Mid-America Union Approves Women's Ordination

On September 12, 2021, the Mid-America Union Conference held its constituency session at the College View Church in Lincoln, Nebraska. Among all of the usual business conducted, one agenda item stands out above the rest: a vote to authorize women’s ordination.

This is a companion discussion topic for the original entry at http://spectrummagazine.org/node/11405

So, if I understand well what the article is saying, the Mid-America union is going ahead with women’s ordination… in spite of the decision of the General Conference constituency!

It’s going to be interesting!

Nymous, the vote opens the doors to the conferences to present women to the Union as candidates for ordination. Presuming the women meet the other criteria for ordination, the Union Conference Executive Committee will approve their ordination without regard to gender.

As a delegate to the MAUC constituency meeting, I was quite oblivious to what the GC might think or do. Intentionally so. I inferred that many if not most of my fellow delegates felt similarly. The GC has made itself irrelevant on this matter, and perhaps other matters as well. It is crystal clear that the Holy Spirit is calling women into ministry, and the delegates expressed their belief in that calling of the Spirit. The GC - more specifically, the President - is on the wrong side of things, out of touch with reality in the U.S. He/they seem to be more concerned with policy matters and the global politics of voting than in the movement of the Spirit among our women, particularly young women.


Rather “mindset” rather than nebulous “decision”
Refer to previous Topic Noncompliance and the Abuse of Authority in the Women’s Ordination Saga
" It bears repeating that the SA vote: “Is it acceptable for division executive committees, as they may deem it appropriate in their territories, to make provision for the ordination of women to the gospel ministry, Yes or No?” was not about the general question of ordaining women. The vote said no only to the divisions’ involvement, and not to whether women should be ordained. With that question settled in the negative, the church returned to the negative status quo concerning women’s ordination, which has always been the purview of the Unions. Before SA, some Unions ordained women. After SA, with nothing changed, they continued to ordain both genders to ministry."

1 Like

this is why the no vote in San Antonio was so wrong: it’s facilitating the movement towards everyone doing what is right in his own eyes, exactly the opposite of what no voters had convinced themselves would be the result…

that no vote was delusion from beginning to end…


We know from numerous writings and statements of SDA opponents of women’s ordination that the San Antonio vote rested in part on the anti-Trinitarian heresy of Eternal Functional Subordinationism, which is the principal component of male headship theory. In the immediate aftermath of the San Antonio vote, many of us felt about the SDA Church as Jerome felt about the world centuries ago, as expressed in his famous statement, “The whole world groaned and was astonished to find itself Arian.” Since the San Antonio vote, a fervent revival of Trinitarian scholarship and sentiment in the SDA Church has occurred. I am happy to see the Mid-America Union Conference do its part and stand up for Jesus.


Blessings to the efficacy of the Holy Spirit in Union with Mid-America!

Jesus and His followers are honored by this decision. Thanks.


Meanwhile, in Australia and New Zealand, the union leaders continue to provide lip service but no action.

Whatever happened to “Dare to be a Daniel”.


It is interesting that many people invoke the working of the Holy Spirit to do whatever they want to do.

It would be more interesting to know what criteria they use to say that this or that is the working of the Holy Spirit and not the pursuit of their own desires.


1 Like

Perhaps it would be better for you explain what criteria you are using to make this determination. This will make your implied questioning of the work of the Holy Spirit more clear to the readers.


Sorry, but I asked first…

And I am not the one invoking the working of the Holy Spirit here.

So, do you have something to say?

1 Like

Unless God himself, or the Holy Spirit are directly speaking to you…exactly where are you to derive their intent? For that matter, from where do we secure our understanding of any of our personal religious beliefs? This is what is so alarming about the concept “leaning not unto thine own understanding”…exactly who’s understanding do you then recommend. Perhaps our illustrious SDA President? Or maybe you might want to quote scripture…but that will surly get you no where, because there are enough contradictory scriptures to blow holes in almost anyone’s particular bend.

I have only one mind, which God bestowed me with, it is all I have to work with, and the morality that was instilled in me by my upbringing…so “what ever seemeth right unto me” is kind of what I must live with, and what, I honestly believe God will hold me accountable to.


Actually you are making an implied assertion that the Holy Spirit is not leading. Lyndy Williams reply pretty much says it all. So are you able to explain the reasoning behind your assertion or not?


this move by Mid-America comes really only two months and change after the South American Division voted to ordain women elders…these are not small isolated churches making incidental moves that barely register on anyone’s radar…they’re major entities making major decisions, knowing full well the divisive nature of these decisions and the fall-out that PUC and CUC have endured for several yrs…

is there perhaps an insider sense that the San Antonio vote is likely to be rescinded, or attenuated, or contextualized by an impending annual council…is it an attempt to possibly steer or influence an expected AC vote on WO, or where the San Antonio vote will be expected to apply…Annual Council 2021 will be held Oct 7-13, less than a month away…it’s in AC’s interest to somehow preserve GC clout, and contextualizing San Antonio may be the only path available now…i suppose we’ll know soon enough…

Why doesn’t the Holy Spirit just stand up and say what is to be done? Why leave it up to committees and sessions and debates and majority votes?

1 Like

Perhaps, you should ask Him…if you get an answer, let us all know.

1 Like

I wonder if invoking the Holy Spirit is a generic linguistic expression of approval or thankfulness. It may be like saying the “Lord was with me” after narrowly avoiding an accident or completing an advantageous financial transaction- giving God credit for direct intervention. (Lindy- Sorry. I was more responding to Nymous and others who invoke the H.S.)

Aha… Now we are going somewhere. Some will invoke the Holy Spirit to go in one direction, some others Scripture to go in the other direction.

Quite a dilemma!

What we can safely suppose is that the Holy Spirit will not go against the Word of God. So we cannot invoke the Holy Spirit and at the same time disregard the Word of God. Or we cannot use the Holy Spirit to oppose the Word of God.

Now, concerning Scripture, are there really contradictions, as you seem to say, or simply a lack of understand on our part?

If we don’t trust the Word of God (because of so-called contradictions) what makes us sure that the Holy Spirit will lead us or that we will trust the Holy Spirit in the first place?

As Christians, we have to use the methods of our Master, Jesus. And He always referred to Scripture to solve any issue. Can we do less?

What are your thoughts on the issue of Women’s Ordination?

Why not vote individual congregation decision? Why does that need to be piped down from top down with all of the political nonsense at the top?