Print
Annual Council Diary, Tuesday, October 11, 2011
Women were the topic of the day at the meeting of the Executive Committee of the Seventh-day Adventist Church. An upbeat report from the Women’s Ministries Department kicked off the morning. Then the body spent nearly four hours discussing a request from the North American Division that would allow the growing number of women (and men) with "ordained/commissioned" credentials to be elected president of a conference.
Procedural questions challenged the chair and the committee members throughout the debate. The first question concerned the fact that the Executive Committee received similar but not exactly the same requests from two different divisions—North American Division (NAD) and Trans-European Division (TED). Should the requests be combined and considered as one request or taken separately? As chairman of the session President Ted N. C. Wilson finally decided to take the motions one at a time, with the North American Division request coming first.
Next, Wilson announced that Vice President Ben Schoun would temporarily take the position of chairman while Wilson went down on the floor to make a comment about the motion. Then Wilson would return to the platform and continue as chair of the session.
NAD President Dan Jackson (pictured) introduced it:
MOTION: To grant a variance to the model constitution to accommodate the unique needs of the NAD with the insertion of “ordained/commissioned” when referring to local field presidents in the North American Division.
To set the context for the discussion, Jackson cited Biblical texts including, “He has shown you O man what is good: to do justice, to show mercy, to walk humbly with your God.” He talked about the beauty of the diversity in the Adventist Church and the need to celebrate and respect culture. “It would be highly inappropriate in China to say that women ought not to preach,” he said, “when we know that a woman planted a church that now has 7000 members. It would be highly inappropriate of this body to say you ought not to do this."
“We believe that the position of the president of the conference should be open to the treasurer, to the secretary, people who are not ordained, but who carry a commissioned credential. This is not just about women, but opening up the leadership track.
It is not about women’s ordination. It is about governance and leadership.
In pitching for the request from the Trans-European Division, President Bertil Wiklander said their request came from their year-end meeting where it was voted unanimously with all 13 unions represented. Their request was for a variance to the model constitution also and included union as well as conference presidents.
There is a very simple explanation for this request, he said. “The SDA church faces an extraordinary mission challenge in our territory where joining a church is an exception. The church needs to mobilize all its members for outreach and leadership and two thirds of the members are women. We therefore have many able women. And the society in which we work, it is required to be equal in treatment.”
With the requests introduced, Schoun took the chair position so Wilson could make his statement. Wilson noted the sensitivity of the matter and asked for members to respect each other. He said that without discussion at the officers level, the item had been simply referred to the floor. “You need to know that the GC administrative committee did not debate the requests,” Wilson said.
The opportunity is now for me to express my thoughts and conviction and they are just those. They are not the collective decision of the administrative committee. But I am going to express my position. I don’t want to offend anyone. But I do have to tell you that with respect and humble conviction. I differ from their opinion. The GC has a position on this and that is why they are asking for a variance. Let me explain my position:
The SDA church is not a corporate entity as such. The church is an ecclesiastical body by its very nature of being organized for the church. Now church leadership in the past has been based on spiritual leadership, trained leadership, prepared leadership. I don’t want to leave the impression that anyone who is not ordained is not a spiritual leader. However, according to Scriptural injunction and our own history we have a particular model which we have followed for top spiritual leadership. In as much as the conference president stands at the head of the conference churches he is the spiritual leader. This is a pastoral approach.
Commissioned minister credentials are used in many of our divisions. The commissioned minister can carry out many pastoral functions, except for organizing of churches, and ordaining of elders and deacons.” He said the overseer of the churches, which is what the president is, needs to be someone who can organize churches and who can ordain elders and deaconesses.
“Whatever we vote will have some impact on the world church. We have taken a position in the past that ordination is recognized around the world. We are not here as the American SDA church. We are the SDA church in America, in Germany, Congo, in Philippines. We are a worldwide church. I personally don’t believe that this is the direction that we should proceed.”
When someone started to clap, he responded, “I don’t want us to be applauding.” He concluded, I don’t believe this is the direction that the church should go. But you will need to make up your own mind."
I would encourage you to vote against the motion.
Then he walked back up to the platform and took the position of the chairman of the meeting.
There were fifty people who commented in the following discussion, six of them women, and two of the women were against the motion.
Three of the General Conference Vice Presidents—Pardon Mwansa, Ella Simmons and Lowell Cooper—spoke in favor of the motion. Mwansa said presidential decisions were not doctrinal. Simmons reminded her African brothers of the oppressors who not so long ago oppressed them in the name of the Bible. Cooper said that because divisions have been charged with the work in their territory, when they speak he is inclined to listen.
Vice President Armando Miranda spoke against it.
Southern Africa-Indian Ocean Division President Paul Ratsara worried that it would pit continent against continent. Jairyong Lee, president of the Northern Asia-Pacific Division said he was against the motion, not because he could not understand their needs, but more on procedure. “Here is a conference president who cannot organize a church or ordain ministers. How can this person function as a leader? I think we need to change the working policy and remove limitations from commissioned ministers.”
Inter-American Division President Israel Leito encouraged members to help a sister division.
Another speaker asked if in granting this to NAD, “will the cloak of my Lord remain one? He brought up the Anglican Church debates that had provoked the suppression of the African church. . . . “Let me put before you that this is a clever way that the Western world tries to make us do what they want us to do. Put in place a commission that will come with a strong theology of ordination,” he said.
Wilson reminded that body that the day before a plan had been outlined for the study of ordination. “In fairness to the NAD,” he added they did not want this to be seen as a side way to bring up the ordination of women. It has to do with all people who are given commissioned credentials.
A pastor from the Trans-European Division agreed with the president in what he said about respecting each other. “I have had the privilege of working for an African church in Amsterdam,” he said. “We are one serving the same Lord. It is not that we from our division want to impose on other divisions. It is a plea, it is a cry from the heart that you would respect us and our request. That we, in unity, have room and respect for groups in the world where this will have great effect. Please, I would like to emphasize that we do not want to impose this on other divisions.”
A man from Nigeria said he had a big problem with the process surrounding the motion. “It should have been discussed before bringing it here. With due respect to you,” he said to Wilson, for you to have started the discussion, it is now very difficult to speak. Having your response shot it down.
“We need to ordain women ministers, he said. “We can’t talk out of both sides of our mouth.”
The discussion went back and forth with approximately the same number of speakers on each side. There were reminders that 60 years ago, persons of color would not have been allowed in the conversation.
Former GC President Jan Paulsen asked, “What are you going to do with a conference that elects a woman if you say no today?”
The suggestion was made to wait at least a year and allow for discussion with constituencies.
A young woman delegate said she could only imagine what Ellen G. White would think about the discussion.
After all the people had made their speeches, Wilson said,“If we have erred in the process, ask for your forgiveness, ask for your forgiveness for making remarks at the beginning. . . We don’t want contention in the church. This subject does create friction. How do we deal with it however it may go? How do we deal with it if some go against the vote? I do know that God intended for this church to be united and not divided. We will have to rise above and come together. It was asked that the item be rescinded in 2009. And it was. When it was not looked at in 2010 NAD took another action. I don’t know of any other way to deal with this but to vote it on the floor.
There was prayer and then the vote by secret ballot.
The motion failed with 117 yes votes, and 167 no votes.
Jackson and Wiklander made gracious speeches in defeat.
Photo by Ansel Oliver/ANN.
User login
Recent
- Joe Erwin Ethics, Evolution, and Ben Carson
- dl Ethics, Evolution, and Ben Carson
- Maggie Ethics, Evolution, and Ben Carson
- Anonymouswon Ethics, Evolution, and Ben Carson
- dl Ethics, Evolution, and Ben Carson
- Maggie Ethics, Evolution, and Ben Carson
- dl Ethics, Evolution, and Ben Carson
- Carrol Grady Should Seventh-day Adventists be Republicans?
- Sirje Ethics, Evolution, and Ben Carson
- Fred Eastman The Role of Institutions in Evangelism – A Call to the Adventist Business Community
Newsletter
Organizations
Fri, 08/31/2012 - Sun, 09/02/2012
Job Dybdahl, Sigve Tonstad, Harri Kuhalampi
Sat, 09/08/2012
|
San Diego Adventist Forum
Sigve Tonstad, MD, PhD, Associate Professor of Religion, Loma Linda
University
Current Issue
Not yet a subscriber? Subscribe today!
Wilson vs Jackson and anor. Now we see those making a public stand. To those prepared to challenge a higher leader - stand strong. Kia kaha.
Please correct me... Ted Wilson speaks first, mentions that he is the spiritual leader of this worldwide church and then hints that "according to Scriptural injunction" our system is right and should not be changed??? That's it? No argument? No reference to justice and equal treatment? I can't believe it....Please tell me that my English is just too bad an I got it all wrong!!!
At what point is the world wide church, specifically Africa, South America, going to understand that we are struggling in the United States. If the US church starts limping the world church is going to struggle as well. The US comes up with %50 of the world wide tithe.
We have qualified women who can help the church in the US grow. If we restrict these spirit led women, we are lowering the chances for growth. The Holy Spirit calls people, not us. If a lady is called by God, who are we to restrict that. We are treading dangerous ground.
Teddy, wants to stay within the literal parameters of the Bible. The irony of that is that, when Jesus came to dwell among men, all he did was work out of the box.
I will pray and hope the Lord will bless this church.
Interesting. Thank you for this report.
I really don't know what to say to be honest. Maybe the NAD and TED should outsource a lot of their evangelism etc. to lay workers in order to promote some of the more talented and motivated women?
A better question would be--why do we assume opposition to women's ordination primarily comes from the so-called Third World?
A conflict of interest? The world leader abdicates the chair, goes to the floor and comments first, and then reassuming the chair opens things up to discussion? Something needs to be amended about the procedure.
Thanks...
Frank
Pr Lee Jairyong, North Asia-Pacific Division President makes a good point. Any conference president that is barred from organizing churches and from ordaining men would not really be able to function in the role.
This fact alone makes a mockery of the any plan to achieve the ordination of women by incremental steps.
Far better to recognize that ordination per se is not biblical. We do not believe in once saved, always saved. Neither should we believe in once ordained, always ordained.
What the church must do is
1. annul the ordination of every Adventist pastor, elder and deacon
2. Introduce a scheme whereby church leadership of whatever kind eg local elder, local deacon, local pastor, conference president, institutional worker is commissioned to his particular role and function.
3. The commission would last only as long as he continues in the role.
4. A new commission would be given to the person, male or female whenever he undertakes a new role in the work of God.
5. Commissions would be given at the time of the laying on of hands.
6. Commissions would provide a short job description. The document would indicate whether the person is to be a marriage celebrant, medical missionary, organizer of new churches or whatever.
Has anyone every thought where we got the whole SDA ordination, laying on of hands from? Would the ordination of an SDA minister in a baptist church be accepted? Who was the first person who received the direct command from the Lord and had that special connection to start the whole laying on of hands process in the church.
I am just curious.
See if this fits the situation...
"Religious and other associations which organize around an inspired leader without always succeeding in preserving the initial inspiration, sometimes even suppressing it by using the very words and forms the original leader had created but without assimilating the leader's revolutionary impact. An example of this is found in Dostoevski's novel "The Brothers Karamazo, in which Christ returns to earth and is condemned to death by the Inquisition of the very Church he had originally founded.
"This strategy also occurs in individuals, leading them to believe they have a clear explanation for just about everything--ignoring the mystery, the self renewing, surprising power of the super-conscious and its paradoxical, indescribable character. Such individuals then adopt formulas, cliches, and slogans. They hold fast to some truth, experience, teaching, or event that has meant a great deal to them in the past. They are only routinely imitating what was once a spontaneous explosion of life and has now become a crystallized fossil.
Anonymous III asks -
"Has anyone every thought where we got the whole SDA ordination, laying on of hands from?"
See if this explains it...
http://www.adventist.ca/en/administration/secretariat/article1.php
Ivan, I thought the blog you put explains quite a bit thanks.
But I am still curious, do we accept the ordination of Baptists just as legit as an SDA ordination. When it comes to baptism we are good, but what about ordination.
Can a Seventh-day Adventist be ordained in another denomination and that ordination be accepted in ours. Why will it not be accepted, besides the fact that there is a license issued. Is the ordination process something or power that Only the sda church possesses, or is ordination something from God .
The "Machista Empire" is well and alive!
The SDA church accepts members who have previously been baptized a Christian. If they were previously ordained in another Christian church would they be unrecognized as ordained in the SDA church? Haven't there been pastors of other churches who became pastors in the SDA church with their previous ordination?
Someone I know very closely, a former Catholic, was recently accepted into the SDA church on profession of faith. Is this the usual procedure?
This is the most galling aspect of all:
"A man from Nigeria said he had a big problem with the process surrounding the motion. “It should have been discussed before bringing it here. With due respect to you,” he said to Wilson, for you to have started the discussion, it is now very difficult to speak. Having your response shot it down."
It only affirms the prevailing opinion of many that he is very dictatorial in his presidency.
Elaine
I think the GC President has unwittingly turned presidents into bishops. This is a sad day.
When will ANN report this story? Has Wilson's tactic been used before by previous GC Presidents? If so, what were the circumstances?
Jairyong Lee, president of N. Asia-Pacific Div., said: "I think we need to change the working policy and remove limitations from commissioned ministers.”
A man from Nigeria chides Wilson, "With due respect to you, for you to have started the discussion, it is now very difficult to speak. Having your response shot it down."
It sounds like there is more support for women's ordination in Asia and Africa than in the leader of the world church.
And after a decision like this leaders will, I am sure, continue to wring their hands and ask, "Why are we hemorrhaging our young adults in North America and Europe? Why is our church not appealing to young professionals and to people with higher levels of education?" The answer to these questions is to my mind increasingly clear: our leaders are dead set against revival and reform.
and they wonder why we are losing ground...
This is all Bush's fault
Soon, y'all SdA's will be required to pray 7 times a day and purchase an "Old Columbia Pike finder" for proper direction.
Jim Roberts, nowadays it is all Obama's fault....
Hold on a moment. The argument I'm hearing is "the church is struggling, so let's put more women in leadership". Excuse me, but what does one have to do with the other?
We may as well say "the church is struggling, let's paint all our churches green and put red crosses on them". The result will be about the same.
Charles Parker wrote: "Soon, y'all SdA's will be required to pray 7 times a day and purchase an "Old Columbia Pike finder" for proper direction."
And I would happily comply. Praying 7 times a day would be better than the current average. Looking to the GC for guidance would be better than liberal proto-anarchism.
I'd be even happier if they added to the above the shahada "There is no God but God and Ellen White is His prophet"! لا إله إلا الله ألّن ويت رسول الله
Pagophilus,
I think you missed the point we are trying to make. The reason the NAD and TED are trying to include women pastors is because:
1. God's calling. Many times women are called by God into ministry. E.g. EGW.
2. By opening the door for women you are picking from a larger pool of people. So the likelihood of finding someone qualified is higher.
3. It gives ministry a different touch. Something we are missing today.
The list can go on and on.
As for adding the Shadah, I would prefer if you abstain from that. There is a lot more meaning to that, than a simple joke.
A very very sad day for a so called sola-scriptura-movement.
We have qualified women who can help the church in the US grow. If we restrict these spirit led women, we are lowering the chances for growth.
Episcopal Church membership in 1970: 3.2 million
Women ordained to Episcopal priesthood in 1977.
Episcopal Church membership today: 2.18 million.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Presbyterian Church USA membership in 1950: 4 million
Women ordained in PCUSA in 1956.
Presbyterian Church USA membership today: 2.02 million
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Why don't liberals just admit that they want to ordain women for ideological reasons, and that church growth has nothing to do with it? If they had integrity, they would argue, "we have to do this because it is the only just course of action, and we realize that the church will shrink as a result. But justice, though the heavens fall!"
David Read,
Women should be ordained, and only because the gospel demands it. The consequentialist reasoning is secondary. And that works both ways. If the consequence of justice is loss of church membership, so be it. Since when has church growth been our method of evaluating the rightness or wrongness of our choices?
"A very very sad day for a so called sola-scriptura-movement."
Is there such a church around?
David Read does not seem to recognize the post hoc ergo propter hoc that he is using is one of the greatest fallacies.
Elaine
May I suggest that the reason for ordaining women is simply because they are human beings.
As SDA's we have a message about a Creator God - who made human beings in his image and gave THEM dominion over his earth.
Jesus message was that the Kingdom of God was not like the kingdom of the gentiles - who lorded it over others and had a hierarchical system of leadership - but he took a towel and wrapped it about himself - taking the role of a woman - he humbly served. Then he asked: "Do you know what I just did?"
In this world, woman and girls are not respected nor treated as equals in most of the world's societies - surely the society of the church should be the one place where the principles of God's kingdom are lived out.
How can you give Matt an up arrow and me a down arrow, when Matt is essentially agreeing with me about how liberals should argue this issue--i.e., justice! and consequences be damned?
Apparently, my name evokes a Pavlovian response.
David asks a question and so here is mine:
Why don't conservative Adventist's admit they do not women ordained because they are a superstitious bunch?
What I mean by this is that much of the reluctance at least in the western world comes from a superstitious believe that God will be mad if the church ordains women. It is ridiculous and embarrassing in light of:
- The reality that there are many very conservative leaders and theologians who are convinced that women should be ordained. While David and Kevin paint this as a conservative/liberal debate it is not. It is in some cases superstition and in other cases cultural. While culture should in a consideration it should never trump doing the right thing.
- Ellen White had ordination credentials. While she apparently never had an ordination ceremony she also never said women should not be ordained and this should be seen as significant.
- A woman is the senior pastor of what is likely the largest Adventist Church in the world, a church with more than 7,000 members and the mother church to dozens of church plants. God does not seem to mad about this woman pastor. Maybe we would have some 7,000 member churches if the western world if we would let women pastor, if we would allow them to lead our conferences.
The bottom line that is that even though God is clearly blessing female pastors, the anti-woman's ordination crowd apparently believes God has got it wrong. Sounds a bit like those people who were mad at Jesus for healing on the Sabbath.
In the grip of grace
Steve Moran
I agree with you Matt. It is fundamentally a question of justice. Which is why it is a question of consequences also. Prolonged and institutionalized injustice will have consequences for Adventists. Church leaders need to know how deeply alienating their actions are going to be to the majority of members in North America, Europe, Australia, and perhaps in time even other parts of the world as well (such as China, where church growth is being driven to a large extent by dynamic female pastors). Our brothers from Africa, Latin America, and Silver Spring need to know that there can come a tipping point at which very large numbers of faithful Adventists no longer give any credence, loyalty, or support to the GC and instead simply ignore it, devoting themselves to local congregational life or tragically leaving the church altogether. What church officials must grasp is that their authority is in fact remarkably fragile. Ironically, this kind of assertion of "power" to maintain the status quo works to drain the GC of actual power by laying bare a crisis of moral legitimacy. Let us pray for actual revival and reform.
@ Chris Schaeffler: "A very very sad day for a so called sola-scriptura-movement."
Chris, I honestly think that it could actually be a very very HAPPY day, because things are becoming more defined and clearer. What some of us anticipated when Ted Wilson was "chosen" is actually happening, i.e., the Church will be put in reverse mode and a more cultic mentality will prevail.
Thus, once people realize that this going backwards is actually already happening, it will be more likely that there will be a split in the church at a certain point. This GC President has the greatest potential ever to end up splitting the church. Not everyone wants to go backwards!
Good grief, Steve! Do we need to drag the emotions of the Almighty into this? I can just hear some Sunday-keeper saying, "do you really think God will be mad at you if you go to church on Sunday and not Saturday? Isn't that a little superstitious?"
I oppose women's ordination not on biblical grounds but on cultural grounds, because I now view it as critical to oppose anything that tends toward a reduction of the differences between the sexes.
Our society is committing sexual suicide; we are not actually physically reproducing ourselves. The USA fertility rate (2.06) is below replacement (2.1). And that is the aggregate; the fertility rate of non-Latino American citizens is much lower. Few developed countries have a fertility rate that approaches replacement, and a few European countries, like Greece (1.38), have entered a demographic death spiral. I think this might be because our elites have fought with every fiber of their beings to wipe out sex and gender differences, to utterly efface every trace of sex and gender roles.
A sexless society is not sexy. Ironically, libertines and lechers like Hugh Hefner promoted feminism and the exploding of gender roles because they thought that economic independence would free up women to be sexual playthings, while freeing men from the obligation to support their sexual partners. Somewhat counter-intuitively, the society they created is much less sexy than the one that existed 50 years ago. I think that's one reason why there is such great nostalgia for that time period, when men were men and women were women, as expressed in TV shows like "Mad Men," "Pan Am" and "The Playboy Club."
It turns out that gender roles that more or less everyone recognizes and participates in are important for the sexual functioning of society. A sexless society is not sexy, which is why there's actually much less sex that means anything today, and why we are not physically reproducing ourselves.
But what is equally as interesting is that our elites don't seem to care that we aren't reproducing ourselves. People just emit carbon dioxide and otherwise foul up the environment, so the fewer the better. If we're the last generation of people, so be it. (Which is why, when I think of "last generation theology," it means something different to me than it does to Kevin Paulson.)
Wilson couldn't trust God in the process, or didn't care to.
Papal machinations under the guise of voting.
____________________________________________________
"be reverent in behavior, not slanderers nor enslaved to much wine, teachers of that which is good" titus 2:3
Sheesh, David!
Human rights rising leads to diminished sexiness leads to lower birth rates?! TMI on your libido.
____________________________________________________
"be reverent in behavior, not slanderers nor enslaved to much wine, teachers of that which is good" titus 2:3
Should women church membership be counting as 1/2 a count and men as a whole?
Is the tithe sent in by women not as valuable (or needed) as that by men?
When Jesus returns will there be two lines to enter heaven, one is slower than the other, and the express-process line is men-only?
Is there any YES to the above questions?
Ted Wilson is driving nail after nail into his own coffin. This kind of bold-faced political maneuvering and careless disregard for women who have given their lives to ministry is appalling. His arguments before the Council are not even coherent. I can't help but think that this kind of "leadership" will be seen for what it is over time. I can only hope that we have people of influence who will see that there is a better way forward when these five years are up.
Are we sure the Florida Supreme Court did not have a say in Ted's election?
Elaine
Good heavens David Read! Have you not successfully reproduced yourself? You are very anxious about the "sexual functioning of society." I'm glad you are honest enough to say your views have nothing to do with the Bible and everything to do with keeping society/women "sexy". But I don't think many women are going to find your comments very sexy.
>>> Episcopal Church membership
http://www.rci.rutgers.edu/~lcrew/dojustice/j325.html
The membership is going down because the anglo's aren't breeding as fast as they used to.
They do this because they have figured out the way to enjoy an affluent lifestyle is to not spread your income over lots of kids, but rather to have a few kids and invest in them.
Societies that have not figured this out include India, parts of Africa, and parts of South America.
David thinks that breeding faster is good. This violates the first rule of holes - when you are in one, stop digging.
/Bevin
I agree about the superstition part. I suffer from that a lot. At one time I was convinced that God was mad at me for reading Spectrum. I also get that feeling about other things as well from time to time and have learned to manage it to some extent.
It stems from a more stern and angry (even Calvinist) picture of God, which--if Maxwell makes any sense at all--we will have to discard as time closes. This is my biggest concern. Maxwell really brought the Great Controversy home for me. I understood the principles behind it (the use of power and influence, the way we treat other people, reason over superstition etc.). Can we as a church get over this?
Interestingly enough, Herb Douglass sees this as well--even though he has relatively conservative views. We need to sort out several issues if we are going to make an impact on the world (particularly cities like NYC). This issue is one of them (although I prefer to work around rather than directly). Another issue is our church standards and their justification/presentation as well as our treatment of outcast groups.
The SDA church has apparently identified women to be in the "outcast" groups. Cast out of any positions that men may hold will continue to be disciminated solely on the basis of sex. Maybe they are "making an image to the beast" by imitiating the Catholic church's men only pastorates.
Elaine
Kudos to President Ted Wilson for standing his ground. Kudos to him for following Scriptural example and injunction!
The feminist movement has been, on the whole, a destructive force in American society in my view. Equal pay for equal work I have absolutely no problem with. Are there roles that male and female should occupy? Definitely, and many of you, I suspect, know that in your inmost soul but it is not politically correct to admit it. Young children are coming from school to an empty home because, in many cases, the mother has to be "fulfilled" whatever that is. 70% of children in one segment of society are born out of wedlock. Dysfunctional homes in USA are rampant. Why aren't supporters of WO as passionate about improving the status of the home?
Again I challenge you to read -- http://www.adventistsaffirm.org/article.php?id=156 and supporting articles. The desire for WO is not at all necessary for the growth of the church as demonstrated by Read, and, I suspect, has nothing to do with young people leaving the church.
>>> Young children are coming from school to an empty home because, in many cases, the mother has to be "fulfilled" whatever that is
The father's are equally responsible for raising the children.
In many societies two hundred years ago the children spent as much time, or more, with their farmer/artisan/hunter dad.
Did you blame the fathers for going off and leaving their boys to be raised by their mothers?
/Bevin
A most interesting process voted at Annual Council when we are studying this week in our SS lesson how Peter, James and John dealt with issues of contention within the early church on how to reach Gentiles with the gospel. Are there similarities?
Many of these women who are called "fulfilling" are filling their children with food, clothing them and more. The world has drastically changed since women could stay at home and watch the children. No longer is one paycheck sufficient to even buy a home or car and put food on the table.
What's YOUR FRIEND's solution to that dilemma? Are you saying that women caused the economy to cause the great dispartiy in top and bottom income earners? Well, women have often been blamed for many of the ills in society, take a number and get in line.
Elaine
Thank you , Peter, for a clear description of what it would mean to implement the biblical model of "ordination."
Simply put, to "ordain" in the biblical way is the same as "commissioning" someone to do a particular task. As a matter of fact, when we vote persons into church office during church elections, we actually "ordain" them to office, to use a quaint term that is not longer used in ordinary language. If you don't believe it, search for each use of "ordain" in the KJV, and consider the context and/or use a good lexicon to determine the meaning.
(By the way you will search in vain for the term "ordain" in the New Testament of the NIV. That's because nowadays it is an archaic term that has been preserved as an ecclesiastical term with quite a different meaning from the original word.)
Fully agree. At least we now how our own Pope.
Therefore I recommand TW to make a formal apology on his pontifical, but insular intervention at the Executive Committee.
(Reminder: Ellen White had ordination credentials. While she apparently never had an ordination ceremony she also never said women should not be ordained and this should be seen as significant.)
@David Read,
"If they had integrity, they would argue, "we have to do this because it is the only just course of action, and we realize that the church will shrink as a result." "
I agree that women should be ordained because it is just, but I don't agree the church is likely to shrink as a result. You cannot realistically argue this simply with reference to the figures you provided above - it is not possible to deduce cause and effect from those figures without a comprehensive analysis of all of the factors that affected the churches during the periods in question.
Your simplistic deductions are about on a par with some "statistics" I sometimes jokingly employ to justify my driving at high speed. It goes something like this:
- 85% of cars that crash, do so while travelling less than 10 mph above the speed limit. Thus by travelling at 20 mph over the speed limit, in that act alone I've reduced my risk of accident by 85%.
- In addition, 30% of car accidents occur at intersections. Thus while I had already reduced my risk of accident by 85%, there is a compounding benefit derived by my speed. Because I'm travelling faster, if I would have collided at an intersection I now wont do that, because I would have passed through the intersection already and been way down the road by the time my accident would have occurred.
If you're going to argue that ordaining women will shrink the church, please come up with some SOUND analysis to support that position.
@your friend - sure, president Wilson has a right to stand his ground. Whether it is wise though to resume to the chair of the same meeting afterwards, is a different matter.
In my view the issue in this report is not so much women's ordination than use of power...
While I would agree that the WO issue cannot be solved by tactical maneuvers, but by solid theology (is there a theological reason, to make a differentiation between commissioning and ordination? do Adventists indeed hold to "priesthood" - ritualistic understanding of ordination? I actually was taught otherwise some 30 years back...).
However, the new disaster makes it very clear where TW stands in the matter (well, we could have guessed, despite his praise for China, which must be puzzling for him) and the prodedural issue tell us what to expect from any GC sanctioned restudying of the issue, ie. pure apologetics.
But we also learn that there is some resistance coming from areas we might not expect. There may be hope, though not for a uniform, streamlined, worldwide church.
@Andreas: I agree with you. It is a question of power not of gender.
Why didn't the president discuss such an important question like the request of the North American Division (NAD) regarding the credentials with his brothers and sister in the ADCOM? This behaviour leaves me with two more or less embarassing explanations that I don't want to share here.
This GC-administration seems to centralize the power at the headquarters. Two days ago the Trans-European- and the Euro-Africa Division have "lost" big fields, mainly muslim countries. The restructuring of the fields in the Near- and Middle East has been done - according to current president of the Middle East Union, Kjell Aune - without even consulting the Middle East Union Executive Committee on the proposed change! The newly established Greater Middle East Union (GMEU) has been attached to the GC. Does the GC better know how to evangelise muslim countries?
In a short time we will see the merging of TED and EUD to one European Division.
Andeas: "In my view the issue in this report is not so much women's ordination than use of power..." And why don't women and their supporters who seek female ordination represent power seekers? Remember--no double standard.
Has anyone ever given thought as to how much the work of conversion could be advanced with an army of well trained women as Bible Workers? In this capacity it can easily be conjectured that such women would have much more influence that a busy evangelist or pastor. Ask anyone who has had studies with a dedicated woman Bible Worker whether that person was influenced more by the Worker or the pastor.
Is the position of Bible Worker too humble for a woman to undertake?
Also in Trinidad etc "Interestingly enough, Herb Douglass sees this as well--even though he has relatively conservative views."
Where has he made this known or is it a conjecture?
>>> Is the position of Bible Worker too humble for a woman to undertake?
Of course not, and they have done it for millenia.
The fact that Teddie Wilson could be the hall-way-sweeper at the GC does not disqualify him from being the GC president, why does the fact that thousands of women are very successful Bible Workers disqualify one woman from being a union president?
/Bevin
As far as the Northern Asia Pacific Division (NSD) is concerned, they don't ordinarily issue a Commissioned Minister Credential. Those in administration, such as treasurers and executive secretaries, hold either a Ministerial Credential if ordained or a Missionary Credential for the unordained..
http://www.adventistyearbook.org/default.aspx?page=ViewAdmField&Year=999...
David Read,
Yes, I was agreeing with your observation. I don't describe myself as a liberal, but I do support the ordination of women, and only for theological reasons.
To be perfectly honest with you, I don't really understand what you were trying to suggest when you mentioned consequences. Isn't a commitment to do what is right the meaning of remnant?
David Read: regarding your mention of three current tv shows which hark back to the, as you call it, "sexist" early 60s...and BTW, discerning minds recognize the CONTEXT aroung which the story line is revolving...we recognize the dialogue is NOT promoting those ideas, just reflecting them, and at the same time, wincing. If you, as a bonified lawyer do not recognize that, then god help anyone you represent in a court of law!
(OTOH, since at least one of those shows have been cancelled after only 3 episodes, perhaps the audience is dumber than I thought)
Perhaps we can mention another show popular then: The Flintstones. Let's go back to the "time" you suggest in publication when dinosaurs lived amongst humans. Altho Fred did not drag Wilma around by the hair, it's not very far removed from what you must think is sexy, eh? Well...those flimsy costumes the women wore being what they were...
are you REALLY a lawyer who passed the bar? Your rhetoric makes me wonder what bar you passed or are still at. I REALLY do hate to sound so unkindly but sometimes I have to wonder and its definitely NOT Pavlovian.
Nether the GC nor the NSD has administrative authority over churches in China that identify themselves as Adventists, so it really matters not to our Chinese pastors, male or female, whether they were commissioned or ordained.
http://www.adventistyearbook.org/default.aspx?page=ViewAdmField&Year=999...
Correction: At least now we know, that we have our own Pope.
Alle, I do understand---better than you could possibly guess---that contemporary TV writers are almost uniformly liberal, and feminist, and write accordingly. But that isn't inconsistent with the idea that nostalgia for a time when sex roles were clearly defined is not part of the interest in those shows and that historical period. Matt Weiner, the creator of "Mad Men," tries to get the historical details right, regardless of what he thinks of the mores of that time.
BTW, it isn't even necessary to go back that far. I look at TV shows from the '80s and I appreciate how much more femininely grown women dressed as recently as when I was in high school. The contrast between male and female apparel was much greater, even 25 years ago. The war on sex and gender roles starts with trying to make men and women dress alike.
David Read says: "Why don't liberals just admit that they want to ordain women for ideological reasons, and that church growth has nothing to do with it? If they had integrity, they would argue, "we have to do this because it is the only just course of action, and we realize that the church will shrink as a result. But justice, though the heavens fall!""
===========================
That is exactly the position that the Episcopal, Presbyterian and other mainline churches have taken over the last 50 years. When the Presbyterian leadership acted to support full civil rights for blacks, they lost huge numbers of members. When the Episcopalians supported full rights for women and then ordination of women for the priesthood, they lost big numbers. When various denominations began to support sanctuary for Nicaraguan refugees, gay rights etc. thousand more left.
These churches have been in step with the progress of social justice and the decisions of the Supreme Court on most of these social issues; those who aren't we call conservative.
What is your point?
Graeme
"trying to make men and women dress alike."
I don't recall anyone, anywhere, trying to make men and women dress alike. Care to furnish some documentation of that off-the-top-of-the-hat statement?
As a young girl growing up in the 30s, all young girls wore dresses, and if they attended SDA boaring schools, anklets, or "bobby-socks" were prohibited and hose had to be worn at all times, no exception. Neither were pants allowed. I remember trudging through deep snow in below zero weather with legs exposed and becoming frostbitten (prarie winds are very powerful).
Women began adopting pants later, and when they discovered the much better comfort and practicality, it became so common that to see women in dresses is almost an anomaly. Women no longer ask men's permission on how to dress, they choose what is most comfortable and if men don't like it--we need no approval from them.
Elaine
In an era when women function effectively in every professional role and young women are expected to select and achieve career opportunities exactly as their male counterparts, it is perplexing that the global SDA church invests such energy in consideration and dispute of the qualifications of women to serve as ordained ministers. While the equally valuable histories and cultures of Divisons outside the NAD deserve respect and sensitivity, shouldn't the essential equity of all persons - whatever their chromosomes - be a value to which they be urged to aspire, if not share?
May I submit as well that justice demands the thoughtful use of authority, be it male or female. Any individual with authority for allocation of an organization's resources or determination of employment within that organization - be it church or business - does not shed that authority until he or she resigns the role. Our church President always speaks from the authority of that role, regardless of the lectern from which he speaks.
I am disheartened that the authority of that role was used for communication of personal opinion in a venue intended for open, and sometimes conflicting, communication by those without that authority or subordinate to it.
OK. ANN has reported the story and did a fine job, I think.
"The war on sex and gender roles starts with trying to make men and women dress alike."
-- David Read
I've always been grateful for my ability to distinguish between men & women depicted in Biblical art. I'm perfecting this gift in preparation for the white robes & crowns EGW said that we'll wear in heaven.
____________________________________________________
"be reverent in behavior, not slanderers nor enslaved to much wine, teachers of that which is good" titus 2:3
I believe it was the TED president who pleaded for understanding from the chauvinistic division presidents because young men and women growing up in a free and equal society are leaving the church when they see how it discriminates unjustly against women. Yet those divisions voted against the requests, knowing that they were causing thousands of young people to lose their faith in the church. For shame!
For the last 40 years or so there has been no formal training for Bible workers in the TED. You either study theology ,b ecome a pastor or not. This is in line with the developement of equal educational opportunities,but also a recognition from the church that all ministerial workers need a good training to be able to function in a highly professional area as is the case in most European countries. No family can exist even at a simple living level on one salary,thus an enoumous problem for single parents to make both ends meet. The pastor of today is doing quite a bit more than holding evangelistic campaigns ,especially as that model does not work at all in Western Europe.It is an utter amazement to me that our church leader seemingly lacks so much knowledge of the real life situation of the church in Western Europe. Or are we to be ostracized because we have another way at looking on outreach and church growth?Now we also have been bereaved of our century long tradition with links to other continents,that inspired and fostered so many committed young people to do foreign mission work-the very cord of making us to belong to the world at large and inspired us to be greatly involved in the global church.What a shame that power and control seems to have highest priority. Kudos to dr Ella Simons for her outspoken courage.
@Y.J.Oster: ...It is an utter amazement to me that our church leader seemingly lacks so much knowledge of the real life situation of the church in Western Europe.
Outside of EUD&TED they simply don't care about.
There is a huge "internal" congress, conference and committee meeting tourism, far away from real life from Aarhus to Zurich...
I worked over the last 30 years in Communication within Europe.
Please explain me what you understand by the following. I am open to learn.
1 Timothy 2:11-12 — "A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent."
The context of that divine instruction from the apostle Paul was ministry in and leadership of the Christian Church, as the apostle in the very next chapter wrote: “...I am writing you these instructions so that ... you will know how people ought to conduct themselves in God’s household, which is the church of the living God...” (1 Timothy 3:14-15)
Mathew
Frank,
Do you honestly think we can ammend the procedure with the same leaders who came so close to oppose each other. hey did you read the vote count between yes and no? very close man...I though for one time, God did not want a "tie" here but has his own time to reveal the true need of the church very soon.
Can you quote biblically where in the history was women allowed to take ledership responsibilities. Infact the following incidence recorded in the bible warrants explanation from you if you can please.
Acts 21:8-11 records an excellent illustration. The apostle Paul was staying at the home of Philip the evangelist (vs. 8), who “had four unmarried daughters who prophesied” (vs. 9). This spiritual giftedness did not make them Ephesians 4:11 prophets! In fact, God wanted to speak a major prophetic word to Paul in that very home. Bypassing the daughters who had the gift of prophecy, God brought up from Judea “a prophet named Agabus” (vs. 10), who proceeded to speak a major revelation concerning the apostle’s future.
I donot know if the above referred women prophesied later..
Agree...all these is done due to "nepotism" prevailing among the leaders. Kjell Aunne dug the well and he fell in it...thats all I can say.
It would be an interesting project to draw a chart showing how a church leade is related to another by birth or marriage. Is anyone sufficiently acquainted with the ledership in conferences to tackle such a project? It is well known that for years, when a husband is called to fill an office position, it is expected that his wife will also be offered a salary on the payroll. This is not to say that one is not qualified, but there is no requirements other than being married or by birth.
Elaine
Help me understand biblcally this passage of Acts 21:8-11 records an excellent illustration of this. The apostle Paul was staying at the home of Philip the evangelist (vs. 8), who “had four unmarried daughters who prophesied” (vs. 9). This spiritual giftedness did not make them Ephesians 4:11 prophets! In fact, God wanted to speak a major prophetic word to Paul in that very home. Bypassing the daughters who had the gift of prophecy, God brought up from Judea “a prophet named Agabus” (vs. 10), who proceeded to speak a major revelation concerning the apostle’s future.
Secondly,
I dont see in EG White 's writings anything about women ordination. Read http://www.adventistsaffirm.org/article.php?id=143.
I know women leaders who are different in the church and different in thier social life. these kind of women leaders cannot take responsibilties...
MATHEW
Matthew,
There is no lack of excellent material addressing the very questions you post. I can only conclude that your interest in becoming informed is not strong, or you are already convinced & no further evidence will enlighten you.
____________________________________________________
"be reverent in behavior, not slanderers nor enslaved to much wine, teachers of that which is good" titus 2:3
Dr. Ella Simmons' comments at the meeting deserve repeating; the following from the ANN article:
Reflecting on one speaker's comment that the push for a variance was a form of salesmanship to lead towards women's ordination, Simmons said, "I was not born into the Adventist Church, but the Adventist Church presented itself to me in a certain way. I hope I am not a victim of 'bait and switch.'"
And in responding to the comments of some African delegates who opposed the motion, she said she was "deeply disturbed and concerned. Are your memories so short that you do not remember when you were oppressed in your own land? And that those who oppressed used the Bible to uphold this oppression?"
Simmons added, "We talk about unity. What is this unity? I've heard something described that is not unity, it is uniformity. ... What we are describing is uniformity that is more akin to the bondage that grows out of mind control."
(Dr. Ella Smith Simmons is the first woman elected a general vice president of the Seventh-day Adventist world church)
http://news.adventist.org/2011/10/variance-for-north-a.html
Two good reasons to ordain women in our church.
1. Women have to be ordained to be chaplains in any penal institution. Our SDA women do not qualify to minister as chaplains in prison because they are not ordained.. Chaplains are allowed to enter any place in a prison. Volunteers are not allowed to do so. There is a great need for women chaplains in any women's prison. So many women have been abused, they need spiritual support from a woman, not a man.
2. Women have to be ordained to serve as chaplains in the military. Our women would not qualify. Women in harms way need the support of a female chaplain.
pvtbank2003
Paul also said that women are to be silent in church.
If our church strictly followed that admonition, no woman could even make an announcement in church. There would be nothing but black suits on the platform. No woman could teach a children's class. No woman could pray out loud in church. There would be no deaconesses, no music which included a woman. No potlucks at church. Well, I suppose women could cook and serve in silence. No woman could make any kind of comment in sabbath-school class. No women greeters.
The church would collapse if we women decided to take Paul at his word. We do most of the menial work in the church without much acknowledgement.
Do you honestly think we can ammend the procedure with the same leaders who came so close to oppose each other. hey did you read the vote count between yes and no? very close man...I though for one time, God did not want a "tie" here but has his own time to reveal the true need of the church very soon.
******************
Matthew...
Who leadership is, or how they opposed each other, is not the question. The procedure itself, that allows for the GC president to relinquish the chair, comment first with the weight of his office behind his words, and then to retake the chair in order to supposedly impartially lead the subsequent discussion on such a highly charged issue, is the question. And it is also highly questionable. It was a conflict of interest. It was a way of submarining discussion before it could ever begin. It was a highly controlling, even manipulative maneuver.
The closeness of the vote is immaterial. How the vote went is also immaterial. Either the procedure is right or it is not, regardless of the outcome...unless, of course, one subscribes to the end justifying the means. It needs to be changed for the future.
Thanks...
Frank
Additionally, ascribing this maneuver to God is a convenient way of absolving those responsible for the problem. This was simply man made machinations. God has nothing to do with our politicizing.
Thanks...
Frank
Renie, a suggestion:
From now on, men take care of all the potlucks, communion bread, teaching all SS classes, including cradle roll, visit the sick, call those who are house-bound, etc.
That will demonstrate the importance of women in the church. When men and women can share equally in all the necessary functions of the church, maybe they will be willing to not only share the ordination privligeges but the duties as well.
Elaine
When I saw Simmons in the picture I went "WTF???" How did a black woman become VICE PRESIDENT (W O W ...wonderful)? Unless it's tokenism...? Or else she's EGW incarnate (there IS legend that she was part black...)? Or a token for the black regional conferences in USA? Or "a symbol for successful SDA women everywhere?" What is this promoting? Not that I care. Just a'wonderin the possibilities? Has she got any "power"? Does this get shown in Africa? Does her presence intimidate the black pastors in Africa who are so adamant against females (do they fear for their jobs?) Does Sammy Pipim approve of her? Oh never mind...
Elaine, as usual, I agree. But there arent very many men in church! Its up to the women, always has been. As they die out, the potlucks quality will decline. I've always said, the best thing about SDA is the recipes. I'm in need of a good cottage cheese/Special K/casserole recipe. Any takers?
Alle, go to allrecipes.com and type in cottage cheese, and there are dozens of delicious recipes. I made cottage cheese patties, much like the loaf and my family loved them. I always type in the food I want recipes for and the choices are amazing!
Elaine
"This was simply man made machinations." The misguided efforts to place women in spiritual headship positions can certainly be described in those words. Such divisive efforts do they not witness a desire for power? Can't a dedicated woman do as much to advance the work in other capacities?
This an obvious desire to follow the culture a culture that has actually denigrated the position of a woman as a wife and homemaker no matter how much you wish to gainsay it. When will we learn to properly evaluate and support the appropriate roles of man and woman?
To those women on this blog who do not want ordination for women......
I am assuming you are silent in church. I am assuming you walk behind your husband in deference to him. Oh, and resist the temptation to go out and vote.
You enjoy all the perks of the modern 'equality for women' world including the freedom to comment on this website. Paul would not have allowed you to do this.
Simmons said, "I was not born into the Adventist Church, but the Adventist Church presented itself to me in a certain way. I hope I am not a victim of 'bait and switch'. ...We talk about unity. What is this unity? I've heard something described that is not unity, it is uniformity. ... What we are describing is uniformity that is more akin to the bondage that grows out of mind control."
Strong words from Ella Simmons, spoken boldly and in direct opposition to her boss, Ted Wilson. Such public disunity among our top world-church leaders will not be tolerated for long, I'd wager. I'll be interested to see how long before she "resigns" or is "reassigned" from her VP position. Maybe "retirement" is in her near future?
All the best leaders have spoken out in opposition to the status quo. Remember Martin Luther? Martin Luther King? All the women who fought for the rights for women in voting, equal pay and more?
Bravo for Ella! There should be a backlash if she is forced out. It is far worse not to speak up with such discrimination than to meekly stay silent. Women have always been expected to silently accept what was done to them. No more!
Elaine
If there is a "sine qua non" in church politics, it is justice and respect in the way we treat the less privileged and share responsibilities. The prophets of old make it plain over and over again: There can be diligence, perseverance, formal worship where justice lacks. God goes for the latter, because with it we demonstrate what is at the core of any religion in the sense of "religio" (=reverence): humility. This is also where the gender-question meets the power-question. As a "simple" church-member I cannot accept the GC's decision on the matter and will not consent to it's implications. Locally and regionally elected leaders might feel likewise and act according to their conscience. As the current 99%-demonstrations remind us: Leadership works only as long as people let themselves be (mis-)led.
>>. The church would collapse if we women decided to take Paul at his word. We do most of the menial work in the church without much acknowledgement.
Renie - I think you are on to something!
How about organizing a "work to rule" by the SDA women! A sabbath where no woman does anything in SS or church except sit quietly?!
/Bevin
The article below caught my attention this morning and I recommended it to "My Friend" because he had evidenced interest in this topic.
I believe this article also speaks to methods of addressing this issue being discussed on this line.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/16/world/africa/movement-to-end-genital-c...
Individuals may speak out on an issue - but when action is needed - when change needs to take place - community involvement is indicated. Group action.
I'm wondering, why SDA's do not call their Pope a Pope.
It were so much easier to explain the facts of SDA internal life to non-SDA's, if correct terms were used.
By "correct" I mean factual, not fictional.
Pauli Heikkinen
Sometimes deeds are more impressive than words.
I'm wondering what would happen if all the women in NAD churches were absolutely silent in their respective congregations in SS's for the next 6 - 12 months.
Only opening their mouths for yawning or shouting "Fire is out. Save the children, do not take care of the men!"
Heipauli - not speak in church - nor open their purse... think it would take 6 months?
Somehow a work-to-rule does not have a Christian ring to it.
Also, while I agree that a better theology of power should be expected from a church so invested int he Great Controversy--the GC president is not a Pope.
Things have changed and will continue to change.
If you want this to get bitter and linger like the endless American culture wars then go ahead and push. However, if you let God use history and culture to change the church, the lasting effects will be less bitter and acrimonious.
God has always used people to effect change. DId God come down and initiate the Civil Rights campaign some 40 years ago?
Let's get real: Just as the "Occupiers" currently around the world are expressing their anger against the "money-changers", a concerted effort by the women of the church most certainly would get some attention. Did the Tea Party get attention? Did the Civil Rights workers get attention? How else, possibly are changes made in the status quo? By those who are enjoying that position? Hardly. Hell could freeze over before the entire church would allow women such privilege.
Renie and Donna and I and how many more--you fellows can also be a part. Women, simply sit in the pews, silently, put in no offering when the plate is passed, no potlucks, no children's classes, and anything for which women have provided the work.
Does anyone doubt that it will not be noticed? If anyone asks, simply tell them that until women can share in all the benefits, privileges, and opportunities allowed men, the "sit-down" will continue. Since men now run the church at the highest levels, let them run it at the level where the rubber hits the road--the local church. How long do you think it might take?
To become effective, we now have the internet, which is how the "Occupiers" spread world-wide so rapidly. Get in touch with other members you know wherever they are and pass the word. The internet and Facebook, whatever the method. This is NOT insubordination, simply a non-violent, harmless message that has worked for centuries. Post it here for all the bloggers to see: how many are willing to send the message?
Elaine
NO...what u expressed s frustration and pain. Well, why cant women carry on God's work without dipping thier heads in this critical ordianation confusion. I dont think God would except only ordained women that minsister HIM. Even you and me can minister and still not be ordained. Comeon...are we like Galations seeking for circumscision now? I am surprised to see there were two women minister who had opposed for ordantion. I wonder what would be thier logic. Mathew
So Sad. JESUS looking at this attitude is very upset. What if men do start running the church at the level where the rubber hits the road--the local church. Should the attutude of women be confrontating? or Challenging? Will this be accepted by CHRIST. Even thinking of such action is sin against our Almighty. I will pray for you so that you will not be instrumental in giving your opinion that would lead other womens to get excited. Pray for the Leaders that at a GOD given time, they will realise the contributon of our women folks.
God Bless. Mathew
Two women ministers opposed to ordination? How significant is that supposed to be? There will always be opposition to anything new and different.
Perhaps a poll could be taken here: those who are opposed to women's ordination
and those who are for women's ordination and then determine the pulse of members who are not officials or delegates.
Elaine
Ha Ha Ha..Simple
GOD will still lead his church for the mission to be accomplished.
God Bless. I pray that you will dilute your negative thoughts soon and be a contriutor towards the leadership decisions.
Mathew
Friends
Just like "women's sufferage",voting rights took time to bring about. In Wash. DC the Daughters of the American Revolution now are sponsors of the Presidential Debates each election cycle. While Ted used a manuever out of "Roberts Rules of Order" to stiffle discussion on this issue (wrongly in my opinion) the discussion still occurred and his own leadership is speaking out quite forcefully on this issue which is a fact not to be ignored. It will happen as long as people continue to engage in the discussion. You can only "suppress" the "right thing" for so long. My sister Nancy Eastman Marter worked on this issue with Neal Wilson with a number of "direct" discussions. They are both dead now but the issue of women's equality in the church will continue to move forward at the local, national and international level.
I believe we need to continue doing the "Master's business" in our sphere of influence and continue pushing the "right thing" at all levels and it will come in God's time. It is a hard thing to remain "patient" in a society of "immediate" gratification especially on an issue that is so obviously "wrong headed" logically. If EGW were alive today I believe she would be pushing equality under the category of "new light" she speaks so eloquently about in "Counsels to Writers and Editors" in the chapter entitled "Attitudes to New Light". If you haven't read it you should and so should Ted!!!
All the best
Fred
On a more "humorous note"
When I lived in Takoma Park there was a saying that "change only occurs at the GC when the undertaker comes". Unfortunately many a "true word" is spoken in jest as my mother-in-law taught me in English class in high school at TA. She also taught Ted W and Bonnie D.
Some people are "faster learners" than others :>)
Fred
In my local (small) church it appears that those who are 'generational' SDAs, those whose grandparents, etc. were Adventists, are the ones to secure positions or to become delegates to conference committees, Union liasons, etc., whether they attend church or not. It seems all to strange to me. As well, these ones are generally refered to by many as liberals. Don't know if there is connection.
It is always interesting to see that people who will quote Paul, that women should be quiet in church, happily quote Ellen White. You can't have it both ways. Either women should be quiet in church and so Ellen White should not have a voice or we keep quoting Ellen White and agree that this Bible text should be read in a cultural context.
We have a very interesting "problem" in our church. We have a hard time accepting women in leadership positions, giving them a real voice and power equal to men in the church. Yet one of our founders, who many Adventists believe to be a prophet and who apparently can dictate policy in the church, was a woman.
Many liberal Adventists want to diminish the role of Elle White, yet she could be a strong argument in equal treatment of women. And many conservative Adventists do not want women ordained, yet they are stuck with a female prophet.
A photograph of EGW preaching from the pulpit. Did she disobey a divine command?
http://www.whiteestate.org/books/pay/PAYc13.html
My great aunt Flossie was a teenager when Ellen White came to Graysville and spoke at the church where I grew up. She told me that the women of the church were at first concerned that she was speaking from the pulpit without wearing a hat... Then one of the women noticed that she had a hairnet on - and so everything was ok.
(I use to go to the church when I was alone and stand in the pulpit there and pretend I was preaching like Ellen)
>>> "change only occurs at the GC when the undertaker comes"
Years ago I saw a comment that
philosophical positions are like old castles, never captured, but no one lives in them any more
Unfortunately, with the arrival of vast numbers of ignorant but well meaning members into the SDA flock over the last 30 years, it is going to take a while longer for the positions to die.
/Bevin
@/Bevin - Are you blaming, and to quote you directly, the 'vast numbers of ignorant but well meaning members' that came 'into the SDA flock over the last 30 years' for the problems in the SDA church, problems/issues like that which was discussed at the Annual Council?
Is it not entirely possible that God has brought these 'brother & sisters' into the flock for 'such a time as this' to help those who should be/used to be on the Watchtowers to recognize their utter retreat into the world and its customs.
Elder Wilson himself, I do believe, as well as many others who are oppose to such un-Biblical stands, is a 'generational' Adventist.
From my personal experience, I have encountered many 'generational' Adventist who are very dismayed at the worldly trends that have been thrust upon the world congregation by NAD, and now TED, without anything near a 'Thus saith the Lord'.
Case In Point (of many): In the last 15 years new-young members were at one point given the option by the NAD Administration to educate themselves in magic as a means of witness and out-reach. Can this sort of thing ever be right? Was it an initiative of the newly minted Adventists, hardly?
To blame the newcomers in the church for the controversies over the past 30 years is a definite tell-tell sign that some of the old 'guard' would rather they leave, so that they can get on with church as they see fit, and not as God sees fit - so much for Bible based evangelism and the three angels message.
MichaelE
If only Cooper had been elected...
---
1 Corinthians 13:13
Who did God choose for spiritual leadership in the OT? Again in the NT in Luke 6:12 Jesus continued all night in prayer to God and in the next verse who did He choose for leadership as the 12? Again in Matthew 19:28 who did Jesus designate as the 12 to sit on 12 thrones judging the 12 tribes of Israel in the Regeneration. "Out of the mouth of two or three witnesses..."
Welland Henry III,
In all those cases, God chose Jewish persons. What shall we do? We're in error by having non-Jewish spiritual leaders.
____________________________________________________
"be reverent in behavior, not slanderers nor enslaved to much wine, teachers of that which is good" titus 2:3
I spent three weeks in Malawi, visiting my daughter was there for two years.
The way Christian denominations work in Malawi is easy - which ever denomination builds a church in or near your village is the one you attend. There is no deep theology, no understanding of science or history, just a friendly getting on with people.
In makes for a flock easily misrepresented, when it comes to voters representing them at the GC.
/Bevin
Hello Hopeful,
I do not know the full ramifications and reasons why God chose Abraham over other individuals of the earth. He made His choice and I am not wanting to argue with Him.
When it comes to things of this nature let the Bible speak. when we allow our personal feelings and agendas to shadow the reality of the Bible we will start seeing things that are not there.
If we would apply this text it would end the gender power struggle in the church today:
Philippians 2:5-8, "Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross."
So Robert Jack, what is the reality of the Bible that you see? Should we ordain women? Or should we not? So if we would all be humble and obedient to death, what should we do? Ordain or not to ordain?
Your answer seems easy, but as with every easy answer it is overlooking the complexity of reality. Nobody can read the Bible without an agenda or cultural glasses or uninfluenced. So we wouldn't solve anything we would just sweep our differences under the carpet.
In a discussion like this it doesn't help to assume that the party opposing your view is not spiritual enough, or to liberal to listen to the voice of God, or too conservative to really know what love is.
In all theogical discussions I always assume the sincerety of the opossing party. I don't doubt the sincerety of the other nor the other's sincerty in spiritual matters. I believe and assume that the other sincerley prayed about it and is sincerely seeking the will of God. If I don't do that then I am not really listening to the other's argument because I have dismissed his/her argument as being un-spiritual, ungodly or unworthy.
Let's assume that we all seek God, want to do what is right and care about our brothers and sisters.