Progressive Adventism

72 Responses to “Catholic Adventism: Cause for Concern or Celebration?”

1. Monte Sahlin Says:
   January 7th, 2007 at 4:34 am

   For a long time there have been ways in which Adventism mirrors Catholicism. Bull & Lockhart make the point in “Seeking a Sanctuary” that Adventism is counter-cultural. They picture it as counter-cultural to American Protestantism, but I woujld argue that as the center of gravity for Christiendom shifts to the southern hempishere, increasingly Adventism is counter-cultural to Catholicism.

   Both are world religions with highly centralized administration. Both are wholistic in their religious concerns. Both see themselves as having roots in the New Testament church, as well as a cosmic role right up to the end of time. Both believe themselves to be the true body of Christ with “other sheep” among the extended family of Christendom. Both can accomodate a lot of legalistic believers while officially adhering to a theology that is based in the grace of Jesus Christ.

   One of the most interesting things to me is the way in which Adventists more and more mirror Catholicism in the existence of orders within the ranks that take their own path yet wish to remain loyal. For the Catholics it is seen in monaticism, while for the Adventists it is seen in the “self-supporting” movement. This has resulted in both Catholics and Adventists having independent cable TV channels in the U.S. which are beginning more and more to extend themselves overseas.

   For young people growing up in Adventism, who are serious about spirituality, it does not surprise me that there is some borrowing going on. The parallels certainly make this likely. Many life-long Adventists have more in common with Catholics or Anglicans than with today’s Evangelicals or Pentecostals, although I would argue that the real place where Adentist faith fits in the larger history of Christendom is with the anabaptist or Radical Reformation groups such as the Mennonites, Brethren and related Pietistic “peace churches.” This, I think takes seriously both the Weslyan roots of the founders of the Adventist Church and the “restorationist” bent that came out of the first couple of decades of the formation of the Adventist movement (1844-63).

2. Dennis Says:
   January 7th, 2007 at 8:29 am

   Interesting article, Nathan.
   What I envy the most is their depth and witdth of theology. Thomas Aquinas, Hans Kung, liberation therology etc.
   What I hate the most is their power hunger. The institution of papacy itself is a prime example of what the church should not be like.

3. Mark Carr Says:
   January 7th, 2007 at 9:12 am

   Thanks for this piece Nathaniel, you’ve opened up yet another comparison between our two faiths, and Monte’s comments highlight your own. I’m a convert to Adventism, not from Catholicism however. and I’ve been making comparisons for many years. We have much to learn from a tradition as old as Catholicism. I recall Raoul Dederen asserting that denominations typically take at least 200 years to settle into what they believe. I think part of this settling in is the full acceptance of wide diversity within the ranks of the denomination. We all know how SDA’s struggle with maintaining unity across the world. In the end, I’ll bet that we’ll have a great deal of tolerance toward a multitude of spiritual/devotional practices within Adventism….anyone want to gamble on when we’ll see our first tongues speaking church?!
   One of the most striking and scary comparisons I’ve made through the years was to compare quotations from our GC president and the Pope. I had been studying the relationship of RCC moral theologians with the Magisterium at the time and so I had a bunch of quotes in hand from a number of Popes. I took a sermon from one of our former GC presidents and read some passages to a couple of my friends. Then I read some passages from the Pope….I asked them to tell me which passages came from the Pope and which came from the GC president. They were only about 30% accurate in their guesses!!

   Finally, I think we can learn a great deal from Orthodoxy as well. Their doctrine of theotokos, I think this is what they call it, where they grow in grace toward God’s character is so very very close to our SDA notions of the life of sanctification. Check out a book by Vigen Guroian called Incarnate Love: Essays in Orthodox Ethics! Awesome read.

4. Bill Cork Says:
   January 8th, 2007 at 9:42 am

   “Adventists who are fascinated with Catholicism ARE NOT converting to Catholicism.”

   Yes they are. Some are. Three in my family did in twenties and early thirties.

   My interest started in mid-80s. First, I went to a John Michael Talbot concert with some friends at Atlantic Union College; this prompted an interest in Franciscan spirituality.

   Then I went to Loma Linda. Tthe late Dr. Paul Landa, onetime managing editor of ADVENTIST HERITAGE and professor of church history at Loma Linda (La Sierra campus) helped to stimulate my interest when I took “History of the Papacy and Roman Catholicism” from him. Reading Vatican 2 documents, John Henry Newman on Doctrinal Development, and visiting a Catholic Church (St. Catherine of Alexandria in Riverside) helped to stimulate my interest–one of the attractions for me was the Catholic sense continuity through history, rather than the break mandated by SDA theology of history. Dr. Charles W. Teel, Jr., was another influence, by provoking an interest in social justice; this led to study of issues like sanctuary for Central American refugees. While a grad student at LLU I also took a course in Liberation Theology from Prof. June O’Connor at UC Riverside.

   I wasn’t ready to go the whole way at the time; Lutheranism provided a via media for me, but eventually I was drawn the whole way, becoming Catholic in 1992 a couple of weeks before my 31st birthday.

   Two of my brothers became Catholic in different directions. One started reading Eastern Religions, which he saw asked lots of good questions; he then found Thomas Merton, who gave Catholic answers to those questions. Another brother volunteered in the Middle East, and became drawn to the Catholic shrines and to the Catholic people of the West Bank.

5. Glenn Says:
   January 8th, 2007 at 12:02 pm

   I’d have to have more info about the numbers of SDA’s inquiring into Catholicism to say whether it’s a “cause for concern or celebration”.

   But I suspect the interest on the part of those doing the inquiring probably has a wide range of causes.

   For some SDA’s it probably has something to do with the fact that it’s different. And for disaffected SDA’s longing for more of a “high church” experience, RC might have appeal.

   Others might be attracted to its cultural conservatism.

   Having read a number of “from [blank] to RC” testimonies one theme seems to be the person’s concern with authority–in particular having one source of authority to determine doctrine, and thus make their faith more certain.

   That being said there are, ironically, some similarities between the two faiths. Both essentially rely on an extra-biblical source for doctrinal authority, which is presumed to be infallible (Ellen White, the Pope). SDAism is in a way, also highly sacramental. Consider the role of the Sabbath in SDA theology. It’s importance has a certain sacramental role to it. The Sabbath is more or less believed to be a grace-dispensing event or mechanism. And the SDA church is in effect the repository of the Sabbath sacrament.

   The health message occupies a similar role. Much of EGW’s writings on the topic tend to stress the necessity for healthy living as a means of receiving Grace. It isn’t put in those terms of course, but the cause and effect relationship seems similar to me.

6. Stephen Korsman Says:
   January 9th, 2007 at 1:37 pm

   I think this is a fascinating article. I’ve seen the beginnings of sacramentalism in Adventist services … from kneeling out of respect for the Bible being raised and then read, to a variety of other things. It can only bring us closer as Christians, brothers and sisters in Christ, and give us more common ground with which to understand each other, instead of misunderstanding, which has led to the current dislike and distrust of things Catholic - from the extreme, where we won’t even work together on social issues such as poverty, abortion, human rights, to the more common misconception that we worship beings other than God.

   I love the icons at the top of the post … Orthodoxy does have a lot that ALL Western Christians can learn from.

7. Hugo Mendez Says:
   January 9th, 2007 at 11:31 pm

   I must concur with Bill Cork; many Adventists do translate a fascination with sacramentalism into a Catholic, Orthodox, or Anglican faith. I developed an interest in ancient Christian history/spirituality my freshman year in college, frequently attending Eastern Orthodox churches. I often considered the possibility of incoprorating at least a few of the “safer” devotions into my Adventism, but recognized their insubstantiality when divorced from their natural theological context. Moreover, I felt drawn to traditions that were inappropriate for an Adventist (prayers to the saints, Marian devotion, etc.) Eastern Christan spirituality is especially holistic, so that it is impossible to satisfactorly divorce its various manifestations. Ultimately, one craves the fullness of the Christian experience only partially embodied in a particular prayer or chant.

   The entire conflict forced me to reevaluate Adventism’s opposition to the Catholic tradition, and my theological study eventually translated into a difficult embrace of Catholic faith. (I rejected Orthodoxy for various reasons not particularly relevant to this discussion.) It is as John Henry Newman said: “to be deep in history is to cease to be Protestant.”

8. Glenn Says:
   January 10th, 2007 at 6:57 am

   Hugo,

   How do you relate to the church’s treatment of heretics, the burning at the stake of John Huss, the inquisitions?

   Glenn

9. Hugo Says:
   January 10th, 2007 at 9:57 am

   Hi Glenn,

   In the last 40 years, the Catholic Church has:

   1. Defined the moral doctrine that “the human person has a right to religious freedom…all men are to be immune from coercion,” “including those who do not live up to their obligation of seeking the truth.” (II Vatican Council, Dignitatis Humanae). This was a watershed moment in the history of the Catholic Church.

   2. Definitively condemned all historical instances of religious persecution,
   including those once sanctioned by the Church (DH 7), also refusing to cite mitigating factors (JP II, Tertio Millennio Adviente 35). The modern catechism condemns past actions by the Church’s “own pastors” (i.e. popes; CCC 2298). Where feasible, the Church has named specific incidents, for which she repents (1990s: e.g., regarding the execution of John Hus [John Paul II, General Audience, 17 Dec 1999]).

   3. Worked to extend full religious liberty to confessional minorities in Catholic countries, and worked to secure that right in other nations. (Adventist Review articles from the late 60s document the radical changes that opened the doors to Adventist evangelism in Spain, all of which were spearheaded by the bishops returning from the II Vatican Council.)

   4. Condemned torture as an intrinsically immoral practice (Veritatis Splendor 80,81) and condemned the Church’s past use of it (CCC 2298).

   So, to answer your question, “how do you relate to the church’s treatment of heretics, the burning at he stake of John Huss, the inquisitions?” I respond the same way the modern Catholic Church does: in a profound spirit of repentance and reformation.

10. Hugo Says:
    January 10th, 2007 at 10:02 am

    (cont.)

    It is unfortunate most of these facts are ignored by the Adventist Church at large. If you’re interested in studying this issue further, this essay should be of great help to you:

    http://diesdomini.com/Papers/Q_ReligiousLiberty_EGW.pdf

    I also compiled a documentary collection including most relevant Vatican statements on the subject:

    http://diesdomini.com/Papers/Q_ReligiousLiberty_Source.pdf

    Pax,
    Hugo

11. Glenn Says:
    January 10th, 2007 at 11:26 am

    Thanks, Hugo.

    We could all use and exhibit a “profound spirit of repentance and reformation”.

    And thanks for the information. i wasn’t aware of these acts.

12. Nathaniel Gamble Says:
    January 10th, 2007 at 5:43 pm

    Dear Everybody,

    Wow, thanks for all the comments; I haven’t been able to respond until my boss at PUC pointed them all out. School is in full force here and I have a lot of different classes in different subject matters, so I have been unable to really do anything. So, sorry about that:) (But I know you all will forgive me.)

    All of the comments on Catholic Adventism are really interesting to read and very helpful in seeing some different perceptions on it. In actuality, as Julius posted at the beginning (or was it end?) of my article, I do not practice a “catholic Adventist” spirituality; I lean a lot more to Eastern Orthodox spirituality and Celtic Christianity. However, I have many family members who are Roman Catholic, and being Irish I have a strong affinity to Roman Catholicism (I’m a fourth-generation Adventist). With this said, I think I may have miscommunicated something to a few people, for which I am sorry: a few of the comments have said that Adventists who practice Catholic spiritual disciplines are actually converting to Catholicism. Maybe it would have been better to say that most of these catholic Adventists fall in the age range of 18-25 with a few people being of an older age.

    I don’t know if Adventists are converting to Catholicism; if they are, that’s awesome (but what do you expect from an Irishman, even one who is firmly established in the theological tradition of Protestantism?)! However, I am speaking about people my age. We have NO DESIRE WHATSOEVER to convert to Catholicism; we like Catholicism, but we like being Adventists too. People who are participants in this movement like the rich spiritual vitality within Roman Catholicism, Eastern Orthodoxy, and Anglicanism-Wesleyism; they recognize within it the common spiritual-theological tradition from which ALL Christians and Christian Churches ultimately draw. These people also recognize that without Catholicism and Catholic spirituality, we ultimately would not have Adventism or Adventist spirituality. So, I’m also sorry for not having communicated that thought better.

    But I’m glad my article was received so well:D You’re all awesome. Pax et bonum Christi omnus tuus.

    ~Nathaniel Gamble

13. Hugo Says:
    January 10th, 2007 at 6:20 pm

    Hi Nathaniel,

    You stated: “It would have been better to say that most of these catholic Adventists fall in the age range of 18-25… I am speaking about people my age. We have NO DESIRE WHATSOEVER to convert to Catholicism; we like Catholicism, but we like being Adventists too.”

    Well, I fall within the age range of 18-25, as does another friend of mine who is seeking the sacrament of Chrismation/Confirmation after first becoming drawn to a Catholic spirituality. I also have three, perhaps four, more friends in the same age group who also have expressed interest in conversion, but have not yet come to a decision on the matter. All of us attended Southern Adventist University in the last 5 years, but our journeys began independently.

    (By “Catholic”, I refer to both Roman and Byzantine (Eastern Orthodox) traditions, and others; remember that there are millions of Byzantine Catholics, reflecting the unity of the pre-schism Church.)

    Most were originally attracted to Roman spirituality; I alone began my journey from Byzantine spirituality (some devotions of which I retain), though I am now a Roman Catholic. In each case, Catholic spirituality continued to draw us to a deeper appreciation (and ultimate confession) of Catholic theology. To be honest, I have never met an Adventist young adult that has incorporated Catholic devotions into his spirituality without eventually considering conversion (for the reasons I submitted in my first comment).

14. Bill Cork Says:
    January 10th, 2007 at 9:34 pm

    “Celtic Christianity” … as if it were something other than Catholicism? Watch out for bogus stuff out there. Good reliable text is that in the Paulist Classics of Western Spirituality.

15. Jimmy Says:
    January 11th, 2007 at 9:21 am

    Celtic Christianity vs. “Catholicism”? Sure.

    Thomas Cahill’s popular work, “How the Irish Saved Civilization” does describe how the Irish monks considered themselves “brothers” to the pope, but did not address him (in their correspondence) with the sort of magisterial reverence to which the papacy had grown to expect.

    Leslie Hardinge, in “The Celtic Church in Britain” describes perhaps a more adversarial relationship, but it’s a bit difficult to sort it out.

    The Wikipedia entry of “Celtic Christianity” may be helpful:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celtic_Christianity

    Then again, how you define and describe “Catholicism” (vs. “catholiic), tradition vs. denominational organzation, etc. is exceeding challenging and interesting.

    I guess if what we retained from all this a call to a deeper spirituality and a close walk with Jesus, it was a worthwhile conversation.

    Certainly not bogus!

16. Nathaniel Gamble Says:
    January 11th, 2007 at 9:24 am

    To Hugo–I am from Colorado, so I’m used to the Midwestern mindset; and I have been going to PUC for a while now, so I’m quite familiar with the California/West Coast mindset. And both regions don’t convert that easily; you have to win them over. I am sure there are many Adventist young people who have converted to Catholicism from being involved in Catholic spirituality; however, there are just as many more who have not. That was all I was trying to say; I could have said more about people actually finding solace in Roman Catholicism, but there wasn’t that much space to do so. As for the South, I have no idea how spirituality and religion works down there, even in an Adventist subculture. I sense that you are happy with your decision to be a Catholic, and I am happy for you (no really, I am; that’s awesome!). I also recognize that there are Byzantine Catholics and that the term “Catholic” was used by both groups to refer to their unity for about 1,000 years; however, if you were to call someone who is a member of any of the Orthodox Churches an “Eastern Catholic”, they would agree with the title, but would prefer to be called Orthodox for the sake of clarity and to help define themselves away from Roman Catholicism. Our Orthodox brothers and sisters are very adament about their own personal ways of practicing catholic spirituality and religion.

    To Bill–Yes, Celtic Christianity is somewhat different from past and present Roman Catholic practice and spirituality; it would be correct to use a paradox here: Celtic Christianity is the same as Roman Catholicism and it is not. Being Irish, I am steep in the culture of Celtic Christianity (to use the term broadly); it is not bogus, though some just do whatever with it and create something of a bogus form of it. I have heard of and read some of what you are referring to in the Paulist Classics of Western Spirituality. Maybe I should clarify: when I refer to Celtic Christianity, I am referring to that established by St. Patrick and then developed by St. Columbanus.

17. Johnny Says:
    January 11th, 2007 at 4:07 pm

    This Adventist loves icons. Why? Because they remind me that I am part of a long, rich tradition of followers of Christ. My preferred icons actually portray Christ.

    I would not agree though with most eastern churches which view icons as being on par with scripture. Thought you might like the pictures anyways.

    As far as Celtic Christianity- they have some amazing prayers. Also, wasn’t St. Patrick a Sabbath Keeper?

18. Nathaniel Gamble Says:
    January 11th, 2007 at 7:44 pm

    Johnny, I actually agree with you on the icons; I really like them too, especially because they remind me that I am not just a solitary Adventist against the world–I too have a Christian religion foundation that is older than Adventism (which I like), which I am indebted to. Many have said that St. Patrick was a Sabbath keeper; many others have also said that there’s no conclusive evidence to support that. Honestly, I don’t know; however, it wouldn’t surprise me with the emphasis most of the Irish converts put on nature and the theology Sabbath represents in Scripture.

19. Hugo Says:
    January 12th, 2007 at 12:40 am

    Johnny,

    Leslie Hardinge, in “The Celtic Church in Britain,” claims that St. Patrick was a Sabbath-keeper (a claim now embraced by many eager Adventists). However, you can count me among those who are skeptical of this conclusion. His only evidence is a passage in Muirchu’s account of Patrick’s life (written two centuries later) that records regular supernatural encounters between Patrick and angels on the Sabbath day. However, Muirchu never states that Patrick observed a Sabbath rest on that day. By contrast, the entire text regularly emphasizes Patrick’s observance of the Lord’s day.

    Now, this legend does suggest that Patrick might have considered the Sabbath a significant day; most Christians (especially in the East) did as well. However, few post-Nicene Christians translated this widespread liturgical/theological veneration for the Sabbath into an actual observance of the Sabbath rest. Without positive evidence, the possibility should be considered unlikely. Furthermore, one should bear in mind that even if Patrick observed some sort of Sabbath rest, it was almost certainly followed by a Sunday rest as well. No evidence from the period suggests that Christian Sabbatarianism was practiced to the exclusion of Dominicalism. In fact, the praise of Patrick’s reverence for the Lord’s day (in Muirchu, among others) gives added weight to that caveat.

    Anyways, lol, there you are.

20. Johnny Says:
    January 12th, 2007 at 2:23 am

    Visited Bill Cork’s website. Thought I’d mention that being interested in learning and dwelling in another denomination/Christian tradition doesn’t mean that I’m interested in conversion at all. Nathanial Gamble said this as did others and they’re right. A lot of people confuse pluralism with relativism; I’m not one of them.

    There remains within Adventism quite a few persons who see “Catholic” as a pejorative. I wonder how they’d read this thread…if they stop by this blog at all.

    While at Newbold one of my friends and fellow Brotherhood officers, Steve, would always make my day when he’d describe himself as a Catholic Adventist. He wasn’t making any sort of theological statement rather, as an Irishman he was making a political statement.

    I’d love it when he’d say that because I sympathized with the republican cause and had never met an Adventist wear the word “Catholic” so proudly and, in my opinion, rightly.

    As an aside my eyebrows went up when I read comments that had some Adventists translate a fascination with sacraments into a Catholic, Orthodox, or Anglican faith. That is like saying that some Catholics translate their fascination with Holiness into a Nazarene, Adventist or Salvation Army faith.

    Shared pasts and common elements sure… but the gulf in belief and practice between the western church and the eastern church is not exactly shrinking. And the sacraments are delivered differently by Orthodox and Catholic congregations.

    No, I’d disagree and say that sacraments belong to the entire Christian church and that Adventists who, say, have the elements at the front of the church where congregants go to pick it up instead of being handed out by deacons, are in no danger of losing their Adventist distinctiveness.

    As an aside on the aside I should point out that the Roman Catholic church does allow for entire Anglican congregations to convert, clergy and all, and join the Roman Catholic fold while keeping Anglican practice (reference). The Roman Catholic church also has eastern rite congregations within its fold (reference).

    Too many asides!

    Ryan Bell has in his office a book on Celtic prayers one of which he read to me as his favorite.

    GOD WITH ME LYING DOWN
    God with me lying down
    God with me rising up,
    God with me in each ray of light,
    Nor I a ray of joy without Him,
    Nor one ray without Him.

    Christ with me sleeping,
    Christ with me waking,
    Christ with me watching,
    Every day and night,
    Each day and night.

    God with me protecting,
    The Lord with me directing,
    The Spirit with me strengthening,
    For ever and for evermore,
    Ever and evermore, Amen.
    Chief of chiefs, Amen.
    —
    Blessings!
    -johnny

21. Hugo Says:
    January 12th, 2007 at 1:40 pm

    Johnny,

    You stated: “my eyebrows went up when I read comments that had some Adventists translate a fascination with sacraments into a Catholic, Orthodox, or Anglican faith… I’d disagree and say that sacraments belong to the entire Christian church.”

    I’ll agree that one can appropriate a few of the prayers of historic Christianity as part of their Adventist devotion. But, I have trouble agreeing that one’s “fascination with sacraments” can ever be satisfied in a non-sacramental church. Most converts embrace Catholic faith precisely from their desire to participate in the fullness of the sacramental life.

    For example, when you say that “the sacraments” are available to “the entire Christian Church,” including Seventh-day Adventists (precluding the necessity of their conversion to Catholicism), of which rites do you speak? I’d imagine you’re thinking of Baptism and the Lord’s Supper. (Although Adventists prefer the term “ordinances.”) Perhaps you would also include marriage, anointing of the sick, and ordination to the list (despite our divergent understandings of each), But, what of:

    1. Sacramental Confession and Absolution, or
    2. Chrismation/Confirmaton?

    Despite their Biblical foundation, both are rejected by most Protestants.

    Furthermore, a Catholic Eucharistic spirituality (and by extension, the liturgy itself) is dependent upon a belief in:

    3. Transubstantiation,
    4. Eucharistic sacrifice,
    5. Eucharistic adoration (implicit or express)
    6. Ministerial Priesthood
    7. Apostolic/magisterial succession
    8. The visibility and unicity of the visible Church

    These elements converge into a brilliant, holistic experience impossible to satisfy outside of a Church that embraces them.

22. Nathaniel Gamble Says:
    January 12th, 2007 at 6:41 pm

    One of the things I think Catholics and Protestants forget (which it appears only the Orthodoxy get) is the fact that Christianity is a sacramental religion in and of itself. Christianity claims that God created the universe, thus giving it a stamp of sacredness (because it was made by Him). In fact, Christian theology, even from its beginning days, has seen pretty much every action of the Christian as have sacramental value: eating, drinking, sleeping, talking, hanging out, etc. Jesus did these things, thus adding so much sacredness to it. (I recognize that some Christians might feel a little uncomfortable with this kind of emphasis on the sacredness of matter, seeing what I have said as a form of mysticism enmeshed in material. However, most of the Church Fathers saw the world this way, which formed the foundation for subsequent generations seeing the world this way as well…until right up to or a little before the Protestant Reformation; it could have been due to the final step in developing modern-day Roman Catholic Eucharistic theology.)

    So to say that Adventists and other conservative Protestant groups are not sacramental is to basically tell them that they’re not allowed to be sacramental. Methodism is very sacramental, but they don’t practice sacramentalism or a liturgy like Anglicanism or Catholicism. All Christian groups naturally take part in the Christian foundation/tradition of sacramentalism, just some more than others.

    As for the contemporary understanding of Catholic Eucharistic spirituality, that is based on rather modern developments from the late Midieval era and Modern era from the 1200’s-1800’s. If you read some of the stuff the Church Fathers believed about the Eucharist, you’ll find different views even among them on the Eucharist. So it’s possible to share those kinds of views on the Eucharist.

    In response to the other sacraments of the Roman Catholic Church, you are right when you say that confession and absolution are biblical, but not confirmation. Confirmation is based in the tradition of the Fathers. As well, the way confession and absolution are practiced in the Catholic Church are not biblical; they are a development of the 5th or 6th century. Confession and absolution was a communal action; the penitent confessed his or her sins to the entire congregation, and then absolution was granted to the penitent by the entire congregation. But you know, I could be wrong about the confirmation thing; it could be different Protestant and Catholic ways of interpreting Scripture.

23. Hugo Says:
    January 12th, 2007 at 9:34 pm

    Nathaniel,

    1. You’re right in saying that no Church is “non-sacramental” (even EGW uses the term “ordinances”and “sacrament” interchangeably). However, I used the term to refer specifically to those churches that eschew high-church “sacramentalism.” This should have been made clear by the context; I was addressing a question regarding the Catholic “sacraments” (the term Johnny used). I certainly did not refer to the “sacramentality” of Creation in general, or consecrated objects in particular (e.g., icons).

    2. Catholic Eucharistic theology was controverted during the 1100s, reached its present form at the IV Lateran Council (1215), and was clarified at the Council of Trent (c. 1551), after which here have been no substantial developments. (Your end date of “1800s” seems a bit too late).

    3. And yes, the church fathers entertained varying views of the Eucharist (as also the ante-Nicene fathers on the Trinitarian mystery). However (it should be noted), a Catholic would disagree with the notion that “it’s possible to hold share those kinds of views on the Eucharist” after IV Lateran and Trent, anymore than one can hold a Trinitarian theology varying from that confessed by the council of Nicaea and I Constantinople. But that’s just Catholics, lol.

    4.Um… the claim that “the way confession and absolution are practiced in the Catholic Church are not biblical” is… well…an inappropriate claim. (Biblical interpretations will always differ). You define the Biblical model as follows: “Confession and absolution was a communal action; the penitent confessed his or her sins to the entire congregation, and then absolution was granted to the penitent by the entire congregation.” You then claim that the Catholic form of confession is an unbiblical development of the 5th-6th century.

    First, Ante-Nicene Christians believed after the penitent confessed his sins, he was absolved by the priest through the intercession of the entire community (Tertullian, On Modesty I, XXI; Hippolytus? Apostolic Tradition 3; Origen, Homilies on Leviticus 2:4; Cyprian, To the Clergy, 9 (16):2). There is no early Christian testimony that indicates “the entire congregation” absolved him. All patristic sources interpret John 20 and Matt 16,18 as bequeathing of the power of absolution to the ordained ministry (as is maintained to the present day in the Catholic and Orthodox churches).

    Now, it is true that in the 5th-6th Century, Christianity generally exchanged a public form of confession for private form (developed by Irish monks), but in both cases, absolution was administered by the priest. Therefore, I don’t see how that exchange in any way undermined the efficacy or biblical validity of the sacrament. The ENTIRE Christian Church of the post-Nicene period certainly didn’t think it did.

    5. Finally, I’ll again state that one should avoid referring to Eastern theological concepts as “Orthodox.” Again, you must remember that millions of Byzantine Catholics retain their Eastern theological heritage, but are by no means “Orthodox.” The terms of “Eastern” or “Byzantine” are proper in most cases, except in discussions of Hesychasm or Orthodox concepts of papal primacy.

    Anyways, sorry if this comment sounds critical. It’s wonderful talking to Adventists conversant on this topic. Best wishes, and happy Sabbath.

24. Johnny Says:
    January 13th, 2007 at 12:57 am

    Hugo,
    You said-
    

    I was addressing a question regarding the Catholic “sacraments” (the term Johnny used). I certainly did not refer to the “sacramentality” of Creation in general, or consecrated objects in particular (e.g., icons).

    I was actually purposefully using your words since I was reacting to you.

    Adventists do translate a fascination with sacramentalism into a Catholic, Orthodox, or Anglican faith.Hugo

    As an aside my eyebrows went up when I read comments that had some Adventists translate a fascination with sacraments into a Catholic, Orthodox, or Anglican faith.Johnny

    Generally in online threads I prefer not to address persons but thoughts. Since you attributed that phraseology to myself I thought I might point out it was your phrasing to begin with.
    Have a happy Sabbath!

25. Hugo Says:
    January 13th, 2007 at 11:21 am

    Yeah I think we all got mixed up with what I meant by “sacramentalism.” My fault.

26. Daniel Hahn Says:
    January 14th, 2007 at 10:27 am

    Greetings and may the graces of the Holy Trinity be upon you all!

    I was born into Adventism and raised an Adventist. The first real issue I took with the Adventist church was when I studied the Sanctuary issue post-Glacier view, however I simply became an “Evangelical Adventist”. However studying early Christianity in history bothered me because I found nothing like Adventism in the early church. Furthermore, what continued to nag me intellectually and spiritually was the fact that early customs in a faith such as the Christian faith die very hard and innovations take time to develop in that area in that period of time. Dr. Sherwin White proposes that it take two generations for legendary development to start creeping into the historical facts of an event that occured. It’s not too much of a strech to apply this thinking to topics such as the VERY EARLY witness, historical and Biblical as well, to the keeping of the Sunday/Lord’s day as the principal day on which the Eucharist was celebrated or the complete concensus in believing the sacrificial nature of the Eucharist and the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist.

    After an intense Biblical and historical study of Sola Scriptura, I was convinced that to be a Christian one enters a pre-existing stream of tradition and that meant that I need to look for one of the older Christian traditions that do not adhere to a rather late and unBiblical innovation such as Bible Only Christianity, in my humble opinion. After studying the issues my decision was between the Catholic, Orthodox and Coptic churchs. I disagreed with monophysite heresy and thus could not become a Coptic Christian. Then the study of the role of the Bishop of Rome was the deciding factor in choosing between the Catholic and Orthodox Churches. The Biblical and historical research took a fair amount of time, however the choice became clear. I could no longer be intellecutally fulfilled and remain outside of Christ’s mystical body on Earth, the Catholic Church, once again in my humble opinion. And so I converted on the feast of Pentecost in 2006.

    On a side note, after I went and experienced the liturgy, good liturgy which may be difficult to find sometimes in the Western of Eastern rites, I felt extremely unfulfilled in a Protestant service. I felt something lacking as if I was experiencing some neat praise and hymns and so forth, however the fulness of His presence was missing. I would also suggest that there is a depth and fullness to Catholic theology and philosophy, which I can appreciate with a philosophy degree, that I simply do not find in Adventism in particular and in Protestanism in general.

    Not to start a debate, however that is a very abbreviated version of my story and may I suggest to some of you why an Adventism would leave Battle Creek Michigan, or DC if you will, to swim accross the Tiber to Rome!

    God be with you!

27. Daniel Hahn Says:
    January 14th, 2007 at 10:29 am

    Oh and please forgive the many spelling mistakes in my comment. God bless!

28. Nathaniel Gamble Says:
    January 15th, 2007 at 9:39 pm

    Dear Everybody,

    Okay, I now repent that I have written this article; this has caused way too much apparent misunderstanding among us all, especially because some of us are Adventist Protestants and some of us are Catholic converts from Adventism (it would be interesting to see what Advent Christians would say to some of this).

    Hugo–You have said many interesting things. There are so many things there that I would love to respond to; some of them would be additional comments on what you or I have said, some clarifications, some agreements with what you said and repairing my comments. However, there is not enough space here for me to address these things. And besides, I get the sinking feeling that I’m a poor communicator and would just end up misrepresenting myself to you. I am sorry if I have frustrated you by my comments or if I have upset you in any way; I am not sorry because “I got caught”; I am sorry because from your last post in response to me it seemed as if I had hurt your feelings. Please forgive me and my poor ignorance. But thank you for the Happy Sabbath wish:)

    Johnny–You’re funny; do I know you from someplace?

    Daniel–You’re name sounds familiar; did you write a testimony online about your conversion from Adventism to Catholicism and how you felt the presence of God in the Catholic Church, etc.? Your story sounds familiar; even if you didn’t, great story (and I’m not just saying that)! As a historian, I found all of the same stuff you did in your search of Early Christianity. And I really like Catholic theology and philosophy. But you know, I can honestly say that after years of looking at all this, Catholicism is just not for me; there’s something about the feeling all by itself that doesn’t sit well with me (and that’s not my Adventism speaking; I actually grew up in a home dominated more by atheism and Catholicism, if that’s believable). If, as Karl Barth said, we could find a way to mix Catholic depth with Protestant simplicity, that would be good (but of course, I’m a little reticent about ecumenical councils; I’d much rather have different Christian groups working in unity rather than uniformity). However, I would like to let you and other converts to Catholicism know that here and elsewhere I’m actually one of the staunchest defenders of Catholicism and our tradition as Adventists within Catholicism, and an advocate for Adventists to actually become more conversant in Catholicism not for apologetic purposes but because by extension we are a part of it. Pax et bonum.

29. Stephen Korsman Says:
    January 15th, 2007 at 10:37 pm

    Nathaniel said “some of us are Adventist Protestants and some of us are Catholic converts from Adventism (it would be interesting to see what Advent Christians would say to some of this)”

    I would think that Adventist Protestants are also Christians … as are Catholic converts from Adventism, and Adventist converts from Catholicism. Does “Advent Christian” mean something apart from that concept?

    Nathaniel also said “If, as Karl Barth said, we could find a way to mix Catholic depth with Protestant simplicity, that would be good (but of course, I’m a little reticent about ecumenical councils; I’d much rather have different Christian groups working in unity rather than uniformity)”

    I think Karl Barth was right - we can, and should. I think theological unity is important, but even within Catholicism there is theological diversity on many issues - even important ones, where Eastern Catholics and “Roman” Catholics (one denomination, acknowledging the pope as leader) have very different ways of understanding the same concepts. As for uniformity - between Franciscans, Jesuits, Redemptorists, Passionists, Benedictines, and between Eastern and Latin rites, uniformity in worship and uniformity in approach to the shared theology is largely absent. It is strived for, e.g. one segment of Catholicism used Latin universally … but that’s not an essential, it’s just nice to have.

    Catholic depth … if you read “The story of a Soul” by St Theresa of Lisieux, you see depth and simplicity need not be opposites. I’m less well-read in Protestant spirituality, but I am sure the same applies there.

    Our goal should be unity in truth, because there is only one truth. I think the New Testament argues for one truth, and diversity in everything else. That’s what I like about Catholicism, and if this blog is representative of Adventism’s other side, then I am very impressed.

30. Nathaniel Gamble Says:
    January 17th, 2007 at 7:56 am

    Oh, well thank you very much, Stephen:) Actually, there is much depth in Protestant theology and spirituality; most Protestant Christians, however, would usually just like the practical side of religious faith. Being a Protestant, there seems like there’s much more depth to even the average lay Catholic’s faith (as I’ve said above, I have Catholic family members and friends). Then again, it could just be different perspectives (i.e., the whole “outside looking in” scenario).

    The Advent Christians are one of four groups that developed from the Millerite Movement after the Great Disappointment of 1844 (they’re pretty cool; I recently checked them out on the web). Actually, I did not mean to imply that there was a difference in Protestants being Christians and Catholics being Christians; I too believe that we’re all Christians, and we’re all part of the Body of Christ, though we are many groups with different theological opinions. I just meant that it appeared as if there were two understandings of my article and what other were saying about it developing here, thus two perspectives were being brought in, but not clarified very well by both parties (myself included).

    But awesome comments, etc. I liked reading them (not only because they were positive). I agree with you on the seeking for truth matter:D Pax et bonum.

31. Nathaniel Gamble Says:
    January 17th, 2007 at 8:01 am

    I clicked on your name, Stephen [Korsman] and it sent me to (I think) your blog. I remember visiting this once before (Julius, the guy who is hosting this blog, emailed me and told me to look at it). So you’re THAT Stephen! Awesome; I love what you have on there! I mean, I saw once before, but it’s really cool:D

32. Brandon Ogden Says:
    January 17th, 2007 at 9:33 am

    Nathaniel,
    I appreciate your article and I agree that there are many SDA’s who are very interested in the “High Church” experience which can be found at many Catholic Parishes. I think there is a draw to a reverent ritual which deepens one’s spirituality. Like Hugo, I would contest the idea that people are not converting from Adventism to Catholicism. I did, in my late twenties. (3 years ago), as did my wife, who was 26 at the time, and I am aware of several others who are in the process of converting or have converted previously, most of whom are multi-generation SDA’s, often educated at SDA Schools, and are between 18 and 35.

    At the last general conference, it was announced that there has been a major exodus (10% attrition) from the SDA Church in the past 5 years, (http://news.adventist.org/data/2005/06/1120249432/index.html.en) bringing the net growth rate to the lowest levels since the 1960’s. I cannot help but think that many of the 1.5 million people who have left the SDA Church in the last 5 years have done so because they have found a closer relationship with Christ in Catholicism; the same reason many people join the SDA Church from Catholicism. Our Christian goal should be to bring people closer to Christ, whether within our own denomination, or without. We need to learn to celebrate a person growing closer to God, even when that means leaving our particular denomination.

33. Hugo Says:
    January 17th, 2007 at 12:44 pm

    Nathaniel,

    I believe your post was an incredible success; don’t you dare repent of it! LOL You turned the spotlight on an intriguing, unnoticed, and sometimes misunderstood phenomneon among Adventist youth. Apparently, many readers share a similar interest in Catholic spirituality, and have different interpretations of that experience (reflected in the animated comments following your post). This is a sign that your post was more successful than you could have imagined.

    As I’ve said before, I could not successflly reconcile my Adventist faith to my growing Catholic spirituality; in time, I sensed a desire, if not need, to become Catholic. Others claim that they have successfully reconciled the two in ways I have yet to grasp. Incorporating more traditional prayers or art forms into one’s spirituality is possible; but I could never overcome the dissatisfaction I felt with the seeming superficiality of this process. Has one honestly inorporated an ancient Christian spirituality into his life if he divorces its devotions from their original theological/liturgical context? Most difficult was the claim that an Adventist could feel sacramentally fulfilled despite the fact that the Adventist Church rejects several Catholic/Orthodox sacraments. (That being said, I must apologize if, in my inability to gasp the opposite point of view, I have come across as too critical, lol.)

    It seems to me that this is the vital question in this discussion: can an Adventist convinction support a genuine Catholic spirituality? Many of the participants believe so; quite a number believe not. (Among the later class are at least four Adventist converts to Catholicism.) This is the beauty of this discussion; it exposes me to entirely different ways of approaching a spiritual experience that proved pivotal in my own life. It reminds me that my path was not inevitable, and raises fasinating questions about the possibilities of an Adventist spirituality.

    I commend you for a fantastic post, informed comments, and an invigorating discussion.

34. Glenn Says:
    January 17th, 2007 at 1:15 pm

    I don’t think anyone has said this yet, but I’ll venture out on the ledge I guess.

    Although some aspects of Roman Catholicism are intriguing, it is just too authoritarian from my perspective. There is essentially no role for the laity other than to accept Rome’s teachings on a wide range of matters.

    It may be that that’s an inherent tension in the spiritual experience. That the depth and height of a spiritual experience is directly related to the degree to which one submit’s one’s own thoughts and feelings to an outside, infallible authority.

    I don’t know. I hope not.

35. Brandon Ogden Says:
    January 17th, 2007 at 3:34 pm

    Glenn,
    “it is just too authoritarian from my perspective. There is essentially no role for the laity other than to accept Rome’s teachings on a wide range of matters.”

    Actually, I think you may be surprised about how much there is for the laity. Most of the larger ministries in the church are completely laity run. Catholic Answers is one such example (Catholic.com). But even outside of evangelism and ministries, I have found a great amount of freedom in doctrinal matters, in my experience, more so than in Adventism. The Catholic Church has defined relatively few doctrines as dogmatic, leaving the Catholic to hold a variety of views without conflicting with Church teachings. Things such as prophetic interpretation, the timing of the millennium, the nature of purgatory, private revelations, to a certain degree, predestination, and several other doctrines, are all open to various positions within the church.

    But on matters that have been defined by the Church, your right, we believe that Christ has invested authority in His Church to be the pillar and foundation of truth. This is really no different than the teachings and practice of Adventism. One could look at several groups and independent ministries which have been chastised for not agreeing with the church as defined by the General Conference.

    The Adventist’s hierarchy is actually very similar to the Catholic hierarchy. This, in and of its self, is not a bad thing… however often I see the laity sitting back and EXPECTING things to be done by the clergy and religious, taking no personal ownership of the church. I think that this is one of the challenges that the Catholic Church is facing right now. Not that there is not enough for the laity to do, but that there are not enough laity that realize that they have a responsibility to fill a role in the church other than bench warmer. It has become a religion of convenience, rather than conviction, for many. I would venture to say that the engagement of the Catholic laity is far behind that of the Adventist laity when adjusted for scale, which in a way, means there is more for those of us who are involved.. to do!

36. Nathaniel Gamble Says:
    January 17th, 2007 at 5:59 pm

    Hugo–YAY, I’m happier now. I’m glad that my article was a success then; I had worried that I had offended some of my Catholic brothers and sisters who had converted into the Roman Church from Adventism. Nah, you weren’t “too critical”; there was just a lot of stuff you said:) Well good, I’m glad this all got worked out:D Pax et bonum,

    Nathaniel

37. Jonathan Canam Says:
    January 17th, 2007 at 9:45 pm

    Hi everyone…..I just happened to stumble across this website. I too am a convert from Adventism to the more traditional Christian churches. I believe the Holy Spirit led me to the Orthodox Catholic Church. There were several issues I jostled with between Roman Catholicism and Orthodoxy…..but eventually decided that Orthodoxy had the fullness of the Christian faith. Aside from this issue though, I think both a Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox would agree that we feel bad for Protestants……..because they are missing out on so much life that the Church offers within Her, which can only be found within the historical Christian churches of East and West.

38. Nathaniel Gamble Says:
    January 17th, 2007 at 11:07 pm

    Well Jonathan, I’ve heard many Evangelicals (not so many Adventists) tell me those exact same feelings about Roman Catholics and Eastern Orthodox Christians–they feel bad for them because they’re missing out on so much life that the Gospel and the true practice of New Testament Christianity have to offer. While I don’t share their convictions or their logic, I don’t feel bad about being a Protestant. But what would you say to the Anglicans, Episcopalians, and other Protestant denominations who are involved in high church? Many of them reflect a Protestant flair of Catholicism; I wonder if they would say there’s really no liturgical/spiritual difference between Catholicism and their denomination, except that they’re not Catholic. While I’m not offended by your comment (really, I’m not), they might be, especially because they consider themselves so deeply involved in it.

39. Glenn Says:
    January 18th, 2007 at 6:48 am

    “Most of the larger ministries in the church are completely laity run. Catholic Answers is one such example (Catholic.com).”

    Catholic Answers is an apologetics ministry–it doesn’t challenge Catholic teaching; it seeks to defend it. If the laity are unhappy with church teaching on, say, contraception, where do they go? (of course most of the Catholic laity ignore this teaching anyway).

    Not to abruptly change topics but there’s something else that interests me that I don’t think has come up directly; The Adventist to RC conversion is particularly intriguing because Adventist teaching is so, if I may use the word, rabidly anti-Catholic. In Adventist theology, the papacy is the anti-Christ, martyred “millions” of God’s true people during the Dark Ages, prevented the Bible from being made available to the people, and is essentially the cause for virtually every evil developed over the past 2000 years.

    Yes, I’m overstating the case a bit; but probably not by much. My question is, this represents a lot of baggage for RC converts to adjust to. Obviously most of you have come to believe that the Adventist teaching about RC was erroneous or at least “not the full story”. How did you all respond to this in your conversion?

40. Hugo Says:
    January 18th, 2007 at 3:11 pm

    1. Nathaniel,

    I guess I’d remind my Anglican friends that Catholicism-Orthodoxy embraces far more than a preference for high-church liturgics (as Glenn noted). I love the Book of Common prayer, and enjoy the Anglican rite more than the Roman rite in many respects. Nevertheless, if I want to embrace an ancient Christian THEOLOGY (and not simply spirituality), I will embrace an instututional ecclesiology that asserts the following propositions:

    A. There is but one true (institutional) Church.
    B. That Church is infallible; its councils cannot err.

    Anglicanism denies these points; it may be traditional in its liturgical forms (smells and bells), but not in much of its theological content. As Jonathan stated (from a Catholic/Orthodox perspective I also share), Anglicans are not in communion with the true Church, and therefore, not participating in its fullness.

    ***

    2. Glenn,

    The above discusion should provide one reason why converts to Catholicism feel comfortable in an “authoritative” Church (historical authenticity). Principally, however, I contend such an ecclesiology is biblical.

    Yes, the Catholic laity only “accept” the Church’s teachings, but when we conceive of the Church as the body of Christ, are all members to share the same responsibility of defining doctrine (or settling disputes)? The New Testament responds in the negative. Some are called to “the ministry of the Word,” others to “wait on tables” (Acts 6:3-4). Some are called to be “apostles” and “elders,” others are to exercise different gifts in the church (healing, etc.; 1 Cor 12). The apostle states that some are entrusted with “greater gifts” than others (1 Cor 12:30), but this does not mean that they are any more “honorable” than others (1 Cor 12:21-26). Scripture “equips” every Christians (2 Tim 3:16-17); but some are specially fitted to carry out that “equipping” upon their fellow Christians (Eph 4:12).

    Specifically, the Biblical model entrusts “the apostles and elders” (in council) with making doctrinal decisions, as in Acts 15. United with their unique ministries (but in no way overlapping them), Christians grow towards “unity in the faith,” and need no longer be “tossed about by every wind of doctrine (Eph 4:10-16).

    Unfortunately, Luther’s reinterpeted the biblical principle of the “priesthood of all believers” to implictly deny the distinction of Christians according to their functions and offices within the Church. He claims in “Freedom of a Christian,” and “Address to the German Nation” that EVERY layman can ordain ministers(!), exercise the gift of teaching, effect the sacraments, pronounce judgment upon the councils and teachers of the Church, and so forth. Is this Biblical? I do not believe so. I’ve learned to appreciate my position as a “foot” and not the “eye.”

41. Andrew Says:
    January 19th, 2007 at 3:22 am

    What I find interesting is that the original post was about SPIRITUALITY, whilst most of the comments (as interesting and informative as it is, leading to a good conversation) tend to focus on ecclesiology, doctrine and denominational differences…

    I’m not sure whether this says something about adventist attitudes to spirituality (which on the whole we traditional just have not understood) or attitudes to catholicism (where we struggle with out historical position contrasting with our contemporary situation).

    Anyway sorry for interrupting, I’ll settle back and watch the conversation continue!

42. Glenn Says:
    January 19th, 2007 at 7:23 am

    “What I find interesting is that the original post was about SPIRITUALITY, whilst most of the comments (as interesting and informative as it is, leading to a good conversation) tend to focus on ecclesiology, doctrine and denominational differences…”

    As a “good” Adventist, I’ve always understood spirituality as being in some way, maybe even in large ways, dependent on ecclesiology and doctrine. But there really is not much of a contemplative spirituality in SDAism. The focus traditionally has always been on the second coming and the “coming crisis”. No real time for contemplation or if there is, it’s focus is different, more concerned with making myself ready for translation. A more contemplative Catholic or Orthodox practice probably stems from what are different understandings of the Kingdom of God and when and where that Kingdom takes place. For Catholics i sense it is more regarded as the here and now, but for SDA’s, it’s future and in heaven. Hence, from ecclesiology and doctrine comes spirituality.

    Which begs the question, What is Spiritual in Adventism? What does it mean to partake of the spiritual life? (Remember the Sabbath; read the Bible; practice health reform???)

43. Glenn Says:
    January 19th, 2007 at 12:22 pm

    Hugo said:

    “Yes, the Catholic laity only “accept” the Church’s teachings, but when we conceive of the Church as the body of Christ, are all members to share the same responsibility of defining doctrine (or settling disputes)? The New Testament responds in the negative.”

    If you’re suggesting that as parts of the body of Christ, we each have unique and Spirit given gifts and responsibilities I agree with you. But what I had more in mind is the role of accountability.

    In Protestantism, the source of authority is presumed to be the Bible. As a lay person, I’m not involved in determining doctrine or preaching the word. But I believe the Bible teaches us to “search the scriptures to see if these things were so” as Acts describes the believers in Berea doing. Hence there is a means for “testing” the prophets and teachers.

    In Catholicism, as I understand it, there is not a source of authority between the church leaders and the laity to which both are accountable to. In Catholicism the source of authority is the church leadership itself, i.e. tradition.

    Of course, Catholic church leadership has produced a Catechism, to which the leadership is presumably accountable. The lay member can compare what he or she hears in church or from the Pope and compare it to the catechism. But I’m not sure how all this works and how accountable the leadership is to the laity and the rest of the Body.

    Of course on the other hand,
    [At the bookstore yesterday I briefly skimmed Why I am a Catholic by Garry Wills in which he appears to quote Alexis de Toqueville as saying something like "the pope doesn't as much want to be a dictator of the people as the people want the pope to dictate to them--I'm butchering this but I think that was the gist of it].

44. Stephen Korsman Says:
    January 19th, 2007 at 1:00 pm

    Andrew said:
    “What I find interesting is that the original post was about SPIRITUALITY, whilst most of the comments (as interesting and informative as it is, leading to a good conversation) tend to focus on ecclesiology, doctrine and denominational differences…”

    As Glenn said, “from ecclesiology and doctrine comes spirituality” … but the converse is also true - spirituality affects ecclesiology and doctrine. This is a VERY interesting discussion of the effects of each one on the other … conversion, amongst other things.

    This is a progressive Adventist blog, which is why it is called what it is called. I suspect the more traditional Adventist would be horrified to think of this sort of thing going on in their own church. For many, smells and bells only rhyme with hell. I wonder how far this progressiveness has spread within Adventism.

    Nathaniel wrote “So you’re THAT Stephen!”

    Yip, it would seem so. I’m glad you like the blog … and thanks for the link on yours … just one mistake - the hover text says I’m ex-Adventist. I’m not … I just had to spend several years asking questions that Sabbath keepers (Worldwide Church of God and splinters) brought up. By the time I first came across Adventism, most had already been answered.

45. Brandon Ogden Says:
    January 19th, 2007 at 5:23 pm

    Glenn,
    “Yes, I’m overstating the case a bit; but probably not by much. My question is, this represents a lot of baggage for RC converts to adjust to. Obviously most of you have come to believe that the Adventist teaching about RC was erroneous or at least “not the full story”. How did you all respond to this in your conversion?”

    Yes, there is certainly “baggage” for converts from the SDA to the RC faith. Much of it for me and my wife surrounded the role of Mary and the Saints. It took a lot of sub-surface study for us to really come to an understanding that was within the Catholic pale of orthodoxy. As far as the reaction to Catholicism, being raised with a SDA view of RC history… for me it was not as hard. Once I really started digging into history and trying to find out not only what happened, but why things happened, most of my concerns were either completely unfounded, or not based in a thorough understanding of history, and thus easily abated.

    That is not to say that there have not been injustices perpetrated by those in the Catholic Church, there certainly have been, just as there have been historical injustices in most cultures, including protestant and American histories. I think the challenge for us is to learn from our spiritual forefathers and pray for wisdom and piety, so that we don’t repeat the same mistakes.

46. Brandon Ogden Says:
    January 19th, 2007 at 5:45 pm

    Glenn,
    “Of course, Catholic church leadership has produced a Catechism, to which the leadership is presumably accountable. The lay member can compare what he or she hears in church or from the Pope and compare it to the catechism. But I’m not sure how all this works and how accountable the leadership is to the laity and the rest of the Body.”

    I am not sure what you’re asking about here? Are you wondering about the disciplinary process of the Church? Who is charged with insuring orthodox teachings? Or how new teachings are ascertained to be true or not?

47. Daniel Hahn Says:
    January 25th, 2007 at 7:08 pm

    Hi Nathan,

    Thank you for the kind words. There is more to the story, of course, such an experience with the Eucharist during an adoration service that was an enormous spiritual event. I’ve never given my testimony thus far formally, however, I have written it on an Adventist yahoo club before getting booted off of it.

    I also thank you for your work in Adventism to find strength in common ground and understanding and for your article to begin with.

    I just wanted to make a quick snap comment to the “simplicity” statement. Just that I feel it is a great utility in order to postulate a grand unified theory in physics or an all encompassing philisophical world view, however when it comes to theology, simplicity for simplicities own sake is not quite as good an arbiter of good from bad doctrine. I remember once reading that C.S. Lewis in fact responded to Islam’s accusation that it has a noble simplicity in it’s theology that Christianity lacks due to doctrines such as the Trinity and the Incarnation. C.S, Lewis’ response was to point out that they are perfectly correct and simplicity would be nice, however Christians would be able to make Christianity as simple as they could had they had the privalidge of making up their religion, unfortunately we did not and thus we simply take what is handed down to us.

    That just struck me. However this is a great exchange so far and hopefully this is indicative of possible things to come. I hope there is a time when Adventists and Catholics can strive for genuine ecumenical unity. I, however, do believe what the Church teaches about itself and do hope that one day we all find ourselves in perfect unity within the bosom of the Mother Church. But I certainly do hope that Christians of all denominations can present a united front to a dying world and offer it its only hope..Jesus Christ, true God and true man!!!

    God bless!

48. Zane Says:
    January 25th, 2007 at 8:10 pm

    Here’s a thought…
    Before the Reformation (way before the Adventist denomination even existed), there was two main branches in Christianity–the Western and Eastern. Before the schism between the Eastern and Western church (way, way before the Adventist denomination existed), there was one church. The Apostle’s, Nicene, and Chalcedonian creeds were agreed upon before ANY of the schisms. They are considered the ecumenical creeds, accepted by East and West–no denomination can claim them as their own. When Adventists explore/use the creeds and worship and spiritual practices of the early church, (which I think is a wonderful thing!) they are retrieving and connecting to their Christian heritage that predates schisms and denominations.
    We as Adventists need to realize that the Church did not start in 1844!

49. Zane Says:
    January 25th, 2007 at 8:22 pm

    What I’m trying to say is that the trends reported by Nathan are a cause for celebration. What would be even more of a cause is if Christians (Catholic and Orthodox included) would reclaim the practices that predate the church itself, the Sabbath for example, and come to identify themselves as part of God’s people throughout history.

50. Elaine Nelson Says:
    January 26th, 2007 at 11:21 am

    Everything Christianity accepts and claims as belief today was long ago decided by the one catholic church: The NT scriptures; the doctrine of he human/divine nature of Christ; the Triinity, and more. Once accepted, we should recognize that our heritage was decided long ago and we are merely accepting those decisions.

    Studies in the history of the Christian church should be given much stronger emphasis than merely in the Adventist church. In my graduate studies on the development of Christianity, it became apparent that the Greek leaders of the church did not accept all the dogmatism of the Roman, or Latin church. Rather than specifying and identifying the relationship of the “Godhead” they approached it as an experience and mystery that could not be neatly defined.

    This experiential approach to religion leaves wide room for the individual to develop his own understanding rather than heeding to dogma. In answering to the Nicene Creed that attempted to define the ineffable paradox that was incompatible with monotheism, Gregory of Nyssa wrote that: “We know our God only by his operations but we do not undertake to approach his essence.” This would be the keynote of the future theology in the Eastern Church.

    Lest we forget, the Christian chuch was born in the Greek culture and after Constantine established his headquarters in Constantinople, it remained for many years much larger and more influential than the Latin, or Roman Church.

    Thus, the difference between the Eastern and the Western churches– the Eastern has always been more contemplative, allowing the individual to develop his own personal experience of God.

    It has always been true that the church that becomes dogmatic on doctrine, eventually becomes the persecutor of heresy. This is as true today as it ws in the first centuries of the Christian church.

51. Hugo Says:
    January 27th, 2007 at 5:41 pm

    Elaine,

    Politely, I must beg to differ. We should recall that the Eastern Church is as equally dogmatic as the Roman Church on what it considers the touchstones of orthodoxy, including: the hypostatical relations within the Trinity, the natures of Christ, and the veneration of icons. The fact that the East did not accept the Latin dogma of the “filioque” does not make it any less dogmatic than Rome; Orthodoxy rejects the Latin model as heresy.

    The hesychast insistence on an apophatic (i.e., negative) approach to theology (claiming that the essence of God cannot be known) still leads to dogmatism. An Eastern Christian insists that although the Church cannot define who God IS, it can define who He IS NOT. (Put it this way: Rome anathemetizes those who do not hold the right faith [which can be positively known]); Constantinople anathematizes those who agree with the wrong faith.) And sure enough, once the ecumenical councils of the first millennium EXCLUDED the errors of Arianism, Nestorianism, Eutychianism, Monothelitism, and Iconoclasm, the Byzantine emperors exacted severe (even capital) penalties upon these heretics. And, unlike the Catholic Church (which has apologized for its use of violence in the past), the Orthodox Church does not excuse the use of force. Accordingly, the claim that the East’s “experiential approach to religion leaves wide room for the individual to develop his own understanding rather than heeding to dogma” is, quite frankly, unhistorical. (I don’t mean to be impolite).

    I also must disagree that a dogmatic faith is a negative thing, even if it leads the Church to suppress members with opinions it has excluded. After the Jerusalem Council in Acts 15, the apostles universally condemned dissent from the council’s decree. For instance, Paul warned Titus (a bishop) of “rebellious people, idle talkers and deceivers, especially those of the circumcision,” adding that, “they must be silenced, since they are upsetting whole families by teaching… what it is not right to teach” (Tit 1:10-11). Likewise, Paul instructs Timothy to hand Hymenaeus (who taught that the Resurrection already occurred; 2 Tim 2:17-18) “over to Satan” (i.e., excommunicate him) so he would “be taught not to blaspheme.” A New Testament ecclesiology is decidedly suppressionist when confronted with heresy. This is a positive reality, however; God instituted the Church to ensure that His people “would not be tossed about by ever wind of doctrine”(Eph 4:14).

52. Elaine Nelson Says:
    January 27th, 2007 at 7:36 pm

    Hugo, you are extrapolating from early Christian history to a much later time. My comments were based on the early centuries. Since hesychasm did not arise until the 14th century, there was ample time for both the Western and Eastern divisions of the church, which did not formally split until the 11th century, to develop many accretions.

    It is still true that dogmatism leads to heresy, as even the modern SDA church has shown.

53. Ella Says:
    January 28th, 2007 at 4:09 pm

    What an interesting post! I can understand the pull of Catholicism’s more contemplative approach to spirituality. It is also mine, and I am well over 40. Like one of the writers, I became enamored with the approach at a John Michael Talbot retreat in Indianapolis in the late 80’s. I had a chance to talk with John and we corresponded for some time. He told me he had been drawn to the Adventist church at one time through the owner of a health food store in the south. However, after a divorce it was the Franciscans who took him in and he felt at home with their approach. His retreat had a balance of worship and Christian teaching along with just enough of the praise/charismatic type of worship to give it a lot of feeling.
    Later I attended various retreats and workshops at a nearby monestery and retreat house. I wish that Adventists had such places.
    Now I still like the contemplative. I like the other forms of worship as well though not so much the traditional from my youth. I like praise and I like high church (not all the time). But in recent years I have come to appreciate the rituals and symbolism of Judaism, and I believe they are what the early church practiced. The Messianic movement has a lot to offer in this regard.
    As far as doctrine is concerned, I could never be a Catholic. My husband was raised as one, and it has left him with a negative image of organized religion. I can, however, understand the pull of the feelings. But I don’t trust feelings as being the presence of God. One can get positve “spiritual” feelings in any environment if it is set up right to appeal to our senses. And there is nothing wrong in trying to do that if we understand the reality behind it is more psychological than spiritual. I wish Adventist churches did more to appeal to the aesthetic and beauty in worship.

54. Dave Says:
    January 29th, 2007 at 4:12 am

    I can’t believe what I’m reading in this article! This is SO far from what we as the Adventist church stand for! I am afraid of the strong tones of Ecumenism in your article. I’m deeply saddened, and alarmed that some our members can be so easily misled. I was even more worried after I read all the letters of “affirmation” of your article. I wish I had a better ability to put my thoughts into words. Suffice it to say: I do not agree with your sentiments at all. Kind regards, Dave.

55. Hugo Says:
    January 29th, 2007 at 2:26 pm

    Elaine,

    I cited hesychasm in my response because I thought you were referring to it in your post. After quoting St. Gregory of Nyssa, you stated that his distinction between the knowable “operations” and unknowable “essence” of God “would be the keynote of the future theology in the Eastern Church.” I assumed that by “future theology,” you had the thought of Gregory Palamas and the hesychasts in mind (which fully developed the Eastern distinction between God’s energies and essence).

    But again, all seven ecumenical councils were convoked by the Byzantines; even in the fourth century, the Eastern church depended upon the state to enforce its dogmas. No period in the history of Byzantine Christianity conforms to your thesis that Orthodoxy allows “the individual to develop his own understanding rather than heeding to dogma.” Honestly, I guess I reacted strongly to the phrase “the dogmatism of the Roman, or Latin church”–as if the East was exempt from the same.

56. Hugo Says:
    January 29th, 2007 at 2:33 pm

    Dave,

    Since the original article explored the question of which elements of Catholic Christianity might be compatible with an Adventist faith, I’d love to hear your thoughts especially. Which elements are “SO far from what we stand for as the Adventist Church?” Should certain elements be rejected simply because of their association with Catholicism (even if their is nothing inherently wrong with them)? You fear of ecumenism seems to suggest the latter, so that Adventists should isolate themselves as far as possible from the historical heritage of Christianity. Is this assessment accurate?

57. Darrell Says:
    January 29th, 2007 at 3:56 pm

    My! I had no idea that there was such a thing as a ‘Catholic Adventist’ or that so many life-long Adventists have or would like to become Catholic. Though I can’t understand why after learning much of the truths of Adventism and Protestantism anyone could go back to Catholic theology, I can understand adopting the ritualistic aspects of Catholicism.

    One need only walk into a cathedral and see the candles, statues, and architecture and feel the symbolic reverence the entire experience provides. It is enough to make even the hardes amongst us fight the urge to genuflect.

    I believe that there is a deep spiritual longing to feel the awe, comfort and ancient ritualistic aspects of being close to God that Catholicism offers and that people are getting tired of in candy-coated Protestant worship services.

    Now I really feel like checking myself in to an ancient European monastary!

58. Nathaniel Gamble Says:
    February 3rd, 2007 at 12:17 am

    To Darrell–Oh, that’s awesome! I think cathedrals are really cool places (it keeps you quiet, anyway). I hope my article was at least informative of a catholic Adventist (since it was something new and all). Also, congratulations on getting down through all these comments:D

    To Dave–I am sorry that you didn’t like my article, but I do not apologize for what I’ve written. I had two goals in mind when I wrote the article: 1)to present the fact that there are Adventists who have a legitimate draw to ancient Christian spirituality and practices that have survived in the Catholic and Orthodox traditions of Christianity; and 2)to indirectly point out the long-held restorationist bent within Adventism of anti-Catholic sentiment (by the way, I find Adventists to harbor a form of anti-Judaism as well, but that’s another story). Like many other Protestants of the 19th and half of the 20th century, we may have felt that the Roman Catholic Church was the “whore of Babylon”, but Ellen White herself led the attitude to not only accept the Catholic Christian but to look upon them as PEOPLE and not demons or animals. So technically, I’m DIRECTLY IN LINE with the spirit of Adventism and what we believe.

    The fact of the matter is this, Dave, and I’m glad you did have a problem with my article so I could present this view that has weighed heavy on my mind for at least half my life (and I’m only 21, so that should tell you something): Adventism has a problem, more accurately a phobia, with Catholicism because of an historically entrenched theological construction inherited from a few hundred years of Pietistic Evangelical Protestantism. I will not stand down from my position of pointing out the good in Catholicism, and I will not stand down from pointing out the injustice and unChristlikeness of this kind of attitude passed down through many generations of Adventism. In fact, I would like to point out right now that there are many Adventists in North America who DO NOT believe that their Catholic next door neighbors are in league with the devil.

    If we are going to be followers of Jesus of Nazareth, we need to realize the sacrifice it will cost to truly follow our Lord; likewise, we need to recognize that to follow Jesus is to live like Him–lives of mercy, love, acceptance, and grace. As Christians, we are to serve everyone we meet, and thus serve our Lord. If you are intent on casting the Catholic, both born into it and the convert, into hell, I can’t change that. But I would like to remind you that if you do that you are committing idolatry and setting yourself up as judge over other people. To quote Abraham, “Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right?” You are not the judge, so maybe it would be wise to not try to take God’s place as arbiter of the universe.

    It is not my intention to sound mean, but this is reality. This month is Black History Month, a time to remember that we’re not over racism or any other kind of prejudice. It is high time we start acting like the Christians we claim to be and stop condemning people we don’t even know to the fires of hell because we don’t care and we’d much rather not have to even deal with them. I thank you for wishing me well, and I too wish you all the best. May God give grace to you as I pray He gives grace to me.

59. Brandon Ogden Says:
    February 3rd, 2007 at 9:18 am

    Nathaniel,
    I really enjoyed your last post and would add that whether it is racial or religious “phobia”, the source is generally ignorance and an unwillingness to learn about that which is different from ourselves. I really commend this type of discussion because it goes far in breaking down stereo-types between Protestantism and Catholicism and vice-versa.

60. Elaine Nelson Says:
    February 3rd, 2007 at 3:19 pm

    These articles, exploring various religions and practices illustrates that there is no specific ritual or ecclesiology that is sacred. The form and practices have changed somewhat through the centuries, but to feel that a particular ritual or sacrament is the same as being sacred should be discarded.

    A few posts back it was mentioned that a form of sacramentalism was practieced in Adventist churches by kneeling when the Bible was read. This eleveats the Bible to the position of the “host” or God, doesn’t it?

    Since the time the Bible was printed and read by every literate person, it seems that Protestants, at least, have revered the Bible so much that it is now called “God’s Word”; every word is inspired, and daring to question anything therein is tantanmount to actually questioning God. When did this become accepted within the Protestant and Adventist churches?

    As for becoming ecumenical, wasn’t Christ’s wish that we all be one? One Lord, one faith, one baptism? And yet, the history of the church has been divisive since its beginning. We should, however, seek to find common ground, yes, even with the other two monotheistic religions, because we zll worship the same God, although we all may have different understandings about him. No one knows Him, so none will see him as he is.

61. Jeremiah Says:
    February 5th, 2007 at 8:21 pm

    Here’s yet another SDA turned Orthodox tuning in… My journey happened between ages 25 and 30…

    I didn’t approach it from being attracted to Orthodoxy and Catholicism… I approached it by first having my extreme conservative SDA foundation demolished because of reading to much anti-SDA material from the internet. Then, eventually, I decided to be a Christian after all, and wondered what the New Testament really taught. To answer this question I discovered the apostolic Church Fathers. I became attracted to their Christianity which I read about, and wondered if it still existed. I wanted to be part of their Church.

    Eventually I did explore both Catholicism and Orthodoxy, deciding on Orthodoxy because of the deep spirituality I found there as well as the strong connection to the beginnings of Christianity which can be seen in the ancient forms of worship. I feel secure with the unchangingness.

    Now, I could never be satisfied with anything else! Once you learn what stuff means in this ancient worship, it’s all you want!

62. Julius Says:
    February 5th, 2007 at 8:38 pm

    Wow…61 comments, Nathaniel!

    And now…#62

    Just a little comment about a resource that some of you might appreciate:

    Reinder Bruinsma’s book, Seventh-day Adventist Attitudes toward Roman Catholicism, is the most complete historical survey on the topic. It was publisehd by Andrews University Press in 1994.

    Also…his Summer 1999 Spectrum article, “Adventists and Catholics: Prophetic Preview or Prejudice?” provides a very nice precis of his dissertation.

    Hugo, Brandon, et al. ~ I’d like to hear reflections on the Spectrum article, if you don’t mind.

63. Jimmy Says:
    February 5th, 2007 at 10:36 pm

    In 1990 Frank Schaeffer, son of Francis Schaeffer, the famous evangelical preacher and theologian, also converted to the Orthodox faith

    Some of you might find this following article interesting: It’s a review of Frank Schaeffer’s “Dancing Alone: The Quest for Orthodox Faith in the Age of False Religions

    DANCING ALONE–OUT OF STEP WITH ORTHODOXY
    by Vigen Guroian

    http://www.jacwell.org/reviews/Books/dancing_alone.htm

    Editor’s Note:

    “The emergence of Frank Schaeffer as an Orthodox apologist has implications which are both promising and ominous. Promising, because there are those who have and will continue to be first introduced to the Orthodox Church through his talks and freely distributed newspaper, The Christian Activist. Ominous, because the tone and style of Schaeffer’s ministry have led some to question whether it is less the Orthodox Church and more the struggle with his own fundamentalist background that he is proclaiming.”

64. Zane Says:
    February 6th, 2007 at 5:42 am

    Julius,

    Thanks for the link to “Adventists and Catholics: Prophetic Preview or Prejudice?” Great essay!

65. Harlen Miller Says:
    February 15th, 2007 at 5:36 pm

    I’m joining this dialogue late. But I’ve posted some comments on a blog relating
    to worship on the PUC campus. I’m a recent ‘immigrant’ to the PUC area, Deer
    Park, exactly, and I would like to connect up with some Adventists who might be interested in experimenting with other forms of Sabbath worship than the current diet of so many SDA churches, in this area, and others.

    I’m a musician,–almost said ‘church’musician–because most of my choral work has interfaced with the Adventist church in its academies and colleges, but also have directed church choirs in Baptist, Presbyterian and Methodist churchs for several years at a time.

    I am older than the age bracket mentioned, but have always enjoyed exploring different forms of public worship, constantly seeking one that works withing a frame of reference of extreme reverence. The current worship models aren’t cutting it for me. I believe there’s a place for informal, chatty worship, but where can we Adventists get the other kind–the kind that recognizes and accepts older forms of worship (did we Adventists invent public worship? NO)(Why do we act like we did?!)

    My email is harlen.miller@yahoo.com.

    I would love to get together with fellow Adventists in the PUC area, and possibly create some alternative SDA worship experiences that borrow from the older traditions–music, prayers, manner of presentation, etc.

    Keep up the exploring.

66. Julius Says:
    February 15th, 2007 at 5:48 pm

    Harlen,

    I’m a recent PUC emigre in Loma Linda. I’d suggest that you contact John Hughson at PUC Church who with his wife Joan periodically puts together a form of liturgical service on PUC campus. I recognize you want to do something regular…and perhaps you could create something in conjunction with PUC Church, and not apart from it. The Hughsons have a deep appreciation of the Eastern Church tradition (in fact, John spent some time at a monastery on Mt. Athos in the Greek Isles as part of his spiritual renewal journey; he wrote about it on Spectrum recently, too).

    All the best…

67. Elaine Nelson Says:
    February 15th, 2007 at 6:57 pm

    Didn’t Jaroslav Pelikan, the eminent Christian historian, join the Eastern Orthodox church from Lutheranism shortly before his recent death?

68. Hugo Says:
    February 15th, 2007 at 7:30 pm

    Yes, Pelikan did convert to Orthodoxy. In fact, he was a member of the Orthodox chapel I most frequently attended during the first part of my conversion experience, on the campus of St. Vladimir’s Orthodox Theological Seminary (Yonkers, NY).

69. Glenn Says:
    February 16th, 2007 at 8:05 am

    Speaking of older worship traditions, I was surprised to read that at the time of the Reformation the mass was not being conducted or at least not provided to the laity, except apparently at Easter.

    http://www.episcopalchurch.org/67620_ENG_HTM.htm?menupage=63787
    (click on “Why do we celebrate Eucharist every Sunday).

    But it seems to me that the heart of traditional litergies was the Eucharist, the symbolic or typological “breaking” of Christ’s body and blood, in rememberance of His life and death for us. The heart of protestant Christianity in the modern world at least is the sermon, which may or may not be Christ-centered (and often is not).

    On the other side, I can see where by repetition the Eucharist could become merely ceremonial and obligatory, resulting in the same indifference on the pat of the worshipper as the animal sacrifices of old. That’s not to say the Eucharist is at fault. But Jesus and the Bible also said that mercy to others and to obey was better than sacrifice.

    An SDA service based on older worship traditions would be a fascinating thing.

70. Nathaniel Gamble Says:
    February 23rd, 2007 at 6:42 pm

    Actually, Glenn, I’m doing something like that right now; I’m in charge of Good Friday and Easter Sunday services this year at PUC. In May 2006 I asked the then future-now present RVP if I could put on Easter Weekend services and be totally in charge of them. He said yes, and I’m basically doing liturgical services lending from ancient Christianity, etc. I hope people are blessed by them, and I hope I don’t get burned at the stake by my Adventist Protestant brothers and sisters

71. Zane Says:
    February 23rd, 2007 at 6:55 pm

    Good luck with your vision, Nathan…Wish I could be at PUC this Easter. =)

72. Elaine Nelson Says:
    February 24th, 2007 at 7:58 am

    Nathaniel, let us know what you plan for Easter and how it is received. Sounds like something the church should have been doing all along. After all, there would be no Christian church were it not for the Resurrection.

    Our church lights the Advent candle on the weeks before Christmas, which is something I imagine most SDA churches do not do.

• 
  

• Pages

  • About
  • Bio
  • Intersections
  • Living Conversations

• Recent Posts

  • Why I “Disagree” with Paul
  • In Conversation #3 ~ Podcast on (De-)Constructing Church
  • How Then Can We Save?
  • Highlights from the ASRS Meetings
  • In Conversation #2 ~ Continuing Podcast Experiment

• Recent Comments

  • Julius on Beyond Irony
  • Julius on Why I “Disagree” with Paul
  • Zane on Why I “Disagree” with Paul
  • Julius on Why I “Disagree” with Paul
  • John McLarty on Why I “Disagree” with Paul

• Archives

  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • July 2008
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • February 2008
  • January 2008
  • December 2007
  • November 2007
  • October 2007
  • September 2007
  • August 2007
  • July 2007
  • June 2007
  • May 2007
  • April 2007