Categories
Breaking news Church governance Columbia Union Conference (CUC) Council of Adventist Pastors (CAP) delegated authority Doctrine of the Church Doctrine of Unity Ecclesiastical authority GC session vote results General Conference General Conference Secretariat General Conference Session 2015 San Antonio General Conference Working Policy Gleaner Headship Lake Union Conference (LUC) NAD Working Policy Netherlands Union North American Division (NAD) North Pacific Union Conference (NPUC) NPUC Ex Com Decisions NPUC Executive Committee NPUC Supporting Pastors Ohio Conference Ordination as a practice Ordination Without Regard to Gender OrdinationTruth.com Pacific Union Conference (PUC) Sandra Roberts Sandy Roberts SECC Seventh-day Adventist Church Ted N.C. Wilson Trans-European Division (TED) Utrecht General Conference Session 1995 Women in Ministry Women's Ordination

NPUC: no independent ordination of women

On August 19, 2015 the executive committee of the North Pacific Union voted 26 to 4 to rescind its November 12, 2014 action. The committee had stated that if the world church refused to permit the regional ordination of women, the NPUC would hold a special constituency session and consider “going ahead” to ordain women. The committee action today aligns the NPUC position with the July 8, 2015 General Conference session rejection of regionally independent ordination. Seventh-day Adventist practice has been unified in following a biblical pattern since the 1800s, ordaining qualified male spiritual leaders serving as pastors leading congregations, conferences, unions, and divisions.
Previous to the August 19 meeting, North Pacific Union president Max Torkelson III received an eight page document from the General Conference Secretariat detailing the authority of unions in relation to the world church. The official document states that

“Unions do not have the right to set their own criteria for ordination and are operating outside the parameters of Church structure if they do, just as if a local church decided to establish its own set of beliefs then it would no longer be a Seventh-day Adventist church” (“Unions and Ordination to the Gospel Ministry,” General Conference Secretariat, August 2015, p. 3).

Thus units that have unilaterally voted to ordain women are “operating outside the parameters of Church structure.” Such entities stand on the fringes of the Church. The North Pacific Union today demonstrated its commitment to operate within the parameters set by the world body. The Council of Adventist Pastors sees the committee’s action to rescind today as positive.
The inappropriate actions and illegitimate, out of policy credentials granted by Pacific Union, Columbia Union, the Netherlands Union of Churches, and certain conferences including the Southeastern California Conference, need to be rescinded and such ordinations repudiated by those entities to keep faith with their sister Adventist congregations. As one Adventist from Netherlands stated in an online comment: “I am a member of the world church, for my membership is accepted all over the world. But not so if my Union is an SDA offshoot.” The Seventh-day Adventist Church as a world body seeks to adhere to the teachings of Scripture for optimum male and female service to God and His church.

21 replies on “NPUC: no independent ordination of women”

Kudos to the leadership and executive committee of the North Pacific Union. I pray it will be but the first of a number of reversals in favor of both the Biblical and the General Conference position on gender-specific ordination.

Next Sabbath (September 5) Randy Roberts, Senior Pastor, is advertising in bulletin: Join us next Sabbath afternoon at 4 p.m. for a town hall session: “The San Antonio Vote: What Did It Mean for Us?” I look forward to seeing you here in our sanctuary.
Can you attend? Can anyone attend to represent the GC vote?

Based on past WO presentations coming out of that venue, the value of the material to be presented there may be limited. It may be more useful to spend energy organizing at the local church level than hearing WO-favorable theories regurgitated. SECC needs a complete reset.

I agree. I called the church to find out who was speaking; pastor’s assistant does not know yet is the answer. Neither church pastor or head of religion department would allow even one against WO speaker before San Antonio (I requested this of both), so I am dreaming, probably, that any speaker will be allowed who supports the world church vote. A university proports to be a teaching and learning institution, yet will not allow any view opposed to the clan in control. A political machine and union are one-sided organizations. A university is to be as Bereans. Maybe the “we” in the announcement is the proWO clan in control rather than I first read it, “we the SDA church.” I appreciate Ted Wilson’s every effort to help SDAs be consistent. What is going on now, I think, is a public relations nightmare for the onlooking universe. The shaking may be God’s public relations move to get SDA all on the same page for the sake of inquirers who are suppose to be attracted to our truths. Thank you for your thoughts. Good advice.

Sadly, while they did vote today to cancel the special constituency session, their attitude remains unchanged. This is very much apparent in bullet point #3 posted in the Gleaner today (http://gleanernow.com/news/2015/08/npuc-executive-committee-decides-against-special-constituency-session), which stated, “We affirm the appropriateness and value of women serving as pastors and in other professional leadership roles within the church.” The rebellion continues, simply doing so in the shadows for the time being.

Though I am happy (and surprised) with this decision by the NPUC, it really changes nothing. I believe they will continue with commissioning pastors which is basically the same thing as Ordination, just doesn’t carry the terminology. This is actually the same thing that is being done with Spiritual Formation which is also being denied as taking place. It also sounds like many of the politicians of today, saying and claiming one thing but then doing something else while still denying that they are doing what they are really doing. Sadly, the majority of people accept the deceptions.
I agree with Kevin Paulson, that I will pray this is the first in a number of reversals in favor of both the Biblical and the General Conference position on gender-specific ordination.

I still cannot get what is the excitement point in there. Since GC continue to ordain the women, then of course NPUC can admit their subordination to GC with no hesitation . But what would happen, if GC declines ordaining of the women all of a sudden?
Could they keep their promise to comply with the GC rules then?

By the way, here is some chilling news from another religious community – advocate.com/religion/2015/08/17/historic-south-carolina-baptist-church-becomes-lgbt-affirming
I think, this is the right time to decide where are we going as the people.

“We affirm the appropriateness and value of women serving as pastors and in other professional leadership roles within the church.”
This shows us, where we are going on. Only the devil is satisfied, that we official according to the GC don´t ordain women as ministers, but through the back door we ordain them as elders and commissioned ministers and give them leadership roles. Ted Wilson has this reaffirmed and NPUC is playing this game together with the GC. A real reformation is as far as ever before. We are making a compromise with sin and and thik a Reform would come, this is an illusion. And I am sad, that CAP has not defend Doug Batchelor and only Spectrum and prophesyagain.com speaks about. What he said is true but many WO proponents don´t like it, so that he cannot preach anymore in every church.

What did Pastor Batchelor say that has excluded him from preaching in all churches–if I understand what you have alluded to correctly?

Every comment is lacking the love of Jesus. Joy for repression, sadness for freedom is counter to the law of heaven. Spend time with Jesus, lift your thoughts to him rather to the words of humans. “higher than the highest human thought can reach is Gods ideal for mankind!”

“Every comment is lacking the love of Jesus”. You mean, every one including yours?
You shouldn’t accuse righteous ones for their cry for lawlessness.

A quote:
“When the issue is truth, there is no such thing as anonymity…. As stewards of the mysteries of God it is our duty to affirm and sustain the biblical trajectory (and I’m borrowing a word there) of male headship/leadership in the home and in the church and not go beyond what is written in the Scripture…. It is our duty (and this is why we’re here) as stewards of the mysteries of God to protect the church from a hermeneutical disaster. That’s the bottom line. Amen” (C. Raymond Holmes, 2014-10-04 at Fresno Central SDA Church, CA USA).
God teaches bot by direct command, AND by consistent example.
God at creation established males as heads of faming in regards to physical and Spiritual leadership.
God established males as priests in the wilderness and later central worship services.
God/Christ chose males as his highest level of followers
God/Christ then ordained those followers in leadership positions (See Acts of the apostles, ch. 9)
Those leaders, themselves ordained by God/Christ, then proceeded to ordain others in leadership positions, just as THEY had been by Christ.
When did God/Christ change their former examples of leadership?
This is not about “male chauvinism” or sexual bigotry, it IS about following both God’s clear Biblical examples, in the same spirit as his direct commands.

SO, it appears that from the GN quote on the same issue:
•We affirm the appropriateness and value of women serving as elders in local congregations
•We affirm the appropriateness and value of women serving as pastors and in other professional leadership roles within the church
•In line with the majority of members of the recent North American Division (NAD) Ordination Study Committee and the General Conference Theology of Ordination Study Committee, we believe that there is no biblical or theological barrier to the ordination of women for professional ministry”
So ALL they have done, is CANCEL a formal constituency meet and vote on the issue, but NOT that they intend to observe or abide by the vote of the GC and world SDA denomination. WHICH then, leaves us with this additional publicly posted view OF the GC regarding non-compliant unions and conferences:
“The inappropriate actions and illegitimate, out of policy credentials granted by Pacific Union, Columbia Union, the Netherlands Union of Churches, and certain conferences including the Southeastern California Conference, need to be rescinded and such ordinations repudiated by those entities to keep faith with their sister Adventist congregations. As one Adventist from Netherlands stated in an online comment: “I am a member of the world church, for my membership is accepted all over the world. But not so if my Union is an SDA offshoot.” The Seventh-day Adventist Church as a world body seeks to adhere to the teachings of Scripture for optimum male and female service to God and His church.”
SO, for us members of the defiant unions/conferences, are WE now considered as “offshoots” of the central GC/world church?

I’d like to ask a several questions if I may.
1. How many pastors are the members of CAP movement?
2. Is it possible to transfer 1/10 to CAP?
I know that the last question is very sensitive, but since we start to see the real oppression toward well known field evangelists like D.G-es and D. B-or, I think we should be ready to make necessary steps to prevent spreading the three Angels messages to be seized.
Because example of the apostolic Church assures us that this is just a beginning and the committee are not going to be satisfied with it.

The Council of Adventist Pastors recommends that all Seventh-day Adventists return their tithe to God through the local church where they hold membership in the SDA Church, which is effectively the door to the “storehouse.”

We need to be clear about some things.
First, even though the Biblical principle of spiritual male headship does not allow the ordination of women as local elders or the placing of females in senior pastor roles (whatever word is used for their investiture), it is still incorrect to say that ordained and commissioned ministers are the same.
Three responsibilities are off-limits in our system to all but the ordained minister:
1. Organizing churches
2. Ordaining local elders and deacons
3. Serving as a Conference president
Frankly, if the principle of spiritual male headship is faithfully followed, the position of senior pastor should likewise be off-limits to anyone but an ordained minister or a licensed minister on track for ordination.
Greater clarity will be needed in the months and years to come, which hopefully will come from the new committee recommended at San Antonio which will clearly defined the opportunities and limits of the role of women in ministry. This committee will not address ordination to the gospel ministry; that question has been settled for the third time at the GC level. But once this new committee defines the parameters of the role of women in ministry, the opportunity will be there to to complete the unfinished business of San Antonio.

I have three questions to this issue.
1) Is women ordination as elders disobedience against the bible and God or not?
2) Shall we have trust in Men or only in God?
3) How long shall we wait to stop sin?
1) The bible says that an elder or bishop „must be… the husband of one wife“ (1 Tim 3:2; and Tit 1:6) and Paul and Barnabas practiced it (Acts 14:12.23; Tit 1:5) If an Elder is a women, it is disobedience and rebellion against the precept or order of God. What is disobedience or rebellion according to the bible?
„For rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft, and stubborness is as iniquity and idolatry. Because thou hast rejekted the word of the LORD…“ (1 Sam 15:23)
2) „Cursed be the man that trusteth in man, and maketh flesh his arms, and whose heart departeth from the LORD.“ (Jerem 15:5)
Not Man but the Lord – It is too often the case that those who are looked up to are not what they are supposed to be. Often sin lurks in the heart, and wrong habits and deceptive practices are woven into the character. How does our heavenly Father regard this? His counsel is always reliable… and He looks on with sadness when His children … place their dependence upon finite men … But this has been done, and God has been made secondary. … Beware how you place men where God should be. We are not safe in taking men as our authority or our guide, for they will surely disappoint us.“ (TM 385.386)
3) „He would teach His people that disobedience and sin are exceedingly offensive to Him and are not to be lightly regarded. He shows us that when His people are found in sin they should at once take decided measures to put that sin from them, that His frown may not rest upon them all. But if the sins of the people are passed over by those in responsible positions, His frown will be upon them, and the people of God, as a body, will be held responsible for those sins.“ (3T 265)

Notice the Bible cautions us not to make “man” our leader. What about God’s Church? Praise God for the Church and God’s design of leadership that it offers! The Bible sets the criteria for God’s Church and how it is to operate. The details of the SDA Church have flowed out of that.

Leave a Reply to canyoncity Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.