Things are different now

[Asia Joe]

Article from Spectrum magazine

Quote

Proposed amendments to the session agenda exposed theological and geopolitical fault lines between delegates from Western countries and those from the Global South.

The first major motion to amend came from Yuliyan Filipov from the Ohio Conference in the North American Division. Filipov moved to include discussion and review of the GC’s 2015 immunization statement, specifically the phrase “peer-reviewed scientific literature.” Filipov and others argued that this language placed science on par with sacred authority, which they said compromised the denomination’s doctrinal foundation. His motion received immediate pushback and drew delegates into a wider conversation over the authority of General Conference-issued statements not voted in Session.

Quote

Outside the hall, as delegates streamed into the lobby after the lengthy proceedings, five Spectrum reporters gathered reactions that revealed not just ideological differences, but diverging priorities shaped by geography and missional emphases.

A delegate from the East-Central Africa Division shook his head and then remarked bluntly, “This is what the Western church has to offer?” The statement was laced with frustration over what he perceived as theological nitpicking and procedural disruption driven by Adventists in the US, Europe, and Australia. “We’re here to talk about mission, not to rehash Western cultural debates,” he added, underscoring a growing weariness among some non-Western delegates with what they view as a recurring pattern: ideological detours that hijack the church’s broader agenda.....

Victor Singh, a delegate from the Southern Asia Division, took to the mic simply to ask for clarity about the order of business. Like many others from the global South, Singh was there to focus on core mission priorities—not internal policy battles.

A Peruvian delegate and two special guests were more pointed. “We are concerned with preaching,” the delegate said. One of the guests jumped in, nodding, “We have to fulfill the mission, mission, mission!”

Also from the South American Division (SAD), three Brazilian attendants—two of them pastors and delegates—shared a similar view. They told Spectrum that while the vaccine discussion may have seemed important during the height of the pandemic, it has long since passed in relevance. “The church’s statement is biblically sound and scientifically responsible,” one pastor said. “It’s not something our congregations are debating anymore.”

Others from the Global South echoed similar views that emphasized a widespread disinterest in revisiting the vaccine statement. A Southern Asia-Pacific Division (SSD) delegate from the Philippines summarized the matter succinctly as “freedom of choice,” reflecting a stance that saw no need for institutional clarification. A WAD delegate from the East Sahel Union Mission in Africa dismissed the issue as a Western imposition, saying, “The vaccine [debate] is an American/white man thing that has been forced on us, and now we are feeling the weight of it.” Another SUD delegate from India took a more pragmatic tone, noting that “Covid vaccines are of importance based on the local government,” while a SID delegate from Zimbabwe emphasized, “The vaccines are a non-contentious issue. It won’t hinder your salvation.”

Taken together, these voices from Africa, Asia, and South America, representing the majority of Adventists, exhibited a clear consensus: the debate felt out of touch with their concerns. For many of them, the issue of vaccines—particularly a nearly decade-old statement—was not a theological or missional priority. As one Peruvian delegate (SAD) put it bluntly, “We are concerned with preaching.” A guest beside him nodded in agreement: “We have to fulfill the mission, mission, mission.”

As the sun set on the opening day, the tension over the vaccine statement settled—at least for now. While the motions to amend the agenda failed, the debate revealed a stark reality: different regions of the Adventist world prioritize different things. For many in the global South, the focus remains on evangelism, not ecclesiastical micromanagement. For others, particularly in the West, questions of doctrinal clarity, institutional transparency, and individual conscience remain vital.

Things have changed. Now with the new president, topics that were once important, are no longer important. This "Global South" as they call it, are not deep thinkers. This is my place. I know these people. I am not criticizing them, merely pointing out facts.

These people are hyper focused on church growth, for better or worse.  This is the trajectory we are headed. It's going to be a wild ride. 

I have some reservations about ignoring these voices of deeper thinkers. But my opinion does not count.  Those deeper thinkers represent less than 3% of the church in my estimation. 

Clubadventist has been a place where we can discuss deep issues. I assure you, in the "Global South", there is no interest in these deep issues. 

I hope more people come here to discuss deeper issues. But they will have no impact on the church.