第七章　将改革进行到底

作为上帝的真理与上帝的品格向世人最后的表现形式，余民教会担负着一项巨大的责任。正如我们的名号所显示的，我们是余剩的民，或者说我们是那长久以来由杰出的忠心之人所组成之队列的最后部分，自从基督来过之后，这少数忠心之人的声音一直为历世历代所听到。那些同样被忽视却为我们属灵先祖们所如此珍爱的教义与标准，现在已经传递到我们手中，要在这最后的世代奋起捍卫之。这是何等的特权啊！

早期的教会为了那些原则受了死的苦害。瓦典西人，宗教改革家，和清教徒们都为从前一次交付圣徒的真道奉献出了他们的生命。我们现在承担着护卫与传扬这同一纯正福音的责任。我们岂敢淡化之或任之被改变吗？

或许我们需要被提醒，提醒我们记得那些遭遇迫害的先贤们是如何运用难以置信的勇气为那不受欢迎的真理刚强站立的。1593年，英国国会给所有不在英国国教敬拜的人打上了“不忠之徒”的烙印。他们这样做是因为热情的、有改革精神的清教徒人数不断加增，他们正从英国国教中退出来，并组织独立的圣会。凡是不留在英国国教里的，就被判处死刑或驱逐出境。

但改革的精神是不能被镇压的。公元1603年伊莉莎白女王过世，此前至少有10%的英国国教牧师信奉了清教徒的观点。当雅各王（King James）同年到达伦敦接受加冕时，立刻就有一牧师代表团带着“牧师请愿状”来觐见；称为“牧师请愿状”是因为它是由1000位英国国教牧师联名上书的。在由托马斯·纳尔逊（Thomas Nelson）印发的新雅各王版圣经（New King James Bible）背面的历史附录里，记述了那些忧心的牧者们向新王递交之请愿状的部分请求。“我们恳请在浸礼中废止用手划十字符号，在婚礼中停止使用戒指，并且恳请自由选择是否穿戴法帽与白色法衣——就是有些牧师所穿的宽松的白色长袍。”（P.222）

虽然在现代基督徒们看来显得有些迷惑，为什么十分之一的英国新教牧师会如此关注诸如结婚戒指和十字符号这样似乎太小的问题呢？我们需要了解他们抗议的根据。他们比较接近于那些做法的异教发源地，并且持有强烈的信念反对将圣的与俗的混杂起来。怀姐妹说明了为什么他们把这些事作为要改革的问题。

“英国的改革家虽然放弃了罗马教的教义，但仍保留了罗马教的许多仪式。这样，英国的国教虽然拒绝了罗马的权威和教条，但仍有相当多的罗马教的风俗和礼节掺在崇拜之中。他们主张这一切与信仰问题无关；《圣经》固然没有明文吩咐，这些礼节固然是不必需的，可是《圣经》也没有明文禁止，所以这些事在本质上不能说是坏的。况且遵守这些仪式可以减少改正教与罗马教之间的距离，所以他们竭力主张这样行，可以使罗马教徒易于接受改正教的信仰。

“这些论据在保守派和愿意妥协的人看来，似乎是确凿的。但另有一班人的看法却不是这样。在他们看来，这些风俗‘可以跨过罗马教和改正教之间的鸿沟’的说法，正是他们反对保留这些风俗的有力理由。他们认为这些风俗正是他们从前所受奴役的标记，他们既得到解放，就没有再回到奴役中去的意向。他们推论上帝已在《圣经》中定立了敬拜他的规例，人不得随意增加或删减。‘大叛教’本来就开始于人想用教会的权威来增补上帝的权威。罗马起先是吩咐人遵守上帝所没有禁止的事，最后她却禁止人遵守上帝所明白吩咐的事。

“许多人恳切地要恢复那作为原始教会特征的纯洁和简朴。他们认为英国国教所设立的许多风俗乃是拜偶像的记念，他们的良心不能同意自己参加她的崇拜。”——《善恶之争》P289，290

我很详细地引用出来，这样你就可以对我们自己教会的信仰前辈们为什么拒绝那些崇拜习俗——就是沾染了罗马教与异教的习俗——有了个灵感画面。虽然结婚戒指与十字符号在圣经中未被特别被禁止，但是改革家们显然知道那些习俗的背景，并视它们为“拜偶像的记念”。他们不想要任何会把他们与背道的天主教联系在一起的人造的惯例。

英国教会领袖清楚地知道那些与异教有关联之物，这已被约翰·亨利·纽曼（John Henry Newman）的著名言论证实了。他放弃英国国教后不久成了罗马教会的一名红衣主教，他写道：“君士坦丁为了使这新宗教受到异教徒的欢迎，就把异教徒们自己所惯用的外在装饰品转移到了这新宗教里。这是一个没有必要再深究的题目，因为新教作者们孜孜不倦的研究已使我们大多数人对此都很熟悉了。殿堂的使用，供奉给特殊圣人的这些…香品…蜡烛…圣水…列队而行…结婚戒指，转向东方，后来的诸偶像等等…都是来源于异教，因它们被教会采纳而得到认可了。”《对教会教义的发展评论》，P373（斜体另加，以示强调　）

确实，即使是这个背道的英国国教徒都知道那些宗教成分从异教继承而来的，那么忠心的清教徒们对其就更加清楚了。纽曼（Newman）说正是新教作者们孜孜不倦地使这些事实广为人知的。难怪那些断言抗议的清教徒们对于使用结婚戒指会感到不舒服了。

怀爱伦很赞赏清教徒的服装原则，以此作为现代基督徒的模范，真是意味深长。

“清教徒的朴素简单，应作为凡相信今日严肃真理之人住处与服装的特征。”——《证言卷五》，第189面

“我们不应耗费分文去买金环来证明我们已婚的身份。”——《给传道人的证言》，第181面

“那戴在你们手指上的戒指，虽是很朴素，但却是无益的，反而给别人不良的影响。”——《证言卷四》，第630面

“服装朴素，禁用各种珠宝和装饰品，这正是符合我们的信仰。”——《证言卷三》，第366面

正是那些勇敢无畏的清教徒抗议者们反对了其余之人的错误与偶像崇拜，他们动身来到这个大陆（译者注：指美国），并建立起了美国的改正教（即基督新教）。但非常遗憾，清教徒前辈们勇敢的信念并没有在其后代之中继续盛行。有些人确实持守了这纯正的信仰，并与在19世纪中叶显现出来的基督复临安息日会联合保守并恢复了那些原则。约翰·卫斯理（John Wesley）在其建立的教会中深受清教徒复兴与改革之理念的影响。

我们自己教会的领袖们在一份早期的《评论与通讯》期刊上称赞了卫斯理是我们高基督徒标准的先贤战士。为捍卫复临信徒反对珠宝的立场，他们引用了卫斯理向早期卫理公会的呼吁：

“我恳劝你们不要戴任何金饰，任何珍珠或是贵价的宝石…我不建议妇女们去戴戒指，耳环，项链…确实，这些都是太小、太小的事物；所以，不值得为它们辩护；所以，放弃它们吧，丢下它们，把它们抛的远远的，不要再辩解；另外，一根小小的针会使身上非常痛，一点点的自我放纵也会严重伤害你的灵命。”（评论与通讯，1855年7月10日）

今日，看着卫斯理的担心如何应验真是件悲哀的事。他是对着比我们还小的教会这样说的，他们的教会所坚持的标准与我们的相差不多。那些早期的卫理公会教友被教导的不单单是反对一枚结婚戒指，而且还反对喝茶，跳舞等等。但是卫斯理所提到的那根小小的针——一点点世俗的面酵——已经如此渗透于卫理公会1千万的教友中间，以至其82%的传道人甚至都不再相信圣经的启示了。甚至在其教会的牧师阶层中，喝酒，抽烟与赌博已经不再是根本的问题了。

一些卫理公会的传道人十分敏感地认识到这一悲剧是如何发生的，为什么今日教会流失的教友比吸收进来的要多得多。凯利牧师（Dean M.Kelly）——卫理公会的任职传道人，作家，教会增长专家，在《传道者》杂志上发表了一篇文章，名为“复临教会怎样才能停止增长”。刊登在1983年2月那一期上。在引证他自己的教会以及其它大型、正式、传统的新教教会的教友流失情况后，他坦率地给基督复临安息日会做了如下的建议：

“如果复临信徒想要停止发展，并开始和其他每个人一样衰退，他们所要做的就是强调对酒精、烟草、以及咖啡因的禁戒并不是得救的关键。判定素食并不是真的那么重要，并且洗脚礼有一点不入流…决定与工会联合并不完全是一件坏事，什一，就像已经提到的那些必要条件一样，可以成为靠行为称义的一种形式…

“我所提到的这些事…正是使基督复临安息日运动独一无二、与众不同且高要求之事。它们赋予了这个运动尖锐透彻，另人信服，严肃认真的特点。每一个教会都需要用其自己的方式坚持‘你必须这样做才能成为我们当中的一员。’如果你们把这些要求都除去，你们就会致使这运动在一夜之间变得软弱，暗淡、而平庸。因而这个问题就有了答案：复临教会怎样才能停止增长呢？回答：是像卫理公会那样。”（第七面）

你们追随了那令人惊奇的让步吗？若你们想要失去能力，活力与教友，就像卫理公会那样吧。他们做了什么呢？他们失去了那些要求牺牲与舍已的独特的高标准。我们在留意他指给我们的教训吗？我们能从我们清教徒的先贤们、从卫斯理、以及从这些一度刚强伟大但现今却坐在衰退与冷淡光景中的教会学到教训吗？

或许我应该告诉你，在接下来的几期《传道者》杂志中，有四封强烈的抗议信反对那篇文章。他们是卫理公会的传道人写的吗？不是，是基督复临安息日会的牧师写的，信不信由你，他们主张说剀利的观点太以行为为导向了。他们忙于拒绝这位卫理会牧师的劝勉，就已经效法起卫理公会来了。或许他们曾经读过并相信复临信徒出版物中所宣称的那句话，“我们不是因为自己的好行为而得救，也不是因为我们的罪行而被剥夺得救。”若果然如此，剀利牧师最后一段话对他们的刺激必是没有结果了。卫理公会信徒对复临信徒传道事工的忠告乃是：“现在我们知道确实没有什么特别的事是你们能做来使自己蒙上帝喜悦的了，但是却有许多事是你们能做的，这些事必使你们自己与上帝分离。它们就叫做罪。”真像是约翰·卫斯理！所有的卫理公会都不曾忘记。我们忘了吗？

学习历年来那些轰轰烈烈的宗教改革运动历程，证实他们内部最终做的那些腐蚀性的妥协之举——这或许是最有益的经验了。然而作为一个教会，我们还不愿意勇敢地面对它。因某种缘由使我们仍然相信假如我们降低约束，并放宽入会资格，就会获得更多的教友。那的确是最受欢迎的遵循之路了，但那是正路吗？即使我们能赢得更多人数，他们也只会使教会团体软弱而非刚强。

怀姐妹说：

“我们不是要只将我们的标准略微提升，使之稍高于世俗的标准；乃是要使其区别绝对地显而易见。”——《基督教育原理》，第288-289面；另见《主必快来》２月８日

她又写道：

“现今对那些要求受浸的人们，还没有照所应有的那么严格施行教友资格试验。应当先明白，他们是单求基督复临安息日会教友的虚名呢，抑或实在愿意与世俗脱离关系并被分别出来，不摸污秽之物，来站在主的一边。”——《给传道人的证言》，第128面

我愿意提出四个理由说明撒旦那不可思议的成功率，将基督复临安息日会如此多的教友席卷进其流行的、属世的放纵之网罗中。第一：我们已被欺骗，认为对外在表现的关注是一种律法主义，完全与得救无关。第二：我们已被欺骗，相信上帝来做一切，我们这一方任何要胜过罪的努力都是一种肉体动作。第三：我们未能明白我们对关闭试探之门并使自己转离会产生试探的环境负有责任。第四：为了在我们周围的社会中显得没那么孤立，不友好与奇特，我们被欺骗，迁就融合了文化。

热诚寻求与文化共存有多安全呢？确实应该要与那些社会主流观点所指示的人应该如何生活怀存同一精神吗？我认为我们作为基督复临安息日会的基督徒不应该为求更被社会接受而尝试修改我们的标准。世界上没有一个国家其文化不是属肉体的。我们没有义务去效忠一个被爱滋病重创、因娱乐疯狂之社会的属世的生活方式。

甚至一想到那已经开始在我们年轻人身上萌芽生长的种子，我就非常担心。安德鲁斯大学（Andrews University）的调查员报告说基督复临安息日会19%的年轻人认为婚前性行为没有什么错，另有19%不确定那是不是罪。在所有参与了调查的我们的年轻人中，这几乎占了40%。我们没有理由相信他们那种迷糊的道德观念不会导致与社会其他人一样的那种乱交的越轨行为。复临教会的牧师正越来越多地花时间劝告那些感染性病的人，以及那些有酒精与毒品问题的人。

随着爱滋病的灾殃更加深入地渗透进异性恋的群体里，我们自己的大学生会被保守不受其感染吗？如果他们中将近40%的人没有良心的信念保守他们的贞操的话，他们怎么能逃脱预计的死亡浩劫呢？——那是没有疫苗也没有手术可以抑制住的。而那些在我们的校园里的年轻人又怎样呢？他们必会处于危险之中，因为他们单纯地相信每一所复临大学都是“世界避风港”。

请不要认为我在把责任推到大学身上。道德的崩溃实际上是从家庭和教会开始的。撒旦的邪恶、使人堕落的原则在我们的男孩子与女孩子们年幼之时就充满在他们头脑中了。每周一小时的安息日学怎么能抵消二十或三十个小时的电视时间呢？那些电视时间暗示了（且常常是明示了）罪的教育。

我们也必须问一问他们在教会里所听到是不是能帮助他们预备拒绝世俗的娱乐。牧师们与教会领导们常常陪伴着我们的孩子们到令人兴奋的运动竞技场，在那里各团队激烈地竞争着，彼此都要把对手打倒。

顺便提一下，新约与旧约的中间时期与我们现今时期一定有非常相似之处。在《玛拉基书》与《马太福音》之间的那400年间，上帝要祂的百姓犹太人预备这个世界迎接耶稣的第一次降临。但是历史告诉我们，他们变得希腊化了，几乎要被希腊文化吞并同化了。特别是他们被露天大型运动场上伟大的奥林匹克运动赛迷住了。我们得知犹太人开始参加运动竞赛，甚至到了在圣殿区域luǒtǐ锻炼的地步。一些祭司参加了体育运动。这种希腊化进程最终导致接纳了许多异教做法。父母们把自己孩子的名字从与雅威（Yahweh）上帝相关之名改为腐败堕落的希腊男神与女神的名字。

现在我们正生活在耶稣第二次来临前的另一个特殊时代。我们再一次发现上帝的子民着迷于竞技运动那种竞争与商业化的精神。这个时代的“神”就是棒球，篮球，足球与网球偶像。基督复临安息日会还没有像犹太人那样偏离的那么远，但我们已经受到如此狂热的冲击，以至我们已经正式地讨论这类问题了；认为校际运动在我们教会及学校系统内是可以接受的。这种世俗化的影响对我们与对上帝古时的百姓岂不是一样的吗？我们岂不是愿意如此忙着练习比赛，要竞争“打败”另一球队，而没有时间分享基督即将复临的好消息了吗？

难道我们不应该开始大胆反对这些专注之事吗？它们钝化了我们属灵的感觉力，为撒旦的影响敞开了心思的门户。撒旦用惊人的情绪攻击人的感官，我们不需要为写文章并布道反对之而道歉。这些事物也许不是教友资格的试验，但它们却很可能成为这些特定时间顺从与否的试炼。享受那些上帝所恨恶之事的乐趣是非常可怕的。这是缺乏热心的老底嘉之特点。

有人在这点上或许要问，这样谁能得救呢？如果心思这么容易就被影响，肉体又有这么惊人的吸引力，那么我们得胜又有什么希望呢？除非一个人的头脑先同意，并且肢体配合那试探人的，否则即使是火力最集中的试探力量也无法使一个人犯罪。所有被撒旦控制之人都必是选择让他控制的。我们借着选择与基督合作，就马上联结于无法抗拒的得胜与能力之源了。我们是最终拍板者。服事基督的决定同时也会使传信的天使来到我们的身旁，就是与曾在但以理与约瑟四面受敌时扶持他们的天上同类的信使。

低估我们同盟军的能力与错误判断敌人的实力一样都是相当严重的。我们没有理由灰心丧胆。帮助我们的比敌挡我们的更大。秘诀就在于意志——选择的能力。我们一旦决定接受基督为我们生命的主，同时也就接受了圣灵的隔离之能力，要保护接近这新悔改之人心思的所有途径。但我们需要再说一遍：那样的保护并不是自动的。能力就在那里，得胜也在那里，但我们必须运用其来抵制通过五感官进来的罪。这就是有功效的信心。我们得胜无可自夸，因为离开祂我们就不能做什么。

然而，在确认了所有人都可以得胜的荣耀真理后，我们却必须难过地承认今日教会里的大多数人是处在不冷不热的老底嘉状态中。他们并没有抓住真实的因信称义的宝贵经验。在教会中存在着非常令人担忧的缺乏，就是缺乏关注上帝律法的尊荣和上帝的圣德反映。这盛行于我们这班人中，所有的一般人与领导层之中。几乎没有人会否认这一点。倘若我们伪称只有非特选教会的教友们将自我降服于基督时才会有争战，我们就太不诚实了。我们每一个人无论在教会的职务是什么，其堕落的本性都在里面向属灵的心意发动同一争战。除非我们每日不断地接受我们救主那分赠的转移的义，就断没有人可以持守着基督的心。开始依靠人的努力，疏忽个人的灵修时光，并开始偏离上帝圣言的指导，这是何等容易的事呀。我们惟有在心里浸透着圣灵的灵感证言，并依循那些劝勉之时，我们才可以成为上帝圣工的真牧人与好管家。

被选为余民教会的官长或领导者是有何等重大的非常责任呀。品格的特质与领导的能力并不赋予某个职位，而是赋予符合属灵职责要求的那些人。成为一名好执事、长老或会长的智慧要加添在那些亲自深深寻求之人身上。在这妥协主义与老底嘉主义的时期，我们迫切地需要那些有见识的工人，可以引领我们回到对基督有“起初的爱心”的经验中。倘若领袖们是“瞎眼”“赤身”的，就会对不冷不热的当地教会相当不利——其指导方向来自那些领导他们的人。

Chapter 7 FINISHING THE REFORMATION

　　As the last manifestation of God's truth and God's character to the world, this remnant church carries a tremendous responsibility. As our name indicates, we are the remnant, or final end-piece, of a long illustrious line of loyalists whose minority voices have been heard in every generation since Christ was here. Those same neglected doctrines and standards which were so dear to our spiritual forebears have been handed to us to defend in the last generation. What a privilege!

　　The early church suffered and died for those principles. The Waldenses, Reformers and Puritans laid down their lives in defense of the original faith delivered to the saints. We are now charged with the protection and proclamation of the same pure gospel. Dare we dilute it or allow it to be changed?

　　Perhaps we need to be reminded of how those persecuted ancestors of ours exercised unbelievable courage in standing for unpopular truth. In 1593, the English Parliament branded as "disloyal persons" all who worshiped outside the Church of England. They did this because increasing numbers of ardent, reform-minded

　　Puritans were withdrawing from the state church and organizing independent congregations. Death or expulsion from the country was decreed against all who did not stay with the Church of England.

　　But the spirit of reform could not be suppressed. By the time Queen Elizabeth died in 1603, fully ten percent of the Anglican clergy were converted to the Puritan views. And when King James arrived in London that same year to assume the crown, he was immediately waited upon by a delegation of ministers who presented him with the "Millinary Petition," so-called because it was signed by one thousand members of the Church of England clergy. In the New King James Bible, printed by Thomas Nelson, a historical supplement in the back of the Bible describes some of the requests made by those concerned preachers in their Petition to the new king. "The Petition asked that the sign of the cross be abolished in baptism, the use of the ring be dropped from the marriage ceremony, and that the wearing of a cap and surplice----the loose fitting white gown worn by some of the clergy----be made optional." (p. 222).

　　Although it may seem puzzling to modern Christians that one tenth of the Protestant ministers of England should have been so concerned over such seemingly trivial matters as wedding rings and crosses, we need to understand the basis for their protest. They were living closer to the heathen origin of those practices, and held stronger convictions against mingling the holy and the profane. Sister White explains why they made these matters such issues of reform:

　　"The English Reformers, while renouncing the doctrines of Romanism, had retained many of its forms. Thus though the authority and creed of Rome were rejected, not a few of her customs and ceremonies were incorporated into the worship of the Church of England. It was claimed that these things were not matters of conscience; that though they were not commanded in Scripture, and hence were nonessential, yet not being forbidden, they were not intrinsically evil. Their observance tended to narrow the gulf which separated the reformed churches from Rome, and it was argued that they would promote the acceptance of the Protestant faith by Romanists.

　　"To the conservative and compromising, these arguments seemed conclusive. But there was another class that did not so judge. The fact that these customs tended to bridge over the chasm between Rome and the Reformation was in their view a conclusive argument against retaining them. They looked upon them as badges of the slavery from which they had been delivered and to which they had no disposition to return. They reasoned that God has in His Word established the regulations governing His worship, and that men are not at liberty to add to these or to detract from them. The very beginning of the great apostasy was in seeking to supplement the authority of God by that of the church. Rome began by enjoining what God had not forbidden, and she ended by forbidding ding what He had explicitly enjoined.

　　"Many earnestly desired to return to the purity and simplicity which characterized the primitive church. They regarded many of the established customs of the English Church as monuments of idolatry, and they could not in conscience unite in her worship." The Great Controversy, pp. 289, 290.

　　I have quoted at length so that you can get the inspired picture of why the religious ancestors of our own church rejected those worship customs which were tainted with Romanism and paganism. Even though the wedding ring and crosses were not specifically forbidden in the Bible, the reformers evidently knew the background of those customs and considered them "monuments of idolatry." They wanted nothing which would link them to the manmade traditions of the apostate Catholic Church.

　　Evidence that the heathen connection was well known by the Church of England leadership is fully established by the famous statement of John Henry Newman. After he forsook Anglicanism to become, later, a cardinal of the Church of Rome, he wrote: "Constantine, in order to recommend the new religion to the heathen, transferred into it the outward adornments to which they had been accustomed in their own. It is not necessary to go into a subject which the diligence of Protestant writers has made familiar to most of us. The use of temples, and these dedicated to particular saints ... incense ... candles ... holy water ...processions...the ring in marriage, turning to the east, images at a later date ... are all of pagan origin, and sanctified by their adoption into the Church." An Essay On the Development of Christian Doctrine, p. 373. (Emphasis supplied.)

　　Surely if this apostate of the Church of England i understood the religious elements which had been inherited from paganism, the loyal Puritans would have been more aware of them. Newman said that it was the diligence of Protestant writers which had made these facts well known. No wonder the protesting Puritans felt uncomfortable about the use of the wedding ring.

　　It is significant that Ellen White enjoined the Puritan principles on dress as the model for modern Christians.

　　"Puritan plainness and simplicity should mark the dwellings and apparel of all who believe the solemn truths for this time." Testimonies, Vol. 5, p. 189.

　　"Not one penny should be spent for a circlet of gold to testify that we are married." Testimonies to Ministers, p. 181.

　　"That ring encircling your finger may be very plain, but it is useless, and the wearing of it has a wrong influence upon others." Testimonies, Vol. 4, p. 630.

　　"To dress plainly, abstaining from display of jewelry and ornaments of every kind, is in keeping with our faith." Testimonies, Vol. 3, p. 366.

　　It was those courageous Puritan protesters against remnants of error and idolatry who made their way to this continent and established the Protestantism of America. How sad it is that their bold convictions did not continue to prevail among the descendants of the Pilgrim Fathers. Some did hold on to the true faith and became links in maintaining and restoring those principles to the Seventhday Adventist Church when it emerged in the midnineteenth century. John Wesley was greatly influenced by the Puritan ethic of revival and reformation within the established church.

　　Our own church leaders in one of the earliest Review and Herald magazines paid tribute to Wesley as an ancestral champion of our view on high Christian' standards. In defense of the Adventist stand on jewelry': they quoted Wesley's appeal to the early Methodists:

　　"I exhort you to wear no gold, no pearls, or precious stones.... I do not advise women to wear rings, earrings, necklaces.... It is true these things are little, very little things; therefore, they are not worth defending; therefore give them up, let them drop, throw them away, without another word; else a little needle may cause much pain in the flesh, a little self-indulgence much hurt to your soul." (Review and Herald, July 10, 1855).

　　Today it is sobering to see how Wesley's fears were fulfilled. He was addressing a smaller church than our own, who held standards very little different from ours. Those early Methodists were instructed, not only against a wedding ring, but against drinking tea, dancing, etc. Yet, that little needle which Wesley referred to-that tiny bit of worldly leaven-has permeated the ten million member Methodist Church to such a degree that 82 percent of its ministers do not even believe in the inspiration of the, Bible anymore. Drinking, smoking and gambling are no longer foundational issues, even among the pastoral leadership of the church.

　　Some Methodist ministers are perceptive enough to recognize how this tragedy happened, and why, today the church is losing many more members than it is gaining. Dean M. Kelly, ordained Methodist minister; author and church growth expert, wrote an article for the Ministry magazine entitled, "How Adventism Can Stop Growing." It appeared in the February, 1983 issues

　　After citing the declining membership of his own church, as well as other large, formal, mainline Protestant churches, he gave this candid advice to the Seventh-day Adventist Church:

　　"If Adventists want to stop growing and begin declining like everybody else, all they have to do is to emphasize that abstinence from alcohol, tobacco and caffeine isn't really essential to salvation. Decide that vegetarianism isn't actually all that important, and foot-washing is a little tacky.... Recognize that membership in labor unions might not be altogether a bad thing, and that tithing, like the requirements already mentioned, can be a form of righteousness by works....

　　"The things that I have mentioned...are the things that make the Seventh-day Adventist movement unique, distinctive and demanding. They give it its bite, its convincingness, its seriousness. Each church needs its own way of insisting that 'you've got to live up to this to be one of us.' If you strip the requirements all away, you can render the movement feeble, pallid, and ordinary overnight. So there's the answer to the question: How can the Seventh-day Adventist Church stop growing? Be like the Methodists." (p. 7.)

　　Did you follow that amazing concession? Be like the Methodists if you want to lose power, vitality and membership. What did they do? They lost those unique high standards that demanded sacrifice and self-denial. Are we heeding the lesson to which he is pointing us? Are we able to learn from the record of our Puritan ancestors, from John Wesley, and from the example of these once-virile church giants which now sit in decay and apathy?

　　Perhaps I should also tell you that in the following issues of Ministry magazine, four strong letters of protest were registered against the article. Were they written by Methodist preachers? No, they were written by Adventist ministers who, believe it or not, contended that Kelly's position was too works-oriented. They were already busily rejecting the counsel of the Methodist minister by trying to emulate the Methodists. Perhaps they had read and believed that Adventist publication which declared, "We are not given salvation because of our good deeds, nor are we deprived of it because of our misdeeds." If so, Dean Kelly's final paragraph must have irritated them to no end. The Methodist advice to the Adventist ministry was this: "Now I know it's true that there is no particular thing you can do to commend yourself to God, but there are a lot of things you can do that will separate yourself from God. They are called sins." Shades of John Wesley! All Methodists haven't forgotten. Have we?

　　It would be a most profitable experience to follow the course of those dynamic religious movements through the years, and confirm the erosive process of compromise which finally did them in. But as a church, we have not yet been willing to face up to it. For some reason, we still seem to believe that more members can be acquired if we lower the restrictions and make it easier to qualify. That is surely the most popular road to follow, but is it the right one? Even if we could win larger numbers, they would be a weakness instead of a strength to the corporate body.

　　Sister White said:

　　"We are not to elevate our standard just a little above the world's standard; but we are to make the line of demarcation decidedly apparent." Fundamentals of Christian Education, pp. 288-289.

　　Again she wrote:

　　"The test of discipleship is not brought to bear as closely as it should be upon those who present themselves for baptism. It should be understood whether those who profess to be converted are simply taking the name of Seventh-day Adventists, or whether they are taking their stand on the Lord's side to come out from the world and be separate and touch not the unclean thing." Testimonies to Ministers, p. 128.

　　I'd like to suggest that there are four reasons for Satan's incredible success rate in sweeping so many Seventh-day Adventists into his snare of popular, worldly indulgences. First: We have been deceived into thinking that attention to external concerns is a form of legalism and totally irrelevant to salvation. Second: We have been deceived into believing that God does it all, and any effort on our part to overcome sin is an exercise of the flesh. Third: We have failed to understand that we are responsible for closing doors of temptation and removing ourselves from the circumstances creating the temptation. Fourth: We have been deceived into an accommodation of culture in order to appear less isolated, unfriendly and peculiar to the society around us.

　　How safe is it to seek a cordial coexistence with culture? Should there indeed be congeniality with those majority elements in society which dictate how people should live? I submit that we as Seventh-day Adventist Christians should make no attempt to tailor our standards in order to be more socially acceptable. There is not a country in the world whose culture is not carnal. We owe no degree of allegiance to the worldly lifestyle of an AIDS-stricken, entertainment-mad society.

　　I am fearful even to think about the future consequences of the seeds which have already begun to grow in our young people. Researchers from Andrews University reported that nineteen percent of Seventh-day Adventist youth see nothing wrong with premarital sex and another nineteen percent are not sure that it is a sin. This is almost forty percent of our total young people surveyed. We have no reason to believe that their confused moral values are not leading into the same promiscuous excesses as the rest of society. Adventist ministers are spending more and more time counseling those who have contracted venereal diseases as well as those who have alcohol and drug problems.

　　As the AIDS plague penetrates deeper into the heterosexual community, will our own college students be protected from infection? If nearly forty percent of them have no conviction of conscience to protect their virtue, how can they escape the predicted holocaust of death which no vaccine or treatment has been able to arrest? And what about those young people who will be at risk on our campuses because they innocently believe every Adventist college to be a "haven from the world"?

　　Please do not assume that I am placing the responsibility upon the colleges. The breakdown of morals really begins in the home and the church. The wicked, perverted principles of Satan have filled the minds of our boys and girls from their earliest years. How can one hour of Sabbath School each week counteract the twenty or thirty television hours of implicit (and often explicit) instruction in sin?

　　We must also ask what they are hearing in the church which prepares them to reject the entertainment of the world. Pastors and Pathfinder leaders often accompany our children to the exciting sports arenas where teams fiercely compete to beat each other down.

　　Incidentally, there surely must be a parallel between Intertestamental times and our own day. During those four hundred years between Malachi and Matthew, God wanted His people, the Jews, to be preparing the world for the first coming of Jesus. But history tells us that they became Hellenized, and were almost swallowed up by assimilation into the Greek culture. Especially were they fascinated by the great Olympic sports events of the stadiums. We are told that the Jews began to take part in the athletic competition, even to the point of exercising nude in the sacred temple precincts. Some of the priests were involved in the gymnastic activities. This hellenization program led finally to acceptance of many pagan practices. Parents changed the names of their children from the combinations of Yahweh to the names of corrupt Greek gods and goddesses.

　　Now we live in another special age just before Jesus is to come the second time. Again, we find the people of God obsessed with the spirit of rivalry and commercialized competitive sports. The "gods" of this age are the idols of baseball, basketball, football, and tennis. The Seventh-day Adventist Church has not gone as far as the Jews, but we have been so impacted by the frenzy that we have officially discussed the issue of ; intercollegiate sports as an accepted feature of our church and school system. Will this secularization affect us in the same way it did God's people of old? Will we be so busy practicing our games, and competing to "beat" the other team, that we have no time for sharing the good news about Christ's soon coming?

　　Should we not begin to speak out against these preoccupations that dull our spiritual sensibilities and open up avenues of the mind for Satan's influence? We need not apologize for writing articles and preaching sermons about the incredible emotional assaults of Satan against the senses. These things may not be tests of fellowship, but they might well be tests of obedience for these special times. It is a fearful thing to take pleasure in those activities that God hates. This is a mark of half-hearted Laodicea.

　　Someone might ask at this point, who then can be saved? If the mind can be so easily influenced, and the flesh has such incredible appeal, what hope do we have for victory? Not even the most concentrated forces of temptation can cause a person to sin unless he gives mental consent and physical cooperation to the tempter. All who are controlled by Satan must choose to be controlled by him. By choosing to cooperate with Christ, we are immediately allied to a source of irresistible strength and victory. We have the final word. A decision to serve Christ will bring to our side the same kind of angel messengers who ministered to Daniel and Joseph in their besetments.

　　It would be just as serious for us to underestimate the power of our ally as to misjudge the strength of our ' enemy. We have no cause to be discouraged. He that is for us is greater than he that is against us. The secret is in the will-the power of choice. Once we have made the decision to accept Christ as the Lord of our life, we also receive the insulating energy of the Holy Spirit to protect all approaches to the newly-committed mind. But we need to say it again: THAT PROTECTION IS NOT AUTOMATIC. The power is there, and the victory is there, but we must exercise it in resisting the entrance of sin through the five senses. This is faith that works. We get no credit for the victory, because without Him we can do nothing.

　　Yet, after recognizing the glorious truth that all may have the victory, we must sadly confess that the majority in the church today are in the lukewarm state of Laodicea. They are not laying hold of the precious experience of true righteousness by faith. There is an alarming lack of concern over the honor of God's law, and reflecting God's character. It is all through our ranks, at all levels of laity and leadership. Few would deny this. We would be less than honest if we pretended that only the unordained church members are having struggles in keeping self under subjection to Christ. The fallen nature is waging exactly the same kind of battle against the spiritual mind in every single individual, no matter what our position in the church. Not one of us can retain the mind of Christ unless we are receiving the imputed and imparted merits of our Saviour on a continual, daily basis. How easy it is to start depending on human effort, neglect the personal hours of devotion, and begin deviating from the blueprint of God's Word. It is only as we saturate our minds with the inspired counsels of the Holy Spirit, and follow those counsels, that we can be true shepherds and administrators of God's work.

　　It is a tremendously weighty responsibility to be chosen as an officer or leader in the remnant church. Qualities of character and leadership are not conferred upon certain positions, but upon persons who meet the spiritual requirements of the office. The wisdom to be a good deacon, elder or conference president will accrue only to those who seek for it in a deep, personal way. In this time of compromise and Laodiceanism, we desperately need overseers who can lead us back to the "first love" experience in Christ. If leaders are "blind" and "naked" it bodes very ill for the lukewarm local body which gropes for direction from those over them.