Advent Talk
Issues & Concerns Category => Womens Ordination & Related Issues => Topic started by: Gregory on May 12, 2012, 06:01:12 AM
-
Jim Walters, writing in an Adventist Today blog said:
General Conference President Ted Wilson's dramatic opposition to women's ordination at the last Fall Council of world church leaders has backfired, and an equality that has been obvious to the children of darkness for decades is now being embraced by the children of light.
I find it interesting that he attributes in part what some call “rebellion” to the present General Conference President. For different reasons, I was coming to the conclusion that GC President, Ted Wilson may be the spark that ignited the female ordination fire. Elder Wilson has an interesting background on this issue.
It is widely reported that women have been excluded from some levels of spiritual leadership under his leadership. I do not know of the accuracy of this report. I do know that it was at the time when he was co-chair of Adventist Chaplaincy Ministries; females were endorsed and began service as military chaplains. This is an important fact. If it is also true that females were generally excluded from some levels of spiritual leadership that were under his control it probably revels his personal beliefs, and makes a statement as to his leadership style.
On the issue of his leadership, it is widely reported that Wilson is committed to the advice Ellen White gave that leaders should not exercise “kingly power.” In other words, Elder Wilson is seen by some to be a leader who does not attempt to force his personal beliefs and views upon an unwilling audience. But, it should be noted that he is seen to be willing to exercise power in the selection of committees that make decisions. He is believed to have shown that he can place people on committees and controlling boards who have views with which he concurs.
I will suggest that it is from this perspective that astute leaders have decided that this is the time to bring the issue of female ordination to a decision. To wait for a Biblical study committee and the next General Conference may very well be a time when people will be in place who are likely to believe that women should be restricted in spiritual leadership.
From the perspective of current events in this area, it very well may be the legacy of Elder Ted Wilson may be that he has some responsibility for setting events in motion that resulted in female ordination and opening up to the higher positions of spiritual leadership.
Let us watch how this develops.
-
I find this interesting, Gregory, that female Adventist chaplains were endorsed while Elder Ted Wilson was co-chair of the committee dealing with the question. In none of the six countries where I have worked for the Adventist Church do we have an Adventist chaplain, and this is why I am not familiar with things that concern the services of a chaplain. I suppose the reason you have Adventist chaplains in USA is because USA has no state religion and all denominations are supposed to be equal.
I have just one question in this connection: Is it possible to assign a chaplain into such service without being ordained? Do the services of a chaplain in the military forces include the ability to perform all the services that are usually done by a pastor?
Some of my schoolmates in America served as chaplains but I never found out if they served as interns before that and were then ordained before becoming chaplains.
This leads inevitably to the question if Ted Wilson, or someone else, ordained those female chaplains or if they could serve without being ordained?
-
Johan:
A Federal Court in the Unilted States has ruled that it is illegal discrimination against females for the Federal government to require that Federal chaplains be ordained, due to the fact that some denominations do not ordain females; and that such illegally discriminates against denominations that do not ordain anyone.
As a result of this ruling, the U.S. military requires that denominations that endorse Federal chaplain certilfy on the Endorsement Form that the endorsed chaplain is authorized to fully perform the duties of a Federal chaplain. It should be noted that the few duties that Commissioned female SDA clelrgy cannot perfom are not duties required of Federal chaplains. Therefore, Adventist Chaplaincy Ministries is able the certify that its endorsed female chaplains are fully able to perform the duties of a Federal chaplain. [NOTE: While I have been specific to military chaplains, all Federal agencies that employ chaplains are, or have moved, to comply with the ruling of the Federal Court. Therefore, in the Department of Veterans' Affairs, the employes me, the VA has established standards that allow female chaplains to be employed who are not ordained as long as they[ have been certifed as authorized to perform all of the duties of a VA Chaplain. Other Federal agencies do the same.
No, the Federal agencies do not required that a Federal Chaplain be authorized to act as a pastor. However, each Federal agency has its own requirements. e.g. The military and the VA have different requirements. As a result, most military chaplains do not meet VA requirements and some VA chaplains do not meet military requirements. However, some agencies require extensive prior service in denominational position that is seen as belonging to clergy. E.G. The VA reqires three (3) years of experience in a clergy position, all of which must have occured after the Reciept of a Master of Divinity degree.
Internship: Throughout SDA history and to the present, some men and women are ordained without serving in the so-called classit internship position. However, this is more an exception than standard practice. And, is has applied to both males and females.
Perhaps the classic example of this is A.S. White, EGW's grandson. In earlier days of our foreign missionary work, it was common to ordain missonaries who had not had a classic internship. I could give you some more recent examples, of both males and females, who only servied in their local Conference, who were ordained without a classic internship. But, I do not wish to identify in a manner that could potentially ca[use their service and ordination to become a matter of public discussion.
-
We have a female SDA Chaplain, in the U.S. Army, who has served in Afghanistan and may (?) be there now, I am not certain on that.
-
Jim Walters, writing in an Adventist Today blog said:
General Conference President Ted Wilson's dramatic opposition to women's ordination at the last Fall Council of world church leaders has backfired, and an equality that has been obvious to the children of darkness for decades is now being embraced by the children of light.
I find it interesting that he attributes in part what some call “rebellion” to the present General Conference President. For different reasons, I was coming to the conclusion that GC President, Ted Wilson may be the spark that ignited the female ordination fire. Elder Wilson has an interesting background on this issue.
Would this not be akin to the South blaming Lincoln for their rebellion?
-
Jim Walters, writing in an Adventist Today blog said:
General Conference President Ted Wilson's dramatic opposition to women's ordination at the last Fall Council of world church leaders has backfired, and an equality that has been obvious to the children of darkness for decades is now being embraced by the children of light.
I find it interesting that he attributes in part what some call “rebellion” to the present General Conference President. For different reasons, I was coming to the conclusion that GC President, Ted Wilson may be the spark that ignited the female ordination fire. Elder Wilson has an interesting background on this issue.
Would this not be akin to the South blaming Lincoln for their rebellion?
Is that the right comparison?
-
Jim Walters, writing in an Adventist Today blog said:
General Conference President Ted Wilson's dramatic opposition to women's ordination at the last Fall Council of world church leaders has backfired, and an equality that has been obvious to the children of darkness for decades is now being embraced by the children of light.
I find it interesting that he attributes in part what some call “rebellion” to the present General Conference President. For different reasons, I was coming to the conclusion that GC President, Ted Wilson may be the spark that ignited the female ordination fire. Elder Wilson has an interesting background on this issue.
Would this not be akin to the South blaming Lincoln for their rebellion?
Is that the right comparison?
There are some parallels, and there are some differences.
-
Jim Walters, writing in an Adventist Today blog said:
General Conference President Ted Wilson's dramatic opposition to women's ordination at the last Fall Council of world church leaders has backfired, and an equality that has been obvious to the children of darkness for decades is now being embraced by the children of light.
I find it interesting that he attributes in part what some call “rebellion” to the present General Conference President. For different reasons, I was coming to the conclusion that GC President, Ted Wilson may be the spark that ignited the female ordination fire. Elder Wilson has an interesting background on this issue.
It is widely reported that women have been excluded from some levels of spiritual leadership under his leadership. I do not know of the accuracy of this report. I do know that it was at the time when he was co-chair of Adventist Chaplaincy Ministries; females were endorsed and began service as military chaplains. This is an important fact. If it is also true that females were generally excluded from some levels of spiritual leadership that were under his control it probably revels his personal beliefs, and makes a statement as to his leadership style.
On the issue of his leadership, it is widely reported that Wilson is committed to the advice Ellen White gave that leaders should not exercise “kingly power.” In other words, Elder Wilson is seen by some to be a leader who does not attempt to force his personal beliefs and views upon an unwilling audience. But, it should be noted that he is seen to be willing to exercise power in the selection of committees that make decisions. He is believed to have shown that he can place people on committees and controlling boards who have views with which he concurs.
I will suggest that it is from this perspective that astute leaders have decided that this is the time to bring the issue of female ordination to a decision. To wait for a Biblical study committee and the next General Conference may very well be a time when people will be in place who are likely to believe that women should be restricted in spiritual leadership.
From the perspective of current events in this area, it very well may be the legacy of Elder Ted Wilson may be that he has some responsibility for setting events in motion that resulted in female ordination and opening up to the higher positions of spiritual leadership.
Let us watch how this develops.
The greatest want of the world is the want of men—men who will not be bought or sold, men who in their inmost souls are true and honest, men who do not fear to call sin by its right name, men whose conscience is as true to duty as the needle to the pole, men who will stand for the right though the heavens fall. {Ed 57.3}
But such a character is not the result of accident; it is not due to special favors or endowments of Providence. A noble character is the result of self-discipline, of the subjection of the lower to the higher nature—the surrender of self for the service of love to God and man. {Ed 57.4}
Political manipulation? I prefer a leader who is true to Scripture and the Spirit of Prophecy and therefore willing to call women into the ministry, regardless of how a majority is swayed to vote by a political manipulation.
-
Is it possible that the world church could make a mistake and embrace error? What does it mean for a person if they believe the church to be misled on a matter? Can a person be held in any regard if they question a ruling of the GC? Can such a person retain the respect of proper members who don't question the church? Is it ever proper to question? Is so, under what circumstances?
-
Had an interesting meeting yesterday with a former Bible teacher and principal, who for years has been a very popular lecturer with the most conservative members of the church in various countries, although not always so popular among the less conservative.
This man of God was eager to share with me his latest discoveries. He had never known there was such a clear statement of Ellen White for ordaining both men and women preachers in her writings until he discovered it there himself.
I tried on him all the argument I have read both here and elsewhere to show him that she might not be referring to regular pastoral work. This could be literature
evangelists?
Dishonest people with preconceived catholic convictions will do anything to throw Ellen White down the drain on this issue, even if they cling to anything else in her writings. He was too conservative an Adventist to permit such catholic infiltration into our teachings, after he had read this Ellen White statement. With this statement of Ellen White there is no problem understanding the writings of Paul on this subject.
How long do we have to wait until a majority of our church will be honest enough to understand this?
-
When he discovered what Ellen White wrote about ordination more that a hundred years ago, this Bible teacher wondered why the Church has been so slow to act.
This sad reluctance of the church to act and do what is right has given the enemy of truth ample time to plant doctrines of discord among us, even at high level. Just look at this effort to make a further delay. The great enemy wants further possibilities to delay the coming of Jesus. He wants even the best of us to think they are doing the right thing, and tries to impress on them that they are receiving a special blessing, just like the false promise he gave to Eve.
-
Johann, maybe I have missed where these statements from Ellen White are located. Would you please list them again? Thank you.
-
Johann, maybe I have missed where these statements from Ellen White are located. Would you please list them again? Thank you.
Here is a sample: “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.” (Review & Herald, January 15, 1901)
-
Johann, maybe I have missed where these statements from Ellen White are located. Would you please list them again? Thank you.
Here is a sample: “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.” (Review & Herald, January 15, 1901)
Johann, did you quote the wrong statement? This one says nothing about ordaining anyone.
And I believe I already gave you a quote about a minister who was preaching to a congregation, but who was not a pastor to that congregation because he did not like doing "pastoral work," which Ellen White described as "visiting" and "personal labor" (9MR 343, 344). To ignore that statement and to just keep quoting RH 1-15-1901 without making any attempt whatsoever to show that "pastors" in that statement must refer to the senior pastor of a local church makes no sense.
Plus, I've also raised the issue how in the very same year, as well as in 1902, Ellen White wrote the folks in Iowa and told them that as a general rule, the preachers were to go out from the churches into new fields (Ev 382; 1888 1762; 16 MR 346). It would make no sense, then, for her to say in that same year that both men and women were to be pastoring local churches rather than laboring in new fields.
-
Johann, maybe I have missed where these statements from Ellen White are located. Would you please list them again? Thank you.
Here is a sample: “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.” (Review & Herald, January 15, 1901)
Johann, did you quote the wrong statement? This one says nothing about ordaining anyone.
And I believe I already gave you a quote about a minister who was preaching to a congregation, but who was not a pastor to that congregation because he did not like doing "pastoral work," which Ellen White described as "visiting" and "personal labor" (9MR 343, 344). To ignore that statement and to just keep quoting RH 1-15-1901 without making any attempt whatsoever to show that "pastors" in that statement must refer to the senior pastor of a local church makes no sense.
Plus, I've also raised the issue how in the very same year, as well as in 1902, Ellen White wrote the folks in Iowa and told them that as a general rule, the preachers were to go out from the churches into new fields (Ev 382; 1888 1762; 16 MR 346). It would make no sense, then, for her to say in that same year that both men and women were to be pastoring local churches rather than laboring in new fields.
Here starts the avalanche Throwing out blurs about local churches versus laboring in the field. We have gone through that before to no avail. And also these blurs about senior pastors etc. In my early youth I never heard the term "senior pastor" used anywhere, neither have I ever read it in the writings of Ellen White. It could have been after 1960 I first heard the term "senior pastor" when I had been working in the ministry for a while.
-
Johann, maybe I have missed where these statements from Ellen White are located. Would you please list them again? Thank you.
Here is a sample: “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.” (Review & Herald, January 15, 1901)
Johann, did you quote the wrong statement? This one says nothing about ordaining anyone.
And I believe I already gave you a quote about a minister who was preaching to a congregation, but who was not a pastor to that congregation because he did not like doing "pastoral work," which Ellen White described as "visiting" and "personal labor" (9MR 343, 344). To ignore that statement and to just keep quoting RH 1-15-1901 without making any attempt whatsoever to show that "pastors" in that statement must refer to the senior pastor of a local church makes no sense.
Plus, I've also raised the issue how in the very same year, as well as in 1902, Ellen White wrote the folks in Iowa and told them that as a general rule, the preachers were to go out from the churches into new fields (Ev 382; 1888 1762; 16 MR 346). It would make no sense, then, for her to say in that same year that both men and women were to be pastoring local churches rather than laboring in new fields.
Here starts the avalanche Throwing out blurs about local churches versus laboring in the field. We have gone through that before to no avail. And also these blurs about senior pastors etc. In my early youth I never heard the term "senior pastor" used anywhere, neither have I ever read it in the writings of Ellen White. It could have been after 1960 I first heard the term "senior pastor" when I had been working in the ministry for a while.
Why is it so necessary for women to be ordained? What is the reason for the push by some men for womens ordinance. How will ordination help women? Is the main reason so that they can have the positions that men currently hold as leaders of the church? Is it a money issue?
-
Why is it so necessary for women to be ordained? What is the reason for the push by some men for womens ordinance. How will ordination help women? Is the main reason so that they can have the positions that men currently hold as leaders of the church? Is it a money issue?
No, Christian, this has nothing to do with money. I have worked in a conference where church school teachers had a considerable higher salary than the ordained pastors were getting. Later it was changed so that the salary of ordained preachers approached the level of the church school teachers.
I have been on the conference board in two different countries, but the board could not determine the salary of the pastors without the assistance of a committee of competent lay members that was appointed. There I experienced the surprise of businessmen on that committee who wondered how the pastors could survive on such a pittance of a salary. We had to convince those businessmen that we did not need a higher salary because we did not use alcohol, nor tobacco, and neither we nor our children took part in expensive worldly entertainment. Besides that we received the blessings from our Lord in our work.
So, forget this false claim that the women are doing it for the sake of money, but what kind of arguments will people not use when they have little else that counts?
Why do women want to be pastors? Because we have some women who have "listened" to a sermon preached by a woman and want to follow what they hear as a call from God: Let all the sisters feel that if they haven’t a husband to lean upon, they will lean more heavily upon God. Every one of our sisters can be a living missionary, and can bring light into every meeting. Do we act as though we were called from darkness into marvelous light? or as if we were lugging along a heavy weight? We must talk light and pray light, and light will come in. If only women in the church [would] show that God can work through women. It was Mary that first preached a risen Jesus.... There are richer blessings for those that have the harder conflict, for Christ is a present help in trouble. But we must be divested of selfishness; be acquainted with the Lamb of God that taketh away the sin of the world, and we shall thus grow more and more like Jesus till the crown of immortality is placed upon our brows.—Manuscript 2, May 13, 1884, “Sermon by Mrs. E. G. White.” {UL 147.5}
Then you want to know why these women should be ordained. An important point is that we thereby show that as Seventh-day Adventists we are not Roman Catholics.
The New Testament ordination consists of a prayer where, in stead of lifting up the hands as people did in those days while praying, a hand is placed on the head of the person. It is a prayer of consecration, of asking the Lord to bless this person in the task he or she has been appointed by the church to do. That is it. Why should it be so difficult asking the Lord to bless the woman in her appointed work? Why should it be all right to ask the Lord to bless the deaconesses, but not those who are pastors/evangelists? Are they to do their work without divine blessings?
The Roman Catholic priesthood is entirely different. It is a process of "Hoc est corpus" a formula often used by children when they want to perform something magic. But that magic is invested in the Catholic priest when he is ordained. With his magic ordination he stands before the altar in the church where he with this magic formula, "Hoc est corpus Christos" (sp?) performs a miracle in creating from the bread a real body of Jesus Christ, so that loyal Catholics will devour the real body of Christ during the Mass. The people get nothing of the Wine. The priest drinks all of that himself. I guess he deserves that after performing such a great miracle. :)
Here is another difference: While Seventh-day Adventist have an open communion where anyone can participate, the Eucharist of the mass is available only to loyal Catholics. I had a funny experience once where a Lutheran lady who attended regularly the Catholic mass together with a friend - she came to me, an SDA pastor, asking me to have some influence on the Catholic priest that he'd give her the bread too, even if she did not break her ties fully to the Lutheran church where her parents had belonged.
So, in a way, the Catholic priest has this magic ordination to be a judge as well to avoid letting the crumbs of the body of Jesus Christ fall on the floor where dogs [pagans] will eat them.
It is a Roman Catholic trademark that only men can receive this magic ordination, thereby indicating their priests are like the priests of the offering system. According to our doctrine of the Sanctuary Service the Old Testament sacrificial priesthood ceased the moment it was absorbed in the real offering of the Lamb of God on the cross. We have no use for this Catholic trademark, and the sooner we show the world who we are and what our relationship is to this falsehood, the better.
We need to show the World that we are the children of God, the servants of Jesus Christ who need no magic formula to come to the throne of grace. Are you willing to follow me to the cross of Christ, or do you still need the magic formula of a Catholic priest in denying a female the blessings of God in her service for Him?
-
Johann, a couple of corrections, at least as practiced in the U.S.
The people get nothing of the Wine. The priest drinks all of that himself. I guess he deserves that after performing such a great miracle.
1) Both the bread and wind are distributed to the members. In fact, On a daily basis, Extraordinary Milnisters (Roman Catholic) visit Catholic patients in the hospital where I work and distribute both the bread and the wine.
I have some real reservations about your statement even as it applies to the rest of the world. A central teaching of the Roman Catholic Church is that in order to live spiritually, one must recieve both the "body and the blood" of Christ at the Mass.
2) The Roman Catholic Church does not restrict participation in the Mass to Roman Catholics. It restricts participation in the Mass to people who believe that the bread and wine are the real body and blood. It grants participation to religious groups that are in communion with Rome, even if not Roman Catholic. IOW there are Catholic groups that are not Roman Catholic. It also grants participation to a few groups that Rome beleives have "priestly succession." If you want documentation for this, IL can easly provide it. The Misseletts (Sp) that are used in every service contains a statement on the inside as to who can participate and who cannot. I am not reading from one right now, so may have made a slight error. But, I am substantally correct.
-
Thank you for your corrections, Gregory. But the way I describe it is not only what I have read in Catholic instructions to the priests, but also as I experienced it when I took part in a Roman Catholic mass in a Roman Catholic church in Copenhagen around 1981 or 82. I received a special invitation to meet with the church members immediately after the mass, to tell them about Seventh-day Adventists and the difference in our beliefs and theirs. It was a member of the Catholic Church whom I knew who arranged it. As I recall I talked to the priest before the mass, so he knew who I was. Then when the priest gave out the bread he took a circle around me to avoid that I'd get hold of the bread. It was after my lecture that this Lutheran lady came to me to ask me to help her get permission to participate in the Eucharist, something the priest had not been willing to let her have, even though she was a regular attendant at the mass.
Thirty years have passed, and this was in a country geographically closer to Rome. Could that explain the differences? But the Hoc est corpus Christos magic formula has hardly changed, unless it is different in the American military?
And the anti female formula is still a Roman Catholic trademark and also the great difference in the Roman Catholic priesthood as compared to the pastor/evangelist of the New Testament.
-
My comments on Roman Catholic belief (doctrine) and practice, when specific, generally come form three sources:
Leaflet Missal, “Guidelines for the Reception of Communion,” published by the American Catholic Press.
Priests’ Manual, published by the Archdiocese for the Military Services, USA.
Priests’ Manual, Appendix, published by the Archdiocese for the Military Services USA.
The Code of Canon Law, in English translation, Prepared by the Canon Law Society of Great Britain & Ireland in association with the Canon Law Society of Australia and New Zealand & The Canadian Canon Law Society. This is a 1983 publication, and is dated.
Under Canon Law 844-3, Catholic ministers may administer the Sacraments to members of eastern Churches not in full communion with the catholic Church and other Churches which the Apostolic See judges to be in the same position as the aforesaid eastern Churches so far as the sacraments are concerned.
Under Canon Law 844-4,Catholic ministers may lawfully administer the Sacraments to other Christians not in full communion with the catholic Church, when in danger of death, or other grave and pressing need, cannot approach a minister of their own community and request such from a Catholic minister.
The May 13 – August 4 [2012] edition of Leaflet Missal, states the following: “. . . members of those Churches with whom we are not yet fully united are ordinarily not admitted to Holly Communion. . . . According to Roman Catholic discipline, the code of Canon Law does not object ot the reception of Communion by Christians of . . . the orthodox Churches, the Assyrian Church of the East, and the Polish National Catholic Church.”
I may post later from the Priests’ Manual, as listed above.
-
Well, Johann, I have learned something and need to correct an error that I have made:
Canon Law 925 allows Communion to be provided by Bread alone, both bread and wine and in case of necessity, wine alone.
The 2008 edition of The Priests’ Manual says in 4.3.13: “When received under both species, Holy Communion forms a more complete sign of the Eucharistic banquet. However, the Eucharistic species may be received under the appearance of bread alone or of wine alone in case of necessity (c.925).”
I was partially wrong in my comment. I have learned.
NOTE: To those who wonder why I am able to cite the above sources: No, I am not a Roman Catholic priest who has infiltrated the SDA Church. :) :) My job requires that I know quite a bit about the doctrines and beliefs of the Roman Catholic Church.
-
Johann, maybe I have missed where these statements from Ellen White are located. Would you please list them again? Thank you.
Here is a sample: “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.” (Review & Herald, January 15, 1901)
Johann, did you quote the wrong statement? This one says nothing about ordaining anyone.
And I believe I already gave you a quote about a minister who was preaching to a congregation, but who was not a pastor to that congregation because he did not like doing "pastoral work," which Ellen White described as "visiting" and "personal labor" (9MR 343, 344). To ignore that statement and to just keep quoting RH 1-15-1901 without making any attempt whatsoever to show that "pastors" in that statement must refer to the senior pastor of a local church makes no sense.
Plus, I've also raised the issue how in the very same year, as well as in 1902, Ellen White wrote the folks in Iowa and told them that as a general rule, the preachers were to go out from the churches into new fields (Ev 382; 1888 1762; 16 MR 346). It would make no sense, then, for her to say in that same year that both men and women were to be pastoring local churches rather than laboring in new fields.
Here starts the avalanche Throwing out blurs about local churches versus laboring in the field. We have gone through that before to no avail. And also these blurs about senior pastors etc. In my early youth I never heard the term "senior pastor" used anywhere, neither have I ever read it in the writings of Ellen White. It could have been after 1960 I first heard the term "senior pastor" when I had been working in the ministry for a while.
We may therefore conclude from your reply that you have no answer, and that therefore RH 1-15-1901 is not talking about ordaining women to be local pastors of local churches.
-
Johann, maybe I have missed where these statements from Ellen White are located. Would you please list them again? Thank you.
Here is a sample: “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.” (Review & Herald, January 15, 1901)
Johann, did you quote the wrong statement? This one says nothing about ordaining anyone.
And I believe I already gave you a quote about a minister who was preaching to a congregation, but who was not a pastor to that congregation because he did not like doing "pastoral work," which Ellen White described as "visiting" and "personal labor" (9MR 343, 344). To ignore that statement and to just keep quoting RH 1-15-1901 without making any attempt whatsoever to show that "pastors" in that statement must refer to the senior pastor of a local church makes no sense.
Plus, I've also raised the issue how in the very same year, as well as in 1902, Ellen White wrote the folks in Iowa and told them that as a general rule, the preachers were to go out from the churches into new fields (Ev 382; 1888 1762; 16 MR 346). It would make no sense, then, for her to say in that same year that both men and women were to be pastoring local churches rather than laboring in new fields.
Here starts the avalanche Throwing out blurs about local churches versus laboring in the field. We have gone through that before to no avail. And also these blurs about senior pastors etc. In my early youth I never heard the term "senior pastor" used anywhere, neither have I ever read it in the writings of Ellen White. It could have been after 1960 I first heard the term "senior pastor" when I had been working in the ministry for a while.
We may therefore conclude from your reply that you have no answer, and that therefore RH 1-15-1901 is not talking about ordaining women to be local pastors of local churches.
Far from that, Bob. I am not trying to invent some detailed excuse that keeps me from taking Ellen White at her words here, but it appears to me like that is your delight. Anything to shirk your responsibility from doing what is prescribed or adjust your thinking to what God is telling us. You do not want this female prophet telling you anything that is different from what you know already.
You do not change my conscience from calling sin by its right name by demanding I define if Ellen White is talking about one kind of ministry or another. God does not demand of us to wait forever before we have defined all the details in his command to us. Males have invented this doctrine of male supremacy just to avoid being obedient, or could there be any other purpose?
-
1976: The Vatican's Pontifical Biblical Commission addressed the topic of female ordination. The text of its report, in French, was leaked to the press. 10 They were unable to settle the question on the basis of Biblical text alone. They concluded:
"It does not seem that the New Testament by itself alone will permit us to settle in a clear way and once and for all the problem of the possible accession of women to the presbyterate.
However, some think that in the scriptures there are sufficient indications to excludethis possibility, considering that the sacraments of Eucharist and reconciliation have a special link with the person of Christ and therefore with the male hierarchy, as borne out by the New Testament.
Others, on the contrary, wonder if the church hierarchy, entrusted with the sacramental economy, would be able to entrust the ministries of Eucharist and reconciliation to women in light of circumstances, without going against Christ's original intentions."
Note the admission that the Roman Catholic position cannot be maintained on the basis of the New Testament alone. IOW, tradition is a factor.
1994-MAY-22: Pope John Paul II issued an "Apostolic Letter on Reserving Priestly Ordination to Men Alone." 4 The letter is titled "Ordinatio Sacerdotalis" (Priestly Ordination). He wrote, in part:
"Although the teaching that priestly ordination is to be reserved to men alone has been preserved by the constant and universal Tradition of the Church and firmly taught by the Magisterium in its more recent documents, at the present time in some places it is nonetheless considered still open to debate, or the Church's judgment that women are not to be admitted to ordination is considered to have a merely disciplinary force.
Wherefore, in order that all doubt may be removed regarding a matter of great importance, a matter which pertains to the Church's divine constitution itself, in virtue of my ministry of confirming the brethren (cf. Luke 22:32) I declare that the Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women and that this judgment is to be definitively held by all the Church's faithful."
The Pontiff's statement was just short of a declaration that, by his own authority, speaking "ex cathedra," and as a result of divine inspiration, the teaching is infallible. "...the pope's Apostolic Letter confirmed and placed on the official record the fact that the bishops of the world, by their universal understanding and practice, had irrevocably established that the Church had no authority to confer ordination on women. This was not merely a disciplinary matter, but belonged to the essence of the Church, and hence was properly a doctrinal matter." 5
But Church Canon 749 states that no doctrine is understood to be infallibly defined unless it is clearly established as such. The pope does not seem to have actually done this, even though his words come close to implying this. If he had declared it infallible, there is no mechanism by which any succeeding Pope could have altered that belief. As things now stand, a future pope has very little wiggle room to change this stance in the future. However, John Paul II stated in this letter that the Church "has" no authority to ordain women. That does not negate the possibility of the Church obtaining such authority in the future.
Note from the above, there is less than a claim of infalibility.
For the above, see:
http://www.religioustolerance.org/femclrg10.htm
I have corrected the URL.
-
What a bombshell, Gregory. Here we have it black on white. The Roman Catholic Church finds no reason in the New Testament to refuse the ordination of women, so they base their doctrine on tradition, and/or an infallible proclamation of the pope himself.
Now we see how interestingly some of our Dear Brethren have stretched themselves to re-invent this teaching that is mainly based on Roman Catholic tradition. So they go searching for an excuse in the New Testament to follow this Roman tradition.
And then some of them make the claim that you cannot be a true Seventh-day Adventist unless you follow the papal tradition. How can the good Lord have His way with us? Laodicea.
-
I am increasingly getting the impression that the strident male voices calling for women to be ordained everywhere are somehow engaged in this for their own benefit. (Not sure what that would be.)
To see comments from many women who are opposing WO, see the petition over on Shane Hilde's site, ADvindicate, which now has over 1,500 signatures.
-
What a bombshell, Gregory. Here we have it black on white. The Roman Catholic Church finds no reason in the New Testament to refuse the ordination of women, so they base their doctrine on tradition, and/or an infallible proclamation of the pope himself.
Now we see how interestingly some of our Dear Brethren have stretched themselves to re-invent this teaching that is mainly based on Roman Catholic tradition. So they go searching for an excuse in the New Testament to follow this Roman tradition.
And then some of them make the claim that you cannot be a true Seventh-day Adventist unless you follow the papal tradition. How can the good Lord have His way with us? Laodicea.
Johann, stop trying to force your opinion on women and over the wishes or God. Where did Jesus ordain a woman? You try and pit the writings or Ellen G. White against the bible, you are a Jesuit for sure. Jesus only picked men to do the toilsum and sacrificial job that ordination entails.
-
Thank you, Christian.
-
Christian, honest people who are committed to follow Christ and who hold the Bible to be the auathorative standard can and do differ of some points as to what the Bible teaches. This is probably due, in part, to the fact that all of us have been corrupted by the world of sin in which we are born and live.
It is entirely inappropriate for you to call Johann a Jesuit. It demeans you as a person. It diminishes any truth that you might claim for your position. It slanders a man who has devoted a life-time dedicated to following Christ in the manner that he beleived God was leading. You may ultimately be correct in your position that God only wants males to be ordained, although I disagree with you as does Johann. But, the Christ that I follow would not stoop to the level that you have done in saying: " . . . you are a Jesuit for sure."
I do not agree with every position that Johann has taken. I do not think that he is 100% correct in everything that he says, just as I do not disagree with everything that you say. Engage in the debate if you wish. But, do so, I would hope, with the spirit of Christ. What you have said about Johann lacks the integrity that I expect to come from those who are following Christ.
-
Even the book of Job tell us Job was a perfect man. Why did the devil hate him so much? He treated his daughters the same as his sons. Look at the beginning of Job and the end, his daughters got an inheritance like his sons. Maybe thats why God called him a perfect man because he treated his daughters the same as his sons not like the customs of the time.
-
I declare that the Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women and that this judgment is to be definitively held by all the Church's faithful.
Absolutely remarkable! The RCC claims that it has the authority to change one of the 10 Commandments, but it has no authority to ordain a woman. How can that possibly be?
-
What a bombshell, Gregory. Here we have it black on white. The Roman Catholic Church finds no reason in the New Testament to refuse the ordination of women, so they base their doctrine on tradition, and/or an infallible proclamation of the pope himself.
Now we see how interestingly some of our Dear Brethren have stretched themselves to re-invent this teaching that is mainly based on Roman Catholic tradition. So they go searching for an excuse in the New Testament to follow this Roman tradition.
And then some of them make the claim that you cannot be a true Seventh-day Adventist unless you follow the papal tradition. How can the good Lord have His way with us? Laodicea.
The anti-Trinitarians say the same, Johann, even though it isn't true.
1 Timothy 2:12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.
-
Johann, maybe I have missed where these statements from Ellen White are located. Would you please list them again? Thank you.
Here is a sample: “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.” (Review & Herald, January 15, 1901)
Johann, did you quote the wrong statement? This one says nothing about ordaining anyone.
And I believe I already gave you a quote about a minister who was preaching to a congregation, but who was not a pastor to that congregation because he did not like doing "pastoral work," which Ellen White described as "visiting" and "personal labor" (9MR 343, 344). To ignore that statement and to just keep quoting RH 1-15-1901 without making any attempt whatsoever to show that "pastors" in that statement must refer to the senior pastor of a local church makes no sense.
Plus, I've also raised the issue how in the very same year, as well as in 1902, Ellen White wrote the folks in Iowa and told them that as a general rule, the preachers were to go out from the churches into new fields (Ev 382; 1888 1762; 16 MR 346). It would make no sense, then, for her to say in that same year that both men and women were to be pastoring local churches rather than laboring in new fields.
Here starts the avalanche Throwing out blurs about local churches versus laboring in the field. We have gone through that before to no avail. And also these blurs about senior pastors etc. In my early youth I never heard the term "senior pastor" used anywhere, neither have I ever read it in the writings of Ellen White. It could have been after 1960 I first heard the term "senior pastor" when I had been working in the ministry for a while.
We may therefore conclude from your reply that you have no answer, and that therefore RH 1-15-1901 is not talking about ordaining women to be local pastors of local churches.
Far from that, Bob. I am not trying to invent some detailed excuse that keeps me from taking Ellen White at her words here, but it appears to me like that is your delight. Anything to shirk your responsibility from doing what is prescribed or adjust your thinking to what God is telling us. You do not want this female prophet telling you anything that is different from what you know already.
You do not change my conscience from calling sin by its right name by demanding I define if Ellen White is talking about one kind of ministry or another. God does not demand of us to wait forever before we have defined all the details in his command to us. Males have invented this doctrine of male supremacy just to avoid being obedient, or could there be any other purpose?
Since you have again failed to show where RH 1-15-1901 anywhere talks about ordination, this is further confirmation that the quote you gave says nothing about ordination.
That's one issue. The other unanswered issue concerns what Ellen White meant by "pastors."
-
Thank you for your corrections, Gregory. But the way I describe it is not only what I have read in Catholic instructions to the priests, but also as I experienced it when I took part in a Roman Catholic mass in a Roman Catholic church in Copenhagen around 1981 or 82. I received a special invitation to meet with the church members immediately after the mass, to tell them about Seventh-day Adventists and the difference in our beliefs and theirs. It was a member of the Catholic Church whom I knew who arranged it. As I recall I talked to the priest before the mass, so he knew who I was. Then when the priest gave out the bread he took a circle around me to avoid that I'd get hold of the bread. It was after my lecture that this Lutheran lady came to me to ask me to help her get permission to participate in the Eucharist, something the priest had not been willing to let her have, even though she was a regular attendant at the mass.
Thirty years have passed, and this was in a country geographically closer to Rome. Could that explain the differences? But the Hoc est corpus Christos magic formula has hardly changed, unless it is different in the American military?
And the anti female formula is still a Roman Catholic trademark and also the great difference in the Roman Catholic priesthood as compared to the pastor/evangelist of the New Testament.
Johann, you have a lot of knowledge about the Catholic Church, I am just saying. You have a way of interpreting everything in the light of your own beliefs, it would do good for you to correctly state what a person is actually saying. Why are you reading the Catholic Instruction to the Priest? Really man stop trying to corrupt the Adventist Church. You know the Church is the Bride of God? With your thinking the church will become the Groom? For the hundredth time you are not fooling anyone, in Gods church men and women have different roles each being different but both of equal value. God created the man and woman different, women have breast for a reason. It is only homosexuals who believe that the relationship between men and women is the same as the relationship between men and men and women and women. Your diabolical mask the covering for the distortion of the gospel will not work.
-
Christian, honest people who are committed to follow Christ and who hold the Bible to be the auathorative standard can and do differ of some points as to what the Bible teaches. This is probably due, in part, to the fact that all of us have been corrupted by the world of sin in which we are born and live.
It is entirely inappropriate for you to call Johann a Jesuit. It demeans you as a person. It diminishes any truth that you might claim for your position. It slanders a man who has devoted a life-time dedicated to following Christ in the manner that he beleived God was leading. You may ultimately be correct in your position that God only wants males to be ordained, although I disagree with you as does Johann. But, the Christ that I follow would not stoop to the level that you have done in saying: " . . . you are a Jesuit for sure."
I do not agree with every position that Johann has taken. I do not think that he is 100% correct in everything that he says, just as I do not disagree with everything that you say. Engage in the debate if you wish. But, do so, I would hope, with the spirit of Christ. What you have said about Johann lacks the integrity that I expect to come from those who are following Christ.
Let me make myself as plain as possible. For much to long we have been cordial with people when having discussions that destroy the very foundation of the church. I truly believe that women will be ordained and in the end as "As for my people, children are their oppressors, and women rule over them. O my people, they which lead thee cause thee to err, and destroy the way of thy paths Isaiah 3:12." I have seen this fight when it came to music, Ellen G. White, movies, video games etc... And the longevity of someone in the work does not diminish the responsibility of that individual to sound doctrine. Even in choosing Ellen G. White, it was only done after men rejected or did not fulfill the call. Even the prophetess Diana wanted to give the rightfull position to the man. I understand what the fight is about and it never is clear until after the die is cast, then the true motive is revealed. This step will lead, in my opinion, to a worse condition of the church instead of a better one. I can remember the music discussions and how the church needed the music of the day to survive but look at the results. Hardly ever is their a discussion of more prayer and to a large extent music has taken the place of prayer and Bible study. Music has become the driving force of many a service, even being liken to the Holy Spirit. Our young people are for the most part participants in every form of entertainment and debauchery as those in the world. And the major Colloges teach some of the most nasty courses in the name of accreditation. ----Have you ever wondered how someone acts when they are in real danger? Your corduality is a result of the fact you don't believe the words of God. Would you sit and kindly ask someone to stop stabbing your daughter? The Pandora's box will be open and you will see the like of what you have not seen and you will lament the day you were cordual. Why do you think Jesus called the Priest of their day servants of the devil? You know what the High Priest had been in service for a long time too. By the way I don't know if her is a real Jesuit or not but I have seen this argument and techniques before and I know what the results will be. As for what he is asking for I believe falls in the realm of the Jesuits.
-
waiting...waiting.....waiting...... exactly what I said and got ripped off posting. Wonder what the difference is here. This post is still here. lol a Jesuit is a Jesuit. Their actions are all the same and there is no stopping it.
But good job with all your comments as I agree with all. Glad someone else stood up as was sickening to watch the improvising of all sound doctrine being ripped in all directions with all ridiculous reasoning. You might add to the perpetrator. It is written!! This is how the "reformers" work and see first hand on here. it's mind boggling...for them to keep up their reasoning of own agenda. But Christian -you got the picture. It took a while to discover, but shocking.