Print

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

[Daryl Fawcett]

The Adventist Review features special letters section and the readers share their views on the ordination issue.

Read more.

http://www.adventistreview.org/article/5665/archives/issue-2012-1525/inbox-letters-from-our-readers

[Gailon Arthur Joy]

Looks like the Review is supporting the "SHRUG".

There will be no battle at the Fall Counsel and and Irv's summary is correct...Jr does not have the political will to discipline the rebellion.

Need to watch Jackson and see how he handles this issue. Both Pacific Union and Columbia are proceeding with ordination of several women. Understand this process of rushing to enforce the will of the constituency means you cannot peaceably reverse this process. Once ordained, any effort to undo the process WILL RESULT IN LITIGATION regardless of the position of the Worldwide Church. Just like unseating rebellious professors was met with litigation in the Pacific Union.

Gailon Arthur Joy
AUReporter

[Dedication]

The method is all wrong.  The way this is being brought in is wrong.

Someone pointed me to this information.
I don't know how much credence to give it but the methods being used does make one wonder what's behind the scene?
The quotes can be found on many webpages.

"From Illuminati “secret correspondence”  included winning “the common people in every corner. This will be done chiefly by means of the schools, and by open, hearty behavior, show condescension, popularity and toleration of their prejudices which we shall at leisure root out and dispel.”

"...He also revealed their plan to use the liberation of women for their purposes, as is stated in their own correspondence:

“There is no way of influencing men so powerfully as by means of the women. These should therefore be our chief study; we should insinuate ourselves into their good opinion, give them hints of emancipation from the tyranny of public opinion and of standing up for themselves; it will be an immense relief to their enslaved minds to be freed from any one bond of restraint, and it will fire them more, and cause them to work for us with zeal, without knowing that they do so; for they will only be indulging their own desire of personal admiration.”

A Godfearing woman can be a tremendous power and influence for good.

On the other hand, it's sadly also true that ungodly women can have a tremendous power and influence for evil.

I guess for me the bottomline question is--
What is motivating the move?

Is it an urgent desire to finish the work and proclaim the gospel to all nations and people and unleashing the power of God in as many people as are willing to surrender themselves to Him and witness for Him?

Or is it motivated by desire for self exaltation and power?

Is the act of ordination recognized as being set apart to work for the LORD, our Creator, and Savior?
Or is ordination now a certificate for power and lordship for self?   

[Dedication]

If
the desire for ordination is  motivated by desire for self exaltation and power?
If
ordination is now seen as a certificate for power and lordship for self over others?

Then it is the very opposite of "all are equal" in Christ Jesus.

[Dedication]

But
If
it comes from an urgent desire to finish the work and proclaim the gospel to all nations and people and unleashing the power of God in as many people as are willing to surrender themselves to Him and witness for Him?
and ordination is recognized as being set apart to work for the LORD, our Creator, and Savior

then let's move ahead and finish the work so Jesus can come.


But how can this happen when the very move causes so much confusion?

[Hope]

It would appear that for some the motivation is power or position regardless of gender.  I cannot judge for all.  I have come to this topic recently and just read through the whole thing.  I was surprised not to see references to Dr. Darius Jankiewicz presentations on the history of ordination.  From that perspective, both sides of the argument are missing the point.  The thing that alarms me is the huge hermeneutical divide. (Is that a correct use of the word?)  We can never agree on particular issues until we can agree on how to approach scripture.  The influence of Protestant Fundamentalism influenced our approach to verbal inspiration back in the 1920's and set us up for loss in the 70's and 80's. In the '20's it was modernism vs fundamentalism and we chose fundamentalism.  But they were not right on all points.  If we could only have seen that there is a third way.  We may be in as much danger from the influence of ultra conservative Protestantism as we are from Liberalism.  And there still could be a third way, but I hear so very few even referring to such an idea. 

[Gregory]

http://www.pcsda.org/Stories/interview-dr-darius-jankiewicz.html

The above link also has a "you-tube" link that will take you to more of his presentation as reverenced by Hope.  The Internet also has several other links to him.

[AVoiceInTheWilderness]

It would appear that for some the motivation is power or position regardless of gender.  I cannot judge for all.  I have come to this topic recently and just read through the whole thing.  I was surprised not to see references to Dr. Darius Jankiewicz presentations on the history of ordination.  From that perspective, both sides of the argument are missing the point.  The thing that alarms me is the huge hermeneutical divide. (Is that a correct use of the word?)  We can never agree on particular issues until we can agree on how to approach scripture.  The influence of Protestant Fundamentalism influenced our approach to verbal inspiration back in the 1920's and set us up for loss in the 70's and 80's. In the '20's it was modernism vs fundamentalism and we chose fundamentalism.  But they were not right on all points.  If we could only have seen that there is a third way.  We may be in as much danger from the influence of ultra conservative Protestantism as we are from Liberalism.  And there still could be a third way, but I hear so very few even referring to such an idea.

The only way is through the path of God's Holy Word. Interestingly enough, this path is the least discussed on this forum and in most debates/discussions concerning this issue. And the issue, as well as the truth of it, is blatantly clear. "Thy way, O God, is in the sanctuary." Psalm 77:13

Those who are endeavoring to follow Christ by faith into the Most Holy Place, keeping their eyes fixed solidly upon the Sanctuary message and understanding the full implications of it, are the only ones viewing this issue in its true light. It is only when we view the matter of women in priesthood through Sanctuary 'goggles' that the issue is exceedingly clear in black and white.

[Dedication]

"Women in priesthood"

We do not  elevate our pastors into the "priesthood".
Christ is our high priest.
The "way of the sanctuary" needs to be studied in connection with the book of Hebrews.
There we see that Christ who ministering in the reality of salvation was the fulfilment of that which the earthly sanctuary only typified (was a shadow of)

Why would anyone continue to look to any finite human being as their "priest"?

This is where we have been highly influenced by the Catholic system. 

The "priesthood of all believers" doesn't mean that a few should be elevated to the priesthood. (Not men or women)
No -- it means we no longer have to go through a human finite priest for forgiveness of sins or  to come before God.
Everyone can go directly to God through Jesus Christ.

Ministers and pastors are NOT PRIESTS.

[Dedication]

Interesting:

One of the mistakes made by the Christian church of early centuries was to ascribe, in Ellen White’s words, “unwarrantable importance” and authority to the right of ordination.  Instead of viewing it simply as a confirmation and a blessing, the early Christians began to assign to ordination powers and authority that did not belong to the Christian leader who exercised ministry according to the New Testament model.

"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, there is no record indicating that any virtue was imparted by the mere act of laying on of hands. There is only the simple record of their ordination and of the bearing that it had on their future work."  {AA 162.2} 

[Bob Pickle]

Interesting:

One of the mistakes made by the Christian church of early centuries was to ascribe, in Ellen White’s words, “unwarrantable importance” and authority to the right of ordination.  Instead of viewing it simply as a confirmation and a blessing, the early Christians began to assign to ordination powers and authority that did not belong to the Christian leader who exercised ministry according to the New Testament model.

"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, there is no record indicating that any virtue was imparted by the mere act of laying on of hands. There is only the simple record of their ordination and of the bearing that it had on their future work."  {AA 162.2}

It is interesting, but I wonder if Jankiewicz went further than Ellen White in his assessment by saying "“unwarrantable importance” and authority." Note that on AA 161.2 it says that setting aside by laying on of hands "was an acknowledged form of designation to an appointed office and a recognition of one's authority in that office."

Certainly the ordination of Paul and Barnabas did not put virtue into them to enable them to do the work. But certainly it did set them aside to an appointed office that had authority, and LP 42 specifically says that they were now authorized to organize churches and baptize.

Or do you see any reference in these pages to a later abuse of ordination in regards to authority?

[Battle Creek]

It would appear that for some the motivation is power or position regardless of gender.  I cannot judge for all.  I have come to this topic recently and just read through the whole thing.  I was surprised not to see references to Dr. Darius Jankiewicz presentations on the history of ordination.  From that perspective, both sides of the argument are missing the point.  The thing that alarms me is the huge hermeneutical divide. (Is that a correct use of the word?)  We can never agree on particular issues until we can agree on how to approach scripture.  The influence of Protestant Fundamentalism influenced our approach to verbal inspiration back in the 1920's and set us up for loss in the 70's and 80's. In the '20's it was modernism vs fundamentalism and we chose fundamentalism.  But they were not right on all points.  If we could only have seen that there is a third way.  We may be in as much danger from the influence of ultra conservative Protestantism as we are from Liberalism.  And there still could be a third way, but I hear so very few even referring to such an idea.

You seem to have HOPE and a finger on the pulse. Lets keep our eyes on Jesus.

[Gailon Arthur Joy]

Here, Here, vox clamantis in deserto!!! ...you are correct that the answer is not in all this human wisdom, but simply found in the Bible. the Biblical standard is to be our only foundation.

Gailon Arthur Joy
AUReporter

"Women in priesthood"

We do not  elevate our pastors into the "priesthood".
Christ is our high priest.
The "way of the sanctuary" needs to be studied in connection with the book of Hebrews.
There we see that Christ who ministering in the reality of salvation was the fulfilment of that which the earthly sanctuary only typified (was a shadow of)

Why would anyone continue to look to any finite human being as their "priest"?

This is where we have been highly influenced by the Catholic system. 

The "priesthood of all believers" doesn't mean that a few should be elevated to the priesthood. (Not men or women)
No -- it means we no longer have to go through a human finite priest for forgiveness of sins or  to come before God.
Everyone can go directly to God through Jesus Christ.

Ministers and pastors are NOT PRIESTS.