SECC gives ordination credentials to men and women pastors

[Overaged]

The same way it does for men,

Being ordained makes no one "more effective." Not too sure how many ways I can say that?

Because the OP did initiate this comment in regards to women; that being ordained would make them more effective in ministry, it would be nice if they would just answer the question.

No one is making that claim for men, so do you perhaps have an answer to my question?

[CoAspen]

The words 'more effective' are clouding the issue and WO is not about that at all. The issue is about Women being recognized as being called of God for any function as a man is recognized.

Hopefully the study being implemented will come to the the conclusion that mankind is not the decider of whom God has called but rather the effect the persons life has on others.

[Overaged]

The words 'more effective' are clouding the issue and WO is not about that at all.

But the OP did state this as a reason for ordination. Its amazing, and very interesting that no one in support of WO will just answer the question.

[Tom Wetmore]

The words 'more effective' are clouding the issue and WO is not about that at all. The issue is about Women being recognized as being called of God for any function as a man is recognized.

Hopefully the study being implemented will come to the the conclusion that mankind is not the decider of whom God has called but rather the effect the persons life has on others.

Yes, and it seems dwelling on that phrase and revisiting it after multiple clarifications and refocussing on the issue, it serves more effectively as a smoke screen to give cover to escape addressing the real issues.

[Woody]

Originally Posted By: CoAspen

The words 'more effective' are clouding the issue and WO is not about that at all. The issue is about Women being recognized as being called of God for any function as a man is recognized.

Hopefully the study being implemented will come to the the conclusion that mankind is not the decider of whom God has called but rather the effect the persons life has on others.

Yes, and it seems dwelling on that phrase and revisiting it after multiple clarifications and refocussing on the issue, it serves more effectively as a smoke screen to give cover to escape addressing the real issues.

[doug yowell]

The words 'more effective' are clouding the issue and WO is not about that at all.

For all who wonder, it was Tom that ordained the phrase "more effective". I didn't think it was misleading from the original stated reason for the SECC actions.Better able/more effective What's the critical difference? It's the excuse,uh, reason given for the necessity for the new policy.

[Overaged]

Originally Posted By: CoAspen

The words 'more effective' are clouding the issue and WO is not about that at all.

For all who wonder, it was Tom that ordained the phrase "more effective". I didn't think it was misleading from the original stated reason for the SECC actions.Better able/more effective What's the critical difference? It's the excuse,uh, reason given for the necessity for the new policy.

[doug yowell]

Hopefully the study being implemented will come to the the conclusion that mankind is not the decider of whom God has called but rather the effect the persons life has on others.

And that conclusion will result in ...??? (The abolition of any human decision or recognition regarding God's call?)Wouldn't that conclusion be the only logical recourse?

[teresaq]

Perhaps you both could point out that exact post? I see OA's right after the OP and the words from him, then eventually Tom's quote of that phrase...

The words 'more effective' are clouding the issue and WO is not about that at all.

[teresaq]

The words 'more effective' are clouding the issue and WO is not about that at all. The issue is about Women being recognized as being called of God for any function as a man is recognized.

Hopefully the study being implemented will come to the the conclusion that mankind is not the decider of whom God has called but rather the effect the persons life has on others.

Doesn't seem to be the only problem clouding the issue. I guess the way we can read posts, etc., differently we can also read the 10c extremely differently.

Otherwise, yes. Except that far too often we fallen beings are adamantly positive we know exactly what God would and wouldn't do.

[teresaq]

"More effective" is a term coined by me for the following phrase used by the OP:

[doug yowell]

Oops,my bad. It was OA who first used the term on page 1 and Tom who responded to it on page 2 with the rest of us following thereafter.But it was an appropriate synonym.

[Tom Wetmore]

... Joshua and Caleb went in with ALL the people. God didn't give them a special dispensation for an early head start. However, when the doubters in the story decided to go ahead and try to enter the "promised" land (are we comparing this promise and the goal of the entire journey with WO?) without God's leaders it didn't go so well either.I just don't see the abolition of gender roles as being one of God's greatest spiritual gifts to fallen mankind.

But had the children of Israel followed the faith and leading of Joshua and Caleb, all would have been spared wandering and dying in the wilderness and all would have made it to the promised land. A stubborn and disbelieving generation had to pass on so a new generation could follow Joshua into the promised land.

And if we honestly consider that as our example, the ones now making decisions are not the generation that did not believe Joshua and Caleb. It is their children.

Notice how many years it has been that we have been wandering around the wilderness of indecision and doubt on this issue. It has been over 40 years - http://www.sdanet.org/atissue/wo/appendix5.htm

[Tom Wetmore]

... Few,if any, are opposed to women as "pastors" …

Simply untrue. I am speaking of the entire world church. The strongest opposition to “WO” comes from areas where there are no women as pastors. They don’t even tolerate or allow women to serve as pastors or local elders. Even in North America, significant doubt and opposition comes from those who have had little or no first-hand experience with women pastors in their churches or even their conference. The least amount of opposition is in areas and churches where there have been and continue to be women serving as pastors.

Originally Posted By: doug yowell

The issue continues to revolve around the Biblical NT model of home leadership being the proving ground for church leadership. In the home the mother is also considered a "pastor" but her role differs from the father's role.In the Biblical home the Father is given the responsibility of being the high priest of the family. This role has never been an optional one for women…

This is confusing and mixing roles much of which are not the point of discussion. I am talking about pastors. Leadership is a different role from pastoral ministry. And it is the call to pastoral ministry to which ordination is addressed. And we are not talking about family roles. And the high priestly role for mankind ended at the cross. Read Hebrews. And even if you want to hark back to OT temple roles, remember the NT proclamation of the priesthood of all believers.

Originally Posted By: doug yowell

Again, an intentionally clear term would be more appropriate here.Not "pastoral ministry" but specifically "head pastoral ministry" is the point of opposition. …

Again, not. And be careful about venturing down the Catholic headship heresy path… But for the sake of argument, not all men that are ordained become “head pastors” and many are not qualified for leadership roles any more than women. But that is a non-issue since their ordination is not to leadership or headship, it is to serve in the gospel ministry as pastors.

Originally Posted By: doug yowell

This test of truth is completely dependent on the assumption that today's pastoral expectations are fully functioning in harmony with the Biblical blueprint of the NT calling. The main thrust of WO comes from NAD where the church is stagnant at best.Hardly a model to emulate.

But the churches with female pastors are growing and thriving. Don’t forget that the majority of churches in NAD (those stagnant and dying ones) do not have female pastors. Don’t forget that EGW said that if there were 20 women serving in ministry where there is now only one, that amazing things would result.

Originally Posted By: Tom Wetmore

These women are bringing souls to Christ and nurturing and building up the body of Christ. That is the Biblical foundation of qualification for ordination recognized by the Church.

Originally Posted By: doug yowell

Can you give a Biblical example of where this is true?

This is taken from the GC Working Policy regarding the qualifications for ordination and what I was actually referring to:

Quote:

“A true minister does the work of the Master. He feels the

importance of his work, realizing that he sustains to the church and

to the world a relation similar to that which Christ sustained….

Those who hear him know that he has drawn near to God in

fervent, effectual prayer. The Holy Spirit has rested upon him, his

soul has felt the vital, heavenly fire, and he is able to compare

spiritual things with spiritual…. Hearts are broken by his presentation

of the love of God, and many are led to inquire, ‘What must I

do to be saved!”—The Acts of the Apostles, pp. 328, 329.

“The conversion of sinners and their sanctification through the

truth is the strongest proof a minister can have that God has called

him to the ministry. The evidence of his apostleship is written upon

the hearts of those converted, and is witnessed to by their renewed

lives….A minister is greatly strengthened by these seals of his

ministry.”—Ibid, p. 328.

Originally Posted By: Tom Wetmore

Why? Are we doomed to wait for all of the doubters to believe before we can move on?

Originally Posted By: doug yowell

Isn't that the Bible way? If we're all one body and being lead by the same Holy Spirit that will lead us into all truth,wouldn't it be better to wait(since this is not a moral issue,right?)for unity, like the church in Acts 15, than to risk dividing with the majority of the world church doubters?

You might want to read Acts 15 more carefully. Quite the opposite happened there to what is happening here. There was a disagreement about maintaining the old ways, customs and rules for the new gentile converts. The compromise was to release them from the strictures of Jewish tradition that was based on their Scripture. Reaching a compromise seemed to be a Biblical way. That is the opposite of what is being imposed on NAD by the rest of the world church. There is zero compromise.

And look how the chapter ends. Paul and Barnabas sharply disagree and decide to part company and go their own way. Hmmm… That also seemed to be the Biblical way.

[M. T. Cross]

Here are the Viking Laws for the SECC to study:

# 1 Be brave and aggressive.

Be direct.

Grab all opportunities. Use varying methods of attack.

Be versatile and agile.

Attack one target at a time.

Don't plan everything in detail.

Use top quality weapons.

# 2 Be prepared.

Keep weapons in good condition.

Keep in shape.

Find good battle comrades.

Agree on important points.

Choose one chief.

# 3 Be a good merchant.

Find out what the market needs.

Don't make promises that you can't keep.

Don't demand overpayment.

Arrange things so that you can return.

# 4 Keep the camp in order.

Keep things tidy and organized.

Arrange enjoyable activities which strengthen the group.

Make sure everyone does useful work.

Consult all members of the group for advice.

Oh no! I have corrupted OA

Good rules all of them........ I am a bit baised but I like Viking laws.

[BobRyan]

You might want to read Acts 15 more carefully. Quite the opposite happened there to what is happening here. There was a disagreement about maintaining the old ways, customs and rules for the new gentile converts. The compromise was to release them from the strictures of Jewish tradition that was based on their Scripture. Reaching a compromise seemed to be a Biblical way. That is the opposite of what is being imposed on NAD by the rest of the world church. There is zero compromise.

And look how the chapter ends. Paul and Barnabas sharply disagree and decide to part company and go their own way. Hmmm… That also seemed to be the Biblical way.

Acts 15 is a great example so also the dispute between Paul and Barnabas.

1. In Acts 15 a sharp dispute in the church is settled in favor of one of the sides - and all were required to go along with it - even if they did not like the conclusion.

2. Those "most comfortable" with accepting circumcision where those who already practiced it. This is not the big surprise that same may have at first imagined.

3. In the case of Paul and Barnabas - they were NOT disputing over whether or not to agree with the Acts 15 church-wide mandate where then one goes his own way in agreement and the other goes his own way in disagreement. Rather they were disputing on a topic not at all covered by the Acts 15 church council.

4. They were two individuals in disagreement - not two factions of an Acts 15 split deciding to "go their own way".

in Christ,

Bob

[Tom Wetmore]

Read it again, more carefully. The compromise reached was toward abandoning many of the Jewish religious practices among the gentiles. There is no indication that the Jewish Christian believers were "all required to go along with it" and stop circumcision or begin eating unclean food. The compromise allowed for different practices among different people to accommodate their cultural backgrounds, practices and comfort levels.

[Tom Wetmore]

I think it also bears consideration what resulted from the Jerusalem Council's decision to make this accommodation to cultural differences. What were the long term consequences of that decision? And consider what the results would have been, had the decision been to hold to the long held Jewish teachings and practices well founded in Scripture.

Now as suggested, compare that to the context of what obstacles we see to reaching very secularized societies and cultures where women are regarded as equal to men and afforded equal opportunities and rights to men. Would not a similar cultural accommodation make sense?

Yes, I think Acts 15 may be very instructive and a "great example" for us to follow...

[Woody]

Read it again, more carefully. The compromise reached was toward abandoning many of the Jewish religious practices among the gentiles. There is no indication that the Jewish Christian believers were "all required to go along with it" and stop circumcision or begin eating unclean food. The compromise allowed for different practices among different people to accommodate their cultural backgrounds, practices and comfort levels.

[Tom Wetmore]

Maybe there is something to this Acts 15 story that is important for our generation to learn on this topic...

[BobRyan]

Maybe there is something to this Acts 15 story that is important for our generation to learn on this topic...

Agreed. The lesson is to listen to and comply with the general council session votes - even if you don't happen to prefer the decision they made.

in Christ,

Bob

[BobRyan]

Read it again, more carefully. The compromise reached was toward abandoning many of the Jewish religious practices among the gentiles. There is no indication that the Jewish Christian believers were "all required to go along with it" and stop circumcision or begin eating unclean food. The compromise allowed for different practices among different people to accommodate their cultural backgrounds, practices and comfort levels.

[phkrause]

Interesting points Bob, a very thought provoking post.

[BobRyan]

Thanks phk -

One of the reasons that the Christian Jews were motivated to "make this idea up" about Gentiles -- when even the non-Christian Jews were not doing such a thing as a condition of worship in the synagogues, is that the Christian Gospel was having far more success with Gentiles than the old Jews non-christian bent-Bible traditionalism and the Christian Jews quickly realized that if that trend continued the entire Christian religion would be predominantly non-Jewish.

That was not a problem that the non-Christian Jews were facing so they had no need to make up that rule.

in Christ,

Bob

[CoAspen]

Originally Posted By: Tom Wetmore

Maybe there is something to this Acts 15 story that is important for our generation to learn on this topic...

Agreed. The lesson is to listen to and comply with the general council session votes - even if you don't happen to prefer the decision they made.

in Christ,

Bob

Got to love those RC concepts! Does that mean Ted is the 'pope'?