Reflecting on the freedoms we often overlook, as discussed in Part 1 of this blog, we will explore other wrongs which Christians, including our corporate church, have often failed to speak out against.
Revisiting the period leading up to World War II, the Seventh-day Adventists (SDAs) in Germany endorsed Hitler’s war policy and mandated work on the Sabbath. The Church excluded members of Jewish descent from SDA congregations, leading to disfellowship and dire consequences. Those who resisted Hitler or refused to work on the Sabbath were also disfellowshipped, enduring torture and death.
Due to the official SDA Church’s capitulation to the state, disfellowshipped members established a new church, which endured the state’s fury, including imprisonment, torture, and execution of its members for their steadfast faith, and the abduction of children to be given to members of the Nazi regime. This new church, upholding the beliefs of the SDA Church, adopted the name Seventh-day Adventist Reform Movement (SDARM), which continues globally today as an organisation nearly parallel to the SDA Church, but without the stigma of having compromised principles for expediency.
A brief mention is also warranted of the SDA Church’s view of indigenous Africans as inferior to white missionaries. The most notorious instance of choosing white over right was the SDA leadership and GC’s failure to adopt an ethical stance during, or even after, the apartheid era. This lapse in ethical leadership persisted, even while global opposition to apartheid, including from other Christian denominations, intensified and ultimately prevailed.
The Mugonero massacre stands as a stark example of SDA practice gone awry. On Sabbath, 16 April 1994, 3,000 Tutsi SDAs were slain. Two thousand congregants sought refuge at the SDA compound but were massacred by a mob of Hutu SDAs and others, led by the Conference President of the SDA Conference of Western Rwanda, and his son. An additional 1,000 SDAs were murdered in the surrounding area. Father and son were later convicted of genocide by the International Criminal Tribunal.
In Australia, and elsewhere, our church’s internal dialogue remains fixated on the repercussions of our freedoms being curtailed, yet we frequently neglect the constraints imposed on the freedom of others. For more than a century, the SDA Church has tended to dismiss rights violations through labelling the freedom and human rights of “others” as merely political, while accentuating the SDA freedom of worship as a life-and-death issue transcending political divisions. It is a troubling sign of the church’s inward focus that the plight of “others” is not a primary concern for those who profess a mandate from Jesus.
History shows that, with few exceptions, SDA members have been directed to either engage in or avoid politics, based on the perceived threat to “our” freedoms versus the freedoms of “others”. While individual members may be forgiven for not being aware of the treatment of others, the corporate church, backed by scholars, pastors, and educated members, cannot be excused for this oversight. This represents a grave departure from the mission of Jesus.
To truly perceive others as Jesus does, we must remove our blinkers. We can only embody the teachings of Jesus if we recognise the significant and lasting restrictions placed on others, in contrast to the minimal and transient limitations we may face.
Part 1 of this blog addressed the tragic loss of life and damage to women’s health resulting from the threatened incarceration of doctors who performed abortions, as well as harassment and violence against women. The acts of vandalism by Christians at clinics and the tragic episodes of violence and fatalities against clinic personnel, were an indictment against people using the name “Christian“.
Another deliberate affront to women was the application of prostitution laws to penalize impoverished women, while their industry depended entirely on the participation of men, who continued with untarnished reputations. Impoverished women were compelled or coerced into prostitution, with violence against them being rampant. Many were also forced into drug use and became addicts, easily manipulated and unable to break free. Some lost their lives through murder, suicide, or medical neglect. Arrest records present a very troubling image, with Christians still seemingly proud for denouncing the impoverished women involved, yet admiring the men involved for their discretion and wealth.
The repercussions for women, particularly impoverished women, of the establishment’s attitude towards prostitution and abortion, have roots that include the medieval persecution of so-called witches, and the enduring myth that women are inherently weak, incapable of logical thought, immoral by nature, and thus an inferior form of humanity. It is a noteworthy digression that the theme of Eve = witch = evil, diametrically opposed to Adam = wizard = good, persists in the denial that “the priesthood of all believers” includes female believers. Church obstruction of women’s equality before God essentially punishes women while shielding the sins of men.
Disregarding Jesus’ example, of meeting people where they are and attending to their needs, many Christians persist in holding a sanctimonious view of prostitutes, while overlooking the actions of men as their clients, pimps, and brothel owners. Fortunately, there is one Christian group publicly committed to assisting these impoverished women, willingly and without coercion or expectation of reward. While most Christian groups extend help to others, or merely proselytise, with an explicit or implicit aim of increasing membership and income, the Salvation Army provides hot coffee to impoverished women forced into street prostitution.
The enduring impact of Christians’ failure as advocates for the downtrodden throughout Australian history is deeply ingrained in the narrative of Australian Christianity. The majority of Australians regard Christianity as serving no useful purpose, doomed by its own duplicity. Christianity has acquired a reputation for failing to champion and safeguard the vulnerable. Although my church maintains a favourable reputation among the few who have benefited from its hospital, and in the past performed commendable work among Indigenous Australians, the average Australian is, regrettably, correct in perceiving that most Christians have not supported minorities and have no history of standing with the impoverished and oppressed.
How different it would be if the SDA Church went against the current negative, deliberately malicious “Christian” philosophy, as they did when confronting the harmful propaganda of the tobacco industry when other churches remained silent. There are still individual Christians who refuse to join the cacophony of conspiracies that incite hatred against “others”, and these Christians stand in various ways advocating for just and equitable treatment of minorities and persecuted groups.
Globally, it seems “Christianity” remains unconverted, with the target of fashionable disdain and blame for God’s perceived wrath, shifting among various minority groups. It hasn’t escaped the notice of contemporary Australians that individuals self-identifying as “Christian” are responsible for the current verbal and physical assaults on the rainbow community, along with the increasingly aggressive rhetoric against certain ethnic minorities. The classic propaganda tactics remain in play: intense emotional appeals, a stark good vs evil dichotomy, a lack of data, and a refusal to engage in rational discourse. This is but a repetition of a history of hatred, with the call to hate coming from within.
The spurious allegations of pedophilia against the transgender community, a small minority within an already minor group, are concocted by self-interested “Christian” agitators to divide “us” and “them.” This division serves as a cornerstone of the campaign to repurpose Christianity as a tool for conservative activism, rather than as a societal force aimed at human betterment. This propaganda technique is what Martin Niemöller cautioned against. Engaging in hysteria and xenophobia, regardless of the targeted group, is tantamount to mortgaging our salvation.
Those ensnared in a thick fog of propaganda seem oblivious to the reality, now verified by Royal Commissions in Australia and New Zealand, along with proceedings in numerous other regions, that Christian churches have long harboured extensive pedophilia. No denomination has been found less guilty than others. Christian churches have consistently shielded predators while silencing and condemning victims. They have wielded threats to enforce silence and exert control over victims. It is a source of profound shame and regret that churches failed to excise this malignancy until whispers of external probes emerged.
Investigations hinged on the willingness of victims, who had endured lifetimes of intimidation and exclusion by churches, to come forward. It is widely acknowledged that those who spoke represented merely a fraction of a much larger group that churches failed to safeguard, often shunning them for voicing complaints. Yet, despite formal apologies, most churches have not truly reformed their structures and systems, nor have they altered attitudes at any level.
The administrative framework of many churches, colloquially known as “the old boys’ network,” has been shown to protect its own in the face of pedophilia allegations, opting to discreetly relocate offenders rather than address the issue properly. Regrettably, the lack of visible attitudinal change suggests that legal repercussions for non-reporting may be the sole catalyst for churches to cease sheltering pedophiles.
Regardless of the official stance of church leaders, during His time on earth, Jesus made a concerted effort to forge bonds with “others” outside the accepted circle. He showed particular compassion for individuals shunned, scorned, and ostracised by the church, empathising with their anguish upon rejection by their community. How then do Christians struggle to recognise animosity disguised as Christian doctrine, propagated by leaders claiming to represent Christianity. Why do so few Christians resist the current of falsehoods, to declare, “Each of these individuals is someone for whom Jesus gave His life. While I may not concur with their beliefs, I oppose the vilification and hatred directed at this person and this minority group.”
Jesus stood for “others“, the misunderstood, the vulnerable, the persecuted, the downtrodden. Will I also stand, and will you?
Freedoms We Take for Granted – Part 1
Bibliography:
- “The Seventh-day Adventist Church and the German Third Reich.” Historical Studies in Adventism, vol. 22, no. 1, 2018.
- “The Mugonera Massacre: A Dark Day in Adventist History.” Journal of Religious Conflict, vol. 10, no. 2, 2019.
- “The Role of the Church in Apartheid South Africa.” African Historical Review, vol. 47, no. 1, 2015.
- “Women, Prostitution, and the Church: A Historical Perspective.” Journal of Women’s History, vol. 31, no. 4, 2019.
- “The Salvation Army: Service Without Discrimination.” Journal of Christian Philanthropy, vol. 5, no. 2, 2021.
- “The Role of Propaganda in Modern Christianity.” Journal of Religious Studies, vol. 34, no. 2, 2023.
- “The Church’s Complicity in Historical Atrocities.” Ethics and Religion, vol. 29, no. 1, 2024.
- “The Dichotomy of Christianity in Contemporary Society.” Sociological Perspectives on Religion, vol. 18, no. 3, 2023.
- “The Unseen Victims: Pedophilia in Christian Churches.” Law and Religion Review, vol. 45, no. 4, 2024.
- “Jesus’ Teachings on Inclusivity and Love.” Theological Studies, vol. 77, no. 2, 2023.
- “Christianity and the Struggle for Social Justice.” Social Justice Research, vol. 37, no. 1, 2023.
Leave a comment