North American Delegates Meet after Women’s Ordination Fails
By AT News Team, July 9, 2015: Pastor Dan Jackson, president of the Adventist denomination in North America, called for a meeting of all the North American delegates in room 103 of the Convention Center after the session ended its meeting Wednesday (July 8) with a vote against the concept of allowing GC divisions to deal with ordination within their territories. The room was packed with dispirited delegates.
Jackson’s main message was that even though the proposal failed, the North American Division (NAD) would continue its unwavering support of its women pastors. He asked for them to stand, and the whole room gave them an extended applause. There must have been about 15 to 20 of them, though Adventist Today was unable to get an accurate count because it soon became a standing ovation. Then Jackson asked that the delegates surround each woman pastor and pray for them. Soon there were clumps of prayer bands all around the room surrounding each female pastor.
Jackson also reminded the delegates that they were still members of the world church, and emphasized that NAD was not in rebellion, and that under his leadership, they never would be in rebellion. Had an African delegate been listening in, however, Jackson’s continued fervent support of women’s ordination might have been hard to reconcile with those pacific words.
So what now? It seems all the GC decision does is prohibit one word (ordination) in association with women clergy but still allow another word (commissioning), connected with the rite of laying on hands, which biblically is the same ceremony anyway. It also seems women are prohibited from some of the highest office spots and some administrative roles (such as consecrating new churches) but otherwise continue to have the full role of women ministers. Women can also continue to be ordained as elders bizarrely, even though many on both sides of the WO debate see the office of elder synonymous as that of minister.
So if the GC prevents equality by allowing women from being “ordained” why don’t all Unions in favour of WO simply use the term “commission” for all new clergy – both men and women?
Alternatively, why not avoid both terms altogether and simply call it in English “appointed through the rite of laying on hands” and strip the words “ordain” and “commission” from all literature, communications and everyday usage.
Those two solution would uphold the GC decision but effectively render the whole issue quite irrelevant? Wouldn’t it?
Absolutely correct, Steve. And you are in good company with Dr. George Knight, who had virtually the same idea: http://EqualOrdination.com/george-knight/
This is the most logical response!
The wording of the motion would have begun a pathway to division among the world church because it allowed each division to decide: A woman ordained as a pastor in the NAD might not be recognized in the E. Nigerian Union.
Personally, I believe that God ordains and the laying on of hands is simply the church recognizing that God has sent called the individual. I was baptized by a woman
I am a pastor from Malawi Africa, in favor of the ordination of women.
What I do not understand is how the third world church of which I am part fails to see the GC’s filthy rag under the NO vote to WO: namely, that unbiblical male headship authority over females suposedly derived from the creation account in Genesis 1-3 and Paul’s writings in 1 Corinthians (11) and 1 Timothy 2 & 3.
Isn’t it disturbing to find the General Conference supporting false theology from aberrated hermeneutics in order to inordinately bar women from being ordained as pastors?
How could the GC employ such politics as were coined in an immutable/if not an eternal motion, that could not be amended in the question that demanded NO/YES votes from GC Session delegates who were not even well informed of the Scriptural interpretations and debates at the core of the ordination conflict.
In my discerning perception, the General Conference leadership should assess itself as to whether the GC is not dividing God’s Church on a purely an insignificant issue as far as ordination even of women is concerned in salvific terms.
There isn’t any biblical reason why women should not be ordained to ministry. The adamancy and tenacity with which the GC holds on to this false theology and pragmatic discrimination calls for a stronger critical function to fearlessly engage the GC leadership.
Otherwise, even SDA theological education will be rendered irrelevant to whatever popularized mission…
If the GC won’t allow our women clergy to be raised up, why don’t their male colleagues in solidarity abase themselves in solidarity. I believe some men are already only “commissioned” and not “ordained” as clergy?
Right on both counts.
Right. That is what Dr. George Knight said he would be willing to do. And he said it would not make any difference — because theologically, ordination and commissioning are the same thing. http://EqualOrdination.com/george-knight/
I personally have known an SdA elder since he was a child and he turned in his ordination paper many years ago which had no signifcance at all to his continue employment. It’s just a piece of paper. But to most men it is so important that they want to make sure that no women can have it! Silly? Yes, because by women also being ordained it somehow lessens its importance in their eyes!
Well, using your analogy then women should not be so upset about ordination. After all, it is just a piece of paper.
I do know of some male pastors in the north of europe who refuse to be ordained as long as women don’t have the same opportunity
I can guarantee there are not many.
I would gladly give up my “ordination” to further equality. It is just a word.
Isn’t the very concept of equality more social than Biblical? It would appear to me that being Godly is not about being equal but about being obedient. And aren’t Godly gender distinctions also more about obedience than equality?
I can’t even see how thin the dividing line is between Commissioning by laying on of hands and ordination by the same method.
To me, the very Roman Catholic theology that supports the Papacy is now right at the very seat of authority and power in the Seventh-day Adventist Church as demonstrated in the General Conference Session 2015 here at San Antonio in the NO vote against women ordination.
Considering the adamant employing of literalism as the GC President’s main hermeneutic supported by those who hold the same opinion as his, doesn’t the General Conference’s EXCOM feature as another superstratum or superstructure imposing itself over the General Conference in Session, [EXCOM itelf being as the latter’s magisterium or sarcerdotal class] that thinks for every one in the Seventh-day Adventist Church?
It looks to me that the the NO vote to ordination of women gives the GC leadership a political milage in terms of building a public image of themselves as spiritual leaders who focus on mission grounded in “plain text reading” which one hears the GC president even defend in pulpit.
Why is the GC president obstinate in holding on to what majority of Bible scholars object against as not sound exegesis.
To me the superstructure created at the GC between God and His people in support of the first citizen of the kingdom, among SDAs, is not different from that which supports the Papacy between God and His people in the other global church.
The spirit and…
I applaud the calls for unity now that the WO debate and vote has taken place in San Antonio. Obviously, the words of the Disney song “Let It Go” might be the best counsel for some who were involved in this WO debate. I hope we can take a note of caution from the great preacher Spurgeon who knew that truth could not be sacrificed for the sake of unity. And that if truth was sacrificed the result would not be a true unity but an erroneous one. He said, “Unity in error is unity in ruin; we need unity in the Truth of God through the Spirit of God.” And he caused much controversy in his day for his bold and outspoken stances against certain teachings and movements within the church. We must understand real unity from the Scriptures. True unity is grounded in the truth of the whole counsel of God. The “unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace” does not come about by a diminishment of the teachings of the Word of God but instead by contending for and boldly proclaiming the doctrines of the Bible. The vote did not nullify the need for women to be ordained in our church. Nowhere does the Bible create a contrast between unity and truth. Nor does it say that only some truths are important enough to stand for and the rest should be set aside so that we can all just get along.
YES
Very, very to the point and factual statement: I agree fully.
Paul, Peter and James varied views and practice failed to stop growth of church we have today. Wilsons call to unity is a call to worship a false God. Divergent ideas are required for any organization to grow.
The SDA Church has been around for over a 150 years now. She knows the truth she finds in Jesus. She knows what God says to her in His Word.
Were we all standing on the Word, we would be united in Christ.
You will discover that when delegates reviewed SDA fundamental beliefs, consensus was overwhelming. No grouping was opinionated against any other.
It comes clearly to me that GC is at the head of all the confusion and basic unreasonableness on the issue of ordination of women.
Why so then? It is simply because the leadership is trying to hide behind its own shadow by presenting a facade of zeal for mission and unity based on the word of God and SOP when the same GC leadership seats on false theology derived from non-adventist hermeneutics of literalistic interpretation,”plain text reading.”
It is such hermeneutics as lift Bible texts out of context, denying them a place in their historical background,reading false universal principles of male headship authority over females in Paul and in Genesis that the GC now locks us up.
After securing offices and the NO vote against women ordination, which was a wrong vote based on a political question that hid the truth from delegates to amass blind voting from them, with that exercise behind them, the GC leaders will now make it appear that they are focused on mission and any recourse to ordination of women issue is deterrent and an impediment to mission since Christ is coming soon, but hearts will still be…
My Plea to AT Reporter. Please can you quote the speech/statement of Pr. Dan Jackson, at least for the sake of his understanding instead of your own paraphrasing of what he said?
Perhaps this is our opportunity to examine the question of whether ordination is even necessary and to return to common believers the privileges scripture never gave to a clergy class. I believe now is an opportunity to shake-off the burdens and limitations of tradition that we falsely believe are based on scripture and allow the Holy Spirit to begin using us without restriction.
The concept of ordination comes from tradition, which has turned the calling and baptism of the Holy Spirit into the practice of setting-aside a clergy class who only are allowed to do certain things that scripture does not associate with them. For example, we delay baptisms and funerals until a pastor can arrive instead of seeking a Spirit-filled believer who is nearby, or letting the person who has brought an individual to belief in God be the one who also baptizes them. How else might we unbind the ministries of Spirit-filled believers to grow the church again where it is lagging and shrinking?
Brother Noel,
You are 100% correct.
Wow, right on! You nailed it! The idea of a separate class of clergy isn’t Biblical. The pulpit-pew mentality should have been thrown out a long time ago. Time for house churches!
I too applaud the idea of the church shedding its physical parameters and settled pastors and pew sitters and taking on the reality ‘the way’ shown to us in Acts. Especially as the end nears. This I believe dovetails with growing enough faith to dispose of the 501 C3 and quit holding hands with a government that is colluding with a high court that is a mockery of Biblical law.
You are very right!
In fact the Latin word, “ordo” from pagan idolatry, associated with election of pagan priests in Imperial Roman regimes, took a political significance when emperors elected successors and important government officials.
The Romanized Christian Church of the day espoused the same term, ordo to establish orders or levels of members, deacons, elders or bishops, priests up to the highest level or order of Papacy.
That hierarchicalization of church offices was never in the Bible, but after Jesus and apostles had disappeared. Then it was required that candidates ascend ecclessiastical ladders by ordination.
Now you should have eyes to see where we came from, where we’re and where we’re going. I am sure you know from Pagan Rome to Papacy, then to Reformers or Protestants or evangelicals, ordination came to Adventists.
Today the SDA church has developed a theology of ordination not voted by the GC in Session, but by a more superior power, GC annual council.
If you look deeper or higher, you will see orders in the Seventh-day Adventist Church in local churches, in conferences up until the highest hierarchical level at the GC apex or pinnacle.
If the policy puts only male ordained pastors as presidents at highest levels, then what GC officers defend in the unbiblical male headship and gender discrimination against women ordination is a mathematical given. But is it biblical? No. It is still pagan unless it is all-inclusive as is…
Symbols mean a lot. Someday the symbol of ordination will be fully inclusive, fair, and available to all of humanity.
It is now. Just not recognized by the SDA church.
“Had an African delegate been listening in, however, Jackson’s continued fervent support of women’s ordination might have been hard to reconcile with those pacific words.”
What does this mean? Do all African delegates have the same opinion on this issue? Are North Americans exclusively gifted with the blessing of diverse thought patterns?
There is a condescending streak of liberal self-righteousness that runs through many AT articles. I see this uncontested assumption that a North American Adventist with a PhD from Georgetown (or wherever) can rise to the seat of Moses and give us an authoritative word on how to live.
Come down from your high seats, dear friends, and let your alienated souls enjoy fellowship with a church that is filled with beautiful complexities your analysis may never contain.
I agree with this thought. The days of somethings are right and wrong are over. Today most conversation among progressive minded scholars sound like arguments that I had when I was a teenager. My granddad used to say commonsense died when the phrase,”Studies show” was invented.
I also believe people are educated beyond their ability to understand. We are like the days of Noah and Lot. We no longer need a God to give rules and guide us. We are smarter than that.
God has used people that needed him and would listen to him. In the liberal progressive world we live in. it is getting hard to find people who will listen to God’s teaching.
Amen! .. and amen!
Kwame I am sure if you think about it a bit you can understand why that phrase was used. It is not because we believe there are no Africans who support WO. It is because the largest block of anti WO members appear to be in Africa.
It is noteworthy here to say that the first woman to be ordained in North America was black. Her service to the church is exemplary.
NAD at it again! Why have they whom our culture supersede voted against our decision? They ask. Now Africans from Africa have been singled out as those opposed to WO. I believe our NAD social and gender equality advocates will start planing against targeted Africans and weaken their base and possibly silence them. Thank God people like Doug Butchlor and many upcoming GYC youngsters are not Africans alone but fully blooded Americans who will still continue to affirm the Bible and not culture or social dogma. Is NAD not worried at what the U.S Supreme Court just did? Is that how America initially started? Where is the glory of the once great fatherland? America has over the years deviated completely from the Bible all because of extreme right and human freedom. By all standards many Africans uphold the Bible than their counterparts in America, a situation which was not so 300 years before. The U. S society as it is now does not befit to have the headquarters of the worldwide Adventist church. NAD has lost its birth right in leading the church due to the manner in which its society has embraced secularism at the expense of the Bible.
So who specifically are these so-called American counterparts you’re referring to? African-Americans? So you’re saying we “uphold the Bible” at a lower standard than our African brothers and sisters? I take personal exception to that. It sounds audaciously and blatantly self-righteous and Pharisaically arrogant!
Arhin I’m having a great deal of difficulty in what your blog posting is suggesting.
1. Africans have not been singled out by anyone except you.
2. Brother Doug and GYC “youngsters” as you refer to them “fully blooded Americans” are a cultural anomaly in Adventism depending on the support given them and tacit approval by Ted Wilson, who is soon to learn what the “loyal opposition” of SDA’s do by their reaction to the vote and how the proceedings went.
3. You refer to the “glory” of the “fatherland” by the USA’s
influence in the past. This is most unkind and ungrateful to the efforts and memories of ongoing financial and spiritual leadership by many, including Ted Wilson and his family.
4. Who can judge NAD-Africa standards and compliance to God?
Calm down, pray, and eat more granola! God bless you.
Some seem to continue to hold the view that The Bible supports male only ordination. I thought that every committee the GC has convened in last 20 years concluded the Bible does not do so.
People who don’t understand the difference between the question of women’s ordination and the question of who should decide such matters will not understand my comment.
The vote to not “let” the divisions or the unions decide is our own (expletive deleted) fault! We sent “missionaries” to the third world without making sure that they would encourage faith in the Lord and his written word. Instead, they encouraged faith in an organization–the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists. The result is a vote to maintain the supposed authority of the hierarchy.
Is there anybody who didn’t see this coming? Ubiquitous references to the “World Church” should have been a clue.
I protested the use of that phrase.
Did you?
P.S. If I failed to include this post script, many people would likely think I favor women being paid as pastors. I don’t but that is an entirely different issue than who should decide.
I would suspect the first missionaries were conservative and also didn’t present the third-angel gospel of righteousness of faith. Therefore, the people became legalist in their thinking. But this has only recently been promoted, say in the last fifty years. Many also wanted to be associated with a western church.
We all made mistakes in the past, and only God can change the hard hearts of humans whatever they espouse. We are naturally self-centered and protective of our ideology and people group.
Arhin in your blog you make one suggestion that is worth considering. You claim that the “US has lost it’s birthright to having the GC headquartered in NAD” by implication I assume you would prefer the GC in Africa. Since your blog implies a criterion of need as to where to place our GC, I have ten countries in Africa that could benefit from the GC influence. Top Ten Countries the GC should consider:
1. Somalia 2. Ethiopia 3. Burundi 4. Zimbabwe 5.Chad 6.Nigeria 7. Libya 8.Central African Republic 9.Democratic Republic of the Congo 10. Sudan…I’d like to see how many would want to move from Maryland…Be careful what you wish for, Brother!
I’m thankful that Divisions weren’t given autonomy on this because it would have opened the door for South Pacific Division to claim their Sunday keeping in the islands should be treated the same. Even though the GC is not the author of truth it ought to be a promoter. GC Session was silent on the subject of Sunday keeping by adventists even though it is a fundamental doctrine. WO is not and will not bring one extra soul into Jesus’ fold, but it dominated GC Session. We truly “treated a troublesome itch while the patient dies of cholera” (G T Ng)
I realise this could probably develop into a tangent but I simply want to add a few words in passing on this one.
When the redrawing of the International Date Line affected the calender in Samoa recently it divided the Samoan SDA community. Some chose to worship on the Sunday of the new calender. Others chose to worship on the Saturday of the new calender. The South Pacific Division chose to support the Sunday keepers, in line with the original error that started in Tonga a century ago.
My confidential sources inform me that Ted Wilson was fully briefed on the situation but refused to intervene, taking the view that the dilemma was in the jurisdiction of the SPD and they should sort it.
Isn’t it an anomaly that he should allow the SPD to condone Sunday keeping by SDAs in Samoa but NOT allow the SPD to ordain women if they wish to?
I don’t know about that Milton. Sabbath keeping at the edges of a round world is a bit of a sticky wicket. Who gets to draw the date line? Who says its where it gets drawn and redrawn. Do you want to wade in and tell the Alaskans how to keep the Sabbath in the land of the midnight sun?
If Wilson wants to punt on this one, let him punt. We can have a long talk about this on the ride to Mars.
With respect to discussions re: ordination vs. commissioning, it’s beginning to sound analogous to allowing civil unions while withholding marriage.
All this semantics and kissing up to the demands of the liberal PC agenda is appalling and abominable. To change Paul’s wording (inspired) btw, to say thst a pastor can be the wife of one husband versus what he actually states from inspiration of Holy Spirit opens the floodgate to tamper with all scripture. Next, among other things rebellious souls will change the wording of Bible verses condemning homosexual acts in both first and second testaments. The ordination versus commissioned scenario is all nothing but playing word games as it all us the same thing any way you cut it. The SDA leaders are just trying to pretend thst they are holding to Bible standards when actually they are caving in big time in order to try to keep the tithes coming to them, playing it down the middle but sorry thst is compromise and a true Chrustian must never unite under the banner of error! SDA org. has sealed its fate now with holy God and will be severely judged for letting NDA defiantly promote female pastors following the no vote at GC. Time to only support worthy independent ministries who stand up fully for the uncompromising truth’s of the Bible and not the half-baked bread with spiritual dung in it. Earl
Earl, your side won at the GC with the No vote on women’s ordination, so why are you trumpeting these independent ministries and sending tithe to them????? But I won’t be too critical of diverting tithe to other ministries. I have to consider if I should do the same and for opposite reasons of yours. I can assure you for me it won’t be ministries like Hartland Institute.
I cannot in good conscience support a church that discriminates against women and continues to denigrate and put down gays. Gays have suffered enough stigma, and don’t need further put downs by you headship people, so please read the teachings of Jesus and Jesus last parable in Matthew 25:31-46.
Here Jesus tells the defining characteristic that separates the sheep from the goats. “As you have done it unto the least of these my bretheren you have done it unto Me.” You can’t get much less than the least of these in the church and be gay. Please think about it friend.
So Tom. Please help us understand where your assumptions lie regarding that anyone has done anything less than the least at it refers to gays. Gender distinctions weigh in heavily here and threats for the withholding of funds prove out the worst fears on both sides. I also would ask you to explain what you believe an abomination is and the degree to which you plan to bring every politically correct argument into the church bringing atheism itself in under the rubric of multiculturalism.. understand this: when its all good, immorality itself is ….”good”.
Hey Earl, have you been paying any attention? All the “kissing up” (what a crude term for a conservative) being done at the GC has been to dogmatic conservatism. And you do know that dung is just another way of saying s#@#. Come on, play nice. You can start by letting the girls play, too.
.. and thats what it will be “play”.
Echos of 1888 past. What would EGW say if she were alive. The very man who signed her ministerial credential as an ordained minister of the SDA church in 1885, was the greatest foe of righteousness by faith in 1888, when it was presented at the Minneapolis GC. Butler was ill and unable to attend the conference, but he sent a telegram with these words “STAND BY THE LANDMARK’S”. Ted Wilson, inspite of all his nice words he pens in the Review, appears to be a ghost of Butler past.
The women’s ordination vote was a travesty. The GC directory doesn’t even recognize Sandra Roberts as the Southeastern California conference president.
So how do these voices who are singing the praises of unity going to deal with this kind of discrimination??????????????????????
I am a lay minister. Womenes ordnation is not a subject for baptism. Most people I have lessons with don’t belive in women pastors. The problem is within our owen church leaders. If we worked in giving bible studies to unbelivers, incouraging them to be ready for jesus to come,this issues would not be a problem. This issue has to do with womens rights.It is used in all other job oppertunities, and now in religious jobs. The world has accepted gay marriges and individuel life style. Most churches accept them as members and leaders. This will be the next decission for the SDA church. We all ready have gay Adventest and nothing is done to encourage them to change. Just come as you are. No change is required.We need to believe that there is a rement church who has not bowed there knee in false worship. We can see the shaking here. Rich
In the SDA church we require folks who are cohabitating out of wedlock to marry before they can be baptized. Tell me friend, if a married gay couple, come to the church with their adopted children, and want to join the SDA church are you going to tell them to get a divorce and break up their family?
Yes the shaking is here I suppose, because folks like you are all shook up. Your hymn should be Elvis Pressley’s song I’M ALL SHOOK UP.
And that is why there will be no SDA church left. Rebellion to God is not a good thing. Homosexuals in the pulpit will be the next move after Jackson finishes.
Can you please provide evidence that Dan Jackson plans to put homosexuals in the pulpit?
If there is no evidence then I suggest your statement is, at best, unfair, or, at worst, libellous.
We have had many homosexuals in the pulpit, I am sure. Most eventually have come out and left. Others have simply remained celebrate as the church demands. We have no policy forbidding them the pulpit. But as for all gay people, they must be celebate. Might be tough to be known but I suspect in my home church no problem.
It’s easy to make general statements, some potentially defamatory, without any real evidence.
Thank you Richard. This is what I see as well. I came back into the church after a 35 year hiatus. When I came back the church had become – well, I usually describe it as “federalized”. The correctness (PC) installed by the government into the school system DOE had infiltrated the church in a huge way and most cannot even see how deceived they are and how little today’s church is like its was 50 years back and it sure isn’t about maturity. The church and salvation are now both seen as a right rather than a result and thus freedom of conscience has become the freedom from having one. I call it free dumb.
The outcome of the Women’s Ordination vote flies in the face of reason and the plain Bible teaching of the equality of men and women in God’s Mind. George Knight made a good argument for the idea that Ordination of Males in the church hierarchy is a Roman Catholic tradition.
I am reminded of the old saying: “A man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still”.
Too bad our church couldn’t do better!
Completely preposterous Gordon. The argument for equality is humanism, socialism, multiculturalism, and post modernism rolled into one and is far from Biblical. Gender distinction itself is obviously NOT about equality – it is about obedience, that is unless you believe in Freud. It is amazing just how deep socialism had eroded Biblical concepts as a whole ..
Umm isn’t the idea of equality biblical? You don’t have to be a PhD scholar in theology to recognise it:
1. The curse of sin being inequality.
2. Prophecies of Isaiah talking about equality in the Temple (which is to say Christ, the true Temple) of all those who were excluded: foreigners, eunuchs and women.
3. Paul talking in Gal 3 about equality on race, gender and status.
Socialism is deeply Christian – if it weren’t usually proposed by atheists who are just selfish humans. The Jerusalem Church of Acts 2 showed raddical communism, where they all sold their possessions and lived in a comune of equal proprietary owernship. This reflects Isaiah’s vision of a communist heaven.
You my friend have watched Fox News for too long. You promote the philosophy of world (capitalism and inequality) and think it biblical!
I often wonder why Jesus didn’t pick a woman or two as part of His team and put an end to this equality question. It could have been just as easy for Him to choose a woman, but He did not.
This is typical of how doctrinal change is manipulated and coerced. Allow something the church does not practice and then put it to vote after the fact. The damage is done folks and while it did not pass now, it will surely pass in the near future.
True and Gentiles too. Jesus picked no Gentiles, yet no one is calling for Jewish-only ordination. That would leave Goldstein and Bachelor left.
oh my, ridiculous.. the one thing about liberal thinkers is they are not near as accountable for their logic as they are about making sure that the only ones that are held accountable are those few conservatives remaining that actually believe in it anymore anyway! Accountability is fast fading from the liberal mindset *by definition*.
How so Gary. Calling me riddiculous doesn’t make it so if you don’t have a merits’ argument behind it. All I’m doing is pointing out the riddiculous nature of your own argument.
George Knight needs reminding that linking Roman Catholic tradition to a view that he disagrees with, in order to disparage it, is not necessarily a strong argument.
Would he be consistent and disparage and disown the Doctrine of the Trinity by linking it to RC tradition? I don’t think he would be consistent. I think he would go with RC tradition. The Doctrine of the Trinity, rejected by many Christians, has a long tradition with roots in the apocryphal Gospel of Phillip and blossoming at the Fourth Lateran Council.
And would he follow Roman Catholic tradition and pray, “Give us this day our daily bread,” when he already has a freezer full of food and enough money in the bank to refill it many times over? Would he interpret the Lord’s Prayer as one that was designed for men who were walking from village to village with their begging bowls in full view? Perhaps not. Again, like most other Christians he is more likely to follow RC tradition.
We need to be careful when we try to blacken RC tradition. If we think carefully we will realise we ourselves, perhaps without much thought, already follow significant chunks of RC tradition.
I’m not arguing for or against WO. If Gordon reflects Knight accurately then I’m simply commenting on Knight’s lack of consistency.
well said
How about, “There are no good guys,
there are no bad guys.
There is just you and me,
And we choose to disagree.”
or…..
“Let it be, let it be, there can be no answer just let it be.”
These songs seem to fit the situation for most people.
I am very saddened but not surprised to see the stance that Dan Jackson is taking with some of his colleagues. Three times the church voted no to women’s ordination. And Jackson and his lot are upset. Do we believe that the church is run by God or not? Why should NAD and TED have the right to ‘opt out’ of this decision and the other divisions not have the right to include polygamy in their congregation? If God is in charge of this church then it is Jackson’s duty to accept the vote and allow God to work out His will in due course. To childishly berate the vote is to sow disunity. Sure, he could register his feelings, but as a leader he should and must call the church to respect the vote until God leads otherwise. To diverge now is to effectively split the church. We are told that the church will appear to fall. Are TED’s and NAD’s behaviour indicative of this statement’s veracity? Should we disagree with the world church when it votes contrary to our ideas? Why not encourage the female pastors to look at Ellen White and allow God to work thing out in His time? All this posturing by TED and NAD is very disheartening. Is this what God wants? Perhaps if NAD was more impartial in discussing WO and allow each one to speak his mind and be encouraged to vote his conscience, the fairness might have garnered more votes for WO’s ordination. One thing for sure, God will preserve His church in spite of those against the vote. Why not resign if you cannot accept the vote?
In Matthew 12 (and Mark 3); CHRIST said to go build strong families, kingdoms and Churches:
29 Or else how can one enter into a strong man’s house, and spoil his goods, except he first bind the strong man? and then he will spoil his house.
30 He that is not with me is against me; and he that gathereth not with me scattereth abroad.
In Matthew 5, JESUS said in the Sermon on the Mount to teach the law:
17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.
20 For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.
Interpretation belongs to no one.
2 Peter 1:
20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.
21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.
In my humble opinion the needs left unfilled and the Souls lost during this time should have been the focus; not individual motives and ideologies.
I would suggest we get off our behinds and do our jobs; or get out of the way (or HE will get us out of the way). I would suggest we teach our children and rebuke failure in Titus 1 and 2; as commanded. I would suggest we build strong families and Churches within Ephesians 5, to be the strong beacon of comfort, safety and support to the world; not to act like spoilt children. I would suggest reading 2 Peter 2 and 3, along with 2 Timothy 2, 3 and 4; and rebuke as commanded there also.
The issue was studied; surveys of over 3900 were taken. More than 75% said that Scripture stated only men should be ordained as pastors. More than 80% stated that Scripture does not teach that women should be ordained elders. Over 68% did say we should create more paid women’s ministry opportunities. Who are we standing up to represent now? How does any of this serve GOD or the body of the Church?
True about the families. Elders must not have rebellious children because scripture says if they can’t manage their own household how can they manage the church.
I look forward to the forthcoming resignation then of the majority of our clergy, most of whom who have children who have rebelled and left the church.
I agree completely with your wish that we get back to doing what God wants us doing. The only problem with that is very few people in the church in North America have any real idea of what that is. They’ve been so clergy-dependent for so long that they have no idea of God’s guidance and empowerment as anything more than the permission they get from the Church Board.
Since when did God start using opinion surveys to define His will? If He did, Jesus never would have just shut-up and gone away.
Steve and William, I whole heartedly agree; but I don’t think we have the privilege to just give up.
My wife thinks that a lot of people need to pray for conviction, wisdom and maybe some body parts; they can’t seem to find them on their own. My 15 year old daughter says it best: “why would you not weight on their conviction as you would mine”. The answer is that many lack the strength and wisdom to handle it; they would have to grow first.
I hate surveys and statics myself; but they do make points. If GOD didn’t want it and the Church didn’t want it; then why are we wasting time with it? We are unable to provide and protect the Church and families; should we not worry of that first? They expect it. Should we not only support, but also expect, wisdom, conviction and strength from the Leadership and Elders.
I can only recommend that we follow GOD’s Plan; we can definitely look at the results around us when we fail in such. Remember there are many needs and lost Souls out there; looking for that light of strength, hope and comfort. They are well worth our miserable attempts and efforts; even if we are not.
There never has been and never will be unity in hierarchy. We fool ourselves if we think that there is. Only Jesus is at the head of the true church and more than the issue of WO do we still believe that there is no human position between man and God? Won’t all, males and females, will be part of the Bride of Christ? In Christ there is also neither male nor female. So I must conclude that since we have decided that their is to be hierarchy in this church and God speaks through the men at the top, that this church is no longer reaching for being in Christ but has officially accepted the paradigms of other religions. For those who say Jesus did not “ordain” women, how come all of the people in the upper room had flames of fire on their heads – including the women? No where does it say that only the men became filled with the Holy Spirit or that only the men were to go out into the gospel commission. If we are not to “fall” as prophesy suggests, it will be interesting to see how we rise out of this…or could it be that this is the time that Jesus Himself will take the reigns of the church into His own hands? Maybe this has happened so that Jesus can take do just this, if this is true I am so glad….let those that are His own shine! Maranatha.
Mark 3:
14 And he ordained twelve, that they should be with him, and that he might send them forth to preach,
John 15:
15 Henceforth I call you not servants; for the servant knoweth not what his lord doeth: but I have called you friends; for all things that I have heard of my Father I have made known unto you.
16 Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you, that ye should go and bring forth fruit, and that your fruit should remain: that whatsoever ye shall ask of the Father in my name, he may give it you.
Romans 13:
1 Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.
2 Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation.
3 For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same:
4 For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.
There will be a fall as prophesy states; within wisdom do you have a plan to stop that? Looks to me like we ate the fruit, broke the law and GOD sacrificed his only begotten SON for us and it still is not enough. Unless you have a better plan than HIS; all we can do is our best for those…
Let us pray. “Our father which art in heaven. Hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread. And forgive us our debt, as we forgive our debtors. And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil. For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever,. Amen.”
Love and peace to all.
if commissioning and ordination is one and the same thing why should people get frustrated about a no vote on ordination of woman.? .secondly why should they keep bringing the motion to the session time and again?