Advent Christian Identity for the 21st Century
Among the Advent Christian faithful, there has been a palpable sense that we are in the midst of an identity crisis as a denomination. It begins with the common report that the majority of people who fill our pews do not identify as Advent Christians. Of the few who do embrace that identity, many are progressively joining the ranks of the elderly, leaving mostly ministers as the sole standard-bearers of Advent Christendom. Beyond this sense of diminished loyalties, it is also suggested that Advent Christian distinctives are anemic and thus insufficient for grounding a sense of unique identity. Taken up together, a question is formed beneath the surface of conversation, a query that some desire to state forthrightly, an existential examination that many more cannot bear to face: “Should the Advent Christian denomination continue to exist?”
Conclusively answering that question relies upon ascertaining the true facts of the matter. If Advent Christians are in fact going the way of the Dodo bird and if our distinctives are overburdened in the task of providing adequate denominational unity and identity, then it would indeed seem the denomination should be dismantled, to be either reconstituted or laid to rest. If this is not in the fact case, despite appearances, then some persuasive explanation is in order. In the space that follows, I hope to persuade you that our situation is not what it seems.
Up front, I will admit our current situation is not rosy. However, I hope by the end you might see things in a different light and that clarity would emerge as to what must be done. Before we can consider whether Advent Christians are in fact dwindling within our congregations, we will need to trace out the markers of Advent Christian identity. Accordingly, the concern that the Advent Christian distinctives are anemic will be considered first.
The Makings of an Advent Christian
What makes a person an Advent Christian? A natural first suggestion would be membership in an Advent Christian church. However, mere membership in an Advent Christian church seems to be an insufficient criterion. This sense is drawn from the fact that Advent Christian churches have traditionally welcomed those who disagree with the distinctives outlined in the Declaration of Principles (henceforth DOP) into membership. If a person does not (mostly) agree with the DOP, how could they be considered truly Advent Christian?
By this account, subscription to the DOP would appear to be the measure of whether a person is an Advent Christian. The tradition of welcoming outsiders into membership has had the interesting effects of insulating and fossilizing the DOP. It has insulated the DOP insofar as it has removed much of the motivation for making amendments – if someone’s beliefs do not align with the DOP they have no need to advocate for its reform, as they have already been accepted. It has fossilized the DOP insomuch as any efforts to change it are typically met with accusations that advocates of such change are trying to purge the denomination of their theological opposites. The result is that the DOP we have today is basically the same (controversy over the Bible and the pacifist principle duly noted) as that which was put together in 1900. The significance grows when one notices the considerable differences between the 1881 DOP and 1900 DOP (see here, courtesy of Bob Mayer’s book Adventism Confronts Modernity). Is it truly the case that those 19 years produced differences warranting a rewrite of the DOP, while the past 120 years have produced none? Something appears to be amiss.
For this reason, I am reluctant to make the DOP, as it currently stands, the final measure of Advent Christian identity. It is an undoubtedly true report of early 20th century Advent Christian identity, but our welcoming posture, which is not accounted for in the DOP, has muddied the reliability of its report into the present. Given these circumstances, I would like to instead put forward a profile of Advent Christian identity, featuring a list of attributes. This list is informed by my acquaintance with the historic stances of Advent Christians and my present interactions with Advent Christian ministers. I offer no substantiation at this point, though I hope each marker/attribute will be obvious enough to be compelling.
Markers of Advent Christian Identity
1. The Statement of Faith (Evangelical)
Advent Christians are essentially evangelical, as is reflected formally in the Triennial delegate body’s recent adoption of the NAE statement of faith as the denomination’s own.
2. Believer-Baptism
While it is not unusual for an Advent Christian church to recognize a person’s infant baptism as legitimate, infant baptism is neither recommended nor practiced in Advent Christian churches. Instead, baptism is properly understood as the visible expression of a person’s conscious confession of faith.
3. Remembrance Communion
While Advent Christians might admit that Christ is spiritually present at the Lord’s Supper, communion is most typically celebrated as a meal of remembrance.
4. The Rule of Scripture
To whatever degree tradition might be appreciated as an aid in guiding the teaching of the Church, Advent Christians believe that all teaching must answer to the rule of Scripture. Nevertheless, Scripture is not a blank check for any interpretation; every interpretation must be judged by the authorial and contextual intent of the text.
5. The Rule of Charity
Advent Christians adhere to the rule of charity in the life of the local church according to the command of Christ as found in John 17. Where differences exist on secondary matters of the faith, charity is shown by extending and maintaining fellowship with such persons. When differences emerge on essential matters of the faith (see SOF), charity is shown by either not welcoming such persons into fellowship or prudentially exercising discipline towards persons who are already members. In the life of the denomination, while substantial partnership cannot always be expected between churches who differ on secondary matters, grace and charity are always to be expected. When churches abandon essential matters of the faith, discipline should be prudentially exercised toward such churches in the spirit of charity.
6. Adventism
In keeping with the denominational name, Advent Christians understand the hope of the Christian faith to be bound up in Christ’s return, the resurrection of the dead, and the establishment of New Heavens and a New Earth. While the Christian may rest secure in the knowledge of God’s sustaining care of his/her person in the intermediate state (that time between one’s death and one’s resurrection), this disembodied state is not most desirable and falls short of the Biblical vision of redemption. This vision is only met in Christ’s return – not bodily death. Accordingly, the Advent Christian presentation of the Gospel is characterized by an explicit expression of hopeful anticipation for Christ’s return in which his work of redemption will be conclusively consummated.
7. Christian Materialism
Naturally tying in with both Adventism and Conditionalism, Advent Christians embrace Christian Materialism. Christian Materialism is the belief that God considers His material creation to be good, though broken, and that He intends to bring newness of life to material existence by establishing New Heavens and a New Earth. Accordingly, human beings should love their physical being and affirm all that is naturally good to it (e.g. eating, drinking, marital sex) rather than disdaining it as such in the pursuit of spiritual goods (e.g. asceticism). Moreover, many Advent Christians believe that human beings only enjoy a conscious existence when they are alive in the body, such that death ushers in an unconscious state of existence. This underscores the goodness of the material existence of human beings, as it indicates that God has always intended for human beings to exist as physical creatures, an intention which will be perfectly realized on the day of resurrection.
8. Conditionalism
Advent Christians gained their denominational form because of their belief in Conditionalism. Conditionalism is the belief that immortality is not proper to human nature and is instead contingent upon being in right relationship with God. Because of sin, human beings can only gain eternal life by being joined to Jesus Christ, in and through whom our relationship with God is restored. The most basic implication of this belief is that those who remain separated from God will not obtain immortality, but will instead be destroyed on the day of judgment and will no longer exist. One could believe in the destruction of the wicked without necessarily being a conditionalist, but this is not typical among Advent Christians.
The Anatomical Conception of Identity
Considered individually, no one of these markers is held exclusively by Advent Christians. Even conditionalism, the distinctive belief that led to the formation of our denomination, is not necessarily unique, as conditionalists have also found welcome in the Anglican Church. Accordingly, there would appear to be nothing unique about Advent Christians. Even if it were granted that Advent Christians were unique solely on the basis of conditionalist belief, this would hardly provide sufficient ground for denominational identity and unity. If every other mark listed above was laid aside and all that remained was conditionalism, we could only expect the range of differences and the sort of unity Roman Catholics and Southern Baptists enjoy by their common belief in the Trinity (in other words, not much).
Those who point out that conditionalist belief is an insufficient basis for denominational identity and unity are absolutely correct. In fact, any one of the markers listed above are individually insufficient. However, if held together, I do believe they provide a sufficient basis for Advent Christian identity and unity, and that they justify the unique existence of our denomination. In considering this, I have been drawn to the analogy of human anatomy. Examined individually, each part of the human body is very common. Even the nose, with all its various shapes, falls into common groupings of shape. However, a unique identity emerges when all these various common parts are assembled in unique ways: that nose with those eyes; those ears with that forehead; that chin with that neck. Many common parts come together to form a unique person, unlike any other.
We see a similar reality at play with our denomination. While some of our beliefs might be common, we should not downplay the reality that together they form a very unique combination. Many denominations exclusively practice believer-baptism, but how many also welcome conditionalist belief? The Anglicans would welcome the latter but not the former. Many denominations would subscribe to the rule of Scripture, but how many would also exercise the rule of Charity in tolerating orthodox differences in Christian fellowship? Conversely, how many denominations would submit the rule of Charity to the rule of Scripture in determining how love should be exercised towards those who defy the ethical norms and essential teachings of Scripture? The possible combinations are exponential! Held together, these common beliefs form a unique identity, an Advent Christian identity.
Advent Christian Essentials
This returns us to our original consideration of the current number of Advent Christians. I have no statistical data, so I can only invite you to consider your own perception. Based on the markers I outlined above, how many of the people in our congregations would agree with every single one of them? If they would have disagreements, how many and what would they disagree with?
Taking a stab at it myself, I suspect that Christian Materialism (specifically the sleep of the dead) and Conditionalism would be where most disagreement would be found. While many might be unable to articulate Adventism and may be apt to reduce salvation to “going to heaven when you die,” I seriously doubt that with further explanation any significant number would literally disagree with the conviction that our hope is found in Christ’s return. These points of belief aside, I think the following would enjoy broad approval: the Statement of Faith, Believer-Baptism, Remembrance Communion, the Rule of Scripture, and the Rule of Charity.
Can one be counted an Advent Christian on these broadly embraced beliefs alone? I do not think so. These make up the necessary elements of Advent Christian identity, but alone they are insufficient. Without Adventism, it would simply be incomprehensible that any person could seriously call herself an Advent Christian. William Sheldon, an early Advent Christian, indicates the central importance of Adventism in 1868:
What is Adventism? It is simply the theory of the second advent of Christ, as the "hub" in the "wheel" of Bible theology, together with its spokes, fellies and tire- all other truths depending on this. Blot out the second coming of Christ, and the resurrection is obliterated, the judgment day is repudiated, and the restitution is set aside, for not until Christ comes are the dead to be raised, or is the judgment to arrive, or the restitution to dawn. (William Sheldon, “Adventism: What is It?” p. 2)
This belief in Adventism has not been as hotly disputed as our belief in Conditionalism. With so much ink spilled in defending Conditionalism, it is no surprise we might think them to be on equal footing. Historically, this may be the case, but theologically, this is simply not the case. Conditionalism has always been the servant of Adventism, buttressing the importance of Christ’s return and defining the conditions of the anticipated reward and punishment. However, of the two, Adventism proper has always been the more essential belief.
Can a person be identified as an Advent Christian without being a Conditionalist? I would say, “Yes, but an impoverished one.” Conditionalism should always characterize the Adventism of Advent Christians, for the simple reason that it is biblically true. The most true account of the nature of Man and the reward and punishment found in Christ’s return is the Conditionalist telling. If most members of Advent Christian churches are not conditionalists, Advent Christian pastors and leaders should not accommodate such persuasions; they should instead stand firm and offer gentle guidance to the truth. Such guidance should be offered in the Berean spirit and in keeping with the Rule of Charity – no one should be barred from membership for failing to embrace Conditionalism, a secondary matter of the faith. Fellowship should only be closed to those who deny the primary orthodox beliefs represented in the Statement of Faith, who defy the Rule of Scripture by appealing to other authorities as final, or who defy the Rule of Charity through needless division.
This of course opens the door to asking questions about the other secondary doctrines: believer-baptism; remembrance communion; Christian materialism. Could one part ways on all those matters as well and still be considered an Advent Christian? I think we must say no. Among those three in addition to conditionalism, I would say at least two of the four must be embraced for a person to be within the frame of Advent Christian identity. Anything less than that muddles any meaningful sense of a unique denominational identity and reintroduces our existential crisis. Positively, by the measures above, most of the people in our congregations would be appropriately identified as Advent Christians.
A Confession & Conclusion
Obviously, I wish that every Advent Christian would embrace all of our distinctive beliefs. I do suspect my Advent Christian forebearers, as well as a number of my peers, might disagree with my estimation of what is minimally required for Advent Christian identity. There are historical grounds for disputing my account of the secondary importance of Conditionalism for Advent Christian identity. Moreover, my “Rule of Charity” unquestionably strikes a different note than mere “Christian character as the only test of fellowship.” I come clean here and confess that I am ready to dispute our historical priorities and to renovate the foundations of some of our longstanding beliefs. I believe there are objective, Bible-based, reasons to do this, but I believe there are also good subjective reasons to do so. If my profile of an Advent Christian were embraced, many more Advent Christians would be counted among us, however unaware of their own identity they might be. This suggests, as was aforementioned, that our Declaration of Principles, largely written in 1900, is well overdue for a rewrite. Taking a verse completely out of context, I ask, “Why do (we) seek the living among the dead?” Those who are actually alive in the 21st century should have the opportunity to define Advent Christian belief for this century and not be held captive by the turn of the 20th century.
Held together, our beliefs present a unique combination not found elsewhere, warranting our distinct denominational existence. If we are experiencing a crisis of identity, it is because we have been constrained by past formulations of belief which bar us from articulating our beliefs in fresh ways that truly align with our convictions. Absent this opportunity, neither our pastors nor our congregations have any reason to passionately identify as Advent Christians. Whether or not you agree with the entirety of the particulars above, I hope you will at least agree that it is imperative that we renew Advent Christian identity for the 21st century.