Annual Council votes

[Gregory Matthews]

A proposal came before the Annual Council to place on the agenda at the next July General Conference a proposal to allow the Divisions to decide whether or not women  should be ordained in their area.

 

243  voted to place that proposal on the agenda.

 

44 voted not to place that proposal on the agenda

 

3 failed to vote either way.

 

It is expected that the General Conference Session, next July will vote on that proposal.

 

 

 

 

[Jeannieb43]

Whew!  

 

Finally.   A reasonable proposal.

 

We stopped requiring polygamists to divorce their "extra" wives in order to be baptized, many years ago (finally realizing that our mission work was not to "Americanize" people but rather to bring to them the gospel of Jesus Christ).   [Honest, that actually was our practice, in some foreign countries, when I was a child.]  

So why should we now be attempting to "Americanize" church members by requiring them to submit to male headship of families and churches?  There are numerous differences in culture, styles, practices, across the world field.   We cannot expect to change long-standing culture.   Let's let each division and/or local conference make those decisions based on the local culture in each area.  Good suggestion!

[Gregory Matthews]

I would prefer to have Unions have the authority, which is what they now have, in may cases.  if authority is given to the Divisions, it may be taken from the Unions.

 

Further, if a GC President wants to do so, it will be easier to select a Division President than that of a Union President.

[hch]

Is having the Unions set different policies really a good idea?

 

Is that the unity that Christ prayed for?

 

I used to avoid this issue. Did not see it as a "salvation issue"

 

But now I understand that following every thus saith the Lord is part of the Testimony of Jesus.

[JoeMo]

Is having the Unions set different policies really a good idea?

It's better than having the General Conference set the policy; not as good as letting individual congregations pick their own pastors.  What if a congregation is 75% women?  Wouldn't it be more prudent (on more than one level) for them to have a woman pastor if a qualified one is available? 

 

This is not an absurd scenario.  There are many congregations that are more than 50% female.

[Johann]

I would prefer to have Unions have the authority, which is what they now have, in may cases.  if authority is given to the Divisions, it may be taken from the Unions.

 

Further, if a GC President wants to do so, it will be easier to select a Division President than that of a Union President.

 

Yes, the GC President directs the Division meeting, but at a recent selection of a new presiden at TED his candidate was not chosen. The new candidate has been approved by the GC.

[Johann]

Back in 1849 the first female physician graduated from an American medical school. Ellen White never disapproved of female physicians. I recall that she stated a female physician could work on both male and female patients while it is preferabe to have female physicians help women. Would this not apply to female ministers as well?

[Joe_in_RP]

I would prefer to have Unions have the authority, which is what they now have, in may cases.

 

Gregory, Are you saying the unions have the authority to ordain women now?

If so, where did they get that authority?

[Gregory Matthews]

Some of the Unions, but not all, have it written into their Constitution that they have the authority to make the decisions on ordination.  That it why some Unions in the United States have ordained women.

 

It is for this reason that some people consider it to be illegal for the General Conference to prohibit the ordination of a female.

 

The way that ordination works is that local Conferences make recommendations to the Union, and the Union approves and then the Conference ordains.  Divisions, at least currently in the NAD, have not made the decisions.

 

NOTE:  I do not know the procedure in the case of a Mission, I am only speaking about a Conference.  The rules are different in the case of a Mission.

 

NOTE:  The following comments may not be the latest up to date information?

 

In the Southern Asia-Pacific Division, the Bangladesh Union is a Mission.  So, I do not know what authority it has.

 

The Central Philippine Union is a Conference, but I do not know what its Constitution says.

 

In the Central Philippine Union, the Negros Oriental-Siquijor is a Mission, as is the Romblon Adventist Mission.

 

The Myanmar Union is a Mission.

 

In the East Indonesia Union, the Bolaang Mongondow & Gorontalo is an attached  Field.  I know nothing about Attached Fields and the authority that they have.

[Johann]

Ours is an attached conference directly under the TED. So we have no union. In this case it is better that the Division is granted the authority. Several conferences in Europe have now become Union of churches because they were earlier more than one conference. So now they are both like a conference and a union. The president of an attached conference does not have the same "privileges" as a president of a union of churches. It seems like he had more privileges in the past. We live in an age of change, so it may be difficult to follow exactly each development.

 

In the United States you still have the old system of conferences, unions and a Division under the General Conference. I do not know how this is now in other divisions.