Jerusalem, Jerusalem, who kills the prophets and stones those who have been sent to her! How often I wanted to gather your children together, the way a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you were unwilling (Matt. 23:32).
As we approach the 62nd General Session of the General Conference of Seventh Day Adventists, I can’t help but think of the significance of this event. As humans we often attribute events in time as being instrumental in guiding the course of history.
And even though events are but a culminating moment of existing culture, morality and ideology, we choose events as the means by which to remember history. And though this GC session will not likely create a new Adventist vision or purpose, it will be emblematic of where we collectively see ourselves as a Church. With the intersectionality of eschatology, secular/social developments, denominational destiny, and coordinated administrative actions clashing in my mind, numerous questions surface for deliberation.
Is the present perception of Adventism, that which we want future members and the world to identify us as? That is, does the present-day Adventist persona, convey a worthy reflection of the movement and purpose we were organized for? Have the incumbent administrators of the Adventist Church positioned us to be appropriately situated for the runout of earth history? Are our leaders focused on the biblically ordained work at hand… or are they fixated on perpetualizing organizationalism; the multi-tiered often redundant hierarchy of word salad titles replete with familial multi-generational employment?
Recent History
Though Covid is behind us and some have developed topic fatigue, I still struggle to reconcile a statement made by a conference religious liberty leader during an in-person meeting. His exclamation of, “we simply don’t see the vaccine mandate as a moral issue” still echoes in my memory and I have not been able to reconcile its detachment from a remnant relevant destiny. When in the course of history has anything been broadly mandated that didn’t have moral implications? If it wasn’t moral, why would you mandate it?
The very definition of moral is: …relating to, or concerned with the principles or rules of right conduct or the distinction between right and wrong; ethical… (dictionary.com). It is exceedingly prevalent for laws or civil mandates to legislate morality.
How can leadership of a remnant movement, knowing the prophecy of tribulation that is rooted in peer pressure, misrepresentation, and coercion, culminating with a loss of life death decree, consider a worldwide mandate, promulgated under false pretenses and financial gain, not be a moral issue? Could it be the lack of moral clarity, lacked moral conviction simply as a function of financial and risk management expediency? I hate to consider it so.
I am not an antivaxxer.
For me, vaccines are a component of risk management, and every human is tasked with weighing the risks of various options and living with the consequences. It is at the core of our spiritual beliefs that singularly, by the grace of Jesus Christ, one can only save themselves. Our faith is built on individual freedom of conscience and when the world stage was set, and all eyes were looking for leadership to emerge, for Adventism to be the head and not the tail of religious freedom, we cowered. Or worst, fell in line for financial gain.
At the 2025 Hyve Conference, held at Andrews University, Jared Thurmon, preached “The prophets aren't on the payroll. The prophets have never been on the payroll.” Pause to consider how sobering the reality of that statement could be. Why is present day corporate Adventism so often on the wrong side of history?
A colossal failure of our GC leadership was first, to seek financial expediency by aligning itself with federal government programs and agencies that forced neutralizing of foundational SDA activity and messaging (no-proselytizing), and secondly, in order to maintain access to the federal monetary teat, GC ADCOM unilaterally proclaimed a re-affirmation statement (along with allegiance to peer reviewed science), effectually stripping the religious liberty exemption provision away from millions of devout Adventists. This abdication of responsible leadership led Dr. Conrad Vine to speak out against the ill-advised actions.
And though numerous conference administrators and risk managers privately voiced the view that the aforementioned actions are errant, embarrassing, and harmful, there is a complete lack of administrative humility and mea culpa. Instead, we were laid witness to:
Deplatforming the messenger, Dr. Conrad Vine, an ordained pastor and elder with hard bans, soft bans, and threats impacting missionaries to his former AFM organization, without due process or disciplinary adjudication on theological grounds.
Character assassination of Pastor Ron Kelly, to effectuate his hastened removal, just in time to cancel VSDA Religious Liberty weekend. The last prominent RL event that historically drew the attention to actions of GC ADCOM and other Administrative events that were out of alignment with our remnant purpose.
GC Spring Meeting: Sorting of the Wheat and the Tares, where ministries not directly operated by the SDA church were strategically defined as:
o Supporting Ministries (Wheat): Refrain from being critical or corrective of church leadership; they function in collaboration and loyalty.
o Independent Ministries (Tares): Often involve critiques of church leadership, may accept tithe, promote factors that impede cooperation.
Recent definitions of “the Church” by Conference administrators as to being the SDA Administrative structure, not the constituency membership.
Oregon conference drafts, adopts, and enacts a draconian approval policy that a local church must follow in order to invite a guest speaker to preach (In lieu of banning Conrad Vine).
Conference, Union and Division Presidents, proactively attempt to influence several NAD conferences from not considering Pastor Ron Kelly as worthy to preach or hold conference office.
Protecting Organizationalism
“…nor are you taking into account that it is in your best interest that one man die for the people, and that the whole nation not perish instead” (John 11:50).
The aforementioned sequence of indefensible acts, not only defy common sense, spiritual guidance, or the Church Manual, but can only be attributed to echo chamber reasoning of protecting a perceived anointed Administration. In the last year, Michigan Conference officials have argued that they are beyond reproach from lay membership.
The “logic” follows that the SDA church is God’s appointed Remnant church. And they the Administrators are the Church, and as God is leading the Church, it is for Him to reprove the leadership. As David was not inclined to strike against Saul (God’s anointed), so no one should attempt to reprove a conference official, for that is only for God to do. What is lost in that analogy is: First and foremost, conference individuals are appointed, not anointed and Second, God historically has used men to effectuate discipline on his chosen. Even to the point of using the heathen nation of Babylon to reprove His people. And most importantly regarding King Saul, God sent a man, Samuel to deliver the rebuke. And what a rebuked it was. For failing to act properly in carrying out the will of God, Saul’s leadership of God’s people would be lost forever.
It is not with ease that I speak frankly regarding our administrative leaders. Many I revere and retain sincere appreciation for and enjoy greeting them with a brotherly embrace. As a builder and developer, I know first-hand how hard it is to build something. Whether it is a structure, an organization, a congregation, or a denomination, it takes a significant amount of prayer, effort, and resources to build anything worthwhile. It takes far less effort to tear something down and too often nay sayers simply want to lay waste in retribution. That is not my sentiment, I am generally charitable in my contention with humanism among the brethren as no one is perfect and all succumb to shortcomings. However, having witnessed the organizational “circling of the wagons” at the expense of virtuous men, I cannot stay silent and ignore the damage that continued silence would cause to the church I love. As is identified in numerous passages within the Spirit of Prophecy, administrative actions of self-preservation at the expense of its ministry is not a new phenomenon.
“Men have taken unfair advantage of those whom they supposed to be under their jurisdiction. They were determined to bring the individuals to their terms; they would rule or ruin... The high-handed power that has been developed, as though position has made men gods, makes me afraid, and ought to cause fear. It is a curse wherever and by whomsoever it is exercised”
(TM, p. 361).
On July 3, 2010, during the General Conference Session in Atlanta, Georgia, President Ted N.C. Wilson, famously proclaimed, “Hold your leaders accountable.” Now, 15 years later, after witnessing questionable actions on denominational/governmental alliances, abandonment of SDA members’ right of conscience, and nationally choregraphed efforts to silence voices seeking leadership accountability… how hollow does our president’s statement ring?
Is the Adventist Industrial Complex so sacred that it must be defended at any cost? Is the Adventist administrative hierarchy the Church? Or is the Church that Christ deeply loves the people willingly gathered to unite on Gospel truths, to serve their fellow man with heart, head, and hand, yearning to proclaim the prophecy of a returning Savior that will cleans use from the fallen deceiver?
Voices that expose Adventist shortcomings should not be summarily labeled as rebellious, offshoots, or denominationally independent. Though prophets were once directed by God to admonish, rebuke, and correct… today in a condition where administrative allegiance is compulsory for denominational leadership advancement, the work of the watchmen can only be found outside of administrative hierarchy. Silencing the messengers does not alleviate administrative failures or protect the Remnant.
Remnant Purpose or People
Adventists should not delude themselves into believing they are remnant in membership. Adventism is a movement with a remnant purpose in message and action. But membership does not affirm salvation. To be remnant you must be relevant, and to be relevant you must have purpose. Membership has no remnancy in itself. SDA is not like American Express where membership has Remnant privileges. Our Remnancy is sealed in carrying forth the ministry in Mission, not Maintenance.
To Delegates
To the delegates that will soon gather at the GC session to vote various policies and elect the next term of administrators, first and foremost, I as well as millions of SDA around the world, will be praying for the Holy Spirit to guide each of you. I would further ask that you please contemplate our heritage, purpose, and human weaknesses. And to consciously advance policies that:
Elevate the voice of the constituents, Christ’s true love,
Elevate SDA employment above at-will guidelines and create biblically arbitered due-process for SDA ministers,
Strike a balance between local church rights and conference oversight that fosters local church member engagement,
Encourage pastors to cast aside our Laodicean membership maintenance model and be rewarded for initiative not complacency,
That you would elect leaders that:
Do justly, love mercy, and walk humbly,
Are bold in defense of our purpose, not of organizationalism, careerism, or nepotism
Are weathered with years of successful pastoral leadership, not politically or familialy positioned,
Are eager to introduce organizational efficiency, reducing repetitive hierarchy,
Are mortified with only 3.5% of tithe allocated specifically for world mission offerings,
Are not threatened by non-SDA employed ministries working to advance the Adventist mandated work, that has significantly fallen short.
Conclusion
Friends, if our Vision is to prepare a fallen world for their soon coming Savior, why does our Mission look more like trying to make the present world our home? We consume more resources and time attempting to fight the end time labor pains of eschatological tribulation than communicating their prophetic significance. Have SDA become the reluctant denomination? As Jonah was called to cry against the wickedness of Nineveh, but fled from his charge, have we when called by God to proclaim repent and come out of the moral and spiritual confusion, instead chosen social expediency and complacency? Is it easier to fit into and operate within society by gaining mainstream recognition and access to federal monies?
This 62nd GC session affords the Adventist Church an opportunity to chart a course of commitments and corrections, of re-prioritization of integrity, honesty, and humility, over expediency, administrative authority and ecumenical imagery. It is an opportunity to re-allocate resources from organizational perpetuity to denominational purpose. In contrast to recent Conference messaging, various congregations are not in rebellion; they simply want the church they first sought membership in—to return.
Many are praying for you, our delegates. May you: have ears and have heard, have eyes and have seen (adapted Mark 8:18).
God be with you all.
****
Daniel Bacchiocchi is an architect and builder. Today he operates an architectural and construction business in Michigan as well as a non-profit building mission organization, Master’s Builders, Inc., supporting Adventist efforts in financially depressed communities around the world.