Dear Friend,
Thank you for contacting the Ellen G. White Estate. I wonder if we may find an analogy to the situation you asked about. Must a nurse who wishes to join the church refuse a rotation of Sabbath duty? There are some jobs that need to be done every day. Caring for the sick is usually considered to be one of them. Feeding of animals is usually understood as necessary, and you have mentioned that some members of your church have livestock of their own and care for them on the Sabbath.
So what are the issues that people are grappling with here? First, do some hold that it is acceptable to care for your own herds but not for someone else's? Perhaps they do. Personally, if the job involved only seeing that the animals were fed on the Sabbath, I wouldn't see much problem with it, especially if it was something one could do, say, in the early morning and then go to Sabbath school and church and perhaps have the rest of the day (or most of it) to keep as the Sabbath should be kept. (Probably not everyone will view matters exactly this way.) But on the other hand, if the Sabbath is a regular work day for the hired workers at this establishment, involving tasks that go beyond what is necessary in mercy to the animals in our care, I would have more of a problem with that. And I have to acknowledge that, even in the case of doing the "necessary" work, it is not healthful for one's spiritual experience to have to work on the Sabbath. If one does not have to do it, it is better not to; especially would I be reluctant to volunteer for Sabbath duty.
Is the problem not so much that they have to feed the animals every other Sabbath, but that the animals are pigs? If so, I think a statement signed jointly by James and Ellen White in our early days may be instructive. I will copy it here from our CD-ROM. It is found in Selected Messages, book 2, p. 338:
Chap. 40 - Hops, Tobacco, and Swine
In answer to many inquiries, we would say that we believe there is business for Seventh-day Adventists to enter upon for a livelihood, more consistent with their faith than the raising of hops, tobacco, or swine. {2SM 338.1}
And we would recommend that they plant no more hops, or tobacco fields, and that they reduce the number of their swine. They may yet see it duty, as most consistent believers do, to keep no more. We would not urge this opinion upon any. Much less would we take the responsibility of saying, "Plow up your hop and tobacco fields, and sacrifice your swine to the dogs." {2SM 338.2}
While we would say to those who are disposed to crowd hop, tobacco, and swine growers among our people, that they have no right to make these things, in any sense, a test of Christian fellowship, we would also say to those who have these miserable things on hand, "If you can get them off your hands without great loss, consistency with the faith of this people whose publications and oral teachings have so much to say on the subject of reform, more than suggests that you should get them off your hands as soon as possible." [THIS IS ONE OF THE VERY FEW STATEMENTS TO BE ISSUED JOINTLY BY JAMES AND ELLEN WHITE. INASMUCH AS IT WAS SIGNED BY BOTH, IT IS EVIDENT THAT THE VIEWS EXPRESSED HAD FULL SANCTION OF MRS. WHITE.--COMPILERS.]--The Review and Herald, March 24, 1868. {2SM 338.3}
They did not make the owning or growing of these things a test of fellowship, but they did urge Seventh-day Adventists who did own or grow them to get out of that business. This strikes me as good counsel.
I doubt that I have resolved the problem for you, but perhaps I have raised some questions or provided some information that may be helpful. I hope so. May the Lord guide you, the church, and the couple to find the best solution to His glory.
William Fagal
Associate Director
Ellen G. White Estate
12501 Old Columbia Pike
Silver Spring, MD 20904-6600 U.S.A.
Phone: 301 680-6550
FAX: 301 680-6559
E-mail: mail@WhiteEstate.org
Web: www.WhiteEstate.org
