ILLEGAL:
The
Wedding Ring Ruling
The
recent North American Division vote to
require Adventist pastors to baptize
prospective members with their wedding
rings-has
become a firing order in the hands of
some conference presidents. They are
using it to demand that the faithful
pastors in their conferences lay aside
their scruples instead of having the
Bible-study interests lay aside their
rings
-and
baptize them anyway-or
else be discharged from the ministry.
One of
these pastors recently spoke with this
writer by phone. Because of his refusal
to baptize some interests before they
remove their rings, his conference
president has threatened to kick him out
of the ministry.
After
that telephone call, this writer prayed
most earnestly about the entire matter
for some time-and then the following
fact flashed vividly to his mind:
The NAD
change in jewelry standards-is in
flagrant violation of one of the most
basic denominational policies: Matters
affecting the local churches must be
printed in the "Church Manual,"-and all
changes affecting the local churches can
only be voted by the local churches or
by a majority of the delegates at a
General Conference Session.
This was
not done in the matter of the new
wedding ring ruling. Directly affected
are the standards whereby new members
are taken into the local churches in
North America-and yet both the local
churches and the General Conference
delegates were by-passed in making this
important change that will affect the
beliefs of Seventh-day Adventists for
years to come.
You see,
a small group of men, meeting in
Washington D.C, in November 1986 at the
"Year-end NAD Meeting," do not have the
constitutional right to change
Seventh-day Adventist beliefs or
standards.
By its
very nature, a standard is a type of
belief. It is part of our tenets of
faith. And a North American Division
small committee tried to change it. Now,
until very recently, no significant NAO
meetings were held-for it is widely
known that, unlike the other world
divisions, the North American Division
is only an extension of the General
Conference itself. And neither the North
American Division headquarters, nor its
committee meetings, counts for much-for
both are merely a rubber-stamp of
General Conference wishes. But now
certain men have decided that they will
try to use such meetings, far removed
from interference by the local churches-to
restructure the beliefs and patterns of
those local churches.
And yet
neither the General Conference, nor any
world division, nor any local union, or
conference committee has been endowed
with the authority to define or change
Seventh day Adventist beliefs or
standards.
Indeed,
-the
truth is that, in the eyes of God, not
even the local church nor the General
Conference in Session has a right to
change our beliefs or standards! When
the Bible and Spirit, of Prophecy
clearly speak in regard to any religious
matter, the issue is settle thereafter
and is not subject to change by any
group of men anywhere in the world
field. Only the God of heaven has such
authority.
Very
obvious and plainly-stated Spirit of
Prophecy statements (quoted in our
earlier tract, "The Adventist Wedding
Ring" (WM-156]) reveal that this
decision made in November by the NAD was
wrong. That the NAD would enact such a
doctrinal change was both wrong in
principle and illegal according to their
policy books.
History
has often shown that it is far better to
live according to God's Word than by
policy books. For those who begin
placing policy above God's
Word-eventually reach the point where
they violate their own policies in order
to achieve their coveted ends. He who
will not revere Scripture will not be
honest even with his own policies.
This NAD
action was carefully worded. Several
friends of ours, who read the first
paragraph or so of it in the "Adventist
Review" for December 4, 1986 (page 9),
then skipped over the rest and said,
"Well, it looks like the Church is
tightening its standards on the wearing
of jewelry." But not so. Under what
appears on the surface to be an appeal
for higher standards in the wearing of
jewelry, this action states-for the
first time in Seventh-day Adventist
history-that wedding rings do not come
under that category, and that those
wearing them must henceforth be accepted
into the Church without question by all
our evangelists, Bible workers, pastors,
and church members.
According
to the book, "The History and Poetry of
Finger Rings" (a condensed copy of which
is obtainable from this publisher-,
Roman Catholic priests made the sign of
the cross over the wedding rings in
order to dedicate them to the Church,
Now the Seventh-day Adventist Church is
baptizing those sacred circlets,
bequeathed us by ancient paganism, along
with the incoming members!
Pastors
in North America are being threatened
with discipline and firing-because they
refuse to go along with this high-handed
violation of a fundamental steno of
historic Adventism and a clear-cut
Spirit of Prophecy standard.
Ten or
fifteen years of such lowered standards
will mean the ruin of the Church. If
administrators wish to enforce a
non-Adventist requirement on those of
our pastors that are still
faithful,-then some of the members need
to write those administrators and tell
them that they will henceforth send
their funds elsewhere as long as that
conference requires allegiance to the
NAD marriage ring ruling. For that
ruling stands in violation of God's
Written Word and submission to it is a
sign of rebellion to His authority.
Giving is
a two-way street. If religious leaders
desire support, they in turn must give
also. They must give their support to
Inspired Writings that form the
foundation of our Church. They must
uphold the historic standards and
beliefs that constitute us the people of
God (for a church organization separated
from those standards and beliefs is
separated from Him), and, of course,
never are they to forbid pastors or
laymen who are trying to uphold those
standards or beliefs.
Sounds
too strong? If we let them kick out the
faithful ministers, who will we have
left? Repeatedly, our Church is entering
upon new avenues that violate clear
Bible-Spirit of Prophecy principles.
Every time we do this, we are moving a
decided step closer to total apostasy.
We can know this: The faithful will have
to protest - because no one else will.
And those who have left the Church don't
bother to. They forget about it and turn
their eyes to other things.
Call sin
by its right name, even though it may
sound better to call it "a church
decision."
Only last
week this writer learned that over a
year ago a meeting at the highest level
of the General Conference commissioned a
certain General Conference research
writer to prepare a study on why the
Seventh-day Adventist Church should now
reconsider and accept the wedding ring
as a fine Christian principle. Having
completed his pre-concluded study, that
writer was then sent on a speaking tour
to a number of the local conference
ministerial retreat: in North America to
prepare the way for the forthcoming NAD
rubber-stamp action. At those meetings,
in which conference officers discussed
the urgent need of increasing our
membership rolls in order to achieve the
"Harvest '90" numerical baptismal goals
outlined by Elder N.C. Wilson at the
1985 New Orleans General Conference
Session, the research writer then
explained to the assembled pastors that
wedding rings were all right after all,-for the very reason that the people emotionally needed them and it
would be inconsiderate to deprive them
of something that they felt that they
could not seemingly live without.
The
conclusions drawn by that General
Conference researcher, form the basic
arguments for wedding rings as stated in
the November 1986 NAD ruling, as it is
written.
Ellen
White has written that it is a fearful
thing when people are buried alive. She
is referring to instances in which
individuals were baptized into the
Church without having first died to sin
and the worldliness they should have
left behind them.
Thus,
there was a lengthy period of
preparation that preceded this November
1986 North American Division vote in
regard to the wearing of wedding rings
by church members and new converts.
But the
surprising news that a softening-up
action was taken for over a year to
prepare the Adventist ministry of North
America for this change in one of our
Church standards,dovetails into a
larger, more startling picture. Many of
our readers will not remember a news
disclosure we made in the June 20, 1985
issue of "Checkpoints." At the time when
we made it, none of us clearly
understood what it meant. But now we are
beginning to understand.
All
changes that affect the local
churches can only be enacted by the
delegates in attendance at a full
General Conference Session. It is of
interest that a similar illegal
action was approved by the Annual
Council which met in South America
last October: They voted to restrict
those permitted to preach in local
church pulpits to only those
specifically approved by the local
conference office. But such a
decision, changing as it does
another pattern in the local
churches, can only be enacted by the
delegates at a General Conference
Session.
The
long-range objective has been in
operation at least since 1981.
First, I
will reprint the nine paragraphs in this
"Checkpoints" report, and then we shall
discuss it:
VERY
IMPORTANT!
-The issue is simple enough-but ominous: Our Church has doctrines
and it has standards. The following
letter indicates that in 1981 the
standards were moved out of the body of
the "Church Manual" to an appendix in
the back. Now the plan is to eliminate
the appendix! As you may know, the
governing code of our local churches is
supposed to be the Bible or the Spirit
of Prophecy,-but
in reality it is the "Church Manual."
This forthcoming scissors-work will
remove all standards requirements from
our local churches!
("Doctrines" = concepts such as the
Second Advent, the Sanctuary Service,
Conditional Immortality, "Doctrinal
standards" = Seventh-day Adventist
members should refrain from jewelry,
theater attendance, dancing,
card-playing, liquor drinking, cigarette
smoking, gambling, etc.)
Read this
letter:
"Dear
Vance: I wonder if you are aware of an
important change in the "Church Manual'
that is being contemplated. It will be
voted on at General Conference Session
in New Orleans. I feel that the best way
to make it known is to let YOU know, but
I am afraid it will be too late to get
the word out. I would appreciate your
not using my name.
"Until
1981 there was a doctrinal, instruction
section in the main body of the "Manual.
" When the "Manual" was revised the last
time, that section was moved to the
Appendix. In its place, there is a
paragraph referring to "Fundamental
Beliefs of Seventh-day Adventists" to
use as instruction for candidates for
baptism. There is also a statement
referring pastors, etc., to the Appendix
for more information for doctrinal
instruction.
"The
problem lies in the fact that the
Christian standards we have believed and
taught for years-such as theater
attendance, jewelry, movies, dancing,
etc.-are only in the Appendix now. But
this places it outside the basic beliefs
in the main part, which is used as the
official standard.
But the plan is to remove this Appendix from the "Manual" at this
coming General Conference Session! By
doing this, they will effectively
eliminate the doctrines that deal with
our standards. This would certainly
accelerate the liberalization of our
Church.
"I understand that there are memoranda at the General Conference
that indicated this is the plan. I hope
it can be stopped in time. "-Somewhere
in the United States.
We are
told that it will be the Constitution
and By-laws Committee at the General
Conference Session, which will be in
charge of making sure that this agenda
item comes to the floor of the Session
for a yes-vote.
The
letter (quoted in italics) in the above
"Checkpoints" reprint, was written by a
top-flight Seventh-day Adventist
denominational worker whose name nearly
all of you are familiar with. It was
written to this writer prior to the 1985
New Orleans General Conference Session,
so that we could alert others to what
might take place at that Session.
Whether or not our alert helped, we
cannot say, but the fact remains that
the removal of the "standards" section
from the "Church Manual" was not
approved at New Orleans.
Now, why
did certain leaders want the standards
removed from the "Church Manual'? Well,
back in 1985, it seemed to us that the
objective was to get them out of the way
in order to cause less friction among
members in our local churches. With no
more standards, there would be no more
problems. At least that is how the
worldlings in the Church of God down
through the ages have always viewed the
matter.
But there
was another issue that we did not
recognize at the time, one that is now
coming closer to fruition: By
eliminating the standards it will be
easier to bring in new church members
almost as easily as do the other
denominations! And do note that the
long-range objective is to remove BOTH
the standards AND and the doctrines from
the "Church Manual"! That fact is of
crucial importance. Please do not forget
it. Keep thinking about it in the days
ahead. Cling to our precious
Bible-Spirit of Prophecy standards and
beliefs. Stand for them. Be willing to
die for them. And you will be safe in
the days ahead. Men may dislike you for
it; they may cast you out for it. But
fear not, the God of heaven approves of
your faithfulness to His Written Word.
(But
please, I would personally urge you:
Misguided men may cast you out for
obeying God's Word, but do not just walk
away from the defense of truth-and ask
that your name be removed. Let them do
the removing. When they do it, you can
say, "This is your hour, and the power
of darkness" (Luke 22:53), but let them
initiate the action.)
The Word
of God, nothing more, nothing less,
nothing else. Let this be your motto
from now unto death or translation.
But with
that, make sure you are personally
obeying that Word. Not only defend the
Word, live it in your daily life. And
whatever comes, keep sharing your faith
and the printed truth with those who do
not know the Third Angel's Message. Do
not become a dried-up prune by crawling
off into a corner and living unto
yourself. God has a special work for you
to do until the close of human
probation-in giving the last-day
messages to a dying world.
For two
pages of Spirit of Prophecy quotations,
see WM-156 ("The Adventist Wedding
Ring"), pages 3-4. The following is
excerpted from that compilation:
"Are we
to follow the Word of God, or the
customs of the world? Our sister decided
that it was the safest to adhere to the
Bible standard [and remove her
ornaments] . Will Mrs. D, and others who
follow a similar course [in continuing
to wear them] be pleased to meet the
result of their influence, in that day
when every man shall receive according
to his works?
"God's
Word is plain. Its teachings cannot be
mistaken. Shall we obey it, just as He
has given it to us, or shall we seek to
find how far we can digress and yet be
saved? . .
"Conformity to the world is a sin which
is sapping the spirituality of our
people, and seriously interfering with
their usefulness. It is idle to proclaim
the warning message to the world, while
we deny it in the transactions of daily
life." Evangelism, pages 270-272.
"Have not
our sisters sufficient zeal and moral
courage to place themselves without
excuse upon the Bible platform? The
apostle has given most explicit
directions on this point: 'I will
therefore .. that women adorn themselves
in modest apparel, with shamfacedness
and sobriety; not with broided hair, or
gold, or pearls, or costly array; but
(which becometh women professing
godliness) with good works.' Here the
Lord, through His apostle, speaks
expressly against the wearing of gold.
Let those who have had experience see to
it that they do not lead others astray
on this point by their example. That
ring encircling your finger may be very
plain, but it is useless, and the
wearing of it has a wrong influence upon
others."-4 Testimonies, page 630.
Ornamentation: Bracelets (Gen 24:22;
38:18; Ex 35:22; Num 31:50; 2 Sam
1:10), Ornaments: (Ex 33:4; Isa
3:18; Jer 2:32; 4:30; Ezek 16:11;
23:40), Chains (Gen 41:42; Prov.1:9;
Ezek 16:11; Dan 5:29), Earrings (Gen
24:22; 35:4; Ex 32:2; Num 31:50;
Judg 8:24; Job 42:11; Prov 25:22;
Num 31:50; Judges 8:24; Job 42:11;
Prov 25:12; Ezek 16:12; Hos 2:13),
Rings (Gen 41:42; Ex 35:22; Esther
3:10; 8:8; Isa 3:21; Lk 15:22),
Jewels (Gen 24:53; Ex 3:22; 35:22;
Num 31:50; Isa 61:10). Jewels
discarded (Gen 35:4; Ex 33:4; 1 Pet
3:3), Jewels brought as an offering
to God (Ex 35:22; Num 31:50). -From
'Modest and Healthful Clothing-Part
3" (RS-7I, p. 3.
WEDDING RINGS-The
following letter came from an Adventist
wife in California:
"A good
question to ask ministers, those who
formerly asked their people to take
their rings off at baptism: Will these
ministers now go back to those earlier
candidates and members and tell them it
is now okay to wear them?
"When I
became an Adventist 18 years ago, I was
asked to remove my rings and to SELL
them. They [the rings] meant a lot to
me, but I took them off and sold them.
Now this change of standard by the North
American Division-that wedding rings are
now okay even in the baptismal pool,
says that the former instruction was
only the will of some church leaders and
not the 'will of God'!
"At the
time of our wedding, I was not
affiliated with any church, and we spent
$1,500 on our set. They were sold for
$350. However, I say that when an
individual joins a church, and the
standard for 150 years has been, 'no
jewelry,' then that person should know
what is expected of him before he joins
the club! And now it's different.
"To fire
pastors for upholding an official
standard that leadership no longer wants
to abide by-is unchristian and unethical. Many would defend pastors who follow
their convictions and uphold what have
always been the historic teachings of
the church."--California.
MORE
ON THE WEDDING RING-The
recent North American Division Committee
action okaying the wearing of wedding
rings by all our church members is
creating far more problems than it is
attempting to solve.
"The
wedding ring is a problem in our little
church, and since, because of this new
ruling, some are now boldly displaying
theirs, others are beginning to put
theirs back on. We are studying with a
lady who recognizes this as a problem to
be resolved before baptism. What are our
people to do?"-Oklahoma.
There are
church leaders among us who are faithful
in trying to find ways to bring in more
members into the Church, but are far
less interested in upholding the
historic beliefs of our people. This is
not as it should be. Fifteen years of
that kind of leadership attitude can
ruin the North American Division as it
1962-1977 ruined the Australian and New
Zealand part of the Australasian (now
South Pacific) Division.
The whole
scheme is paradoxical, for the
underlying objective is to increase
membership in order to increase
offerings; but such a course of action
is resulting in bringing into the Church
a class of people who have little
interest in paying offerings-and
offending those who formerly paid them
devotedly.
"NOW
WE CAN WEAR RINGS!"-The
following letter comes from a location
east of the Mississippi:
"Praise
the Lord, I finally found someone who
agrees that the new law about wedding
rings is a big mess-and
really from the devil.
"I want
your tracts, 'The Power and Magic of
Finger Rings,' and also 'The Adventist
Wedding Ring,'-and anything else you
have on this subject. [The most recent
tract, before this one, is "Illegal: the
Wedding Ring Ruling"] .
"I have
two precious grand-daughters at ---
Academy. They came on a home leave and
said, 'Oh, we can now wear wedding
rings!' I was shocked. They have not
been wearing ANY jewelry at all. Their
mother has talked against it all these
years. Now all that she has worked so
hard to impress on their minds will be
broken down. What a pity.
"Some of
our supposed-to-be leaders are sure
following Satan's ways and leading many
in the ditch. I was baptized in the
early '40's and they wouldn't baptize
with rings then. I took mine off and
never wore them since. I have no desire
to and never will wear them again.
"If I had
a weakness for it though, I could now
say, 'Just think: all those years I
could have worn my rings.' I could sue
them for false teachings. I'm thoroughly
disgusted (righteous indignation).
Mainly concerned for my grand-daughters,
for I'm afraid as they SEE others
wearing rings (not just the wedding
ring), they will be wearing the
engagement ring too (many already are).
"Another
girl in school has a weakness for ear
rings, so now she thinks a ring is a
ring; 'I can wear them anywhere even to
church-and
she really is right. Jewelry is jewelry,
no matter what kind.
"Please
send several copies of the ring
tracts."-Eastern U.S.A.
TELEPHONE CALL FROM A GENERAL
CONFERENCE-LEADER-Last
week a high-ranking General Conference
leader decided on an impulse to
telephone this writer and plead with him
to stop writing in protest about our
falling church standards and doctrines.
In response, he was told that we would
be deeply happy to stop doing so.
Preparing missionary tracts and books
for distribution to non-Adventists is
far more satisfying.
-But
warnings have to be given; pleadings
have to be made. Members and workers
must be aroused by some means before it
is forever too late and probation has
forever closed.
"For
example, there is this matter of wedding
rings," I said. "Our faithful members
and pastors have for years upheld clear,
God-given Spirit of Prophecy statements
on this point. The Inspired counsels
teach that no matter how plain the
wedding band may be, it is still a wrong
influence and should not be worn."
To this,
the General Conference representative
solemnly replied with deep-toned
authority: "Brother Ferrell, you do not
understand the situation. We here at the
General Conference must deal with many
perplexities, and this new wedding ring
ruling was very much needed. Our people
needed it. We studied the matter at
great length, and this was a wise
decision. If you only could be there on
the committees as we wrestle with these
weighty problems, you would understand.
Brother Ferrell, please, you do not have
the understanding of this that the
brethren here in Washington D.C. have.
Lacking this understanding, you should
yield your judgment and abide by their
decisions."
At this,
I thought, "Well, what is this deep
problem that only approval of wedding
rings for all of North America could
solve?"
I then
spoke to this kind gentlemen about the
importance of upholding our historic
Bible-Spirit of Prophecy standards, no
matter what perplexities might arise.
To this,
the General Conference officer was
adamant that I simply lacked a clear
understanding of the weighty issues at
stake in such matters, and if I had that
understanding, I would be able to see
why the brethren who lead out in the
work must vote as they do.
"What was
the reason underlying this; why did they
vote to approve wedding rings?" I
inquired, expecting him to respond with
what I consider to be the real reason:
the need to increase the number of
baptisms into the Church throughout the
United States and Canada.
"My dear
brother, we wrestle with the weightiest
of problems and we have dedicated men
who are deeply concerned that our Church
adhere to the standards. That which you
do not understand is that we have
workers who come here to North America
from Europe. Please understand: Over
there they have worn wedding rings all
their lives, and when they come here
they are confused. They have always worn
wedding rings in Europe, and yet here
they are not permitted to do so. And
this has brought great perplexity to our
European workers. This was a serious
problem; it had to be dealt with in the
right way, and our leaders here in
Washington did so. They voted to approve
the wearing of wedding rings so that
these faithful workers would no longer
have to be embarrassed. Brother, if you
had been there, you could have seen how
serious this matter was."
At such a
reply, I nearly fell off my chair. A
handful of workers from Europe entering
the United States or Canada, and we must
lower the standard-no, eliminate the standard in regard to wedding rings, in order to
assuage the feelings of some
denominational immigrant workers from
Europe!
"But, my
brother," I protested, "Why were they
wearing those wedding rings in Europe!"
"Oh, it
is the custom there; everybody does it.
And they did it also. You must
understand, Brother Ferrell, the
feelings of our workers in Europe. They
are used to wearing wedding rings there.
It is expected of them. If you were
there, you would understand. And we
studied this problem for some time, and
this solution was__."
"But,
brother, the solution is not to lower
the standard in America, but to raise it
in Europe. The standards given by Heaven
to our people are for our people
everywhere, not just here or there."
"Oh, but
they must wear the rings over there; it
is the custom, you know. It is expected
of them."
"But they
did not need to wear those rings in
Europe. I personally know a couple that
has lived in Europe for nearly seven
years now. On a recent visit to America,
they stopped by here,-and
I asked them about wedding rings in
Europe. The husband said, 'Vance, over
there nearly all the Adventists wear
wedding rings. Because the workers do
it, the members do it also. But some do
not, and they experience no difficulty
in their own communities or when
traveling. My wife and I have never worn
wedding rings and we have traveled all
over Europe because of the type of work
I do.'
" 'But
have you ever met with any kind of
trouble for not wearing them?' I asked
him. 'European workers at the Seminary
back in the '50's told me that they
thought it necessary to wear wedding
rings on the Continent and in England in
order to give a good appearance. They
thought they had to have them; at least
that is what they said.'
"And he
answered, 'No, my wife and l have
traveled together all over Europe, and I
have gone alone to France, England,
Holland, Germany, Switzerland, Italy,
and the Scandinavian countries. Never
did any hotelkeeper question why we were
not wearing rings. And no one else ever
questioned it either. It is NOT
necessary to wear rings in Europe!' "
At this,
the General Conference officer seemed
somewhat taken aback by my words, but
spoke resignedly, determined that he
must take his stand in defense of the
action.
"Brother
Ferrell, this action was necessary for
the best interests of the work; that is
all I can say. You just don't
understand, and because you don't-you
really shouldn't have written what you
did about the matter. I appeal to you,
brother, to realized the gravity of what
you are doing."
My reply
may have seemed simplistic to any reader
well versed in high-level committee
action, but speaking directly to the
point, basing one's thoughts on obvious
cause-effect relationships, is what life
is all about on the practical every-day
level that common folk live on.
"Elder
__, in relation to the number of
Seventh-day Adventists in the U.S. and
Canada, the number of incoming European
workers is few. Few; very few. The
embarrassment of removing their rings
over here is the pain of moving up to a
higher Scriptural standard. This is what
our baptismal candidates have undergone
for decades. We used to call it
'sacrifice for Jesus' sake,' but now
when it applies to incoming foreign
workers, we term it 'embarrassment.'
"But the
ramifications of this action are more
far-reaching than I believe you grasp,
our people in North America are
experiencing it right now. And in the
long-term it will have a devastating
effect on the jewelry and adornment
standards of Adventist churches, small
and large, all over America and Canada.
"We have
received letters from church members
that are suffering as a result of this
problem. And pastors have contacted us
also. For example, one pastor that I
personally know to be a very faithful
Adventist minister telephoned me. That
man is an earnest Bible student, and one
who loves the Spirit of Prophecy
writings. There is no television set in
his home. He studies the books and gives
powerful Scripture-filled sermons. His
members respect him and follow his lead.
Wherever he goes, local churches are
helped by his personal example.
"And so
he calls me on the phone, depressed.
'What's wrong?' I ask.
"'My
conference president told me this past
week that my job is on the line.' 'Why?'
'Because I won't baptize three interests
till they take their rings off.' He [the
conference president] told me that that
"Church Manual" standard had been
recently rewritten by the North American
Division Committee-and I wasn't to urge it any more.'
"'He told
me to shape up or ship out. He said he
can get all the men he wants from
Andrews, and that he's found that some
of the new ones coming in seem more
willing to adapt.'
"Now,
Elder __, the brethren in Washington may
have the best of intentions, but,
personally, I think that this new action
was more concerned with increasing North
American church members than with
appeasing some European workers. But,
either way, the result is going to be
termination of employment for some godly
pastors, and confusion and disgust by a
lot of church members-the very church
members who in the past had been the
most faithful in paying in their tithes
and offerings."
A long
silence and then a sigh.
"Brother
Ferrell, I did not know that it was
affecting our faithful pastors in this
way." Another pause, and then, "But you
brought up the wedding rings; I didn't."
With that
he turned to another topic, but the tone
of his voice seemed more purposeless
now. And soon the conversation ended.
There are solutions, but they lie in
humbling our hearts before God,
confessing our sins, studying His Word
as carefully as though we had never read
it before,-and
then resolutely obeying it.
There is
no other workable solution to the
problems in our individual lives, our
homes, and our churches.
And there
is no other way to be saved.
-Vance
Ferrell
|