| WORLD VISTA

 

An interview with Seventh-day Adventist Church president Jan Paulsen 

 

Integrity is such a big issue in the news media at present. It seems that every day we’re seeing more examples of corporations and individuals who sacrifice principle for profit. So it’s probably natural for church members also to ask, How’s my church doing in this area? How would you answer? 

First, what does it mean to have integrity? To me, it is about openness and trust—you are what you show. When people see you, they don’t have to wonder what’s real and what’s not. The values that you project are the values that actually guide your life.

 

Integrity covers an almost unlimited range of issues; I’m here choosing to focus on just one. We’re hearing more about what’s going wrong in the world’s financial markets, and there’s a palpable sense of anger—of outrage—directed toward those who’ve abused positions of trust. These are individuals who’ve been driven by extreme selfishness and greed to “gather unto themselves,” and who are claiming remuneration far in excess of what’s fair and reasonable.

 

Does all this impact us as a church in any way? Yes, I think it does. We’re not isolated from the kind of scrutiny it generates. Our members live and work in the secular marketplace, and so what happens there affects them also. And in this economic climate, they become even more sensitive to how the church uses its money—and rightly so! They should be sensitive and they should hold church leadership accountable. 

I have to remember as I talk about this issue that whatever observations I make, people have a right to ask, Well, then, how does that apply to you? I can’t talk about this from the perspective of a bystander; I’m really talking about how I, as a church leader, also fit into this particular landscape.

 

You mentioned those in the corporate world who hold positions of trust with respect to people’s money. The trust relationship is even more critical, isn’t it, within a spiritual community, where people are “investing” so much more of themselves than just their finances? 

Yes, that’s true. Church members have high expectations precisely because this is their own spiritual community. And so if you take on an assignment within the church you must remember, whatever your function, you’re a servant. You’re entrusted with a responsibility by your faith community and by your God. That must be the mental backdrop against which salaries, bonuses, and allowances are viewed.

 

But there are some within the church who are given special assignments. For them to ask, What is someone in a similar position in the corporate or secular world getting?” and then let the answer define their own salary expectations—this is a fundamentally flawed way of thinking.

 

People who support the church have a right to expect the highest integrity.

It’s flawed because it fails to acknowledge that they are first and foremost part of a spiritual community; they are servants. If a large paycheck is required in order to bring out your best, then I would suggest that something is fundamentally wrong. Whatever the church is involved in—whether it is preaching, teaching, healing, development aid, or other institutional work—it is primarily about serving God and serving humanity. 

 

So how then has this situation developed? 

Well, there are certain categories of workers—highly specialized workers—who are in demand within secular society, but whom the church also needs because of the special skills they bring. Their functions may not be funded entirely by church resources, but by the service that the institution provides, or sometimes in part by government funding. So, yes, there are some whose highly technical roles should be remunerated differently from those who, like myself, function in the church in a pastoral role.

 

But I would also say to those who hold such positions, “You, too, are servants of the Lord!” Of course, you have to be adequately provided for, but there comes a moment when you move beyond what’s reasonable. What does the president of the United States get? His salary is around $400,000. It’s substantial, but far less than leaders in the corporate world. How much more should those who serve within a spiritual community avoid even the appearance of the excessive! 

 

In any discussion about integrity within church administration, some will point out: “There have been times in the church’s history when the best financial decisions were not made—when integrity may have been in short supply.” What would you say? 

Yes, we could certainly make a list of mistakes, both here in North America and in other parts of the world field. The important question now is Did we learn something from them?

 

The major mistakes that come to mind were not caused by systemic flaws, in the sense that we don’t have boards or bodies set up with the ability and authority to monitor this. We do. But problems arise when information doesn’t flow through where it should, or where members of a board of an organization vote on issues about which they have little understanding or knowledge.

 

We’re a spiritual community—we pray before each meeting of a board or executive committee. But we’re not sheltered from flawed human judgments, nor are we always protected from deliberate—and unacceptable—attempts by some individual leaders to “filter” information they give to a board.

 

These chapters in the church’s history cost us dearly, and it’s not measured primarily in money, but in loss of trust and loss of confidence. This can take years—decades—to rebuild, and I would say justifiably so. People who support the church have a right to expect the highest integrity and the highest care from individuals and boards making executive decisions. So I can’t overstate the importance of openness and transparency in administration—allowing a board to know all the relevant information and to be informed about the full extent of the resources they’re dealing with. 

 

Much of the world suffers with poverty. Is poverty a factor in integrity? 

Poverty can play tricks on the mind. Individuals can begin to rationalize and justify certain things, or allow resources to come to them that are not rightfully theirs. If it’s deliberate fraud, then auditing should catch that, and it does. We have a good auditing system in place. But integrity is most often compromised not because someone gets personally rich in the process, but because they allow themselves to be drawn into less than candid or open administration. 

 

Is one remedy, perhaps, greater involvement or oversight by laypeople in some management functions? 

I think we’ve actually become better at ensuring this. We’ve sometimes been charged in the past with leaving decisions in the hands of ministers that they’re not specifically trained to make, and this is a fair point. We are more deliberate now in making sure that entities that are making major financial decisions, and the boards of these entities, have skilled, professional leadership, and this involves many laypeople. Although in fairness it should be said that skills in matters of financial management are not wholly owned by “laity” or “ministry.” Skills have to do with training, experience, and good judgment—whether in laity or ministry. 

 

We’ve been focusing mainly on the negatives and situations that can compromise integrity. But you must also regularly see examples from the opposite end of the spectrum—instances in which integrity really shines through. 

Yes, absolutely. Keep in mind that we’re talking against a very specific background; every time we open a newspaper or turn on the television we’re being saturated with information about corporate greed and mismanagement. So it’s good for us to examine ourselves and ask, Are we doing all we can to make sure these dynamics aren’t also creeping into the church?

 

But let me clearly say, the vast majority of our operations as a church and our institutions function with transparency, with openness, with honesty, and with good management. But at the same time, unless we are very careful and deliberate, we’ll allow problems in. A few moments ago I mentioned greed. You know, greed is very, very difficult to resist, even in smaller portions. But it will damage us. It’s so important to recognize that satisfaction, fulfillment, and sense of fair reward for our efforts should not be defined only by money. 

 

So public integrity is built on this personal integrity, on making sure our personal priorities and values are in order? 

Yes. What you are in your own personal relationships and behavior is basically how you will be and function in a public setting. If you choose not to be open and honest in your personal dealings, if you become subtle or calculating, then your motives and intentions become less transparent. And this becomes part of your personality and feeds into the way you function in society and within the church.

 

I meet so many people—people I work with every day—whose lives are defined by devotion to God, loyalty to His church, a sense of servanthood, and a commitment to transparency. Sadly, I have also met people who will sell their integrity for cash. And this is a profoundly disappointing thing to see. 

 

You’ve said on a number of occasions that the Adventist Church should be more involved in the public discourse about integrity, that we have something significant to contribute. Why does the church need to make its voice heard more clearly on this? 

One compelling reason is that this issue has immense value for young people—those 35 and under. They need to trust you before you even open your mouth. They need to feel there’s enough basic integrity there that they don’t have to wonder if there’s a hidden agenda—that things are being deliberately left unsaid. And you can be sure they will have an unfailing sense of when the “talk” doesn’t quite line up with the action!

 

Consider also the growth of our church. Today we may be a global community of some 25 million, young and old. In 10 years, if things keep going as they are and the Lord hasn’t yet returned, the figure will be closer to 50 million worldwide. I’ve visited with many leaders of state and I’ve heard some of them say, “You Adventists, you’re good for us. You’re good for our communities and good for our nation.” But in other places I’ve sensed unspoken questions: Who are you, really? What are your intentions? What do you have to contribute? I want them to know that Adventists will contribute honesty, integrity, and a commitment to serve humanity in many, many different capacities; and I want them to know that their cities and their nation will be better places because we are there.