Print
Dan Jackson Letter to NADCOM on Women in Ministry
To say that we are perplexed regarding the outcome of the actions taken over the past three years would be a huge understatement. However, rather than throwing our hands up in despair we need to see what can be learned from this experience.
Having said all of this I believe that the clear commitment of the members of the NADCOM to strengthen the role of women in ministry within the North American Division has not changed. It is of vital importance that we affirm the women clergy presently serving in our Division, that we encourage women who may be called to gospel ministry in the future and that we enhance the understanding and unity of our membership regarding the role of women in the church.
We see this as a very significant matter that needs to be dealt with. In saying this, we need to view it in the light of the biblical and Spirit of Prophecy concepts of justice, equity, morality and the calling of God to individuals of both genders. As we move this matter forward and begin to consider new approaches there are lessons for us all to learn from this experience both in terms of history and in terms of presentation.
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!
It was helpful to read the entire letter. It would seem to me that since unions and conferences do have constituencies, they also have the authority to change their policies if their constituencies agree - is this correct? Although this will slow progress, it also offers a great hope for future progress - and I don't think anyone was expecting progress before the next GC, were they?
Great clarification. As Carol has noted, this is a clear message to conferences, missions and unions that they are empowered to make their own decisions.
Take up the challenge folks!
This is exactly what ONE in Christ is doing in starting with the SECC. Visit http://one-in-christ.com, sign the petition, and share it widely.
Someone who knows, please clarify whether other Divisions are considered to have their own constituencies while the NAD shares w/ the GC?
____________________________________________________
"be reverent in behavior, not slanderers nor enslaved to much wine, teachers of that which is good" titus 2:3
Im gald to see our Church, finally bringing this issue to light, now if we can deal with workplace bullying inside the church, esp one of our universities in southern california. Interesting to see support for progressive thinking in southern california, yet we are ignoring a fundamental issues of how we treat one another.
As a side note altho in the past i do disagree with Warren, I do support the http://www.one-in-christ.com/
campaign, Please Sign it as i have.
__________________________________________________________
Former Adventist & Black sheep
There is an important lesson here...
general conference
- have a constituency meeting
---- which is largely manipulated by the leadership
- get money from the divisions
- I don't know how much hire-and-fire power the president has
division
- don't have a constituency meeting
- get money from the unions
- controlled by the GC
union
- don't have a constituency meeting
- get money from the conferences
- controlled by the division, whose is controlled by the GC
conference
- most of the power is in the constituency meeting
---- which is largely manipulated by the leadership
- income comes from the congregations
- owns the church buildings
- employs the pastors
congregation
- fully controlled by the members
- don't pay the pastor or own the building
- send most of their money up the tree
It is time for the individual conference constituency meetings to start ignoring the directives from the suits at the top, and start following the wishes of their God-lead individual Christian members. All levels above them are controlled by the career white male suits.
The only power the conferences have over the union and up is STOP SENDING THEM MONEY. It is now clear that the Div and the Union leadership is controlled by the GC and not by the conferences.
The constituency meetings are within their rights to direct their conference leaders to stop sending money up the tree. The leaders and pastors serve at the will of, and follow the instructions of, the constituents, not at the will of the Union and up.
The Conferences can do this. They are basically legally autonomous units that hold the their portion of the assets and income of the denomination under their own control.
/Bevin
The conferences are autonomous? Where I live , the Union president has a stranglehold on the conference sessions and often gets what he wants. That's how it's been over the last 2 decades no matter who is the boss.
There is the theory and the practise....
Most of the laity want to get fleeced. They want to be told what to do by the priests, bishops, and popes.
This bottom-line is why the SDA have changed from 1990, when being a thinking SDA was acceptable, to today when it is not. The arrival of large numbers of laity who want to be fleeced, and their selection of and support for the leaders who fleece them.
/Bevin
I also have noticed that thinking is generally not appreciated in the church since the early 80s
The split of influence between local congregations and the four hierarchy levels above them is one reason why so many of the Adventists I talk to pat me on the head and tell me not to worry about "the politics" in the church.
I think this apathy about the hierarchy is a deep mistake. Local participation may be the only legitimate avenue for contributing to an Adventism that resists movement at a structural and value level, but clearly isn't the only piece of the puzzle. The North American Division's experience here shows that.
I read Dan Jackson's letter as saying in essence: "Sorry folks... we've shown over three years that we believe X and we're going to try doing X-like things in the future... but the lawyers are saying we can't actually go ahead and do X because we're hamstrung by our structure."
So the division submits to the structure above it at cost to its delegates' commitments and values and to the 2.6% of current ministers who it will not affirm in policy as well as in quiet practice. It's nice to know this, so I appreciate the letter's transparency.
It does all leave me with the sense that the current structure is hardening rather than softening as some have suggested in the past.
How sadly irrelevant and small our denomination will become if we continue to demean women and maintain segregated conferences. How can we claim to be led by Jesus when we blatantly promote a structure that dismisses His counsel?
I commend Elder Jackson for the tone and content this letter. I also applaud him for the candor with which he reports that a careful professional analysis has established that in some of its recent actions the North American Division probably tresspassed the boundaries of its legal and organizational jurisdiction.
Yet in the end of the day the question is not whether the NAD had a legal and administrative right to do what it did but whether it had an ethical and spiritual duty to do so.
Legal and administrative right or ethical and spiritual duty: This is the question.
We all agree that some laws and administrative norms violate God's will and basic human decency so seriously and irremediably that honorable people must openly disobey them and accept the consequences.
This is why I have suggested that, if the overriding majority of the constituencies of any Local Conference and Union Conference weighs current denominational policies about women in the balances and finds them ethically wanting, they should prayerfully and courageously move forward in harmony with their convictions no matter what the General Conference and its Divisions say or do.
After an initial flury of words and actions in which some people will be hurt, things will settle down. Many will be surprised by how swiftly things return to normal. What alternative is there?
Two important implications flow from this. The first is that denominatlonal leaders must remind themselves that attempts to settling such matters by administrative power more than by precept and example do not succeed in the long run. Second, those who seek change must focus on the laity and clergy in Local Conferenes and Union Confereneces. This is where such decisions are supposed to be made in our system of church governace and this is where positive change might have a chance.
We can hope that the Committees studying the matter in each Division at Elder Wilson's request will return with reports in the Fall of 2014 that will lead to positive changes in the 2015 General Conference sessions. This hope must be made realistic by the reminder that each time the full General Conference has addressed this issue positive change has not been the result.
David,
can you clarify whether the Unions are legally subject to the Division, or are they legally subject to the Conferences?
/Bevin
I disagreed with Dave Larson a year ago. I still had hope. Now I agree with him. There is no other way than to do right. People will adapt. And those who won't can still reject women as pastors if they must.
Tim,
There is a third way!!.That is to do away with both 'ordination'and 'commissioning.'People may still be set aside for their particular role whether administrator, resource specialist, local pastor, institutional head, deacon or elder, or professor to name a few of the categories. Obviously, only those with experience and training would be designated marriage celebrants or creators of local churches.
I was intrigued that in a report contained in the South Pacific Record re the timetable for the Study of the Practice of Ordination. This report by the SPD Field Secretary and BRI person specifically mentioned the anomoly created when we have a three tier ordination of elders, deacons and pastors.
Elders and deacons are ordained at the beginning of their career, pastors when they have proved themselves.
And yes! In this system, recommended above, the local field would make the decisions - all of them. So that women would not be selected in some parts of the world.
For approximately 150 years the SdA Church has practiced and codified racism, sexism, and bigotry.
It has grown numerically and economically.
Until it decreases numerically and economically where is the incentive to change?
@ Peter Marks.
Yes, there is a third way.
But the reality is that the answer will always be No Way to the third way or any other way. That's what's been happening for at least sixteen years.
Best regards.
-- Tim
Blessings to you Tim. Say hi to my mono-zygotic sibling.
As I read the comments above I noticed that most of the participants swapped off humility and waiting for God's timing for some sort of aggressive activity that suggested retribution in some fashion. The suggestion to withhold financial support, the suggestion to do it my way or the highway, the third option of doing away with ordination and others. Those comments each seemed to suggest that those involved have been injured and therefore justification of this injury needs to be addressed in some manner.
Whether justification is needed or required is beyond me, however the single thread that ties most of these comments together is the detail of self interest!
From experience I have learned that has we go forward hanging onto the hem of Jesus' robe, the perplexing details of items like ordination, which sex ministers to what clientele, what church leader is not a godly steward or which neighbor is a bigot all fall into the background as we each become more like Jesus, and exhibit the fruits of the spirit noted in Galatians 5:22. Items like love, joy, long-suffering, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control! As I recollect the main theme of the Bible is that we love God because He loved us first 1John 4:8,19. Perhaps it is time to share God's love and let God handle the details and settle the unrest.
I remember a very applicable quote--or a thought based on common sense that provides a personal message to each of us. As i recollect it goes something like this; Most if not all arguments could be settled in less than 5 minutes if selfishness, greed and self interest were set aside.
From the comments above, it certainly appears that there is a controversy that is generating a general outlook that could be interpreted as "ANTI-FRUITFULNESS OF THE SPIRIT".
This ANTI-SPIRIT stuff is an offensive maneuver by the enemy satan to take our minds off the major campaign goals that each of us face as a team that is working, striving, endeavoring, and campaigning to recruit those around us to join the winning side with Jesus and to be "over comers" that will share eternity in God's kingdom and with each other. (Rev 3:21)
RLJ - Fri, 02/10/2012 - 07:57
As I read the comments above I noticed that most of the participants swapped off humility and waiting for God's timing for some sort of aggressive activity that suggested retribution in some fashion. The suggestion to withhold financial support, the suggestion to do it my way or the highway, the third option of doing away with ordination and others. Those comments each seemed to suggest that those involved have been injured and therefore justification of this injury needs to be addressed in some manner.
****************************
Hello RLJ,
In focusing on Pastor Dan Jackson's letter of which these comments are about, are you in agreement with the way the letter was worded? Where do you agree or disagree with what Pastor Jackson wrote?
Cheers,
Mike
as far as I know the priciple applies for all divisions which are all part of the GC.
RLJ,
My suggestion that Adventists take the third way ie. not status quo, not WO but a desisting in the use of the "O" word or the "C" word is designed to do two things.
1. To bypass the fruitless discussion of WO, both pro and con.
2. To focus on a spiritual gift model of ministry, which will ideally sweep away any hierarchy, real or imagined among Adventists.
Those who know me, understand that I am a conservative soul, who is not averse to intelligient discussion as long as it advances the Cause. (The current discussion about WO, has for the most part produced more heat than light).
RLJ
Claiming that "the way it is, is the way God intends it to be" is a standard self-serving defense mechanism of the white guys in suits that have taken over any organization - be it a dictator in a country, the pope at the head of the RC denomination, or the GC country club at SilverSpring.
God clearly intended local congregations to be largely self-sufficient, with lots of local variation. That is the church that was set up in the NT. The addition of layers of hierarchy on top and career paths was a later purely human addition.
/Bevin
Thank You each for your returns. It appears that each of you put your own spin and ideas into the meaning of what I presented, regarding the fruit of the Spirit...
In my travels..and I travel frequently, local as well as internationally it seems that we have various personalities that get in the way of solutions.
The conflict that is documented above is certainly representative of the various participants personalities, personal agenda's and in many instances has deteriorated to viciousness based on various reasons that most likely has to do with the mistreatment of some sort that has been received or perceive to have been dished out by some person or entity that is in control.
As I read 2Cor 3:18--the thought is presented that has we become closer to Jesus, we project his image and reflect his goodness. Then my mind's eye jumps to that evening event when the Paraphrases took and innocent Jesus and put him on trial basically because he did not agree with their terms of religion. As an innocent he was mistreated--yet because of that treatment the human race was saved.
I wonder how many people that are observing the hate and discontent that is being advertised above have the same thought as noted in Romans 2:24 that reads "Because of you, they Blaspheme Me.
Perhaps the bit of adversity as noted above will have consequences of the opposite effect?
I really do not need a return...the written notices above are enough proof of the answer!