Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Gregory]

I have stated for some time that the issue as to whether or not the Unions that have voted to ordain without reference to gender had the authority to do so was debateable.  I have said that there were valid reasons for stateing that they did not have such authority and valid ones for stating that they did have such authority.  I do not intend here to restate my reasons for stating such.  I have posted on this before.

But, I have recently become aware of another aspect of this issue that I have not posted on in the past.  So, I am posting that now.

The developement of the so-called "Model Constitution" happened about 1980.  As it was put into place in 1985 it read as follows:  "Model Union Conference Constitution and Bylaws for use as guidelines to be followed as closely as possible pending final consideration by the 1987 Annual Council."    NOTE:  This issue of the Model Constitution did not mandate.

In 1995 the same article in the Model Constitution read:  This model constitution shall be folowed by all union conferences.  The model bylaws may be modified, with the approval of the next higher organization.  Those sections of the model bylaws that appear in bold print are essential to the unity of the Church worldwide, and shall be included in the bylaws as adopted by each union  conference.  Other sections of the model bylaws may be modified . . . provided they continue to be in full harmony with the provisions of this model."  NOTE:  Now the Model Constitution changes to mandated with provisions for some change.

The 2010 edition of the Model Constitution reads essentially the same as the 1995 edition.

Article III of the present Model Constitution reads as follows, in part:  " . . .all purposes, pollicies, and procedures of this union Conference shall be in harmony with the workimg policies and procedures of the ___________ Division and the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists.  This union conference shall pursue the mission of the Church in harmony wiht the doctrines, programs, and initiatives adopted and approved by the General Conference in its quinquennial sessions."

NOTE:   The Constitution of the Columbia Union Conference does not read as I have cited above.

Article III of the Columbia Union Conference reads in part:  " . . .In general the purposes, policies, and procedures of the Union shall be in harmony wihtt he working policies and procedures of hte North American Division of the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, to the extent that these are consistent with the articles of the Union's Constitution and Bylaws." 

NOTE:  It is important to note that the Columbia Union has been allowed to operate for some time with a Constitution that does NOT require the Union to follow GC policies to the same degree that the GC Model Constitution requires.

This is only one reason that some beleive that the Columbia Union is NOT in rebellion against the GC.  It is doing what it is allowed to do.  I have posted earlier other reasons why I believe that the Union  is doing what it is allowed to do under its Constitution.  I  will not repeat those here.  I am posting this as I have not posted it before.

NOTE:  Some of  the above consists of my own words.  However, I am endebted to Stanley E. Patterson, PhD. of the Christian Ministry Department of Andrews University Theological Seminary who wrote the article "Kingly Power: Is it Finding a Place in the Adventist Church?," which was published in the September - October 2012 edition of ADVENTIST TODAY.

As the above consists of a few brief statements from a much longer article no conclusions should be drawn as to Dr. Patterson's thesis.  For an understanding of the position that he took please read his article in ADVENTIST TODAY.

[Daryl Fawcett]

This is how all of Article III reads and is all in bold:

Article III—Relationships
The __________ Union Conference of Seventh-day Adventists is part of the __________ Division of the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, a world church organization; and all purposes, policies, and procedures of this union conference shall be in harmony with the working policies and procedures of the __________ Division and the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists. This union conference shall pursue the mission of the Church in harmony with the doctrines, programs, and initiatives adopted and approved by the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists in its quinquennial sessions.

[Gailon Arthur Joy]

The General Conference IN Session is still God's highest authority on earth. The premise that a Union can move it's own direction and be OUT OF HARMONY with clear Biblical standards and with the General Conference in Session IS REBELLION!!!

Antime any church entity is out of harmony there is specific guidelines for bringing the errant entity back into the sisterhood of the church. If they elect not to reconcile then they are to be disbanded and the assets moved to the next high organization, in this case the NAD.

However, there remains to be seen if the NAD is going to be in Harmony with the General Conference.

It is time, here and now, to establish a church with standards and not a rudderless social club.

Gailon Arthur joy

[Bob Pickle]

This is only one reason that some beleive that the Columbia Union is NOT in rebellion against the GC.  It is doing what it is allowed to do.  I have posted earlier other reasons why I believe that the Union  is doing what it is allowed to do under its Constitution.  I  will not repeat those here.

It seems to me that you are arguing as if you are on the side of John Harvey Kellogg, who changed the charter of the Battle Creek San and, with the help of lawyers, used legalities to steal the San away from the denomination. To a worldly minded lawyer, it might not be theft, but it certainly was.

All legalities aside, we still have Acts 15, Ellen White's comments about Acts 15, and 9T 260-261, a matter you haven't addressed at all, except to refuse to address it.

Let's be clear: A Union is not permitted by God under its Constitution to violate Acts 15 and 9T 260-261. There is no theological basis for saying that God permits any such thing.

You may want to frame the discussion in only human, worldly terms, and you may not want to frame the issues in a spiritual context, but that seems rather strange.

Now if we do venture onto that ground and discuss it only from purely human, worldly terms, does not the GC and NAD Working Policies mandate that all union officers be in harmony with church policies? Is not one of those church policies that GC Sessions are the highest authority on earth under God? Does not another of those policies state that officers who won't abide by these policies should not be re-elected by their constituencies? On what basis, then, can anyone suggest that the Columbia Union is not rebelling against GC Session votes?

[Daryl Fawcett]

The General Conference IN Session is still God's highest authority on earth. The premise that a Union can move it's own direction and be OUT OF HARMONY with clear Biblical standards and with the General Conference in Session IS REBELLION!!!

Antime any church entity is out of harmony there is specific guidelines for bringing the errant entity back into the sisterhood of the church. If they elect not to reconcile then they are to be disbanded and the assets moved to the next high organization, in this case the NAD.

However, there remains to be seen if the NAD is going to be in Harmony with the General Conference.

It is time, here and now, to establish a church with standards and not a rudderless social club.

Gailon Arthur joy

Here is what Ellen White has to say about the SDA Church:

http://www.maritime-sda-online.com/main/?page_id=51

[Artiste]

The General Conference IN Session is still God's highest authority on earth. The premise that a Union can move it's own direction and be OUT OF HARMONY with clear Biblical standards and with the General Conference in Session IS REBELLION!!!

Antime any church entity is out of harmony there is specific guidelines for bringing the errant entity back into the sisterhood of the church. If they elect not to reconcile then they are to be disbanded and the assets moved to the next high organization, in this case the NAD.

However, there remains to be seen if the NAD is going to be in Harmony with the General Conference.

It is time, here and now, to establish a church with standards and not a rudderless social club.

Gailon Arthur joy

Here is what Ellen White has to say about the SDA Church:

http://www.maritime-sda-online.com/main/?page_id=51

Thanks for the link, Daryl.

A lot of good quotes there.

[Battle Creek]

Here is an official statement found on the web page of the General Conference:

A Statement on Women's Issues

Seventh-day Adventists believe that all people, male and female, are created equal, in the image of a loving God. We believe that both men and women are called to fill a significant role in accomplishing the primary mission of the Adventist Church: working together for the benefit of humanity. Yet we are painfully aware that throughout the world, in developing and developed nations, adverse societal conditions often inhibit women from fulfilling their God-given potential.

The Seventh-day Adventist Church has identified several major problems, well-documented by research, that often keep women from making valuable contributions to society. Stress, the environment, and increased demands have placed women at greater risk for health problems. Poverty and heavy workloads not only deprive women of their ability to enjoy life, but also impair their physical and spiritual well-being. Family violence takes a heavy toll on its victims.

Women are entitled to the God-given privileges and opportunities intended for every human being--the right to literacy, to education, to adequate health care, to decision making, and to freedom from mental, physical, or sexual abuse. We also maintain that women should play an increased role in the leadership and decision-making bodies of both church and society.

Ultimately, we believe that the church will fulfill its mission only when women are empowered to achieve their full potential.

 

This statement was approved and voted by the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists Administrative Committee (ADCOM) and was released by the Office of the President, Robert S. Folkenberg, at the General Conference session in Utrecht, the Netherlands, June 29-July 8, 1995.

http://adventist.org/beliefs/statements/main-stat28.html

[Daryl Fawcett]

Here is an official statement found on the web page of the General Conference:

A Statement on Women's Issues

Seventh-day Adventists believe that all people, male and female, are created equal, in the image of a loving God. We believe that both men and women are called to fill a significant role in accomplishing the primary mission of the Adventist Church: working together for the benefit of humanity. Yet we are painfully aware that throughout the world, in developing and developed nations, adverse societal conditions often inhibit women from fulfilling their God-given potential.

The Seventh-day Adventist Church has identified several major problems, well-documented by research, that often keep women from making valuable contributions to society. Stress, the environment, and increased demands have placed women at greater risk for health problems. Poverty and heavy workloads not only deprive women of their ability to enjoy life, but also impair their physical and spiritual well-being. Family violence takes a heavy toll on its victims.

Women are entitled to the God-given privileges and opportunities intended for every human being--the right to literacy, to education, to adequate health care, to decision making, and to freedom from mental, physical, or sexual abuse. We also maintain that women should play an increased role in the leadership and decision-making bodies of both church and society.

Ultimately, we believe that the church will fulfill its mission only when women are empowered to achieve their full potential.

 

This statement was approved and voted by the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists Administrative Committee (ADCOM) and was released by the Office of the President, Robert S. Folkenberg, at the General Conference session in Utrecht, the Netherlands, June 29-July 8, 1995.

http://adventist.org/beliefs/statements/main-stat28.html

Yes, but at that same session they voted against the ordination of women.  Check the minutes, if they are available somewhere on the Internet, and see for yourselves.

[Battle Creek]

From the official news report:

Fewer than one-third of the delegates voted in favor of the request from the North American Division of the Church which asked that divisions, not the Church as a whole, be allowed to make the decision on ordination. Of the 2,154 votes cast, 1,481 voted against the request, 673 voted for. 
- - -
As debate opened, there was a rush to the two microphones on the floor. One-hundred and twenty persons lined up to speak for or against the motion. Passionate speaches, mostly from the delegates representing Central and South America as well as Africa and Asia, appealed for the motion to be defeated. Statements for the right of gender inclusive ordination not to be defeated, came mostly from North American and European delegates.

http://news.adventist.org/en/archive/articles/1995/07/05/womens-ordination-request-rejected-at-seventh-day-adventist-world-session

[Daryl Fawcett]

I find it interesting that those in favour of WO comes mainly from parts of the world that are "rich and increased with goods and have need of nothing."

[Artiste]

I think it is because those parts of the world have a more "evolved" culture and are the areas where women's lib is promoted.

[Daryl Fawcett]

I think it is because those parts of the world have a more "evolved" culture and are the areas where women's lib is promoted.

Can't argue that.

[Dedication]

Do a little research and see how the average woman is treated in these countries.
Not the few in higher societies --

Are you sure you want promote their culture?

[Artiste]

I don't think anyone said anything about wanting to promote their culture.

[Dedication]

As debate opened, there was a rush to the two microphones on the floor. One-hundred and twenty persons lined up to speak for or against the motion. Passionate speaches, mostly from the delegates representing Central and South America as well as Africa and Asia, appealed for the motion to be defeated. Statements for the right of gender inclusive ordination not to be defeated, came mostly from North American and European delegates

I find it interesting that those in favour of WO comes mainly from parts of the world that are "rich and increased with goods and have need of nothing."

I think it is because those parts of the world have a more "evolved" culture and are the areas where women's lib is promoted.

Do a little research and see how the average woman is treated in these countries.
Are you sure you want to promote their culture?

And yes, the talk was about our "evolved" culture, vs,  theirs.

People from those cultures where women are largely suppressed, have a real problem thinking of women in ministry.

Many in America and Europe do not see why they have to hold women back from full recognition in gospel ministry just because people from cultures where they don't  want women to have any "authority"  vetoed their request.

In some countries in Africa there is considerable problems because the men don't want women to own land (even though in Africa 80% of food raised, is produced by women) thus causing great hardship on widows (of whom there are many) as they have no land on which to grow food for themselves and their children .  But in their culture "owning land" gives prestige and authority, and the men don't want to relinquish that.

Some similarities there with the problem of "ordination".