One of the most difficult challenges facing our society is the choice of leaders. In public elections, there can be a host of people who meet the qualifications to run for a particular office, who tell the electorate what their pundits tell them is most digestible, and who meets the “likeable” checkbox. And yet this question hovers over the voter at the ballot box, “is this the right person for the job?”
In local church, conference, union, division, and GC elections, committees meet, often pray, asking for guidance to choose those who should serve in offices of ministerial responsibility throughout the organization. There can be a bit of jostling, a tincture of lobbying, and a modicum of campaigning to get to the dedication ceremony.
If history teaches us anything it should be that the process is not a perfect path to the perfect person. Elections have put individuals in place who were unfit, unequipped for the task, and uniquely unqualified. And all the handwringing in the world cannot put the genie back in the bottle. What is often more difficult to accept is that in both civil and religious-based entities there can be machinations designed to yield a desired outcome.
What experience has taught this writer is that all leaders must remain at the top of our daily prayer petition before an omniscient God. It is possible that an appointed and anointed leader loses focus and becomes disqualified.
I Samuel 10:1 “Then Samuel took a flask of olive oil and poured it on Saul’s head and kissed him, saying, ‘Has not the Lord anointed you ruler over his inheritance.’”
Samuel, the highly respected Prophet of God, had been instructed to anoint this Benjamite the first king of Israel. There was no politicking or backroom deal-making in this selection.
”Now the Lord had told Samuel in his ear the day before Saul came, saying, Tomorrow about this time I will send you a man from the land of Benjamin, and you shall anoint him commander over My people Israel, that he may save My people from the hand of the Philistines; for I have looked upon My people, because their cry has come to Me. So, when Samuel saw Saul, the Lord said to him, “There he is, the man of whom I spoke to you. This one shall reign over My people” (1 Samuel 9:15-17).
Fast forward to I Samuel 15. After the war with the Amalekites and Saul’s disobedience in not following God’s instructions to destroy everything, Samuel was sent to Saul to give him a very direct message from God. “So, Samuel said:
“Has the Lord as great delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices,
As in obeying the voice of the Lord? Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice,
And to heed than the fat of rams. For rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft,
And stubbornness is as iniquity and idolatry. Because you have rejected the word of the Lord, He also has rejected you from being king” (I Samuel 15:22, 23).
In the Prophet’s rejection speech to Saul, one observation he made, is that the King’s position may have gone to his head,
“Samuel said, although you were once small in your own eyes, did you not become the head of the tribe of Israel? The Lord anointed you King over Israel. And He sent you on a mission…” (vs 17, 18).
The instructions of God had become secondary to Saul’s own proclivities to do what he wanted, when he wanted.
In 1979, Elder Charles E. Bradford was elected to serve as President of the North American Division (NAD) of Seventh Day Adventists, a position he held until 1990. His election was historical in many ways. He became the first African American elected to that position since the General Conference divided its governing world territories into Divisions. This decision was celebrated by many, especially those who felt the organization’s leadership should reflect the diversity of the people it is charged with serving.
In July 2020, with the retirement of Elder Daniel Jackson, history repeated itself with the elevation of Elder Glenward Alexander Bryant, who was serving as Executive Secretary of NAD, to President. Dr. Bryant became the 2nd African American in that position. He was reelected at the 2022 GC Session.
Since Oakwood University (OU), Huntsville, Alabama, is now under the auspices of the NAD, and not the GC (as most, if not all other higher education SDA institutions are) the OU Bylaws state that the President of the NAD is Chairman of the OU Board of Trustees (BOT). While it is possible for the NAD President to designate someone else to serve as chairman, to date, that person remains Dr. Bryant.
The chairman presides over the Oakwood University Constituency meetings. After a year of COVID delay, the most recent OU Constituency meeting was held June 16, 2022. Once the delegates were seated, registration packets in hand, quorum established, the chairman called meeting to order.
After a casual perusal of the documents, there were several observations that were abundantly clear. First, most of the decisions that should have been made at the session were already predetermined. The expectation was that decisions would be rubber stamped. The fact that the incoming Board of Trustees (BoT) members’ names were already printed in the documents was a shameful display of administrative arrogance. This was a perfunctory process. The fix was in. The chairman should have known better and acted differently. Secondly, there were two questions which were presented on the floor that were not given fair discussion.
One was that there was not enough female representation on the BoT. To this observation, the chairman responded (without looking at a transcript of the proceeding, please accept this as a paraphrase), “We are aware of that. But we have not been able to find enough qualified women.” I have sought to get a copy of the video of the day, without success.
As a member of the SDA church for more than 50 years, I was offended. I thought of my mother, now deceased, who gave everything she could to this church. I thought of my sister who is well educated and could have adroitly contributed to the BoT and the strengthening of Oakwood University. I thought of my wife, who I met at Oakwood College more than 40 years ago. She is my co-partner in ministry. I appreciate the many Godly women who have blessed and enriched my life, even if others don’t.
Secondly, the Chair recommended that the size of the OU BoT be increased to 40 members. At that point, a delegate, who is also the author of this treatise, asked if there could be consideration for a balance of laymen and denominational workers represented on the BoT. The recommendation was to use a formula, 40/60 or 45/55 percent split. By so doing, when the total number of members change, the proportion of representation will adjust accordingly.
After an exchange between the chairman and the Delegate, Dr. Bryant said “The Chair has heard enough. I am asking you to take your seat.” The only interpretation of that comment is “shut up and sit down”. The delegate stopped speaking but did not move away from the microphone. After a period of eerie silence, the chairman spoke again, “on the other hand, let me allow you to finish your comments.” But the damage was done. This experience pivots to a much larger discussion.
Has the church leadership become so insulated and disconnected from those who they were elected to serve, protected by the governing policies of the church—which they wrote—that their only expectation is that the people are obsequiously loyal to their voice?
The committee which recommended and voted Dr. G Alexander Bryant for the position of NAD president, may have been right about his fitness for that office. Time will tell. But the corollary to that position, which makes him the chairman of the Oakwood University Board of Trustees, is a looming disaster.
Unlike civil elections, where the registered voter knows in 2, 4, or 6 years they can undo a bad choice, church affiliated elections are more difficult. For some reason, dedicated members believe that interspersing politics and prayer, even if the wrong person is chosen, or the right person is chosen at the time but loses his godly aegis and is rendered unfit, that the only safe position is to wait on God to act. That could not be further from the truth. There is no nexus between elected, appointed, and anointed. God is the voice of final authority, as He was with Saul. Man is empowered to act. That time is NOW!
Key Points
1. A chairman has no right to tell a legitimate delegate who has the floor to shut up, unless there is a limited allotment of time that has been legitimately voted on by the delegates. That wasn’t the case here.
2. There are many consecrated women in the church who enrich our lives and he should apologize for what appeared to be a dismissive statement towards them.
3. Oakwood University BoT is excessively large.
4. Bryant needs to step down or be removed.
Conclusion
The current chairman of the Oakwood University Board of Trustees should apologize to the men and women of this church in an open letter, step aside as Chair, and appoint a designee until 2025, when his position as President will be under review.
Allow the Oakwood University family to heal.
“For rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft, and stubbornness is as iniquity and idolatry.”
****
Danny R. Chandler is a 1984 graduate of Oakwood College. He is the Founder of Mississippi Friends of Oakwood Committed to University Support (MS FOCUS) and the Chandler Foundation, both Funds held at Oakwood University. He also led the initiative to remodel the On-campus daycare, in which a room was dedicated and renamed Chandler Child Enrichment Center to honor his sister, Francine Chandler. He served on the South-Central Executive Committee and Constitution & Bylaws Committee for more than 25 yrs.