SooutheasternCalifornia elects female Conference President.

[olger]

Green is right, Greg. Sligo ordained some women (Kendra was one) in 1995 in raw defiance of the Utrecht GC session decision. And it wasn't as elders.

G

[Green Cochoa]

Green, I do not take my source of authority in this matter from a newspaper.

A local congregation, whether it is Sligo, Loma Linda or Pennington Gap cannot do what it is not authorized to do. It can only do what it is allowed to do. The fact that it may want to do something does not mean that it can.

The local congregation only has the authority to ordain local elders.

The local conference can only recommend to the Union who should be ordained as clergy.

It is the Union that decides who to ordain as clergy. It could be argued that a Union had ordained a female as clergy, as has recently been done in South Eastern California.

But, any statement, from you or anyone else, to the effect that a local congregation has ordained someone as clergy, male or female, is simply false in modern times.

NOTE: Yes back in the formative days of our denomination local congregations did ordain clergy. They no longer have that authority.

I am not twisting the facts.

Gregory,

Apparently you would easily accept the fact that no woman, including Mrs. White, has ever been ordained in the Adventist church.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

[Gregory Matthews]

No woman, in the past, including Ellen White, has ever been ordained to a clergy position in the SDA Church by the laying on of hands.

We have ordained women to the position of local Elder.

My positon on EGW is well known and you likely know what it is. So, I do not have a need to further state it here.

A recent action by the Pacific Union related to the current President of the SECC is a first for the Denomination.

[Gregory Matthews]

Quote:

Green is right, Greg. Sligo ordained some women (Kendra was one) in 1995 in raw defiance of the Utrecht GC session decision. And it wasn't as elders.

You miss my pont. The local congregation does not have the authority to ordain to a clergy position. They can only ordain as local elders.

Let me illustrate: As a Federal chaplain, I am required to be endorsed by the SDA Church. If I lose that endorsement, my employment is terminated.

Adventist Chaplaincy Ministries in the only part of the SDA Church that has the authority to endorse me. The local congregation does not have that authority. It cannot endorse me. I can submit to the government a letter from the local congregation saying that they endorse me. In fact, I can submit a signed Federal form stating that they endorse me. If I do that, the Federal government will reject it as only ACM has the authority to endorse me. Only it can do so.

Sligo can call an ordination service whatever they want to call it. They can say that it is an ordination to clergy status if they want. But, as long as they remain a SDA Church their service remains only an ordination to a local Elder because within the SDA denomination that is the only authority that Sligo has.

If Sligo were to leave the SDA Church and become independent, they could do whatever they want. But, under such they would not be ordaining to SDA Clergy as they would have left the denomination.

This is the reason that Sligo was not disciplined. What they actually did was within their authority.

[Green Cochoa]

Gregory,

You appear to be trying to say two opposing things at once.

The local congregation does not have the authority to ordain to a clergy position.

[ClubV12]

What is lawful is not always moral. There is a higher law.

Sligo certainly violated a number of moral laws with their act of defiance toward authority. Then pointing to the law, declared it was lawful to eat that chicken egg the chicken laid on the Sabbath day.

SECC and NAD are in the same boat. Pointing to the letter of the law to sustain their defiance while willfully remaining in ignorance of the higher demands of the law.

As long as I go to Church every Sabbath, keep all the commandments perfectly, salvation is mine? If so, let me grasp it with greedy fingers and demand God honor my works.

[Gregory Matthews]

Green: Sligo can call it whatever they want. The can call it the consecration of a Bishop, if they want. But, the SDA Chruch does not officially have Bishops. Their authority to ordain was limited to that of local Elder, regardless of what they called it.

Yes, I am aware of a well-known SDA who took the title of Biship and was known by that title. Him calling himself a Bishop did not make him a SDA Bishop. The SDA Church does not have Bishops.

If you want to know more about this SDA pastor who took the title of Bishop you may see:

http://www.americanreligious.org/tele-cast/telecast-history-and-information

Also Pacific Press in 1981 published a book about him. You may (?) find it on Amazon.

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

Lots of churches will ordain someone as a "pastor" and a conference will recognize them as such, but only associated with a specific church. I know of a number of such "associate" pastors ...

[Johann]

I recall his films shown on TV. Our teacher told us, as far as I remember, that he used his own name which happened to be Bishop. The series was called Religious Town Hall and dealt with Religious Liberty. I think the name was Bishop Leiski (sp. ?)

[Johann]

Lots of churches will ordain someone as a "pastor" and a conference will recognize them as such, but only associated with a specific church. I know of a number of such "associate" pastors ...

This happened to me too before I was ordained as a pastor. Then I was ordained as a local elder. Back then, about 1959, I needed the authorization to baptize from the conference president. Now that authorization comes with the ordination in many cases.

[Gregory Matthews]

Pam; True. I live one mile from such a SDA Church. They function as a local Elder. Yes, that is how it was done for me prior to my ordination as a minister.

[Gregory Matthews]

Johann: His name was Albert A. Leiske. Bishop was not part of his name. Professionally he usually listed his name as A. A. Leiske. But, his first name was Albert.

The URL that I listed gives the correct spelling of his last name.

He was a well known Adventist. In his time, he was probably the best known Adventist in the United States. Ministry magazine has listed on the Internet a number of articles that he wrote for them.

I know of two books that were written about him, his life and work. One was published by Pacific Press. The other was a non-SDA publication. They are both still listed on the Internet.

[Gregory Matthews]

Green said:

Quote:

Last time I checked, pastors are "clergy."

Well you need to check again.

The SDA Church has many lay people who are rightfully called "pastor." They are called "pastor" because they run the day to day operation of local congregations who do not have a full-time minister in charge of them. They are locally ordained as local Elders. They serve under the direction of ordained ministers who have other congregations under their charge.

This is true for the United States. It has been true for the Conference in which I live in the U.S. It is also true in places where I have lived outside of the U.S.

These people are rightfully called pastor but are not SDA Clergy.

I live one mile from such a SDA Congregation. That individual is rightfully called Pastor. However, he is not listed in SDA publications as clergy because he is not.

They may receive some payments for their work. Or, they may not and may do it all for free.

I am personally know of a situation of a congregation in the U.S. that had very limited contact with their supervising SDA minister. So, the Conference, for a period of one year, provided this lay pastor with an annual salary of $5,000. While this was several years ago, but in recent times. In no way was he considered to be clergy. He was simply a local Elder.

When the year was up, his salary went away as the congregation was not able to provide him with even that amount.

In other situations of which I am personally knowledgeable, a local congregation has been able to provide the lay Elder with something. I know of one at the present, where the local congregation is personally paying (through the Conference) a salary about 2/3 of what a minister would be paid. He is not a SDA Minister.

As I have said, I am also aware of situations where a local Elder (pastor) is working for free.

NOTE: I am not saying that every local Elder is in a situation where they are the de facto pastor.

Green, you simply need to check again.

[olger]

In one the myriad threads discussing the pros and cons of recent events in the SDA Church, I found this post (from someone who strongly favored WO) particularly salient:

"More then thirtyyyyy lonnnnng years we have been asking, begging, pleading for this conversation. And now when we are in the middle of this long awaited conversation we just walk away and do our own thing. That tells me we weren't really interested in having this conversation with our brothers and sisters in Christ, just in having our way. That attitude not women's ordination is what will cause the most offense. We want to be ordained to be Representatives of the meek and lowly Jesus but the taste of this particular action of the California Conferen is neither meek nor lowly. Particularly because as a world church we were in a conversation and We just walked away. There is no good reason why they could not have waited for 2015 and then decided on the next step to take."

[Enabled]

Exactly Olger. Patience, the first thing one needs in Christian growth. Saul didn't have it and he grieved away the Spirit. Long suffering is there also for those who would say 30 years is to long, Moses spent 40 in the wilderness to be ready for another 40 in the wilderness because of the fearful and unbelieving. I for one am tired of waiting in this wilderness, when will we decide that God has a plan, if we will follow his counsel and wait upon him. Equality is a new age gospel, different from the one Paul preached. If this new view of things is spirit led who was speaking through Paul. I change NOT says God, is it not his spirit speaking. My mother did more to prepare me to be an elder than any pastor ever did, as did Mary for Christ. Let us be like Mary,"let it be as you have said".

I have sat under the teaching of some pretty good pastors yet it doesn't negate the higher Value of a mother in Israel.

Quote:

That attitude not women's ordination is what will cause the most offense. We want to be ordained to be Representatives of the meek and lowly Jesus but the taste of this particular action of the California Conferen is neither meek nor lowly.

[olger]

Amen.

g

[Tom Wetmore]

Regarding the misunderstanding about ordinations that took place in the Sligo Church, it should be understood that the General Conference recommendation has been that female pastors be ordained as local elders. That is what was done.

It really is amazing how persistent the misrepresentation of this event has been by those opposed to WO. It is as if no women should be ordained for any purpose whatsoever. And it also seems that there is not distinction made about the various roles to which anyone could be ordained or that someone could possibly have more than one at the same time. (Kind of like EGW being both a prophet and a minister… and a mother and a wife and a sister…)

[olger]

I think we should ordain women.

As mothers.

the G

[phkrause]

Yes, I believe that God has already ordained women as Mothers and men as Fathers. No need for anyone of us to have to "lay on hands" and take that right away from him.

[olger]

Since Sandy Roberts is a zealot of Fuller's version of spiritual formation, does that qualify her as a spiritual leader?

She is also a firm believer in using Lectio Divina to clear and center the mind...

People who got into this stuff and almost lost their souls are telling us that this leads to occult spiritualism. Wouldn't it be wise to heed their warning?

[CoAspen]

Accusations..always, but never proof! What does the Bible say about 'rumor mongering'?

[ClubV12]

The evidence strongly supports Olgers suppositions. The issues are sufficiently serious concerning her background, that it would be foolish to dismiss them out of hand.

Obviously many have done just that, I certainly won't. Your free to believe whatever you want in that regard. I see a "red flag", a "warning", some don't. Some drive right off the cliff ignoring the warning flags. Caution is advised, follow that GPS at your own risk.

[Tom Wetmore]

What evidence? What red flags? What warning flags?

[ClubV12]

Tom, surely your not ignorant of her educational background? Which DOES raise some questions concerning her position on these important issues. As to what exactly her position is, I don't know. But the questions are relevant and I have seen no documents, papers or articles that specifically address them. Why is that? I would like to be assured, as much as possible, that these are not issues worthy of consideration.

The silence is not only deafening, it is a red flag, a warning. It is reasonable to ask: Is something being swept under the rug in this regard?

[Tom Wetmore]

Have you stopped to consider that the reason you have not seen or heard anything in response to these accusations is because they are baseless? Seriously, if all screwy ideas are responded to, one is left with little time for anything else.

What you are saying, based on her graduate study is that a person who studies criminology is learning how to be a criminal. Or that an oncologist is a specialist in spreading cancer. Might you consider that one can give extensive study and analysis to a topic for any number of reasons other than to become a proponent or defender of it?