. However the guidelines that Mrs. White proposed for this education was never implemented (at least not on a large scale; things like hiring men and women as ministerial teams with both the men and women getting paid etc.

Apperently Mrs. White started paying some of her tithe to women in ministry and to try to get this going) but it never took off, we lost sight of it until other churches started to do this and now people are saying that we are trying to just be like the other churches and that is wrong.

Good questions. Was she the spiritual leader of her own home?

Did she baptize anyone? Did she pastor any church? Did she perform any wedding ceremony?

Did she baptize anyone? Did she pastor any church? Did she perform any wedding ceremony?

It has been asked if any of these women became local pastors of local congregations. No. In the early days of our denomination the ordained milnisters were not local pastors. They like James White evangelized, raised up congregations and left them in the care of local leaders who were not what we would call ordained ministers. These ordained ministgers also conducted the work of the developing denomination.

So these two tell us:
1) EGW with her husband filled a general pastoral role.
2) EGW With her husband filled the role of developing a newly established congregation.
3) EGW took a leadership role in providing the sacrament of Communion to a congregation.

Did she baptize anyone? Did she pastor any church? Did she perform any wedding ceremony?

Hiring women, whether single or married, to act as head pastors... Neither was her support of the ordaining of women to the gospel "ministry" her way of doing her part to do away with the "curse" of Gen.3.

Well - she told her husband to back off when she felt the need:

"I feel sorry for you and feel deep sympathy for you in your
affliction. I mean to help you what I can, but don't let the enemy make you think only of my deficiencies which are, you think, so apparent, for in trying to fix me over, you may destroy my usefulness, my freedom, and bring me into a position of restraint, or embarrassment, that will unfit me for the work of God." {2BIO 431.3}

We women must remember that God has placed us subject to the husband. He is the head and our judgment and views and reasonings must agree with his if possible. If not, the preference in God’s Word is given to the husband where it is not a matter of conscience. We must yield to the head.—Letter 5, 1861. {2BIO 431.5}

Did Jesus?

And Ellen White pastored the whole church.

I guess I'm not understanding why that has any relevancy to anything, for one thing...and why anyone should get more money because they baptize and marry others.

What scriptural evidence do you have for your statement re Gen 3?

... Senior pastor,

Neither was her support of the ordaining of women to the gospel "ministry" her way of doing her part to do away with the "curse" of Gen.3.

What scriptural evidence do you have for your statement re Gen 3?

My statement was in regards to the assertion often made by WO advocates that one of the consequences of the gospel was to put an end to the "curse" of God... Me no comprende the question.

Did Jesus?

And Ellen White pastored the whole church.

I guess I'm not understanding why that has any relevancy to anything, for one thing...and why anyone should get more money because they baptize and marry others.

Ordination, or being a Pastor is not about "more money" or "equal" rights.

You have twisted it into a straw man argument. Few, if any, are approaching this as a legal issue, because it is not. And certainly in context of the immediate topic question, it is way off topic.

And it is also not about money now. Female pastors and male pastors with equal years of experience and in the same cost of living area are paid the same. And generally a senior pastor is paid very little more than an associate pastor. The church pay scale is quite flat so that even the conference president is paid only slightly more than the church pastors.

However, in EGW's day there was a pay difference between ordained pastors and unordained licensed pastors. And women were paid less, if at all, for the same work. That is why she rather bluntly told the Church leaders that unequal treatment of the women in ministry was wrong, not legally, but morally wrong.

And that is the framing of the inequality issue, not as a legal issue, but what is morally right.

And no, Woody, an ordained pastor and a commissioned pastor are not paid differently in NAD.

Actually it wasn't. Seriously, the tax issue was resolve long before things started heating up in the Pacific Union. I know, because as tax counsel I resolved the tax status of the unordained/commissioned female pastors back in the 80's. Quite frankly, it was only the ignorant and confused that kept raising that issue years later as somehow a reason something else needed to be done.

And the equality of pay issue for women generally was resolved by the Merikay/Pacific Press case.

You have twisted it into a straw man argument. Few, if any, are approaching this as a legal issue, because it is not. And certainly in context of the immediate topic question, it is way off topic.

And it is also not about money now. Female pastors and male pastors with equal years of experience and in the same cost of living area are paid the same. And generally a senior pastor is paid very little more than an associate pastor. The church pay scale is quite flat so that even the conference president is paid only slightly more than the church pastors.

However, in EGW's day there was a pay difference between ordained pastors and unordained licensed pastors. And women were paid less, if at all, for the same work. That is why she rather bluntly told the Church leaders that unequal treatment of the women in ministry was wrong, not legally, but morally wrong.

And that is the framing of the inequality issue, not as a legal issue, but what is morally right.

Even more interesting is 2 paragraphs later:

We women must remember that God has placed us subject to the husband. He is the head and our judgment and views and reasonings must agree with his if possible. If not, the preference in God’s Word is given to the husband where it is not a matter of conscience. We must yield to the head.—Letter 5, 1861. {2BIO 431.5}

I wish in all sisterly and motherly kindness to kindly warn you upon another point. I have often noticed before others a manner you have in speaking to John in rather a dictating manner, the tone of your voice sounding impatient. Mary, others notice this and have spoken of it to me. It hurts your influence. {6MR 126.2}

We women must remember that God has placed us subject to the husband. He is the head and our judgment and views and reasonings must agree with his if possible. If not, the preference in God’s Word is given to the husband where it is not a matter of conscience. We must yield to the head. I have said more perhaps upon this point than necessary. Please watch this point. {6MR 126.3}

I am not reproving you, remember, but merely cautioning you. Never talk to John as though he were a little boy. You reverence him and others will take an elevated position, Mary, and you will elevate others. {6MR 126.4}