On the evening of June 9, 2022, sometime after 9 o’clock in the evening (Central U.S. time), the business portion of the 61st session of the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists drew to a close. It is time to reflect and to take stock.
Because of the COVID pandemic, the session was abbreviated to four business days. The various committees were thus constrained to finish their work in less time than is usually allocated. But in the end, for those with a passion for Scripture, the writings of the Spirit of Prophecy, the Fundamental Beliefs of the church, and a faithfulness which eschews extremism while keeping its focus on the written counsel of God (Isa. 8:20; Acts 17:11), notable victories were achieved even as the struggle against compromise and apostasy continues.
What follows, in the present writer’s view, are the most significant takeaways from the deliberations and decisions of the 2022 General Conference session:
1. The re-election of the General Conference president. The current presidential incumbent has truly been the most outspoken champion of our distinctive faith and its Bible/Spirit of Prophecy imperatives in the modern history of the Seventh-day Adventist Church. His re-election by 74 percent on the session floor was a persuasive and powerful mandate for the continuance and intensifying of the revival-and-reformation agenda he has pursued since his first election in 2010. After having already served two terms and a portion of a third (due to the pandemic and the session’s postponement), such a margin clearly indicates deep and widespread trust throughout the denomination in the president’s leadership. This likely augurs well for the years to come.
2. Positive personnel changes. As the current president of the United States has learned the hard way, significant legislative goals are often hampered by a lack of support in the bodies responsible for agreeing to such changes. When one surveys the list of new leaders chosen for the General Conference secretariat, the list of general vice-presidents, as well as the new departmental directors, there is definitely cause for encouragement so far as likely support for increased theological clarity and corrective discipline are concerned.
Just as the U.S. Congress must agree to legislative initiatives proposed by the U.S. president, the same is true for the General Conference executive committee and the initiatives of the General Conference president. Looking at the new list of officials chosen in St. Louis, there seems cause for guarded optimism.
3. Taking a stand against anti-vax extremism. A major flash point of conflict on the session floor took place Monday morning, when a lay delegate proposed that the continuing controversy over COVID vaccine mandates be placed on the session agenda. The president of the General Conference and his fellow officers made it clear that the GC session was neither the time nor the place for discussing that issue.
Opposition to the COVID vaccines has been driven—not by Scripture, the writings of the Spirit of Prophecy, or scientific fact—but by baseless conspiracy theories, culture-war polarization, and the knee-jerk hatred in much of America just now against government mandates of any kind. The fact that the world leaders of the Seventh-day Adventist Church have taken a publicly negative stand against such extremism is a most heartening development. Ellen White has pointedly warned the church against fanaticism and false tests [##1|Ellen G. White, Selected Messages, vol. 2, pp. 14-15.##], and it is imperative for God’s people to reserve their spiritual energies for the choices and battles defined and authorized by the inspired text (Isa. 8:20; Acts 17:11), and not to permit cultural and secular political priorities to distract their focus.
4. Unauthorized speakers. One item of interest on the session agenda was the issue of unauthorized speakers being invited to the pulpits and other public platforms of the church. While the newly voted statement retained the earlier prohibition against former members and those under discipline speaking in our churches, the addition of the phrase “conference guidelines” relative to such invitations has raised some concerns.
The St. Louis meeting rightly reaffirmed the fact that only the General Conference in session has the right to define tests of church fellowship. But a problem that has lately drawn attention in certain places is the misguided attempt by leaders in certain local territories and institutions to write their own doctrinal standards regarding who can and cannot be invited to speak. The new phrase “conference guidelines” is not clear as to which conference entities are in focus. Is this the local Conference, the Union Conference, or the General Conference that is being described?
Since only the General Conference has the right to decide what the church does and does not believe relative to faith and practice, one must hope and pray that the new language in the Church Manual on this subject will not suffer abuse at the hands of those at other levels of church authority who have wrongly presumed to impose on others doctrinal biases not endorsed by the worldwide Adventist body.
5. The continuing gender controversy. Women’s ordination may not have been on the official agenda in St. Louis, but it was definitely on the minds of many of the delegates present. Repeatedly this issue was voiced by certain of those on the floor, though only—at least from my observation—by delegates representing Western territories (North America, Europe, Australia, New Zealand), which comprise barely 10 percent of the world church membership.
One addition to the Church Manual which provoked serious discussion was the statement that once elders are elected by the local body, this election authorizes their ordination. Some have assumed that this decision automatically authorizes the ordination of women as local elders. But the fact remains that the 1984 Annual Council decision permitting such local decisions does so within specific limits, such as approval by local Conference authorities and the existence of a “clear consensus” in the church in favor of women serving in this position [2]. As this Annual Council policy is still operative within the church, the election of local elders remains subject to these guidelines, just as it remains subject to other official church guidelines regarding who can and cannot serve in church office.
But without question, the issue of women serving as local elders must in time—sooner rather than later—be brought to the worldwide Adventist body for final adjudication, and on strict Bible/Spirit of Prophecy grounds as distinct from administrative or cultural ones. The debate on the floor in St. Louis relative to any number of issues offers clear evidence as to the necessity of settling this issue once and for all.
6. Removal “for cause” of GC executive committee members. A major point of discussion on the session’s third day was a proposed clause in the General Conference constitution and bylaws authorizing the removal of GC executive committee members who refuse to comply with properly constituted church authority and the voted policies of the church.
The liberals fought back vigorously, recognizing that such a measure could easily jeopardize the position on the GC executive committee of those Union presidents whose territories have defiantly and illegally chosen to ordain women to the gospel ministry despite the thrice-voted prohibition of the General Conference in session. I and others were concerned when this particular clause was separated from a subsequent one in the discussion and voting, the latter clause involving removal from the executive committee in the wake of conviction for a crime under secular law.
But while persons opposed to the disciplinary clause dominated the microphones, they apparently spoke for only a very few. When the vote was taken, 82 percent of the delegates (1,319 to 289) voted to approve this disciplinary measure.
7. Annual Council meetings and local Conference presidents. Another positive development was the removal from the bylaws of a clause permitting local Conference presidents to speak during Annual Council deliberations, though this clause forbade them to vote at such meetings. Since the Annual Council usually meets in North America, this clause meant that North American Conference presidents were often found at the microphones during the Council’s meetings, many of them rising in opposition to recent General Conference efforts to impose compliance relative to the church’s ordination policies.
The removal of this clause from the bylaws will now mean these local presidents will not have the voice at Annual Council that they once had.
8. Spirit of Prophecy coordinators in local churches. Wednesday afternoon witnessed the vote regarding the creation of the office of Spirit of Prophecy coordinator in local churches. This proposal evoked huge protest from the liberal faction, many of whom blamed others in the church for “idolizing” Ellen White and allegedly placing her writings above the Bible. Traffic on liberal Adventist Internet and social media sites in recent weeks has raised bitter opposition to the creation of this office, many fearing it will encourage what some call a “Spirit of Prophecy police” in the denomination.
Others wondered why the position of Bible coordinator wasn’t also being created. Some seem not to realize that while many more today are attacking Biblical authority in the church than in previous times, the Spirit of Prophecy writings have more often been singled out for hostility and revilement due to their incisive and often unwelcome clarity in matters of theology and personal behavior. Moreover, the present unavailability of Ellen White’s writings in many of the world Divisions has also been a problem, an issue that was noted by an African delegate during the debate.
One had reason to be grateful that Dr. Artur Stele, the GC vice-president who chaired the session that afternoon, noted correctly during the debate that despite the claim of certain ones that focusing on the writings of Ellen White leads to a neglect of the Bible, that in fact evidence shows that those who regularly read and study Ellen White’s writings are more avid Bible students than those who neglect the writings of Ellen White. A similar observation was made by another General Conference delegate during the discussion.
In the end, when the vote was taken, 66 percent voted in favor of this new church office. The lower level of approval for this proposal than others may have had more to do with some perhaps wondering why the Bible wasn’t also named in this regard, and also due to the scarcity of the Spirit of Prophecy writings in certain territories, than because of resentment on the part of these delegates toward Ellen White’s influence in the church. One has a hard time believing that 34 percent of Adventists worldwide hold a negative view of Ellen White’s prophetic authority.
9. A notable failure in “last day of the session” maneuvers. Many have noted at former GC sessions how those of a liberal theological bent have at times attempted controversial maneuvers on the last day of the session, a day when many delegates for various reasons are not found on the session floor.
On Thursday, the last day of business in St. Louis, it appeared that a significant number of delegates were not on the floor during the afternoon. It was then that the resolutions of confidence in the Bible and the writings of Ellen White, respectively, were brought up for discussion and voting.
Criticism from liberals arose first with the resolution on the Bible, some objecting to the insistence on a six-literal-day creation. A sufficient number of quibbles over the resolution’s language caused it to be referred back to the GC administration, by a vote of 650 to 449.
Soon thereafter the statement of confidence in Ellen White’s writings was brought up, and it seems the liberals may have smelled blood in the water on account of the statement on the Bible being referred back. To abbreviate the narrative a bit, the Ellen White resolution was temporarily tabled by one of the closest votes at the session: 642 to 619. Consternation may well have followed, as many delegates began returning to the floor in the following minutes.
Soon the resolution on the Bible was brought back to the floor, and the refer-back motion reversed. In the end, with strong support from prominent delegates (e.g. Mark Finley), the Bible resolution passed as originally worded: 1,234 to 77.
Shortly thereafter the resolution on Ellen White was taken off the table, and subsequently approved: 1,189 to 212.
In the future it might be advisable for such weighty resolutions as those debated on Thursday to not be left for the last day. We can praise God that the statements on the Bible and Ellen White were in the end approved decisively. But it isn’t wise to leave such statements or other consequential issues for the session’s final moments, when people are often tired and wanting to close business.
10. Microphone traffic and actual votes. At the 1960 Democratic National Convention, where John Kennedy won the presidential nomination, the name of Adlai Stevenson (the party’s presidential nominee for the previous two election cycles) was also placed in nomination. The Stevenson delegates responded with a wild demonstration that enveloped the convention hall, as Stevenson supporters erupted in cheers from both floor and galleries. Joseph Kennedy, watching the demonstration, was nervous. John Kennedy, sitting at his side, reassured him: “Don’t worry, Dad. Stevenson has everything but delegates” [##3|Robert Dallek, An Unfinished Life: John F. Kennedy, 1917-1963 (Boston: Little, Brown and Co, 2003), p. 266.##]. And so it proved.
This pattern was evident in St. Louis, as it has been evident at some recent Annual Council deliberations. Those of a liberal theological bias—nearly all, as noted earlier, from North America, Europe, Australia, and New Zealand—have tended to dominate the conversation in numbers vastly out of proportion to their strength in the global church. But in the end, as with the supporters of Adlai Stevenson at the Los Angeles convention, those with the loudest voices have fallen woefully short when the votes have been counted.
Church members need to remember this when they witness these discussions. Microphone traffic doesn’t always equal voting numbers. We can praise the Lord this was especially true at the 2022 General Conference session.
11. The role of technology. One major change at this year’s GC session involved post-pandemic technology, which enabled delegates unable to travel in person to St. Louis to participate by voice and vote through Zoom. As many as 600 delegates, from the present writer’s understanding, were able to take part in the St. Louis deliberations through this means.
This will undoubtedly facilitate greater participation at such gatherings in the future, though technology is no substitute for fellowship and the interaction which only in-person togetherness can provide. But we can be grateful that Zoom and similar vehicles can enable greater involvement in the church’s governing procedures than would otherwise be possible.
Another technological advancement over previous GC sessions was the success of electronic voting, which notably failed at the 2015 session in San Antonio. Few if any glitches in the voting system appeared in St. Louis, nor did anyone (to my knowledge) allege inaccuracy or vote-tampering. This too is a positive development.
12. God is still guiding His church. In all, the St. Louis meetings demonstrated God’s continuing superintendence over the great Advent movement. Not every decision which might have been made was made, and greater clarity remains essential relative to a number of key issues. But the following divine assurance, through God’s modern prophet, should resonate more than ever in the hearts of the striving Adventist faithful:
Not one cloud has fallen upon the church that God has not prepared for; not one opposing force has risen to counterwork the work of God but He has foreseen. All has taken place as He has predicted through His prophets [##4|White, Selected Messages, vol. 2, p. 108.##].
REFERENCES
1. Ellen G. White, Selected Messages, vol. 2, pp. 14-15.
2. Stephen Bohr, “Reflections on San Antonio,” Secrets Unsealed Ministry Update, Third Quarter 2015, p. 10. www.secretsunsealed.org
3. Robert Dallek, An Unfinished Life: John F. Kennedy, 1917-1963 (Boston: Little, Brown and Co, 2003), p. 266.
4. White, Selected Messages, vol. 2, p. 108.
Pastor Kevin Paulson holds a Bachelor’s degree in theology from Pacific Union College, a Master of Arts in systematic theology from Loma Linda University, and a Master of Divinity from the SDA Theological Seminary at Andrews University. He served the Greater New York Conference of Seventh-day Adventists for ten years as a Bible instructor, evangelist, and local pastor. He writes regularly for Liberty magazine and does script writing for various evangelistic ministries within the denomination. He continues to hold evangelistic and revival meetings throughout the North American Division and beyond, and is a sought-after seminar speaker relative to current issues in the Seventh-day Adventist Church. He presently resides in Berrien Springs, Michigan