For decades abortion-on-demand has been the Adventist organization’s dirty little secret. Ever since 1971, when Adventist administrators and health professionals met and “unofficially” approved an internal document permitting Adventist hospitals to provide abortions for a variety of reasons including when “the requirements of functional human life demand the sacrifice of the lesser potential human value,” Adventist physicians and hospitals have been able to do abortions on demand. (See “Abortion In Adventism”, Summer/2014 Proclamation!) They may call the procedure by different names, but they have been abortions nonetheless.
This internal working policy, however, was “hidden” from the public and even from the members in general. Publicly, the Adventist organization shared a different statement which projected a conservative pro-choice position that allowed abortions in extreme cases only.
Last week, however, the Adventist Annual Council met at the General Conference headquarters in Silver Spring, Maryland, and it again attempted to whitewash its reputation. There was increasing publicity from vocal Adventists as well as from former Adventists about the organization’s pro-choice position, and this year administrators apparently decided to do damage control.
On Wednesday, October 16, the Annual Council voted by “a vast majority of the delegates”, according to the Adventist News Network (ANN), to approve the statement that had been prepared by a working committee of 26 people.
The discussion prior to the vote, however, revealed several details from Adventist leaders who were attending. According to ANN, Jiri Moskala, the dean of the Seventh-day Adventist seminary at Andrews University said, “This Statement is strangely silent about the most painful issue in regards to abortion, namely rape. I hope we will not send a false signal to our churches by omitting in this document the problem of violence and rape. I think rape should be included.”
Richard Hart, president of Loma Linda University Health, the medical system that operates the Adventist-owned Loma Linda University and Loma Linda University Medical Center, is reported to have said that Loma Linda does not offer elective abortions. In watching the live-stream of the discussion online, however, I heard Hart say Loma Linda has never performed elective abortions.
Anecdotal stories, however, have painted a different picture. I have a friend who said to me, “I remember when [LLUMC] tried to give ME an abortion by accident. They walked into the wrong ER room. And I know of one nurse who witnessed MANY abortions at LLU.” I also know that Loma Linda has historically taught its medical students to perform abortions, and one Christian medical student who specifically asked not to be made to participate in an abortion during her surgical rotation was scrubbed in for a procedure that was NOT called an abortion—only to discover that was exactly what was about to take place. She left the operating room.
Doug Batchelor, the speaker/director of Amazing Facts (an independent supporting ministry of the Adventist organization) spoke first during the discussion. He endorsed the statement, as reported by ANN, saying, “I praise God because the church is addressing this issue; I wish we would have done it sooner. The Bible teaches that human life is a miracle, a gift of God’s creation and begins at conception. Having a clear Biblical statement on abortion does not mean that we are going to attack people who disagree.”
ANN did not report, however, what I heard Doug say during his comments. He stated that there had been several occasions in which he had been working with people who were seriously considering joining the Adventist organization, but when they heard that Adventism approved abortions, they backed off and did not join. It appeared to me that he was thrilled about this statement at least partly because it might prevent potential proselytes from changing their minds.
One other detail worth mentioning is that during the presentation of the document, the attenders were shown statistics for live births and terminations of pregnancy for the years 2016 to 2019. Only five Adventist health systems were represented in the statistics: Adventhealth, Adventist Health West, Adventist Health Care, Kettering Health, and Waltfriede (Berlin). Adventhealth showed 23 terminations in 2016 and 2017 respectively; Adventist Health West showed one termination during the three years between 2017–2019; Adventist Health Care showed six for the year 2018 and Kettering had three during 2018. Waltfriede reported no terminations since 2012.
Significantly missing from the data, however, was Loma Linda Health.
What the document says
The statement the committee approved is carefully-worded to to appear pro-life. It claims to present “biblical principles bearing on abortion,” and it identifies and explains six “principles and teachings relating to abortion”.
I will share only the points which seem most clearly to reveal the Adventists’ worldview and commitments.
The first point, “God upholds the value and sacredness of human life,” prefaces a paragraph which hints at Adventism’s physicalism if one knows how Adventists think. The paragraph says,
Furthermore, the importance of human life is made clear by the fact that, after the Fall (Genesis 3), God “gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life” (John 3:16). While God could have abandoned and terminated sinful humanity, He opted for life. Consequently, Christ’s followers will be raised from the dead and will live in face-to-face communion with God (John 11:25-26; 1 Thessalonians 4:15-16; Revelation 21:3). Thus, human life is of inestimable value.…
For those who have been Adventist, this wording will seem “normal”. As an Adventist I would have understood the words “He opted for life” to refer to the fact that Adam and Eve did not die physically when they ate the fruit. I would understand this passage to say that God didn’t kill them outright but gave them a second chance to obey Him. Those who follow Him—or keep the commandments—will be raised from the dead (a condition in which a person is decaying in the ground while no part of him exists with the Lord), and one day those “followers” will be physically recreated and will literally live in physical face-to-face communion with God (who also has a body). Thus, God “opted for life”.
A never-been-Adventist reading this paragraph, however, would not likely perceive the underlying worldview implicit in this vague passage. They will understand the words according to their Christian (or, perhaps, even from their pagan) worldview and will not understand what Adventists mean when they say these words.
The second point, “God considers the unborn child as human life,” cites biblical examples, such as Jeremiah and Paul, who were “called from the womb” and acknowledges that “Those not-yet-born have a firm place with God.”
The current (2018) edition of Seventh-day Adventists Believe, however, reveals the rest of the story in its explanation of Adventism’s Fundamental Belief #7: The Nature of Humanity (p. 94):
[I]n the Old Testament “soul” is a translation of the Hebrew nephesh. In Genesis 2:7 it denotes humans as living beings after the breath of life entered into a physical body formed from the elements of the earth. “Similarly, a new soul comes into existence whenever a child is born, each ‘soul’ being a new unit of life uniquely different and separate from other similar units” (quoted from the SDA Bible Dictionary).
In other words, Adventist doctrine explicitly describes a soul coming into existence only AFTER the “breath of life” (the air one breathes) enters a physical body. Because they believe humans are merely bodies plus breath, they will read this new abortion statement without thinking that the unborn have an immaterial identity. At the same time,“regular Christians” will likely hear nothing alarming because they do not understand how Adventists “hear” these words.
In the third principle, “The will of God regarding human life is expressed in the Ten Commandments and explained by Jesus in the Sermon on the Mount,” The authors explain,
“The Decalogue was given to God’s covenant people and the world to guide their lives and protect them. Its commandments are unchanging truths which should be cherished, respected, and obeyed.
Significantly, this statement falsely declares that God gave the Ten Commandments to His “covenant people and the world”. Exodus and Galatians and Hebrews clearly explain that the Decalogue was given only to Israel. Adventism does not acknowledge that the law was fulfilled and the Mosaic law rendered obsolete by the blood of Jesus (Heb. 8:13) nor explain that Jesus raised the bar and declared hatred to equal murder (Mt. 5:21, 22).
The sixth point, “God’s grace promotes life in a world marred by sin and death.” contains the words that reveal this statement is pro-choice, not pro-life:
Consequently, in rare and extreme cases, human conception may produce pregnancies with fatal prospects and/or acute, life-threatening birth anomalies that present individuals and couples with exceptional dilemmas. Decisions in such cases may be left to the conscience of the individuals involved and their families. These decisions should be well-informed and guided by the Holy Spirit and the biblical view of life outlined above.
A pro-life statement would leave the matter of life and death in God’s hands and would not allow for a human to determine that an unborn baby should die even in cases involving serious “birth anomalies”.
The final section of the statement introduces directives for compassion with vague, generalized scenarios leaving one wondering exactly what is meant. It calls for “an atmosphere of love” for those “facing the difficult decisions regarding abortion. It calls for “well-functioning and committed families” to educate and provide care for those who are struggling and encourages members to “open their homes to those in need”. It admonishes members to “care deeply for and support” pregnant women who decide to keep their children and to “provide emotional and spiritual support to those who have aborted a child for various reasons or were forced to have an abortion.”
What exactly does loving support look like when dealing with the “difficult decision regarding abortion”? What kind of help are “well-functioning” Adventist families supposed to offer in order to educate those in abortion dilemmas? How are they supposed to “care deeply for and support” pregnant women who keep their children? Even more puzzling—what is meant by those who “were forced to have an abortion”? This description is clearly a different category from those who “aborted a child for various reasons”.
The purpose of the document
General conference president Ted Wilson stated that the Adventist organization had never had an “official” statement in the past; this document would be the first official Adventist statement about abortion.
The public, however, would not have known that the Adventists had no official statement because there was a document (written in 1992) stating the organization’s pro-choice stance on the Adventists’ official website. This new document with its toned-down “choice” stance, however, is filling a specific purpose. Elias de Souza from the Biblical Research Institute explained that this document “was not prepared to be incorporated into the Church Manual or even into the Fundamental Beliefs; but this document is guidance for the church to tell its members, to tell the world, where we stand on this important issue.” It is intended to be “redemptive”.
In other words, this statement does not define internal practices nor provide grounds for disciplining anyone. It is meant to deliver a public message that colors Adventism as pro-life while still validating the choice to abort under certain circumstances. Also, according to statements by administrators, it will be used as the basis for developing “practical protocols and processes” for healthcare providers.
Implications
As I watched the livestream of Ted Wilson presiding over the pre-vote discussion, I couldn’t help remembering that his father Neal Wilson, then the president of the North American Division, was one of the most influential voices in creating a liberal set of guidelines that allowed abortion on demand (see “Abortion In Adventism”, Summer/2014 Proclamation!).
Furthermore, Adventism does not appear to be changing its doctrine on the nature of man. Believing that humans do not have immaterial spirits makes abortion look completely different than it looks for Christians who believe we have spirits separate from the body.
Technicalities of organization also help Adventism revise its public image regarding abortion. The regional Adventist health systems are independent corporations that technically are not church-owned, but they manage Adventist hospitals. Thus the hospitals are technically under the authority of their regional health systems.
Also, abortions have become largely out-patient procedures. Since out-patient procedures do not have to be reported the same way in-patient procedures are reported, terminations of pregnancy may be done that are never reported in a way that identifies them as abortions.
Today doctors can send their patients desiring abortions to out-patient surgery centers or other clinics where they may have these procedures done, but those same doctors and even the clinics and surgery centers may be managed by the local regional Adventist health system. The local hospitals themselves would be able to say they had not provided abortions. Furthermore, some of those clinics are owned by Adventists, such as the infamous Family Planning Associates in Southern California founded by Adventist Edward Allred which, in 2005, he sold to Adventist dentist Irving (Bud) Feldkamp III.
Finally, although news sources around the country reported “Seventh-day Adventist Church Adopts Pro-Life Position” after last Wednesday’s vote, this statement is actually pro-choice. It clearly allows for abortions under certain conditions. It is another example of Adventist double-speak.
An organization that has permitted abortions for decades is not suddenly pro-life because it writes a compassionate document permitting abortions in particular circumstances. Adventism has not renounced its previous position nor stated that Adventist health providers must cease performing them.
Deception and disappointment
Now, as the Adventists commemorate the 175th anniversary of the Great Disappointment this week, it is natural that they would continue the same deception that has marked it from its beginning. When Jesus failed to come on October 22, 1844, the little flock that became the Seventh-day Adventists re-visioned the non-event of the date. Instead of repenting and admitting that they had been wrong to believe Jesus would return on a certain date, they insisted that their date had not been wrong; they had mistaken the event.
In what has been known as their great face-saving act, the early Adventists, endorsed by a vision from Ellen White, declared that Jesus had entered the Most Holy Place in heaven that day and had begun the investigative judgment. It was utterly untrue, but those founding Adventists hung their spiritual hats on that contrived explanation. They have spent the rest of their history defending Ellen White’s authority as a true prophet of God while publicly redefining and down-playing the reality of their central doctrine. They have overtly deceived Christians as well as the world about what they really believe.
Now, with this first official statement on abortion and sanctity of life, Adventism has performed one more sleight-of-hand. While touting this document as pro-life, Adventism has included conditions validating abortion. Further, this document replaces a clearly pro-choice “unofficial” statement that has been on the website for years. There is no retraction of the previous statement or explanation for why they have modified the statement, and there seems to be no attempt to modify their underlying doctrine of the nature of man.
In short, words may change, but without a clear renunciation of previous beliefs and practices, one can only assume that this statement is an attempt to deliver a certain picture of themselves while saying nothing really new.
How this statement will play out in terms of guidelines and protocols remains to be seen. Meanwhile, it appears to be just one more evidence of the deceptive double-speak that has marked Adventism since that day of the Great Disappointment.
Sources:
World Church Executive Committee Considers Statement on Abortion
Statement on the Biblical View of Unborn Life and Its Implications for Abortion
- May 4–10, 2024 - May 2, 2024
- We Got Mail - May 2, 2024
- April 27–May 3, 2024 - April 25, 2024