The two parts of the foregoing have become known as the "establishment clause" and the "free exercise clause." Most spiritual organizations are strong advocates of the "free exercise clause"--at least at it pertains to them. They appreciate the right to worship according to the dictates of their conscience. But many of these same organizations are not as protective of the "establishment clause." If the government were willing to give them truckloads of money, they'd be willing to take it--as long as the government didn't try to then tell them how to run their religion. Historically, Seventh-day Adventists have taken a radically different stance.

At one point in our organization's infancy, the General Conference Committee voted not only to refuse all tax exemptions that normally were granted by government to religious entities but to refund to the government any such exemptions that had already been received. Of course, by the very next day they had decided that certain of the church's ministries weren't first and foremost "religious" so should enjoy tax-free status. And soon the stance had softened to join the majority of religions in accepting the governmental largess of exempting church property from taxation. And, unfortunately, the "justifiable" exceptions have grown over the intervening years. 

Still, because of our history and because of our end-time theology, Adventists have been more vociferous advocates of the establishment clause than most religions. Which means that, conservative religious organization that we are, our church's Religious Liberty Department has been on the same side as the American Civil Liberties Union in more cases than one would expect. Whereas most religious entities want the right to worship in their own way, they don't have the same commitment toward ensuring that the public purse isn't used to fund their religious activities or that their religion--or religion in general--isn't being imposed on those who would rather not be the recipients. 

Independence Day is a good time to think about freedom in general and to ensure that the historic Adventist commitment to religious liberty remains strong. 

Jim Coffin, Senior Pastor

Recently a General Conference Session was held in Atlanta, Georgia, and a new president was elected––Ted N.C. Wilson. Pastor Wilson, 60, was the first son of a former GC president to also become president. His father, Neal C. Wilson, was president from 1979 to 1990.

Various Markham Woods members have asked what I know about Pastor Ted Wilson. Let me share just a little.

1. I knew Neal Wilson better than I know Ted, because I worked at our denomination’s headquarters during four of Neal Wilson’s 11 years as president. In fact, I did an in-depth interview with him for a personal profile we published in the Adventist Review, if my recollection is correct, immediately after his re-appointment as GC president in 1985.

From my perspective, Neal Wilson was a man who knew what he wanted for the church, why he wanted it and how he was most likely to get it. He knew the church system better than any other leader I’ve observed up close. He was a force to reckon with. He pursued relentlessly what he thought was best for our denomination. But I never had the feeling he did anything to feather his own nest or for personal aggrandizement.

He always treated me well, always knew my name, always took time to ask me how things were going and has been very friendly and fatherly toward me whenever we’ve met in the intervening years.

2. If memory serves me correctly, I first met Ted Wilson when he came to Union College during the 1970-71 school year for some kind of Bible Conference or campus leadership seminar. Years later, I remember talking to him quite extensively during a meal at my parents-in-laws’ home when he and his wife were back on furlough from their mission posting in the Africa-Indian Ocean Division, where he was serving as secretary.

Shortly after that meal, he phoned to see if I’d be willing to come to the Abidjan, Ivory Coast, to serve as the division communication director. As I was already under appointment to serve as editor at the church’s publishing house in Australia, I declined the invitation to Africa. In the intervening years, Ted, like his father, has always been friendly, solicitous and gracious whenever we’ve met. I’ve always felt that he was very approachable, down-to-earth and didn’t put on airs.

3. One of my friends who works at the General Conference told me in passing several years ago that Ted Wilson was the best listener in the headquarters building. "When you go into his office," my friend said, "he gives you his full and undivided attention, he asks questions that show he’s listening, and he doesn’t make you feel that he can’t wait to get on to the next item on his ‘to do’ list."

The rest of items on my "to say" list will have to wait until next week.

Jim Coffin, Senior Pastor

4. During the 1985 General Conference Session in New Orleans, Louisiana, Pastor Neal C. Wilson, father of our new GC president, wanted to merge a number of departments into a mega-department called Church Ministries. Those in favor of the idea held their convictions strongly.

Even though it was his father’s brainchild, Pastor Ted Wilson, a delegate to the session, spoke eloquently against the proposal, saying he felt it was a bad idea. The proposal passed, but Ted was right. It was a bad idea and was eventually reversed. I always find it admirable when people speak their mind even when it could be politically disadvantageous to do so.

5. Despite Pastor Ted N.C. Wilson’s unflinching conservatism, when it was announced that he’d been chosen as General Conference president, several equally unflinching liberals posted comments on liberal websites about their personal friendship with Pastor Wilson and their respect for him. That impressed me. I always take it seriously when people tell me they’re not on the same theological/philosophical/ideological wavelength as someone else––yet highly respect the person despite their disagreements.

I think the foregoing five points are significant and say something about the character of our new church leader. I believe him to be a good man who’s totally committed to God and to the church. However, Pastor Wilson is substantially more conservative/traditional than I am––or than the Markham Woods congregation is collectively. And that’s not a problem––as long as the new president adopts a live-and-let-live posture. But I’m not sure that’s how he perceives his spiritual mandate. His inaugural sermon suggested not just a cautious but (what I would consider) a retrogressively activist agenda.

Our approach at Markham Woods Church has been an intentional, well-considered, carefully monitored attempt to be inclusive rather than exclusive, interactive rather than isolationist, diverse rather than monochromatic, monotone or mono anything else. We’d prefer to run the risk of too much heresy and too much individual freedom rather than too much control and too much restriction. We value imagination and creativity. We see the spiritual life as a journey of discovery and ever-unfolding insight rather than as a mere defense of insights already gained.

At the very beginning of Christianity, church leaders faced a "good problem"––many Gentiles were being attracted to the story of Jesus. But they weren’t attracted to some of the Jewish cultural/spiritual carry-overs––such as circumcision. After considerable discussion, the church "president" at the time, James, stood up and said: "It is my judgment . . . that we should not make it difficult for the Gentiles who are turning to God" (Acts 15:19).

James’s observation addresses a crucial principle held by our Markham Woods congregation. And we hope it will be equally supported at the highest levels of our denomination’s hierarchy. We don’t want would-be members alienated by too much emphasis on non-major matters.

Jim Coffin, Senior Pastor