Stephen
Terry, Director
The
Most Convincing Proof
Commentary
for the December 1, 2018 Sabbath School Lesson
“Therefore, since we are surrounded by such a great cloud of
witnesses, let us throw off everything that hinders and the sin that so easily
entangles. And let us run with perseverance the race marked out for us,”
Hebrews 12:1, NIV
Throughout history mankind has been blessed by
individuals noted for their morality and self-sacrifice. Most often standing
alone in their vision and on occasion martyred for their temerity in facing
down the powerful and the wealthy they often represent apogees of illumination in
their place and time. Often derided by their contemporaries they remained true
to the Spirit that guided them. As with all men and women, they were flawed and
acutely aware of those flaws. Perhaps it was their humility, produced by that
self-awareness that influenced their desire to be of service to humanity. As
they reached out in service to help the downtrodden, the persecutors who were
oppressing those they sought to help would often turn on them as well. But
rather than flee the persecutors in fear, they gloried in the opportunity to
share in the suffering. Ultimately, when martyred, their deaths testified that
the world was not worthy of their sacrifice. Although they often died alone,
through the centuries, they have become a “great cloud of witnesses.” The names
of many are well known. From Thomas Becket to Martin Luther King, Jr., from
John Wycliffe to Mahatma Gandhi, from Teresa of Avila to Harriet Tubman, they
have at times been officially declared “saints” by the church, but even absent
that recognition, their hearts were bound to one another by a vital desire to
serve the needs of others who sought sources of light for their lives in a
darkened world.
For those uninitiated to a life of service it may be
hard to understand the laying aside of personal gratification for a life of
hardship and opposition. This may especially be the case when that opposition
arises from the institutional church. That organization has a checkered history
when it comes to support or opposition to those uniquely called to ministry. In
the early church, as evidenced by Paul’s letter to the church in Rome,
toleration of diversity seemed to be encouraged.[i] Centuries later, perhaps
as an incentive to spread the influence of the church throughout the known
world, several different monastic orders with divergent viewpoints were allowed
to arise and prosper in Europe under the protective umbrella of the medieval
church. But that same toleration extended to Cistercians, Carmelites,
Benedictines and Franciscans was not extended to those deemed outside the pale
such as Cathars, Jews, Waldenses, Huguenots and those who eventually developed
into the mainline Protestant denominations. At times, toleration seems to be like
a pendulum, swinging favorably toward inclusiveness at one point and then back
to exclusiveness at others. On the one hand, this can make the church appear
somewhat schizophrenic. On the other, it can drive from membership those who
value diversity and toleration and who see exclusiveness as hindering the work
of spreading the gospel to the world.
If unity is the most convincing proof of our divine
calling, the moments of any such unity may very well be limited to the
Pentecost after Christ’s resurrection, for our desires for unity continually
seem to be checked by those who would toss out or aside any who disagree with
their peculiar perspective on church praxis. Sometimes this exclusiveness
spirit raises its head over relatively minor issues such as what kind of music
to have in church, or in some cases whether to allow music at all. Perhaps this
is because some search the inspired writings of Christianity to find things
they can deny to themselves and others, while other readers search those same
writings for what will elevate and liberate the oppressed. While both may see
legitimacy to their viewpoint, others looking on see so much division and
dissension that the message of the gospel becomes enmeshed and confused by all
the other noise surrounding it. They may then turn away from what appears to
them to be only chaos and vindictiveness. While some feel that they are saving
the church by taking such stands, we might ask at what point do we cross the
line from saving the church to become like some of those in the Vietnam War who
“burned every hut to save it?” Maybe a scorched earth policy toward every
spiritual perspective we do not agree with is not the answer.
Jesus seemed to exemplify the spirit of inclusiveness.
When his disciples discovered that someone whom they did not approve of was
casting out demons in Jesus’ name, they wanted to forbid him from doing so.
Jesus told them to leave the person alone, pointing out that it was a
supportive ministry.[ii]
Much of the work of the church today is accomplished through such independent
ministries moving forward based on the vision of one or more individuals who
have not waited for approval from often calcified church administrative
structures. Responding like Jesus’ disciples who, when called, did not go first
to the temple to ask the priests if they should follow Jesus. Instead they left
their careers and immediately followed him, though he had no visible means of
support. Today as then, those who step out in faith to follow such a calling
will find that their lives will never be the same. Much of the vitality of the
church derives from these ministries. As anyone who has served on a church
board knows, this may be because the greater part of the energy and resources
of the institutional church is consumed on program and building maintenance
with little allocated to expansion of the existing work. But the greatest
resource the church has is not programs or buildings. It is the inspired and
empowered people who are working around the world as they always have, with
little support or recognition from the church organization. On some level, it
seems the church tends to want to control everything, even the independent
ministries.
A good example would be the Annual Ingathering Program.
In 1903, Jasper Wayne of Iowa began an independent ministry of distributing
copies of “Signs” magazine and asking for donations for mission work in return.
Initially the church was opposed to his ministry, calling it “begging from the
Gentiles,” but soon with Ellen White’s endorsement of the program, the church
stepped in and began to promote it. The idea of collecting money for foreign
missions caught on and the work grew considerably. However, after a few decades
the focus changed from foreign missions exclusively and money even began to be
funneled into various local financial projects by some conferences. Some
naturally felt that since it was all for the church it was still the Lord’s
work. However, it diluted the focus of Jasper Wayne’s vision and perhaps
contributed to a falling off of interest on the part of the church members.
In the 1960s, at the church I was attending in Texas
while a young adult, it was difficult maintaining interest even with the church
offering prizes for participation. I remember winning ribbons and a pen during
that time for meeting various Ingathering goals. By the time I began pastoring
in Kansas in 1979, I could find little interest in going door-to-door asking
for donations, although the church still enjoyed going door-to-door to sing
Christmas Carols and sang their hearts out, much to the delight of the
community. While some churches still do Ingathering door-to-door, many churches
no longer do it or only do what is referred to as Business Ingathering where
they call on local businesses to solicit donations. Since the denomination has
501c3 status with the Internal Revenue Service, the businesses see the
advantage to having a tax deduction at the end of the year.
Whether it is Jasper Wayne’s Ingathering or some other
independent ministry, they all tend to have one thing in common. Their driving
energy is derived from the vision of the founder. Once that ministry is
controlled by the church, it can be difficult to find another person with similar
vision and drive. This is especially true after the founder has died. Therefore
it is vital to the church to provide a fertile ground for the growth of such
ministries that people with vision and feeling the call of God may arise and
provide light and direction for the church to continue moving toward the
Parousia. If we define our faith too narrowly, and exclude those who do not
meet our definition of faithful, we may find that we are excluding some of the
very wheat as weeds[iii]
that God intended to lead us through the wilderness. If we strive for
uniformity as the disciples sought to do in forbidding the man casting out
demons, we may find that paradoxically the first casualty of that uniformity is
unity, and the second casualty after that may well be the driving force behind
the mission of the church. Perhaps if we allow the Holy Spirit to inspire and
call whom he will instead of attempting to forbid those we do not approve of.
We will be astonished at how quickly sought after unity can be achieved and how
soon the mission of the church will come to completion.
