent author who is finding his voice and place like most of us. He’s an important voice, just like you are. Advent Christian Voices is a place for Advent Christians to publish just about any article they’d like. 

Many have used this platform to express ideas, share concerns, and write about topics that interest them. I’m proud to be part of such a platform. We haven’t had a public place to express ourselves until this point. These conversations may irk many, but to Luke’s point, let’s discuss it.