Desmond Ford, and my much less famous father, Ralph S. Larson, were among those who took sharply differing positions in the theological battles which began with the publication of Questions on Doctrine in 1957 and have continued to this day long after the theological shoot-out at Colorado’s Glacier View Ranch in August of 1980.
Although our fathers were on opposite sides of these battles, and although he is much younger than I am, Luke Ford, one of Desmond Ford’s sons, and I see what happened in much the same way. We agree that no one has won these battles but everyone has lost. We agree as well that they have caused much pain and sorrow, especially for the wives and children of the debaters. We also agree, however, that what has happened was inevitable. Luke and I have not discussed why it was inevitable. My own view is that at least three things made it so.
To begin with, each of the primary debaters sincerely believed that on the major issues he was right. They could not in good conscience make any substantive compromises.
Furthermore, each of them had constituencies with which they had mutually responsible relationships. They could not in good conscience disregard those who were relying on them.
Still further, each of them believed that the denomination was doomed unless it adopted what he believed on the big matters. They could not in good conscience stop trying to bring this about.
It was not that they rejected the possibility that the denomination could be as different on the issue of faith and works as are the Epistles of Paul, on the one hand, and the Epistle of James, on the other. None of them could even imagine this much denominational diversity.
If what has happened had been one of Shakespeare’s plays, it would have been neither a history nor a comedy but a tragedy which ends with everyone on the stage either dead or dying. It was an inescapable clash of good consciences.
None of the primary debaters was villainous; all of them were virtuous. Despite their different personalities and occasional slips of good judgment all around the circle, these persons all struck me as men of theological integrity and pastoral sensitivity. This is what has made this tragedy so very tragic.
Now what? One option is to continue their battles. There is a more excellent way, however. It is to remember these debaters not primarily as theological warriors but as pastor-teachers, as the New Testament puts it, whose greater ministries blessed many, in all the meanings of “greater,” and try to follow in these of their footsteps.
I divide my fathers's ministry into three chapters and call the last one in which he was preoccupied with these issues "The Sad Years." Although he will probably be remembered less for them, his earlier years as a pastor, evangelist and professor were happier for him and for his family. They were also years in which he successfully ministered to thousands in Nevada, Hawaii, California, Washington, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Arizona and the Philippines. I think that this is what is underlined in the eternal "Book of Life."
Doctor Ford’s ministry began in a time and place where a particular form Christian perfectionism had robbed many SDAs of their confidence in God’s forgiving love and their assurance of salvation. It turned out that there were many SDAs all over the world who were suffering the same anguish. To them, and others, Doctor Ford taught and preached “Good News Unlimited,” which became the name of his ministry’s organization. People responded to the gospel as he presented it with joy, gladness and an eager happiness to do God’s will as they understood it.
Although Doctor Ford wrote a massive dissertation in defense of his views, its hundreds of pages will not be his lasting legacy. It will be the thousands of lives his ministry blessed, and the thousands of other lives their lives are blessing, and so on into the future as long as time as we know it lasts. There can be no greater legacy!