|
Reply from members of
NAD Executive Committee
to letter sent in October 2013 |
Requesting NAD to clarify
the process for reinstatement
when the charges were
changed only four days
prior to the hearing |
|
I did not receive a reply from anyone in the administration of the North American Division, however, ten members of the NAD Executive Committee did reply.
|
| It seems to me that the replies did not indicate that they even read the letter to Dan Jackson which I sent on Oct. 17th ( copy to G. Alex Bryant ) and none of the replies attempted to answer the question posed in the letter. [ read letter ] |
| |
| One reply stood out from the others as a legitimate attempt to address the situation and I an posting this reply here. |
| |
| Dated: Nov. 6, 2013
Dear Mario,
I am so sorry to learn of the things that have happened to you! My heart goes out to you. There is no pain that is quite like the pain we feel when our "brothers and sisters" hurt us.
For some reason, I've just seen your email today, November 6. Year End Meetings ended yesterday. However, in all the years I've been attending these meetings I've never seen an issue of this nature brought up at the Year End Meetings. It is generally considered to be outside the realm of responsibility for the North American Division.
Membership issues, and church discipline issues, are always handled on the local level. While the Conference can get involved if they choose, they cannot force the local church to reverse their stance. The local church is considered to be the final authority on these issues. The Conference could urge the church to reverse itself, but I've rarely seen this happen.
When I served as a pastor of a local congregation I often helped people in your circumstances. If I felt the discipline was unjust, I would offer the victim membership in my church through Profession of Faith. They could then transfer that membership anywhere they chose. However, I no longer have a local pastorate and am therefore unable to offer this option to you. You may be able to find another congregation that will be willing to assist you in this manner, but that is the only real solution I could think of since you've already appealed to the Conference, Union, and the Division.
Please understand that I am sorry for your pain and wish I could do something to help. But I assure you that even if your request had reached me in time, it is highly unlikely that the Division would have placed it on the agenda. Even if they felt your case had merit, they would have gone through channels, referring the matter to the Union which would have referred it to the Conference, which would have likely deferred to the local church. That is the sad reality.
You are in my prayers. I pray that God will heal you and that He will give you justice.
Yours in Christ,
Mike Tucker
Director, FaithForToday |
| Below is my response to this message |
| |
| I received permission to post the reply with the name of the author, and I have now posted the reply I sent to Mike Tucker. |
Nov. 11, 2013
Dear Mike Tucker: |
| Thank you for responding, I sent out 170 messages to the members of the Executive Committee (for whom I have e-mail addresses ) and only ten responded. Yours was the longest and in my opinion the best response. |
| Please allow me to continue the dialogue with you because Test, Vol. 4, p. 18 par 1 says, “Every believer should be wholehearted in his attachment to the church. Its prosperity should be his first interest, and unless he feels under sacred obligations to make his connection with the church a benefit to it in preference to himself, it can do far better without him. . .” |
| I feel all of the above including a sacred obligation to make my connection with the church a blessing and to use the talents and skills that the Lord has given me to benefit the church. Please see my LINKEDin profile for more information about me http://www.linkedin.com/in/mariopetrovalle/ |
|
However, I speak out when church leaders take a wrong turn down a wrong path. It is for this reason that my church board decided to remove me from membership rather than deal with the issues I brought to them, and since they could not find a sin to accuse me of, they charged me with “irreconcilable differences” and then realized that I had a defense for this charge, so they changed the charge to something that was harder to defend, especially with only 3 days notice of the change.
|
| The question I asked the local conference, the Union Conference and the NAD was one about the due process guaranteed by the church manual, and no one will answer the question. |
| You say that, “I've been attending these meetings I've never seen an issue of this nature brought up at the Year End Meetings. It is generally considered to be outside the realm of responsibility for the North American Division.” You should not go back too many years because the last GC session changed the church manual and added the following. |
|
"While it is the right of the church to administer discipline, this does not set aside the rights of members to seek fairness. If members believe that they have been treated unfairly by the local church, or not had the right to be heard fairly . . ."
Church Manual, (18th edition) page 67
|
| This is explained in my letter to Dan Jackson http://www.diggingfortruth.org/article/2900/
So there may be reasons why you have not seen this before, however, I know of 22 members who have been disfellowshipped unfairly and have a valid reason to come to the NAD, what makes it valid now, is the right to seek fairness. The disfellowship would have to happen after the June 2010 GC Session, and the local conference and the Union Conference need to refuse to uphold the due process that is guaranteed by the church manual. This scenario would make it valid. I know the other 21 disfellowshipped members did bring their issue the NAD leaders and it was ignored. So I guess the reason you have not heard about these 21 members is because they don’t have your e-mail address and Dan Jackson will not put it on the agenda. The last I heard is that these 21 faithful members have given up and joined the 5.9 million former members who have left the church.
|
| You say, “Membership issues, and church discipline issues, are always handled on the local level.” I agree with you. “While the Conference can get involved if they choose, they cannot force the local church to reverse their stance." The local conference did get involved, they sent a representative to the hearing, but his mistakes only made the situation worse. “The local church is considered to be the final authority on these issues. The Conference could urge the church to reverse itself, but I've rarely seen this happen.” I see that you have some understanding of the process. However, I am not asking the conference to urge the church to reverse itself, I asked the conference to correct the mistakes made by the representative that they sent to the hearing. By refusing to do this, the conference President and Executive Secretary has allowed the representative to speak for them, and his mistakes have become their mistakes, and I am allowed to bring this to the Union level. |
| If the conference did not send a representative, it could be claimed this is the church decision, and I would NOT have a strong case to bring to the Union level. But the church members ability to conduct a fair hearing was damaged by what the conference rep did and said. And their ability and willingness to correct themselves is hampered by the fact that his actions have not been corrected by the conference. The 59th GC Session made “fairness” the basis for appeal. Without proper due process you can not have fairness. The way the hearing is conducted does matter and proper due process and the rights of members should be upheld. |
| You say, “But I assure you that even if your request had reached me in time, it is highly unlikely that the Division would have placed it on the agenda. Even if they felt your case had merit, they would have gone through channels, referring the matter to the Union which would have referred it to the Conference, which would have likely deferred to the local church.” |
|
I knew that getting this on the agenda is just as hard as when two Adventist ladies accused Dan Jackson of neglect of duty and had Working Policy L-60/15 to show that he had actually neglected his duty. He prevented an investigation of these charges by keeping it off the agenda. So I knew what I was up against and although I asked for it to be put on the agenda I would be satisfied if a member of the Executive Committee would just answer the question and I could bring that answer to the church when I write my appeal for a new hearing, which is my right according to Church manual, page 67.
You say correctly, “That is the sad reality.” |
| But what is the sad part? The church manual has a good process that will prevent a member from being “railroaded” out of the church by unfair practices, Jesus instructs the church to remove sin from the church but not to uproot the tares (Matthew 13). Ellen White makes this point very clear, http://www.diggingfortruth.org/article/2785/ - - The result is that when the NAD leaders do not uphold the rights of members to due process and their rights clearly stated in the church manual, what you have is that the membership of over one million Adventists in the North American Division is not really secure. Their membership is only as secure as the willingness of church leaders to uphold the church manual. Satan is aware of this neglect on the part of church leaders and you will see more and more issues like this. |
| David Trimm reported to the Annual Counsel the fact that 5.9 million members have left the church between 2000 and 2012, and ANN wrote about it ( Click here ). Is this enough to make you wonder just how far God will allow Satan to have his way? It seems to be until the church leaders decide to uphold what the church manual says. |
| What I am asking for at this point is permission to publish your response on an Adventist forum, yours is the best response of all the ones I got. Allow me to publish this so that the Lord can draw Adventists to the realization of how sad this reality is and how secure their membership actually is. |
| "God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints." There was order in the church when Christ was on the earth, and after his departure, order was strictly observed among the disciples. And now, in these last days, when God is bringing his children into the unity of the faith, there is more real need of order than ever before; for as God seeks to unite his people, Satan and his angels strive to destroy this unity. RH, February 16, 1911 par. 8 |
| The 22 faithful Adventists who have been disfellowshipped from the church unfairly, know that this is the work of Satan and his evil angels, we just want to exercise our right to seek fairness, and the Lord will rebuke Satan and allow us to return to the church where I feel that we belong. |
In God We Trust
Mario |
| PS: There are over 250 comments regarding this issue on the on-line forum for Adventists called E-ventist Network. This is a group for Seventh-day Adventists on the popular networking website LINKEDin.com with over 1,860 members. To see the comments or post your own comment, Click Here There are many other interesting discussions. |
| |
| Read another reply from another member of NAD Exec Committee |
| Return to Open Letter to NAD Exec Committee |
|
