Appointed, Not Ordained???

[Gregory Matthews]

See:

http://atoday.org/adventist-church-denmark-appoints-pastors-avoid-ordination-conflicts.html

[Charity]

What I find most interesting is that the focus is more on women's opinions and church politics.  What does it matter whether women are ordained or not.  What are the real issues?  Isn't it more important that God's purpose is being carried out?

What if God wants us to use the set up of the Old Testament sanctuary and the New Testament selection of His disciples as an example of how His church should be run.  Men as priests, apostles - and yes, as pastors.   This does not preclude women from being active in the church and the spreading of the gospel - just that they can't be priests , apostles - and pastors.  

My point is.  What's the big deal.   This is not our church.  Our gospel.  Our kingdom.  Our creation.  It doesn't matter what we think, believe, feel, or how liberated women have become or how far the world has progressed.  This all belongs to God and we are fighting over it with no regard for Him.  I would say - enough with the drama.  Let's get on with God's business - spreading His word and living a life that reveals Him.  I don't have to be ordained to do that - I just have to love Him enough to let Him shine through me.  No one needs to see me.  Only Him.  I didn't die to save anyone - He did. And He is alive to prove it.  My part is to let others know that.  I gain nothing by being an ordained pastor.  But oh what joy I'll have by letting others know about the only one who deserves praise, honor, adoration, recognition - a well- deserved title - Mighty God. The Good Sheppard

If there is ever a title we should fight for it is to hear God proclaim -  well done you good and faithful servant. Praise God!!

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

I wonder what the legalities of "appointment" would be in the various countries.  For example, will Denmark accept "appointment" by the church as acceptable for the pastors to perform marriage ceremonies?

[Charity]

Hmmm.  I would hope that they considered all the ramifications of adopting this form of ministerial credential. Otherwise they would have to reconsider it. 

[Tom Wetmore]

@Charity the point of the direction Denmark is taking is that all of their pastors, male and female be treated the same.  Since it seems that the word "ordination" is the singular sticking point, then just stop using that designation altogether. 

On one level you are correct about question why all the fuss. Why indeed! If it doesn't really matter all that much, why on the other hand do those opposed feel so strongly? It is about recognition and respect. And it is not about the women that are pastors striving for it and needing a title or status.  It is about those opposed who refuse to see and recognize that women indeed are capable and qualified and do in fact satisfy all the criteria the church has set down in its policies and practices for pastors from the very beginning of the Church just the same as their male counterparts.  Even though this is not about pay, it is the same sort of sense of fairness. If a man and a woman equally qualified and experienced doing the very same things, hold the very same position, why treat them differently? 

The Danish solution simply says, let's remove the the inflammatory word form our vocabulary and change the terminology to reflect the reality.

[Charity]

So instead of helping the believers to put aside the issues that are not important to their salvation or the work of the Kingdom so that they can serve God in goodness and truth, our leaders help to perpetuate a lie that it is about us and what we deserve in God's Kingdom by trying to implement a system that will appease egos

I understand what the Danish conference is trying to do - in it's own wisdom.  Those in opposition hold on to what they believe is correct.  Those trying to change it are responding to that opposition in light of many things - including what they believe should be justice and equality for all.  It all sounds fair.  But we are fighting within.  That house cannot stand.  And this house is supposed to be God's house.  He will put a stop to it - in His time. This is petty and unacceptable behaviour for a people called by God's name.  Someone must take the lower seat.  Back away and say - there are more important things to squabble about. Jesus warned us that we would not be treated fairly - for His sake.  Let's face it.  When Jesus came here as God - He humbly did what He came to do and didn't stop to argue with men in authority about giving Him His rightful title - God.  You get the point.   What makes us think that it is important that we stop to ensure that we -  women pastors- should be given the same respect as our male counterparts because it is only fair - right - just - because we are equally qualified, experienced - and we deserve it???  Therefore we should be ordained .   

My opinion is that that is losing sight of the goal - the purpose for entering the ministry.  It is not to gain equality with men.  It is not about us and our gender / racial etc battles.  It is about God - His Kingdom - and serving God!   I don't believe that we can serve Him - truly - if we are serving ourselves.  

So. Here is the important question.  Will I serve Him any better once I've achieved equal status with my male counterparts? God will now respect me more and I have achieved a great  thing in the advancement of His Kingdom. For this service I will hear - We done ...!!

i don't support inequality in any way.  It is unjust. But for Kingdim work - I agree with Paul even though the context is not the same , the principle applies .  It doesn't matter who waters or plants - God is responsible for the growth .

1 Cor 3

 5Who then is Paul, and who is Apollos, but ministers by whom ye believed, even as the Lord gave to every man? 6I have planted, Apollos watered; but God gave the increase. 7So then neither is he that planteth any thing, neither he that watereth; but God that giveth the increase. 8Now he that planteth and he that watereth are one: and every man shall receive his own reward according to his own labour. 9For we are labourers together with God: ye are God's husbandry, ye are God's building.

[Tom Wetmore]

Can you see that a church that perpetuates inequality between men and women creates a barrier to reaching people with the modern perspective predominant throughout the Western world , and now increasingly beyond, of gender equality?  I can certainly see and appreciate that women in ministry would be a barrier to reaching the people in areas of the world, such as Muslim countries, and shouldn't be encouraged in such places.  Contrary to opposition misinformation, nobody in the camp supporting women in ministry is demanding that this be forced on any area of the world where it is not acceptable.  But the predominant voice of those opposed are insisting that their POV be forced upon the church in areas where that POV is very much unacceptable.  

[Rossw]

Society is the determining factor on church polity?

[Tom Wetmore]

The vote in San Antonio was largely driven by culture. If the delegates had reflected even the divided TOSC, a majority would have voted in favor of the motion. 

Maybe Paul's declaration "I am all things to all people" should speak to us on this. 

[bluejx]

I think the comments of Bill Sorensen in the comments section of the article linked by Gregory Matthews sums up the truth.  For whatever logically convoluted reason some have simply defied the world church and just won't wait until such time as WO is approved.  But even when it is it will not have followed Biblical instruction and practice.  If the GC in session vote was driven by culture it was a culture that gave weight to scripture.  That is apparently no longer the case in the NAD or TED.  An entirely new culture has arisen.

[Rossw]

Looks like we have a house divided.

[Rossw]

On 7/10/2016 at 4:02 PM, Tom Wetmore said:

The vote in San Antonio was largely driven by culture. If the delegates had reflected even the divided TOSC, a majority would have voted in favor of the motion. 

Maybe Paul's declaration "I am all things to all people" should speak to us on this. 

In what way was the vote driven by culture?

[Charity]

Good question Ross W:. Does society determine church government?  I thought that God is the head of His church and is the one who determines its structure - in every aspect.  How can we determine what is God's will on this topic.  

[Gregory Matthews]

Rossw mentioned culture and Charity mentioned society.

They are not one and the same, generally.  Society is more inclusive.  Society, as in the U.S.A. is composed of multiple cultural groups.  In some countries, their society may be composed of only one culture.  In fact, that is true in many countries.

I am not attempting to nit-pick.  In the U.S.A.  We might say that a when the U. S. Supreme Court rules that society has spoken.  That might be true.  But, that ruling might conflict with the norms of a cultural group that exists within the U.S.  So, I consider the distinction to be important.

 Yes, one might say that the ruling reflected a cultural bias.  Regardless, it would still be true to say that society has spoken in the ruling.

 

 

 

[Gregory Matthews]

Charity asked, see below:

The Mary Kay Silver (McCloud) case   is an teaching example to this question.

The lesson that we learned in that case was this:  We cannot (should not) claim a religious/theological exemption in a manner to allow us to pay women less than men for the same work provided by them. 

God, as head of the Church, may use civil government and dedicated members/employees to bring us into compliance with the will of God.

I thought that God is the head of His church and is the one who determines its structure - in every aspect.  How can we determine what is God's will on this topic.