Pacific Union Info on WO...

[Tom Wetmore]

On July 9, 2016 at 0:23 PM, Rossw said:

So, the church did err at that time and required the guidance of EGW? There is a difference between understanding the church's history and learning from the good and bad from it or just picking and choosing church history to set precedence to support an argument. 

In my readings of the church's historical evidence on WO there is more to the scenarios then is what is presented here. This leads me to believe the historical evidence is continually used in a dishonest way.

You are misunderstanding or twisting what I said and missing the point. I did not say that on this issue that EGW gave corrective guidance to the very point in question. Very much to the contrary, there is really no evidence that she said or wrote anything to discourage women from full ministry, including preaching, teaching and pastoral ministry. Her own life and over 10,000 worth of sermons preached rather pointedly confirms her own position that a woman could and should be able to "stand in the sacred desk" and preach. There were historical accounts of her being opposed from doing so before she stood up to preach. Church leaders addressed the concerns raised, which included many of the same Biblical objections  to women in ministry we keep hearing and seeing right here. After that, EGW got up and preached. And then there is her own acceptance of the ordained minister credentials, year after year for over 30 years, without a word of objection from her.  The evidence is very much on the side of her support for women in ministry.  If she was the messenger of the Lord as we believe, where is the clear and unequivocal word from her condemning any of the historical evidence of women fully participating in the preaching, teaching and pastoral ministry, and leadership within the Church during her lifetime?  Crickets chirping...  

[Rossw]

We shouldnt confuse the issue of women prophesying in Acts 2 and the order set for us in 1 Timothy. The 2 writings are not contradictory nor the same.

[Rossw]

4 hours ago, Tom Wetmore said:

 If she was the messenger of the Lord as we believe, where is the clear and unequivocal word from her condemning any of the historical evidence of women fully participating in the preaching, teaching and pastoral ministry, and leadership within the Church during her lifetime?  Crickets chirping...  

She would not condemn the writing of Acts 2 but there is a distinction from eldership. She set the example by never being ordained. Having credentials from a denomination is purely administrative. Our church administration has its own authority to do as they wish but is not necessarily always doing the will of God. 

She did speak on the man being the head of the house mirroring 1 Timothy. By implication it eliminates female ordination. 

How many of the contemporary women were ordained?

[Robert]

Just one question:  Is ordination a salvation issue?  

 

[Rossw]

15 minutes ago, Robert said:

Just one question:  Is ordination a salvation issue?  

 

On the surface no but is it important for the church to be obedient to the precepts of God? The deeper matter is who's truth do we prefer, ours or God's?

[Robert]

I would say it depends on the motive. Why does any male or female want to become a pastor?  Is it to be "the greatest" or "slave of all"?

 

 

[Rossw]

11 minutes ago, Robert said:

I would say it depends on the motive. Why does any male or female want to become a pastor?  Is it to be "the greatest" or "slave of all"?

 

 

The unanswerable question is how many are truly called to ministry?

[Robert]

2 minutes ago, Rossw said:

The unanswerable question is how many are truly called to ministry?

I don't know, but I can tell you this if they are not preaching the gospel nothing else really matters.... See Gal 1:6-10

[Kevin H]

Mrs. White said that God had ordained her. The church just recognized the fact that God ordained her. Since she was ordained the church felt free to give her ordination papers. You talk about how she did not have the laying on of hands, but sitting at a Rabbi's feet in Jesus' day had the same meaning as the laying on of hands would later have...

[Tom Wetmore]

On May 29, 2015 at 3:07 PM, Tom Wetmore said:

EGW on Women Ministers

Posted on 03/18/2015 by CEO

“It is not always men who are best adapted to the successful management of a church.” (Pastoral Ministry, p. 36).

“It is the accompaniment of the Holy Spirit of God that prepares workers, both men and women, to become pastors to the flock of God.” (Testimonies for the Church, Vol. 6, p. 322).

“There are women who should labor in the gospel ministry.” (Manuscript 43a, 1898) 

“The refining, softening influence of Christian women is needed in the great work of preaching the truth.” (Review and Herald, Jan. 2, 1879).

“When God created Eve, He designed that she should possess neither inferiority nor superiority to the man, but that in all things she should be his equal.” (Testimonies, 3:484)

“When God specially calls your wife to the work of teaching the truth, … God may give you both, as possessing an equal interest in and devotion to the work, equal qualifications to act a prominent part in the most solemn work of saving souls.” (Testimonies for the Church, 1:710)

“Young men and young women who should be engaged in the ministry, in Bible work, and in the canvassing work should not be bound down to mechanical employment. … Some will be trained to enter the field as missionary nurses, some as canvassers, and some as gospel ministers.” (Testimonies for the Church, 8:229-230)

“Christ, not the minister, is the head of the church.” (The Signs of the Times, Jan. 27, 1890)

“If men and women would act as the Lord’s helping hand, … the glory of the Lord would be their rearguard… Of those who act as His helping hand the Lord says, ‘Ye shall be named priests of the Lord; men shall call you the ministers of our God.’” (Manuscript of Jan. 17, 1901)

“Make no mistake in neglecting to correct the error of giving ministers less [salary] than they should receive…. The tithe should go to those who labor in word and doctrine, be they men or women.” (M.R. 1:263)

““I [Sister White] ask not permission to take the desk [pulpit] in the tabernacle. I take it as my rightful position accorded me of God.” (Manuscript 30, June 1889)

“Study the Scriptures for further light on this point [women in ministry]. Women were among Christ’s devoted followers in the days of His ministry, and Paul makes mention of certain women who were helpers together with him in the gospel (see Phil. 4:2-3)” (Letter 142, 1909; Manuscript Releases, Vol. 12, pp. 166-167).

“We cannot then take a position that the unity of the church consists in viewing every text of Scripture in the very same light.” (Manuscript Releases, Vol. 11, p. 266). Rather, “The secret of unity is … equality of believers in Christ.” (1 Selected Messages 259)

 

[Tom Wetmore]

On July 9, 2016 at 5:48 PM, Rossw said:

She would not condemn the writing of Acts 2 but there is a distinction from eldership. She set the example by never being ordained. Having credentials from a denomination is purely administrative. Our church administration has its own authority to do as they wish but is not necessarily always doing the will of God. 

She did speak on the man being the head of the house mirroring 1 Timothy. By implication it eliminates female ordination. 

How many of the contemporary women were ordained?

We have covered this repeatedly already.  Quite a few times actually.  At least please go back and read the previous discussion you have been a part of since you joined us. Better still spend some serious quality time reading the many helpful discussions on WO that we have right here. But best move for you at this time would be to spend some serious quality time on the many resources in the pinned and locked topics at the top of the topic menu in this sub forum devoted to WO.  Then let's talk. 

EGW was ordained.  She herself said God had ordained her  at the begining of her ministry.  By the time the GC past the 1881 resolution and shortly thereafter began issuing her ordained minister credentials, pretty much everyone was very familiar with her calling and ministry.  The early Church leaders were quite pragmatic and not prone to ritualistic  religious practices. Since ordination is at its most fundamental level the official recognition by the Church of a person's gifts and calling, the issuance of credentials was sufficiently just that. The credential is self authenticating evidence to the facts it presents on its face. A ritualistic ceremony by men would have been unnecessarily redundant and superfluous.  

[Tom Wetmore]

@Rossw carefully read through the collection of EGW quotes I just posted. (It was taken from one of the helpful sources I just referred you to.).  Please note the very first one.  The management of the local church is a primary function of elders.  The rest of the passage from which that sentence was taken clearly states that in her view there were women very capable of fulfilling that role of managing the local church.  

 

[Rossw]

Let's read the whole quote in context.

Quote

Piety and devotion are what count—It is not always men who are best adapted to the successful management of a church. If faithful women have more deep piety and true devotion than men, they could indeed by their prayers and their labors do more than men who are unconsecrated in heart and in life.—Manuscript Releases 19:56.

Yes, I agree with the statement but not taken out of context. Yes the gospel should be propagated in any circumstances but there is a caveat in EGW's statement... "do more than men who are unconsecrated in heart and in life." Women WOULD do a better job if the men are unconsecrated in heart and in life but is that always the case or even the ideal?

Is it the practice of the pro-WO to continually lift quotes out of context?

I'm certain these topics have gone on with a fine tooth comb long before I've gotten here but maybe I want my questions answered directly. The same muddled answers keep coming out though. The question has not been whether women have a part in ministry but whether they have a part in leadership. The pro-WO continues to answer the question in a straw-man manufactured way. They continue to answer the question of whether women have a role in ministry but that isn't what is being asked. The question is always the Biblical role of women in leadership. 

This quote spoke directly to me, by the way...

Quote

Those with incorrigible, unbending, stubborn traits of character, when transformed, make the most valuable ministers—Ministers have been presented to me, with their course of action and their character before they were converted—the hardest and most incorrigible, the most unbending, the most stubborn—and yet, every one of these traits of character was what they needed in the work of God. We don't want to kill that. It is needed in order to fill important positions of trust in the cause of God. There must be a transformation of character. The leaven must work in the human heart, until every action is in conformity to the will of God, and they are sanctified; then they become the most valuable. It is this very kind of individuals that God can use in the different branches of His work.—Manuscript Releases 9:61.

Notice also White mentions "different branches of His work".

 

 

[Tom Wetmore]

Missing the point...   

The point is that EGW affirmed that women can manage the church, which is a function of being an elder, and leader for that matter.  

As for your supposed ( you were the one that said "maybe") desire to have your questions answered directly, If you are unwilling to do the simple thing I suggested of checking the resources  for yourself where those answers are, then I am a bit skeptical of whether you genuinely are seeking answers as much as you are seeking an argument and an opportunity to spread your own POV of doubts about, and opposition to women in ministry and WO.  This has been confirmed by your responses to the article and my repeated answers to your questions about Phoebe, one of the clearest and most convincing Biblical examples of a woman in ministry and leadership appointed by Paul himself to lead and guide the Roman believers.  

It just seems to me that a person truly  desiring to find answers and genuinely desiring to learn would welcome and embrace the readily available resources  offered that have those answers.  The information is there easily and readily available if you really are interested in learning and understanding why we support women in ministry and leadership. 

[Gregory Matthews]

Rossw, as I understand your response to Tom, you agree that EGW says that there are times when women could do a better job of managing a congregation, which contained men, than could the available men.

Is this your position?

I may have been wrong, as I thought that those opposed  to female ordination generally believed that women should never have leadership in a congregation that was expected to contain males.

As a former congregational pastor, I have seen many SDA congregations that were largely made up of females and of which did not have males who were best qualified to serve in that role, but did have   women who were qualified.

There can be many reasons why a congregation may not have qualified males--age, illness, the ability to read, write and speak English in an English speaking congregation. Should a congregation elect a brand new Adventist. to such a leadership position?  I know of a congregation who in an attempt to provide male leadership placed a man in the position of Head Elder on the day of his baptism. 

You would probably say that EGWs use of the word "piety" would exclude a man who had fathered a child within the congregation to a woman to whom he was not married.  O.K. but what about the aged man who has dementia?

Rossw, this morning I attended a congregation that has six (6) people, men and women (4 males & 2 females), on their pastoral staff.  But, even in the United States, there are many SDA congregations who do not have that luxury.  They may be female run due to the fact that there are no available males who are  qualified to take leadership within the congregation.  In addition to the pastoral staff,  there are four (4) people, two men and two women who manage the affairs of the congregation and its property.  In addition to these there are six (6) senior officers in the life of the congregation, three (3) males and three (3) females.  A number of these women (out of the total number) serve in  positions that require ordination.

I am thinking right now of a SDA congregation that does not elect any person to the position of Deaconess.  This congregation only elects Deacons and they elect a male and a female as Co-head Deacon.  All Deacons are ordained, both male and  female.

Well, this is a bit off of the subject matter.

But, the bottom line is that we have many small congregations in the U.S. that do not have the luxury of being led by a competent male and although they have males in the congregation they must be led by a female.

 

 

[Rossw]

17 minutes ago, Tom Wetmore said:

Missing the point...   

The point is that EGW affirmed that women can manage the church, which is a function of being an elder, and leader for that matter.  

You repeatedly keep saying I miss the point but I of course disagree. The quote was obviously misrepresented in assuming in all situations women should be ordained but that was not what the quote said. 

 

20 minutes ago, Tom Wetmore said:

As for your supposed ( you were the one that said "maybe") desire to have your questions answered directly, If you are unwilling to do the simple thing I suggested of checking the resources  for yourself where those answers are, then I am a bit skeptical of whether you genuinely are seeking answers as much as you are seeking an argument and an opportunity to spread your own POV of doubts about, and opposition to women in ministry and WO.  This has been confirmed by your responses to the article and my repeated answers to your questions about Phoebe, one of the clearest and most convincing Biblical examples of a woman in ministry and leadership appointed by Paul himself to lead and guide the Roman believers.

I am a pragmatic guy but Scripture says what it says and I must believe it. My position is supported by both Acts 2 and 2 Timothy whereas I don't believe you can make the resolution between the two. 

As far as Romans 16:2, it is an interesting topic and I am looking deeper into it and reading more on the Greek. The many forms and roots of prostatis cause the argument to not be so cut and dry. Benefactor seems to be a very good translation to English. But anyway... it takes time to study the Greek roots of the word. Especially because of time constraints. If Phoebe is your strongest case for WO then Biblically WO won't hold together.

29 minutes ago, Tom Wetmore said:

It just seems to me that a person truly  desiring to find answers and genuinely desiring to learn would welcome and embrace the readily available resources  offered that have those answers.  The information is there easily and readily available if you really are interested in learning and understanding why we support women in ministry and leadership. 

Iron sharpens iron. Answers don't always come as easily as we'd like them to. Pro-WO of course make compelling arguments but as I am finding out much of the evidence is incomplete and slightly dishonest but, yet, dishonest enough to cause a question on motive.

[Tom Wetmore]

If your bias going into the conversation is that our position is based on dishonestly representing the evidence, than we have nothing further to discuss.  Some basic trust in the honesty and integrity of others is important.

That problem seems evident in regard to the quote you are currently disputing. You are accusing me and others of misrepresenting it to mean something that I clearly never said, ironically misrepresenting what I did say.  Nor did anyone that I am aware of that has brought it up. You indeed have missed the point. 

Given these serious obstacles, I really don't see that continuing a dialog with you will be helpful or time well spent from my perspective.

[Rossw]

25 minutes ago, Gregory Matthews said:

Rossw, as I understand your response to Tom, you agree that EGW says that there are times when women could do a better job of managing a congregation, which contained men, than could the available men.

Is this your position?

Only as far as what EGW outlined in the quote provided. I would not support the failure of a church because of the failure of men but that is not the ideal and not true in most cases.

 

27 minutes ago, Gregory Matthews said:

I may have been wrong, as I thought that those opposed  to female ordination generally believed that women should never have leadership in a congregation that was expected to contain males.

I do not represent all who are anti-WO. But as for the ideal a man should be the head and leader of the church per scripture and the make up of the church mirroring the family per EGW. I have no intention of watering down the ideal set by God though.

 

59 minutes ago, Gregory Matthews said:

There can be many reasons why a congregation may not have qualified males--age, illness, the ability to read, write and speak English in an English speaking congregation. Should a congregation elect a brand new Adventist. to such a leadership position?  I know of a congregation who in an attempt to provide male leadership placed a man in the position of Head Elder on the day of his baptism. 

Either way, a congregation should not make hasty decisions. 

1 hour ago, Gregory Matthews said:

You would probably say that EGWs use of the word "piety" would exclude a man who had fathered a child within the congregation to a woman to whom he was not married.  O.K. but what about the aged man who has dementia?

We are bordering on the absurd. Normally those aren't our only 2 options.

 

[Rossw]

Greg, to clarify my position, I still do not believe a woman should stay in the leadership position and not be ordained and when a properly suitable male is available should replace the woman.

[Green Cochoa]

16 hours ago, Tom Wetmore said:

there is really no evidence that she said or wrote anything to discourage women from full ministry, including preaching, teaching and pastoral ministry

From Mrs. White's perspective, that statement may be partly true.  From YOUR perspective, that statement is simply false.  Mrs. White never once encouraged women to work in the lines of ordained gospel ministry, and, in fact, wrote much that might discourage anyone from thinking she supported such.  For example:

I do not recommend that woman should seek to become a voter or an office holder; but as a missionary, teaching the truth by epistolary correspondence, distributing tracts and soliciting subscribers for periodicals containing the solemn truth for this time, she may do very much.--Review and Herald, Dec. 19, 1878.  {ChS 28.4} 

Mrs. White differentiated between the work of church pastors and that of a missionary.  All were called to the latter.

[Green Cochoa]

14 hours ago, Robert said:

I would say it depends on the motive. Why does any male or female want to become a pastor?  Is it to be "the greatest" or "slave of all"?

 

I would agree that motive is very important.  However, in this particular case, motive cannot be trusted to guide us.  Consider David.  His heart was pure in its devotion to God as he desired to build the temple.  God did not accept merely his motive, however.  King Saul may have excused himself for offering sacrifice based on his motives too--but God did not see things as he did.

[Robert]

You can do the right thing for the wrong motive.  That's called self-righteousness.

You can do the wrong thing for the right motive.  Since God looks at the heart motive is everything.

 

[Robert]

Just now, Robert said:

You can do the right thing for the wrong motive.  That's called self-righteousness.

You can do the wrong thing for the right motive.  Since God looks at the heart motive is everything.

 

Not to get off the subject, but let me give an example:

1. You can have a person keeping the 7th-day Sabbath in order to be saved.  That person is keeping the right day, for the wrong motive.

2. On the other hand you can have another person keeping Sunday because they are resting in Christ's finished work.  They are keeping the wrong day, but for the right motive.

Who will be condemned in the judgment?

Person # 1

[Green Cochoa]

13 hours ago, Kevin H said:

Mrs. White said that God had ordained her. The church just recognized the fact that God ordained her. Since she was ordained the church felt free to give her ordination papers. You talk about how she did not have the laying on of hands, but sitting at a Rabbi's feet in Jesus' day had the same meaning as the laying on of hands would later have...

You, like many others, appear to remain willfully ignorant of the fact that there are three positions to which God has ordained people.  Of the three, for only two has God given us criteria for ordaining them ourselves.  No criteria are provided in the Bible for ordaining prophets--because we are not to do so.  Therefore, it should be clear to all that these three positions differ in fundamental ways, and, particularly the post of a prophet or prophetess, cannot be equated with each other as of equal "ordinations."

13 hours ago, Tom Wetmore said:

“It is not always men who are best adapted to the successful management of a church.” (Pastoral Ministry, p. 36).

 

This statement is given without qualifications; however, I can think of some circumstances where this would certainly be true.  One is that of a church composed entirely of women and children.  In such a case, a male pastor might truly be out of place.

12 hours ago, Tom Wetmore said:

@Rossw carefully read through the collection of EGW quotes I just posted. (It was taken from one of the helpful sources I just referred you to.).  Please note the very first one.  The management of the local church is a primary function of elders.  The rest of the passage from which that sentence was taken clearly states that in her view there were women very capable of fulfilling that role of managing the local church.  

 

I did that for you.

[Gregory Matthews]

Roosw said below:

I disagree with you.  No, I was not limiting my comment to a man who had fathered a child out of wedlock, and a man with dementia.  I was just illustrating my point that in  many of our small congregations there may, as I said earlier,  no male available who could be considered qualified and/or women were available who were better qualified.

Every example that I gave came from personal knowledge that I have/had.

If you think that I was being absurd, you simply are not aware of the issues that are faced in many small congregations here in the U.S.

 

We are bordering on the absurd. Normally those aren't our only 2 options.