Says Slate: "An impossible-to-put-down Vanity Fair feature chronicles the sex scandal that has rocked Pitcairn, the tiny Pacific island where the Bounty mutineers sought refuge in the late 18th century. Technically a British colony, Pitcairn is so isolated that the residents—fewer than 50 of them—developed their own mores, like the practice that eventually got "six men—a third of the island’s adult male population" arrested: sexually initiating island lassies before the age of 12."
Pitcairn is notable for many things including its Adventism and its rape.
I was raised a Seventh-Day Adventist. I never learned much about rape. Rather, I was taught that cities are dens of evil and it is better to live in the country to await the Day of Trouble, the end of Time and the soon coming of Christ.
I wonder if he’ll find me in Pico/Robertson.
Since a population peak of 233 in 1937, the island has been suffering from emigration, primarily to New Zealand, leaving some fifty people living on Pitcairn.
There are allegations of a long history and tradition of sexual abuse of girls as young as 7, which culminated in 2004 in the charging of seven men living on Pitcairn, and another six now living abroad, with sex-related offences, including rape. On October 25, 2004, six men were convicted, including Steve Christian, the island’s mayor at the time. See Pitcairn rape trial of 2004. The British government has decided to set up a prison for only the island, and spend an annual budget of NZD 950,000, after the six men lost their final appeal.
…Until 30 October 2004, the mayor was Steve Christian; after his rape conviction on October 24, 2004, Christian was dismissed (after refusing to resign). Steve Christian, who claims to be a direct descendent of Bounty mutiny leader Fletcher Christian, was convicted of five rapes, including one of a girl of 12, and sentenced to three years in prison. The charges against the men, one of which dated back to 1972, followed a report by a British policewoman stationed on the island in 1999. The defendants were convicted based on testimony from eight women. Dozens of alleged victims refused to testify. The three-week trials were held under British law in makeshift courtrooms on the island and presided over by three judges from New Zealand. Steve Christian’s son, Randy, was sentenced to six years for four rapes and five indecent assaults. Len Brown, 78, was convicted of two rapes and sentenced to two years. His son, Dave, was convicted of nine indecent assaults and sentenced to community service. Dennis Christian, 49, the postmaster and another descendant of Fletcher Christian, was convicted of one indecent assault and two sexual assaults he had pleaded guilty to. He was also sentenced to community service. Terry Young was convicted of one rape and six indecent assaults. Judges imprisoned him for five years. Jay Warren, the island’s magistrate, was cleared of indecent assault.
…Pitcairn culture, like its language, is a mix of English and Tahitian influences. A successful Seventh-day Adventist mission in the 1890s was important in shaping Pitcairn society, though the inhabitants were already observing the Seventh-day Sabbath before the arrival of Adventism.[3] In recent years, the church has declined, with only about eight islanders worshipping regularly, but most of them still attend church on special occasions. The Sabbath is observed as a day of rest and as a mark of respect for observant Adventists.
The once-strict moral codes, which prohibited dancing, public displays of affection, and consumption of alcohol, have been relaxed in recent years. Islanders may now obtain a six-month license to purchase alcohol.
My dad gets mentioned in Wikipedia’s entry on Seventh-Day Adventism:
The most recent large-scale schism within Adventism was the Glacier View controversy of 1980. This crisis centered around the 900-page research paper by Dr. Desmond Ford entitled Daniel 8:14, the Investigative Judgment, and the Kingdom of God. The paper questioned the church’s position on the investigative judgment. The meetings at Glacier View Ranch, near Estes Park, Colorado, rejected Ford’s proposals. The schism caused by this rejection resulted in Ford being removed from teaching and having his ministerial credentials revoked. Many Adventists also left the church as a result.[67] In the years since, Ford has worked through the independent ministry Good News Unlimited.
Since the 1970s, debate concerning the inspiration of Ellen White has been particularly heated. A number of Adventists such as Walter Rea and Dale Ratzlaff left the church and have become prominent critics of the church’s teachings and particularly of Ellen White. In parallel with these events, many Adventist scholars have adopted more moderate views of her inspiration.
When I was at Pacific Union College in May, I heard about this play "Red Books" that mentions my dad. Here’s a blog post about the play by Nathan Schilt:
Did you ever hear the tune, "What do you do with a drunken sailor?" I’m not sure just how this old English chantey made it into the musical canon of my conservative Adventist childhood. But it’s there – and to my great surprise, it recently flashed across my mental screen as I was driving home from a performance of the eagerly awaited "Red Books" at Loma Linda University Church. Perhaps it was the way in which Ellen White was caricatured; perhaps it was the still ringing question – "What do we do with Ellen White?" – that started me humming the tune. But there it was…with suddenly updated lyrics: "What do you do with a sullied prophet? "Well, unlike the drunken sailor, you can’t just "put ‘er in a long boat til she’s sober"… can you? It’s a bit more complicated with prophets and prophetic writings, more like putting Humpty Dumpty together again.
"Red Books: Our Search for Ellen White" provokes and stimulates, but proposes no satisfactory resolution of the question – "How shall we regard Ellen White?" Those who attend the play, anticipating a Norman Rockwell picture of a revered Adventist pioneer, will be disappointed. Unlike the advance billing, which hints at a bucolic stroll down memory lane, the actual production is for "mature" Adventists. It is, as the title suggests, more about us than about Ellen White. She is the central character, but not the protagonist. And the "us" portrayed in the play is really those of us who have seriously questioned the claims made by and on behalf of Ellen White. More specifically, it is about the "us" who question the extent to which she was the recipient of "special revelation" as that term has been used by her apologists.
The opening scene of the play dramatizes cro magnon SDAs, on Oct 23, 1844, standing tightly packed, anxiously craning heavenward; then sadly going off their separate ways after The Great Disappointment. The closing scene brings disparate "believers silently together toward a somber looking, almost sacramental, food table, their heritage shaken and their future uncertain. But they ritualistically shuffle toward the one tradition that still unites them – Sabbath potluck.Those scenes bookend a somewhat daft, bi-polar Ellen, obsessed with red fabric, stretched between playful compassion and stentorian judgmentalism, claims and disclaimers, shoulds and shouldn’ts. (The hortatory barking seal scene is not to be missed.) Moving on and off the stage around Ellen White are her defender/follower champions and the reluctant, but persistent critics.
The critics (Johnathan Butler, former history of religion scholar at La Sierra University – and Fred Hoyt, Professor Emeritus of History at La Sierra) are portrayed as thoughtful, honest researchers, troubled by their discoveries, but compelled by conscience to brave opprobrium and risk careers in pursuit of the truth. "Progressives" and secular Adventists who experienced the disillusioning and/or liberating "aha" of the ’70s and 80s revelations about the Red Books will positively identify with the questioners. But SDAs who sincerely and thoughtfully defend the prophetic "lesser light" as the incarnate and specific fulfillment of Rev. 12 will be disappointed by the absence of a credible E.G. White apologist to counter the detractors or put their findings in perspective. Without discounting their very significant contributions to our understandings of the Red Books, it is risible to suggest that revisionist views of Ellen White at La Sierra during the past two-plus decades have subjected anyone to censure or put careers in jeopardy. Questioning the authority of Ellen White at La Sierra requires about as much courage as anti-Bush editorials at the N.Y. Times.
