Like many of you reading this article, I was born and raised as a Seventh-day Adventist.
That side of me could be on a front cover, since being SDA isn’t just a religious label. That’s because, unlike the majority of protestants, SDAs have a community aspect intertwined within their belief system, which can make it feel all-encompassing. Being engulfed in this subculture since birth, I was oblivious that most people didn’t have all their connections, resources, friends, and role models come from a singular origin. That’s not to say I didn’t know people who weren’t SDA; I definitely did, and wasn’t blinded to the fact that there were other churches that existed. But when I sat down, bewildered by the reality that I associated nearly all my friends with church functions and that I barely knew any of my neighbors, I realized that I lived in what many SDAs refer to as “the bubble.”
Now, why is it that things related to church and things that aren’t related are seemingly indistinguishable? In other words, what factors make the bubble exist at all? There are several reasons, including the interconnectedness of ministry organizations, the church’s extensive education system, the church’s involvement in the healthcare industry, and its distinctive vocabulary, just to name a few.
Although these distinctions are visibly present, doesn’t the church discourage exclusivity and promote inclusivity? The answer to that would be yes; officially, the SDA Church does promote cooperation with non-members and encourages interaction, as they very much should. The church website states that “[they] reject bigotry against any person, regardless of race, nationality, or religious creed.” However, if what’s stated is being followed, then the bubble effect should —in theory— be close to nonexistent, especially because several credible sources in the church preach against the factors to make it so. Not only do places like the SDA website have several sections where it declares this exclusiveness to be harmful to church growth (much like the quote above), but for years, the church has and still does “recognize that true religion is based on conscience and conviction.” These types of statements suggest that separation from the rest of society would be a result of unmistakable neglect of church doctrine.
So then, why do many feel like they live in a bubble? After all, the church’s official position is that the exclusive nature of SDA communities is a detriment. Even with many Adventist connections available, experiencing the bubble effect shouldn’t be a result of church culture since exclusivity is officially discouraged. To put it simply, it’s more of a you problem, not a them problem. But is it?
It should be noted that SDAs are one of the most politically diverse denominations in the world. Not only are they politically diverse, but they are also one of the most culturally diverse. Take one look at the Andrews campus, and the sheer amount of diversity present is enough to be nationally recognized. All the representation existing in the church would strengthen the argument that the bubble effect is in no way a them problem.
But, if it’s only a you problem, then there shouldn’t be individuals from multiple backgrounds experiencing similar things. The reality is, this is a widespread concern that encompasses many people from various parts of Adventism. A research project done at Southern Adventist University several years ago sums its effect up quite nicely: “The Seventh-day Adventist system is all encompassing from the cradle to the grave.”
It is likely a combination of both social institutions and personal background that add to this bubble effect. Moreover, the fact that despite contrasting cultures, SDAs are able to relate to each other in ways that many churches cannot is evidence that the bubble is an ever present reality that needs acknowledgement. While it’s not necessarily a bad thing to share a global religious identity, a distinction must be made between official statements and qualitative experiences.
The official statements support the claim that religious isolation is bad. They say that misusing doctrine in order to separate from the rest of society is unacceptable, unthinkable. These concrete statements are one hundred percent correct. However, the qualitative experiences show that many SDAs feel isolated from everyone else. These experiences show that doctrine has been presented in ways that hone on specific aspects of SDA beliefs and extrapolates its effect on perceptions of people who aren’t members.
Now, why is this the case? It is generally accepted that human identities are influenced by communities, and they impact what we learn, think, and believe. This seems obvious, but when taking into account that the community in question engulfs nearly all aspects of someone’s life, then it becomes a problem. Consistently being exposed to a singular narrative produces outcomes such as a lack of diverse thought, a subconscious bias against people not part of the de facto ‘in’ group, and the potential inability to relate to others. So yes, although personal choice has much to do with how much someone is impacted by the bubble effect, the sheer amount of presence SDA culture has on its members makes it much more difficult to escape from it. A fix to this, while obvious, is much harder in reality than it is on paper.
The truth is, we need to get out of our comfort zones and build intentional relationships and connections with others outside of the church. SDA fundamental belief #14 explicitly points to Jesus as a prime example of its application, as it says that “Jesus was never one to be confined by social convention…(He) made it clear His Gospel was for everyone.” However, it’s not enough to recognize that what we must do is clearly stated; it must be consciously followed.
Author John Pavlovitz, in his book “A Bigger Table,” (2017) summarizes this notion that we can break out of the bubbles we were put in and that we can step forward in confidence, knowing that we can grow into the most authentic versions of ourselves:
The kind of intimacy Jesus shares with people…only comes through the redemptive relationship forged from when we are willing to sit across from people who believe differently than we believe…This is how we love people well; it is how we put flesh on our faith; and it is how we follow so close behind the Rabbi Jesus that we are covered in His dust (121).
Words in and of themselves are not the key to breaking out of the bubble. The 28 doctrines of the SDA church are not the key to breaking out of the bubble. In fact, even our own personal opinions are meaningless unless they are paired with deliberate efforts. What must be remembered is the thought, above all else, that if we don’t strive to relate to others in the same way Jesus forged relationships with people that did not share his beliefs or culture, then our claim to Christianity is nothing but a label, that same label which seemingly connects us all in practice but fails to take into account who that practice was originally directed towards.
The Gospel is us. It is one thing to say it; it is another to embody it. We must bathe in the dust of our Creator, to experience our lives and the lives of others in the way that He lovingly cares for us. Being a part of the Seventh-day Adventist church does not mean we remain forever stagnant; it means that we can break free of the bubble effect and that we have a chance to further a more positive impact in whatever scope of influence we have control over. Church culture has its issues, no doubt about it; but at the end of the day, it is our choice whether we want to add to the problem, or become part of the solution.
That side of us could be on a front cover.
The Student Movement is the official student newspaper of Andrews University. Opinions expressed in the Student Movement are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the editors, Andrews University or the Seventh-day Adventist church.