North German Union Conference Constituency Session Votes to Ordain Women
by AT News Team
The fifth constituency session of the North German Union Conference, meeting in Geseke on April 22 and 23, was the first gathering of official Seventh-day Adventist delegates since the 1881 General Conference session to vote approval of ordination for women serving in pastoral ministry. The resolution was approved by more than a two-thirds majority of the delegates.
The text of the action reads as follows: “Voted, to ordain in the North German Union female pastors [in the same way] as their male colleagues.” Pastor Klaus van Treeck, union conference president, told Adventist Today that the action is “without any limitations” in terms of when it will be implemented. It did not include language such as that in a similar vote by the Southern Union Conference executive committee in the United States deferring to the granting of permission by the General Conference.
“There was not change of the constitution nor bylaws,” van Treeck stated. The topic of ordination is not part of the constitution of the union conference. The action also did not involve a change in the working policy of the denomination in Germany. The working policy there is under the authority of a body named the Seventh-day Adventist Church in Germany (FiD) which is constituted of a joint meeting of the executive committees of the two union conferences in that country.
There was not vote taken to propose changes in the working policy because “the delegates didn’t want to push the South German Union … in the matter,” said van Treeck. “We didn’t want to open the way or to encourage others to oppose the guidelines of the world church or to join us in civil disobedience. We discussed the matter in the context of our culture and ask the world church for understanding of our situation and decision. We are respectful towards our brothers and sisters in any area of our world church. We feel deeply associated with them in the love of Jesus and in the unity and mission of the church.”
Although there was no mention of the precedent in China, clearly the North German Union Adventists are in hopes that the General Conference will take the same attitude of tolerance toward their cultural and legal context. In Germany both the law and social values strongly condemn discrimination against women in the selection of leaders in any organization, including the Church.
It was also voted to require that at least 40 percent of the delegates sent by the local conferences to the next North German Union constituency session be female. About 20 percent of the delegates at this session were women.
A third item voted by the delegates charged the union executive committee with implementing additional study of the topic of ordination, including research to be conducted by Friedensau University, the Adventist higher education institution in Germany. The findings from this study are to be presented to the Euro-Africa Division and the General Conference.
There was a motion to amend the union conference constitution to delete the language that requires that the president and secretary be ordained ministers. This motion was not passed by the required two-thirds majority.
The North German Union Conference covers 11 states in the northern region of the German Federal Republic, including Berlin and other major urban areas. It is made up of four local conferences with a total of about 20,000 church members among a population of more than 47 million. There are 346 local churches and 149 ministers, including two women.
The North German Union is to be congratulated for its principled stand. What is preventing the enlightened parts of North American Adventism from doing the same thing? I'm afraid we all know the answer to that question. Issues other than than justice, truth, and equity outweigh principle.
…..that the General Conference will take the same attitude of tolerance toward their cultural and legal context. In Germany both the law and social values strongly condemn discrimination against women in the selection of leaders in any organization, including the Church.
Interesting that nothing is said of the Bibical context…
"Those that have yielded step by step to worldly demands, and conformed to worldly customs, will then yield to the powers that be, rather than subject themselves to derision, insult, threatened imprisonment, and death" (Prophets and Kings, p 188)
As I have mentioned about others with very onservative views, I hope that "All4Him" continues to post his (or her?) comments on the Adventist Today web site. The rest of us need to be constantly reminded about what right-wing Adventism is all about. For example, "All4Him" talks about "Biblical context" and then quotes EGW– as if the Bible and EGW are interchangable.
Ervin I take the Bible and It alone as my defense of the truth. 1 Peter 3:5-8, Titus 2:4-5, 1 Timothy 2:9-15, 1 Timothy 3:1-7, and many others.
But I find it a little hypocritical that you put down prophetic words written by a women. Prophets have always been given by God to point people back to His Word. Any new light is brought to light this way.
Take time to read both the Bible and SOP and you will discover they are in harmony with each other.
2 Peter 2:2
"… was the first gathering of official Seventh-day Adventist delegates since the 1881 General Conference session to vote approval of ordination for women serving in pastoral ministry."
When someone wrote to me this statement a month or more ago, I decided to check it out. See http://www.adventistarchives.org/docs/GCB/GCB1863-88.pdf#Page=197. The resolution in question is dealt with in paragraphs 6 and 7 on page 197. I count a total of 40 resolutions presented to the session at one time or another, and the only one of the 40 not "adopted," "carried," or "approved" is the one on women's ordination. But somehow the failure to vote approval for that resolution has morphed over the years into a vote of approval.
Have I missed something in the GC Session minutes? Or is the pro-ordination side so bankrupt of support that it must resort to historical fiction to promote its agenda? As far as Germany goes, the precedent they are setting would seem to dictate that if culture and the laws of the land require that Sunday rather than the Sabbath be kept holy, we must comply.
Bob
As I understand it, decisions over who is ordained as a Pastor have long been delegated to Unions and it is not a GC decision. Deciding which day to worship on is a GC decision so your comparison would seem to be irrelevant.
GC were drawn into the matter of ordination of women by Unions who did not have the courage to make decisions that were their’s to make.
Your judging why and how they came to that decision would seem to be a little ill-advised since I assume that you were not their and did not have privy to their thoughts. Has it not occurred to you that they might just disagree with your interpretation of he Bible?
If I am incorrect no doubt I will be corrected sharpish!
John,
Please read again the AToday article. AToday, not me, brought up the false claim that the 1881 GC Session voted for women's ordination. And whether unions had courage or not had nothing to do with the 1881 GC Session considering the issue, since there weren't any unions in 1881.
Second, you may not realize that GC and NAD Working Policy states that a GC Session vote is the highest authority under God, an idea based on the SoP. Therefore, no union has the authority to ignore or violate the 1990 and 1995 GC Session votes against the ordination of women.
Third, by questioning my statement about Sunday vs. the Sabbath, are you saying that AToday's article misrepresents the reasons the German union voted the way they did? "In Germany both the law and social values strongly condemn discrimination against women in the selection of leaders in any organization, including the Church"? Or, did I mistake AToday's editorializing for the motives behind the German vote? I admit, I could have misread the aritcle on this point, though I don't know whether I did or not.
Hi Bob
I was intending to comment solely on the action of what the Northern German Union did. Whether or not AT misrepresented the 1881 vote was immaterial to the German decision. I regret I was not as clear as I should be and apologise if I suggested that you were wrong on that issue.
Secondly
Regarding the GC working policy, I did not think that it could overrule the authority already granted to Unions to make decisions on ordination unless that authority had been qualified or revoked. I must point out that I am not a parliamentarian and if given the job would be abysmal at it!
Thirdly
Possibly yes!
One can take the AT statement to imply either that the vote was because of the legal and cultural context or that the legal and cultural result was a fortunate benefit of a decision based on biblical interpretation.
They certainly give little evidence to support either.
Bearing in mind that implying that Biblical grounds were not considered would only inflame those against ordination of women I would hope that they meant the latter. If they meant the former they give no evidence to support it.
Their statement could be based on what the speakers said.
It could be based on a statistically based sample of ALL delegates not just those who spoke.
I would be stunned it was based on a 100% interview of all the voting delegates!!
If I had been a delegate I would vote for ordination on the basis of my biblical understanding but be delighted that it fitted in with this aspect of equality. I would be very irritated to have anyone think that my decision was based on other than Biblical grounds!
On such sketchy evidence I feel it to be unwise to base any statements about the motives of the voters on the article information. I prefer to give them the benefit of the doubt and assume that they based their decision on their Biblical interpretation until I see evidence to the contrary.
The account in Spectrum decided to back both horses by firsrt implying that it was an equality matter while then stating that it was admitted at the meeting more than once that it was a matter of following the gospel.
>>All in all the final vote of 160 to 47 ……. it became clear that the floor had made up its mind that on the issue of the equality of female with male pastors playing for time is no more an option. Patience has yielded to resolution.
While the decision is in contradiction to global regulation, it should be noted that it was emphasized more than once that this is not to be considered as an act of disloyalty towards the world church, but as an act of conscience toward the gospel, albeit with a flavor of civil disobedience.<<
It is a matter of faith among many opposing the ordination of women that there is NO biblical support and we only support it for CULTURAL reasons. To admit some of us have read our Bibles and Ellen White and have come to the conclusion neither forbid the ordination of women as pastors would apparently be too much for them. They just don't believe any sane person who is open to being led by the Spirit would support something as unbiblical as ordaining women.
I believe EGW was led by the Spirit and would be very interested in any quotes where she mentions she is for WO. To the best of my knowledge no statement supporting WO to headship role of congegational leadership our head ship role has been found. I can see where one could take Gal. 3:28 out of context though, if you do not take into consideration what the rest of the Bible says.
Let's honor God by standing up for the roles that He gave without the thought that men our superior or women inferior but that we are following roles (of which are equally important) but not the same….
Eriv
I worry when I find myself agreeing with you …. 😎
All4Him
I notice that you do not quote 1 Co 14:33,34.
A former SDA I know uses that to explain why EGW is a false prophet …
When looking at 1 Tim 2:12 surely you must be aware that EGW endevoured to demonstrate authority over many men including James. He didn't half get mad over that as well!!
Just a final thought. I also cannot recall EGW condeming the idea of women ministers so she would seem to be neutral on the subject.
When the love of a husband is shown to his wife in God ordained headship, and the love of a wife is shown to her husband in God ordained submission there is no room for confusion and it help keep peace in the home and the church. 1 Cor 14:33. This mirrors the relationship of the husband (Christ) and the wife (the Church).
EGW was not neural on the subject of women ministers… she clearly made a distiction of the genders when it came to heading the church.
The primary object of our college was to afford young men an opportunity to study for the ministry and to prepare young persons of both sexes to become workers in the various branches of the cause. 5T page 60.
Those who enter the missionary field should be men and women who walk and talk with God. Those who stand as ministers in the sacred desk should be men of blameless reputation. 5T page 598
All4Him
Any reason why you replied to my post but ignored the points I made?
John J: Men are to be priest of the home and ambassador of Christ in the church.
Shepherds who fail at home will fail at church—He who is engaged in the work of the gospel ministry must be faithful in his family life. It is as essential that as a father he should improve the talents God has given him for the purpose of making the home a symbol of the heavenly family, as that in the work of the ministry, he should make use of his God-given powers to win souls for the church. As the priest in the home, and as the ambassador of Christ in the church, he should exemplify in his life the character of Christ. He must be faithful in watching for souls as one that must give an account. In his service church there must be seen no carelessness and inattentive work. God will not serve with the sins of men who have not a clear sense of the sacred responsibility involved in accepting a position as pastor of a church. He who fails to be a faithful, discerning shepherd in the home, will surely fail of being a faithful shepherd of the flock of God in the.—Manuscript Releases 6:49
One wonders what "All4Him" would do if he/she did not have a collection of EGW "All-Purpose-Quotes" that could be brought out to address any and all questions. We all agree that EGW wrote about her understanding of the role of a pastor in her time. However, what does this have to do with making decisions on this topic in the 21st Century?
I am not sure how you distinguish in a C19th century writer times when she is merely reflecting the reality of the times (pastors are men) and when she is giving some form of divinely inspired counsel of how things should be. Putting aside the (to me) minor issue of ordination, it is somewhat odd that she had nothing negative to say about the women working as pastors in her time. If she believed it was unbiblical, surely she would have said something? She isn't known for standing by and allowing the church to 'sin' without a word of rebuke. But then, how does a prophetess who spends most of her time telling the church (corporately or individually) what to do – and expecting to be obeyed – and teaching what God requires of his church, inform the church that God does not permit a woman to have any authority over men, nor to teach men?
Adventist have always proclaimed reformation on the basis of scripture, not on current trends or culture. Paul refers back to creation to the words of God. Ellen White refers back to the writings of Luke and the example of Jesus. This quote was written in the 20th century which we were born.
Choose Wise Men—For years the Lord has been instructing us to choose wise men,-men who are devoted to God,—men who know what the principles of heaven are,-men who have learned what it means to walk with God,—and to place upon them the responsibility of looking after the business affairs connected with our work. This is in accordance with the Bible plan as outlined in the sixth chapter of Acts. We need to study this plan; for it is approved of God. Let us follow the Word.—The Review and Herald, October 5, 1905.
The same principles of piety and justice that were to guide the rulers among God's people in the time of Moses and of David, were also to be followed by those given the oversight of the newly organized church of God in the gospel dispensation. In the work of setting things in order in all the churches, and ordaining suitable men to act as officers, the apostles held to the high standards of leadership outlined in the Old Testament Scriptures. They maintained that he who is called to stand in a position of leading responsibility in the church "must be blameless, as the steward of God; not self-willed, not soon angry, not given to wine, no striker, not given to filthy lucre; but a lover of hospitality, a lover of good men, sober, just, holy, temperate; holding fast the faithful word as he hath been taught, that he may be able by sound doctrine both to exhort and to convince the gainsayers." Titus 1:7-9
Do you think that Ellen White may have been familiar with the long-standing concept that the use of 'man' or 'he' was to be taken to include the female as well, unless excluded specifically or by context? As we see female church officers spoken of in the NT, and we know women functioned as pastors in the C19th SDA church, perhaps the context does not exclude women?
Kevin, please look at the two quotes put up four days ago from 5T. She means male because she clearly makes a distinction. There were no female Elders/Bishops/Apostles ordained in the NT. Yes there are times that man/he means mankind yet there are times that she is specific in either of the genders. One thing is for sure is there is a great need for Biblical womens ministry in these last days. As we follow Biblical teaching and examples men and women's roles will complement each other in harmony in the family and the church.
You seem determined to avoid addressing the more major question. If Ellen White both taught and had authority over men, how can we possibly use her work to teach that the Bible forbids both these things? Whether she is or is not making a statement on women as pastors and/or ordination is an important question, and I think we will have to agree to disagree on that, as I don't believe she would be hypocritical in that way. She also had many chances to address the issue of women working as pastors and remained silent. So I don't see the quotes you provided as arguing against the ordination of women as pastors, but more likely reflecting the reality she was addressing. No one who knew her and would be likely to know of any privately expressed opinions has ever claimed she was against the ordination of women, or that women should not work as pastors.
Kevin culture does not usurp Biblical authority.
All4Him
You keep dodging the question regarding EGW and her teaching and having authority over men. If you are right that women should not do that, you are essentially classifying EGW as a false prophet. Please elucidate.
Well John, so is Paul a false apostle?…. let's take this to the root. A donkey had authority over a man in Balaams day and the Bible says in Genesis 1:26 that they were to have dominion over the beast and those were Gods words….
Look at Ellen Whites words and her example, she stated….."We women must remember that God has placed us subject to the husband. He is the head…..We must yield to the head. Letter 5, 1861
She also wrote, "The husband is head of the family, as Christ is head of the church, and any course which the wife may pursue to lessen his influence and lead him to come down from that dignified, responsible position is displeasing to God." T1- 307
She is clear that men and women are of equal value yet are given different roles by God.
It is clear Ellen White is making a distiction on which gender should lead out at the sacred desk. She was called by God to be a prophet and there are examples of that in this Bible. There is no examples of women in the OT or NT becoming a Priest/Elder/Bishop/Apostle even though it accepted by the the cultures of the day. Yes look at her example when she marked a question asking if she was ordained…. Read all her writtings in context and it is clear that she makes a distinction of roles to follow in the Home and the Church.
So a prophetess has neither authority over men nor the right to teach men? Remember, that is the issue Paul was speaking to, not ordination as a pastor. You seem to want to overlook that it is now gnerally accepted by even most conservative theologians that Junia is called an 'apostle'. So how can you say there is no example of a woman becoming an apostle? What do you do with the licence where it clearly says that Ellen White is 'ordained'? Things are not as clear as you believe.
BTW women being a priest or religious leader was not acceptable to Jews. The list of women who are 'fellow-workers' with Paul at the end of Romans in a Gentile context can be seen as showing women in positions of leadership, even if those positions are not spelt out. What positions were available apart from apostle, elder and deacon? All those were preaching/teaching positions with authority.
Will AToday be printing a correction regarding the misstatement about the 1881 GC Session?
Yes we don't ordain donkeys or the rocks that cry out… God may use whom ever or what ever he choses. God placed men at the head of the home and the church and thier wives and church members as equals.
Slavery, polygamy, and subordination of women was practiced in Israel as well as all the surrounding nations. The Bible was written by men who practiced all these customs and they described the way in which they lived as being ordained by God. Once any program or concept is prefaced with "God says…. that ends discussion; completely forgetting that man described the way he was living and attributed it to God.
So how many slaves did Paul have? Did he fill the tents he made with his harem? If you do not believe in Biblical authority of the written word of God I can see where we surely differ….
Timo I was just answering the claim by Elaine that the Bible was written all by slave owners and polygamist…. Let take the Pentateuch for example, didn't it's author kill someone who mistreated a slave then preceeded to free a whole nation of them? And I am sure Zipporah would disagree on the polygamy charge…..
Jesus choose the "12 homeys" that were male to be apostles for a reason, and yes there was many women that ministered to and for the Lord and should be also today. Again equal in importance yet given different roles to fulfill.
Truth should change culture yet culture should not change Truth….