A decision of the South American Division executive committee on July 8, 2021, authorized the ordination of women as elders. Previously, the Church Manual of that Division did not authorize women to be nominated as elders. The decision was made based on a report submitted by a committee that surveyed 1800 local church leaders from December 2020 to the end of June 2021. We are not told how partial or impartial that consultation was. But I received a message telling me that “in this consultation of the SAD, we were told:
a) ‘We will not discuss if we have to ordain women or not.’
b) Several tendentious questions were asked: ‘Do you believe that women are qualified to lead groups of persons?,’ questions which logically one would answer yes, because no middle options were allowed.
c) No provision for a debate was allowed.”
This new vote of the SAD presumes to strengthen the position of elders in the churches, and believes that ordaining women in that position will be part of that reinforcement. But they do not take into account that the experiment has already been done in other churches, and the appointment of pastors did not contribute to the growth of those churches. On the contrary, it increased liberalism and caused the number of baptisms to decrease. See A. R. Treiyer, How Typology Affects Church Structure, p. 3.
Nor are there any statistics offered of an improvement in the spiritual condition of our church in other Divisions where some Unions ordain women as elders. It was said some time ago that the church culture in China generally agreed to appoint women pastors but this was proved not to be true.
I was in China four years ago giving a seminar for pastors and church leaders and I was informed that liberal pastors came from the U.S. and ordained some sisters as pastors, but that this practice is rejected by the majority.
What are the reasons given in the SAD for this change?
1. Statistics. They report that 73 % of the administrative regions of the different Divisions in the world approve in whole or in part the ordination of women as elders. What do they mean by full or partial approval? The official note says nothing about that. So the percentage given does not necessarily reflect the approval or rejection of the majority in those Divisions.
2. It is reported that in the last ten years, seven percent more women than men joined the church in the SAD, although it is not said how many men and women there are as church members. There are also 5,626 women group directors serving the church when the church is not yet organized as such. What they don’t say is that there was always a general balance between men and women in the history of mankind, and in the church, and yet women were not ordained as elders either in the Bible or in early Christianity or in our church from the beginning. If the statistics offered now by the leaders of the SAD are enough to justify the appointment of women as elders, might they not resort to the same strategy in the near future to get a vote on the appointment of lady pastors? And if, because there are 7% more women baptized than men, do we also have to accept women performing marriages and acting as spiritual leaders in the church?
3. In their view, E. G. White was a co-founder of the church and prophetess, yet they admit that she did not speak of WO as elders. They took out of context an isolated statement of E. G. White, where she advises to consecrate by the laying on of hands some women fitted for a special mission, but not as women elders.
She referred to “women who are willing to consecrate some of their time [not as full time service] to the service of the Lord… to visit the sick, look after the young, and minister to the necessities of the poor.” But she also warned: “In some cases they will need to counsel with the church officers or the minister…” (RH July 9, 1895).
In other words, the reference of E. G. White to a particular laying on of hands for certain ministries which could include women, was not referring to an administrative or governing position of the church by those women. It has to do with the mission equivalent to Bible Instructors exercised in the past by some women who studied at least two years of religion. And as for E. G. White, the administrators of the SAD do not take into account that she openly said that she never intended to lead the church. She defined her mission as a messenger of God for the remnant (8T 236-7).
Historically there were a few occasional ordinations of deaconesses in our church, but not as elders or pastors. I personally witnessed in a local church in Maryland, an ordination of deaconesses a few years ago, with laying on hands on the shoulder, not on the head.
There is no mention in the report of the SAD of the many statements from E. G White that warn us against the danger of women who want to occupy a leadership position for which God did not call them, and neglect the more specific task God gave them of taking care of their home and educating their children. Nor do they cite biblical texts to justify that decision. It is a pity that the SAD is now bringing up an out-of-context quotation, and neglecting all the wealth of information we have today on the subject in the Spirit of Prophecy writings. See my web page WITH several papers that I prepared in the section Articles in English and Spanish on these issues. www.adventistdistinctivemessages.com
No Session of the General Conference voted to authorize women ordination as elders.
According to Pr. Ted Wilson, current president of the Adventist world church,
“the particular item regarding whether to allow women to be ordained as local elders was never brought to the General Conference Session explicitly… What the 1990 General Conference Session did was amend the Church Manual to provide gender-neutral language regarding church elders. Even though background information was provided before the vote, the question of whether women should be ordained as local elders was never debated on the floor of the Session; the 1989 Annual Council had already assumed the responsibility to make that decision.”
Does the Bible authorize the use of neutral language for the ordination of elders and pastors? No. Neutral language is typical of modern times when additional genders are being introduced. But the Old Testament as well as the New Testament always employed masculine gender for the ordination of elders. I ask the pastors who ordain women, how do they handle reading the words of the Apostle Paul in a ceremony of ordination, which affirms that the elder is to be “husband of one wife” (1 Tim 3:2)?
The basic problem: the leaders of the church want to follow the practices of the world
What we are seeing in our church is a repetition of what God’s people did in the past, and which shows us that we are “sons of this [corrupt] age.” They want to imitate the customs of the world. Because the world was ruled by kings, the Israelites wanted to have kings as well. And as a result, God gave them “a king in His wrath” (Hos 13:11). It didn’t take long for the people to realize the mistake they had made, and then they came to Samuel asking him for forgiveness (1 Sam 12:19-20). Will the leaders who today seek to resemble the world in their practices and customs later ask for forgiveness?
The dilemma facing the Adventist Church now is that they ordain women as elders but not as pastors, when in the Bible there is no different principle for ordaining elders or pastors, because the elders who governed the church were pastors.
So here we must ask ourselves a question: What is the current criterion for deciding whether to ordain women or not? Is it statistics which tell us how many men and women there are in the church? Is it society that rises up against biblical patriarchy as something abhorrent that must determine what God wants?
The initial publication of the new SDA International Bible Commentary (SDAIBC) on the book of Genesis written by the general editor of that series presumes to be an Adventist commentary. Despite having been written by a Jew who often uses many Jewish sources in his commentaries, in that commentary he imposes surprisingly modern social criteria on not only Jewish literature but also over what the book of Genesis itself states. See A. R. Treiyer, Critical Analysis of Jacques Doukhan’s Commentary on Genesis:
The worldly current which tries to elevate women to an egalitarian plane with men and even over men in many issues, is leading some Protestant churches to introduce Mariology in their midst. In Germany there are even Protestant churches that accept the introduction of images of the Virgin Mary. Could it be that we are repeating in this regard, the old saying that, “all roads lead to Rome”?
Three Sessions of the General Conference opposed by a large majority the ordination of women as pastors. But in this modern time of rebellion many say as in the time of the prophet Jeremiah, regarding the Lord’s command to march together in the ancient paths: “we will not walk therein” (Jer 6:16).
Some have been outraged when they were warned that along this new path they would end up ordaining pastors from the LGBTQ+ community as well. But by following the custom of the world in the age of greatest moral degeneration of mankind—as Jesus warned us when He said it would be like the days of Noah—who can guarantee the final outcome? Wasn’t the sage Solomon clear enough clear when he repeated more than once: “There is a way that appears to be right, but in the end it leads to death”? (Prov 14:12; 16:25; see 12:15).
A first step toward accepting the new [im]morality?
We no longer need to warn about this egalitarian new [im]moral trend in neutral language, but simply to note it.
A new book on full LGBT+ equality is receiving praise from many Seventh-day Adventist pastors. Alicia Johnston was a former pastor from the Arizona Conference of Seventh-day Adventists. She resigned from the ministry after coming out as a member of the LGBT+ community. She has now published a new book called The Bible & LGBTQ Adventists which, according to her, “challenges the prevailing SDA beliefs.” Alicia Johnston calls for “full affirmation of same-sex marriage and transgender identity.” She says that it is NOT “biblical to oppose same-sex marriage or transgender identity” and that Seventh-day Adventists have “gotten this question completely wrong.”
What is most concerning is that this new book affirming LGBTQ theology has the support of former and current pastors and church administrators. There is a section on Alicia Johnston’s page that lists current Adventist ministers who “endorse” her book. The following names are listed on the fundraising page for the new book “The Bible & LGBTQ Adventists” as those who endorse her views:
• Reinder Bruinsma, retired Adventist pastor and administrator in the Netherlands, scholar, and author.
• John McClarty, Adventist pastor at Green Lake Church.
• Chris Blake, pastor, San Luis Obispo and Morro Bay Seventh-day Adventist Churches.
• Stephen Chavez, Adventist pastor and long-time Assistant Editor for the Adventist Review and Adventist World.
• Anonymous Adventist pastor in the Atlantic Union.
• Anonymous Adventist pastor in the Southern Union.
• Anonymous Adventist pastor in the Pacific Union.
Then we have Pastor Kevin McGill, who is the pastor of the Troy Seventh-day Adventist Church in Troy, ID. Pastor Kevin is not only promoting Alicia Johnston’s book, but he is also directing people to Alicia Johnston’s fundraising page. He also says he met Alicia while studying at the Adventist Seminary in Berrien Springs, Michigan.
Here we have some Adventist pastors who are paid with sacred tithe money supporting the full inclusion and equal status of LGBT+ people with full rights to ministry, ordination and leadership positions. This is an effort to detach ourselves from truth and righteousness towards pure secularism and worldliness. We are witnessing in Adventism the heretical denial of the will of God for men, women and marriage, as revealed by God at creation. This development shows how low God’s doctrinal and moral standards have fallen in many places within the church. Instead of leaving the movement, as Alicia Johnston did, these apostate pastors stay to impose their heresy while undermining the clear teachings of God’s Word.
The Background of the SAD Vote on Women Elders
Several pastors from South America are asking my advice on what to do in the case where they feel they cannot ordain women as elders against their conscience.
I replied that if a leader/administrator takes such a vote, they are free to do like Samuel did when the people required him to anoint a king against the will of God. Or simply, to ask another pastor to officiate in the ordination of a woman when the members of the church pressure him to do it.
Other pastors want to excuse the SAD by saying that they were pressured by some strong liberal Unions in Brazil to take that vote. And pastors are not lacking who believe that this pressure came from the General Conference, by way of Pr. Erton Köhler, former president of the SAD, who could become the next GC President. In other words, the leaders of the SAD would be acting, in their view, like Aaron when the people required him to make a golden calf.
In at least two Unions, the respective administrations are requiring the pastors not to communicate yet the vote of the South American Division to their churches. It is evident that they expect a strong controversy on this issue, and are trying to study how to introduce the matter with the least negative impact. A pastor wrote me:
“For my part, I will completely ignore this issue. I’m not going to opine either for or against. I’m not going to ruin the unity of my district, distracting our attention to this issue that doesn’t arise as a need of the church or women. I don’t have a single sister who is inactive because they are not ordained as elder.”
Our question is: Are not the warnings of the Spirit of Prophecy enough for us be careful not to follow ancient Israel, in the customs and idolatry of the world? Let us prayerfully consider the following warning.
“As the storm approaches, a large class who have professed faith in the third angel’s message, but have not been sanctified through obedience to the truth, abandon their position and join the ranks of the opposition. By uniting with the world and partaking of its spirit, they have come to view matters in nearly the same light; and when the test is brought, they are prepared to choose the easy, popular side. Men of talent and pleasing address, who once rejoiced in the truth, employ their powers to deceive and mislead souls. They become the most bitter enemies of their former brethren” (GC 608).
****
