NAD Reaffirms Women as Conference Presidents

31 October 2011 | Bonnie Dwyer

| 13

Shortly after 11:30am today, the North American Division Committee voted 162 to 61 to reaffirm the E 60 policy voted by the 2010 NAD Year-end Meetings.

This policy will open the way for either ordained or commissioned ministers to serve in the role of conference president.

Full report to come from Charles Scriven.

He said that during the two hour debate on the item not one person stood to object to women functioning as president.

Bbbazusa - Mon, 10/31/2011 - 09:16

The 61 that voted against, was it

1. They believe women are equal to men, but because only men are ordained, and only ordained persons can be president, therefore woman should not - a GOVERNANCE issue.

2. Women should not hold that position because it will annoy Third World patriarchal groups who hold pre 1800 Western views - a CULTURAL issue.

3. Men and women are NOT equal as persons ie. Ted Wilson believes his wife is NOT equal to Ted, is lower than Ted, but higher than the animals - a THEOLOGICAL issue.

I am NOT asking for a personal opinion, or debating Gender Equality. I was not at the meeting, I just want to know what drives the 61 votes.

Edgar Drew MD
Bbbazusa@aol.com

Jared Wright - Mon, 10/31/2011 - 09:34

Whatever the case, this is a historical vote in the history of the denomination, and a significant step toward equality within the Seventh-day Adventist Church.

It certainly is not the end of the discussion by any stretch of the imagination, but it is a breakthrough.

Bbbazusa - Mon, 10/31/2011 - 09:40

A "historical vote" but we don't what the positions of the voter's were and why they voted

Is this a solid basis for rational discourse?

Daniel Masela - Mon, 10/31/2011 - 10:24

6 years ago at the General Conference in St. Louis, after being elected the first VP of the world Seventh-day Adventist Church, Elder Ella Simmons said, ""I believe I hear bells tolling in the courts of heaven announcing a transition in Christ for God's church today." I too can sense that the bells in heaven is tolloing in the courts of heaven because of this historic vote. God hears, and answers the prayers of his people. This is the start of something new, not just for the NAD, but even for the world Seventh-day Adventist Church.

Mike MacLennan - Mon, 10/31/2011 - 10:25

Bbbazusa - Mon, 10/31/2011 - 09:40
A "historical vote" but we don't what the positions of the voter's were and why they voted
Is this a solid basis for rational discourse?"

Bbbazusa,
It might be interesting to know the reasons why people voted the way they did, but the important thing is that an overwhelming majority voted in favor of women. Everyone in the church has a right to his/her opinions.

Bbbazusa - Mon, 10/31/2011 - 10:40

So basically the Church has no theology on gender, but discusses and debates it each according to hisv bview. They all talk Gender equality but noone defines it. Bit like Socrates asking Euthypro about justice, Euthypro claiming he knew what it was, but was not able to explain.

Maybe I was expecting rational discourse.

So the Church does have a theology but you and I are not privy to it, or we are not to know, or it does not and we have church leaders with a mixed bag of views, in which in this case, the result is more important than the process.

Unfortunately without any rational or theological base. This 'victory' could very well backfire.

Kay Rosburg - Mon, 10/31/2011 - 10:40

All I can say is, Hallelujah!! Finally, a step in the right direction....even in the current climate at the GC. I've been praying that political expediency would not win the day this time and my prayers have been answered!

davidrlarson - Mon, 10/31/2011 - 10:53

What a relief and joy! Thank you NAD YEM Delegates!! You did that which is right!!!

so then - Mon, 10/31/2011 - 11:51

Help me understand, is this now official policy of NAD, and it's component Unions and Conferences? If one of the SoCal conferences choose to elect a woman to the position, what can be done by the GC? Is there an option for them to withhold funds that are sent up to the GC through the conferences and then redistributed? Who will be punished - the whole NAD or just the offending Conference and/or Union?

so then - Mon, 10/31/2011 - 11:53

This vote is meaningless unless it is acted on? Who are the women most likely to elected in the next year? Which conferences? If there are none, then so what?

so then - Mon, 10/31/2011 - 11:56

Football has the "Rooney Rule" that requires a black candidate to be interviewed for every open head coaching position.

Will the NAD now have the "Jackson Rule" that requires a woman to be interviewed for every open conference president position? What about union president positions.

I can just imagine the difference at LSU right now if Chris Oberg had been Pacific Union president during the last three years.

KM - Mon, 10/31/2011 - 12:06

Bbbazusa wrote: "So the Church does have a theology but you and I are not privy to it, or we are not to know, or it does not and we have church leaders with a mixed bag of views, in which in this case, the result is more important than the process."
----
I think that's a misrepresentation of what's happening right now.
Several factors are in play at the same time.

1. The global status quo, including China's female leadership exception, and the TED and NAD's seeking the liberty to handle work in their territories in ways that match their culture and convictions
2. The current General Conference policy, not discussed at 2010 GC by Paulsen's choice, but discussed at Annual Council with Wilson presiding this year
3. The North American Division constitution and practice, as discussed at Year-End Meeting
4. Ongoing local conference constituency meetings and administrative discussions about leadership requirements
5. A worldwide study on ordination that was proposed at last year's GC session that will (we expect) terminate at the next GC session in San Antonio, TX, in 2015.

The kind of univocal clarity you seem to want, or even the "rational debate" that should precede such clarity, couldn't appear in this church before the new study has been undertaken, completed, read, and evaluated. There are too many variances and not enough of a common foundation.

In the meantime, this Division could choose to sit on its hands for 5 years, waiting for the study to end and the post-study debates to begin, but there are pragmatic reasons for continuing to work instead.

The vote isn't a random act. It's occurring in the context of several years of discussion and debate, and three consecutive affirmations in the NAD alone.

For some of the older discussions around female church leadership, you might take a look at the resources on the SDAnet At Issue page or read Women in Ministry, a historical and theological survey that came out of Andrews University and its press. A committee meeting such as the Year-End Meeting would not be an occasion for extensive presentations. That happens between meetings and people develop their reasoning at home, through practice. (Any church administrator feel free to correct me if I am wrong.)

As Fritz Guy once wrote, "The intervening two and a half decades [since 1973] have seen more study, more meetings, more proposals, more discussion at conference constituency meetings, annual councils, and General Conference sessions, but no fully authorized ordination of women in ministry." So there has been no shortage of "rational discourse" over the last 40 years, but the discussion has been hampered by the kinds of questions we've been asking. The new ordination study asks different, foundational questions, and so I expect more useful outcomes will come from it.

Alexander Carpenter - Mon, 10/31/2011 - 12:08

To keep the conversation about this vote centralized, we're closing this thread. Comments on this news continue on Charles Scriven's full-report here At NAD Year-end Meetings: A Door for Women Opens.