MANDATE AND CONDUCT

Over the last year, some concerns [concerning the mining case] have been raised by members which have also been shared by the Executive Committee, and we have been working hard to address them.

       – The EXCOM, open letter to the church boards, 16 March 2022, p. 8.

The EXCOM is democratically elected by the delegates of all the churches at Session every three years, and is responsible for the administration of the IC, receiving its authority from the Session.[1] Adventists do not believe that their administrators and leaders, whether they are ordained ministers or laymen, are somehow superior to the laity or that they have some god-given claim to their position. The administration and leadership of Adventists is democratically elected and receives its authority as a mandate temporarily from the people. And even though we pray to God to guide our denomination, that does not in any way mean that every administrator and leader is the best person for their position or inherently elected by God. To affirm such things is simply not in harmony with Adventist theology or Adventist biblical interpretation. 

The mandate of the EXCOM means that the EXCOM is accountable to the Church (i.e., church members in the Conference) because the EXCOM receives its mandate from them, with their permission, and is protecting their interests. This accountability means that the EXCOM services, informs, and co-operates with the Church. The EXCOM informs the Church about its activities since the EXCOM operates on the Church’s behalf and receives its authority from it. The EXCOM services the Church because it is the Church that elects the EXCOM to take care of its interests. And the EXCOM works with the Church and not in its place. As theologians have termed it, the EXCOM leads by serving (servant leadership). 

The mining case has demonstrated that the EXCOM views its mandate in a different light. It seems to hold the following opinion: 

1. that the EXCOM does not need to consult with the Church as a whole when it comes to making big decisions that concern the interests of the Church

2. that the EXCOM is not obligated to inform the Church about the EXCOM’s activities

3. that questions and criticism from church members are unchristlike and unacceptable behavior 

This opinion is understandable if the EXCOM believes it is somehow superior to laypeople—but that view is, however, neither in harmony with the democratic administrative model of Seventh-day Adventists nor their theology. Let us look at each of these factors separately.

Interests

When questions and comments were raised concerning the old contracts from 2008 and 2009 and their implementation, the EXCOM demonstrated in praxis that they simply did not have the will to explain the matter to church members. The EXCOM did not inform church members about their new negotiations with Eden (early 2021 to January 2022) and signed a new long-term contract with the company even though they knew that church members were unhappy with Eden because of unanswered questions concerning the two then-valid contracts. The new contract seems to violate article no. 18 in the bylaws of the IC. That article states that the EXCOM must present big financial decisions that concern the interests of the IC to Session.[2] With this behavior, the EXCOM showed they did not think it was necessary for the Church as a whole to make the decision. The EXCOM believed they had sufficient mandate to make this decision unilaterally even though the bylaws explicitly state that is not the case. 

It can also be pointed out that the EXCOM does not seem to have protected the interests of the IC when the old contracts were valid, even when the EXCOM could have. The 2009 contract was not terminated when the original business idea fell through—article no. 9 permitted termination in that case. The EXCOM had the IC pay for the environmental assessment even though the contract stated that Eden should pay for it.[3] When Eden did not pay the IC on time, it seems that the EXCOM did not utilize a clause in article no. 7 which stated that Eden should pay late payment penalty (dráttarvextir) and should receive a written warning from the EXCOM—and in case the written warning was not heeded, the EXCOM could have terminated the contract. Every time something came up where it seemed that Eden was wronging the IC, the EXCOM did not try to stand up for the rights of the IC but seems instead to have been on the side of Eden in all their actions. Why?

Information Provision

Despite individual church members having asked questions about the mining case for several years and despite this request for information having become increasingly louder, the EXCOM has still not answered any main question substantially. Moreover, the flow of information has been slow and confusing. Space permits me only to discuss each of these factors briefly.

Answers of the EXCOM

On 5 December 2021, the EXCOM received an open letter. The EXCOM did not reply to the authors of the letter. Instead, three months later, on 16 March 2022, the EXCOM wrote an open letter to the church boards. In its open letter, the EXCOM only addressed some of the points of the open letter from December but did not reply substantially to them. When the EXCOM received a petition (with 61 signatures) to convene an open information meeting about the mining case, the EXCOM decided to hold such a meeting with the church boards. This meeting took place 24 May 2022 when the GCAS report was announced and read. The EXCOM asked the church boards to send in questions about the mining case ahead of the meeting. And yet these questions were not addressed at the meeting. And the GCAS report—which the EXCOM had spoken about as a final verdict and explanation in the mining case—did not even address the legal aspect of the case. In the mining report which was included the meeting documents for Session 2022, the delegates to Session were asked to accept a motion that unanswered questions and discussion about the mining case be dropped completely. In short, church members have not received substantial answers to their mining case inquiries.

A Tardy Process

The EXCOM made it difficult for Kristján Ari Sigurðsson to continue his investigation. For several years, he tried to advance it, without much success, by repeatedly asking the EXCOM to give him pertinent information, etc. Church members had spoken to the administrators and the EXCOM for many years but this led to nothing. It was not until spring 2021 that the EXCOM decided to ask GCAS to investigate the case. However, it was not until October 2021 that the EXCOM finally asked GCAS for the investigation, half a year after the decision. On 5 December 2021, the EXCOM received an open letter. In January 2022, the Hafnarfjörður church board had a meeting and the IC President Gavin Anthony was present. The church board asked him questions concerning the mining case. The President stated that he could not speak about the issue until GCAS would finish its investigation. The GCAS report arrived four months later. But it turned out that the report did not answer the questions of church members at all. It did not even address the mining case in its entirety. At the GCAS meeting, the majority of the church boards voted for the possibility of the EXCOM convening another information meeting about the mining case. Nevertheless, the EXCOM decided not to hold such a meeting and put forth a motion (via the mining report) to delegates at Session 2022 to cease all discussion about the mining case.

Conflicting Answers and Actions

The EXCOM’s reluctance to provide information has also been manifested in the EXCOM’s inconsistent actions. It is as if they use anything to excuse lack of information and as if they try to delay the process as much as possible. Few examples can be mentioned. Session was first delayed because the EXCOM believed it was impossible to hold Session before the mining case would be solved. The EXCOM than held one meeting with the church boards about the mining case. The church boards felt that meeting was insufficient since their questions were not addressed. The majority of the church boards therefore asked for a second meeting. That meeting has never been held. The EXCOM’s mining report (which was included in the meeting documents for Session 2022) demonstrated that the EXCOM that it was in fact quite possible to hold Session without solving the mining case.

How the EXCOM Views Inquiries and Critique

The EXCOM’s opinion about their position has also been demonstrated by their opinion of inquiries and critique. 

The EXCOM has talked about inquiries and critique as if they are unchristlike and inacceptable. In their 16 March 2022 open letter, the EXCOM states that inquiring church members have caused “much personal pain” in the Church, “disrepute to God and His church” and that they are fighting against their fellow believers.[4] The EXCOM also strongly emphasized this view in their mining report which was written for Session 2022. In the report, it is affirmed that the discussion concerning the mining case has “harmed our church family” and caused “public disrespect of God” and that it entails “serious accusations” that have hurt many church members.[5] In Kirkjufréttir, 6 January 2023, the IC administrators compared critical church members to the enemies of the Jews in the days of Nehemia and said that their open letters were “the strategy of Satan” and not worthy to receive an answer.[6] 

Secondly, the EXCOM has played down the voices of inquiring church members and tried to portray them as few irritating voices and that the majority is happy with the mining case and that everything is as it should be. By doing this, the EXCOM has simply tried to gaslight church members. Only a handful of the available examples will be mentioned: 

• The case as as whole: At the GCAS meeting, 24 May 2022, the IC President asserted that inquiries had only begun the year before, and thus downplayed the many questions and concerns of all the church members which have been speaking about the case for years before the meeting. In an interview with Vísir, President Gavin Anthony stated that the criticism inside the Church comprised only “the dissenting voices of a few church members”[7]—even though 61 church members signed a petition asking for an information meeting about the mining case, and even though four out of five church boards requested an information meeting about the mining case after the GCAS meeting. The President’s statement was repeated in the EXCOM’s statement in Hafnarfréttir 27 January 2023[8]

• The open letter: In a letter to Jón Hjörleifur Stefánsson, 1 August 2022, the IC Executive Secretary writes that Stefánsson is the ringleader behind the open letter and thus downplays the other church members who signed the letter with him. She further asserts that these other church members are only “very few church members”[9]

• The petition: The IC administrators have expressed in personal conversations that the petition is not credible and affirmed that church members were tricked into signing it. Thus, the administrators thought little of 61 church members signatures – which is a high number in a Conference where little more than 100 members are active and regularly attend church

• The church boards requesting another meeting: At the GCAS meeting, the Executive Secretary expressed her surprise when the majority of the church boards voted Yes for another information meeting. She said she had thought that the GCAS report would be sufficient to conclude the entire mining matter. She said this even though the questions of the church boards (which the EXCOM had asked them to send before the meeting) were not addressed at the meeting

• The new contract: In their statement in Hafnarfréttir, 27 January 2023, the EXCOM affirmed that “a few specific issues in the contract” were “confidential.”[10] The truth in the matter, however, is that all financial information in the contract is secret, except the fact that Eden has to pay annually at least 15 million ISK to the IC regardless of the amount of minerals removed from the mine[11] 

It would be worthwhile for the Church to discuss openly with church members what the mandate of the EXCOM entails, to ensure that everyone is on the same page.

[1] “The EXCOM is in charge of the interests of the IC between Sessions and does so in harmony with the bylaws of the IC and the decisions of Session, and Session delegates its authority to the EXCOM between Sessions.” The bylaws of the IC, article no. 14, 2, author’s translation.

[2] See the chapter “Alleged Breach of Article 18.”

[3] The amount was 6 648 066 ISK at the time and is the equivalent of ca. 10 million ISK today. Committee for the Utilization and Future Vision of Breiðabólstaður Property and Hlíðardalsskóli. “Tillaga að framtíðarsýn Kirkjunnar varðandi Hlíðardalsskólaeignina” (Suggestion for a Future Vision of the IC concerning the Hlíðardalsskóli Property), p. 3. The IC paid Eden probably shortly after the EXCOM signed their contract with Eden in 2009.

[4] The EXCOM, open letter to the church boards, 16 March 2022, p. 8.

[5] The EXCOM, “Skýrsla um námuna” (Report concerning the mine), p. 84.

[6] “As we start this new year together, here is a question to ask ourselves: what is our first duty that God has put before us in Iceland in 2023? …

Once Sanballat and his allies discovered that Nehemiah had finished rebuilding the walls of Jerusalem, they focused their attention on destroying the remnant’s work [i.e., the remnant of the Jews]. First, they tried to lure Nehemiah away from his work to meet with them on the plain of Ono where they planned to hurt him (Nehemiah 6:1-2). When that didn’t work, they wrote an open letter containing explosive false accusations against Nehemiah personally that were designed to be leaked to all the Jews and discourage them (Nehemiah 6:5-9). … The enemy of God’s people tried to use fear and discouragement to sabotage God’s work. …

So as we enter into 2023, our responsibility is to keep that focus and not allow ourselves to be distracted by the strategies of Satan. Ellen White comments on the attacks against Nehemiah, ‘Repeated solicitations [requests] will come in to call us from duty; but, like Nehemiah, we should steadfastly reply, ‘I am doing a great work, so that I can not come down.’ We have no time to seek the favor of the world, or even to defend ourselves from their misrepresentation and calumny [slander]. We have no time to lose in self-vindication. We should keep steadily at our work, and let that refute the falsehoods which malice may coin to our injury. Slanders will be multiplied if we stop to answer them.’” President Gavin Anthony, Executive Secretary Þóra Sigríður Jónsdóttir, and Treasurer Judel Ditta, Kirkjufréttir, 6 January 2023. Usually the devotional thought of the newsletter is only signed by the President, but surprisingly all the three administrators signed the devotional thought this time.

[7] Jakob Bjarnar, “Ólga meðal aðventista” (Commotion among Adventists).

[8] “Inside the church a few skeptical voices have been heard when it comes to the contract.” The EXCOM, “Yfirlýsing frá Kirkju sjöunda dags aðventista” (Statement from the Seventh-day Adventists Church), author’s translation.

[9] “It is also quite revealing that you [in plural] only managed to get very few church members to sign [the open letter] with you [in plural] even though you [in plural] contacted many.” This is fiction since we who signed the letter did not contact others to sign it with us. “Even though four lay-persons signed the letter with you [in singular], it seems that everyone in the general discourse ascribes the letter to you [in singular].” Executive Secretary Þóra Sigríður Jónsdóttir, “Atferli hefur afleiðingar“ (Actions have consequences), a three-page letter attached to an email to Jón Hjörleifur Stefánsson, 1 August 2022.

[10] The EXCOM, “Yfirlýsing frá Kirkju sjöunda dags aðventista” (Statement from the Seventh-day Adventists Church).

[11] “The Conference will receive a minimum of ISK 15.000.000 per year even if no gravel is taken out of the mines.” The EXCOM administrators, Námufréttir – Mining news, 1 February 2022.