Analysis of What is Happening with the Ordination of Women Pastors

[lazarus]

Who are the "constituents" in that case and how was the agenda determined? What % of the "constituents" were conference owned and directed employees for that union?

Conference owned? LOL.

As a conference worker and someone who has sat on a number of committees and currently sit on our conference executive I have never been directed to vote or speak in a particular way. Of course there is certainly a degree of loyalty and "group-think" but to characterize workers as "conference owned" is hyperbolic.

Clearly, for some reason you have a low opinion of church workers since you seem not to think they have the integrity to make decisions based on the leading of the Spirit rather than a paycheck.

The ratio of conference workers to employees on executive committees etc. is governed by policy and not an arbitrary decision by administrators. At local conference constituency meetings the lay delegates are always a significant majority.

Quote:

I also was rudely introduced to the fact that discussion on subjects and information on decisions is not "allowed" on the floor when it comes to a vote by the real lay constituents at that meeting - in areas of conference officers.

Not sure what you are saying here. Can you give an example?

Quote:

So it is easy to see how a conference could go "off the rails" in that sort of system and it is not too difficult to see how a union of such conferences could then reflect that fact.

"Off the rails" is a considerable exaggeration since before the votes women preached, baptized, married couples, conducted funerals, etc. There is a VP of the General Conference who is a woman. The only thing women were not allowed to do is to organize a church, ordain other pastors, become a conference president. All of those things are out of the reach of most SDA male pastors too.

To recognize the gifts of these women in ministry by praying and laying on of hands, which is what ordination is in the SDA church is, is hardly going off the rails.

You must also think GC is off the rails since it has supported women in pastoral ministry for many years.

[Tom Wetmore]

...and I would add that the same process and policies regarding constituency meetings being complained about pertain to the GC level as well. The GC in session is simply a world constituency meeting of the Church.

The difference is that the ratio of representation gets thinner the further up the organizational ladder you go. That would tend to imply that the criticism expressed by Bob should be magnified more so the higher one goes.

But as you said Laz, one has to have very dim view of the integrity of church workers and a sad lack of faith in the role of the H*S in all this. As I have said, the H*S is working on everyone involved. Consider the leading metaphor of the working of the H*S as rain. Results will vary. For some the rain brings relief and life, for others, cause to complain of mud and wet feet.

[Woody]

From the beginning of time - man has wanted to have a King OTHER than Jesus. And yes - the people want the GC to be our King. What a shame that their King would go contrary to scriptures. But, a King they want. So- a King they will get.

[olger]

As we approach the end of time, it will become more and more difficult to remain faithful to Scripture while remaining, in any degree, sympathetic to the prevailing culture.

[Woody]

During the end times - it will be so tempting to go contrary to scriptures or to even make up fantasies about what scripture actually does say and promote.

[BobRyan]

...and I would add that the same process and policies regarding constituency meetings being complained about pertain to the GC level as well. The GC in session is simply a world constituency meeting of the Church.

The difference is that the ratio of representation gets thinner the further up the organizational ladder you go. That would tend to imply that the criticism expressed by Bob should be magnified more so the higher one goes.

No doubt that is true - however it is offset by the fact that to derail the entire denomination at the GC level you would have to have derailed the majority of conferences, divisions and unions that make up the entire world church.

A far more daunting task - as compared to just getting two or three conferences to go off the rails and thus take out a union my majority vote.

My point about "Conference owned" is that once leadership of just a very few men at the top of one or two conferences goes wrong on some point - they can heavily influence anyone under them whose job depends on a good review from them.

There is a very prominent "Chain of command" element at those levels.

And I think anyone who has been exposed to it - is well aware of it.

That works well if the leadership actually has a clear vision of right and wrong. But should that ever get clouded -- "look out below!".

in Christ,

Bob

[CoAspen]

I am curious as to why some, a small few, who are anti WO, still attend the SDA church. They very much say that the church is going wrong about WO and yet the church does NOT agree with that view or is it saying that WO is wrong. The constant usage of the words 'rogue', 'gone astray', insinuation that the conference leaders do not have a 'clear vision of right and wrong, etc, etc would seem to demonstrate a deep unhappiness with the church. They have said if one does not agree with leadership on an issue, that person should/would be happier elsewhere, so why are they still 'hanging around'? Very puzzling, since the .org does have their viewpoint. Makes one wonder....hmmmmm.....

[olger]

Originally Posted By: Tom Wetmore

...and I would add that the same process and policies regarding constituency meetings being complained about pertain to the GC level as well. The GC in session is simply a world constituency meeting of the Church.

The difference is that the ratio of representation gets thinner the further up the organizational ladder you go. That would tend to imply that the criticism expressed by Bob should be magnified more so the higher one goes.

No doubt that is true - however it is offset by the fact that to derail the entire denomination at the GC level you would have to have derailed the majority of conferences, divisions and unions that make up the entire world church.

A far more daunting task - as compared to just getting two or three conferences to go off the rails and thus take out a union my majority vote.

My point about "Conference owned" is that once leadership of just a very few men at the top of one or two conferences goes wrong on some point - they can heavily influence anyone under them whose job depends on a good review from them.

There is a very prominent "Chain of command" element at those levels.

And I think anyone who has been exposed to it - is well aware of it.

That works well if the leadership actually has a clear vision of right and wrong. But should that ever get clouded -- "look out below!".

in Christ,

Bob

A very excellent point Bob. Many executive committees in America are stacked with liberals. Here's why.

Conservatives are generally focused on their work, giving bible studies, taking care of their families, ministries etc, and they are not interested in politics. Thus positions of political "leadership" are sought and filled by liberal thinking and leaning individuals. And these liberal leaning individuals want to take our church in a direction most of us would prefer not to see it go.

g

[BobRyan]

I am curious as to why some, a small few, who are anti WO, still attend the SDA church. They very much say that the church is going wrong about WO and yet the church does NOT agree with that view or is it saying that WO is wrong. The constant usage of the words 'rogue', 'gone astray', insinuation that the conference leaders do not have a 'clear vision of right and wrong, etc, etc would seem to demonstrate a deep unhappiness with the church.

[lazarus]

Many executive committees in America are stacked with liberals.

Stacked? I wonder who stacks them? Church members?

Quote:

Conservatives are generally focused on their work, giving bible studies, taking care of their families, ministries etc, and they are not interested in politics.

Why make these wild unprovable generalizations? I doesn't help you case. It's just strange.

There are many conservatives I know who expend a lot of energy complaining about liberals, write lengthy emails, post comments about the way the church is etc. but yet have never led anyone to Jesus. They will circulate Youtube vids, watch their favorite speakers, gripe about this and that, but never share the good news. The loudest but yet the most dysfunctional.

Quote:

Thus positions of political "leadership" are sought and filled by liberal thinking and leaning individuals. And these liberal leaning individuals want to take our church in a direction most of us would prefer not to see it go.

For conservatives, your perspective is I'm sure comforting but could it be that most SDA's do not want to take the church in the direction your brand of conservatism wants to? I think so. My understanding is that the Annual council was significant in that those in authority stepped back, took a breath and moderated their position. This was not about some conservative ideal it was about how we deal with each other when we disagree.

Our biggest challenge is that there are conservatives and liberals who are more focused on fighting about peripheral issues while our communities are not being reached with the message of Jesus.

One of the lay members of our executive committee took the devotion earlier this week. He and his wife have spent the last four years building up the work in a poverty stricken area of a country in the far east. They have built a community center, a church and plan a radio station. The stories were powerful and moving. The commitment of he and his wife to Jesus was evident. The spirit and work is typical of the members of the committee I serve on.

It's disturbing to me that you would write in such a cavalier fashion about lay people who serve faithfully and without compensation. Your sentiments have no basis in fact and are as the Bible puts it evil surmising.

[CoAspen]

Quote:

I object to the method of destroying the SDA denomination to promote it.

Quote:

a few odd conferences near the SECC and in the Columbia Union are not thinking straight.

Quote:

I don't object to WO

Splitting hairs of your objections? Not sure what you are even saying!!! You call those ordaining women as being

Quote:

a rogue conference or union

Can you tell us what method you wouldn't object too??

[olger]

Grandpa said if you toss a rock into a dog pack the one that yelps is the one that got hit.

[lazarus]

Grandpa said if you toss a rock into a dog pack the one that yelps is the one that got hit.

Yeah, I remember the kids who used to throw rocks at animals. They had a lot of unresolved issues.

[olger]

Thanks!

[Johann]

Last Sunday the Dutch Union in general session also voted to ordain women, not later than six months after the next GC session.

Here is a report by the union secretary:

http://spectrummagazine.org/blog/2012/11/12/road-womens-ordination-netherlands

[olger]

Cancer spreads rapidly when it isn't treated properly.

[Johann]

Cancer spreads rapidly when it isn't treated properly.

If you read the report thoroughly you would have noticed the secretary compared the situation with what he had experienced in South Africa where he grew up, how the black people were treated by the white minority.

Was that the cancer you are referring to?

[Johann]

Here are the "critical" comments by the TED Division President:

Quote:

Dr Bertil Wiklander, President of the Trans-European Division, was the official representative from the Division at the Session. Asked to make a comment, he responded: “It is good that the church supports women and men as equals in the priesthood of all believers. In 1990 the General Conference decided to withhold the ordination of women to the gospel ministry, not because of theological reasons, but for practical reasons, such as the differences in cultural contexts and the danger of losing our world-wide unity. I understand that some in our Division are now impatient, because 22 years have passed and while more and more women have accepted the call to serve as ministers in the Trans-European Division, little progress has been made on the matter of their ordination as pastors. I also appreciate that there is, in the Netherlands Union, a clear commitment to work with the Church in the study of the Theology of Ordination, including Women's Ordination. I appreciate that the Netherlands Union does not intend to implement ordination of women until the current process has culminated at the General Conference Session in 2015.

However, what I pointed out to the Session delegates on 11 November, is that I think the decision would have benefitted by two things: Firstly, the action would have been improved by recognising in its language that the Union has already, through the Trans-European Division, asked the General Conference for permission to ordain women and that, as a division family, we are waiting for their answer, which will come in 2015, and that, therefore, it looks somewhat odd to now decide to do in the future what you have already asked for permission to do, before you have received the answer from the General Conference. Secondly, I think it is in principle, inadvisable to word an action now about what you will do in three years, since nobody knows exactly what the result will be of the study of the Theology of Ordination. The Church may, for example, change its policy language and use different and more biblical terminology about the induction of pastors, which the action of the Netherlands Union Session would want to recognise. In addition, there are members in the church in the Netherlands who are not yet clear on Women's Ordination, and the study process that is now in progress would in my view help them. With this action being taken now, these people are not given time to understand what may come from the world-church study process, but you tell them in advance what the outcome will be and what they are to think.

Having said that, I want to underline that the Trans-European Division is deeply committed to working for the unity of the Church, while doing all we can to empower men and women in their spiritual and administrative leadership in our church. The Holy Spirit is guiding us through the ministry of Ellen White, who said: ‘Women who are willing to consecrate some of their time to the service of the Lord should be appointed ... They should be set apart to this work by prayer and the laying on of hands. In some cases they will need to counsel with the church officers or the minister; but if they are devoted women, maintaining a vital connection with God, they will be a power for good in the church.’ (Review and Herald, 9 July, 1895, p. 434)

I continue to pray that God will lead His Church to full clarity on the matter of "Ordination" and that we will be given the wisdom to handle the current situation in a true Christian Spirit, in patience, humility, with a concern also for the interests of others, and a commitment to do what is right”, concluded Wiklander.

For more information about the Seventh-day Adventist Church in the Netherlands, please visit www.adventist.nl [tedNEWS]

[Gerr]

There will be, among the remnant of these last days, as there were with ancient Israel, those who wish to move independently, who are not willing to submit to the teachings of the Spirit of God, and who will not listen to advice or counsel. Let such ever bear in mind that God has a church upon the earth, to which He has delegated power. Men will want to follow their own independent judgment, despising counsel and reproof; but just as surely as they do this they will depart from the faith, and disaster and ruin of souls will follow. Those who rally now to support and build up the truth of God are ranging themselves on one side, standing united in heart, mind, and voice in defense of the truth.--Letter 104, 1894. {3SM 23.1}

But we should be very cautious not to advance too fast, lest we be obliged to retrace our steps. In reforms, we would better come one step short of the mark than to go one step beyond it. And if there is error at all, let it be on the side next to the people. {CD 468.1}

[olger]

As we near the end of time it will be impossible to maintain fidelity to the Bible while remaining in any degree sympathetic to the culture around us.

[Naomi]

As we near the end of time it will be impossible to maintain fidelity to the Bible while remaining in any degree sympathetic to the culture around us.

[Tom Wetmore]

There will be, among the remnant of these last days, as there were with ancient Israel, those who wish to move independently, who are not willing to submit to the teachings of the Spirit of God, and who will not listen to advice or counsel. Let such ever bear in mind that God has a church upon the earth, to which He has delegated power. Men will want to follow their own independent judgment, despising counsel and reproof; but just as surely as they do this they will depart from the faith, and disaster and ruin of souls will follow. Those who rally now to support and build up the truth of God are ranging themselves on one side, standing united in heart, mind, and voice in defense of the truth.--Letter 104, 1894. {3SM 23.1}

But we should be very cautious not to advance too fast, lest we be obliged to retrace our steps. In reforms, we would better come one step short of the mark than to go one step beyond it. And if there is error at all, let it be on the side next to the people. {CD 468.1}

Seems that this could cut both ways, and very much depends on ones point of view. But the last paragraph seems odd since this is an issue on which advancing too fast certainly cannot said to be happening. Within our own lifetime, it has been 40 years, since the early 1970's, that this issue has been an issue under consideration. The progress that has been made has been painfully slow for sure. But this issue is not new to this generation of Adventists. It was a matter addressed from the very beginning of the Church.

[Tom Wetmore]

As we near the end of time it will be impossible to maintain fidelity to the Bible while remaining in any degree sympathetic to the culture around us.

Which can mean very different things to different people...

Shall we apply that generalization on this issue to the prevailing culture around most of our brothers and sisters outside of North America, Europe and Australia?

I am inclined to agree that now in this time of the end it is impossible to maintain Biblical fidelity on the treatment and role of women while remaining in any degree sympathetic to the prevailing culture in much of the world.

[Gerr]

Originally Posted By: Gerry Cabalo

There will be, among the remnant of these last days, as there were with ancient Israel, those who wish to move independently, who are not willing to submit to the teachings of the Spirit of God, and who will not listen to advice or counsel. Let such ever bear in mind that God has a church upon the earth, to which He has delegated power. Men will want to follow their own independent judgment, despising counsel and reproof; but just as surely as they do this they will depart from the faith, and disaster and ruin of souls will follow. Those who rally now to support and build up the truth of God are ranging themselves on one side, standing united in heart, mind, and voice in defense of the truth.--Letter 104, 1894. {3SM 23.1}

But we should be very cautious not to advance too fast, lest we be obliged to retrace our steps. In reforms, we would better come one step short of the mark than to go one step beyond it. And if there is error at all, let it be on the side next to the people. {CD 468.1}

Seems that this could cut both ways, and very much depends on ones point of view. But the last paragraph seems odd since this is an issue on which advancing too fast certainly cannot said to be happening. Within our own lifetime, it has been 40 years, since the early 1970's, that this issue has been an issue under consideration. The progress that has been made has been painfully slow for sure. But this issue is not new to this generation of Adventists. It was a matter addressed from the very beginning of the Church.

It may cut both ways, but who has the greater authority? The whole body or just part of the body? It seems to me, an arm (SECC) and a foot (CUC) have gone off on their own without regard to the whole body. Agitate for whatever changes we might want to make, but making independent decisions against the wishes of the whole body does not bode well for a healthy body.

[CoAspen]

Quote:

.....but making independent decisions against the wishes of the whole body does not bode well for a healthy body.

That has happened before in the opposite when the 'whole body' refused to go into the promised land. Have we not wandered around long enough?