SDAs & Culture

[Gregory Matthews]

See:

https://spectrummagazine.org/views/2018/why-do-general-conference-and-world-church-leaders-support-hierarchy

 

 

[pierrepaul]

The issues of hierarchy and authority plague all human organizations. Below is the response I posted to the Spectrum site.

Fascinating topic. The reality though is that no large human organization can maintain itself without hierarchy and authority- be it a state, political party, corporation, association or church. Every single ecclesiastical group that broke away from a hierarchical group, ended up (a) splintering further at the first sign of dissent; (b) withering and dying; © staying isolated in a tiny group, or (d) establishing its own hierarchy.

SdAism when through all of this. After 1844 the Advent movement splintered in many directions. A few splinters remained small; others died. The splinter that became the SdA church slowly established a hierarchy, a written statement of beliefs, an authority competent to expel troublesome dissidents, and today, the modern 21st century General Conference. Certain members want a more decentralized structure while others clamour for a King - but even the decentralizers are hierarchical, just on a smaller scale. Few of the Union administrators in North America, Europe or Australia would countenance congregationalism. They also stand for heirarchy, only they see the union or conference as the pinnacle of the hierarchy, and the GC as a loose association of unions. The present fight is about the clergy, by the clergy and for the clergy - with both sides financed by the laity.

As for the Holy Spirit leading; either the Spirit conveys competing incompatible messages to different delegates, or their isn’t a true leading of the Spirit, only power politics and vote counting. Were the Spirit to be leading we would have consensus, not vote counting.