Sir, even in Africa, in some tribes, women hold leadership roles, including being chiefs of the tribes. I have met one of them on my recent trips to Gambia.
Thanks everyone for commenting on my article.
The core issue of WO is a function of Male Headship. The church may be able to resolve WO but no doubt, as long as there are more male than female church policy leader voters, its leaders will be creative enough to come up with another title or layer of titles to maintain its inborn need for a caste system. It is an innate male trait fostered by the principle of “survival of the fittest.”
So why didn’t the African delegates want Women’s Ordination? Are they not representing Africa properly? If so, that’s a good sign for the African church, but also suggests that the delegates were being petty or bigoted or worse.
You have to ask them. I haven’t gone around asking everyone how they votes but I would imagine some African delegates votes for, while others, against, as was the case for those from every other region, including North America.
Sir, does the Church in Africa have any “female chiefs” as well, or only tribes have them? Do they have ANY representation sent to the GC conferences every 5 years, and to the ACs every year?
The proportion YES/NO cannot be compared. It’s so obviously not the same, not even closer. Some delegations are asked to vote in block. Crazy!
Anyone who follows those voting sessions closely knows what the massive vote from Africa is. Why do you think that TW always relies on those votes from Africa so confidently? Let alone South America and many hispanic regions. Even Asia has it’s serious problems with supporting discrimination of women.
Sir, you seem to know all the facts, so, state what the proportion Yes/No is, for the different African divisions. All I am saying that women are in leadership positions in Africa, both in and outside of the church. I met some of them on my trips. In fact, I stayed with one of them in her family home.
Sir, I am sure you met some of them, no doubt about it. I am wondering, though, how are women represented at the GC’s meetings.
Regarding the voting, as I said, watching the procedures gives us a pretty clear understanding of the positions held by each region of the world.
If women from those regions (including Africa) had actually any respect from their men, they would have a significant representation at those Church meetings. Do they have it? Absolutely NOT.
At Pentecost when the New Testament church was formed, one man was chosen and ordained through the power of the Holy Spirit to replace Judas. The Holy Spirit failed to ordain any of the other disciples or women present in the upper room.
Is the Holy Spirit constrained by the customs of the time?
How do we know this?
One could, via this logic, posit that the HS made a mistake “ordaining” Judas, couldn’t she?
Also, sacerodotal ordination traces it’s roots, unbroken lineage, straight to St Petra. According to the Roman Catholic documents of the Second Vatican Council, sacerdotalism is the teaching that “through the ministry of priests, the spiritual sacrifice of the faithful is made perfect in union with the sacrifice of Christ, the sole Mediator. Through the hands of the priests and in the name of the whole Church, the Lord’s sacrifice is offered in the Eucharist in an unbloody and sacramental manner until He Himself returns.” Thus, priests “exercise within the Church a function of the apostles. They are empowered to perform the ministry of the Word, by which men are formed into the People of God. They catch up and draw into the Eucharistic Sacrifice the spiritual sacrifice of the common priesthood of the faithful”. As such, only validly ordained Catholic priests with an apostolic lineage are able to offer the sacrifice of the Mass (from wiki)
Many Adventists have come to regard ordination a virtual sacrament, as though it conveyed an unction or ability that was not present in a person before ordination. This is wrong. We do need to start over, to redefine ordination as a recognition of God’s call upon a person for a specific ministry. Ordination for life is also wrong. When assignments change, new ordination for new roles should be considered. The author quoted from the church manual (“The only way one may be qualified for serving the Church at large is by ordination to the gospel ministry.”), which implies that ordination is the means of qualifying a person for service. This is backwards. And it leads to authoritarian use of the rite. Such use also enables using the tithe for services only peripherally connected to “gospel ministry”; i.e., department director and/or associate, school principal, treasurer, etc. Yes, we need to start over, and refocus ordination on God’s call for service.
Once upon a time, I really didn’t think that woman’s ordination was worthy of any consideration: it was not big deal as far as I could see even though there was a lot of concern voiced about in from both sides.
Elder Ted Wilson said something to the effect that SDA’s should search the Scriptures for themselves regarding it. I did. It’s biblical and it is settled. But It is like the circumcision issue of Paul’s Day: Circumcision is biblical, but Jesus fulfilled the law so it was no longer required.
In this time of the final shaking, the wheat and tares are about to be separated based on how they read the Bible. Rather than get into long debates or protracted discussion… If you want to see a short slide show that sums up my biblical research on woman’s ordination that is supplemented with one Spirit of prophecy statement; my link is www.loudcry101.com (The middle video on the bottom row)
This topic was automatically closed after 30 days. New replies are no longer allowed.