SECC gives ordination credentials to men and women pastors

[Woody]

Quote:

That you have tied your dog to the dog house (so to speak), should prevent others from running theirs in the race and cheering them on. Right?

[Overaged]

Quote:

Injustice has been done to women who labor just as devotedly as their husbands, and who are recognized by God as being as necessary to the work of ministry as their husbands. [if ordination is defined as an official church recognition of a calling that was instituted by God, it would seem long past the time when the church should harmonize with that Divine perspective.] The method of paying men-laborers and not their wives, is a plan not after the Lord's order. . . . This arrangement . . . is liable to discourage our sisters from qualifying themselves for the work they should engage in [i.e., ministry]. . . . This question is not for men to settle. The Lord has settled it. You are to do your duty to the women who labor in the gospel. [Ms 43a-1897, emphasis supplied.]

[phkrause]

I thought it was a pretty well understood way of acknowledging what is added and what is original since it happens rather frequently even by some members of this board in various discussions.

Not at all.

[Tom Wetmore]

... and I find nothing in the Bible or spirit of prophecy that calls women pastors.

If you do, then you have not yet shown us where.

Did you not see the quote I posted from Testimonies, vol 6, p. 322:

Quote:

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.

[Woody]

Quote:

If you do, then you have not yet shown us where.

I am not going to hand feed you OA. The quotes have been presented many times. Of course - you always state that no evidence has been presented. So, why would anyone show you again?

[teresaq]

I am opposed to women pastors and elders, Bruce.

The fact that there were women ministers pastoring SDA churches in Ellen White's day and nary a word from the Lord against it should say something.

If it were as "horrible" an idea as some seem to feel it is, something that went against the "natural order of things" God would have had quite a bit to say against it. It didn't stop Him in other regards.

[teresaq]

Originally Posted By: teresaq(sda)

I thought it was a pretty well understood way of acknowledging what is added and what is original since it happens rather frequently even by some members of this board in various discussions.

Not at all.

Not at all what? It doesn't happen frequently here where quotes and texts are underlined and colored and enlarged? Or something else?

[Overaged]

This whole topic is a disaster and a disgrace.

[Woody]

Quote:

This whole topic is a disaster and a disgrace.

Oh. I had thought you were open minded and wanted to study the topic. The church has been studying it for decades. But you seem to have had a brief encounter and no longer are interested in hearing or reading about the topic.

Some of us don't feel that God's cause is a disgrace nor a disaster. We are here to learn and through all means promote the Gospel. That is no disgrace in my book. This is serious business. God's business. No other business is more serious.

[teresaq]

This whole topic is a disaster and a disgrace.

To hold yourselves aloof from an investigation of truth is not the way to carry out the Saviour’s injunction to “search the Scriptures.” Is it digging for hidden treasures to call the results of some one’s labor a mass of rubbish, and make no critical examination to see whether or not there are precious jewels of truth in the collection of thought which you condemn?

Will those who have almost everything to learn keep themselves away from every meeting where there is an opportunity to investigate the messages that come to the people, simply because they imagine the views held by the teachers of the truth may be out of harmony with what they have conceived as truth?

Thus it was that the Jews did in the days of Christ, and we are warned not to do as they did, and be led to choose darkness rather than light, because there was in them an evil heart of unbelief in departing from the living God. No one of those who imagine that they know it all is too old or too intelligent to learn from the humblest of the messengers of the living God.—Testimonies on Sabbath-School Work, 62-66. {CSW 29.1

[Woody]

Quote:

To hold yourselves aloof from an investigation of truth is not the way to carry out the Saviour’s injunction to “search the Scriptures.” Is it digging for hidden treasures to call the results of some one’s labor a mass of rubbish, and make no critical examination to see whether or not there are precious jewels of truth in the collection of thought which you condemn?

Excellent teresa.

We must investigate TRUTH through diligent study of God's Holy Word. STUDY to show thyself approved unto God.

[phkrause]

[quote=teresaq(sda)Not at all what?

I think you knew exactly what I was referring to! The post was made to make it seem like EGWs was actually commenting on her own words trying to clarify what she meant. When in reality it was someone else that was quoting her and than trying to tell us what she really meant. Now it probably wasn't meant that way, but that's the way I took it and from some of the other posts, I'd say one or two others thought that too.

[John317]

Did you not see the quote I posted from Testimonies, vol 6, p. 322:

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.

It's important to know how Ellen White used the word "pastor." The above quote was written in the context of the canvassing work and in regard to those who are fitting themselves for the gospel ministry. She said that not all ministers are pastors. She considered herself a pastor in the sense of feeding the flock from the word of God. She also spoke of herself as being "in the ministry," yet she was never the pastor or minister of a local congregation. So Ellen White used those words differently than we're accustomed to seeing it used today. For her, "pastor" included anyone who made a practice of feeding the flock from the word of God.

Quote:

All who desire an opportunity for true ministry, and who will give themselves unreservedly to God, will find in the canvassing work opportunities to speak upon many things pertaining to the future, immortal life. The experience thus gained will be of the greatest value to those who are fitting themselves for the ministry. 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. As they cherish the thought that Christ is their Companion, a holy awe, a sacred joy, will be felt by them amid all their trying experiences and all their tests. --Testimonies, vol. 6, p. 322. (1900)

The following paragraphs related to the ordination of women are found in Appendix C of Daughters of God

Quote:

8. IT IS LIKELY THAT ELLEN WHITE DID NOT SUGGEST AT ANY TIME THAT THE SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTIST CHURCH SHOULD COMMENCE THE PRACTICE OF ORDAINING WOMEN TO THE GOSPEL MINISTRY. HER SECRETARY, C. C. CRISLER, SAYS THAT SHE WAS VERY CAUTIOUS ON THIS POINT. HERE IS THE CORRESPONDENCE RELATING TO THIS QUESTION:{DG 253.2}

"MARCH 12, 1916

"MR. CLARENCE CRISLER, SANITARIUM [CALIFORNIA]

"DEAR BROTHER: WILL YOU PLEASE INFORM ME IN REGARD TO THE SETTING APART OF WOMEN WHO CAN GIVE SOME TIME TO MISSIONARY WORK, BY LAYING ON HANDS IN PRAYER, FOUND IN REVIEW AND HERALD, BACK IN THE EARLY PART OF THE NINETIES, PROBABLY BACK IN ABOUT 1892 OR 1893, FROM THE PEN OF SISTER WHITE.{DG 253.3}

"THE REASON I ASK FOR THIS, I WAS IN A RECENT MEETING WHERE ELDER ANDROSS SET ASIDE WOMEN BY THE LAYING ON OF HANDS, AND WHEN I ASKED HIM FOR THE AUTHORITY FOR SO DOING, HE REFERRED ME TO YOU, AND AS I HAVE BEEN A BIBLE WORKER FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS AND HAVE RECENTLY BEEN GRANTED A MINISTERIAL LICENSE, I WANT THIS INFORMATION. {DG 253.4}

254

"PLEASE ANSWER AT ONCE, AS I WANT TO HEAR FROM YOU BEFORE I GO TO THE SOUTHWESTERN UNION CONFERENCE, WHICH CONVENES APRIL 7. PLEASE SEND ME TWO OR THREE COPIES OF HER STATEMENT, AS THE PRESIDENT OF OUR CONFERENCE WANTS ONE."-- MRS. L. E. COX, 134 AGARITA AVENUE, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS.{DG 254.1}

"MARCH 22, 1916

"MRS. L. E. COX, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS

"DEAR SISTER: I HAVE YOUR LETTER OF THE TWELFTH, MAKING INQUIRY REGARDING THE ORDINATION OF WOMEN WHO GIVE SOME TIME TO MISSIONARY WORK--PARTICULARLY TO SOME STATEMENT WHICH YOU BELIEVE TO BE FOUND IN A REVIEW EARLY IN THE NINETIES, FROM THE PEN OF MRS. ELLEN G. WHITE.{DG 254.2}

"AS THIS QUERY WILL REQUIRE SOME STUDY ON MY PART, AND SEARCHING, AND AS I MUST GO TO MOUNTAIN VIEW IN THE MORNING FOR A FEW DAYS, I AM UNDER THE NECESSITY OF ASKING THAT YOU EXCUSE ME FROM ANSWERING FOR A FEW DAYS. UPON MY RETURN, EARLY NEXT WEEK, I WILL ENDEAVOR TO SEND YOU A REPLY, ACCOMPANYING SAME, IF POSSIBLE, WITH THE EXTRACTS CALLED FOR. HOWEVER, I MIGHT SAY THAT I HAVE NOT UNDERSTOOD THESE EXTRACTS AS TEACHING POSITIVELY THE ORDINATION OF WOMEN AS MINISTERS OF THE GOSPEL. I HAVE SUPPOSED, RATHER, THAT THEY REFER PRIMARILY TO THE ORDINATION OF GOD-FEARING WOMEN AS DEACONESSES IN LOCAL CHURCHES. BUT OF THIS I WILL SPEAK MORE FULLY WHEN I WRITE AGAIN.{DG 254.3}

"I HOPE TO WRITE YOU ABOUT THE TWENTY-EIGHTH, AND WILL ADDRESS YOU AS ABOVE. IF YOU ARE LEAVING SAN ANTONIO FOR OTHER PARTS, IT WOULD BE WELL FOR YOU TO LEAVE A FORWARDING ORDER, SO MAIL ADDRESSED AS ABOVE WILL REACH YOU IN DUE TIME AT THE UNION CONFERENCE."--CLARENCE CRISLER.{DG 254.4}

"JUNE 16, 1916

"MRS. L. E. COX

"DEAR SISTER: IN MY ANSWER UNDER DATE OF MARCH 22, I WAS UNABLE TO FORWARD YOU COPY OF THE REVIEW ARTICLE CALLED FOR, BUT VENTURED TO SAY, 'I HAVE NOT UNDERSTOOD THESE EXTRACTS AS TEACHING POSITIVELY THE ORDINATION OF WOMEN AS MINISTERS OF THE GOSPEL. I HAVE SUPPOSED, RATHER, THAT THEY REFER PRIMARILY TO THE ORDINATION OF GOD-FEARING WOMEN AS DEACONESSES IN LOCAL CHURCHES.'{DG 254.5}

"SINCE WRITING THE ABOVE, I HAVE FOUND THE ARTICLE IN QUESTION AND

255

HAVE HAD SAME COPIED. ENCLOSED FIND A COPY OF THIS ARTICLE. [RH, JULY 9, 1895.] I AM ALSO FORWARDING A COPY TO YOUR LOCAL CONFERENCE PRESIDENT, ELDER E. L. NEFF, AND TO THE PRESIDENT OF YOUR UNION, ELDER J. W. CHRISTIAN, THAT THEY MAY KNOW WHAT I AM SENDING TO YOU.{DG 254.6}

"WHILE I DO NOT MAKE IT A PART OF MY WORK TO PRESUME TO INTERPRET THAT WHICH HAS BEEN WRITTEN, YET I MAY BE PARDONED FOR EXPRESSING AS MY CONVICTION THE THOUGHT THAT THIS ARTICLE PUBLISHED IN THE REVIEW DOES NOT REFER TO THE ORDINATION OF WOMEN AS MINISTERS OF THE GOSPEL, BUT RATHER TOUCHES UPON THE QUESTION OF SETTING APART, FOR SPECIAL DUTIES IN LOCAL CHURCHES, GOD-FEARING WOMEN IN SUCH CHURCHES WHERE CIRCUMSTANCES CALL FOR SUCH ACTION.{DG 255.1}

"AND MAY I ADD THAT SISTER WHITE, PERSONALLY, WAS VERY CAREFUL ABOUT EXPRESSING HERSELF IN ANY WISE AS TO THE ADVISABILITY OF ORDAINING WOMEN AS GOSPEL MINISTERS. SHE HAS OFTEN SPOKEN OF THE PERILS THAT SUCH GENERAL PRACTICE WOULD EXPOSE THE CHURCH TO BY A GAINSAYING WORLD; BUT AS YET I HAVE NEVER SEEN FROM HER PEN ANY STATEMENT THAT WOULD SEEM TO ENCOURAGE THE FORMAL AND OFFICIAL ORDINATION OF WOMEN TO THE GOSPEL MINISTRY, TO PUBLIC LABOR SUCH AS IS ORDINARILY EXPECTED OF AN ORDAINED MINISTER.{DG 255.2}

"THIS IS NOT SUGGESTING, MUCH LESS SAYING, THAT NO WOMEN ARE FITTED FOR SUCH PUBLIC LABOR, AND THAT NONE SHOULD EVER BE ORDAINED; IT IS SIMPLY SAYING THAT SO FAR AS MY KNOWLEDGE EXTENDS, SISTER WHITE NEVER ENCOURAGED CHURCH OFFICIALS TO DEPART FROM THE GENERAL CUSTOMS OF THE CHURCH IN THOSE MATTERS."--C. C. CRISLER.{DG 255.3}

Conclusion

THE QUESTION OF WOMEN'S ORDINATION WAS NOT HIGH ON ELLEN WHITE'S AGENDA DURING HER LIFETIME. HER BEST ENERGIES WERE DIRECTED TOWARD ACHIEVING A GREATER UNITY AND A DEEPER SPIRITUALITY IN THE CHURCH. {DG 255.4}

[olger]

Originally Posted By: olger

Bert Haloviak has a dog in that race (so to speak).

Now it's a bit rude to refer to someone as a dog, wouldn't you say? (Might be well to consider your figures of speech a bit more carefully...)

A person can't win with you, Tom.. If I had said "that's a horse of a different color" you probably would have bounded onto the scene with another load of phony outrage. "How dare you refer to someone as a horse!?!?!"

I'm used to it.

Back to the doghouse illustration, my wife and I make a good team together. She is a great helpmeet and this fall, we celebrate our 30th! She's a good Bible student. She is as opposed to WO as I, maybe more.

rejoice always, and pray for us. We have a youth class to lead out in this weekend in Illinois.

G

[Woody]

OK og bd boy - I will be brave and say - you are certainly a horse of a different color. lol

[teresaq]

Quote:

yet she was never the pastor or minister of a local congregation.

Quite true. She was the Pastor/Minister/Shepherdess of the whole church, not just one tiny part of it.

[teresaq]

Originally Posted By: teresaq(sda)

Not at all what?

I think you knew exactly what I was referring to! The post was made to make it seem like EGWs was actually commenting on her own words trying to clarify what she meant. When in reality it was someone else that was quoting her and than trying to tell us what she really meant. Now it probably wasn't meant that way, but that's the way I took it and from some of the other posts, I'd say one or two others thought that too.

You can get angry all you want but I wouldn't have asked if I did know. I thought it was pretty well understood what the brackets meant, as Tom explained, but then I come across it quite frequently.

[teresaq]

Quote:

"AND MAY I ADD THAT SISTER WHITE, PERSONALLY, WAS VERY CAREFUL ABOUT EXPRESSING HERSELF IN ANY WISE AS TO THE ADVISABILITY OF ORDAINING WOMEN AS GOSPEL MINISTERS.

SHE HAS OFTEN SPOKEN OF THE PERILS THAT SUCH GENERAL PRACTICE WOULD EXPOSE THE CHURCH TO BY A GAINSAYING WORLD;

BUT AS YET I HAVE NEVER SEEN FROM HER PEN ANY STATEMENT THAT WOULD SEEM TO ENCOURAGE THE FORMAL AND OFFICIAL ORDINATION OF WOMEN TO THE GOSPEL MINISTRY, TO PUBLIC LABOR SUCH AS IS ORDINARILY EXPECTED OF AN ORDAINED MINISTER.{DG 255.2}

"THIS IS NOT SUGGESTING, MUCH LESS SAYING,

THAT NO WOMEN ARE FITTED FOR SUCH PUBLIC LABOR, AND

THAT NONE SHOULD EVER BE ORDAINED;

IT IS SIMPLY SAYING THAT SO FAR AS MY KNOWLEDGE EXTENDS, SISTER WHITE NEVER ENCOURAGED CHURCH OFFICIALS TO DEPART FROM THE GENERAL CUSTOMS OF THE CHURCH IN THOSE MATTERS."--C. C. CRISLER.{DG 255.3}

So Ellen White, according to the knowledge of CCC, was not ready to go against the culture of the day, perhaps like Jesus and Paul were not ready to go against the brutality of slavery in their day.

Perhaps if the church had not chosen to retrograd from women pastors in Ellen White's day to a rarity after her death it would not be such an issue in the SDA church today.

[Woody]

Quote:

yet she was never the pastor or minister of a local congregation.

Quite true. She was the Pastor/Minister/Shepherdess of the whole church, not just one tiny part of it.

Excellent point . In fact she gave herself the same title as the pastors of her time had - "messenger".

[olger]

OK og bd boy - I will be brave and say - you are certainly a horse of a different color. lol

[doug yowell]

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.

So was it the Holy Spirit that moved the United Methodist, Church of Christ, ELCA,ect... leadership to beat the SDA leadership to the WO punch? Is it the work of the Holy Spirit that people like Doug Batchelor, Mary Walsh, HMS Richards, and other WO opponents are in danger of attributing to "other forces"?

[doug yowell]

We must investigate TRUTH through diligent study of God's Holy Word. STUDY to show thyself approved unto God.

Yes Woody, but 90% of the WO support comes from the past and present experience of the SDA movement. Look at the majority of reasons given---"we've done it in the past and we've been doing it for years now so we must be consistent." We argue that since EGW was a prophet that all roles are now interchangeable.But we have no contemporary equivalent to EGW today. No prophets,ect... EGW has been traditionally recognized by the Church as being unique and having an extraordinary gift. The way WO presents her now is that her calling is no different than the latest grad student from Andrews.Her gift was openly demonstrated for even her skeptics to witness.

[Tom Wetmore]

Originally Posted By: Tom Wetmore

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.

So was it the Holy Spirit that moved the United Methodist, Church of Christ, ELCA,ect... leadership to beat the SDA leadership to the WO punch? Is it the work of the Holy Spirit that people like Doug Batchelor, Mary Walsh, HMS Richards, and other WO opponents are in danger of attributing to "other forces"?

You will have to consult with Ellen G. White on that since those are her words, not mine.

Nonetheless, I accept what she said as sufficiently clear on the matter that the answer to your question should be self-evident.

However, I am not inclined to attributing to "other forces" the inclinations of WO opponents, if you mean evil spirits as some here have suggested as being the inspiration of those who disagree with their position on the matter. Nor do I believe that would be a fair reading of what EGW said. Following ones own inclinations may not be with the accompaniment of the Holy Spirit, but that does not mean that it is to be attributed to such "other forces."

[Tom Wetmore]

Originally Posted By: Woody

We must investigate TRUTH through diligent study of God's Holy Word. STUDY to show thyself approved unto God.

Yes Woody, but 90% of the WO support comes from the past and present experience of the SDA movement. Look at the majority of reasons given---"we've done it in the past and we've been doing it for years now so we must be consistent." We argue that since EGW was a prophet that all roles are now interchangeable.But we have no contemporary equivalent to EGW today. No prophets,ect... EGW has been traditionally recognized by the Church as being unique and having an extraordinary gift. The way WO presents her now is that her calling is no different than the latest grad student from Andrews.Her gift was openly demonstrated for even her skeptics to witness.

First of all that is a serious exaggeration and overlooks that both in the past and the present, there has been substantial study and discussion of God's Word as the foundation to guide what is done. It is not simply, "Well that's the way we've always done it. The resources I posted should bear that out rather emphatically.

And regarding EGW, likewise what you have posted to Woody is an exaggeration/distortion of the position taken by those in support of women in ministry when EGW is cited as an example of the Adventist Church recognizing a woman in that position. I am not aware of anyone claiming that "since EGW was a prophet that all roles are now interchangeable", whatever that means. And nobody is arguing that "her calling is no different than the latest grad student from Andrews." That's absurd.

The way I have understood it is that when the General Conference leadership issued her the credentials of an ordained minister, they were not diminishing her prophetic role or suggesting it was interchangeable or undifferentiated from that of an ordained minster. As a recognized and tested prophet, it was also recognized that she was more than qualified to be recognized as a minister of the gospel. The qualification to be an ordained minister was exceeded by what she was already recognized to be. And since they did not have an "ordained prophet" credential, this was the highest credential they had authority to give. And I am quite confident in saying they likely were not inclined to make up and issue an ordained prophet credential since that would have been misunderstood by outsiders and would have created more conflict and confusion than giving her an ordained minister credential. Everyone understood and accepted what that meant during her lifetime without any controversy or confusion.

[teresaq]

I have a problem with the reasoning of what may be only a certain segment of those against WO.

According to the scriptures:

Quote:

Gen 2:18 And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.

19 And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.

20 And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him.

and

Quote:

After the creation of Adam every living creature was brought before him to receive its name; he saw that to each had been given a companion, but among them “there was not found an help meet for him.” Among all the creatures that God had made on the earth, there was not one equal to man. And God said, “It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.” Man was not made to dwell in solitude; he was to be a social being. Without companionship the beautiful scenes and delightful employments of Eden would have failed to yield perfect happiness. Even communion with angels could not have satisfied his desire for sympathy and companionship. There was none of the same nature to love and to be loved. {PP 46.1}

According to both, Eve was not created at the same time as Adam, then the animals brought to him, so that he could see his aloneness and appreciate when another person was created to be his companion.

God says He will create a companion for Adam, yet brings the animals first, the reason why being stated, but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him.

Adam was created alone, the animals were brought to him, so that he could see his aloneness. Scripture and SoP agree and stress these reasons. Any other teaching that would ignore this, not include it, I have to reject.