Historic/Traditional
SDA's Vs. Progressive SDA's General Differences
Labels are a convenience used to help differentiate people of different beliefs or philosophies. A label such as Historic Adventism or Progressive Adventist are terms which must be selected by those who want to apply the terms to themselves. Declaring a person liberal or conservative is counterproductive if the person being so labeled does not agree with the label. So the generalization of a label must not be used carelessly. If the label used is meant to damage a persons reputation that label is most likely being misused.
In the subculture of Seventh-day Adventists a few labels have been used to represent where a particular person or group of peoples belief fit in. Since in most any religious movement there will be a spectrum of beliefs which can range widely. The following labels have begun to come into usage. Historic/traditional, moderate, and Progressive. As is true of the political category known as moderates, the moderate SDA is someplace between the Historic and Progressive position. Rush Limbaugh would say of the moderates in the political arena that they are people who can't make up their minds. More likely though the moderate is someone who agrees somewhat equally with either those on the conservative side as well with those on the liberal side. This is probably the case for moderate SDA's also. Depending upon the subject matter they will side with one side or the other, but not side with any one side enough to want to accept the generalization inherit in their label, Historic or Progressive.
On the spectrum of Seventh-day Adventism the Historic/traditional SDA would be classed as conservative, using the right to left direction found in the American political system. Using the Merriam-Webster definition of conservatism: a : disposition in politics to preserve what is established. b : a political philosophy based on tradition and social stability, stressing established institutions, and preferring gradual development to abrupt change : the tendency to prefer an existing or traditional situation to change (© 1996 Zane Publishing, Inc. and Merriam-Webster, Incorporated)
So the Historic/Traditional SDA desires to hold to and continue with the beliefs which were instituted at the foundation of the Seventh-day Adventist church, during the mid to latter 1800's. A move away from those traditions or teachings is viewed with suspicion or as error. This can be demonstrated by the resistance which occurred in the Historic/Traditional SDA's rejection of the 1957 book Questions on Doctrines. It was felt that the book was too great a departure from the Historic position of the Seventh-day Adventist church. The move to use drama or contemporary Christian music in the worship service is often thought as worldly entertainment entering the church. The Historic/Traditionalist desires to hold on to several "pillars" of the SDA church.
Some key doctrines would be:
At the other end of the spectrum is the Progressive Seventh-day Adventists. This could be termed liberal except that the term liberal Christian is generally used of those who believe that Christ was not resurrected, miracles did not happen and other tenants which most Progressive SDA's would not agree. The liberal Christians are by this most accepted understanding, those involved in the Jesus Seminars, or people like bishop Sprong. While people who would agree with those just listed as Liberal Christians probably do exist in the Seventh-day Adventist church. They would not make up a sizable portion of those who would feel comfortable with the label Progressive SDA. Of the key doctrines listed above as the "Pillars" of Historic/Traditional SDA's the Progressive SDA's would hold to significant modifications.
The Progressive Seventh-day Adventists do not feel that the church should be limited by the teachings of its founders. If errors are discovered in teachings previously held, the errors should be acknowledged and corrected. That all knowledge is built upon those who have gone before us, not only those in the SDA church, but also the many Christians outside and far before the existence of the SDA church. Knowledge is progressive. What seemed right a hundred years ago may not be right for today or tomorrow.
Since it would not be in the best interest of the Seventh-day Adventist church or any denomination for that matter to create divisions in its membership, there is no official definitions for the terms listed above. If the church were to segment itself by the above divisions it would likely cause a fragmentation of the denomination. For example the Progressive SDA's would form there own churches and the same for the Historic/Traditional SDA's. Greatly undermining the authority of the Denominations leadership. It would likely not be able to retain the respect of both ends of the spectrum. As is evidenced today by the more organized Historic/Traditionalist who make up the majority of those involved in Hope International and Hartland Independent Ministries. These groups reject the rebukes of the General Conference because they feel that the General Conference is not behaving correctly.
There are very fundamental differences between the Historic/Traditional and the Progressive SDA's. The need is for both sides to listen to the Spirit of God, and allow Him to lead us to a greater knowledge of God. Yet how we study and who we listen too, may well be areas that continue to separate both sides.