Women Pastors Tell Their Stories

Claims of inherited power and direct lineage from gods predate Christianity and Judaism by thousands of years. In ancient Sumer, high priests ca. 3500 B.C. claimed kinship with the gods with authority passing down family family lines. This was similar to the Israelite priests which were limited to the tribe of Levi.

The earliest known rite for Christian ordination is found in the Apostolic Tradition of Hippolytus of Rome (ca. 200 A.D.) In truth, there is NO scriptural prohibition against the ordination of women. Married men have no objection to their wives being presidents, prime ministers, leading politicians, judges, lawyers and doctors. But celibate priests cannot bear the thought of women whom they have renonunced, being on a par with them."

1 Like

As a child I alway felt so superior to the Pharisees and Sadducees because we followed scripture only, not humanities writing on the holy scripture. I wondered how they could have gotten it so wrong. I can picture in my mind the temple scene where the religious jewish lawyers came to Christ and how they had the writing of their forbearers with them and likely memorized and asked Christ their pointed questions, I also see that scene played out here. The working policy of the C.G. and NAD… that is the law, that is right and righteousness all wrapped up into one neat package and when the wo supporters lose watch out…

Amazing, truly amazing. I’ll stick with Christ’s response, love the Lord with all your heart and mind and soul and your neighbor as yourself, thank you very much.

1 Like

Here’s another who has long adopted the Golden Rule as the finest motto to live by. Another which is equal for me is the famous Serenity Prayer:

“Give me the serenity to accept what I cannot change;
The Courage to change the things I can;
And the wisdom to know the difference.”

Thank you George, I’ve only gone through the first 2 websites so far, and interesting to note is: “On one of the credentials (1885), the word “ordained” is struck through.” The way this was presented to me was, that it was the only credential Ellen White received, and it was struck through. But apparently, from what you have posted, it was not the only credential, there were many others, all of which, where not struck through.

hehe Kevin is on the ball, George :eyes:

Well Tony, he claimed that all those certificates are "simply illegal."
So the Church did something so illegal, and EGW accepted it without any problem.

Man, she would have had a very hard time trying to convince Kevin that her Certificates of Ordination were all legit and acceptable. I bet he would abandon the Church at that time… It may also be jealousy, because she got at least 6, and Kevin is still waiting for his first…

Its quite clear they are not “illegal”, she had the credentials. I have much to think and meditate on George, much to think and meditate on. Thank you once again for going out of your way to share these things with me.

When I first gave my life to Christ, I was the best Pharisee in town. Oh, you should have seen me in my prime! I would see a family member watching something on TV which wasn’t “godly”, I was there in a flash of light, to remind them, of how sinful this is. And I’m sure the enemy loved every moment of it…even now, I’m still undoing much of what I caused.


Kevin, apparently I touched a nerve since it elicited a shrill response. Perhaps you’d like to call your good friend, Elder Wilson, and ask him if the GC vice-presidents, treasurer, secretary and department directors agree with him that women should never be ordained as ministers or elders. Then let us know who has been under an illusion. Since you have grossly mis-characterized the 2012 Annual Council action, I will find the wording in the minutes and post it here for readers to compare.


Kevin, Here is the full text of the statement you referred to from the 2012 Annual Council. Hmm, I cannot find the words “condemn” or “illegal” anywhere. Are you trying to mislead Spectrum readers? The intent of the voted statement was an appeal–not a condemnation–urging groups not to run ahead of the process.

Perhaps you did not notice this paragraph in particular: “This statement deals with Church structure and procedures. It does not address the question of ministerial ordination practices per se. The central issue is one of Church polity—how the Church defines its organization, governance and operations. Historically, the Seventh-day Adventist Church has developed on the principle of interdependence rather than independence. A course of action contrary to the will of the whole places the organization at risk.”

I’m afraid you may have damaged your credibility with readers. :smile:

Statement on Church Polity, Procedures, and , Resolution of Disagreements in the Light of Recent Union Actions on Ministerial Ordination

VOTED, 1. To adopt the following Statement on Church Polity, Procedures, and Resolution of Disagreements in the Light of Recent Union Actions on Ministerial Ordination and

          2. To request that division administrations engage with field unit administrators in reviewing this statement and its implications for Church structure, identity, operations, and mission:


Foundational principles for Seventh-day Adventist Church structure and operations are rooted in the Bible and draw heavily from the teachings of Jesus, the apostles and the experience of the early Church. In the New Testament the people of God are urged to demonstrate unity (John 15 and 17, Ephesians 4); to engage in worldwide mission (Matthew 28:18-20, Acts 1:7-8, Acts 10-11); to acknowledge differences/disagreements and to have a process for their resolution (Acts 6, 15, Galatians 3:26-29, Philippians 2); and to live as a transformed and transforming community in a fractured and sin-burdened world (Ephesians 2 4).

The Seventh-day Adventist Church seeks to preserve its identity as a united global family while addressing mission opportunities and challenges in widely differing cultural, political and economic environments. The desire to hold two objectives, global unity1, and global mission, in creative and dynamic balance has led to an organizational structure that shares and delegates responsibility for mission within a framework of participation in and respect for collective decision-making processes. Within this organizational structure, decisions of a General Conference Session represent the highest authority2—the voice of the whole Church in respect to beliefs, procedures and relationships.

It is natural to expect that in response to diverse and ever-changing circumstances differences will arise in determining the most appropriate ways of accomplishing mission while also preserving Church structure and relationships. The articulation of different viewpoints and the expression of disagreement are important ways by which the Church gains new insights and more fully understands the global impact of decisions. Speaking and listening, when done respectfully, are essential to the operational health of the whole body and its continuing effectiveness in mission. The process adopted by the Church for the resolution of disagreements involves forums where all those affected by a decision are represented in the exploration and adoption of decisions.

The call, by both individuals and organizations, for change in ministerial ordination practices illustrates one expression of disagreement. This subject has been on the global agenda of the Church at General Conference Sessions for several decades. Thus far the General Conference Session (by actions in 19903 and 19954) has chosen the pathway of uniform practice worldwide—ministerial ordination for males only. A recurring question is whether or not the authority to grant ministerial ordination without regard to gender could be granted to divisions without making the provision mandatory everywhere. Several unions in various parts of the world have voiced support for this kind of change in ministerial ordination practices. Three union constituency sessions have authorized their executive committees to approve ministerial ordination without regard to gender. Of these, two have recently chosen to proceed according to the constituency decision.

Decisions to pursue a course of action not in harmony with the 1990 and 1995 General Conference Session decisions (with respect to ministerial ordination) represent not only an expression of dissent but also a demonstration of self-determination in a matter previously decided by the collective Church. The General Conference Executive Committee regards these actions as serious mistakes. They directly challenge two world Church decisions on the matter of ordination. They create doubts about the importance of collective decision-making as a basic feature of denominational life. They weaken the fabric of Church life and operations by giving opportunity for other entities to follow this example in order to justify independence and autonomy in other matters rather than maintaining a mutual commitment to collective decision-making.

The world Church cannot legitimize practices that clearly contradict the intent of General Conference Session actions. This applies to ordination decisions as well as to other matters in which a local organization may feel constrained not just to voice its disagreement with the world Church but to proceed along a pathway that directly conflicts with the expressed will of the worldwide Church. Accordingly, the world Church does not recognize actions authorizing or implementing ministerial ordination without regard to gender.

This statement deals with Church structure and procedures. It does not address the question of ministerial ordination practices per se. The central issue is one of Church polity—how the Church defines its organization, governance and operations. Historically, the Seventh-day Adventist Church has developed on the principle of interdependence rather than independence. A course of action contrary to the will of the whole places the organization at risk.

Discussion and debate about ministerial ordination practice is a separate matter and is under global study and review. General Conference Session decisions (1990 and 1995) did not authorize ministerial ordination without regard to gender, either globally or regionally. Any change in this practice requires action by a General Conference Session. Every Church organization in the world has been given the opportunity of participating in the current global study. This can be accomplished through interaction with the respective division-appointed Biblical Research Committee. Division Biblical Research Committees will interface with the General Conference-appointed Theology of Ordination Study Committee. The study is to be completed by 2014 with a report from the Theology of Ordination Study Committee presented to the General Conference Executive Committee at its 2014 Annual Council, which will decide what to refer to the General Conference Session in 2015.

The role of women in ministry and leadership has been a long-standing question. It is one that attracts strong yet differing convictions and can readily divide families, congregations and constituencies. The process toward finding acceptable solutions must not obscure the contribution that women have made and continue to make in many areas of Church life and leadership.

The General Conference Executive Committee specifically affirms the important roles that women fill in the life of the Church. Their giftedness and commitment is a blessing to the whole Church and a necessary part of its work in mission.

Moments of tension in denominational life can be opportunities for both learning and enhancing relationships. The presence of conflict and the expression of difference can help make the Church stronger. In such moments the commitment of all to informed and collective decision-making processes is the best way to resolve matters while keeping the Church together as a world family.

The General Conference Executive Committee appeals to all organizations—local churches, local conferences/missions, unions, institutions and divisions—to consider thoughtfully the impact and implications of decisions beyond the boundaries of each entity’s territory of operations. General Conference Working Policy, the Church Manual, and General Conference Session decisions are designed to assist the Church in demonstrating the unity for which Jesus prayed and at the same time to provide a structure that advances the gospel commission in every part of the world.

This appeal is also addressed to individual Church members everywhere. Drawing upon Paul’s analogy of the Church as a body (1 Corinthians 12) it is a call for all parts of the body to perform their individual service, to express their unique giftedness with the realization that each is part of something much larger—a worldwide family that seeks to do all things in the name of Jesus (Colossians 3:17).


Tony, this happened to many people. Legalism is not religion, it’s just fanaticism. Those of us who were raised in a legalistic environment had to fight a big battle to get back to normality.
I too was raised in a legalistic environment, but I had the blessing of having parents that would never compromise their freedom to think and not to follow any fanatic teacher or legalistic teaching. Therefore, when I had to confront reality in the early 1980s, it was painful but not hard.
Hang in there!


The GC Executive Committee’s Statement ratifies the ordinations as valid in the unions in which they were done. As a result of the Statement, not one function, duty, responsibility, right, or activity of any ordained woman is disturbed, proscribed, or changed. The Statement is the best evidence we have regarding how the issue will be addressed in the near future. Our good friend Kevin does not fully understand the difference between law on the books and law in action. His approach to law is formalistic, and hence erroneous, rather than realistic.


We can always trust Kevin, but we MUST verify!
Thanks for debunking his incorrect information.


What do you mean “that there are no female angels too”?.. Certainly we don’t know the gender of angels (Deuteronomy 29:29 The secret things belong unto the Lord our God: but those things which are revealed belong unto us and to our children for ever, that we may do all the words of this law.), but what we know is that each time when angels were seen, came with the appearance of a man not a woman. This is not to say women are not important as men, but please get this fact right, God has his symbols and markers in the plan of salvation, we dare not to move them. All Priests from the tribe of Levi were ordained to work in the sanctuary were men, but the tribe consisted women too. And from Old Testament to New no women complained about it. Only in this day and age were you have activists and bogus advocates fighting for equal rights try to move the markers God put in place in his church, woe unto those who place darkness for light

Who are we to tell God who He can and who He cannot call to pastoral and administrative ministry? God called Ellen White to be the end-time prophet while women still did not have the right to vote in this country. I urge you to watch the video posted on the TOSC website and listen to the testimonies of God’s calling. (http://www.adventistarchives.org/june-2014-papers-presented-at-tosc#.VCKvvFfYATA) At the very least, watch the segment on Pastor Hao Ya Jie. If Position #1 advocates have their way, the church is going to have to re-baptize much of the Seventh-day Adventist Church in China.


Ellen White was never ordained “laying of hands”…ordination is the question at hand, not calling for ministry. Why limit ministry by women to pastoral, they can do much in the church, that is evident through Ellen’s work. And who are we to change what God has appropriated in his plans to save humanity. If He called 12 disciples (men), and Priests (men) to carry the duty, it means something. So who are we to direct the channel of the gospel by our own bogus thinking. Women are not to be ordained for Pastoral or Elder-ship position, that’s biblical…if they want to be pastors no laying of hands should be conducted, and that’s also biblical…you wont find such practise in the entire bible…

‘And from Old Testament to New no women complained about it.’

Please explain:how can you possibly know this?!

‘Only in this day and age were you have activists and bogus advocates fighting for equal rights’

Err…Yeah terrible thing those equal rights. Women? Equal rights?! Get outtta here!

Only MEN can baptise, preach and be ordainededed. REAL MEN , machos like errrm… Stephen Bohr, Larry Kirkpatrick and David Read. Um…

Kevin Paulson do you baptise? You’re not ordaineded so shouldn’t you NOT baptise? Or is it ok cos you’re a MAN?

This is getting confusing…

Jesus was baptised…By a Levite MAN priest.

No wait!?


"And who are we to change what God has appropriated in his plans to save humanity."

Are you suggesting that Jesus was nailed on the cross so that women would never to be ordained as ministers?


"Only in this day and age were you have activists and bogus advocates fighting for equal rights try to move the markers God put in place in his church, woe unto those who place darkness for light"

Does this apply to Paul and the Jewish issue of circumcision too?


I’m not talking about circumcision…this is about ordination. When they actually wanted to replace Judas as the 12th disciple, they cast lots upon two men, not women…this must tell you something. Say whatever but women ordination is not biblical…give me a verse which say so and suggest so

"markers God put in place in his church…"

One of which is ordination, Others include circumcision. Why pick and choose?

Paul had no biblical evidence when he argued against the Jewish rites of circumcision. Did he?



You are,

  1. Asking way too many questions, and some people may stop liking you for that…
  2. Trying to make sense of those confusing thoughts, and you may end up very frustrated…

It seems that when a man experiments with discrimination of women he may end up like a lion who experiments with blood: liking it!

1 Like