I was really enjoying reading your article until you used it for you views against WO in the church. I am an Adventist who was very much involved with the Catholic Church and I still have dear friends who are Catholic that I regularly visit with. They are solid Roman Catholics and they have a love of Jesus that I respect. And, when I have need of prayers I call on them as much as I would an Adventist brother or sister. I do not believe in having women pastors and I guarantee that you will never see a female pope.
1 Like
Dear EJ,
I hear you and appreciate your perspective. My wife and I are SDA. We sent our children to Catholic school. Of the spiritually related options, this was the best academic alternative.
We grew close to our Catholic brothers and sisters and their children. However, what struck me most was how I came to understand the ministry of Mary, mother of Jesus. Though Mary gets very little press in scripture, the words she spoke at the wedding of Cana resonate incredibly. She simply said to the servants when the wine had run out, “Do what He tells you”.
If Christians around the world were to heed these few words of Mary in scripture, think of how much less trouble there would be with abuse, suffering and conflict of all kinds.
You have expressed gratitude for the grace brought to you by other believers in God’s church on earth. I have had a similar experience. These are people and spirit who draw us to Him.
Let us keep earthly attitudes, words and actions from clouding our vistas of glory by simply invoking the elegant and ever so timely truth of Mary, to “Do what He tells you”.
If that’s just too Catholic, then so am I.
1 Like
Jeremy, dig deeper.
Read the primary sources regarding EGW, abundant on the internet. Read The Fannie Bolton Story (from the EGW Estate!) and discover her response to Fannie’s requests that the women who ghosted for her receive acknowledgement for what they contributed. And how she slapped them when they talked too much for her comfort. Read The White Lie by the denomination’s erstwhile champion of the “spirit of prophecy”.
Or you might read examples of her real writing “skill” in Fred Veltman’s magnum opus, commissioned by Neal Wilson then buried. (Actually, it’s safely hidden in plain sight on line in the Adventist Archives. Be different, read Fred’s sad observation that she never stopped copying and never stopped denying it.) Truth can hurt, but it never injures.
I have found that the chains that bind us here are usually our persistent friendships, something seldom at risk when we encounter disappointing facts.
3 Likes
I am reminded of the text in 2 Corinthians 3:18. EGW in AH 330 expands on this thought with the promise that “by beholding we become changed” for truth and righteousness as we behold Jesus, or in this case it becomes a warning that if we behold deception, however cunningly woven into the fabric of Christianity, we will eventually find it has made its mark. If you no longer see the red flags, then perhaps your admission in the last sentence is true - sadly.
The contrast is so obvious that it is not dismissive in the least, but an actual reality; in stark contrast to the desires and wants of some who have no qualms in blowing out of all proportion their perceived hurt.
Perhaps I should revise my first sentence, because in most cases in this situation, it is the hangers on who do most of the agitating for what they perceive is necessary. And in this case also, quite a majority are males who see themselves as some sort of Social Justice Warriors.
I missed out on a lot of things in life, many due to economic circumstances. Do I have the right to go about like some spoilt child, and demand someone give them to me? Demanding them as my right? Millions are in the same boat I am sure. Have we all the right to make the “haves” in this world bend to our wants, our claims, when society is not geared to that “perceived justice.” Nor should it be, because the Bible is not about social justice, and the few experiments at social justice in our world have seen millions killed in the 20th century alone. Russia (USSR) alone has the estimates at anywhere from 70 million to over 100 million in the seventy of the “social justice revolution.”
I receive up-to-date information, and support several organizations around the world in situations where REAL oppression, slavery, sexual and physical abuse are all too common. If you have no concept that I can emphasize with them because I am a male, perhaps I should put my wife on, maybe you will believe her. But in stating as you do, that I cannot understand because I am not female, It makes me wonder if this same thought is carried over to the real Jesus of the Bible, perhaps He too cannot really understand, or indeed emphasize with any female because He was not? Interesting concept, but Scripture is against such a feministic construct (HEB 2:14-18; & 4:15).
Regarding the names mentioned to which you ask “of what” I was suggesting they might be good leadership candidates for the new church so many are calling for now.
Jimmy,
Thank you for the reminder re: deception. You are entirely right. Anything that doesn’t point TO Christ, points AWAY from Him.
Mary (His Mother) is no exception. Her testimony in John 2:6 does in no way seem to signal a basis for veneration. No more so than any other voice in scripture (led by the Holy Spirit) to bring glory to Christ (His mission, office, headship, priesthood, servanthood, prophesy, sacrifice, obedience and kingship).
Mary’s affirmation of Jesus’ nascent ministry was wholly nonsectarian, though prompted by the Spirit. She has, however, been co-opted from time to time throughout history. Her statement is no more Catholic than the today’s weather report is SDA. Both mother and son belong forever to all. And there seems to be plenty of each to share.
True, Jesus was not SDA or Catholic. Nor was Mary. Yet both have given us plenty upon which to build more than just one church. Though much of what’s been built is very good, not all that’s been built is true and very right.
Follow God or follow His mother. God’s all about choice. I’m pointing myself to the kingdom of God, not the kingdom of Mary. And the same Spirit that prompted her to say “Do whatever He says” will cause me to turn and to do just that.
1 Like
"The contrast is so obvious that it is not dismissive in the least, but an actual reality; in stark contrast to the desires and wants of some who have no qualms in blowing out of all proportion their perceived hurt."
Again…I understand your opinion.
"I receive up-to-date information, and support several organizations around the world in situations where REAL oppression, slavery, sexual and physical abuse are all too common."
Fantastic! But I would like to point out that there are the same issues in this country. I have volunteered and worked with those who have suffered from what you have mentioned.
No, it isn’t possible that you could or would have the same experiences that a female has(even in this country). I am sure that you can be empathic and sympathetic towards women and their issues- but that isn’t the same. I am quite positive that your wife would agree with this…I am sure that she would be more concerned about her personal safety than most any man (except LGBTQ+) in this country ever is on any given day. Different experiences entirely.
Thanks for explanation about the names. I know one or two of them and they are Godly women. We shall see what happens in the future.
harry, i’m a relatively rare example of someone who has gone the full distance with egw…over many yrs, and likely thousands of hours, i’ve read all her published writings, compilations, manuscripts, letters and diaries, and most more than once…and this comprehensive reading and studying continues…in fact the main reason i go to the ABC bookstores is to find something newly published from the writings of egw…
there’s no chance i can be swayed by anything going on on the internet…even the stories you mention of fannie bolton, etc., with which i’m already familiar, can have no impact…i’m certain about what egw is about, and what she isn’t…i’m also very certain of what she’s said, and what she hasn’t…
Thank you for your reply, it sets my mind at rest to some degree.
Re the last sentence, I meant to make that clear in the first mention of it, but slipped into shorthand mode and did not make it clear that is why I referred to them.
Regarding the fear of being attacked in the sentence before that If I understand you correctly. You probably could fight off an attacker better than I could now at my age and health. I couldn’t fight my way out of a wet paper bag at times. But that aside, it is a terrible world we are now in, and as Satan takes control of more and more minds in the final days, we have been told it will get worse dramatically. All the more reason to trust in God completely.
Just a few days ago, I received an email regarding the daily news. In this news event article it showed a small crowd had been present at a protest of a Ben shapiro (I think) speaking at some convention center or place. The crowd began shouting/chanting repeatedly something like “Ronald Reagan is dead,” then as someone obviously realized how inane that was, he/she led them into another equally inane chant “John McCain is dead.” Someone on the edge of the crowd turned around to the phone camera recording that event, and gave that look which pretty much said, “how stupid are they?”
Turning this into an object lesson, we should realize that much in society, and in church, what people regard today as so important, is orchestrated - designed to destabilize by inserting chaos into the picture. Incidentally, I have seen a Masonic 18th degree level certificate, and prominent is the “Ordo Ab Chao” on it, meaning the organization, at its top echelons. intend to bring the word to chaos in order to then bring it to their kind of order.
Many are unwittingly following the popular protesting formats, not realizing they are but being led down a path toward an agenda purposely set up for them. A trap into believing an all important issue (which was not there many years ago) is not only relevant, but now is vital. Call it revolution, social justice change, equality, or just cultural change, Its program ideal is that you don’t look too carefully into the past and find it wasn’t there, or a problem, until some made it an issue in recent years. I’m talking way beyond the usual thirty to forty years we tend to think of about these issues.
Take for instance WO. Except for a few, EGW included, to receive a preaching licence, no women were ordained to the gospel ministry. David Trimm, a far more careful historian that Knight’s little foray into that field, has carefully checked. EGW received a licence which was for a purpose. It was not ordination.
But I somehow suspect you are being told differently, because I have heard them also.
1 Like
Actually there are several EGW “certificates of Ordination” in existence. We have seen several on this site through the years. In one…the word, “ordination”, is crossed out but not in the others. I believe that @harrpa might be able to find a copy since I believe she has posted one of these certificates years ago.
It is good to remember that Dr. Trimm is in the employment of the Church and therefore not an unbiased historian. 
Here is a link that has the years that EGW received the certificates of ordination with the links:
1 Like
I understand the problem of being employed therefore liable to be biased, but it does not automatically follow that one in that position is always biased. I went to the site you directed me to. I hope you will bear with me as I return the same thought to you on this site.
It is dedicated to make women’s ministry plausible. Their goal is stated clearly “Council for Equal Ordination is a network of pastors, scholars, leaders, and lay persons…” Now that is also biased. Remember I said some have an agenda; that cuts both ways also. The trick is to see which bias is the best bias to be biased with.
I sought some answers on the Equal Ordination site.
A bigger picture must be gained regarding the statements the Equal Ordination.com uses on their “About” page. They quote so little of the statement, I wondered if it was worth reading in the original. Here it is in the section they quote.
“Letters have come to me from several, asking my advice upon the question, Should ministers’ wives adopt infant children? Would I advise them to do this kind of work. To some who were regarding this matter favorably, I answered, No; God would have you help your husband in his work. The Lord has not given you children of your own; His wisdom is not to be questioned. He knows what is best. Consecrate your powers to God as a Christian worker. You can help your husband in many ways. “You can support him in his work by working for him, by keeping your intellect improved. By using the ability God has given you, you can be a home-keeper. And more than this, you can help to give the message.
“There are women who should labor in the gospel ministry. In many respects they would do more good than the ministers who neglect to visit the flock of God. Husband and wife may unite in this work, and when it is possible, they should. The way is open for consecrated women. But the enemy would be pleased to have the women whom God could use to help hundreds, binding up their time and strength on one helpless little mortal, that requires constant care and attention.” Ms43a-1898.9.
What is the subject of this section of the statement, the reason for writing? It is about minister’s wives adopting children which she says is not good, compared with these wives being able to support their husbands in work for lost souls.
But what is also most interesting is that the beginning of the message is even more succinct.
“Some matters have been presented to me in regard to the laborers who are seeking to do all in their power to win souls to Jesus Christ. The ministers are paid for their work, and this is well. And if the Lord gives the wife as well as the husband the burden of labor, and if she devotes her time and strength to visiting from family to family, opening the Scriptures to them, although the hands of ordination have not been laid upon her, she is accomplishing a work that is in the line of ministry. Should her labors be counted as naught, and her husband’s salary be no more than that of the servant of God whose wife does not give herself to the work, but remains at home, to care for her family?” Ms43a-1898.1
What jumps out at you in this paragraph? The ministers are paid for their work, and if the wife labors as he does, though the hands of ordination have not been laid upon her, she is also working for the Lord. She should receive a salary, even as her husband receives one.
Now I wonder why the Equal Ordination people sought only to give you such a short extract, and then tried to make it say what it did not say in the least. In fact, it said the exact opposite than they wanted. Maybe that is why you got such a short extract.
Then I turned my attention to the next short quoted piece. The entire passage of eleven paragraphs is interesting. The short quote is from the opening paragraph. Again I am amazed at the lack of faithfulness to the theme of the message. In this statement, EGW calls for all, men and women to step up to the plate and not become do-nothing Christians. “There will be no lazy Christians in this cause” she says (para 9). It is essential for Christians in perfecting Christian character to engage in active evangelism.
(Given the number of people who support this site and who decry with sneers, the responsibility of Christians to perfect a Christian character, I wonder this statement was included in their opening declaration. Somebody was bound to see it eventually.)
Returning to a short analysis of this call to evangelism message, we find, The true Christian must grow and progress amid strangers to God, and scoffing, subject to ridicule, yet always faithful to duty (para 10).
As the opening paragraph states, women are to engage in this work also, because their refining, softening influence is needed in the great work of preaching the truth. They are not to be wrapped up in selfish interests, but the results would astonish us if they were to work diligently.
Again no talk about ordination for either male or female. The entire passage is about heeding the call to evangelism, and the results that would follow.
Now if we believe that the originators of this web site are learned and not unable to understand the English language, we must draw one of two conclusions. Either they have an agenda, and so don’t care if they wrest a passage or statement from its true meaning, or they have been misled themselves.
Can you tell me who these people are who set up this web site ?
I will continue further on this site as time permits, but it’s not looking good right at the very beginning.
1 Like
How dare you compare the abuse that is going on in the RCC to the Adventist Church. Creating a false equivalence… The Adventist Church is God’s remnant church, enfeeble though it may be. But to compare women’s ordination as an abuse that deserves mention with the rape of children in the RCC is disgusting.
Most Adventist believe that there are God fearing loving people in the RCC and we are called to warn them to come out of this system.
1 Like
"I understand the problem of being employed therefore liable to be biased, but it does not automatically follow that one in that position is always biased."
Nope…but one could never use him as an unbiased source.
I was only using the site because it had the links to ordination so that you were aware that there were other “certificates of ordination”. Nothing more.
"How dare you compare the abuse that is going on in the RCC to the Adventist Church. Creating a false equivalence… The Adventist Church is God’s remnant church, enfeeble though it may be. But to compare women’s ordination as an abuse that deserves mention with the rape of children in the RCC is disgusting."
That is not what the author is saying:
"I am not equating sexual abuse in the Catholic Church with our Church’s abuse of women — the majority of our membership — through lack of recognition and downright hostility. What I am saying is that both are abuse, and both have the power to destroy lives."
1 Like
Why even mention the abuse in the Catholic Church if the author was not trying to draw an equivalence…I would have no problems with the article if the argument was mention on it’s merits. The fact that the author chose to mention the abuse in the RCC shows that they were trying to say see we are also abusive in our church.
Not ordaining women is not abuse period. Women in our church are allowed to preach and hold leadership positions.
1 Like
They are allowed to do that while being held back from equal recognition with men, and equal pay. If we rephrase that, it’s called discrimination. In my mind, that’s abusive. It’s also preempting the Holy Spirit’s authority, saying that chromosomal makeup is more important for recognition by the body of Christ, than is the Spirit’s gifting. A total mess!
Frank
3 Likes
There are a number of abuses, sexual, physical, mental, emotional etc. Not ordaining women is not an abuse. Placing them in positions of responsibilities and not recognizing their status is emotional abuse. Period!
4 Likes
Perhaps discrimination against women says it better.
3 Likes
This could not be further from the truth from the formers that I know, and the formers whose stories that I have heard and read.
There is no “true church”. Christians are all members of the body of Christ. The churches that make that claim are usually cults, or cultic to a great degree.
5 Likes