It was like an upside-down television experience, Last month, I was back in my hometown of Berrien Springs, Michigan to attend my 55th Andrews Academy class reunion and the Andrews University Board of Trustees’ meetings. The leaves were brilliant! The color peaked while I was there.
Two weeks later I was in Tucson, Arizona for the Pacific Union Adventist Attorneys’ Conference where everything was a drab brown. Visiting your hometown generally reminds you of the “old days.” My hometown reminded me of color television while Tucson took me back to the days of black and white.
That was not the only stark contrast.
While at Andrews I sat in Pioneer Memorial Church listening to its current head pastor, Shane Anderson, speak about how we should vote. Two Sabbaths thereafter, I attended the Tucson Desert Valley Adventist Church where the former head pastor of Pioneer Memorial Church, Dwight Nelson, warned about “Christian Nationalism” in his sermon.
Pastor Shane told his congregation that the primary basis on which they should vote is to preserve religious liberty. Pastor Dwight’s argument about “Christian Nationalism” is about what might happen in the future.
I heard Shane’s single sermon, which was half of a two-part series. I spent more time listening to and debating Dwight’s views because he was also on a panel with me in Tucson to discuss religious liberty. My short exposure to the views of both men should tell the reader that I’m an expert on my own views but suffer the limitations of hearing and perception regarding the views of Shane and Dwight. If they read this and believe I’m misstating their views, then they are right.
Pastor Dwight believes that “Christian Nationalism” is making a difference right now. We did not have time to exchange specifics so I could better understand his claims, but my extensive understanding of what is presently taking place in religious liberty causes me to disagree with Dwight that Christian Nationalists are even close to getting legislation passed that infringes on religious liberty.
Both Pastors Dwight and Shane are men of God. In my debate with Dwight (a panel discussion with Dwight and Jonathan Cherne), it was clear to me that Dwight and I disagree. To the extent that I understand Shane’s position, I agree with him. This is not the same as asserting that he agrees with me!
In the discussion between Jonathan, Dwight, and me, I characterized Dwight’s position as akin to an Adventist focused on planning recipes to improve future health while the Adventist’s kitchen was on fire. Focused only on the future, the Adventist overlooks the fire that presents imminent peril. That is a problem. Shane’s position that we should vote based on current religious freedom issues places the focus on the fire.
At the conference I was challenged on whether I believed the prophecies. The answer is, “Yes.” I believe the Christian-left, allied with pagans and spiritualists, are described by the prophecies of Daniel, Revelation, and the statements of Ellen White. But that is the future.
A huge amount of humility is essential in describing how this future will be realized. God’s people completely misunderstood His first coming. Only the foolish are confident they have a precise view of the events leading to His Second Coming. For that reason, I will simply say that while I disbelieve “Christian Nationalism” is a problem rather than a talking point of the Democrat Party, I will try to be humble and say, “Let’s wait and see how the prophecies unfold.”
In the present, the kitchen is on fire in at least three ways that Adventists need to understand and fight. This fire originates with the hard-left of the political spectrum. As one of the lawyers on the religious right I am fighting these attacks. Here are the three I specifically mentioned in my “Your Kitchen Is on Fire” debate with Pastor Dwight.
Hard-left Attacks on Jews
Before a ban on Sabbath worship could be enacted, the proponents of the ban would have to “roll over” American Jews. They are few in number but have a powerful influence. If you follow the news, attacks on Jews are happening right now. I just helped settle a case in which I represented Jewish graduate students at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology who were forced to either support a labor union which advocated the destruction of Israel or give up their work for the school that was part of their educational experience. We won a settlement that protected their graduate work and their religious beliefs. I now represent a student at Dartmouth who faces the same challenge. Many Jewish students are contacting me for help. It does not seem that the hard-left will relent any time soon in its current attacks on Israel. A substantial portion of organized labor is now taking a stand against Israel.
Alphabet People and Trinity Western University School of Law
The other hard-left attack comes from those who support the homosexual lobby and its “alternative sex” allies. Trinity Western University is an overtly Christian school with three locations in Canada. Trinity decided that it would open a law school because there were are no overtly Christian law schools in Canada. The British Columbia lawyers supporting the alphabet people, coupled with lawyers from other provinces, took the position that they would not admit to the bar any lawyer who graduated from Trinity Western School of Law. Why? Because Trinity has a Bible-based teaching on marriage. The Canadian Supreme Court overwhelmingly voted to permit this new law school to be crushed for its theology on marriage.
Who defends the religious liberty of a nation? The answer is, “Lawyers.” Canada is now “safe” from having lawyers educated with a Christian perspective on the law.
Think about this brazen attack on faith. It was Trinity Western’s theology that caused the Canadian government to kill its law school. With this precedent, what is next? Can Catholics, Baptists, or Adventists have their schools closed over a disagreement with their theology? Can anyone warning of “Christian Nationalism” cite anything even remotely like this currently taking place?
We need to be honest about the threat to religious freedom presented by the Alphabet lobby. I have often heard Christians attack other Christians for picking out homosexuals and those experiencing gender dysphoria for special and unequal treatment. They say in one way or another,
“God loves everyone, and all sin is sin. Quit targeting the alphabet sins.”
Those voicing that criticism need to pay closer attention. The alphabet sinners are the only ones demanding the Church approve their sin or go out of business. Think about it. Have you ever heard of a lobbying group dedicated to getting the government to financially harm, or force to close, those Christians and their institutions who do not embrace their sins? Is there a lobby for adulterers? How about thieves and scoundrels? Have you ever heard “Unless the Church embraces theft, they should not be allowed to operate a law school!” Right, you have never heard of such a thing. The efforts of the alphabet people to coerce the Church includes making the embrace of their sin a criterion for licensure, accreditation, and employment.
Revelation 13:17 warns that God’s followers will not be able to “sell or trade” without accepting a mark of approval. That warning is reflected in these alphabet attacks. They include removing judges who will not perform same-sex marriages to creating accreditation and licensure standards that require embracing the alphabet lifestyle without criticism.
The COVID Attack
If you have “never forget” markers in your mind, such as the Jewish Holocaust, September 11, and the missing prisoners of the Viet Nam War, you need to add the COVID attack on religious worship. The governments of several states ordered churches to close their worship services. Why? Because the government decided this was an emergency and government bureaucrats knew better than church elders what was best for church members.
Fulcrum7 previously published my article on the specifics of the COVID cases that reached the U.S. Supreme Court. The Fat Lady and the COVID Song. Litigation continues for employees who lost their jobs because their faith conflicted with taking the vaccine. To date, the Supreme Court has not ruled on the merits of a case squarely raising the constitutional claim that the authority of the state does not include closing churches. It is certainly possible that the High Court, as with the Ministerial Exception cases, will rule that just as the state has no authority over who is the minister selected by a church, so the state has no authority over the worship determined by the church.
While the motive of the state was not to force worship for theological reasons, we must never forget that state government has already assumed the authority to force the closing of worship services regardless of the theological views of the church.
Friend, the kitchen is on fire! These attacks are supported by the hard-left of the political spectrum. We need to acknowledge the peril and fight back with our prayers, our votes and in the courtroom.
No doubt those enthralled with the supposed peril of “Christian Nationalism” are sweating over the re-election of Donald J. Trump to the presidency. I’ve spent nearly a half-century fighting for religious freedom and free speech. I’ve never seen an administration as friendly to religious freedom as the first Trump administration. Could that change? Of course. But I doubt it.
What about the rising power of the evangelicals in the new Trump administration? Pastor Dwight, for example, sees peril in “White Christian Evangelicals” (while admitting that Adventists are Evangelicals). In the November 15, 2024, edition of the Wall Street Journal, an opinion article entitled “Trump’s GOP Revival Isn’t Sectarian,” revealed that the percentage of “white evangelicals” continues to shrink from 26% of the electorate in 2016 to 21% today. Voters who described their religious beliefs as “something else” (other than Abrahamic faiths), coupled with those who profess no religious beliefs, constitute 30% of the electorate. The article suggests you can hardly attribute Trump’s reelection to evangelical Christians.
What about Evangelicals and recent state laws mandating the posting of the Ten Commandments (Louisiana) or the inclusion of Bible stories (Texas) in public schools? Logic says that these pale in comparison to the state stopping worship services, crushing a Christian law school, or forcing individuals out of their professions because of their religious beliefs.
Are these recent actions intended to return morality to society at least wrong, if not unconstitutional? Consider what Ellen White wrote about the need to have civil laws in harmony with God’s law:
“In the law of the kingdom of God … are to be found the principles that should lie at the foundation of the laws of earthly governments. The laws of these governments should be in harmony with the law of Jehovah, the standard by which all created beings are to be judged” (E. G. White Letter 187, 1903, p. 5).
If civil law is to accord with God’s Law, then educating young citizens about the Ten Commandments in public schools is an excellent plan.
Here is what Ellen White said about bringing the Bible, not just Bible stories, into the public schools:
“My brother, this objecting to the passing of a law to bring the Bible into the schools will work against us, those of our faith who are making so much of the Bible. A year ago there was something presented before me in reference to these things, and we shall have to use the Bible for our evidence to show the foundation of our faith. We should be exceedingly cautious in every particular lest we shut out a single ray of light from those who are in darkness” (Ellen G. White Letter 44, 1893).
To be clear, Ellen White disfavored forcing the reading of the Bible in public schools. At the same time, she counseled against objecting to it. One reason was the belief that Bible reading would give light to those in darkness.
Assuming that the current “harm” of Christian Nationalists is to subject public school students to the Ten Commandments and Bible stories, look at what the left has foisted upon students in California. The 2011 Fair Education Act in Section 51204.5 requires in pertinent part:
“Instruction in social sciences shall include … a study of the role and contributions of … lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender Americans … with particular emphasis on portraying the role of these groups in contemporary society.”
The conclusion is clear, the Alphabet people pose a much greater threat to religious liberty than so-called “Christian Nationalists.” Is there any reason to believe that in the future the left will switch roles and come to the rescue of “those who keep the Commandments of God and their faith in Jesus?” (Revelation 14:12). I have more confidence in the “Christian Nationalists” who in my definition are those who love Jesus and their country.
****
Bruce N. Cameron is the Reed Larson Professor of Labor Law at Regent University School of Law and is on the litigation staff of the National Right to Work Legal Defense and Education Foundation.
