I published this series less than two years ago, but I am going to re-post it over the next few days, because I believe that most Adventists are not well educated on this issue. This belief is based upon my own personal experience.
Ten years ago, I was largely ignorant of the biblical arguments. I remember telling someone at the Idaho Camp Meeting in 2010 that I did not have a problem with female ordination. I was no different than most cultural, multi-generational Adventists in this regard. There has never been anything in official Seventh-day Adventist journals, such as the Sabbath School Quarterly or the Review, that explains the doctrine of male headship in the church. To be sure, I had occasionally read and wondered at the male headship statements in the Pauline epistles, but these had never been acknowledged in any Adventist publication, nor were they placed in the context of any Adventist doctrinal statement. So there was really no reason for a lifelong Adventist such as myself to be aware that there is a biblical doctrine of male headship in the church.
What alerted me that there might be a problem with female ordination was the fact that it was one of the three legs—the other two being Darwinism and homosexuality—propping up the Spectrum Magazine stool. (I had recently begun to read Spectrum because, having just written a book on origins, I was fascinated by the phenomenon of the “Seventh-day Darwinian,” to borrow Cliff Goldstein’s term.) In other words, that female ordination was traveling in bad company is why I thought there might be a problem with it. Over the course of the next few years, I began to study the issue. I came to see female ordination as part of the post-Sexual Revolution sexual constitution in the developed world. I came to understand that the approach to Bible study used to argue in favor of female ordination was different from the approach we use in establishing our other doctrines and doctrinal apologetics.
Based upon these early articles, I was invited to be on the Theology of Ordination Study Committee, which met during 2013 and 2014. A whole world of new argumentation opened up to me. I learned that many had thought deeply and extensively about this issue, that there were many in my church who believed in the doctrine of male headship, and that this was not solely the possession of other Christian denominations. It was an eye-opening experience, but not one open to many other Adventist laypeople.
The role of women in the church is a doctrinal issue. It is not a mere “policy” issue, and should never have been treated as merely a policy issue. Here, and in the installments that will follow, I will present a case study of doctrinal apologetics, a biblical defense of the doctrine of male headship in the church. Little of what will be presented is original to me; I am merely the editor and redactor of material largely provided by other authors.
A Note: How Adventists Study the Bible
Historically, Adventists have followed William Miller's principles of Bible study, which were endorsed by Ellen White. These principles are:
1. All Scripture is necessary, and may be understood by diligent application and study;
2. Nothing revealed in Scripture can or will be hidden from those who ask in faith;
3. To understand doctrine, bring all the Scriptures together on the subject you wish to know, then let every word have its proper influence. If you can form your theory without a contradiction, you cannot be in error;
4. Scripture is the interpreter of itself.
Please give special attention to number three. We must never interpret Scripture in a manner that sets one text against another, and then explain why we prefer to heed the one and not the other. We must form our interpretive theory “without a contradiction.” The texts must be interpreted to harmonize with each other.
The North American Division Theology of Ordination Study Committee calls its approach to hermeneutics the “principle-based, historical-cultural” method. This method is not compatible with the historical-grammatical method in longstanding use in the Adventist Church, and clashes with the 1986 General Conference “Methods of Bible Study” document, sometimes called the Rio Document. The NAD report urges us to recognize a “trajectory” in Scripture, which can then be used to discredit passages that go against the “trajectory.” The trajectory approach is a way to set text against text, and disregard some texts. Non-Adventists employ this method to set aside the Seventh-day Sabbath.
Adventist have always held that “the Bible transcends its cultural backgrounds to serve as God’s word for all cultural, racial, and situational contexts in all ages.” “All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work” (2 Tim 3:16, 17).
What is Ordination?
It has become traditional to begin with a discussion of ordination, even though ordination itself should not be controversial in the least. What is hotly disputed is whether the church’s headship offices—elder, bishop—are restricted to men. Nevertheless, in a nod to tradition, we will begin with a brief discussion of ordination.
Ordination is a grant of ecclesiastical authority, in which the church authorizes someone to act for it in a certain role, office, or mission. Ordination is how God's church sets aside a person, blesses that person, and authorizes that person to perform a specific mission or fill a particular church office.
Ellen White wrote that ordination was a “form of designation to an appointed office and a recognition of one’s authority in that office” (AA 161). After their ordination, Paul and Barnabas were “authorized by the church, not only to teach the truth, but to perform the rite of baptism and to organize churches, being invested with full ecclesiastical authority.” (AA 160)
Ordination to gospel ministry is the church’s recognition that a man has been set aside for the office of gospel minister—devoting his entire life to the service of Jesus, to be near Him, to receive His instruction, and to be sent as His personal representative. (Mark 8:1; Ex 19:22)
Ordination to gospel ministry is in some ways analogous to a professional license, serving to protect people from quacks and charlatans. Ordination protects the flock of God from self-appointed persons who would claim to speak for the church, but who are not authorized by a consensus of the church's elders and overseers.
Ordination is an essential element of church organization and has been important to the Adventist church from its earliest days. Immediately upon the organization of our first conference, Michigan, James White made a motion:
“Resolved, that our ministers’ papers consist of a certificate of ordination, also credentials to be signed by the chairman and clerk of the conference, which credentials shall be renewed annually.” (1BIO 455).
The English word “ordination” comes from a Latin word, ordo (order, class, rank), not a word from biblical Greek or Hebrew. Nevertheless, the concept of the church authorizing someone and setting them apart for a holy purpose is found throughout Scripture. Many English translations of the Bible have used the word “ordination” because it was the most efficient way to communicate in English the concept the Bible describes.
Ellen White found the term “ordain” and “ordination” useful. She used the term “ordain” both in connection to the twelve disciples and to later apostles, such as Paul and Barnabas. She describes the simple ceremony by which Jesus ordained the twelve disciples:
“When Jesus had ended His instruction to the disciples, He gathered the little band close about Him, kneeling in the midst of them, and laying His hands upon their heads, He offered a prayer dedicating them to His sacred work. Thus the Lord’s disciples were ordained to the gospel ministry.” (DA 296)
Probably because the word “ordination” comes from a Latin word, it has been asserted that the Adventist Church got its practice of ordination from the Roman Catholic Church. This is not true. The Adventist pioneers took their concept of ordination directly from the Bible. They understood the Catholic version of ordination and rejected it.
Ellen White was careful to distinguish the early church’s practice of ordination from the corruptions to ordination that crept in during the Great Apostasy of the middle ages. She makes clear that ordination is not a sacrament, and the rituals and symbols associated with it, such as the laying on of hands, do not magically transform the candidate being ordained:
“At a later date the rite of ordination by the laying on of hands was greatly abused; unwarrantable importance was attached to the act, as if a power came at once upon those who received such ordination, which immediately qualified them for any and all ministerial work. But in the setting apart of these two apostles [Paul and Barnabas], there is no record indicating that any virtue was imparted by the mere act of laying on of hands.” (AA 162)
Many use the term “ordination” only in relation to the headship offices of the church, and do not use the term “ordination” in connection with the ordination of deacons, deaconesses, medical missionaries, and other church offices. This is not helpful. It is very important to keep the concept of ordination separate from the issue of whether the headship offices—elder, bishop—are restricted to men. The conflation of the term “ordination” with the belief that the headship offices are restricted to men has led to needless broadsides against the concept of ordination which, again, should not be controversial. Ordination is simply the church’s public, ceremonial act of authorizing a person to act on its behalf in a certain office or mission.
After the first meeting of the Theology of Ordination Study Committee, a smaller subcommittee was appointed to prepare a statement on ordination. Even though this subcommittee contained partisans on both extremes of the question of whether women can assume the headship offices, e.g., Randy Roberts and Doug Batchelor, they were able to cooperate easily in producing a statement of the doctrine of ordination, because ordination is simply not that controversial. What is controversial—at least in the context of today’s egalitarian culture in the West—is the belief that the headship offices are restricted to men.
Frequently Asked Questions:
1. Is the distinction between ordained and un-ordained workers trivial?
No. It was so important that during a time of soul searching, fasting, and prayer, the Holy Spirit sent the Antioch church leadership instructions to ordain Barnabas and Paul. (Acts 13:1-3) Ordained workers have the authorization of the Church to carry out their office or mission, and that is important both to those within the church and to those outside of it. The ordained worker represents the church in a way that others do not, which is why Paul instructed Timothy to “lay hands on no man suddenly” (1 Tim. 5:22), lest the failures of an unqualified ordainee cast a shadow over the whole body of believers.
2. Why do some theologians say ordination is an un-biblical or even a pagan concept?
As we noted above, the English term “ordination” comes from a Latin term ordo. Latin is not a biblical language but is the language of the Roman Catholic Church. The term “ordination” comes freighted with centuries of church history and practice—mostly that of the Catholic Church. This creates a not-unreasonable fear that some of the pagan concepts that entered the Catholic Church’s practice of ordination will attach themselves to the modern Adventist Church’s practice of ordination.
But there is no reason to believe that the early Adventists imported any pagan concepts into their practice of ordination. As indicated above, Ellen White was aware that non-biblical concepts had come into the church during the middle ages, and was careful that our understanding of ordination remained free of these errors.
Do not get hung up on words or word origins. We are not defending the word “ordination” but rather the biblical concept that some—and not others—should be set apart by the laying on of hands for a specific church office or mission. This concept has Bible examples in three categories of church workers, including: 1) the apostles (Acts 13:1-3 “the Holy Spirit said, ‘Now separate to Me Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have called them’ Then, having fasted and prayed, and laid hands on them, they sent them away”), 2) the twelve disciples (Mark 3:14 “And he ordained [KJV, Gr. = “he made”] twelve, that they should be with him, and that he might send them forth to preach”), and 3) the local elders that Timothy was to ordain (1 Tim. 5:22 “lay hands on no man prematurely”).
Ordination is not of pagan or Roman Catholic origin, but finds its roots in Scripture:
“God foresaw the difficulties that His servants would be called to meet, and, in order that their work should be above challenge, He instructed the church by revelation to set them apart publicly to the work of the ministry. Their ordination was a public recognition of their divine appointment to bear to the Gentiles the glad tidings of the gospel.” (AA 160)