Trans-European Division votes on WO

[Tom Wetmore]

Trans-European Division has just voted and is the 4th world division to vote in favor of WO. The other three are NAD, SPD and EUD. That represents 1.8 million of the world membership.

[olger]

So ten percent.

[olger]

Those divisions are still obligated to abide by the TOSC conclusions if they are voted in 2015. They will be.

[Tom Wetmore]

And if the GC TOSC concludes that there is no clear Biblical impediment to WO and that the divisions may handle WO as appropriate in their own territory and the GC votes to act accordingly will you accept it and abide by it?

Or is that too hypothetical for you?

There is a distinct possibility that the GC TOSC could reach that conclusion and make that recommendation and the delegates at the Session might reject it as they have done in the past. A consensus of our best theologians after months, if not years, of thorough and careful study say one thing and the delegates say another after a few hours, at best, of debate.

What then?

[ClubV12]

I'll go with the highest authority on earth, the delegates in session. Everyone else, TOSC, NAD, everyone, will have to accept their vote as Church law on the issue.

As there is no clear violation of a direct command of God, to ordain or not ordain women, you have no choice but to abide by the ruling of the highest authority on earth. Regardless of how many committees there are or what they say, when the smoke clears, ONLY those chosen delegates become the final and highest authority. To which, there is no appeal.

[olger]

And if the GC TOSC concludes that there is no clear Biblical impediment to WO and that the divisions may handle WO as appropriate in their own territory and the GC votes to act accordingly will you accept it and abide by it?

Or is that too hypothetical for you?

There is a distinct possibility that the GC TOSC could reach that conclusion and make that recommendation and the delegates at the Session might reject it as they have done in the past. A consensus of our best theologians after months, if not years, of thorough and careful study say one thing and the delegates say another after a few hours, at best, of debate.

What then?

We'll see.

Patience Tom.

og

[ClubV12]

I suspect a friend of mine is considering termination of his Adventist employment, at a high level, if the G.C. rules FOR W.O. He personally feels this issue is so clear in the bible, that women should not be ordained, he is willing to give up his career over it.

I'm sure there are others also considering termination of their employment if the G.C. DOESN'T vote for womens ordination!

This is madness, as James White said of those during the Civil War who refused to serve in the armed forces because it violated their conscience. Those that refused to serve could be charged with treason and be sentenced to death. They would be committing SUICIDE, they would not die a martyrs death, they would die the death of an idiot!

So it will be for those who would sacrafice their career over a ruling by the G.C. pro or con for womens ordination. The issue simply does not rise to the level of doctrine or test of faith. It does not rise to the level of "obeying God rather than man". Those who would sacrafice their career over this, are, as James White would say filled with "madness".

Thats why the only reasonable thing to do, is honor the G.C.'s decision. If you don't like it, fight honorably against it with pen and voice. But do it carefully, with respect. In time, perhaps the issue will come around again!

[debbym]

Thank-you for sharing this news Tom.

[Tom Wetmore]

Here is a full account of it - http://www.ted-adventist.org/news/ted-ex...er-distinctions

[CyberGuy]

I'll go with the highest authority on earth, the delegates in session. Everyone else, TOSC, NAD, everyone, will have to accept their vote as Church law on the issue.

As there is no clear violation of a direct command of God, to ordain or not ordain women, you have no choice but to abide by the ruling of the highest authority on earth. Regardless of how many committees there are or what they say, when the smoke clears, ONLY those chosen delegates become the final and highest authority. To which, there is no appeal.

Church law? No church policy. Policy can be changed in division per division. Church policy used to pay women less than men. NAD was forced by the US federal government to pay women the same as men for the same job even though policy said differently. I expect these divisions will ordain women anyway after 2015 regardless if the vote of the world church. That vote will continue to come up and it will get closer and closer as the old guard in the church dies or retires and the new generation comes up who want equality for the genders.

Now when it comes to DOCTRINE. Yes I would agree that when the world church votes on DOCTRINE that the entire church should follow that. Church policy is another matter. It is more of a guideline rather than law. It is changed or ignored when the laws of the land conflict with the policy. Doctrine on the other hand should not and cannot be ignored even if it conflicts with the law of the land.

You seem to put policy up there on the same level as Doctrine. It is not. I have no problem setting aside policy if I feel it is unfair to people in the church as not ordaining women is.

[olger]

Male leadership is a doctrine. It comes from the Bible, of course.

The issue has wrongly been argued by progressives (or liberals) as one of equality. The impetus for that argument comes from external cultural pressure, and is then eisogeted by possibly well-meaning individuals trying to construct a biblical basis for that impetus.

And God's Word remains the same. Nature has no regard for equality, and each one of us is born differently from each other. We are diverse and dissimilar in our roles, talents, physical aspects, intellect, and emotions; and the sexes are inherently different. This is a good thing, made beautiful by cooperation. Feminism makes our differences ugly.

`oG

[Neil D]

Where do you get that "male leadership is a doctrine"?

Explain what you mean that "Nature has no regard for equality"...What do you mean by "Nature"?

Can't it be argued that if "each one of us is born differently from each other" then we are all equal, gender included? If we are all " diverse, and dissimilar in our roles" ect, then we are all diversely the same, with one exception....The sexes are separated by anatomical differences....These anatomical differences, speaking collectively, have only one purpose... procreation...which begs the question- When procreation is no longer a primary purpose for our being, does that mean the mature no longer have purpose in this religious life?

I see no command in the 10 commandments that men are to be the leaders. I see men who have decided on how to use their strength to accomplish goals...and from that, women have allowed men to use their strength to accomplish those goals as they see fit and they have become leaders on how they want to use that strength. I also see from the NT, hardcore examples of female leadership. Because, "Leadership" can also come from other areas of behavior other than strength. A successful business can make one a leader in how to sell, a successful educator can be a leader in how he unfolds information to accepting minds...Traits that be used to advance the Gospel...and it is the Gospel that needs these talents to become fully realized, culminating in the 2nd Coming which is the goal of the Great Commission. God will use whatever means to fulfill this One Goal. Ordination is only mankind's spiritual response to God empowering a person's God given traits....

But Sin and greed has infiltrated the church, and men have desired that recognition of God's empowering...and sought the rite of ordination to 'prove' that God was with them. That is why those who truely are of God, don't seek the ordination rite....as shown by EGW...Let the works do the convincing, not the pleading/arguements....

[Tom Wetmore]

Male leadership is a doctrine...

`oG

Our doctrine is stated in the 28 Fundamental Beliefs. Please tell us which one of those actually says that. I just reread them and I don't see it in any of the 28.

[Kevin H]

Male leadership is a doctrine. It comes from the Bible, of course.

Archaeology and linguistic and cultural studies about the Bible questions that assumption...

[olger]

Doctrine is a "true teaching" according to the Good Book.

courage,

G

[ClubV12]

While there is room for what Kevin speaks of, an "academic" interpretation of biblical text, that must not be the end of it. There is also room for a simple man, simple reading the bible and understanding it as common sense.

Much is lost when academia is done "analyzing" to death some verse(s). Sometimes, much is gained.

The 28 fundamental beliefs are not the entire doctrine of the Church nor are they specific in every detail. They are a guideline, they form "policy".

W.O. is much more than just "policy" or a "suggestion" to be followed as any one individual or group may see it. It rises to the level of doctrine, even if the word does not directly apply.

This is NOT an issue for "academia" to resolve for the "unlearned" Church members! This is a doctrine where comman sense, plain reading of the bible at face value, academic view points and spiritual guidance must all come together. NOT influenced by young, old, society, current trends or popular opinion.

Creeping compromise, the very hallmark of waiting for the old gaurd to die out so "books of a new order" can replace the old pillars of our faith.

[Neil D]

This is NOT an issue for "academia" to resolve for the "unlearned" Church members! This is a doctrine where comman sense, plain reading of the bible at face value, academic view points and spiritual guidance must all come together. NOT influenced by young, old, society, current trends or popular opinion.

IOWs, a cursory reading...

You get the general idea, depending upon how fine a reader you are ..whether you get the detail or not...whether you have dyslexia or not...or are prone to reading narrowly.... BUT You get the general feel/tone when reading the text...

...........and then, someone who had done some more reading, not a scholar, but someone whose hobby is to peruse the history books, or someone who likes philosophy/debate and brings up a point that you didn't think about...and in the course of the discussion, s/he brings up a point that you hadn't thought of....or brings out the context of the passage....or shows the true meaning of the greek word that the whole passage hinges on....and you look like a blooming idiot... or at least, that's how you feel...

So, you do some research, and read more...you answer the questions, and become a mini-scholar...you know the subject/passage matter and everything the bible has to say about that subject...and you realize that the guy was right....and you decide to side with the guy because you want to be on the bible's side....

We tend to call this sort of thing "spiritual growth".....and we deem it a good thing....

[Johann]

The report under discussion here has a total of 830 pages which deals with these issues:

APPENDIX A:

The Research Task Defined by the GC BRICOM on May 1, 2012

We divided the tasks listed into the following seven main groups:

1. Principles of Biblical Interpretation

a. What view of the Bible, exegesis, and interpretation should the Church agree on, as it studies the theology of ordination and the gender issue?

b. What does ‘plain reading’ mean in the light of Ellen White's counsel that ‘The word of God is infallible; accept it as it reads; look with confidence to God; trust him to qualify you for his service’ (R&H, February 11, 1896)?

2. The Biblical View of Church Leaders, their Selection and Induction to Office

a. How is biblical ordination to be understood? How are we to understand the origin, basis, and significance in the Bible of concepts like ordination, anointing, consecration, commissioning, and the laying on of hands?

b. What is the relationship between authority and ordination from a biblical perspective?

c. Why do we have ordination at three levels: deacons, elders, and pastors? What are the biblical distinctions?

d. What is the nature of pastoral ministry? What are the similarities and differences between priests and pastors, and their leadership?

e. What does it mean to be a leader in the church? How were leaders chosen in the Bible and how are they chosen today?

f. Terms for study should include doulos, diakonos, presbuteros, and episkopos.

g. Does the Bible teach leadership role distinctions in the gospel ministry between male and female and are they still valid today?

h. What are the roles or functions God assigned to males and females in the Bible? Study the functions of man and woman at creation, and the changes that happened at the fall. Does Paul's interpretation of events before the fall and at the fall, as stated in 1 Timothy 2:12-13, justify only male leadership in the church? And is this text still valid for leadership qualifications in the church today?

i. Why were priests in Israel always male? Was it cultural?

j. Why were all the apostles male? Would the selection of the apostles not have been the best occasion to introduce a change and choose women in that role?

k. How does a study of biblical patriarchy relate to biblical leadership in the home and in the church today? Does the Bible present an over-arching patriarchy for both the home and church?

l. Does the biblical headship role of man in the family have any influence on the headship position in the church, ‘the family of God’, or are the two completely separate? And if so, on what basis can we maintain that? (Study 1 Timothy 2:12-14; 3:1-7; Ephesians 5:17-33; Titus 1:5-9.)

3. Seventh-day Adventist Understandings of Ordination – Past and Present

a. Review the historical background of the concept of ordination in the SDA Church and of the current position of the Church with a view to issues therein.

b. Is the church currently employing the biblical understanding of ordination correctly?

c. What was Ellen White’s understanding of ordination itself and is the church currently employing this practice correctly?

d. How does Ellen White see the relationship between authority and ordination?

e. Ellen White refers to women being set apart by the laying on of hands for work like literature evangelism. Does this mean ordination is merely the setting apart of someone to some specific work?

f. Study Ellen White’s clear and succinct statements on what ordination is and what it is not in the book The Acts of the Apostles. In addition, she stated that ‘the inspired apostle’ Paul's qualifications for local church leadership need to be followed.

g. She mentioned that in some churches the ordination of ‘elders have been premature, the Bible rule has been disregarded, and consequently grievous trouble has been brought upon the church’ (5 T 617). What does that refer to?

h. She quoted 1Titus 1:5-7 and 1Timothy 5:22 as the context of the Bible rule that upholds ordination of only male elders and ministers. Is this rule still valid today?

i. Does Ellen White confirm the existence of leadership role distinctions between male and female in ministry?

j. Does Ellen White present an over-arching patriarchy for both the home and church?

4. Review of the Development of Ordination in Post-Biblical Times and in Some Major Christian Denominations

Review the history of ordination within the Christian church through the centuries, including the theology, history, practice, antecedents, cultural aspects, rites, and so on.

5. Theology of Ordination

a. Make an analysis of the biblical material and a synthesis of its theological teaching on ordination.

b. In view of the fact that the priesthood of all believers does not do away with the clergy in the church but only refers to the change that now all believers have direct access to God, what is the relationship between the priesthood of all believers, the elected leadership of elders and deacons (1 Timothy 3 and Titus 1), and the gifts of the Spirit?

6. Women’s Ordination

Make an application of the theology of ordination to men and women in the SDA Church.

7. Hermeneutics of Change

Are there biblical examples of how change happens? Do changes always constitute a new norm, or are they at times God’s accommodation to less than ideal circumstances?

[Johann]

This report is probably the most thorough investigation done by any division of the Bible texts involved, the writings of Ellen White, and the history of ordination through the centuries.

The report was thoroughly discussed before the final vote, according to an e-mail I received from one of the presidents involved. After the discussion a secret ballot was taken where every delegate voted in favor.

I find this remarkable because we were told that earlier, probably a couple of years before, one of the unions involved was against the ordination of women. After this investigation and discussion, they were all in favor of ordaining women.

Although the report recommends the General Conference approves a world wide ordination of women, it requests that if this is not possible yet, then it be allowed in areas were it is regarded appropriate.

[Gregory Matthews]

Than you for that link, Tom.

As I read it I was so impressed with recommendation # 2, that I wanted to copy it here for comment.

But, as I read on, I came to the conclusion that I could not separate # 2 from the other eleven. The twelve recommendations, if accepted and put into practice would change the way we do business.

[Tom Wetmore]

Here are the twelve recommendations from TED:

1. Focus on the Mission of God and All Being Servants for the Salvation of the World. The entire matter of ordination should be seen and our terminology should be defined in the context of God’s purpose for the world as the Creator in Genesis 1-2 and the end-time vision of Revelation 21-22. This will revive the doctrine of the Priesthood of All Believers and the inspired biblical theology of mission, church, and service. It will give a theological foundation for activating all members in mission.

2. Remove the Current Distance between Clergy – Laity and the Levels of Ordination. We recommend that the Church embraces truly biblical principles and frees itself from the continuing dependence on ‘Roman’ practices, for example, by:

(a) Finding ways to visibly include the role of lay people in the ordination ceremony (lay people are theologically included in the idea of the church delegating authority to ordained pastors, and lay people participate in the conference/union committee decisions to ordain a pastor);

( Removing any idea of ‘(apostolic) succession’;

© Removing the existing distance between clergy and laity, and the idea that the ordained clergy forms a separate class of members who are elevated to a higher status than others;

(d) Removing the levels of ordination between all the different ‘servants’ who work in the church (globally and locally) and applying, rather, one concept of servanthood but with distinctions of duties and responsibilities which are documented in written credentials;

(e) Removing the intricate differences between various levels of ministry, such as the licensed and ordained minister, the licensed minister and the ordained local church elder, the pastor and the local church elder, etc.;

(f) Admitting that there is no biblical command to ordain anyone by the imposition of hands and that there is no consistent biblical formula for how a leader is inducted to office in the Christian church.

3. An Inclusive Ministry. Where it is culturally appropriate, the Church should allow for an inclusive and gender-neutral ministry, which means that credentials will be granted to men and women on equal terms for all offices which require ordination, presently the gospel minister, the elder, and the deacon/deaconess. This means that the Church removes all gender distinctions in its Working Policy related to the ministry and thus fulfils the biblical intent of the Working Policy BA 55 on ‘Human Relations’.

If this cannot be implemented across the world at the same time, the Church should allow it where unions/divisions request permission to do so. This may mean that the world-wide recognition of an ordination in one country may have to be reworded in the Working Policy to the effect that an ordained minister’s credentials are subject to the acceptance of a receiving division/union/conference.

4. Recommendation to the GC Session in 2015. We propose that a recommendation be brought to the General Conference Session in 2015, that it approves a revised policy in which unions, whose constituency meetings in session have voted approval and whose division committee has voted approval, be allowed to maintain an inclusive pastoral ministry which removes all gender distinctions within the work of the church in that union territory.

5. Theology and Practice of Ordination – Education of Members. The Church should continue its development of the biblical theology of ordination. Based on our study, we urge the Church to proceed in considerably more detail than in the brief consensus statement now considered by the Theology of Ordination Study Committee. This should be accompanied by an organised and intentional attempt to educate members regarding the biblical rationale for ordination and what Seventh-day Adventists believe about it in view of the teaching of the Bible, our only authority for life and practice.

There should be an on-going teaching of church members regarding the mission of God, the nature of the Church and ordination. This is especially important for new members who come from Roman Catholic or Orthodox backgrounds. The Roman Catholic Church has extensive catechetical teachings about ‘Orders’, which is one of seven sacraments and lays the foundation for the priesthood and the right to determine a person’s salvation or condemnation. ‘Orders’ are part of even brief and popular Catholic Catechisms, but in the Seventh-day Adventist Church, we say almost nothing about ordination. This deficit has generated bias and unwarranted traditions that have determined members’ opinion on both ordination in general and women’s ordination. The text of the Working Policy is hardly known by members and is even insufficient as it now stands.

B. A REDUCED CEREMONIAL EMPHASIS:

6. Consider the Best Terminology. The Church should carefully consider the wisdom of using the term ‘ordination’, which is ambiguous and loaded with meanings from the Roman Catholic Church and various Protestant denominations that are not biblical and that are confusing our members who have come to us from other churches. Its origins in the pagan Roman empirical administration, its laws and idol worship, and in the false Christian theology introduced by Tertullian and Cyprian and others after them, make a Seventh-day Adventist hesitant and uncomfortable about this term. We recommend therefore that terms that are closer to the biblical terminology are introduced, such as ‘appoint’, ‘commission’, ‘dedicate’. If for traditional reasons, it is decided to keep ‘ordination’ as a technical term in denominational language, it should be acknowledged that each language in the world has ways of referring to the concept of ‘ordination’ that does not reflect the English ‘ordination’ or Latin ordinatio. For example, Greek Adventists use the common Greek term of cheirotoneo, which is found in Acts 14:23. Other options abound in various languages and the Church should acknowledge the wish of a union to choose better terms in the local language than ‘ordination’ or ‘ordain’.

7. Remove Ritualistic and Consecrational Flavour. Seeing how ‘ordination’ is treated in the New Testament – which is where we must find our guidance on Christian ministry – we recommend that the ritualistic and consecrational flavour of the act of ordination, its vague mixture of granting the Holy Spirit or gifts for ministry and ecclesiastical authority be radically toned done and removed from policy and practice.

8. Make the Imposition of Hands Optional. While an installation ceremony is a positive and needed feature in church life, we recommend that the imposition of hands be an optional part of the ceremony. In the New Testament, the apostle, servants/ministers, overseers/elders are nowhere ordained by imposition of hands in clear terms. For these functions, however, there is a clear biblical ground for talking about being ‘appointed’.

9. Emphasis on God’s Blessing and Practical Aspects. We recommend that the emphasis in the ceremony be placed on the public recognition of the ordinand, the church’s confirmation of the ordinand’s call from God and commitment to serve Christ and the Church, the Church’s approval of the ordinand as teacher, preacher and spiritual leader, and the invocation of God’s blessing.

10. Review Who Is To Be Ordained in the Church. A special study should be conducted regarding the biblical basis for applying ordination to some offices and not others in the Church. All office holders in the Church are servants of God, but the Bible is not clear on who is ‘ordained’ and who is not. All officials at local church level and in conferences, unions, and the General Conference can be introduced to their functions when they start. This is practical and encouraging, but the biblical basis for ordaining only the pastor, elder, deacon/deaconess is very scant.

C. SOME OTHER RECOMMENDATIONS:

11. Separate Ordination from Election to an Organisational Office of Leadership. A clearer distinction should be made between the ordination (i.e. the ordained minister’s credentials) and the election of leaders for regular church offices in missions, conferences, unions, divisions, and the General Conference. Ordination for the gospel ministry should be for the ministry of the word (Acts 6:2) and not for administrative positions. If an ordained pastor is elected for a church office of organisational leadership, this is a different task from being a pastor (although some functions may overlap). Holding ministerial credentials may certainly be a merit of one who is elected as a leader, but in its theology and policy, the Church should ensure that the two are clearly distinguished, so that ordination does not automatically imply administrative or organisational leadership.

12. Improve Ministerial Training, Education, Preparation for Ordination, and Clarify Processes, Requirements, and Qualifications. We recommend that, based on the study we submit, the Church sharpens its processes and requirements for pastoral education and training, and develops better means by which the qualifications of an ordinand are examined, evaluated, and developed. [tedNEWS]

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

2e makes me wonder if a legal interjection might happen... for example, who would be officially recognized by the church AND the government to perform marriage ceremonies... it sounds like a local church elder would have the credentials ...... wouldn't it be a bit cumbersome for the church to add all these extra people onto the logs of those recognized by the church to do specific things?

And then, why should anyone bother to go to the seminary? (what's the purpose of that anyhow? It's not necessary in order to be a pastor...)

[Kevin H]

i. Why were priests in Israel always male? Was it cultural?

j. Why were all the apostles male? Would the selection of the apostles not have been the best occasion to introduce a change and choose women in that role?

These two questions make assumptions that are going to effect what they will see and what they will overlook at they evaluate the evidence.

A good first question to ask is, are my assumptions correct? Were all the priest in Israel male or does the Bible support the idea that there were also female priests as well? I have heard arguments for female priests including the woman who drove the stake through the head of the enemy in the story of Deborah. As well as Isaiah's wife among others. And those who are more skilled in the languages should look at these texts.

Also, not all the apostles were male. Only the 12 "Full Time" disciples who would have 24 hour access to the teacher, with a lot of discussions when relaxing in bed before dozing off. Remember Jesus also had 70 part time disciples for a second level of apostlestic leadership and there is evidence that this level included women.

Too often our scholars want to study how Christian Scholars interpreted the texts in the past to reach conclusions. They should include in their studies the archaeology. Look at the debate in Judaism of the time of Christ over the controversy about ordaining women back then. How did the schools who rejected to ordination of women respond, how did the schools who ordained women respond. How did they ordain? Do we see anything in the words or actions of Jesus or Paul that are in harmony with the one school or the other.

[ClubV12]

Item number 11 is vitally important. It appears to me that the ordination process has become to much like getting another degree in college to move up the career ladder. It cheapens the meaning and the spirituality such an act should carry.

Obviously not all ordinations are like that, but even a few is to many when it is used as little more than a spring board to enhance ones career.

[lazarus]

So it will be for those who would sacrafice their career over a ruling by the G.C. pro or con for womens ordination. The issue simply does not rise to the level of doctrine or test of faith. It does not rise to the level of "obeying God rather than man". Those who would sacrafice their career over this, are, as James White would say filled with "madness".

I'm puzzled! Didn't you say this was a life or death issue?