The issue of political engagement is a divisive one within the Adventist church. For me, a political science and journalism major, it is deeply intriguing. Since the birth of the denomination in the late 19th century, politics has been a hot-button topic. But why?
Many might point to John 17:15-16 (“in the world, but not of the world”) or Matt. 22:21 (“to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s”) as Biblical evidence that religion and politics are and should remain heterogeneous. However, this long-held view has been flipped over in recent years as a growing number of young Adventists are becoming more politically aware. The Millennial generation is one of the most socially and politically active we’ve seen, perhaps because of the unprecedented sociopolitical climate, or simply the rapid spread of information social media has enabled.
When I helped organize a campus-wide voter registration and engagement initiative before the 2020 presidential election, I observed a noticeable interest in civic engagement from students. I couldn’t help but wonder if I would have seen the same thing in 1950 or 1890.
I spoke with Koralys Rodriguez, a Puerto Rican lifelong Adventist who attends Statesville Seventh-day Adventist church. This is the same church I attend at home and the one I referenced in my introductory blog post. I asked her about race in the church, with a special look at how they’re doing today. I’ve researched the past, but now it’s time to get some perspective on the present. She had some powerful things to say. Check it out down below:
The Adventist church struggles with race, which is no different today than at its inception in the mid 1800s. I suppose that’s no different than any church or any institution that exists today, especially in America. It should be noted that the Adventist church is the most diverse Christian denomination in the world. Unfortunately, that does not elevate the denomination above the racial struggles we see today.
“I believe that gays can go to heaven.” A very bold statement I made to my parents that inevitably started a discussion.
I have never been the kind to hide my opinions. I have also never been the kind to sit on my hands when I feel strongly about something. My beliefs are important to me.
I knew this statement would start a discussion with my parents in which we would be able to exchange viewpoints. This was definitely the case.
By the end of the conversation, we were able to reach some middle ground: Homosexuals can go to heaven if they are not engaging in a sexual lifestyle. The reason we came to this conclusion was based on some very brief research that we did on what the Bible had to say about this topic.
I was actually surprised by how easy it was for me and my parents to agree on this topic. This is not to say that my parents or I look down on this topic or people dealing with this issue. Simply, I thought that our different perspectives based on the different times that we grew up in would be stronger and harder for each other to understand.
I guess this really short discussion with my parents taught me two main things that are valuable to me today. One, it is important and almost crucial for families to have real conversations about difficult topics such as sexuality and the LGBTQ community. Whatever reaction or opinion you think they might have, might be proven wrong.
The second thing that I learned is that generations are not necessarily as different as we think in every issue. Sure, there are some significant viewpoint differences that are worth noting, however, not everything needs to be or is an argument. Maybe if we spent some more time looking for common ground and exploring our similarities it would be easier to progress on different issues.
Modesty continues to be a controversial topic. While, sure, it is not the most trivial of issues, it is one several people have mixed opinions about. Modesty controversies, however, have been present for a long time, at least within the Adventist Church.
If we go back to the 1800’s and analyze some of Ellen G. White’s writings, we see a strict and strong emphasis on modesty. More specifically, women’s modesty. Several of her writings, in fact, reflect that. In some cases, the examples mentioned are a response to church members’ letters, and some are just her interpretation of modesty according to the Bible.
As presented on the timeline, there are some very specific “requirements” such as the statement that anything above the knee is deemed too short, and the ideal length is around eight or ten inches above the floor.
Ellen White also presents strong resistance about what was commonly known as the “American Costume.” According to the Missouri Historic Costume and Textile Collection at the University of Missouri, the American Costume is part of the dress reform, which started in 1824. This movement was intended to empower women, to a certain extent, through their clothing. This is when a lot of clothing layers were removed for women’s comfort. As a consequence, women started to wear short dresses that eventually became widely accepted to what we know today.
In her writings, and throughout the years, Ellen G. White expresses her opposition to the shortened length of the skirt. On several occasions, such as in Testimonies for the CHurch in 1868, Ellen G. White emphasized the importance for the Adventist Church and for the Seventh-day Adventist woman to stand out from secular practices.
In some of her later writings, however, Ellen G. White expressed that no “sisters” were convicted of the Seventh-day Adventist dress reform. An example is shown in 1885 in Manuscript Releases vol. 5 she expresses that although this is not the tradition, it would “have proved a blessing.”
The interesting fact about this timeline is the mindset change seen throughout Ellen G. White’s writings. Although the writings are not necessarily drastic in nature, it reflects the eventual acceptance of a certain kind of dress. These writings have impacted the way in which we currently address the issue of modesty.
This week I had the privilege of talking with Professor Jud Lake from the Religion Department at Southern Adventist University. Lake said he has been teaching at Southern for 23 years and each time he teaches – especially a class called “Adventist Heritage” – he learns something new.
“I still feel excited and passionate about these truths as I did when I first encountered them,” he said in a recent interview. “Now, I just have a [deeper] understanding and appreciation [than] before.”
Throughout our conversation, I asked him if he thought the way the early pioneers approached prophecy was wrong. Could there have been a difference if we had approached prophecy differently early on?
“I think our pioneers [made an approach] that was appropriate for their time,” he said. “But then you have the second generation Adventism, the famous [righteousness by faith] 1888 crisis,” he said. “… [For] the early pioneers, everything was fresh [and] it was exciting. They were developing this church [and] new doctrines and [Jesus’] teachings, but as time went on, the second generation, the children of those pioneers lost something.”
Lake said church leaders slowly shifted their focus until legalism started to be the main issue with the “Mark of the Beast,” Christ’s soon return, and God’s law thrown in – … “They lost the centrality of Christ… and that brought on the crisis of the 1888 [in the] General Conference, and the debates on righteousness by faith, but that experience changed the denomination.”
This legalistic spiral shows up even today with the older and younger generation perceived to be at odds.
“If you go about it in the wrong way, and you lose sight of Christ, the freshness, the beauty of it, the assurance is gone,” Lake explained. “And it becomes scary [for] Adventists that are my age, in the late 20th century. Even as far back as when I was a teenager in the 1970s, that generation of adults [was] struggling with legalism. They had lost sight of Christ, and the prophecies were all the beast and the plagues. And it was fear. Then we went through some theological crisis, and a lot of people left, but Christ became central again. Today, the challenge is there are so many distractions. Can people [think] about what really matters?”
Yet, Lake believes the Biblical account of end-time events has the potential to captivate a new generation of believers.
“The idea of the supernatural invading this planet [and] Jesus coming back and invading this world and radically turning it over, and in a matter of moments, is something that can be very appealing, “ Lake concluded, “because it’s radically different from what the world teaches today.”
