Mid-America Union Communication Department Press Releases Regarding the Executive Committee Vote on March 8, 2012 to Support the Ordination of Women in Mid-America
Statement #1 / March 8 (Thursday)
In a continuing effort to support the role of women in ministry, the Mid-America Union Executive Committee in its regularly scheduled mid-winter meeting took the following action: “It is voted to support the ordination of women in the Mid-America Union.”
The committee also recognized the authority of the world church and the need for harmony across the various administrative levels of the Seventh-day Adventist faith community.”
Statement #2 / March 9 (Friday)
In a continuing effort to support the role of women in ministry, the Mid-America Union Executive Committee in its regularly scheduled mid-winter meeting took the following action: “It is voted to support the ordination of women in the Mid-America Union.”
“Nobody planned for this,” said Thomas L. Lemon, president of the union. “Without any expectation, the subject of ordaining women came up. In the ensuing discussion a consensus formed that gender should not disqualify any future candidate recommended by local conferences for ordination. The committee also recognized the authority of the world church and the need for harmony across the various administrative levels of the Seventh-day Adventist faith community.”
*The following addendum was not part of the statement itself but was attached for the sake of providing supporting information upon request:
One of our six local conferences may at some point vote the recommendation of a woman for ordination. The Mid-America Union Executive Committee will then evaluate the candidate on her own merits, without prejudice regarding gender, when deciding for or against ordination.
Statement #3 / March 12 (Monday)
On March 8, the Mid-America Union Conference (MAUC) Executive Committee voted to support the ordination of women to pastoral ministry. The vote followed a thorough discussion, in which the 35-member body representing six local conferences also focused on the need to move forward in harmony with the Seventh-day Adventist world church.
After the meeting, MAUC president Thomas L. Lemon testified that while the action was unplanned and unprecedented, he felt God’s presence at work within the committee. “To me, this means that we will no longer allow gender to prejudice decisions about candidates brought to this body for consideration,” he said. He emphasized that the group recognizes the authority of the world church and the need for harmony across administrative levels. “I consider myself a loyal son of the church that I have loved and belonged to for more than 50 years.” he said.
Since the meeting, some have wondered whether any female candidates are presently under consideration and if the union has the authority to ordain them. “We are not aware of any candidates, but at some point, one of our six local conferences may vote to recommend a woman for ordination,” Lemon explained. “As we do with all such requests, the union committee will then prayerfully evaluate the candidate on her own merits while making its decision.”
Lemon summarized the meaning of the committee’s action to be as follows:
- To affirm the priesthood of all believers, including women, in regards to the call to gospel ministry
- To support Seventh-day Adventist leaders, including those in North America, as they continue their efforts to follow the guidance of God’s Spirit regarding women in ministry and leadership
- To create a safe environment for local conferences to continue their own discussion of this subject to help them discern which candidates to recommend for pastoral ordination
Plans are being discussed by which the union will continue to study biblically the way forward, and our local conferences are encouraged to do the same for their fields. Union leaders are asking pastors and members across Mid-America to make this subject a matter of prayer so that the Holy Spirit, whose presence was deeply experienced by the MAUC Executive Committee, will continue to advance God’s kingdom in our territory.
Statement #4 / March 16 (Friday)
(Modification of #3: additions in bold; deletions in strikethrough)
On March 8, the Mid-America Union Conference (MAUC) Executive Committee voted to support the ordination of women to pastoral ministry. The vote followed a thorough discussion, in which the 35-member body representing six local conferences also focused on the need to move forward in harmony with the Seventh-day Adventist world church.
After the meeting, MAUC president Thomas L. Lemon testified that while the action was unplanned and unprecedented, he felt God’s presence at work within the committee. “To me, this means that we will no longer allow gender to prejudice decisions about candidates brought to this body for consideration,” he said. He emphasized that the group recognizes the authority of the world church and the need for harmony across administrative levels. “I consider myself a loyal son of the church that I have loved and belonged to for more than 50 years.” he said.
“There are a number of questions still under consideration,” stated Lemon. “We are in uncharted territory and our constituents should expect further clarification as our committee works their way through this.”
Since the meeting, some have wondered whether any female candidates are presently under consideration and if the union has the authority to ordain them. “We are not aware of any candidates, but at some point, one of our six local conferences may vote to recommend a woman for ordination,” Lemon explained. “As we do with all such requests, the union committee will then prayerfully evaluate the candidate on her own merits while making its decision.”
Lemon summarized the meaning of the committee’s action to be as follows:
- To affirm the priesthood of all believers, including women, in regards to the call to gospel ministry
- To support Seventh-day Adventist leaders, including those in North America, as they continue their efforts to follow the guidance of God’s Spirit regarding women in ministry and leadership
- To create a safe environment for local conferences to continue their own discussion of this subject to help them discern which candidates to recommend for pastoral ordination
Plans are being discussed by which the union will continue to study biblically the way forward, and our local conferences are encouraged to do the same for their fields. Union leaders are asking pastors and members across Mid-America to make this subject a matter of prayer so that the Holy Spirit, whose presence was deeply experienced by the MAUC Executive Committee, will continue to advance God’s kingdom in our territory.
*On March 19, Mid-America Union president Thomas L. Lemon issued a statement addressing questions raised by the executive committee vote that may not have been answered by the press releases above. Click here to read Statement #5.
Church history will mention MAUC as leading a long-overdue movement to recognize gender equality in ordination to the gospel ministry. One can be proud of such leadership!
–Rajmund Dabrowski
Thank you MAUC for standing tall for women’s ordination. May we someday see an end of these differences around the world. Every vote against women’s ordination is a backward step for God’s work.
In one instance I’m greatly saddened. Then on the other, this is evidence that we are not long for this earth, which brings excitement and thankfulness. Am so grateful this is not a “top down” system, and that our local church and members will be able to choose for ourselves on this matter.
Praise the Lord! Galatians 3:28-29 being lived out.
I am sorry, but as a woman, I just think this is totally unnecessary….I have never felt there was a need of this. I honestly think this is all about “titles” and “statuses”. The most spiritually influential woman I learned from did not need to be ordained to have a spiritual effect on me. She didn’t need the “title” of pastor in order to teach and live the Gospel. So I think this is about women who think they need the supposed “power” that men think they have….I am disappointed in my church at this point. And I am really disappointed in the women who choose to do this….there are so many other things that women excel in that to me this is just a sad, sad piece of evidence that selfishness is prevailing.
I share your disappointment. Several years ago I converted to Eastern Orthodoxy. The way I see it; if the Apostles were to be resurrected today, they would walk into an Orthodox church and hear the liturgy written by St. James himself and while the church buildings are more elaborate than in their day, they would recognize the worship to God and know that they were in the Tradition that they started according to Christ’s instruction. On the other hand, my devout SDA grandmother who died 30 years ago would scarcely recognize her church that now wears jewelry, makeup, and short skirts, has incorporated drums and electric guitars into worship service, and now is ordaining women. I think Ellen White would roll over in her grave to see the state of the church today. I am saddened that the values of our elders could not prevent the mainstreaming of “the remnant church.”
I think Ellen White would sit up and cheer. There were ordained women in her day, she’d wonder “What happened?”
Ah! I didn’t know that the SDAs ordained women in the day of Ellen White. It seems that as one of the founders of the church and a prophetess of God she would have had something profound to say against this practice if it was happening in her church and it was wrong. Based on your statement the male only ordination has been a theologically baseless doctrine the church has held for some extended time? The worldwide conversation should be a very short one, harmony should be easily gained, and the practice reinstituted. Do you know any of the names of the female ordained pastors of her day?
Ellen White Receive ordination credentials. I just read it in the third biography of Ellen White. I don’t think other women were ordained during her time.
About Ordination. Are we sure this is theologically based at all. Ordination may have pagan origins. Perhaps we should be “annointing all of our pastors.”
JKSM, Ellen White was issued credentials on several occasions. Sometimes the word ordained was scratched out and other times not. There is no record of her being ordained and of course she never served as a pastor. This was the church trying to figure out how to best give official documentation to one with the prophetic gift, so they issued the highest credential they had.
The issue really isn’t about ordination (setting apart by laying on of hands) per se, but ordination to what office? The real question is Biblically can women serve as pastors? If the answer is yes then there is no reason not to ordain them, if the answer is no then we need to stop letting women fill these positions even if unordained. Its this halfway position of letting them serve in this office but not ordaining them that is problematic.
Is that the Eastern Orthodox remnant church? I am confused on which Christian movement you are talking about. This comment doesn’t go along with EG White’s state of the dead beliefs either. Technology isn’t all bad, our pastor has been known to even use an iphone while behind the pulpit. The real authority comes from God. It will be a good question to ask when we get to Heaven. Should women have been Ordained? I have a feeling the answer won’t be: “No they shouldn’t have ordained women. That’s why none of the Adventists are here in Heaven.”
We are saved by His grace not by who we as human’s give certain authorities to.
My friend obtained information from one of the booths at the last General Conference session showing that Ellen white herself was an ordained minister. It’s about time all accept that God is not in the discrimination business. See Gal. 3:28. It will take the combined effort, dedication, and commitment of both male and female to finish the work.
Ordination of women should be a cultural issue only. In North America there are women who have served the church for years in the position of Elder, but have not received the “authorization” of the church to employ the tools confered to an elder (communion, preaching, holding the office of Elder, etc.) We have been content to allow these women to do the job, just not to acknowledge their role in the church. I am thankful that Mid-America stood for a principle rather than standing on tradition.
Wow! I will pray for Elder Lemon and the others leaders of the MAUC. I am sure there will be significant blow back for taking such a healthy holistic step.
Who knows, with steps like these maybe the SDA church in America will also desegregate, maybe even in my lifetime!
Recognizing the clear biblical teaching regarding differing male and female roles in the church does not do violence to the understanding that we all stand equal before God in Christ. Invoking the notion of “gender equality” in support of disobedience adds insult to injury, exalting political expediency at the expense of fidelity to Scripture.
Well Put!
I am confused about what action was taken. By law there can be no ordination of women pastors in the church. The bylaws require that the union be in harmony with the General Conference decisions on women’s ordination. The NAD Constitution does not allow for ordination of women pastors. What is the union planning on doing? They cannot ordain women.
EXPECT THIS AND WORSE TO ENTER THE RANKS OF ADVENTISM AS MANY SUBSTITUTE THE BIBLE FOR POPULAR OPINION.SOME CLAIM IT IS ‘WOMAN’ TIME NOW,AS IF THAT WAS NEVER THE CASE……”THERE IS A WAY THAT SEEMETH RIGHT UNTO A MAN/WOMAN,BUT THE END THEREOF IS THE WAY OF DEATH.
The only reason the Division could not approve women’s ordination is that the NAD is a division of the General Conference. So they have to be in unity with the GC. On the other hand, the conference and unions are the true decision-making arena of the church. It is my understanding that our church is set up with a power from the people on up to the top. It is also my understanding that even the decisions made at the GC level have to be approved by the general assembly (the delegates) of the world church. We do not have a power from the top system in our church.
Of course then the real issue becomes the fact that the members as a whole of the world church made their wishes known to the GC and their view on Women’s ordination is different from the members of the conferences in Mid-America.
But this is exactly how it should work. As each conference and union studies out this issue they must make their decision. Eventually this will become a General Conference decision as well as each area of the world begins to see the light.
I just read last night where Ellen White was telling the GC President, Butler, (who had become ill and was not happy with the way things were going in 1888) that we need to err on the side of loving kindness in allowing people to speak and act on what they see in the word of God. (Butler didn’t think Jones should have been allowed to speak at the General Conference Session). But Ellen White didn’t agree. While she did not say she agreed with Jones, she said he should be allowed to speak.
God is calling His people to revival and reformation, to put away every ism and action that is against God’s character. This is another step towards the “when the character of God is perfectly revealed in his children, then He will come.” How exciting.
This is rebellion.
I pray that each person will submit their preconceived ideas to God and that God will touch their heart with truth as they search the scriptures. In my reading of Ellen White’s books and the Bible I have never understood that women are to be treated in any way as unequal. Different family roles does not translate to censure in the public arena.
I see this issue as an opportunity to do the right thing.
Is it any more rebellious than when Jesus and his disciples were hungry and ate grains from the field on Sabbath. Or when Jesus healed the man with a withered hand on the Sabbath?
During a time when women were treated in some cultures as sub-humans, Jesus treated women as equals.Jesus went to a party held by Simon and the Jewish leaders thought he was out of line.
I think that Jesus taught us to not just follow the status quo. But to do what is right and kind.
This vote is just and righteous. It reminds me of the words of Jesus when John reported stopping an “unauthorized” person who was ministering in Jesus’ name: “Do not stop him.” Mark 9:39.
Just as the disciples were not to think they could limit ministry, so the church today should not attempt to limit ministry to people with the right education, gender or accent.
An ecclesiastical process for controlling ministry through “ordination” is not mentioned in the NT. It is an extra-biblical church-management tool. So ordaining women does not violate any Bible rule or principle.
AMEN!
I totally agree with Karin…as a Christian woman my first priority is God’s revelation of His will in Scripture…it is very clear that God has an order that is reflected in His church as well as in the family… Just like Jesus is equal to the Father…I feel equal to the men in church and to my husband although our roles are different… I am appalled at those in the church who are falling for the feminist agenda which has caused disunity in the church which is satans plan to make a woman feel inadequate in her role…may we rise up against this apostasy!
I am in full support. I pray the GC will give this further study and act accordingly.
Bravo, MAUC! Your courage tells young Adventist women that they are equally valued in their church and that they can equally serve God. Thank you!
I believe I am equally valued in the eyes of God and in the eyes of His church, and that I can equally serve my God in His church, without being ordained.Thanks.
This is a sign of the times… “For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear” — 2 Timothy 4:3.
The Bible clearly teaches that God has developed gender roles. These gender roles were put in place at the fall of Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden. Our NAD leaders need to stop rebelling against God and His world Church or be removed from office.
The article says that the committee “also recognized the authority of the world church and the need for harmony across the various administrative levels of the Seventh-day Adventist faith community.” It sure does not look like they did that. What it does look like is an act of rebellion that will take us out of harmony with the world church. We need to be in deep prayer over this.
Amen Pastor Carner
I do not see it as an act of rebellion but rather as an act of sound biblical leadership. North America needs to lead the rest of the world church away from man made traditions. We are being exhorted to Revival and Reformation, why not consider Women Ordination as one of the steps to experience genuine Revival & Reformation?
Hey John M.,thanks for sharing this on FB. Understanding that Paul wrote instructions for a male dominated society where women were hardly more than chattel helps us to grasp the principle that we are to consider time and circumstances whenever we read inspired spiritual counsel. The ordination of women is not addressed in the 10 Commandments and is therefore not a moral issue. I feel sorry for my fear-mongering short-sighted fellow SDA’s who don’t think that a woman should be compensated equally for doing the same work as a man. It’s no wonder that so many of our people prefer a worship style from the Victorian era where women were considered second class citizens. It’s high time that our people revolt against the artificial constraints that have hindered our relevance for so many decades.
Pastor Mike, you are right, I just read this at [website deleted]:
“One of our six local conferences may at some point vote the recommendation of a woman for ordination. The Mid-America Union Executive Committee will then evaluate the candidate on her own merits, without prejudice regarding gender, when deciding for or against ordination.”
If you are in this Union, you are in our prayers. The Mid America Union is going contrary to the World Church in session, Scripture, and their own bylaws which require them to act in harmony with the General Conference decisions.
The unity in the church is evaporating before our very eyes.
Yes I do pastor in Mid-America, thank-you for the prayers.
I find it interesting that Adventist Today’s coverage http://www.atoday.org/article/1072/news/headlines-for-march/mid-america-union-conference-votes-to-support-ordination-of-women makes it sound like this is just sort of a request for the approval of women’s ordination like a couple other Unions have already done. Where as Spectrum’s coverage http://spectrummagazine.org/blog/2012/03/09/mid-america-union-votes-support-ordination-women has an interview with elder Lemon reporting what you have shared above. This has clearly changed the working policy of our union. They are now willing to approve the ordination of female candidates that are advanced by the local conferences.
It is most important to be in line with God’s word (in His will). First and foremost we should be treating people with love and unity, as in John 17.
God Bless these courageous men but I have to admit that I will believe it when I see it actually happen. Leslie Baumgartner who is currently an associate pastor at Walla Walla University Church was the first woman pastor to have her full ordination voted by both the Ohio Conference Executive Committee and the Columbia Union Executive Committee. In the end both groups wimped out and bowed to pressure from above and to this day Leslie is still not ordained. I was a member of both committees and I still cringe when I think of what happened probably more than 15 years ago. I have had a number of leaders from around the world say to me,” Would you all please just drop this subject and go ahead and ordain your women and get it over with? It is political suicide for us to vote for it in our part of the world but it really won’t impact our ministry at all. Just do it and let’s move on to more productive issues.” The GC will never vote this in session. Quit holding out hope that they will. Before Ted rushes out and over reacts to this he might give some thought as to how much influence the Pope and the Catholic bishops have on the use of birth control by Catholics in North America. Statistically they lost that war a long time ago but that does not mean that the members do not love their church or that they will not turn out to cheer the Pope when he visits. They just take their pill before they go.
Excellent! You have spoken!
Wow, you certainly have spoken and I think your last sentences says it all for WO. Are we now to use the Catholic Church as our mantra? As SDA’s are we to believe we love our church and then cheer the womens’s unisex liberation Movement which has infiltrated our church while we rebelliously claim to change the order of men and women established at creation. Women were created to be the “helpmeet” to man, nurturers of their children, and Queen of the home. Man, created first was to be King of the whole earth. Many now are trying desperately to make women’s role identical to mans in every area of life including the battlefield. There is an even more important “battlefield, the body of Christ, where satan is intent on pitching his black banner while many cheer him on!
If one will note the order that Jesus assumed when he came to earth, under the Father laying aside His divine perogatives of equality that He might become like us. And yet many women will not be satisfied until every single difference between them and the male sex is done away with and they are “equal” with men. Being “equal” does not mean being the “same”! It was only after the resurrection that Jesus again assumed His role of equality with His Father, and it will only be at the second coming that women and men will together assume their role as the Bride of Christ. Even then, some will be “greater in the kingdom of heaven” having more stars and more responsibilty but it will not then be based on their sex but on how willing they were to lay aside self, humble themselves, and follow the order God ordained for us on this earth. Blessings
God bless you, Tom, for your courage and your clarity! Dave
I fear that we may be bringing to the fore uneducated arguements with regards to this issue and basing our thoughts on feelings and on other people’s opinion and not on the Bible. Whats more scary is that there is clear support of this subtle rebellion from church members and even pastors!..may the Lord help us.
Congratulations to the Mid-America Union for taking this step when many around were timid or lacked the courage to do so. When the criticism comes, I hope you will stand your ground.
Praise the Lord! Thanks to the Members of the executive committee of the Mid-America Union for heading to the promptings of the Holy Spirit. It is high time for the world church to follow their example. Church unity will be secured when we resolve at every level of church administration to be truly led by the Spirit of Christ and Him alone!
“Nobody planned for this.”
What? The MAUC Executive Committee takes up what is arguably our church’s most controversial and potentially divisive issue as an impromptu afterthought? No plan of action. Not on the agenda. No opportunity for prayerful forethought by committee members. Is this how our Mid America leadership conducts God’s business? Are those who believe this action is a huge mistake supposed to excuse it because it “just happened”?
“The committee also recognized the authority of the world church and the need for harmony across the various administrative levels of the Seventh-day Adventist faith community.”
To vote a policy that was specifically denied by the world church and simultaneously say you recognize “the authority of the world church” is such a blatant contradiction that it is an affront to one’s intelligence. Has our church become so politically correct that we now deny the obvious? The politically incorrect fact is that the MAUC does NOT recognize the authority of the world church and it is OUT of harmony with the higher administrative levels of the SDA faith community. Only one word describes this situation: insubordination. If the equivalent happened at the local church level it would be grounds for disfellowshipping.
“Persistent refusal to recognize properly constituted church authority or to submit to the order and discipline of the church.” SDA Church Manual [1995], p. 169.
Do we follow an organization or God? The Adventist Church is not a church with a creed or an unchanging system of beliefs. We believe the Bible is so full of truth and light that the more we study the more we will fully understand “truth.” We advance as a church as more light is given to us.
We should never for one moment, look to people or organizations for truth, but only to the truth of the word of God.
It is tricky and “seems” out of compliance for a Union to vote something different than a Division. But is it wrong? Think about the fact that the Adventist church is about truth as studied out by the people of the church. Churches nominate delegates to the conference executive committees and to the constituency sessions. These are decision-making bodies that function in each part of the world. Conference and Unions are governed from the grass-roots upward. On the other hand the General Conference is governed by these same people but they are elected from all over the world.
So you can see that a conference executive committee from a union in North America may not agree with a similar group of God-fearing people selected from all over the world.
The disagreement does not mean that the local group is wrong or that the world group is wrong. Truth does not demand that the majority agree. Truth is truth.
Let us all leave our pre-conceived ideas and “read” the Bible and be open to God’s truth.
Thank you for your reply. My point was that the MAUC claims to recognize the authority of the world church at the very time it votes a policy in defiance of the world church. This is pure hypocrisy, which you have not refuted.
Women’s ordination is an important issue but it is not the issue I address. The more pressing issue is whether a Union can summarily ignore a definitive policy of the General Conference. Is it wrong for a Union to do so? My answer is an emphatic Yes! It is true that the Adventist Church does not have an unchanging system of beliefs, but it does have an orderly system in place for making the changes. This system the MAUC has now irresponsibly defied.
I greatly appreciate your emphasis on deriving truth from the Bible. But what one person considers advancement into biblical new light another person may consider a retreat from biblical old light. By what means, then, should God’s remnant church resolve such differences? By each Union doing that which is right in its own eyes? Are Unions now suddenly the final authority in the church? If so, then what need have we for a world church organization? We are no longer a world church, but a loosely organized band of Divisions or Unions, none of which is accountable to the others. Would you be happy with this arrangement?
And do you think this precedence will stop with this one issue and at this one level of church government? If this act of insubordination stands, what prevents a Conference from going contrary to its Union’s policies? And if governing from the grass-roots upwards means establishing policy from the bottom up, what prevents a local church from ordaining gays or lesbians if that constituency finds biblical justification for doing so? Would you object? Based on what principle?
The action of the MAUC Executive Committee is an unprecedented disregard for church unity and this violates the fundamental principle of order in the body of Christ. This is not how the Holy Spirit guides the church, and unless this action is retracted its baleful fruit will be a church split in North America.
I am reminded of the situation in 1888 when Ellen White did not come out on the side of the GC President, Butler, or on the side of A.T. Jones and Wagner on the subject of the law and righteousness by faith. This discussion had polarized the Adventist people. She studied the issue late into the night but was impressed by God that this was not a vital question ( White biography vol. 3 p. 402). She realized this the difference was less important than love and unity. Differences can cause sharp divisions in the church.
She said, “there are some differences of views on some subjects, but is this a reason for sharp, hard feelings? shall evil suspicion, hatred, jealousies and imaginings, … Become enthroned. In the heart? … ( ibid p. 403)
When you think about important issues, and the question: will ordaining women bring more souls to the kingdom? We have to realize that this is an issue that is even less Important, theologically, than the discussion of the law back in 1888 .
Not making an affirmative decision slows down the work of winning souls to Jesus. We need to put personal and cultural differences aside. When an issue is so clouded that both sides think they are biblically correct, we need to do as Ellen White did, let unity and love overpower our minds because this is more in line with who God wants us to be as a people. Read John 17.
Believing that ordaining women will bring more souls to the kingdom is a good motivation for ordaining women. But believing that ordaining women will bring fewer souls to the kingdom is an equally good motivation for not ordaining women. There is no basis for your assertion that “Not making an affirmative decision slows down the work of winning souls to Jesus.” Your assertion presumes that God calls women to the position of pastors and elders. But if your presumption is wrong, then the opposite of what you assert is true.
I agree with you completely that “We need to put personal and cultural differences aside. When an issue is so clouded that both sides think they are biblically correct, we need to do as Ellen White did, let unity and love overpower our minds because this is more in line with who God wants us to be as a people.”
Well said! But who is sacrificing unity and love? The one who calls for respect for duly constituted church authority? Or the one who defies church authority and is willing to risk a church split in order to have his own way? It is those who demand the ordination of women irrespective of its harm to church unity who are putting their personal and cultural differences ahead of all else. Ellen White’s appeal for having the right spirit when discussing doctrinal differences applies equally to both sides of the ordination issue, not just the side opposite our own.
Yoder,
President Butler thought Ellen White was risking a lot by not saying that AT Jones was wrong. In fact he was so sure she should have done something that he was ill and could not make it to the General Conference Session. I believe the law in Galations and Righteousness by faith was a huge issue. Yet Ellen White did not come out on one side or the other. In vision she was told that there were errors on both Butlers view and in AT Jones views and yet she was not told take sides but to call people to unity. I’m just saying we can learn a lot from this situation.
And how do you propose that we apply the lesson from the 1888 situation to our 2012 situation? You seem to be saying that women’s ordination is an issue important enough to take a stand on (to the point of sacrificing unity), but respecting church authority (in the attempt to preserve unity) is not. Please explain this quandary.
A post for such a time as this !
Congratulations to the Mid-American Union for taking a bold step in the right direction. I believe that the time is right, for all Unions in the NAD to take a similar step. Yes, there will be people who will not like it, but it’s time for the discrimination to end in the Seventh-day Adventist Church.
Sorry that you see it that way, but I would not label women as selfish in seeking ordination.
Amen, Steven!
Thank you for your courageous action. God bless us everyone.
I am so happy that the Mid-American Union has finally harmonized its policies with decades of Adventist scholarship concluding that there is no theological barrier to the ordination of women! Bravo, MAU!
To the rest I ask, how many GC sponsored studies need to come to this conclusion before it’s ok to correct policies to reflect our theology? All the way back in 1973 a GC Sponsored study committee recommended a pilot program that would lead to the ordination of women in 1975. The corporate church has been studying this issue since at least 1950 (possibly since 1881), and yet, embarrassingly, church leaders continue to call for “more study.”
The MAUEC displayed their integrity in voting to finally end the injustice of gender discrimination in the MAU–a practice that was out of step with the consensus view in Adventist scholarship and out of step with church history. Bravo, again!
As a former Adventist who still highly regards the more socially-aware outlook of many in the church, I congratulate the MAU for taking this big step toward equality.
It is long past time that all faiths start taking an active role in questioning stereotypes of all types.
I find it sad that so many Christians, including those in politics, take the view that women are somehow less worthy than men to hold positions of leadership. While it perhaps can be argued with a literal reading of some Bible passages, it is imperative to recognize that the Bible was translated by men who had a biased and deep-held cultural view of the lesser roles of women. We are no less able to lead and serve than men, and clinging to archaic views that were not part of original biblical documents is a sad show of how uneducated many truly are. Blind faith is not a positive attribute. Knowledge, research and education is.
Thank you, MAU for taking a stand.
I think a vote this important should have been taken to a constituency session rather than an executive committee meeting. 35 people do not represent the whole union. A poor leadership choice in my opinion. I motion the MAUC to call an emergency constituency session to put this to a real vote.
M M,
This vote is no small matter. That being said, it’s simply a statement that the Union (executive committee) will not use gender as a basis for discrimination. The Union will not be nominating women for ordination. Rather, as a state conference nominates a candidate, male or female, the Union will not be using gender as a factor. This decision has always been made by the committee and not a consituency. Unless such a time comes that ordination (of men as well) is decided by a constituency, there’s no basis for your arguement.
The question that remains to be answered is how this decision will harmonize with the world church. Regardless, things cannot stay the way they are. As others have stated here, we can’t use scripture as a basis to disqualify women from ordination while at the same time allowing them to hold the very positions we’re arguing against, just without title or equal compensation…
Ithink we are nearing home now.is this the remnant church i know?we are drifting away slowly.People of God pray for our leaders and even church members so that we can hold on to the truth
As a denomination worldwide, we have been living a lie for over 40 years now. We have encouraged women to enter the ministry along with their male counterparts. We have placed them in pastoral positions. They are Senior Pastors, theologians, missionaries. They receive the same benefits, salary, and have all the same rights and privileges of all other pastors worldwide. But we have not “ordained” them as called of God. This has been, not a dirty little secret, but a dirty OPEN reality. Thank you, Mid-American Union, for doing what is RIGHT.
What is the real issue here? Was it not Jesus who questioned the pharisees on their ‘traditionalism’? Are we to stay stuck in a certain place, due to tradition? Or are we to grow in Christ light?
Are we holding the word of God back by following tradition?
Eve was formed from the rib of man, if you know your biology, the rib is from the side, not the back. Women are to serve and yes, it may be different from a man’s calling. But we are to stand beside and equal to each other; respecting each others mission. In addition, do we (man, women, child) not have our own calling? Has God given a man authority to tell a women what their calling is?
As many of you know, the world looks at ones credentials as a part of a persons legitimacy. I agree this should not be the case, but it is reality. Being ordained for me simply tells others that I have committed my life to spreading his word and my commitment is recognized…
Is it up to man, to tell a women who is called to minister that their calling is not as important? When you put in place a ‘protocol’ or ‘law’ that women should not be ordained, you are telling them their call to God’s work is not worthy enough to have the title of ordination.
The entire debate truly saddens me. If you love God and want to commit your life to his word and spreading that word, what is the harm in our church recognizing that calling?
I would like to commend those church lesders and pastors in the MAU who have the courage and trust in God to stand against a culturally driven movement that is not a biblically led movement. This tail spin headed toward a crash and burn must be stopped. God will not be mocked. May our lesders and laity rise to the occassion.
Well, may the mighty God forget all our sins and bless us. I counsel both side to contain themselves and pray for the guidance of the Holy Spirit. Everyone knows that God does not change. When He ordained the priesthood ,He only chose men. Jesus-Christ came and chose 12 men and so on. We also know that the last priest was Jesus. Now if we decide to ordain a person, is it equal to a priest. I don’t think so. So far we are in line with the Bible. Let’s see what the Bible says about ordination. Jeremiah1:5. Acts 17:31.there are many scriptures in the Bible regarding ordination,chosen ,laying hands or elect.. Read these verses and act upon them as God put it. As for me, these two verses are enough Isa 8:20 and Eccles.12:13-14. HIS CHURCH WILL TRIUMPH…..