Netherlands Union Conference Votes 88 to 76 to Continue Ordaining Women


(DENNIS HOFER) #30

First:
I LOVE that there are now places like ‘Spectrum’ for SDAs of all ‘colors’ of the spectrum to ‘vent’, somewhat publicly, when they cannot agree with the ‘official’ SDA-GC positions. I would not want to jeopardize that great freedom. So, please, feel free to ‘edit’ me whenever you see fit. As a ‘dog’ like the Syro-Phoenician woman Jesus tested, I’m happy with ‘crumbs’ from the SDA table. Moreso, as the ‘tail’ of the ‘dog’, I may contentedly rest in the realization that I will never ‘wag the dog’ of my SDA ‘betters’.
You see, I was once told by an authoritative SDA (now a PhD) that,
"With some education you could be someone."
Happily, I determined to follow the advice of another Leader.

Now, regarding the new NUC development :

We SDAs love prophecy. . . but all prophecies ?

The prophecy linked below in Ezekiel 34 – which is against the bullying ‘shepherds’ of God’s flock, and the bullying members within the flock itself – seems to have been fulfilled at least twice by Jesus, Himself, while on Earth. Then, He ‘cleansed’ the ‘Temple’. . . NOT of ‘sinners’, but of the self-‘righteous’ bullies, so he could ‘heal’ in peace.

Why not again, right now ? And, as many times as it takes until His ‘flock’ has ‘eyes that see’ and ‘ears that hear’ ?

So, isn’t it fascinating and exciting to see Jesus at work, again ? !

Who would accuse Gentle Jesus of disregarding His own church policies by mercifully overruling the bullies for the sake of the wounded, sick, weary and hungry of His flock ? How many of us have felt the sting of the ‘whips’ raised against us, or against our close friends, by ‘Good Adventists’ in the SDA church, and so, have consistently failed to find comfort in ‘My Father’s House’ ?

"When Jesus heard it, He said to them,
“Those who are well have no need of a physician, but those who are sick.
I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners, to repentance.”
Mark 2:17 NKJV

". . . And the Lord, whom you seek,
Will suddenly come to His temple,
Even the Messenger of the covenant,
In whom you delight. . . ."
Malachi 3:1 NKJV

"He who testifies to these things says,
“Surely I am coming quickly.”
Amen. Even so, come, Lord Jesus!
The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen."
Revelation 22:20-21 NKJV


(Michael) #32

I am glad to hear this thing has happening in our church. We have been told that we are in time of shaking. At the time where GC take action on this part, it is so surprising when others did something strange specifically against it. “I want my church back” Let our leaders learn from Aron as SOP says in Patriarchs and prophets. May God give us wisdom in this subject matter. Thank you Spectrum for letting us know. I like your dedication. God bless.


(jeremy) #37

edmund, are you perhaps inferring from the title of this article that the NUC vote of 88 to 76 was to continue to ordain women, as per the 2012, 2013 and 2015 votes…this is not what jared is saying…combining information from ingrid, he’s saying these previous votes are continuing because the 88 to 76 vote was meaningless because it lacked a 2/3 majority even though, on its face, it defeated the motion to rescind the 2013 vote…jared’s conclusion that NUC will continue to ordain women is therefore correct…

it also lost because it didn’t meet a simple majority, regardless of what the chair imposed…the 82 concerned members of NUC were obviously outnumbered and perhaps out-maneuvered…i think, like edmund, you may be reading this article incorrectly…jared isn’t saying NUC voted 88 to 76 to continue to ordain women…if we factor in information you are providing, jared is saying not only that the vote to rescind the 2013 vote to ordain women failed by a vote of 76 to 88, but that it was irrelevant because the winning vote of 88 to 76 to not rescind the 2013 vote didn’t achieve a 2/3 majority…

but you appear to be suggesting that your union doesn’t reflect your membership…perhaps we’ll see a story along this line at some point…


(Jared Wright) #38

I can see how the headline could confuse people if they took it to mean that the motion that was voted was to ordain women (the article explains, with a link to the entire motion). If there is confusion, the final line clarifies:

The immediate upshot is that the union will continue ordaining women, as first voted in 2012, and reaffirmed in May 2013 and again in July 2015 after the San Antonio General Conference vote on ordination.


(jeremy) #39

there may also be language issues…


(Jared Wright) #41

That’s a fair point.


#42

Harrpa,

Do you know that the notion of priesthood of all believers is found in the Old Testament?

The explanation is very simple: the church, in some quarters, has become very “liberal” and very lax. You will notice that in the places/countries where they are more “conservative”, women wear hats or head coverings in a greater proportion.

Tony,

I am not speaking about the text of Isaiah 61:6. I am speaking about the text found in Exodus 19:3-6:


3 And Moses went up to God, and the Lord called to him from the mountain, saying, “Thus you shall say to the house of Jacob, and tell the children of Israel: 4 ‘You have seen what I did to the Egyptians, and how I bore you on eagles’ wings and brought you to Myself. 5 Now therefore, if you will indeed obey My voice and keep My covenant, then you shall be a special treasure to Me above all people; for all the earth is Mine. 6 And you shall be to Me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.’ These are the words which you shall speak to the children of Israel.”

In this text, we see God instructing Moses about what to say to the children of Israel. It is not a prophetic text.

From this text, we can see that Israel was supposed to be a nation of priests. But we know that only the males of the tribe of Levi could be priests. This proves that the expression “kingdom of priests” doesn’t mean that women can be priests (since they were not priests in Israel).

Peter referred to that text of Exodus 19:5,6 in 1 Peter 2 . And many Christians refer to the text of 1 Peter 2 to say that the priesthood of all believers (as they call it) means that women can be ordained as ministers. This is not true since the priesthood of all believers already existed in Israel and this priesthood of all believers didn’t imply that women could be priests.

You are correct. There is no tribe of Levi among Christians (nor any other tribes for that matter) but there are still women… as far as I know…


#43

Nymous, it’s a prophecy. It does not say, You are, rather, You shall be called the priests of the Lord.

Ty Gibson put it well while looking into how Ellen White interpreted this passage:

“If men and women would act as the Lord’s helping hand, doing deeds of love and kindness, uplifting the oppressed, rescuing those ready to perish, the glory of the Lord would be their rearward…
“Christ said of His work, ‘The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me; because the Lord hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek….
“Wake up, wake up, my brethren and sisters. You must do the work that Christ did when He was upon this earth. Remember that you may act as God’s helping hand in opening the prison doors to those that are bound. Wonderful is the work that God desires to accomplish through His servants, that His name may constantly be glorified. He is waiting to work through His people. Those who are willing to be used will obtain a rich experience, an experience full of the glory of God….
“Of those who act as His helping hand the Lord says, ‘Ye shall be named the Priests of the Lord; men shall call you the Ministers of our God’” (Ellen White, Review and Herald, October 15, 1901).

The biblical passage from which she is quoting is Isaiah 61. It is a prophecy of the ministry in which the Messiah would engage. We are generally familiar with the part of the prophecy Jesus applied to Himself. But Ellen White goes on to quote a part of the prophecy with which most of us are not familiar, the part in which Isaiah foretells the formation of the New Testament church in the wake of the Messiah’s ministry:

“Ye shall be named the Priests of the Lord: men shall call you the Ministers of our God” (Isaiah 61:6, KJV).

One of the arguments being offered against allowing for the ordination of women is that the Old Testament priests were all men. Therefore, it is reasoned, only men should be allowed to occupy the pastoral role in the church. The problem with this argument is that it fails to recognize that within the biblical narrative, the Old Testament Levitical priesthood gives way to the New Testament priesthood of all believers. Isaiah 61 is a specific prophecy that foretold this transition. What Ellen White has done with Isaiah 61 is quite illuminating. She quotes the prophecy, invoking the language of “Priest” and “Minister,” and applies it to both brothers and sisters, men and women, within the church. This is of extreme significance, because it demonstrates, unequivocally, that Bible prophecy envisioned the body of Christ as a priesthood of all believers, and Ellen White simply assumed that the prophecy pointed to both men and women occupying the priestly and ministerial role, in the Christian church.
http://www.lightbearers.org/a-closer-look-at-womens-ordination/

Edit:

Correct, women could not be priests, but that also included anyone not a Levite. However, it is now said that all men can be “priests”/pastors in the NT dispensation. The part about having to be a Levite is done away with, but not the part about having to be a man…


#44

I find it strange when people say that the GC vote was just for the GC and divisions…But when you come down to unions and conferences they are free to ordain persons the world church has said we must not ordain… If you understand the church structure you will know that from local church you send delegates up to the conference, and they up to unions et al for special sessions, apart from other officers and persons in our institutions. therefore from bottom up and top down the church is ONE. You cannot pick and choose what you accept and what you reject… thats why a union cannot say we want to worship on Sunday; the world church will discipline that union…

This move is only showing rebellion by many up north and west who believe in this new theology of cultural relevance etc Over our doctrines…?? Very strange indeed…Else let those who practiced voodoo continue on with theri music etc cause they are being culturally relevant… I remember in history in the 4th century, a one mr Constantine the great brought in such "traditional and cultural"practices into the church and there was massive compromise and apostacy…and it led to Sunday observance etc… and the formation of Roman Catholicism…beware; are Unions not going down the same road…


(Elaine Nelson) #45

Can you quote that from official publications? There was never a vote taken that prohibited ordinations for either gender. The delegates in various divisions voted either for or against; but the church never made a change in their official Working Policy to that effect; which is why they cannot restrict divisions and unions from ordaining.


(paul) #47

Denford is right Elaine. The world church votes not in isolation but its votes are applicable down the structure to the last member. That is why the church manual, fundamental beliefs etc, are applicable even in the village chuirch way down in the jungle. We are a world church with a representative form of governance. We are not pentecostals who can vary a million times among themselves. Consider the following links of the official and independent news sources in the church:

Delegates Vote ‘No’ on Issue of Women’s Ordination: Adventist News Network

Adventist Review Online | Delegates Vote ‘No’ on Issue of Women’s Ordination
http://www.adventistreview.org/church-news/story2988-​gc-delegates-vote-‘no’-on-issue-of-women’s-ordination


(Tim Teichman) #48

Well, if you read carefully the text of the WO proposal they voted on, it sought to shift the authority of who can be ordained from the Unions up to to the Divisions. It failed. So the status quo remains, where the Unions have this authority.

The GC has no say in the matter, the way the church is currently structured.

So, no matter the GC’s (or really Ted’s) stated opinion of what should be, the vote did nothing (though many think it did.)


(George Tichy) #49

One day people will look back and ask, "Why was this WO a process that reminds us the birth process?"
Sure, slowly, in pain, but little by little the church will make progress in the direction of eliminating discrimination of women.
I don’t think that the future generations will easily understand the minds and the thinking of those who fight in favor of discrimination of women. They will think we were completely nuts!
What can we do to make sure they understand that many of us were (are) not nuts, that we were actually people ahead of our time who kept denouncing the this malaise, discrimination of women.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Exactly. That circus in SA regarding WO was nothing but a maneuver from the GC trying to introduce some changes without people actually knowing what was happening. It had nothing to do with permission/no-permission to ordain women. It was just an attempt to steal the right the Unions had (and still have) have and in a very subtle way transfer it to the Divisions, aka GC.

Of course it backfired! They didn’t word it properly, and people voted against it. I loved it! This way the Unions continue retaining the centennial power to make all decisions about ordination without the interference of the GC and without the threats from TW regarding “grave consequences.” What can be better than this?

Next time the anti-WO crowd decides to throw another maneuver (coup) they should consult someone who has the ability to write the proposition properly.


(Carlos) #50

This is outright rebellion !


(Carlos) #51

No apostasy is what it is my friend


(Carlos) #52

Yes spiritual priests ! Not literal ones ! Read the counsel from the spirit of prophecy on this


(Tim Teichman) #53

Yes, it’s wonderful isn’t it?

Great stuff! But I don’t think you know @andreas Do you?

That’s rather vague. Do you mean any of these statements Ellen wrote?


Women should be involved in the management of the church:
“It is not always men who are best adapted to the successful management of a church. If faithful women have more deep piety and true devotion than men, they could indeed by their prayers and their labors do more than men who are unconsecrated in heart and in life.” -Ellen G. White to Brother Johnson, n.d. (Letter 33), 1879, in Manuscript Releases, 19:56

Women are well represented in the bible as important to spreading the gospel:
“The number of women of whom honorable mention is made for their labors in the gospel is not small. Now, in view of these facts, how can any man in this age of Bibles say that the Bible does not notice women, or give them a place in the work of God? The Lord chooses his own workers, and he does not judge as man judges. Man looks at the appearance; God judges the heart, and he never makes mistakes.” - J. N. Andrews, “Women in the Bible,” Signs of the Times, October 30, 1879, p. 324.

Women should be involved in pastoral labor:
“If there is one work more important than another, it is that of getting our publications before the public, thus leading them to search the Scriptures. Missionary work—introducing our publications into families, conversing, and praying with and for them—is a good work and one which will educate men and women to do pastoral labor.” - Testimonies for the Church, 4:390
God chooses who will function as a pastor, not men:
“Those who stand as leaders in the church of God are to realize that the Saviour’s commission is given to all who believe in His name. God will send forth into His vineyard many who have not been dedicated to the ministry by the laying on of hands.” - The Acts of the Apostles, 110

Church Ordination is not required. One can be ordained directly by God and that is enough:
“In the city of Portland, the Lord ordained me as His messenger, and here my first labors were given to the cause of present truth.” - Ellen G. White to “Dear Brethren and Sisters,” October 19 (Letter 138), 1909

Women are needed to spread the gospel for the church and should be paid for this work:
"Women, as well as men, are needed in the work that must be done. Those women who give themselves to the service of the Lord, who labor for the salvation of others by doing house-to-house work, which is as taxing as, and more taxing than standing before a congregation, should receive payment for their labor. If a man is worthy of his hire, so also is a woman. The tithe should go to those who labor in word and doctrine, be they men or women. - All Kinds of Workers Needed,” Manuscript 149, 1899, in Manuscript Releases, 18:66-67

Women and men should be ministers:
"Young men and young women who should be engaged in the ministry, in Bible work, and in the canvassing work should not be bound down to mechanical employment. Some will be trained to enter the field as missionary nurses, some as canvassers, and some as gospel ministers. - Testimonies for the Church, 8:229-230

Women and men should be pastors/ministers:
“All who desire an opportunity for true ministry, and who will give themselves unreservedly to God, will find in the canvassing work opportunities to speak upon many things pertaining to the future, immortal life. The experience thus gained will be of the greatest value to those who are fitting themselves for the ministry. It is the accompaniment of the Holy Spirit of God that prepares workers, both men and women, to become pastors to the flock of God.” - Testimonies for the Church, 6:322

Women should be ministers:
“There are women who should labor in the gospel ministry.” - The Laborer Is Worthy of His Hire, Manuscript 43a, 1898, in Manuscript Releases, 5:324-327


(Website Editor) #54

This article is now closed to comments.