Idaho Conference Issues Statement Concerning 2018 Annual Council

Dear Idaho Conference Family & Friends:

On Sunday, October 14, 2018, the General Conference (GC) Annual Council approved a document recommended by the GC administration on how to relate to units of the church organization that are out of compliance with voted GC actions and policies. You may find the document via this link: The proposal was approved with 185 in favor, while 124 opposed. There were two abstentions. This action by Annual Council was taken primarily because of perceived noncompliance with GC actions regarding the ordination of women. There are church members and leaders happy with the action, while there are church members and leaders disappointed with the results of the vote. Regardless of where you stand on this issue, we appeal to you to pray for God’s church and its leaders. We are living in momentous, exciting, and challenging times. Nevertheless, we strongly believe the Seventh-day Adventist Church is God’s church, and He is big enough to take care of His church.

This is a companion discussion topic for the original entry at

Since employment of qualified women and men pastors is between local conference and local congregation, decisions made elsewhere, higher up the organization should be of secondary importance as far as we, the average church members, are concerned.

Locally funding pastoral associates is a fairly common practice among some ethnic congregations I know.


Does this Conference support ordination of women? Have they ever ordained women?
These are the first questions that need to be addressed/answered before any meaningful dialogue can take place. Otherwise, … mere talk?


This GC action could be invalid for the reason that “perceived noncompliance” can be a result of a wide spectrum of reasons including incompetence, intellectual disabilities, dementia, personality disorders and psychotic disorders (among others) none of which were ruled out among those officers who formulated the document. One more reason why “noncompliance” is in order and indicated.

What provision does the Idaho Conference have for those women pastors in regards to ordination?


The Idaho conference statement:

“The Idaho conference highly values women in ministry “

This is blatantly BOGUS baloney!

If you highly valued women in ministry you would confer on them equal status with their male colleagues!

You would not have an efficient GLASS CEILING that forever prevents them from attaining conference president status.

Is your “white male privilege” threatened by the concept of a female Idaho Conference President ?

Why do you reserve this special entitlement for your male bastion???


George, are you kidding??? I haven’t been in an Adventist church since I moved here 2 years ago. I have to dodge bullets all the time just for disclosing I’m from California. My unqualified opinion is NO this conference doesn’t support the ordination of women.


The answer to this question should have been their opening statement. But it was nowhere to be found through the whole statement either. It seems to me that it was nothing but another “beautiful statement.”

Too many people now are making statements that are completely vague and dubious about the real issue, WO.

Hey, WO is no longer an elephant in the room, (much less one “bearded”… :laughing:). Leaders have to take a position, a clear/clean position and make a clean/clear statement about it.

I hope we won’t have now a cascade of declarations from leaders who will talk only vaguely hoping to save face on both sides. It’s already happening, but we can see through it!!!


Perhaps the Idaho Conference sent this bulletin for publication in Fulcrum7 and Advinticate and intentionally included Spectrum for trolling purposes? What do you say George @GeorgeTichy?


Tom, thanks for the input. Yours may be the only revealing statement about what actually happens in that Conference. What they wrote may well be just another mere “beautiful statement.”

The only thing I want to hear from those suddenly-so-vocal leaders is,

"_Does your Conference/Union/Division support ordination of women?_
Of course in the famous format…, ___ YES … … ____ NO_


From now on, my first comment on future statements from other entities will be the question,

Does your Conference/Union/Division support ordination of women?
___ YES … … ____ NO

Until they answer this question, any statement will be just a “beautiful statement” and not worth spending more time on it. Do we really want to spend time on dubious, maybe even misleading statements?


Dr Tichy…

Do you support the ordination of a class of female and male SDA clergy?

Yes__ No ___


1 Like

I will certainly answer your question after you clarify for me what you mean by “a class of female and male SDA clergy.”


A social class is a group of people of similar status, commonly sharing comparable levels of power and wealth. In sociology , social classes describe one form of social stratification. … A society organized according to social classes , then, allows for some social mobility.

OK, back to your question (forget the “class” issue):

I support the ordination of any person who is found competent for ministry, who is living according to the biblical principles, who feels called for the work, who got proper education in the field. I general terms, this is my position.

I also support the elimination of discrimination in Church - and everywhere else. Any kind of discrimination by the way.


This topic was automatically closed after 30 days. New replies are no longer allowed.