1. Leadership in the Seventh-day Adventist Church
Policy and Practice

2. Historical Background
Late Industrial Revolution influence
Mirroring current secular leadership behaviors
1861 marked the formal emergence of the word leadership
George Butler Leadership essay and subsequent controversy
The polarization of the church during the last 2 decades of the 19th Century
Reorganization at the 1901 and 1903 General Conference sessions

3. Mirroring of Secular L’ship
Great Man Theory and Practice the norm
Rockefeller, Carnegie, J.P. Morgan, Edison, etc
Command and control methods challenged
Enlightenment
Emergence of non-military management of large organizations
Slavery outlawed but attitudes of control and coercion remain
Kingly Power controversy pitted autocratic vs. representative leadership models
U.S. President Theodore Roosevelt tackled autocratic models at the same time as we were dealing with Kingly attitudes in the SDA Church

4. Biblical Precedents Biblical history reveals
God shares authority broadly in a distributed model
Humans granted shared leadership before Adam was created
Shared leadership restored in New Jerusalem
Tendency of humans to centralize and consolidate authority into hands of a few
Offer to Gideon
Israel’s request for a king
God’s intervention never consolidates but rather distributes and disperses authority as a solution
Radical distribution of authority in the early church replaced by centralized leader (pope)

5. Symptoms in late 19th Century SDA Church
1860’s- Poorly defined authority structure led to leadership stresses in 1870’s
1873- Butler’s Leadership essay and GC acceptance promoted hierarchy of power
C:\Users\patterss\Dropbox\Articles\terminal authority\Butler Pamphlet Leadership.pdf
Rescinded in 1875
Polarization of attitudes related to autocracy
1900- EG White returns from Australia with experience in formation and value of Unions
Calls for change and challenges Kingly Power attitudes and practice
Challenges commercial models of organization and leadership applied to church

6. 1901 GC Session (affirmed at 1903 GC session)
Reorganization was the solution for dysfunctional leadership
Overreaction- No GC President elected in 1901
Illustrates the level of passion for an egalitarian model of governance
SDA organizational structure cannot be understood apart from an awareness of the Kingly Power controversy
Authority was vested in the people—not in leaders
Leaders function on the basis of “loaned” authority limited by time and scope
Leaders accountable to representatives of the body

7. Papal Model (Hierarchy of Power)
1/20/2014
Papal Authority
Few barriers or hindering buffers
Cardinals
Archbishops
Bishops
Priests
Exercise of authority
Members Subject to Authority
S.E. Patterson, PhD SDATS

8. Representative Model (Hierarchy of Order)
barriers or hindering buffers
Conference
(authority limited to term)
General Conference/Division
Union
Local Church
(Authority vested in Collective Membership)
delegation of authority
S.E. Patterson, PhD SDATS

9. Safeguard: Terminal Authority
Terminal authority is the point at which power can legitimately be exercised as decisions
1901 GC Session granted TA to sessions and executive committees
Leaders called to analyze and craft recommendations—not decisions

10. Leaders administer via
Recommendation
Authority loaned to Leaders
Executive Committee
Makes Terminal Decisions
Constituency Session
Authority Vested in Delegates

11. Safeguard: Semi-autonomous structures
Organizational structures bonded by relationship—not law
Absence of coercive organizational bonds

12. Threats to 1901 Model
Human nature historically reveals consistent move toward the kingly model
Expediency drives us toward the power hierarchy model
Complexity and size of the organizational challenge
Influence of the US presidential model on executive leadership practices
The subordination of Secretariat and Treasury- designed as a balance of power
The adoption of the VP executive model

13. Threats to 1901 Model (cont.)
Ignorance of the people regarding their vested authority
The ineffectiveness of the Executive Committee as a decision- making body
The relational distance of Union, Division and GC leaders from local church
Abandonment of the Business Meeting as the terminal point of local church decisions
Hierarchy of Order replaced by Hierarchy of Power