Final Tosc Report

general conference
study committee report

june 2014
theology of
ordination
Copyright (c) 2014 by the General Conference of Seventh-
day Adventists, 12501 Old Columbia Pk, Silver Spring, MD
20904 Published as an internal document by the General
Conference of Seventh-day Adventist for use by and as a
reference for its affliated entities and constituents.
Section I:
Terms of Reference ............................................................ 2
Introduction and Guidelines .......................................... 3
Terms of Reference ........................................................ 4
Committee Members ..................................................... 5
Section II:
History of TOSC ................................................................. 8
Section III:
Presentations on This Subject ........................................... 14
Statements .................................................................... 15
January 2013 Papers ...................................................... 15
July 2013 Papers ............................................................ 15
January 2014 Papers ...................................................... 17
June 2014 Papers ........................................................... 18
Papers Commissioned and
Submitted but not Presented ....................................... 18
Section IV:
Consensus Statement on the Theology of Ordination ......... 20
Section V:
Position Summaries ........................................................... 24
Position Summary #1 ..................................................... 25
Position Summary #2 .................................................... 62
Position Summary #3 ..................................................... 98
Section VI:
Way Forward Statements ................................................... 118
Way Forward Statement #1 ............................................ 119
Section VII:
Vote of Affrmation and Commitment ................................. 126
terms of reference
section i
3 Section I: Terms of Reference
introduction and
guidelines
Te Teology of Ordination Study Committee is the result of a request made from the
foor by a delegate at the 2010 General Conference Session. Te General Conference admin-
istration later took that request to the General Conference Administrative Committee for
approval of the theology of ordination study process on September 20, 2011.
Te objective of the Teology of Ordination Study Committee should be to carefully
and prayerfully follow the terms of reference with an aim of reaching consensus on as many
points as possible.
Te Teology of Ordination Study Committee will provide for a committee member-
ship with a broad base of perspectives to allow the Holy Spirit to help bring about consensus
as much as possible.
Since this is to be a study committee, the normal voting process will not be used to
place positions or representatives against each other. Rather, the study approach will provide
opportunity for one consensus report on items accepted by consensus. For items on which it will
be impossible to reach consensus, various reports should be prepared that present the diferent
viewpoints and their appropriate responses. Trough strong prayer sessions, study of the Bible,
study of the Spirit of Prophecy, and the resulting careful discussion, the Teology of Ordination
Study Committee should focus on solutions that would support the message, mission, and unity
of the Seventh-day Adventist Church.
In its study, the Teology of Ordination Study Committee will collaborate with the es-
tablished division Biblical Research Committees (BRCs) and provide assistance to the BRCs
with the comprehensive agenda to be reviewed. Te Teology of Ordination Study Committee
will receive reports from the division BRCs and can assign research papers and presentations
to committee members and nonmembers to be reviewed by the Teology of Ordination Study
Committee.
Te Teology of Ordination Study Committee will meet approximately four times, con-
cluding its work in June 2014. A steering committee of the Teology of Ordination Study
Committee will provide supervision of the process. Te work of the study committee will be
to provide as much complete information on its assigned topic as is possible to be reviewed by
General Conference administration in June 2014, and then the complete report provided to the
General Conference Executive Committee to be reviewed and discussed at the 2014 Annual
Council. Te 2014 Annual Council will decide on any items to be referred to the 2015 General
Conference Session.
terms of reference
terms of reference authority and responsibility
1. Supervise the worldwide study of the theology
of ordination and its implications, reviewing
and analyzing data from the Bible and the Spirit
of Prophecy.
1. Power to act.
2. Review the history of the study of ordination in
the Seventh-day Adventist Church.
2. Power to act.
3. Develop a comprehensive agenda on the
subject of theology of ordination and its
implications for practices in the Seventh-day
Adventist Church, including the subject of
ordination of women to the gospel ministry.
3. Power to act.
4. Receive (not later than December 31, 2013)
and discuss reports from the division Biblical
Research Committees concerning their division-
wide studies and conclusions, ensuring that
division Biblical Research Committees address
the comprehensive study agenda.
4. Power to act in consultation with
division Biblical Research Committees.
5. Request studies or solicit papers from
committee members and/or non-members
when further study is deemed necessary.
5. Power to act.
6. Develop a Seventh-day Adventist theology of
ordination to recommend to the 2014 Annual
Council for consideration.
6. Power to act.
7. Submit to the 2014 Annual Council, through
General Conference administration, the full
report of the worldwide study indicating areas
of consensus and areas where consensus has
not been obtained with respect to the theology
of ordination and its implications for practices
in the Seventh-day Adventist Church.
7. Power to act.
8. In areas of disagreement, focus on potential
solutions that support the message, mission,
and unity of the Seventh-day Adventist Church.
8. Recommend to the General Conference
Administrative Committee (ADCOM)
(GCC-S).
committee members
STELE, ARTUR A., Chair
Mbwana, Geofrey G., Vice-chair
Porter, Karen J., Secretary
Trim, Wendy, Recording Secretary
Arrais, Jonas
Arrais, Raquel C.
Batchelor, Doug
Bauer, Stephen
Beardsley-Hardy, Lisa M.
Bischof, Fred
Bohr, Stephen
Brown, Gina S.
Brunt, John
Ceballos, Mario E.
Chang, Shirley
Clark, Chester V. III
Costa, Robert
Damsteegt, Laurel
Damsteegt, P. Gerard
Davidson, Jo Ann M.
Davidson, Richard M.
de Sousa, Elias B.
Diop, A. Ganoune
Donkor, Kwabena
Doss, Cheryl
Fagal, William A.
Finley, Mark A.
Fortin, Denis
Gothard, Doris M.
Haloviak-Valentine, Kendra
Hasel, Michael
Holmes, C. Raymond
Howard, James
Hucks, Willie
Jankiewiez, Darius
Kent, Anthony R.
King, Gregory A.
Knott, Esther
Knott, William M.
Koh, Linda Mei Lin
Kuntaraf, Kathleen K. H.
Mackintosh, Don
McLennan, Patty
Miller, Nicholas
Mills, Phillip
Moon, Jerry
Morris, Derek J.
Mueller, Ekkehardt F. R.
Nelson, Dwight K.
Nix, James R.
Oberg, Chris
Page, Janet
Page, Jerry N.
Paulson, Kevin
Peters, John
Pfandl, Gerhard
Poirier, Timothy L.
Prewitt, Eugene
Proftt, Kathryn L.
Raferty, James
Read, David C.
Reeve, Teresa
Reid, George
Roberts, Randall L.
Rodriguez, Angel M.
Scarone, Daniel
Silva, Sandra
Slikkers, Dolores E.
Small, Heather-Dawn K.
Sorke, Ingo
Timm, Alberto R.
Trim, David
Tutsch, Cindy
Veloso, Mario
Vin Cross, Tara
Wahlen, Clinton L.
Warden, Ivan Leigh
Zarska, Carol
two representatives assigned from
each division
Coralie, Alain East-Central Afica Division
Mathema, Zacchaeus
Biaggi, Guillermo E. Euro-Asia Division
Zaitsev, Eugene
Henry, Elie Inter-American Division
Perez, Carmen
Hasel, Frank Inter-European Division
Magyarosi, Barna
Bietz, Gordon North American Division
Pollard, Leslie N.
Doh, Hyunsok John Northern Asia-Pacifc Division
Higashide, Katsumi
Schmied Padilla, Lilian South American Division
Siqueira, Reinaldo
Musvosvi, Joel Southern Afica-Indian Ocean Division
Ratsara, Paul S.
Christo, Gordon E. Southern Asia Division
Tlau, Chawngdinpuii
Gayoba, Francisco Southern Asia-Pacifc Division
Sabuin, Richard
Oliver, Barry D. South Pacifc Division
Roennfeldt, Ray
Barna, Jan Trans-European Division
Wiklander, Bertil A.
Bediako, Daniel K. West-Central Afica Division
Nwaomah, Sampson
ex offcio
Wilson, Ted N. C., President
Ng, G. T., Secretary
Lemon, Robert E., Treasurer
steering committee of the theology of
ordination study committee
STELE, ARTUR A., Chair
Mbwana, Geofrey G., Vice-chair
Porter, Karen J., Secretary
Damsteegt, P. Gerard
Davidson, Richard
Fagal, William A.
Rodriguez, Angel M.
history of tosc
section ii
9 Section II: History of TOSC
scope of the committee
Te Teology of Ordination Study Committee (TOSC) had a membership with a broad
base of perspectives. Te committee was comprised of 106 members, including a chair, vice-
chair, and secretary; two representatives from each of the 13 world divisions; and 74 members
from NAD representing all strata of the church. Te committee also included lay members,
pastors, and administrators, and many theologians from the major Seventh-day Adventist
institutions of learning. Additionally, the three GC ofcers were ex-ofcio members of the
committee.
A seven-member steering committee was appointed with the three committee ofcers,
two members representing those opposing womens ordination, and two members represent-
ing those in favor of womens ordination.
Since this was a study committee, the normal voting process was not used. Rather,
the study approach resulted in one consensus report on the theology of ordination. On items
about which it was impossible to reach consensus, various reports were prepared to present
the diferent viewpoints and their appropriate responses. One signifcant achievement that
has come about as part of this study process is the creation of a web page on the Archives,
Statistics, and Research website for all of the papers and reports presented to TOSC as well as
GC Session actions, GC Committee actions, Study Committee and Commission papers and
reports, and other ofcially commissioned reports. Tis web page, for the frst time, makes
these historical documents available to the public.
completed tasks of the committee
Te TOSC met four times, with the fnal meeting having taken place June 2-4, 2014. At
each meeting, signifcant time was spent in prayer and devotionals, turning thoughts to the
One who has all the answers. At difcult junctures in the discussions, debates were stopped
for a time of prayer. By refocusing thoughts and inviting the presence of the Holy Spirit, the
tone of the meeting changed and a spirit of congeniality was felt.
Troughout this process small discussion groups were employed to give members a
chance to express their convictions, ask questions, discuss topics, and hear the perspectives of
others in a non-threatening environment.
First Meeting, January 2013 (three days)
Talked about how to deal with doctrinal issues in the Church and what ground rules to
follow, while taking counsel from Scripture and the writings of Ellen White.
Reviewed and afrmed the document entitled Bible Study: Presuppositions, Principles,
and Methods which was voted at the 1986 Annual Council in Rio de Janeiro.
Listened to the reading of papers on the history of ordination in early Christian history
as well as in the Seventh-day Adventist Church.
Spent signifcant time examining the actual theology of ordination itselfunrelated to
gender. It was felt that this needed to be addressed before discussing the topic of wom-
ens ordination.
Discussed the ordination issue in small groups.
Following the frst meeting, the steering committee appointed a writing committee,
chaired by Geofrey G. Mbwana, to create a consensus statement on the theology of ordina-
tion. A level of trust was created among the members of the writing group and a deep spirit of
cooperation and a willingness to work together was exhibited.
Second Meeting, July 2013 (three days)
Te frst action at the second meeting was to vote the consensus statement on the theol-
ogy of ordination.
Te committee then moved on to the topic of womens ordination.
Tere were several presentations on the history of womens ordination in the Christian
church from both viewpoints (pro and con).
Hermeneutic principles were presented from each viewpoint, followed by presentations
on 1 Timothy about how to apply these principles.
An overview of womens ordination was presented from both perspectives.
Te second meeting was the most intense with 16 papers presented and little time for
small group discussion.
Tird Meeting, January 2014 (fve days)
Tis was a longer meeting with an additional two days.
Reports and conclusions were shared on the issue of womens ordination from all 13
division Biblical Research Committees.
On one of the evenings, a panel of presenters responded to questions regarding their
presentations at the previous meeting.
Two presentations were made, one from each viewpoint, on 1 Timothy 3:2 (husband of
one wife), with time for small group discussion on this subject.
Position summary papers were presented from each side.
Te pro group gave an exegesis on 1 Corinthians 11.
Te con group gave a presentation on hermeneutics.
Presentations from each group were given on the question of Where will our position
lead us?
Tose holding the opposite view on womens ordination to the gospel ministry made
evaluations of these presentations.
Small groups met to respond to the evaluations of positions, through the study of Genesis
13 and 1 Timothy 2 and 3, and to suggest ways to move forward.
Friday evening vespers included a presentation, Being Peacemakers, by a local church
group and a devotional by Artur A. Stele.
On Sabbath, Mark A. Finley challenged the group in his Sabbath sermon on Acts to fol-
low the method of the early church in settling difcult church questions, and the small
groups met and addressed the challenge given by Pastor Finley.
Small groups met again Sabbath afernoon to discuss the following key passages: 1 Cor-
inthians 11, Galatians 3:26-28, and Joel 2:28-32.
Te meeting concluded with a challenge by Geofrey G. Mbwana to build bridges and
move forward together, united in Christ.
Fourth Meeting June 2014 (three days)
Time was given for a presentation of a third position representing the views of those who
held a more moderate or middle position.
Te majority of time during these meetings was spent in caucus groups, rather than
plenary sessions, reviewing and refning the three summary position statements and way
forward statements.
Presentations of the Way Forward statements, from each of the three position caucus
groups, were made to the full committee.
A unanimous vote was taken to afrm that, in spite of the diferences of opinion on the
subject of womens ordination, the members of the Teology of Ordination Study Com-
mittee are committed to the message and mission of the Seventh-day Adventist Church,
as expressed through the 28 Fundamental Beliefs.
A survey was taken asking each member to mark the position or positions that were
most acceptable to them. Te results of the survey are as follows:
consensus views
95 total votes;
1 voted for
none
Ordaining/Commissioning
only qualifed men to the
offce of pastor/minister
throughout the world
Church.
Each entity responsible for
calling pastors/ministers
be authorized to choose
either to have only men
as ordained pastors or
to have both men and
women as ordained
pastors
Denominational
leadership at a proper
level be authorized to
decide, based on biblical
principles, whether such
an adaptation [permission
to ordain both men
and women] may be
appropriate for their area
or region.
First Choice 32 40 22
Second Choice 0 12 19
Third Choice 2 0 0
Ted N. C. Wilson thanked the committee for its work and outlined the process ahead of
taking the report to the Executive Ofcers Meeting, PREXAD, Annual Council, and
then to General Conference Session in 2015.
Te meeting closed with a prayer by G. T. Ng, Secretary of the General Conference of
Seventh-day Adventists.
presentations on
this subject
section iii
15 Section III: Presentations on Tis Subject
The following presentations from the TOSC meetings are available on
the GC Archives, Statistics, and Research website.
1
Past research and all
division Biblical Research Committee study reports and papers are also
available on the GC Archives, Statistics, and Research website under the
menu item Theology of Ordination.
statements
Consensus Statement on a Seventh-day Adventist Teology of Ordination
january 2013 papers
Dealing With Doctrinal Issues in the ChurchProposal for Ground Rules
by Paul S. Ratsara and Richard M. Davidson
Te Proper Role of Ellen G. Whites Writings in Resolving Church Controversies
by William A. Fagal
Ellen G. White on Biblical Hermeneutics
by P. Gerard Damsteegt
Ordination in Seventh-day Adventist History
by David Trim
Te Problem of Ordination: Lessons From Early Christian History
by Darius Jankiewicz
Magisterial Reformers and Ordination
Towards a Teology of Ordination
by Angel M. Rodriguez et al
Bible Study: Presuppositions, Principles, and Methods
by Annual Council 1986
july 2013 papers
Te Ordination of Women in Seventh-day Adventist Policy and Practice
by David Trim
1 http://www.adventistarchives.org/gc-tosc#.U8qjz1aNj7S
Womens Status and Ordination as Elders or Bishops in the Early Church, Reformation, and
Post-Reformation Eras
Te Ordination of Women in the American Church
by Nicholas Miller
Te Ordination of Women in the American Church Appendix
by Nicholas Miller
Trajectories of Womens Ordination in History
by John W. Reeve
Back to Creation: Toward a Consistent Adventist Creation-Fall-Re-Creation Hermeneutic
by Jiri Moskala
Paul, Woman, and the Ephesian Church: An Examination of 1 Timothy 2:8-15
by Carl Cosaert
Biblical Hermeneutics and Headship in First Corinthians
by Edwin Reynolds
Adam, Where are You?
by Ingo Sorke
Man and Woman in Genesis 1-3: Ontological Equality and Role Diferentiation
by Paul S. Ratsara and Daniel K. Bediako
Women of the Old Testament: Women of Infuence
by Laurel Damsteegt
Issues Relating to the Ordination of Women with Special Emphasis on 1 Peter 2:9, 10 and
Galatians 3:28
by Stephen Bohr
Headship, Gender, and Ordination in the Writings of Ellen G. White
Ellen White, Women in Ministry and the Ordination of Women
by Denis Fortin
Ellen White, Ordination, and Authority
by Jerry Moon
Should Women Be Ordained as Pastors? Old Testament Considerations
by Richard M. Davidson
Shall the Church Ordain Women as Pastors? Toughts Toward an Integrated NT Perspective
by Teresa Reeve
Authority of the Christian Leader
by Darius Jankiewicz
january 2014 papers
Hermeneutics: Interpreting Scripture on the Ordination of Women
by P. Gerard Damsteegt, Edwin Reynolds, Gerhard Pfandl, Laurel Damsteegt, Eugene Prewitt
1 Corinthians 11:2-16 and the Ordination of Women to Pastoral Ministry
by Teresa Reeve
Leadership and Gender in the Ephesian Church: An Examination of 1 Timothy
by Carl P. Cosaert
Is Husband of One Wife in 1 Timothy 3:2 Gender-Specifc?
by Clinton L. Wahlen
Restoration of the Image of God: Headship and Submission
by John W. Peters
My Personal Testimony: Some Pastoral Refections
by Dwight K. Nelson
Evaluation of Egalitarian Papers
by Gerhard S. Pfandl with Daniel K. Bediako, Steven Bohr, Laurel and P. Gerard Damsteegt,
Jerry Moon, Paul S. Ratsara, Edwin Reynolds, Ingo Sorke, and Clinton L. Wahlen
Evaluation of the Arguments Used by Tose Opposing the Ordination of Women to the Ministry
by ngel M. Rodrguez
Moving Forward in Unity
by Barry D. Oliver
Women In Ministry: What Should We Do Now?
by C. Raymond Holmes
june 2014 papers
Position Summary #1
Position Summary #2
Position Summary #3
Way Forward Statement #1
papers commissioned and
submitted but not presented
Seventh-day Adventists On Womens Ordination: A Brief Historical Overview
by Alberto R. Timm
consensus statement
on the theology of
ordination
section iv
21 Section IV: Consensus Statement on Ordination
recommended, to adopt the document,
consensus statement on a seventh-day
adventist theology of ordination, which
reads as follows:
In a world alienated from God, the Church is composed of those whom God has recon-
ciled to Himself and to one another. Trough the saving work of Christ they are united to
Him by faith through baptism (Eph 4:4-6), thus becoming a royal priesthood whose mission
is to proclaim the praises of him who called you out of darkness into his marvelous light (1
Pet 2:9, NKJV). Believers are given the ministry of reconciliation (2 Cor 5:18-20), called, and
enabled through the power of the Spirit and the gifs He bestows on them to carry out the
Gospel Commission (Matt28:18-20).
While all believers are called to use their spiritual gifs for ministry, the Scriptures iden-
tify certain specifc leadership positions that were accompanied by the Churchs public en-
dorsement for persons who meet the biblical qualifcations (Num 11:16, 17; Acts 6:1-6; 13:1-
3; 14:23; 1 Tim 3:1-12; Titus 1:5-9). Several such endorsements are shown to involve the
laying-on of hands. English versions of the Scriptures use the word ordain to translate many
diferent Greek and Hebrew words having the basic idea of select or appoint that describe the
placement of these persons in their respective ofces. Over the course of Christian history the
term ordination has acquired meanings beyond what these words originally implied. Against
such a backdrop, Seventh-day Adventists understand ordination, in a biblical sense, as the
action of the Church in publicly recognizing those whom the Lord has called and equipped
for local and global Church ministry.
Aside from the unique role of the apostles, the New Testament identifes the follow-
ing categories of ordained leaders: the elder/supervising elder (Acts 14:23; Acts 20:17, 28;
1Tim3:2-7; 4:14; 2 Tim 4:1-5; 1 Pet 5:1) and the deacon (Phil 1:1; 1 Tim 3:8-10). While most
elders and deacons ministered in local settings, some elders were itinerant and supervised
greater territory with multiple congregations, which may refect the ministry of individuals
such as Timothy and Titus (1 Tim 1:3,4; Titus 1:5).
In the act of ordination, the Church confers representative authority upon individuals
for the specifc work of ministry to which they are appointed (Acts 6:1-3; 13:1-3; 1 Tim 5:17;
Titus 2:15). Tese may include representing the Church, proclaiming the gospel, administer-
ing the Lords Supper and baptism, planting and organizing churches, guiding and nurtur-
ing members, opposing false teachings, and providing general service to the congregation (cf.
Acts 6:3; 20:28, 29; 1 Tim 3:2, 4, 5; 2Tim1:13, 14; 2:2; 4:5; Titus 1:5, 9). While ordination
contributes to Church order, it neither conveys special qualities to the persons ordained nor
introduces a kingly hierarchy within the faith community. Te biblical examples of ordina-
tion include the giving of a charge, the laying-on of hands, fasting and prayer, and committing
those set apart to the grace of God (Deut 3:28; Acts6:6; 14:26; 15:40).
Ordained individuals dedicate their talents to the Lord and to His Church for a life-
time of service. Te foundational model of ordination is Jesus appointing the twelve apostles
(Matt 10:14; Mark 3:13-19; Luke 6:12-16), and the ultimate model of Christian ministry
is the life and work of our Lord, who came not to be served but to serve (Mark10:45; Luke
22:25-27; John 13:1-17).
position summaries
section v
25 Section V: Position Summaries
Summary Statement ........................................................................................................................................ 26
Introduction ..................................................................................................................................................... 26
Three Reasons for Our Position ........................................................................................................................ 28
The Bible clearly says that the elder must be the husband
of one wife (1 Tim 3:2; Titus 1:6) ......................................................................................................... 28
The Seventh-day Adventist Church should continue to be
Bible based in all matters of faith and practice ..................................................................................... 28
Allowing competing methods for interpreting Scripture
brings greater disunity ........................................................................................................................ 29
Relating the Bible To Culture ............................................................................................................................ 30
Principles of Biblical Interpretation ................................................................................................................... 31
The Bible and the Bible Only Standard of Interpretation ..................................................................... 31
The Bible was Written for Everyone ............................................................................................. 31
We Must Take the Bible as it Reads ............................................................................................ 31
Interpretation and the Three Angels Messages ................................................................................... 32
Application of Principles of Biblical Interpretation to Key Texts ......................................................................... 33
Interpretation of 1 Timothy 2 and 3 ....................................................................................................... 33
1 Timothy 2 ............................................................................................................................... 33
1 Timothy 3 ............................................................................................................................... 35
Implications ............................................................................................................................. 37
Relation of Men and Women in 1 Corinthians 11 .................................................................................... 37
Galatians 3:2629 .............................................................................................................................. 39
Male-Female Equality and Difference in Genesis 1 and 2 ....................................................................... 39
Male-Female Equality in Genesis 1 and 2 .................................................................................... 40
Male-Female Difference in Genesis 1 and 2 ................................................................................. 41
Relationship of Man and Woman after the Fall in Genesis 3 .................................................................. 42
Biblical Ordination ........................................................................................................................................... 44
Old Testament .................................................................................................................................... 44
New Testament ................................................................................................................................... 45
Offces and Gifts .............................................................................................................................................. 48
The Gift of Pastoring ........................................................................................................................... 48
New Testament Church Offces and the Gifts of the Holy Spirit ............................................................... 49
Ordination and the Laying-on of Hands ............................................................................................................ 49
Ordination and Authority ................................................................................................................................. 50
The Authority of Ministers ................................................................................................................... 50
The Authority of Elders ........................................................................................................................ 51
Ordination and Worldwide Unity ...................................................................................................................... 51
A Summary of Biblical Ordination ..................................................................................................................... 52
Answers to Some Questions About Ordination ................................................................................................. 53
position summary #1
outline
position summary #1
summary statement
Tis document presents the biblical qualifcations for ordination to the ofces of elder/
pastor/minister and examines whether women in ministry should function in these ofces.
First it gives the fundamental reason why we understand from Scripture that only cer-
tain qualifed men may occupy those ofces. Next it discusses the principles of how to in-
terpret the Bible and how to apply these principles to 1 Timothy 2 and 3, 1 Corinthians 11,
Galatians 3, and Genesis 1 through 3. Ten it shows biblical examples of ordination and its
practice, the diferences between ofces and gifs, and the meaning of laying-on of hands;
addresses ordination and authority, and ordination and the unity of the church; and ofers a
response to some arguments in favor of womens ordination.
introduction
God calls women to ministry. His service needs their labors, and He is honored when
they devote their talents to ministering to the needs of others in His name. Tey are an es-
sential part of the spiritual forces that Jesus Christ has deployed into the world to conquer
for Him.
In both the frst-century church and the early Adventist movement, women were im-
portant to the functioning and growth of the church. Female believers were called to sig-
nifcant roles in the ministry of Jesus: learning lessons from Him (Luke 10:39), providing
fnancial means for advancing His ministry (Luke 8:3), and supplying moral encouragement
during the crucial closing week (John 12:1-8), not least by their determined presence at the
cross (Mark 15:40, 41; John 19:25). Tey were also His witnesses before and afer His resur-
rection (Luke 8:1, 2; 24:9, 10). Jesus asked Mary Magdalene to carry the news to the other
disciples (John 20:15-18) and, together with the other women who went to the tomb, she was
among the frst witnesses to His resurrection (Luke 24:2-10). Despite Jewish cultural sensi-
tivities, Jesus invited women to fulfll these important tasks.
Te Bible names other women who worked in local churches: Priscilla (Acts 18:1, 18,
26; 1 Cor 16:9; Rom 16:3), Phoebe (Rom 16:1; cf. 15:25-32), and Mary (16:6). Junia, with
Andronicus, was well-known to the apostles (v.7, ESV); Tryphaena, Tryphosa, and Persis
worked hard in the Lord (v. 12).
1
But there is no clear evidence that any of these women
ever exercised a church leadership role. Teir labors appear to have been supportive of the
1 Unless otherwise noted, Bible quotations are from the New King James Version.
work being carried forward by the apostles and other men whom God had called to lead His
church. Every worker has an important role to fll, but it is Gods empowerment at work that
makes no individual more important than another. Equality of service is not incompatible
with diferent roles; we are all servants of Christ, and the glory belongs to God for the growth
of the church and the abundant fnal harvest.
In the Advent movement, women such as Annie Smith, Ellen Lane, S. M. I. Henry, and
Hetty Haskell flled important roles in publishing and evangelism, and many others served
in conference positions and in various lines of local church work. Ellen G. White wrote that
women are recognized by God as being necessary to the work of the ministry.
2
A mistake
is made when the burden of the work is lef entirely upon the ministers.
3
She explained that
women can do in families a work that men cannot do, a work that reaches the inner life.
Tey can come close to the hearts of those whom men cannot reach.
4
Trough the exercise
of womanly tact and a wise use of their knowledge of Bible truth, they can remove difculties
that our brethren cannot meet.
5
Further, she advocated that women who devote their full
time and talents to ministry should be paid from the tithe.
6
It is clear, then, that White con-
sidered the participation of women in the work of the gospel to be not merely an option but a
divine mandate, the neglect of which would result in diminished ministerial efciency,
7
fewer
converts,
8
and great loss to the cause,
9
compared to the fruitfulness of the combined gifs of
men and women in ministry.
Tis document upholds the right and duty of women to serve God actively and fully in
ministry of various kinds, in harmony with the Bibles guidelines for church leadership. Tose
guidelines are not to be set aside or ignored. We are convinced that we can remain united as
a world church only by remaining faithful to the Churchs long-standing biblical position.
10

Simply put, while the Bible and Whites writings encourage the active participation of women
in the work of the church, in neither of these sources is there any clear support for the ordi-
nation of women to the gospel ministry. We believe the Bible is normative for all parts of the
world; therefore we cannot support appeals to culture from various world divisions. While
those who hold other positions have brought forward seemingly plausible arguments, we do
2 GW 452.
3 DG 111.
4 WM 145.
5 Ev 491.
6 GW 452-453; Ev 492.
7 Ev 491.
8 Ibid., 472.
9 Ibid., 493.
10 Tere is nothing to show early Adventists arguing for womens right to baptize, to preside over the ordinances, to organize local churchesno
evidence of any commitment to ordination. David Trim, Te Ordination of Women in Seventh-day Adventist Policy and Practice, up to
1972, 7, http://www.adventistarchives.org/the-ordination-of-women-in-seventh-day-adventist-policy-and-practice.pdf.
not fnd these arguments to be biblically well founded. Tis paper explains our own position
and summarizes why we cannot accept the arguments of our friends who hold a diferent
position.
three reasons for our position
Tere are three vital reasons for the position we hold. First, the Bible seems quite clear
on the matter of the ordination of women. Second, we believe that we should continue to
have the Bible as our supreme authority in all matters of faith and practice. Tird, if we are
infuenced by culture to depart from a biblical basis for our practice in this area, we are more
likely to depart from Scripture in other areas.
the bible clearly says that the elder must be the husband
of one wife (1 tim 3:2; titus 1:6)
Tis instruction was given in two diferent settings, so it cannot be just a response to
a local problem that is not applicable elsewhere. Rather, it is instruction for the church at large
for all time (1 Tim 3:15). Furthermore, in 1 Timothy this specifcation occurs just fve verses
afer instruction restricting women from a certain teaching authority in the church (1 Tim
2:12). Since the church leader described in 3:2 must also be able to teach, the prohibition
and the requirement seem to be related. Paul restricts the leadership of women in the church
on the basis of Adams priority in Creation as well as the respective roles of Adam and Eve
before and afer the Fall (2:13, 14). Tis grounding of his instruction in the early chapters of
Genesis indicates that the matter relates to Gods original plan for human beings and is not
just His response to the sin problem. Tere is something fundamental here that we should not
dismiss or ignore.
the seventh-day adventist church should continue to be
bible-based in all matters of faith and practice
While the impetus to change our Churchs practice may appear to have arisen in
the last 40 years or so, in fact it dates back to societal changes in America that began in the
mid-19th centurychanges that led many Protestant churches to begin ordaining women to
the ministry during that period.
11
Tis campaign was decidedly rejected by the Advent move-
11 Te womens rights movement in America is usually traced to a conference held in Seneca Falls, New York in 1848. One of its resolutions called
for women clergy. Te frst known ordained woman in America was Antoinette Louisa Brown, ordained to the Congregational ministry in
1853, and many others followed in many denominations (a partial list: 1853, First Congregational Church; 1863, Wesleyan Methodist Church;
1865, Salvation Army; 1888, Disciples of Christ Church; 1895, National Baptist Convention). Although our church papers discussed the
role of women in worship, supporting the right of women to speak and participate in worship, not one article during Ellen Whites lifetime
advocated the ordination of women as elders or pastors. Some articles explicitly rejected placing women in those roles. Our pioneers recognized
that doing so was not biblical (see, e.g., D. T. Bourdeau, Spiritual Gifs, RH 21/1, Dec. 2, 1862: 6; [J. H. Waggoner,] SOT 4/48, Dec. 19,
1878: 380). In recent years, though, some Adventists have taken positions that align with what many other churches have done. Te Adventist
Church must now decide whether this really is new light that it should follow.
ment.
12
Our Church frst took up the matter of ordaining women at the General Conference
session in 1881 but declined to make a change. Tis did not mean Seventh-day Adventist wom-
en had no part in gospel work. Before 1881 as well as aferward, Adventist women were actively
working for God in such areas as evangelism, medical missionary work, and welfare ministry.
Tey gladly and enthusiastically functioned in these capacities without being ordained.
In Western society today, some within our ranks again feel pressure to be in step with
the surrounding culture. We must speak meaningfully to the culture around us, but should
this lead us to disregard biblical principles and the clear teaching of Scripture on the leadership
of the church? Such a change, we believe, would have serious implications for our unity as a
church. It could also have serious consequences for our evangelistic outreach as Bible-believing
Christians who accept the Word of God as the one infallible rule of faith and practice.
13
allowing competing methods for interpreting scripture
brings greater disunity
Seventh-day Adventists generally use the historical-grammatical method of interpreta-
tion. In 1986, the Annual Council of Seventh-day Adventists in Rio de Janeiro approved
the Methods of Bible Study (MBS) document which outlines the components of the histor-
ical-grammatical method. It states that the student should seek to grasp the simple, most
obvious meaning of the biblical passage being studied (4c). It further advises, Recognize
that the Bible is its own interpreter and that the meaning of words, texts, and passages is
best determined by diligently comparing scripture with scripture (4e). Te principles of the
historical-grammatical method as found in the MBS are not new; they have been used by
Protestants since the time of the Reformation.
14
Recently, the NAD Teology of Ordination Report introduced a new method of inter-
preting the Bible, which is described as a principle-based, contextual, linguistic and his-
torical-cultural method or, for short, the principle-based reading of Scripture.
15
One of the
principles on which this method is based is the complete reliability and trustworthiness of
the Bible in terms of its salvifc message. Te report further states: A plain and literal read-
ing strategy would be sufcient to understand most of the Bible. Yet the committee believes
that there are occasions when we should employ principle-based reading because the passage
12 Tis judgment that no women have been ordained with the sanction of the organized denomination runs contrary to the trend of much of the
recent historiography on womens ordination in Adventist history, which is written by proponents of ordaining women to gospel ministry. Te
sheer volume can seem impressive. However, this body of scholarship does not actually prove its case, due to a critical misunderstanding of what
early Adventists supported when it came to the involvement of women in the church. David Trim, Te Ordination of Women, presented at
the second session of TOSC, 4, http://www.adventistarchives.org/the-ordination-of-women-in-seventh-day-adventist-policy-and-practice.pdf.
13 Ellen G. White, Te Faith that Will Stand the Test, RH, January 10, 1888, par. 11.
14 Tis section has been adapted from Gerhard Pfandl, Evaluation of Egalitarian Papers (presented at the Teology of Ordination Study Com-
mittee, July 22-24, 2013), 10-11, http://www.adventistarchives.org/evaluation-of-egalitarian-papers.pdf.
15 See Teology of Ordination Study Committee Report (Silver Spring, MD: North American Division of Seventh-day Adventists, 2013), 8; see
also Kyoshin Ahn, Hermeneutics and the Ordination of Women, in NADTOSC Report, 25.
calls for an understanding of the historical and contextual setting.
16
According to the MBS,
whenever we interpret or exegete a text we need to take into consideration the context and
historical circumstances. Adventists generally use this method when interpreting Scripture.
So why is there a need for a new method? Te diferences between the two methods are
twofold. In contrast to the historical-grammatical method, the principle-based reading of
Scripture sees the Bible as reliable and trustworthy only in matters of salvation, and there
is a strong emphasis on Scripture as culturally conditioned. In regard to the ordination of
women, with the help of the principle-based reading method, all the texts used to support
the churchs longstanding view are reinterpreted to allow for the ordination of women as
elders and pastors/ministers.
17
In other words, a principle-based reading helps advance the
efort to ordain women. However, it does so at the cost of reinterpreting Scripture in harmony
with modern cultural preferences, which raises the issue of relating the Bible to culture.
relating the bible to culture
Regarding cultural issues, the Bible itself provides us the key as to how to handle them.
For example, while some Evangelical Christians would classify the Sabbath as a temporary,
cultural institution, Genesis 2:1-3 and Exodus 20:11 show that it originated as part of Gods
perfect plan for humanity and is therefore applicable in all cultures and for all time. Circum-
cision began with Gods command to Abraham. Like the presence of the temple, it was no
guarantee of Gods favor without a right covenant relationship (Jer 4:4; cf. 21:10-12; 22:5).
In fact, the time would come when God would treat the circumcised like the uncircumcised
(Jer 9:25; cf. 1 Cor 7:18, 19). Te New Testament teaches that baptism (John 3:3-8; Col 2:11-
13) represents the reality symbolized by circumcision (Deut 30:6; 10:6)a change of heart
and the gif of the Holy Spirit (Acts 15:7-11; Rom 2:28, 29). Unlike circumcision, baptism
is for either gender. It symbolizes the believer being washed from sin, identifying with the
death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, and accepting Him as Savior (Rom 6). Furthermore,
the command to baptize is given in a universal setting (all nations, Matt 28:19), indicating
its applicability worldwide and throughout history. By contrast, circumcision was the sign of
Jewish identity. In addition, such institutions as slavery and polygamy, though tolerated in
Scripture, are never commanded there. Instead, based on Bible principles, these practices have
subsequently been rejected by the church.
16 Ibid.
17 Ibid.
principles of biblical interpretation
the bible and the bible only standard of interpretation
From the beginning, Seventh-day Adventists have maintained the motto, the Bible and
the Bible only. On the interpretation of Scripture we are in harmony with the Protestant
Reformers, who regarded the Bible as the fnal authority for doctrine and practice. Te Bible
claims that all Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is proftable for doctrine, for re-
proof, 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).
Ellen G. White afrms that the Bible must be our standard for every doctrine and prac-
tice. . . . It is the word of the living God that is to decide all controversies.
18
As the Bible is
the standard for every practice, it does not leave us to wonder who should be ordained to the
biblical leadership ofces and whether women qualify for the ofces of elder or minister.
the bible was written for everyone. In studying the question of ordination, it
is important to know the purpose and audience of the Bible. White writes, Te Bible was
given for practical purposes.
19
It was written for the common people as well as for scholars,
and is within the comprehension of all.
20
Te Bible was designed for the common people,
and the interpretation given by the common people, when aided by the Holy Spirit, accords
best with the truth as it is in Jesus.
21
Surely the matter at hand, regarding leadership in the church and ordination for it, is in-
cluded in these statements. Te priesthood of all believers that Peter notes (1 Pet 2:9) implies
full access to the Bible by all believers and a Spirit-guided ability to understand it.
we must take the bible as it reads. When opponents disputed with Jesus, He
questioned them about the Scriptures: What is written in the Law? He asked. How do
you read it? (Luke 10:26, NIV). Jesus pointed out that the way we read the Scriptures is
important in understanding its truths. White expresses similar thoughts, showing how to
determine whether to take a word, text, or passage literally or symbolically. Te language of
the Bible should be explained according to its obvious meaning, unless a symbol or fgure is
employed.
22
Te MBS says, Seek to grasp the simple, most obvious meaning of the biblical
passage being studied.
23
18 1888 44-45.
19 1SM 20.
20 RH, Jan. 27, 1885; CSW 23.
21 5T 331.
22 GC 599.
23 MBS, section 4c
interpretation and the three angels messages
Adventists interpret the Bible guided by their understanding of the three angels messag-
es of Revelation 14:6-12. In 1844 the Protestant churches in America rejected the frst angels
message with its warning to prepare for the Second Advent. As a result of this rejection, Jesus
directed Adventists to the second angels message and made them aware that Babylon had
fallen, indicating that the moral fall of the non-Adventist churches had become a reality.
24

Since 1844 when the churches rejected the present truth, there has been a rise of the histor-
ical-critical method of Bible study among Christians. Consequently, these fallen churches
have departed progressively farther from the Word of God.
25

One area of departure involves a campaign that arose for women clergy in America as
part of the larger womens rights movement, starting in 1848, which we have noted already.
Tese historical facts, as well as the counsel of Ellen G. White referred to above, should be
a warning to Adventists to be very cautious about adopting teachings and practices from
non-biblical sources. White warns, Satan will use every advantage that he can obtain to cause
souls to become beclouded and perplexed in regard to [1] the work of the church, in regard to
[2] the word of God, and in regard to [3] the words of warning which He has given through the
testimonies of His Spirit, to guard His little fock from the subtleties of the enemy.
26
Te issue
of womens ordination afects all three of these areas, endangering the mission of the Rem-
nant Church. Te seriousness of this matter is illustrated by the fact that all sides of the issue
claim the support of the Bible and the writings of Ellen G. White for their views. Tis claim
of equal validity has the efect of neutralizing these divinely inspired sources, leading us to
think that we cannot look to them for solutions. However, as White reminds us, Gods Word
is to decide all controversies.
27
24 EW 235, 237-240, 247; GC 381, 388-390.
25 Ibid., 273-274; GC 389.
26 SpT B Nos. 2, 9, emphasis and bracketed numerals added.
27 1888 45.
application of principles of biblical
interpretation to key texts
interpretation of 1 timothy 2 and 3
At the heart of the ordination debate lies Pauls gender-specifc counsel of 1 Timothy 2 and
3. Te apostle crisply states the purpose behind his counsel: Tese things I write to you . . . that
you may know how you ought to [Greek dei, must] conduct yourself in the house of God,
which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth (1 Tim 3:14, 15).
1 timothy 2. Paul begins 1 Timothy 2 by indicating that prayer is to be ofered for all
people. He gives several reasons: God is the Savior of all, He desires all people to be saved, and
Christ gave Himself as a ransom for all (2:1-6; 4:10). Tis gender-inclusive language shows
that elsewhere, when Paul discusses the respective roles of men and women, his use of the
gender-specifc terms man (anr) and woman (gyn) is deliberate. Men are to lead out in
prayer and worship (1Tim 2:8); women are to submit to Gods arrangement, whereby they
are not to be placed over men as the teaching authority in the church (1 Tim 2:11, 12). Tese
instructions are designed to promote harmony in worship by following Gods order for the
church.
Te structure of 1 Timothy 2 and 3 includes clearly gender-specifc sections: men (2:8),
women (2:9-15), male elders (3:1-7), male deacons (3:8-10), women (3:11), male deacons (3:12,
13). Pauls mandate in 2:11 is gender-specifc: Let a woman learn in silence with all submis-
sion. In Acts 22:2 and 2 Tessalonians 3:12, silence or quietness emphasizes respect and
the humble pursuit of relational peace and harmony. Here and elsewhere in Pauls writings
(1 Cor 14:34; Eph 5:21; Col 3:18; Titus 2:5), submission sensibly governs male-female rela-
tions. In context it always takes place within the framework of divine authority and submis-
sion to God; it does not refer to an abusive subordination of all women to all men.
Paul then expands his mandate: I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over
a man, but to be in silence (1 Tim 2:12). Rather than providing instruction just for a supposed iso-
lated local situation (in Ephesus, where Timothy was working), Pauls wording (I do not permit)
underscores the universal nature of the apostles mandate. Tis prohibition against women teach-
ing does not target false teaching, as in 1 Timothy 6:3, which uses the specifc term heterodidas-
kale, teach something diferent. Troughout Pauls letters, teaching means positive instruction
(1 Tim 3:2; 4:11; 6:2; 2 Tim 2:2). Paul is not requiring complete silence. Women may pray and
prophesy (1 Cor 11:5) and engage in much-needed personal ministry (e.g., Aquila and Priscilla,
Acts 18:26). Tus, they are not prohibited from all teaching. Tey are also encouraged to bring up
godly children (1 Tim 5:10, 14), and older women should instruct younger women (Titus 2:3-5).
Since the Greek phrase translated to have authority over a man (1 Tim 2:12) is used
only once in the Bible, it cannot be defned by examining occurrences elsewhere. But the im-
mediate context makes its meaning clear:
teaching and learning submission and authority
Let a woman learn in silence with all submission
And I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man,
but to be in silence.
Sandwiching the prohibition of teaching and having authority over a man between two
admonitions of silence clearly puts these phrases in relation to one another. Learning and
not teaching are parallel counterparts, as are submission and not having authority. Te
logical complement of women learning is men teaching, and consequently the complement of
submission to Gods plan for church order is for a woman not to have authority over a man by
occupying the ofce of elder.
Paul bases key points of his instruction on information from Genesis 2 and 3, giving two
reasons for male leadership in the church:
1. Te order of creation: For Adam was formed frst, then Eve (1Tim 2:13). By reaching
back to Genesis 1 and 2, Paul bases his argument on a universal principle of creation, not
culture or a concern for mission. While both man and woman were made in the image
of God and thus are equal in nature (Gen 1:26, 27), Adam was created frst (Gen 2:7, 18-
24). It is the woman who is brought to the man (Gen 2:22) and, subsequently, the man is
the one who is to initiate a new family entity (Gen 2:24). God presents Eve to Adam as a
helper for him, not the other way around (Gen 2:18). Te creation dynamics designed by
God underline the distinctions between a man and a woman and, with these distinctions,
a diference of roles.
28
Equality of personhood is never in question, nor is man ever given
license to abuse his authority.
2. Te nature of the deception: And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being de-
ceived, fell into transgression (1 Tim 2:14). Genesis 3, in recounting the sad history of
the Fall, describes the overthrow of selfess male leadership: the serpent talks to the wom-
an as if she were the head and representative of the family; the woman accepts the role ac-
corded her by the serpent.
29
Signifcantly, it was a questioning of the word of GodHas
28 6T 236: Under God, Adam was to stand at the head of the earthly family to maintain the principles of the heavenly family.
29 Cf. Con 13, 14, amplifying Genesis 3:5, includes the deeper issue of power among the temptations: the serpent claimed the prohibition was
given to keep them [Adam and Eve] in such a state of subordination that they should not obtain knowledge, which was power.
God really said? (Gen 3:1, NIV)that led her into being deceived. Te mans activity
and initiative had been the focus in Genesis 2, but now, in chapter 3, the woman takes the
initiative. She reasons to a decision, takes of the forbidden fruit, eats it, and gives some of
it to Adam (v. 6). In short, there is a total reversal of the principle of leadership based on
the creation order. Te man ate the fruit second, following the initiative and example of
the woman. Paul points to the respective roles of men and women established at Creation
and the consequences that followed the reversal of that leadership role as the scriptural
basis for preserving male teaching authority in the church.
Signifcantly, Paul places the responsibility for the fall of humankind on Adam, not
Eve (Rom 5:12-19; 1 Cor 15:22), again confrming Adams leadership role. Several facts from
Genesis already make this point: the realization of nakedness comes to the pair only afer the
man eats the fruit, God seeks out Adam (Where are you? in the Hebrew of Genesis 3:9 refers
only to the man), and God holds the man primarily responsible as His questioning makes
clear (vs. 10, 11). Adams role as head of the frst home and spiritual leader of the human fami-
ly is reafrmed afer the Fall (Gen 3:16). Even afer the cross, these gender-specifc stipulations
remain intact: the husband is head of the wife, as also Christ is head of the church; and He
is the Savior of the body. Terefore, just as the church is subject to Christ, so let the wives be
to their own husbands in everything (Eph 5:23, 24). Te fact that Paul bases this instruction
on the relation of man and woman before the Fall shows its validity also for us today.
Pauls instruction safeguards the family. Within the context of faith in Christ and sub-
mission to Gods will, a man is to have an important role as the spiritual leader of the home.
His teaching and example are to have a positive infuence; he must not be dictatorial, de-
meaning, or indulgent. Tat is why Paul insists that a mans eligibility for church leadership
be based on key character qualities and his successful spiritual leadership in the home (1 Tim
3:2-5). At a time when culture is fast redefning gender and challenging the very fabric of the
family, the church would do well to follow the wise directives of the Word of God in the rela-
tions between men and women, as well as in all other matters of faith and practice.
1 timothy 3. Based on this understanding of Genesis, in 1 Timothy 3 Paul turns to the
matter of elders. Tis was an important subject for him, and more especially for the church.
Elsewhere Paul wrote to Titus that he should set in order the things that are lacking, and
appoint elders in every city (Titus 1:5). Detailed instructions are given to Timothy and Titus
as to the qualifcations for the elder, who is Gods steward (Titus 1:7).
Regarding the historical background of these instructions, there is no evidence in the
epistle itself or from frst-century historical sources to think that the church situation Timothy
faced in Ephesus was somehow unique or that 1 Timothy is primarily addressing a problem in
the local church there. Unlike Pauls other epistles, which are clearly addressed to individual
churches and their local situations, the epistles to Timothy and Titus are addressed to min-
isters. Tese men did not stay in one place to serve a single congregation only; Paul expected
them to apply these instructions wherever churches were established (Titus 1:5). If any of
Pauls epistles were meant as general instructions for the church at large, it is theseespecially
in view of indications Paul gave that his life might soon be cut short (2 Tim 4:6).
Troughout the discussion of church ofcers in 1 Timothy 3, Paul uses very specifc
language. He employs the technical terms overseer (episkopos) and deacon (diakonos). He
also uses the words man and woman in their most specifc sense of husband and wife.
Tus, a clear progression can be seen in 1 Timothy 2 and 3 from general terms (all people)
in 2:1-6 to more specifc (men and women) in 2:8-15 to most specifc (husband of one
wife) in 3:2, 12 (cf. Titus 1:6). Te overseer/elder must be (dei. . . einai) the husband of one
wife because he is responsible for the oversight of teaching and instruction in the word (3:2;
Titus 1:7).
Te use of the generic anyone (tis) in verse 1 does not negate the gender specifcation;
rather, the gender specifcation husband of one wife limits who qualifes. First Timothy 3:1
speaks of an ofce (episcop) to be occupied. Te following verses reveal that only a man who
meets special qualifcations can fll that position. A woman does not meet the gender qual-
ifcation and consequently cannot be ordained to the ofce of overseer or elder (terms Paul
used interchangeably in Titus 1:5-9).
30
If Paul had meant to allow for women to be included
among the elders, he could have specifed both possibilities, as we see him doing extensively
elsewhere in terms of the husband-wife relationship (1 Cor 7:1-16). Tus, husband of one
wife means just what it says: that an elder must be a man who is married to one wife, as 56
of 61 English translations consulted (including the most recent) show.
31
Te recognition of
this masculine element by so many teams of translators through the years up to the present is
eloquent testimony that on this point Paul is clear and unambiguous. Only four translations,
intent on gender neutrality, depart from the widely agreed and established meaning of the
phrase husband of one wife.
Te qualifcations given for the elder in 1 Timothy 3:2-5 focus on the kind of person he
is at home, in the church, and in society. Paul points out that only those who meet the quali-
fcations he sets forth should lead Gods church. Tese qualifcations are that a church leader,
specifcally an overseer or elder, is to be a faithful husband of one wife who gives evidence of
successful leadership in his own family, which qualifes him to fulfll the leadership ofce in
the house of God, the church (1 Tim 3:15), which is made up of many families. In addition,
he is to be blameless, temperate, sober-minded, of good behavior, hospitable, able to teach, to
30 See Sorke, Adam, Where Are You? 31, 32, http://www.adventistarchives.org/adam,-where-are-you.pdf.
31 See Wahlen, Is Husband of One Wife in 1 Timothy 3:2 Gender-Specifc?, 29-30, 35-39.
exhort and convict by sound doctrine those who contradict, and to have a good reputation
with outsiders, among other stated qualifcations (1 Tim 3:1-7; Titus 1:5-7). It is obvious that
not all qualify for the sacred calling of leading a church congregation, but only men who have
a proven record of successful leadership in the home and have a high spiritual commitment
and a godly moral lifestyle. A mans ftness for leadership in the church is based on how well
he has managed his home. Te mention of children at the end of verse 4 (having his children
in submission with all reverence) tells the church where to look for supporting evidence for
the qualifcation in the frst half of the verse (one who rules his own house well). Tis is
important because if a man does not know how to rule his own house, how will he take care
of the church of God? (v. 5).
It is true that we live in a less than ideal world. Tis causes us to elect elders who may not
meet every ideal of the biblical qualifcations. Some are less temperate than others; some
engage in more or less good behavior; some are more or less hospitable; etc. Tese quali-
fcations are measured in degrees. Where degrees are involved, it is not safe for us to draw ar-
bitrary lines when Scripture has not given us guidance. But it is not so with the fundamental
requirement of gender. Men are not more or less male. Gender is not measured in degrees. It
is a clear, unambiguous requirement that gives us no room for misinterpretation or misun-
derstanding.
implications. Although 1 Timothy 3:2 excludes women from the ofce of overseer
or elder, nothing prevents them from continuing to serve the church in many diferent capac-
ities, assuming they are willing to work in cooperation with the leadership authority that God
has established for the church and not try to undermine it or call it into question. Te biblical
principle of godly male leadership in both the home and the church is to be carried out in
loving service under the lordship of Christ as is ftting in the Lord (Col 3:18).
relation of men and women in 1 corinthians 11
Another place where Paul touches on the relationship of men and women in the church
is 1 Corinthians 11, where the context is division and disorder in the church. In the previous
chapter, Paul asks the Corinthians to give no ofense to the church of God (10:32), and he
cites himself as a model (10:33-11:1).
Verse 3 establishes the principle: But I want you to know that the head of every man
is Christ, the head of woman is man, and the head of Christ is God. In the sequence, Paul
places the relationship of the man and woman between the headship of Christ over man and
the headship of God (the Father) over Christ, indicating that it is just as valid as the other
two headship relationships. Since neither of those other two relationships can be challenged,
the relationship God has established between the sexes cannot be challenged either. In fact,
1Corinthians 15:28 shows that the headship of God over Christ continues even in the new
creation, far beyond the reign of sin.
Verses 4 and 5 point out that this principle applies to conduct in the church. Verses 7
through 9 provide the biblical and theological rationale for this principle: man is the image
and glory of God; but woman is the glory of man. For man is not from woman, but woman
from man. Nor was man created for the woman, but woman for the man. Paul is here point-
ing to the order and purpose in the creation of man and woman as the reason why man is the
head of the woman and why the application of the principle is diferent for men than it is for
women. Te man was created frst, for the glory of God, whereas the woman was created sec-
ond, for the glory of the man, as a helper comparable to him (Gen 2:18). Tus, when women
appear in Gods presence, they are to show their reverence for God diferently: every mans
head is Christ, but the womans head is man, so the man should not cover his head, which rep-
resents Christ, but the woman ought to cover her head, as a symbol of her submission to the
headship authority that God has established in the church. Te text provides no evidence for
a local, cultural reason for male headship. Although respect for authority may be expressed
diferently in Adams day, in Pauls Corinth, or in todays societies, wherever the principle is
honored it will show respect towards Gods plan for leadership in the home and in the church.
Verse 10 adds an important fact to the rationale in verses 7 through 9that the head
covering is a symbol of authority: For this reason the woman ought to have a symbol of
authority on her head. Tis clarifes what the issue is: that the woman is operating under
someone elses authority. Te principle of submission to godly headship in the church remains
valid, even if the outward symbol of a womans submission to this headship authority (a head
covering) may be expressed diferently in many cultures today.
Verses 11 and 12 warn against abuse of headship privileges, reminding the men that they
are not independent of the women, but that just as woman came from man, even so man
also comes through woman; but all things are from God. Tis interdependency is diferent
from the non-reciprocal relationship of male headship, and it clearly shows that Paul is not
limiting his concern to husbands and wives within the home, but speaks of men and women
in general since the husband does not come into existence through his wife, but a man comes
into existence through his mother.
A few chapters later, Paul discusses disorderly conduct in the church. For the sake of
those who wish to debate his instruction, he adds: If anyone thinks that he is a prophet or
spiritual, he should acknowledge that the things I am writing to you are a command of the
Lord. If anyone does not recognize this, he is not recognized (14:37, 38, ESV). Tus Paul
excludes any basis for challenging his teaching.
galatians 3:26-29
Galatians 3:26-29 addresses the relationship between God and his people. Every verse
focuses on this connection: For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus (v. 26).
For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ (v. 27). Tere is neither Jew
nor Greek, there is neither slave or free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in
Christ Jesus (v. 28). And if you are Christs, then you are Abrahams seed, and heirs according
to the promise (v. 29).
32
Paul does not write that in Christ man is no longer the head of the woman or that
males and females can now serve as elders/overseers in the church. Such statements would
confict with his own testimony in 1 Corinthians 11:3, Ephesians 5:22-33, 1 Timothy 3:1-
7, and Titus 1:5-9. Pauls point is clear: not ethnicity, economic circumstances, nor gender
grants one person a privileged status over another before God.
Furthermore, the cross did not erase the functional distinctions that God established
before sin. Man is still to fulfll the role of the father and husband and woman the role of the
mother. Te wife must still submit to the loving headship of her husband in the Lord, and
husbands must still love their wives (Eph 5:22-25). Tere is no hint in Galatians 3:28 or its
context to indicate that Paul was addressing roles in the home or in the church.
Te context of Galatians 3 indicates that Paul was addressing the issues of justifcation,
baptism into Christ, and the reception of the Spirit at the beginning of the Christian life, not
ofces or leadership positions in the church. If we wish to know what Paul had to say about
qualifcations for church leadership ofces, we must go to the places where he addresses these
specifc issues in the pastoral epistles of 1 Timothy and Titus.
Te NT passages on leadership and male-female relations within the church consistently in-
dicate a God-appointed plan for qualifed men to lead the church. As Ellen G. White states, Te
Scriptures are plain upon the relations and rights of men and women.
33
male-female equality and difference in genesis 1 and 2
As we have seen, Paul establishes his understanding of leadership in the home and in the
church based on the early chapters of Genesis. His interpretation reveals inspired insight into
the meaning of these passages. Paul is not placing a construction on them that is foreign to
their original setting. In Gods kingdom, the relationships among human beings are designed
to refect the relationships among the Godhead and among the angels, which are character-
ized by equality as well as functional diferences.
34
32 Emphasis added.
33 1T 421.
34 EW 167. For these functional diferences, see Jerry Moon, Ellen White, Ordination, and Authority (paper presented at the Teology of Or-
dination Study Committee, July 22-24, 2013), 3-6, http://www.adventistarchives.org/ellen-white,-ordination,-and-authority.pdf; Damsteegt,
Headship, Gender, and Ordination in the Writings of Ellen G. White (paper presented at the Teology of Ordination Study Committee, July
22-24, 2013), 10-14, http://www.adventistarchives.org/headship,-gender,-and-ordination-in-the-writings-of-ellen-g.-white.pdf.
male-female equality in genesis 1 and 2. Te frst chapters of the Bible present
the divine design for the relationships between men and women. Te frst chapter of the book
of Genesis reveals that both male and female were created in the image of God. Te scriptural
record states, God said, Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness. . . . So
God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female
He created them (Gen 1:26, 27). Tey were commanded to be fruitful and multiply, to pop-
ulate the earth and subdue it, and to exercise dominion over all living things (Gen 1:26-28).
Tis chapter shows that both male and female have a basic equality of nature, essence,
or being, because both are created in the image of God. Tis view is in harmony with the
plain teaching of the apostle Paul with regard to the equal value of men and women as heirs
of salvation (Gal 3:26-29).
35
Genesis 2 builds on Genesis 1, revealing a relationship between godly men and women
that is derived from the way in which God created man frst and then created the woman
from the man. And the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall on Adam, and he slept; and He
took one of his ribs, and closed up the fesh in its place. Ten the rib which the Lord God had
taken from man He made into a woman, and He brought her to the man. And Adam said:
Tis is now bone of my bones And fesh of my fesh (Gen 2:21-23). Ellen G. White com-
ments on this event:
God Himself gave Adam a companion. He provided an help meet for hima help-
er corresponding to himone who was ftted to be his companion, and who could
be one with him in love and sympathy. Eve was created from a rib taken from the side
of Adam, signifying that she was not to control him as the head, nor to be trampled
under his feet as an inferior, but to stand by his side as an equal, to be loved and pro-
tected by him. A part of man, bone of his bone, and fesh of his fesh, she was his sec-
ond self, showing the close union and the afectionate attachment that should exist in
this relation. For no man ever yet hated his own fesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth
it. Ephesians 5:29. Terefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall
cleave unto his wife; and they shall be one.
36
Tis statement shows that the woman is to stand by the mans side as an equalnot to
be inferior or superior, but equal to the man. White further adds, Te holy pair were to have
no interest independent of each other; and yet each had an individuality in thinking and
acting.
37
35 For an exposition on Galatians 2:28, see Stephen Bohr, A Study of 1 Peter 2:9, 10 and Galatians 3:28 (presented at the Teology of Ordina-
tion Study Committee, July 22-24, 2013), http://www.adventistarchives.org/a-study-of-i-peter-2.9,-10-and-galatians-3.28.pdf.
36 PP 46.
37 3T 484.
Te above statement on the importance of equality also introduces the concept that
Adam and Eve have diferences in function. Te frst White statement quoted above indicates
that even in pre-Fall Eden, with no threat of physical harm, one of Adams tasks was to protect
his companion, who was to be loved and protected by him.
38
Nowhere does it state that Eve
must protect Adam. Knowing the future, God brought Eve to Adam because she was created
for him and from him. Tis indicates an important distinction in roles between male and
female.
male-female difference in genesis 1 and 2. While Genesis 1 indicates that
God made human beings physically diferent, as male and female,
39
the second chapter ex-
plains in detail how this creation, with functional diferences, took place and the responsibil-
ities given to the man before the woman was even created. It describes the formation of the
man from the dust, (Gen 2:7), the garden God prepared and the responsibility He gave to the
man to tend and keep it (2:15), the command concerning what he could eat (2:16), and the
warning about the forbidden tree (2:17). Afer this God brought the animals and birds to
Adam and gave him the responsibility to name them. And whatever Adam called each living
creature, that was its name (2:19). As a result, Adam discovered his own need of a compan-
ion: Tere was not found a helper corresponding to him (2:20). So the Lord God caused a
deep sleep to fall on Adam, and he slept, and He took one of his ribs, and closed up the fesh
in its place. From this rib the Lord God made a woman and brought her to the man (2:21,
22), giving to Adam the privilege also of naming his companion: She shall be called Woman,
because she was taken out of Man, he said (2:23).
Based on this divinely-established relationship between Adam and Eve, God indicates
also that in the marriage relationship the man is to take the initiative, leave his family, and
be joined to his wife (Gen 2:24). At this time Eve considers Adam her husband (Gen 3:6).
Ellen G. White interprets the term husband to mean he is the house-band of the family,
binding the members together, even as Christ is the head of the church and the Saviour of the
mystical body [Eph 5:23].
40
Tus the internal evidence within Genesis prior to Adams fall
reveals his leadership role and his responsibility toward the woman.
What type of relationship existed between the man and the woman at this time? Here
we need to follow the important rule of interpretation by consulting the whole Bible to see
if there are any other references indicating the relationship between the man and the wom-
an in Genesis 2 before sin, because the New Testament explains the Old.
41
We return to
38 PP 46.
39 About their physical diferences, Ellen White writes, Eve was not quite as tall as Adam. Her head reached a little above his shoulders (3SG
34).
40 AH 215.
41 Ev 578.
1 Corinthians 11, where Paul points out that Adam and Eves relationship before the Fall was
based on a headship/leadership principle that already existed within the Godhead. Within
the context of faith, Paul wants believers to know that the head of every man is Christ, the
head of woman is man, and the head of Christ is God (1 Cor 11:3).
Te New Testament brings out further evidence regarding these relationships. In 1Tim-
othy, referring to Genesis 2, Paul illustrates the leadership principle with the creation of the
man. In connection with order in the church, the house of God, which is the church of the
living God, the pillar and ground of the truth (1 Tim 3:15), Paul writes that he does not per-
mit women to teach or to have authority [KJV: to usurp authority] over the man (1 Tim
2:12), for Adam was formed frst, then Eve (1 Tim 2:13).
Te New Testaments explanation of the relationship between the man and the woman
before sin clearly teaches that the man has been given the leadership function in the home and
in the church. As headship and submission are principles in heaven (1 Cor 11:3), so on earth
human beings have been created to refect the image of God.
In the following statements White confrms Adams role in the Garden of Eden: Un-
der God, Adam was to stand at the head of the earthly family, to maintain the principles of
the heavenly family;
42
Adam was appointed by God to be monarch of the world, under the
supervision of the Creator;
43
Te Sabbath was committed to Adam, the father and repre-
sentative of the whole human family;
44
Adam was lord in his beautiful domain.
45
Although
both were given dominion over the earth (Gen 1:26, 27), the leadership in this relationship
was given to Adam. Adam was crowned king in Eden. To him was given dominion over every
living thing that God had created. Te Lord blessed Adam and Eve with intelligence such as
He had not given to any other creature. He made Adam the rightful sovereign over all the
works of His hands.
46
Co-equal leadership roles and titles for Adam and Eve are completely
missing from the inspired writings. Adam alone is designated as the head.
47
Both the Bible and the writings of Ellen G. White present Adam as having the leadership
role in terms of the man-woman relationship and even in terms of their dominion over the earth
before the Fall. What do the inspired writings tell us about their relationship afer the Fall?
relationship of man and woman after the fall in genesis 3
Afer the Fall, Adams headship role became even more pronounced. It was only afer
42 CT 33; See also 6T 236.
43 White, Marriage in Galilee, BE Aug. 28, 1899 (cf. ST Apr. 29, 1875). See also RH Feb. 24, 1874.
44 PP 48.
45 FE 38.
46 White, Redemption; or the Temptation of Christ, 7; also in 1BC 1082
47 See John W. Peters, Restoration of the Image of God: Headship and Submission (presented at the Teology of Ordination Study Committee,
Jan. 21-25, 2014), 9, http://www.adventistarchives.org/restoration-of-the-image-of-god-headship-and-submission-john-peters.pdf.
Adam, as leader, followed his wife in the path of disobedience and sinned that their eyes were
opened and they realized their sinful condition and resulting nakedness (Gen 3:7). Next God
came down to question Adam (not Eve) as the responsible leader (3:9-12). Ten He addressed
the woman (3:13). Finally God pronounced judgment on each party, beginning with the ser-
pent and his ultimate defeat (3:14, 15). Adam received the death penalty, which consequently
afected every living being (Rom 5:12). Ten he was expelled from the Garden, his wife fol-
lowing him.
Te Fall of Adam and Eve brought a change to their relationship. Te punishment God
put upon the woman was pain in childbirth and that your desire shall be for your husband,
and he shall rule over you (Gen 3:16). Just as pain entered into the experience of childbirth
as a result of sin, so we observe a change in the way the headship principle would function. Be-
fore the Fall, there was a harmonious relationship in which Eve gladly and willingly accepted
Adams godly leadership, submitting without resentment or duress. However, once their rela-
tionship was broken and distorted by sin, it was necessary for God to enforce Adams role by
way of command. Te principle itself had not changed, but the woman must now accept his
rule over her (Gen 3:16), although her new sin-borne desire was to rule over him (note the
similar meaning of the terms in the close parallel a few verses later, in Gen 4:7).
48
Te change
was not in terms of two pre-Fall heads being reduced to one but in moving from a harmoni-
ous, willing cooperation with Adams leadership to a diferent relationship that would include
tension within the human family between the two genders. As a result, harmony could only
be preserved by the (now unnatural) submission of the woman to the man, since there can
be only one head/leader in any relationship. Otherwise, there would be constant and open
confict over authority.
Tis authority within the home (as also within the family of faith) is given by God, but
must never be demanded, used autocratically, or in an abusive manner. Rather, it should be
expressed in loving care for the wife, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself
for her (Eph 5:25). Tat is the nature of headship authority as modeled by God and Christ
(1 Cor 11:3; Eph 5:22, 33).
To Adam God said, Because you have heeded the voice of your wife and eaten from the
forbidden tree, the earth will be cursed and you will die (Gen 3:17, 19). Comparing scripture
with scripture, we notice that the New Testament also teaches that Adam, as the leader, was
responsible for the entrance of sin into the human race, not Eve, despite her being the frst
to transgress Gods command. Terefore, as through one mans ofense judgment came to
all men, resulting in condemnation, even so through one Mans righteous act the free gif
48 Paul Ratsara and Daniel K. Bediako, Man and Woman in Genesis 1-3: Ontological Equality and Role Diferentiation (paper presented at the
Teology of Ordination Study Committee, July 22-24, 2013), http://www.adventistarchives.org/man-and-woman-in-genesis-one-thru-three.
pdf.
came to all men, resulting in justifcation of life (Rom 5:18). Clearly, Pauls contrasting of
Adams role with that of Christ is rooted in the fact that Adam was the responsible leader.
Even though Adam followed the leadership of his wife in disobedience, the Bible continues
to honor Adams role as head of the human race and of his family.
In subsequent generations, following this divine design of headship, husbands occupied
similar leadership roles. Ellen G. White writes, In early times the father was the ruler and
priest of his own family, and he exercised authority over his children. . . His descendants were
taught to look up to him as their head, in both religious and secular matters.
49
Abraham,
representative of Gods truth and father of true believers, followed this divine pattern. White
adds, Tis patriarchal system of government Abraham endeavored to perpetuate, as it tend-
ed to preserve the knowledge of God.
50
With Israels Exodus from Egypt, God established
the nation of Israel as His kingdom on earth and appointed men to lead His people. From
that time onward, we are introduced to the concept of ordination, which means installing
qualifed men for service in leadership ofces so that they might guide Gods people under
His direction.
biblical ordination
old testament
Te Old Testament records instances of special appointments to leadership. Although
recent translations of the Bible do not use the terms ordain or ordination, the concept is
present throughout Scripture. Many, including Ellen G. White, have used this term to refer
to these appointments to positions of authority among the people of God. While Moses (and
later Joshua) carried the primary leadership responsibility in Israel, representing a unique
combination of religious and civil leadership roles, the ofce within Israel most illustrative for
our understanding of ordination is that of the priesthood. Unlike the civil leadership ofces
of judge and, later, king, the priest was responsible for leading Israel in worship and religious
instruction. Terefore, the priest represents the closest parallel to the leadership ofces of the
NT church.
51
Shortly afer the Exodus from Egypt, God selected Aaron and his sons to lead
out in the religious services of the sanctuary. Trough a special ceremony during which Moses
49 PP 141.
50 Ibid.
51 Troughout Scripture, prophets, both men and women, are raised up intermittently by God Himself to communicate His inspired word to
the people. As messengers of the Lord, they did not hold an ofce as such, nor were they ordained by human hands. God called and sent them
at particular times in the history of His people when there was need for more direct divine guidance. Similarly, in modern times, God raised
up Ellen G. White as His messenger. According to the Ellen G. White Estate, while ministerial credentials were voted for her by the Michigan
conference and, later, by the General Conference, she was never ordained by human hands, nor did she ever perform a wedding, organize a
church, or conduct a baptism (DG 248). White, referring in 1911 to her own call to service, wrote the following: In the city of Portland the
Lord ordained me as His messenger, and here my frst labors were given to the cause of present truth (ibid., 252). Te White Estate adds: It
will be recalled that Ellen White was given her frst vision in December 1844, in Portland, Maine. Shortly thereafer she was prompted by the
Lord to tell others what she had seen (ibid.).
was to anoint them with oil, they were sanctifed or set apart, and consecrated to occupy the
ofce of priest (Exod 29:1-37; Lev 8). In addition, there were Levites who were set apart by
the laying-on of hands (Num 8:10) and elders who fulflled somewhat lesser roles as religious
leaders.
In addition to these various leadership roles, the Old Testament identifes a number
of women who were infuential in Israel, including the prophetesses Miriam, Huldah, and
Deborah (who also judged
52
the people), and Queen Esther. Although none of these women
functioned in the ofce of priest or elder or were ordained, God used them powerfully, and
they fulflled vital roles at particular times in Israels history.
new testament
Te New Testament mentions the setting apart or ordination of individuals in the ap-
pointment of the twelve apostles, the seven deacons, Paul and Barnabas, Timothy, and the
elders and deacons. Here is the origin of the NT practice of ordination in the early Chris-
tian church. Te NT writers used various Greek words for appointment. Some Bible versions
translate them ordain while others use diferent words, but the idea of ordination, installa-
tion to a specifc ofce, remains in the text (e.g., Mark 3:14; Titus 1:5).
53
Te frst major step in the organization of the NT church was Jesus ordination of the
twelve apostles, mirroring the establishment of the OT church and its foundation of the
twelve patriarchs, the sons of Jacob. Jesus showed the importance He placed on the apostles
ordination by praying all night prior to this momentous event. Ten Jesus set apart the twelve
apostles from the larger group of disciples. Ellen G. White wrote, It was at the ordination of
the Twelve that the frst step was taken in the organization of the church that afer Christs
departure was to carry on His work on the earth. Of this ordination the record says, He
goeth up into a mountain, and calleth unto Him whom He would: and they came unto Him.
And He ordained twelve, that they should be with Him, and that He might send them forth
to preach. Mark 3:13, 14.
54
On this occasion Christ appointed them as His representatives,
and gave them their ordination charge, their commission.
55
52 Deborah gave judgment (Hebrew mishpt) to the people privately when they came to her. When the text says that Deborah. . . was judging
Israel at that time (Judges 4:4), the Hebrew verb shphat, to judge, in this context does not mean to rule or govern, but rather has the sense
decide controversy, discriminate between persons in civil, political, domestic and religious questions. Tat is evident because the next verse
tells how she was judging: she used to sit under the palm tree of Deborah and the people of Israel came up to her for judgment. Tis is not
a picture of public leadership like that of a king or queen, but private settling of disputes through both arbitration and judicial decisions. If
we decide to take this as an example for today, we might see it as justifcation for women to serve as counselors and as civil judges. But the text
of Scripture does not say that Deborah ruled over Gods people. Laurel Damsteegt, Women of Infuence (paper presented at the Teology
of Ordination Study Committee, Jan. 21-25, 2014), 14-15 (quoting Wayne Grudem, Evangelical Feminism and Biblical Truth [Sisters, OR:
Multnomah Publishers Inc., 2004], 133 [emphasis is Grudems]), http://www.adventistarchives.org/women-of-the-old-testament.pdf.
53 Edwin E. Reynolds and Clinton Wahlen, Te Minority Report, in the North American Division Teology of Ordination Study Committee
Report (November 2013), 203, http://static.squarespace.com/static/
50d0ebebe4b0ceb6af5fdd33/t/527970c2e4b039a2e8329354/1383690434980/nad-ordination-14-minority.pdf.
54 Ibid., 18.
55 White, Te Regions Beyond, PUR Dec. 4, 1902.
Later, Jesus explained that it was He who chose these men for their specifc function of
leading out in establishing the NT church (John 15:16). Here it becomes clear that Gods call
comes frst; then, afer the individual responds, follows the appointment to a specifc ofce.
Te apostles were selected, appointed, or ordained for a specifc work of preaching, casting
out demons, and healing (Matt 10:1, 7, 8).
Because Jesus ofen laid His hands on people for healing and blessings, it seems natural
that He did so during the ordination of the Twelve. Te Bible records a similar practice used
in the setting apart of the Levites and Joshua (Num 8:10; 27:18). White confrmed that Jesus
gathered the little band close about Him, and kneeling in the midst of them, and laying His
hands upon their heads, He ofered a prayer dedicating them to His sacred work. Tus the
Lords disciples were ordained to the gospel ministry.
56
Te second major step in church organization took place with the ordination of the
seven deacons. To resolve tensions over equitable distribution of aid to the churchs widows,
at the apostles instruction the believers chose seven men to oversee the matter and brought
them before the apostles; and when they had prayed, they laid hands on them. Te ordi-
nation of these men by the apostles contributed to the unity and rapid growth of the church
(Acts 6:1-7).
Although this passage does not explicitly name the ofce to which the seven were ap-
pointed, the Greek words used for serve (diakone, Acts 6:2) and ministry or service
(diakonia, Acts 6:1, 4) have the same root as the word for deacon (diakonos). It appears that
Luke, as a careful historian, avoided designating these men as deacons because the name for
the ofce arose a little later. Paul spells out the qualifcations for the ordained ofces of both
elder and deacon in 1 Timothy 3:1-13. Te qualifcations for elder are mentioned also in Titus
1:5-9.
In contrast to the apostles who were entrusted with the ministry of the word, the seven
deacons were ordained to care primarily for the material needs of the church.
57
According to
White, this development in church organization was in the order of God.
58
Although the
seven were ordained for the special work of looking afer the needs of the poor, they were
not prevented from teaching the faith. On the contrary, they were fully qualifed to instruct
others in the truth, and they engaged in the work with great earnestness and success.
59
Te
ordination of the deacons was similar to the ordination of the Levites (Num 8:9, 10). In both
56 DA 296, emphasis added.
57 Since the deacon (diakonos in Greek) is to be the husband of one wife (1 Tim 3:12), Phoebe, though referred to as a diakonos (Rom 16:1),
could not have served in this ofce. Te word diakonos is used in the New Testament only rarely in the sense of deacon (Phil 1:1; 1 Tim 3:8,
12). Usually it has the more general meaning of servant (e.g., Matt 22:13; Mark 9:35; Rom 15:8, etc.), which is why in most translations of
Romans 16:1 Phoebe is referred to as a servant of the church at Cenchrea.
58 Ibid.
59 Ibid., 90.
cases it included the laying-on of hands, the congregation was involved, and those ordained
were to serve on behalf of the congregation. Tus two basic ofces were established in Jeru-
salem: apostle (and, later, elder) for the ministry of the word, and deacon for ministry to the
material and practical needs of the church. White wrote that the organization of the church
at Jerusalem was to serve as a model for the organization of churches in every other place
where messengers of truth should win converts to the gospel.
60
Te ordination of Barnabas and Paul took place in the church of Antioch, Syria. Here,
as certain prophets and teachers ministered and fasted, the Holy Spirit spoke to them: Now
separate to me Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have called them. Afer having
fasted and prayed, and laid hands on them, they sent them away (Acts 13:2, 3). Tese men
were now being sent out by the Holy Spirit as missionaries (Acts 13:4).
White provides additional insights on the meaning of ordination in connection with the
setting apart of Paul and Barnabas. Trough ordination, they were authorized by the church,
not only to teach the truth, but to perform the rite of baptism and to organize churches, be-
ing invested with full ecclesiastical authority.
61
It was a public recognition of their divine
appointment to bear to the Gentiles the glad tidings of the gospel.
62
Inasmuch as Paul and
Barnabas had already received their commission from God Himself, the ceremony added
no new grace or virtual qualifcation. It was an acknowledged form of designation to an ap-
pointed ofce and recognition of ones authority in that ofce. By it the seal of the church was
set upon the work of God.
63
When the ministers of the church of believers put their hands
on Paul and Barnabas, they by that action, asked God to bestow His blessing upon the cho-
sen apostles in their devotion to the specifc work to which they had been appointed.
64
Paul
considered his formal ordination as marking the beginning of a new and important epoch in
his lifework, from which he dated the beginning of his apostleship in the Christian church
to carry the gospel to the Gentiles, as Peter, James, and John had been appointed to preach
Christ among the Jews.
65
During their travels in Asia Minor, as Paul and Barnabas organized groups of believers
into churches and appointed elders in every church, and prayed with fasting, they commend-
ed them to the Lord in whom they had believed (Acts 14:23). Here we observe that the orga-
nizational model of the Jerusalem church was being established in the mission feld. Later,
when Paul found disorderly behavior in some of the churches, he sent letters to his associates
60 AA 91.
61 Ibid., 161.
62 Ibid.
63 Ibid., 161-162.
64 Ibid., 162.
65 Ibid., 164-165.
Timothy and Titus with strict guidelines about the proper qualifcations for elders and dea-
cons with the goal to restore order in the churches and prevent problems from arising (1 Tim
3:1-14; Titus 1:5-9). Troughout the history of Christianity, almost all Christian churches
have adhered to these qualifcations.
66
Pauls letters contain two references to Timothys ordination (1 Tim 4:14, 2 Tim 1:6).
From Timothys involvement in Pauls mission it is clear that Timothy was not merely a local
elder but functioned more in the role of an itinerant or traveling elder or minister, represent-
ing biblical Christianity to the newly established churches throughout the Roman Empire.
offces and gifts
the gift of pastoring
In the New Testament there is no ofce of pastor. In Ephesians 4:8, 11, 12, pastor
is spoken of as a gif of ministry. Paul referred to this spiritual gif in his commission to the
elders of the church in Ephesus. Terefore take heed to yourselves and to all the fock, among
which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd [pastor] the church of God which
He purchased with His own blood (Acts 20:28). Te apostle Peter, who considered himself
also an elder, referred to this gif in a similar way, stating, Te elders who are among you I
exhort, I who am a fellow elder. . . : Shepherd the fock of God which is among you, serving
as overseers, not by compulsion but willingly, not for dishonest gain but eagerly; nor as being
lords over those entrusted to you, but being examples to the fock (1 Pet 5:1-3). Among the
tasks of elders is the responsibility to shepherd, nurture, and protect church members. Unless
one of their gifs is that of shepherding, they do not qualify for this ofce. However, this gif
is not confned to the ofce of an elder or minister. Te gif of shepherding or pastoring can
be manifested by persons who work in other callings, professions, or ministries that are ben-
efted by aspects of caring.
Ellen G. White used pastor and pastors to the fock in this way, as when she wrote
that responsibilities must be laid upon the members of the church. Te missionary spirit
should be awakened as never before, and workers should be appointed as needed, who will act
as pastors to the fock, putting forth personal efort to bring the church up to that condition
where spiritual life and activity will be seen in all her borders.
67

Tis appears to be her meaning in her well-known statement about literature evange-
lists, that it is the accompaniment of the Holy Spirit of God that prepares workers, both men
66 Damsteegt, P. Gerard, Womens Status and Ordination as Elders or Bishops in the Early Church, Reformation and Post-Reformation Eras
(paper presented at the Teology of Ordination Study Committee, July. 22-24, 2013), http://www.adventistarchives.org/womens-status-and-
ordination-as-elders-or-bishops-in-the-early-church.pdf.
67 5T 723, emphasis added.
and women, to become pastors to the fock of God.
68
She was not calling on the Church to
open the way for women to serve as ministers just as men do, since, a little further on in the
same volume, she repeatedly urged young men to enter the ministry, with no mention that
women were to do so as well.
69

new testament church offces and the gifts of the holy spirit
While spiritual gifs include pastoral care, this is not equivalent to the biblical ofce
of elder that today is ofen referred to as pastor. In the New Testament we can distinguish
between ofces and gifs as follows: (1) Tree church ofces are mentioned: apostles (Acts
1:21-25), elders/overseers (1 Tim 3:1-7; Titus 1:5-9), and deacons (Acts 6:1-6; 1 Tim 3:8-13).
However, there are many gifs (1 Cor 12:8-11; 28-30; Rom 12:6-8; Eph 4:11). Every believer
has received at least one gif (1 Pet 4:10). (2) Tose who occupy ofces are ordained, appoint-
ed, or chosen based on explicit qualifcations (Acts 6:3; 14:23; 1 Tim 3:1-13; Titus 1:5-9).
Gifs, however, are bestowed according to the will of the Holy Spirit without any stated qual-
ifcations (Eph 4:7; Rom 12:6; 1 Cor 12:11, 18, 28). (3) Tough every believer has at least one
gif, not every believer has an ofce (Eph 4:7; 1 Cor 12:7, 11; Rom 12:4). (4) An elder cannot
be a recent convert (1Tim 3:6), but gifs are bestowed independently of age or experience.
(5) Te ofces of elder and deacon are limited to the husband of one wife (1 Tim 3:2, 12;
Titus 1:6),
70
whereas gifs are given to both men and women (Acts 21:9, 10; 1 Cor 11:5).
71

Unfortunately, in the ordination debate, some Seventh-day Adventists are confusing the gif
of pastoring with the ofce of elder/minister, contrary to the biblical pattern.
ordination and the laying-on of hands
Te church should choose gifed individuals whose lifestyle fulflls the biblical qualifca-
tions for the ofce of elder or deacon. Tis should be done carefully, with much prayer and
fasting, asking for the guidance of the Holy Spirit in the selections made. Te ordination service
appoints persons to these ofces through the laying-on of hands by ordained church leaders
ministers or elders (2 Tim 1:6; 1 Tim 4:14). Although ordination of persons to the biblical
leadership ofce of elder or deacon is accompanied by the laying-on of hands, not every instance
of the laying-on of hands is equated with ordination to church ofce. In a well-known example,
68 6T 322.
69 Ibid., 411-416.
70 Although Scripture does not mention an ofce of deaconess, the fact that Paul refers to the women while discussing the ofce of deacon (1
Tim 3:11) suggests that some women were given a role in the early church not unlike deaconesses today. Rather than being ordained to an of-
cial church ofce, they seem to have been designated to assist the deacons in their work, especially in relation to helping other women (21MR
97).
71 Tis list is adapted from Harold W. Hoehner, Can a Woman be a Pastor-Teacher? Journal of the Evangelical Teological Society 50/4 (Dec.
2007): 763-764. See also Pfandl, Evaluation of Egalitarian Papers, 10-11, http://www.adventistarchives.org/evaluation-of-egalitarian-
papers.pdf.
Ellen G. White wrote, Women who are willing to consecrate some of their time to the service
of the Lord should be appointed to visit the sick, look afer the young, and minister to the neces-
sities of the poor. Tey should be set apart to this work by prayer and laying on of hands. In some
cases they will need to counsel with the church ofcers or the minister; but if they are devoted
women, maintaining a vital connection with God, they will be a power for good in the church.
Tis is another means of strengthening and building up the church.
72
Some have interpreted this to mean that women should be ordained to the gospel min-
istry. However, White does not speak about ordination but about setting these women apart
for a particular work or ministry. Tey are part-time workers who are appointed to visit
the sick, look afer the young, and minister to the necessities of the poor. Tis appointment
does not make them church ofcers because, as White says, in some cases they will need to
counsel with the church ofcers or the minister. Te church leaders are advised to set them
apart to this specifc work by prayer and laying on of hands. Te purpose of this ceremony is
to recognize and enable another means of strengthening and building up the church.
73
Tis
ceremony, then, is not ordination to one of the New Testament ofces, but the laying-on of
hands sets these women apart for a specifc ministry that will strengthen the church.
74
Tis example makes it clear that the laying-on of hands can be used to appoint church
members to specifc tasks or ministries, afrming the unique abilities, talents, or gifs God
gave them, but should not be equated with ordination to the specifc biblical leadership ofce
of an elder or minister.
ordination and authority
Ordination functioned throughout biblical history as a means to set apart and appoint
qualifed men to a specifc ofce of leadership. In this role they are responsible to promote
Gods mission, protect the believers from false teachings, and preserve order and harmony in
the church. What kind of authority is bestowed on them with the ordination to these ofces
of leadership?
the authority of ministers
Todays ministers who oversee and serve several churches can be compared to Timothy
and Titus, whose gospel ministry was not confned to one church. Ministers who function as
teachers of word and doctrine have a special place in Gods church on earth. Pauls instruc-
tion to Timothy gives some idea of the authority entrusted to them: Preach the word!. . .
72 White, Te Duty of the Minister and the People, RH July 9, 1895.
73 Ibid., emphasis added. Another example sometimes referred to is the missionary physician, whom Ellen White said is to be as sacredly set
apart for his work as is the minister of the gospel (Ev 546). In this case, however, she did not explicitly mention the laying-on of hands as part
of the service, though she may have had this in mind. In any event, her statement makes it clear that such a service was not ordination to the
gospel ministry.
74 Ellen White wrote of women who, although the hands of ordination have not been laid on them, were accomplishing a work that is in the
line of ministry (GW 452).
Convince, rebuke, exhort, with all longsufering and teaching. For the time will come when
they will not endure sound doctrine (2 Tim 4:2, 3). Titus was instructed to set in order
the things that are lacking, and concerning those who subverted the faith, to rebuke them
sharply (Titus 1:5, 13). He was to speak the things which are proper for sound doctrine,
and exhort the young men to be sober-minded, among other things (2:1, 6). Speak these
things, exhort, and rebuke with all authority. Let no one despise you (2:15).
the authority of elders
Te authority of elders is vested in the Scriptures and in the ordination of these men by
the church. Paul told Titus that the elders must be able, by sound doctrine, both to exhort
and convict those who contradict . . . whose mouths must be stopped (Titus 1:9, 11). To Tim-
othy Paul wrote, Let the elders who rule well be counted worthy of double honor, especially
those who labor in the word and doctrine (1 Tim 5:17). Because of the important role of the
elder, Paul specifed, Do not receive an accusation against an elder except from two or three
witnesses (5:19). Peter wrote that the elders are the overseers of the fock, commanded to
shepherd or feed the fock under the Chief Shepherd (1 Pet 5:2, 4). In expounding on
the authority of elders, Ellen G. White noted that they have the responsibility to educate or
train members so they will use their talents and spiritual gifs,
75
the authority to make sure
all members are proper stewards and support the church fnancially,
76
the duty to deal with
erring members and look afer weak and backsliding members to try to help them,
77
and the
obligation to uphold the standards of the church and see that members respect its decisions.
78
In the days of the Adventist pioneers, when, in spite of the example of many other de-
nominations they followed Jesus model of leadership in the New Testament, the authority of
the elders in the above areas became frmly established and the church grew rapidly.
ordination and worldwide unity
An important part of Jesus last prayer for His disciples in John 17 concerns their future
unity. He prayed that they might be sanctifed by the truth. . . that they all may be one, as
You, Father, are in Me, and I in You, that they also may be one in Us (vs. 19, 21). Unity is
based on union with Jesus and acceptance of His truth, which comes through hearing His
words as revealed in Scripture (John 5:39; Rom 10:17). Tis unity is in itself a powerful wit-
ness, having as its purpose that the world may believe that You sent Me (John 17:21). So a
75 White, Te Church Must Be Quickened, RH Jan. 17, 1893.
76 White, TM 306; SpTA Nos. 7, 21.
77 White, Elder Daniels and the Fresno Church, Pamphlet 028; see also 5MR 447-448.
78 White, 5MR 296; SpTA Nos. 1b, 24-25.
Bible-based unity is vital for carrying out the mission of the church.
From our early beginnings as Adventists, the importance of wisely selecting ministers
has been impressed upon us by inspiration as being essential to our unity.
79
Although every
one of us is called to share the reason for the hope that is in us (1 Pet 3:15), elders and min-
isters, who labor in word and doctrine (1 Tim 5:17) are especially charged to proclaim and
teach the word of God accurately (2 Tim 2:15; Titus 1:9). Tey are set apart to their work
through the rite of ordination, based on the call of God and recognition by the church region-
ally (Acts 13:3) in harmony with the church globally (Matt 28:18-20).
80
Te gospel proclama-
tion in the end time culminates in a worldwide, united people who keep the commandments
of God and the faith of Jesus (Rev 14:12). Various proposals to regionalize the practice of
ordination can endanger our organizational unity and open the door to the regionalization
of church organization. It is not clear where this process of progressive regionalization would
end. It is best for the church to stay united for its global witness to be most efective.
a summary of biblical ordination
Ordination is a setting apart of men to a sacred ofce of leadership in the church. To
qualify for such ofce, they need to meet the Bible qualifcations. Jesus was the one who in-
stituted this service when He established the NT church. In ordaining people today, it is
important to remember that it is God who calls them to such ofce. And He calls only those
who meet the qualifcations that He has set forth in His word. Te leaders of the local church
should ordain men to the ofce of elder only afer a careful examination, with prayer and
fasting, to see whether the Bible qualifcations for that ofce have been met.
Following the practice in the New Testament, those who participate in laying hands on
those being ordained as local elders are to be ordained ministers or elders of the local church.
Tose who lead out in this service represent the church, not themselves. Before a person is
appointed as a minister, ordained ministers also evaluate the candidates lifestyle and experi-
ence in the light of Bible qualifcations. Upon a successful evaluation and clear evidence of the
Holy Spirit in his ministry, life, and family, he too will be set apart through ordination, but
this time for a wider ministry. In this ordination service, he will be invested with full ecclesi-
astical authority that includes, besides the work of a local elder, the training and oversight of
several churches, baptizing of new believers, and the planting and organizing of new churches.
Beyond the local geographical region, this ordination authorizes the minister to serve
the worldwide community of Seventh-day Adventistsan expression of our global unity.
Tis is why ordination should not be implemented regionally. Allowing for regional auton-
79 See EW 97-104.
80 LP 43.
omy may bring distrust and disunity into the world feld where an ordained minister is
allowed in one division but prohibited in another.
Paul indicates that each member receives from the Holy Spirit a gif for the good of the
church (1 Cor 12:7) and for its unity (1 Cor 12:12-27). Te gif received is not for boasting
but for the equipping of the saints for the work of ministry, for the edifying of the body of
Christ, till we all come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a
perfect man, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ (Eph 4:12, 13).
From these fndings we conclude that women may fulfll many valuable service roles in
the church in harmony with the spiritual gifs they have been given. However, the biblical
qualifcations for overseeing one or more churches as elders or ministers include the stipula-
tion that those charged with caring for Gods church as His household must be the husband
of one wife. At the present time of revival and reformation, as part of its divinely ordained
mission, the Seventh-day Adventist Church is to call people out of Babylon and back to the
Bible as the Word of God and the rule of faith and practice. All the teachings of the remnant
church of Bible prophecy must be established frmly on the Bibles clear message, in prepara-
tion for the latter rain and the imminent return of Christ.
Te Churchs strength lies in its obedience to the Bible. We should not be afraid to do
what the Bible calls us to do, even if the surrounding culture does not approve. Tis is what
we call others to do in connection with Sabbath observance, diet, and other matters, and we
should be willing to do so on this matter as well. As we know, the time is fast approaching
when a false day of worship will be enforced and Sabbath observance will become even more
difcult. Could God be testing us now on lesser points in order to develop the lessons of faith
needed to stand these more difcult tests in the future? God will honor faithfulness to Him
and His Word. May He fnd us willing as individuals and as a church to stand for Him at a
time when the world and even many Christians are becoming increasingly hostile to the vital,
eternal truths of Scripture. Jesus encourages us, Be faithful until death, and I will give you
the crown of life (Rev 2:10). Let us live so that we may hear Him say, Well done, good and
faithful servant (Matt 25:21).
answers to some questions about
ordination
81
Does the priesthood of all believers permit women to be ordained as pastors?
But you are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, His own special
people, that you may proclaim the praises of Him who called you out of darkness into His
81 Tis section draws on Pfandl, Evaluation of Egalitarian Papers, http://www.adventistarchives.org/evaluation-of-egalitarian-papers.pdf.
marvelous light (1 Pet 2:9).
Although Peter calls Christians a royal priesthood, this does not mean that all adults
and children, male and female, are serving as priests or ordained ministers. Just as God called
ancient Israel a kingdom of priests yet established the priesthood of Aaron and his sons as
the spiritual leaders, so in the Christian church the apostles and elders were established as
leaders, and all of them were males.
Israel was a royal priesthood because every Israelite was a member of the covenant com-
munity and was expected to mediate the gospel to the world and prepare it for the arrival
of the Messiah. In other words, the objective of Gods call to every member of Israel was
to evangelize the world, and the priests and Levites were called upon to lead and teach the
people how to do it. Similarly, all Christians are a royal priesthood, called to announce to
the world what Jesus has done and that He is coming again, but it is the role of the elders/
overseers to lead and teach the people how to do it. Te royal priesthood concept upholds
the leadership of elders and deacons, and it does not open the door for women to be ordained
as elders/ministers.
Was hierarchy abolished by Jesus and the Apostles?
Jesus called them to Himself and said to them, You know that those who are consid-
ered rulers over the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great ones exercise authority over
them. Yet it shall not be so among you; but whoever desires to become great among you shall
be your servant. And whoever of you desires to be frst shall be slave of all (Mark 10:42-44).
To say that the words of Jesus in Mark 10:43 constitutes a thorough rejection, or re-
versal, of the hierarchical model is misleading. Jesus condemned the selfsh, self-seeking, or
self-exalting use of authority, but He did not condemn an authority structure per se. When
Jesus says, But it shall not be so among you, He is especially addressing the Twelve. Each of
them desired to be frst in the kingdom that they all expected the Lord to establish soon
(Matt 18:1). Tey forgot that true greatness requires renouncing greatness as an objective in
life. Te Twelve were peers to one another in every sense of the word. Jesus warned them not
to lord it over each other, not to seek the highest place or to exercise power over their peers.
Yet the NT church was clearly structured with levels of authority (apostles, elders, deacons).
Not everyone could be an apostle, elder, or deacon. Apostleship was a spiritual gif distributed
by the Holy Spirit according to His will (1 Cor 12:3-11; 28-31). Elders and deacons were to be
carefully chosen according to clear qualifcations (1 Tim 2:103:13). Tose holding an ofce
had authority over others (1 Cor 16:15, 16; Heb 13:17; 1 Tim 5:17). Elders had authority in
the church. Paul wrote to Titus, Speak these things, exhort, and rebuke with all authority.
Let no one despise you (Titus 2:15).
So Jesus did not forbid the exercise of godly authority. He opposed the selfsh exercise
of authority. Te NT church was clearly organized with levels of authority. Not everyone was
given the same authority, but each was to respect and submit to those of greater authority, and
each was accountable for serving responsibly, in humility and love, those who were of lesser
authority. Nevertheless, levels of authority point to a hierarchy.
Does head in 1 Corinthians 11:2-16 mean source rather than headship authority?
Paul begins his counsel by stating the biblical principle that the head of every man is
Christ, the head of woman is man, and the head of Christ is God (v. 3).
Te claim that headship is ofen understood as ruling power but that this is not normal
in the Greek language is incorrect. Walter Bauers Greek Lexicon under the fgurative use of
kephal (head) says that head in the case of living beings denotes superior rank, and cites
examples of texts both within and outside of Scripture.
82
No reference is given for kephal as
source; in fact, in the latest edition of the Lexicon, source is explicitly rejected as a possible
meaning for head.
83
Clearly the intent of the metaphorical use of head is to describe some-
one who holds superior rank as leader, master, ruler, authority fgure, or other person of frst
status among others.
We need to understand head in 1 Corinthians 11 as it is used in the parallel expres-
sions found in other Pauline passages, such as Ephesians 5:23: For the husband is the head
of the wife as also Christ is the head of the church. Te husband is certainly not the source
of the wife, and it would be awkward to understand in the same context that Christ is the
source of the church, since He is depicted not as Founder of the church but as its Savior, and
the relationship is clearly defned in the next verse as one of submission to the head: Now as
the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything
(Eph 5:24). Also, in Colossians 1:18, which declares Christ to be the head of the body, the
church, the text explicitly states the purpose: so that in all things He may have the preemi-
nence. Te issue is one of rank, not of source.
Te meaning of head in 1 Corinthians, then, is headship, not source. Te leadership
that Scripture points to as headship, and which was modeled by Christ, is a loving, nurturing,
self-sacrifcing leadership to which women voluntarily submit, as called for in Ephesians 5:22-
33 and 1 Peter 5:2, 3.
Does mutual submission mean that there is no more male headship?
Submitting to one another in the fear of God. (Eph 5:21)People have used this verse
to show that husbands and wives need to submit to each other. Te text, they say, calls on all
82 Frederick William Danker, W. F. Arndt, and F. W. Gingrich, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, third edition (Chicago, IL:
University of Chicago Press, 2000), 542.
83 Ibid., citing Joseph A. Fitzmyer, Another Look at Kephal in 1 Corinthians 11.3, NTS 35 (1989): 503-11. See also, more recently, Fitzmyer,
Kephal in 1 Corinthians 11:3, Interpretation 47 (1993): 52-59, esp. 57: Tose who have claimed that source is the meaning intended by
Paul have ofered no other argument than their claim that kephal would not have meant ruler, leader, one having authority over in Pauls day.
Te evidence brought forth above shows that it was certainly possible for a Hellenistic Jewish writer such as Paul to use the word in that sense
[ruler]. Hence, their argument has collapsed, and the traditional understanding has to be retained.
of us to be subject to one another and not just women to their husbands. Tey conclude that
there is no longer a male headship in the family and in the church.
When we read further in Ephesians we see three clusters of relationships that show how
people need to relate to each other. First it deals with relations between husbands and wives
(Eph 5:22-33), next between children and parents (Eph 6:1-4), and fnally between slaves
and masters (Eph 6:5-9). In this context, how does mutual submission work in each of these
relations?
God does call on all of us to submit to one another, but doesnt ask us to submit to one
another in the same ways. Nowhere in the Bible are husbands called on to obey their wives.
Instead, husbands are asked to sacrifce themselves for their wives. Te husband is also asked
to serve as the head of the wife, to whom the wife is asked to submit. Husbandship is head-
ship, not dictatorship. As head, the husband is expected to be the family leader; but he is to
lead in the way that Christ leads as head of the churchcompassionately, graciously, justly,
openly, honestly, responsibly, manfully. Te wife is asked to submit herself to her husband in
everythingnot meanly or grudgingly, but gladly, wisely, nobly, as to the Lord.
In Pauls next example children are required to obey their parents; parents are not asked
to obey their children. Te Bible calls for children to obey their parents in everything, for this
pleases the Lord. Yet fathers are not to provoke their children. Slaves are called to obey their
masters in everything, not as men-pleasers, but in singleness of heartas serving the Lord
and not men. Masters are not expected to take orders from their slaves, yet masters are to treat
their slaves justly and fairly, knowing that your own Master also is in heaven.
Te Bible requires not only wives but all of us to be in submission to one another. It asks
us to do this in the only way it can possibly be donewith our eyes on Jesus. But it calls on
us to be submissive in diferent ways, suitable to our diferent roles. Te Bible asks husbands
to shoulder the primary responsibility for family leadership, in imitation of the Lord. And it
asks wives to be subject to their husbands, as to the Lord.
84
Can women be ordained because male leadership is an ideal, not an absolute?
It is true that Jesus makes a distinction between the weights of various divine instruc-
tions. He told the Pharisees that despite being scrupulous about tithing they had neglected
the weightier matters of the law: justice and mercy and faith (Matt 23:23). But we must re-
member that He followed this by saying, Tese you ought to have done, without leaving the
others undone. Just because a biblical command is not as foundational as others does not give
us authority to alter it as if it were fexible, depending on the situation. Te Bible has many
examples of those of those who assumed that a command of God was fexible when it wasnt.
84 Adapted from C. Mervyn Maxwell, Mutual Submission: What is it? Adventists Afrm, Fall 1987, 23-27.
Adam and Eve were punished for eating a piece of fruitan act that certainly isnt wrong in
most circumstances. Cains ofering was rejected due to a modifcation of what God asked
him to use in worship, and Uzzah was punished merely for steadying the arkboth transgres-
sions of commands not related to the moral law. Nadab and Abihu were punished when they
ofered a diferent fre from the one the Lord commanded to be used in the sanctuaryagain
only a command not found in Gods moral law. Ten there were Miriam and Korahtwo
people who challenged the leadership structure of Gods people. Miriam challenged Moses
place of leadership and was punished by the Lord. Korah, Dathan, Abiram, and 250 leaders
of Israel came to Moses asking for a higher place in the organizational ranks of the Levites.
Nearly the entire congregation was on Korahs side, believing that he and his company should
be allowed to serve as priests. What followed was a refusal to make an adaptation to the
functional, ecclesiastical norm of the Aaronic priesthood, even though the people strongly
believed it should be that way.
Are we really safe in this new interpretive method of biblical instruction in which some
commands are considered absolute and others fexible? How are we to know which biblical
commands are open to adaptation? What about tithing? Te ordinances? Lifestyle teachings?
Are they fexible, too? Should we give liberty to individual churches to baptize by sprinkling,
use leavened bread in communion, or drink alcohol in moderation? Classifying biblical in-
struction in two diferent categories is a dangerous slippery slope.
If Adventists already adapt biblical instruction, should we not allow women to be ordained?
Because Paul forbids women to teach and we as a church have women teachers, some see
this as evidence that the Adventist Church already adapts non-essential divine commands.
But the Bible does not prohibit women from all teaching. On the contrary, it mentions wom-
en involved in both teaching and prophesying, and Ellen G. White concurs by encouraging
women to address the crowd whenever you can (Ev 473). Paul, therefore, could not have
been giving an outright prohibition of teaching. In saying, I do not permit a woman to teach
or to have authority over a man (1 Tim 2:12), he linked the prohibited teaching with author-
ity over men. A few verses later, he directs that the ofcial church ofce of elder must be held by a
man who is able to teach. So the prohibition given to women was that they could not assume the
teaching authority that belongs to the church elder. We neednt think that we have been adapting
Pauls instruction when women are encouraged to teach or preach in various settings; they may do
so as long as they are not exercising the authority that belongs to the ordained elder or minister.
Does 1 Timothy 2:12-14 apply only to a local situation, not universally?
Contrary to the claim that in these verses Paul addresses only a specifc issue in Ephesus
where women are infuenced by false gnostic teachings, what Paul says in 1 Timothy 2 and 3
is clearly meant for the universal church, not just for the church in Ephesus. In chapter two he
discusses the universality of Christian worship (2:1-15):
a. Prayers for those in authority (2:1-3) should be made in all churches, not just in
Ephesus.
b. God wants all human beings saved (2:4-7), hence all churches should work for the
salvation of souls, not just the church in Ephesus.
c. Te worship procedures (2:8-15) are for all churches, not just for Ephesus.
In chapter three, Paul discusses the prerequisites for Christian leaders in all churches,
not just in Ephesus (3:1-13):
a. Te character of bishops (3:1-17) refers to bishops in all churches, not just in Ephesus.
b. Te character of deacons (3:8-13) refers to deacons in all churches, not just in Ephesus.
Tus to claim that 2:12-14 refers only to the local church is to ignore the context, which
is clearly universal. Te immediate context of verses 12-14 begins in verse 8 with the words,
I desire therefore that the men pray everywhere, lifing up holy hands, without wrath and
doubting, indicating that Paul is speaking to the universal church and not just to the local
church in Ephesus. In verse 9, where Paul begins his admonition to women with the words,
in like manner also (i.e., speaking to women everywhere), he addresses the issue of adorn-
ment and good works. Te whole of chapter two is addressed to the universal church.
In the text, I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man (v. 12),
the Greek word didask (teach) refers to sound instruction. It does not refer to false teaching,
for which Paul uses the word heterodidaskale (teach something diferent, i.e., false doctrine)
in 1Timothy 1:3 and 6:3. Does Paul mean that women can never speak in church? Certainly
not; he has women praying and prophesying (preaching?) in church (1 Cor 11:5). What is
prohibited to women is the authoritative teaching that is part of the ecclesiastical ofce of
minister/elder, which involves the exercise of spiritual authority. In other words, teaching in
combination with having authority over refers to the authoritative teaching of the ordained
minister/elder.
Te fact that Paul addresses certain false teachings in his letter to Timothy does not
mean that everything he says has meaning only for the local situation in Ephesus. For ex-
ample, what he says in chapter 3 about elders and deacons is repeated in Titus 1, indicating
that his counsel is meant for all churches, not just for the Ephesians. Similarly, what Paul says
about the apparel of women in 1 Timothy 2:9, 10 is also emphasized in 1 Peter 3, again show-
ing its universal meaning, not just for the church in Ephesus.
Does the Creation-Fall-Re-Creation motif establish full gender equality at the frst
advent that allows the ordination of women?
Te New Testament continues to teach the leadership of men in the home and church.
Tis is especially clear from the writings of Paul in 1 Corinthians 11, 1 Timothy 2 and 3, and
Titus 1, in which to the end of his life he advocated male leadership in the Christian church.
Te above discussions on these passages show that the distinctions in function between male
and female continue afer Christs First Advent without any provision for women to function
as elders or ministers. Only an incorrect interpretation of the text would eliminate male lead-
ership. Te re-creation of humans to the pre-Fall condition, whatever that may entail, takes
place at the Second Advent, not at the First Advent.
Does religious liberty demand that we allow for women to be ordained?
Tis understanding of the concept of religious liberty is not supported by the Bible.
Te churchs loyalty must be to God and His Word, not to the varying individual convictions
of its members. Te Bible gives instructive examples of how church leadership is to relate to
the individual convictions of its members. Tough the whole congregation cried out for a
change in leadership, Aarons efort to honor their convictions with a golden calf was met
with punishment. Tough the people pleaded with Saul to accept an ofering from the fock
of the Amalekites, when he accepted the plan, God rejected him as king. Tough the whole
congregation was strongly convicted of the need for a change in organizational structure,
Korah and those with him were denied their convictions. And though many were convict-
ed that circumcision must be required of the Gentiles, the Jerusalem Council rejected their
convictions in every case, stating that circumcision was never to be required of the Gentiles.
Using freedom of conscience to shape the Churchs beliefs and practices, as seen in
other churches, can pave the way for the promotion of homosexuality, academic freedom to
teach evolution in Adventist schools, etc. Tese things, it will be rightly claimed, are for many
just as much a matter of conscience as is the ordination of women. Even if it were not church
members but civil authorities that required ordination as a matter of equality, it would not
pay for the church to acquiesce. We must not be afraid to take a stand for Bible truth, even
now.
While we observe the sincerity of many who try to keep the Church together while it is
currently divided on the issue of womens ordination, we see no safety in opening the doors
of ordination to women in direct contradiction to clear biblical commands. God has placed
in His word no command which men may obey or disobey at will and not sufer the conse-
quences.
85
Rather than simply allowing for everyone to do as they wish in regard to the ordination
of women as ministers, the church should focus on opening a broader range of ministries to
women. It should train godly women in ministry areas in which they can do a greater work
than that of men. Te Saviour will refect upon these self-sacrifcing women the light of His
countenance, and this will give them a power that will exceed that of men. Tey can do in
families a work that men cannot do, a work that reaches the inner life. Tey can come close
to the hearts of those whom men cannot reach. Teir work is needed.
86
Te Church should
also be giving far greater prominence to promoting the work of the Christian mother. And
for those who are employed in ministry, we should compensate women in harmony with the
importance of their work. We can do these worthwhile things now, but to make allowance for
acting contrary to Gods Word can only result in loss to the church and to the cause of truth.
May God help us to remain faithful to His Word while reafrming and further developing
the roles of women in ministry.
85 PP 360
86 ChS 27
position summary #2
outline
Summary Statement ....................................................................................................................................... 64
Introduction .................................................................................................................................................... 65
Biblical Hermeneutics ..................................................................................................................................... 65
Use of Proper Method ........................................................................................................................ 66
Study of Language, Grammar, and Context .......................................................................................... 66
Theological Focus .............................................................................................................................. 66
Use of Biblical Theological Principles ...................................................................................................67
Text, Theology, and Ordination ........................................................................................................... 68
Order in Gods Cosmic Kingdom ...................................................................................................................... 68
God, Women, and Men in the Old Testament ................................................................................................... 69
Adam and Eve Before the Fall ..............................................................................................................69
Created in the Image of God ......................................................................................................69
The Priority of Adam ..................................................................................................................69
Adam and the Law ....................................................................................................................70
Created from Adams Rib and for Him .........................................................................................70
The Naming of the Woman ......................................................................................................... 71
Marriage .................................................................................................................................. 71
Men and Women After the Fall ............................................................................................................72
Adam and Eve ...........................................................................................................................72
Women in Leadership Roles in Israel ..........................................................................................72
God, Women, and Men in the New Testament .................................................................................................. 73
Husbands and Wives: Headship .......................................................................................................... 73
Ephesians 5:2133 .................................................................................................................... 73
1 Corinthians 11:216 ................................................................................................................ 74
Main Topic of the Passage ................................................................................................. 74
Cultural Practice ............................................................................................................... 74
Use of the Term Head (kephal) ...................................................................................... 75
Connection with Genesis 1 ................................................................................................. 75
Timothy 2:914 .........................................................................................................................76
Context ............................................................................................................................76
Learn in Silence and be Submissive ................................................................................... 77
Women Forbidden to Teach ................................................................................................ 77
To Have Authority Over ...................................................................................................... 77
Adam and Eve ...................................................................................................................78
Nature of Christian Ministry .................................................................................................................78
Jesus and Christian Ministry ......................................................................................................78
Ministry in the Church ...............................................................................................................79
The Gifting of the Spirit .......................................................................................................................79
The Spirit for Men and Women ...................................................................................................79
Gifts are Gender Inclusive ........................................................................................................ 80
Members and Ministers: No Essential Difference ....................................................................... 80
Gifts and Offces ................................................................................................................................ 80
God Takes the Initiative ............................................................................................................ 80
The Twelve Apostles .................................................................................................................. 81
Specialized Gifts ....................................................................................................................... 81
Beginning of Appointive Leaders ............................................................................................... 81
Deacons and Elders .................................................................................................................. 82
Laying-on of Hands in Scripture ...........................................................................................................83
Laying-on of Hands in the Old Testament ...................................................................................83
Laying-on of Hands in the New Testament ..................................................................................83
Signifcance of the Rite ............................................................................................................. 84
Qualifcations for Leadership ............................................................................................................. 84
Female Deacons ................................................................................................................................. 84
Female Elders ........................................................................................................................... 86
Conclusion .............................................................................................................................. 86
Ellen G. White and Women in Ministry ............................................................................................................. 87
Silence .............................................................................................................................................. 88
Inclusiveness .................................................................................................................................... 89
Variety .............................................................................................................................................. 89
Commissioning .................................................................................................................................. 90
Mission .............................................................................................................................................. 91
Appointment to Offces in the Seventh-Day Adventist Church .......................................................................... 92
Conclusion ...................................................................................................................................................... 93
Answers to Some Questions About Ordination ................................................................................................. 94
position summary #2
summary statement
Order in Gods cosmic kingdom is based on the love that defnes His very nature and
expresses itself in service to God and others. In His love, He gave capacities and abilities to
His intelligent creatures and, on the basis of their development and their loving service, spe-
cifc responsibilities were assigned to them. Since God granted them freedom, they were not
arbitrarily restricted in their development by being assigned a particular role to be exercised
throughout eternity without the possibility of performing other roles. God did not arbitrarily
limit them in their expression of loving service to others.
Adam and Eve were members of the cosmic kingdom of God. Tey were created in the
image of God as equal. No one was placed under the authority of the other on the basis of
gender or order of creation. Eve was not created to be by nature under Adam. It was only afer
the Fall that in order to preserve order at home she was under subjection to her husband. But
this was restricted to the husband-wife relationship.
In Israel, leadership was primarily under the leadership of men. But this common prac-
tice should not blind us to the fact that God was interested in using women as leaders of
His people. Te common practice never became a law in Israel or a direct divine command.
God wanted His people to understand that men and women should work together as equal
in service to Him and to His people. He provided for His people male and female prophets
(the highest and most important spiritual leaders in Israel) and a female judge, who was
also a prophet, to hold the most important leadership role in Israel during the period of the
judges. From the divine perspective, leadership among His people is not based on gender
diferentiations.
In the New Testament, the common pattern of male leadership is continued but the
leadership of women becomes highly visible. Women could now occupy positions of lead-
ership equal to those of men. Tey too received the gif of the Spirit that equipped them, as
well as men, to build up the church. Since the gifs are gender inclusive, women who had the
necessary gifs to function as deacons were appointed and ordained as such. Tis immediately
reveals that although the qualifcations for the ofces of deacon and elder are gender specifc
they are not gender exclusive. Both male and female members of the church could function
as elders and deacons as long as they had the appropriate gifs and the church acknowledged
the divine calling. Te fact that the New Testament does not explicitly mention female elders
does not mean that they did not function as such. Te qualifcation of elders and deacons are
very similar and we know that there were females deacons in the New Testament. Tere is
enough biblical support for the church to proceed to ordain women to the ministry.
Ellen G. White, like the Bible, does not explicitly prohibit or afrm the ordination of
women to the ministry. However, she has opened the door for women who are qualifed to
occupy in the church any position of leadership. She encouraged young women to study and
develop their God-given gifs in order to be ready to serve the church in such positions.
Te biblical evidence is clear: there is nothing spiritually, ethically, or morally wrong
with ordaining women to the gospel ministry.
introduction
Aware of our high calling as Seventh-day Adventists, we eagerly anticipate the soon com-
ing of our Lord Jesus. We passionately believe that God will have a people upon the earth
to maintain the Bible, and the Bible only, as the standard of all doctrines and the basis of all
reforms.
1
Tis calls for a full commitment to the totality of the Scripture and to its unques-
tionable authority as the only source of faith and practice. Such convictions are indispensable
to us as we examine the history of salvation as revealed to us in the Scripture in our search for
Gods will on the question of the ordination of women to the gospel ministry.
As we address this subject, a proper understanding of Gods character, the great contro-
versy between good and evil, and the plan of salvation will provide the interpretive frame-
work. Consequently, in our examination of the biblical evidence for the ordination of women,
we need to ask pertinent questions about God: What is Gods view of women and how has He
communicated it to us? What picture of God will come out of an interpretation in favor of the or-
dination of women? What picture of God will be painted by a denial of the possibility of womens
ordination? We begin our study in sincerity of heart, with a prayer, and with willingness to
listen to what the Spirit has to say to the church.
biblical hermeneutics
Te need to begin our study with a brief discussion of hermeneutics arises out of the fact
that the Bible does not explicitly command or forbid the ordination of women to ministry.
Adventists who love the Lord and take the Scriptures seriously as the inspired Word of God
have come to diferent conclusions using the same Bible on the same subject. Hence, these
diferences require refection on how we interpret the Word of God (hermeneutics).
In 1986, at the General Conference Annual Council in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, Sev-
enth-day Adventist leadership adopted a document on methods of biblical hermeneutics:
1 GC 596
Methods of Bible Study: Presuppositions, Principles, and Methods
2
(MBS). Hermeneutics
deals not only with understanding the Bible but also with the process of thinking about and
evaluating biblical interpretation. Seventh-day Adventists agree that we should follow sound
hermeneutical principles. Exegesis applies these principles to particular texts, and the exposi-
tion of these texts communicates Gods message from the text through preaching or teaching.
use of proper method
Putting diferent texts together and understanding their theological signifcance re-
quires great awareness of the entire biblical teaching. Te task must be done under the guid-
ance of the Holy Spirit if we hope to understand the truth as the Spirit intended. In accor-
dance with the Rio document, we accept the historical-grammatical method of interpreting
the Bible as a proper tool for understanding it. Firmly accepting the Bible as the Word of God
and rejecting methodologies that undermine its supernatural origin and message, we seek
to follow and obey what it teaches. We desire to study it with a humble heart and teachable
spirit, recognizing our human limitations in understanding all it has to say to us.
study of language, grammar, and context
As the Rio document states, we also wish to follow faithful methods of Bible study to
arrive at the true meaning of the text of the Bible. Tis requires the study of backgrounds: In
connection with the study of the biblical text, [we] explore the historical and cultural factors.
Archaeology, anthropology, and history may contribute to understanding the meaning of the
text.
3
Hence, we must consider, as best we can, the original languages of the Bible books with
help from grammar and syntax, the context of the passages, the literary genre of the books,
and guidance from Ellen G. White where available. Te context of the passage is its imme-
diate context within the book and the whole Bible. In some cases the meaning of a passage
is plain to the reader, but in many others its understanding requires careful and prayerful
analysis. Tis would require the study of terminology, grammatical constructions, literary
structure, its contextual setting, etc.
theological focus
Te Rio document alludes to such a theological approach to hermeneutics when it says,
Te Scriptures were written for the practical purpose of revealing the will of God
to the human family. However, in order for one not to misconstrue certain kinds of
2 Tis document was published in the Adventist Review, January 22, 1987, and is available online at https://adventistbiblicalresearch.org/
materials/bible-interpretation-hermeneutics/methods-bible-study. We will use its publication in George E. Reid, ed., Understanding Scripture:
An Adventist Approach (Silver Spring, MD: Biblical Research Institute, 2005), 329-337.
3 MBS, 333.
statements, it is important to recognize that they were addressed to peoples of East-
ern cultures and expressed in their thought patterns . . . . Te Scriptures record ex-
periences and statements of persons whom God accepted but were not in harmony
with the spiritual principles of the Bible as a wholefor example, incidents relating
to the use of alcohol, to polygamy, divorce, and slavery. Although condemnation
of such deeply ingrained social customs is not explicit, God did not necessarily en-
dorse or approve all that He permitted and bore with in the lives of the patriarchs
and [kings] in Israel . . . Te spirit of the Scriptures is one of restoration. God works
patiently to elevate fallen humanity from the depths of sin to the divine ideal.
4
In other words, a theological approach to biblical, spiritual, and theological principles that
highlights the unfolding of Gods revelation is part of a faithful Adventist biblical hermeneutic.
It is the narrative of salvation history: from Gods creation ideal, through the fall of humankind,
to a restoration through Christ to Gods original ideal in the new earth. Adventists employ a
distinctive approach in their Creation-Fall-Re-Creation theological method. Creation is a fun-
damental and overarching theological principle of Adventist teaching and serves as the basis for
the theological formulations of our teachings. Tis is the case for our understanding of the cos-
mic confict and for such teachings as abstinence from alcohol, vegetarianism, and the rejection
of polygamy and slavery. Tis Adventist hermeneutic is refected also in our name: we are Sev-
enth-day (creation) Adventists (re-creation). Te entire story of redemption is included. With
this distinctive approach based in creation and re-creation, we are able to see the big picture of
Gods revelation, the unity of the Scriptures, and the ultimate intention of the biblical material
as a whole (a canonical approach) in order to correctly discern the meaning of Gods message. In
this task we seek to uncover, guided by the Spirit, the loving character of our God as manifested
in His Son and on the record of His self-revelation in the Scriptures.
use of biblical theological principles
Tus, sound hermeneutical principles provide a balanced and biblically informed under-
standing of the biblical text. If we tried to explain biblical truth only and simply by quoting Bible
texts instead of fnding and applying biblical principles provided by the larger context of the
Bible itself, Adventists would not be able to support our positions against smoking or the use of
drugs, or to promote vegetarianism.
A hermeneutic that takes seriously the biblical principles and that traces its roots back to
creation is also consistent with our Adventist position against a homosexual lifestyle, because
the biblical account of creation provides the fundamental reasoning for a total opposition to
4 Ibid., 335-336.
this lifestyle. Biblical teaching against homosexuality is rooted in the creation legislation, univer-
sal, is not temporal, never changed, and is valid in all times (see Gen 1:26-28; 2:22-24; Lev 18:22;
20:13; Rom 1:26, 27). It, too, is consistent with a biblical trajectory built on the pattern from cre-
ation through the fall to the re-creation.
text, theology, and ordination
As suggested above, even though there is no explicit and direct biblical statement command-
ing to ordain women to ministry, neither is there any biblical hindrance to doing so. On the con-
trary, a careful textual and biblical-theological analysis points in the direction of fully including
and afrming women in all ministry positions. Tis approach is used by all the parties involved in
the discussion of the ordination of women to the ministry. In the absence of an explicit command
we have to look for the biblical teaching on the relationship between man and woman. It is only
by attentively listening to what the Bible teaches as well as to its theological emphasis that we can
reach a sound conclusion.
order in gods cosmic kingdom
Te biblical emphasis on the ordained ministry is primarily about church order and as such
it should refect the principles of order that rule the cosmic kingdom of God. Te mystery of the
unity of the Godhead is for us an impenetrable mystery. We know that God is love and that the
inter-Trinitarian relationships are a constant expression and outfow of that love. Beyond that we
should humbly bow ourselves before Him in silence. Order as such characterizes Gods creation
and is indispensable for it to function properly. Within His cosmic kingdom, order is simply the
creations refection of the love of God.
Te law of love being the foundation of the government of God, the happiness of intelligent
beings depends upon their perfect accord with its great principles of righteousness. God desires
from all His creatures the service of loveservice that springs from an appreciation of His charac-
ter . . . To all He grants freedom of will, that they may render Him voluntary service.
5

According to this quote, love is the foundation of the divine government. Te character of
God is the law that rules the universe. Second, the well-being of intelligent creatures is dependent
on their subjection to God. God Himself is the center of order. Tird, intelligent creatures express
their love in service to God. Nothing is arbitrarily imposed on them but on the contrary, having
been created free, the Creator only expects from them voluntary service.
6
Trough this law of service, God holds the universe together. It is this law of service out of
love that rules among the angels. Ellen G. White suggests that positions of leadership among
the angels were assigned to them on the basis of service.
7

5 PP 34.
6 See Ed 103.
7 SpTED 57.
We know that angels are assigned new responsibilities, which means that they were not
created to fll a particular one without the possibility of new opportunities for service.
8
Since
positions were assigned by God on the basis of service, the submission of angels to new angelic
leaders was voluntary in the sense that they could understand why the Creator assigned to
them their new roles of service. Te submission to angelic leaders was in fact a submission to
God. As time passed the functions would change as a result of God bestowing new honors to
other angels. No one was limited to a particular role within the Kingdom of God. Tere was
a harmonious order within which each intelligent creature could freely develop the potential
God gave them without any predetermined and arbitrary restriction (for instance, who was
created frst; for sure not on the basis of gender).
god, women, and men in the old testament
Using our hermeneutical approach we will now proceed to study the role of women in
the Bible beginning with the Old Testament. Tis is indispensable due to the fact that we do
not have an explicit biblical command to ordain or not ordain women to the ministry.
adam and eve before the fall
We go back to origins because there we fnd for the frst time the divine understanding
of the relationship between man and woman and what God expected from them. A reading
of the text clearly indicates that they were created equal and that one was not placed under
the authority of the other.
created in the image of god. God created man [haadam, humankind] in His
own image, in the image of God created He him; male and female He created them (Gen
1:27)
9
. Both man and woman are made in the divine image, both are blessed, both share alike
in the responsibility of procreation, both are to subdue the earth, both are to rule over the an-
imal kingdom (Gen 1:26-28). Teir nature is the same and under God they are to perform the
same functions. Although the terms male and female do connote sexual (biological) and
other diferences, both man and woman are commanded equally and without any distinction
to have dominion, not of one over the other, but both together over the rest of Gods creation.
Tese verses explicitly and strongly indicate the absence of any hierarchy of men over women.
the priority of adam. Tat man is created frst, before the woman, may suggest
to some that Adam was to have authority over Eve, but contextually this is not the case (e.g.
the animals were created before Adam). Rather, the entire account of Genesis 2 is written to
8 For instance, Gabriel was not a covering cherub, but was assigned that position afer the fall of Lucifer. Ellen White describes Gabriel as the
angel who stands next in honor to the Son of God (DA 99; see also 234). Tis was Lucifers position before his rebellion (cf. 4BC 1162; Conf 9;
GC 495; 4BC 1143).
9 Unless otherwise noted, Bible quotations are from the New American Standard Bible.
show that the creation of woman at the end of the narrative corresponds in importance to the
creation of man at the beginning. Woman is created as the climax of the creation story. Te
movement in the text is from incompleteness to completeness. Adams priority means that the
creation of humans was not yet completed. We can clearly state that the Adam of Genesis 2 is
the male of the Adam of Genesis 1 that was created in the image of God as male and female.
Te dam of Genesis 2 is the hdam of Genesis 1 in the process of being created. Tis is
contextually what the biblical writer is intending to communicate to us.
adam and the law. A reading of Genesis 2:16, 17 gives the impression that Adam
received a specifc command from God and that he was expected to inform Eve about it (i.e.
he was her teacher). First, with respect to who was the teacher in the Garden of Eden, we only
know that God and the angels were their instructors.
10
Second, it is logical to assume that as
soon as Adam was created God needed to warn him against transgression.
11
Tird, we know
that God also told Eve that she should not eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.
12

God also instructed both of them in how to work and take care of the garden.
13
God gave
specifc instructions to both of them and made them accountable to Him. He treated them
as equals.
created from adams rib and for him. Te derivation of Eve from Adam points
to their equality. Using the raw material of the rib, God chose to aesthetically create a woman
while Adam was asleep. Eve was created from Adams side (not from his head or foot), to show
that she was to stand by his side as an equal
14
(Gen 2:21, 22). Genesis 2 speaks directly to the
question of the relative roles or functional relationship between the frst man and woman: Eve
was to be Adams helper (ezer kenegdo, Gen 2:18). Te term ezer, ofen translated helper,
in the original does not denote a subordinate helper or assistant, as the English term helper
ofen implies. Used mostly of God (as in Exod 18:4; Deut 33:7, 26; Ps 33:20; 70:4; 115:9-11),
this relational term in Scripture simply points to a benefcial relationship. Te term kenegdo
literally means like his counterpart, and thus the entire phrase ezer kenegdo in Genesis 2
signifes no less than a benefactor who is his counterpartan equal partner (Gen 2:18,
22, NEB) both in nature and function. Ellen G. White writes: When God created Eve, He
designed that she should possess neither inferiority nor superiority to the man, but that in
all things she should be his equal. Te holy pair were to have no interest independent of each
other; and yet each had an individuality in thinking and acting.
15
10 Ed 20; PP 50.
11 Cf. YI, February 27, 1902 par. 1.
12 ST, October 8, 1894, pars. 2, 3.
13 Ibid., par. 1.
14 PP 47.
15 3T 484, emphasis added. Cf. PP 58: In the creation God had made her the equal of Adam. Tat Ellen White implies functional (role) equality
without hierarchy as well as ontological equality is clear from the next sentence, in which subjection/submission of wife to husband is introduced
only afer the Fall: Had they remained obedient to Godin harmony with His great law of lovethey would ever have been in harmony with
each other; but sin had brought discord, and now their union could be maintained and harmony preserved only by submission on the part of the
one or the other. Such contrast makes clear that such role hierarchy involving headship/submission was not present before the Fall.
Te creation of Adam and Eve was a unique act in which separation and reunifcation
played an important role. Adam was created frst and consequently his frst social relationship
was with the Creator, not with Eve. Wanting to give Eve the same privilege, God put Adam
to sleep. Eves frst relationship was not with Adam but with God and then He brought her
to Adam to initiate a wonderful relationship in union with each other and with the Creator.
Separation is in their case followed by reunifcation. Eve is created fom the rib of Adam and
brought back to him. Tis is diferent from the way God created other phenomena. In such
cases there was no reunifcation because something radically diferent was created (Gen 1:4,
7, 9; 2:7). Te terminology from and to is used (1 Cor 11:8, 9) to indicate the equality of
Adam and Eve as well as gender diferentiation. She was to be a blessing to him as his equal.
the naming of the woman. When Adam receives the woman from the Creator
he exclaims: Tis is now bone of my bones and fesh of my fesh; She shall be called Woman
[iah], because she was taken out of Man [i] (2:23). We should pay careful attention to
the language used here. Adam is not celebrating that Eve is now under his authority but that
he has now a companion that corresponds to his own nature (bone of my bones). In fact,
the act of naming in the Old Testament normally signifes the ability of discernment, i.e. he
discerns her true identity (cf. Gen 16:13). Moreover, in Genesis 2:23 two divine passives are
used. Te frst one, she was taken from, indicates that it was God who performed the action.
Te second one, she shall be called, indicates that afer creating her God was the one who
called her Woman (Tis one is called [by the Lord] Woman).
marriage. Te equality of Adam and Eve is expressed in the marriage formula: For
this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife; and they
shall become one fesh [basar ekhad] (2:24). Te relationship of Adam and Eve is upheld as
the pattern for all future human marital relationships. It was expected in a patriarchal society
that the woman would cling/be joined to her husband, and hence the force of this state-
ment is that both man and woman are to cling to each other. Reciprocal clinging indicates
the absence of the submission of one under the authority of the other. Likewise, in the context
of the marriage covenant, the husband and wife become one fesh (basar ekhad). Tis ex-
pression indicates a oneness and intimacy in the total relationship of the whole person of the
husband to the whole person of the wife, a harmony and union with each other in all things.
In short, Genesis 2, like Genesis 1, does not provide any evidence that could be used to
support a pre-Fall subjection of the woman to the husband. Tey are rather presented as fully
equal, with no hint of a diferent nature or functional hierarchy.
men and women after the fall
adam and eve. Te submission of the wife to the husband occurred afer the Fall of
Adam and Eve. He [your husband] will rule [mashal] over you (Gen 3:16). Te Hebrew
verb translated will rule over you (mashal) is not the same used for the human couples
rule/having dominion (radah) over the animals (Gen 1:28), but points toward a leadership
role that implies comforting, protecting, care and love. It is crucial to recognize that the
loving leadership of Adam and submission of Eve comes afer the Fall, introduced by God as
a remedial measure to preserve unity and harmony in the marriage. Tis relationship is not
a creation ordinance, but comes as the result of sin: Sin had brought discord, and now their
union could be maintained and harmony preserved only by submission on the part of the one
or the other.
16
Finally, the loving leadership (mashal) role in Genesis 3:16 is limited to the
husband-wife relationship, and therefore does not involve a general subordination of women
to men or universal headship of men over women. In short, there are no impediments in
Genesis 3 preventing woman from full and equal participation with man in any ministry to
which God may call her and for which He may enable her.
women in leadership roles in israel. Since the biblical text leaves open the
possibility for woman to exercise leadership roles, there are numerous examples of women
exercising the gif of leadership and ministry in the Old Testament. Among others we fnd
Miriam, a noted prophet, leader of Israel alongside her brothers (Mic 6:4), and Huldah (2 Kgs
22:14-20; 2 Chr 34:22-28). It is Deborah, however, who deserves special consideration. In the
book of Judges she is depicted as a military leader with the same authority as male generals,
and a judge to whom other male Israelites turned for legal counsel and to settle court cases. It
would be a mistake to consider Deborah as only a prophet who was temporarily given juridi-
cal powers. What is ofen overlooked is that very few prophets in the Old Testament are called
judges and prophets. Tese two roles are ascribed to Moses (Exod 18:16) and Samuel (1 Sam
7:6, 15-17). Tis would suggest that she was the top leader of Israel at that time as prophet
and judge. Tere is no question that the judges were leaders in pre-monarchical Israel (Judg
2:11-19) and that they also had judicial functions. At the moment of crisis, she was Gods in-
strument to deliver His people.
17
Tis was the work of the judges during the time of the judges
(2:16). Guided by the Lord, she had authority over men as prophet and judge. Her leadership
role is so impressive that when Barak hesitates and wants her to be on the battlefeld with
him, she points out that this would be against the traditional role of women and culturally
damaging to Barak; he will experience shame. But he does not care because he wants the best
16 PP 58 (emphasis added).
17 Ellen White writes: Tere was dwelling in Israel, a woman illustrious for her piety, and through her the Lord chose to deliver his people (ST,
June 16, 1881 par. 4).
leader of Israel to accompany him. By choosing Deborah as a leader in Israel, with authority
over His people, God demonstrated that there is nothing morally or spiritually wrong with
having a woman in top leadership roles among Gods people.
In conclusion, the God of the Old Testament does not arbitrarily discriminate against
humans on the basis of gender. Whenever He wanted to use a woman as a leader in Israel He
would do it. Tis shows that the common pattern or practice of male leadershipfollowed
everywhere in the ancient Near East and not only in Israelwas not for God the exclusive
one. If we were to talk about divine ideals, this would be a clear one. Te ideal was not for men
to occupy the most signifcant leadership positions but for both men and women as equals to
lead Gods people. Tis ideal goes back to what God instituted in the Garden of Eden.
god, women, and men in the new testament
Our study of the New Testament will show that what we found in the Old Testament
is equally valid for the New Testament. Te Bible reveals a God who consistently loves, cares,
and uses human beings, male and female, in any position of responsibility among His people.
Te common pattern of male leadership found in the New Testament, also present in the
Old Testament, does not exclusively represent Gods will for His people. We will examine the
relationship of husband and wife and some of the most important passages on our topic in
the New Testament, the nature of ministry, the gifs of the Spirit, and the qualifcations for
church leadership.
husbands and wives: headship
Te New Testament gives important instructions regarding the relationship between
husbands and wives. In the epistles we fnd seven uses of the Greek word meaning to submit
(hypotass; 1 Cor 14:34; Eph 5:21, 24; Col 3:18; Titus 2:5; 1 Pet 3:1, 5) in the context of man/
woman (anr/gyn) relationships. Tere is some ambiguity in the Greek language regarding
anr/gyn because the same words can mean either man/woman or husband/wife. How-
ever, a close look at each of these passages reveals that the context is consistently one of hus-
band and wife relationships and not of men and women in general.
ephesians 5:2133. Tis is the foundational NT passage dealing with husband-wife
relations, and the only one on this issue that contains both words head (kephal) and sub-
mit (hypotass). Tis is not about the unconditional obedience of the wife to the husband
and much less about coerced submission. Te reference to the husband being the head of
the wife (v. 23) must be understood in relation to the nature of Christs headship described in
the same verse. In Pauls day, the Greek word for head (kephal) could be used in a number of
symbolic ways. Here it is not used of Christs authority over the church but Christ as source
of life and nourishment for the rest of the body (cf. Eph 4:15, 16; Col 2:19). Husbands are to
emulate the love of Christ as the Savior of the church. Te husband is to love, nourish, and
cherish her, just as Christ gave Himself for the church (vs. 25, 28). In marriage, love is the
ultimate form of submission.
As was the case in Genesis, Ephesians 5 also makes clear that Pauls counsel for husbands
and wives cannot be extended to the relationship of men and women in general. Even though
some may argue that the church is a family and thus the male headship in the family should
be followed in the church, the apostle himself shows how the marriage relationship applies to
the church. Husband headship in the home is not equated with male headship in the church.
Rather, the only Husband/Head of the church is Christ, and all the churchincluding
malesare His bride, equally submissive to Him (Eph 5:21-23).
1 corinthians 11:2-16. Aside from Ephesians 5:23, the only other NT passage
utilizing kephal head in the context of man/woman relationships is 1 Corinthians 11:3.
Tis passage is thematically and terminologically related to Ephesians 5:21-33, and focuses
on wives submitting to the headship of their own husbands, and not the headship of men
over women in general. While many arguments against the ordination of women have been
built on Pauls counsel in 1 Corinthians 11, a plain reading of this passage reveals that Paul is
not speaking here about church leadership and authority, nor about ordination. Rather, the
purpose of this passage is to instruct the Corinthians regarding the wearing or not wearing
of head coverings when leading out in church gatherings, and giving his rationale for this
instruction.
Main Topic of the Passage. In reality, Pauls counsel in this passage stands in harmony
with other passages of his letters where we see women exercising leadership in gospel minis-
try. In 1 Corinthians 11:4, 5, Paul identifes the main topic of the passage, and both men and
women are pictured as participating and leading in worship by praying and prophesying (that
is, counseling and instructing the gathered believers in the name of God; cf. 1 Cor 14:1-5, 29-
33). Such leadership is here described in exactly the same terms for male and female with no
suggestion of disapproval or of diferentiation between the two, either in the type or level of
leadership in which they engaged.
Cultural Practice. For many generations, Adventists have not understood this instruc-
tion to mean that women should wear head coverings while men should not during worship
service. Tis has been considered to be a culturally specifc instruction within a particular
context. Such recognition by the church is not the result of setting aside the counsel of Scrip-
ture, but is done for the opposite reasonto be fully attentive and obedient to the fundamen-
tal cultural concerns revealed in the passage.
Paul explicitly states in verses 4-6 that his concern with relation to head coverings is the
question of bringing dishonor rather than honor upon ones head. Indeed, the concern about
honor is further developed in verses 7-9, where Paul speaks of the woman as the glory of the
man. It is to such perceptions that he returns in the concluding verses, appealing to what was
generally considered proper for a woman, natural for a man, and generally practiced by
the churches (vs. 13-16). Te instructions of Paul that it is shameful for a woman to have
her hair shaven (v. 6) must be understood against the high value given to honor in the con-
temporary Greco-Roman society. In this society a woman with head uncovered or shaven was
in danger of being considered as an adulterer or a prostitute, and a woman who spoke in public
in a casual setting to males who were not her husband was considered as seeking to seduce them.
Use of the Term Head (kephal). Paul opens his argument regarding head coverings
in verse 3 using a word picture, a metaphor, to speak to this honor/shame culture about what
is proper and shameful for men and women to do in a public church setting. He uses
the metaphor of the head to demonstrate that what an individual believer does with their
physical head impacts also their metaphorical head. Tus a mans choice regarding the wear-
ing of a head covering is not simply about his own freedom to choose, but impacts the honor
with which others will view Christ, his head. Similarly, a womans free choice regarding her
head covering afects not only herself but also her husband/head, and ultimately God, the
absolute head.
Te word for head (kephal) was used by Jews and Gentiles to convey a variety of ideas
related to the place of the physical head in relation to the body, including that of prominence,
of representation of the whole, of being the frst or source. In this passage, Paul is focusing on
the metaphorical idea of Adam as being the frst created, and indeed the source from which
the woman was created (vs. 8, 9). Tis usage makes perfect sense with verse 3, and indeed the
best sense chronologically. It would then be saying that Christ was frst, or source, in relation
to man (encompassing all of humankind, as in Rom 4:8; Eph 4:13); that the man, Adam,
was frst, or source, in relation to his wife, Eve; and that God was frst, or source, in relation to
Christ (the Messiah) in sending Him to redeem humankind.
Connection with Genesis. In verses 7-9, Paul builds on the head metaphor by adding
several reasons from Genesis 1-3 that women should be concerned about not dishonoring
their husbands. Although, like the man, the woman was created in Gods image, Paul focuses
here on the fact that she has the additional privilege of being created to fulfll mans need
and to be his glory. Paul goes to Genesis 2 and provides an excellent reading of it. He notices
that in Genesis the woman is created from manthis is her immediate originand not man
from woman. Tese are the facts. According to Paul, the woman came to enrich the man and
in that sense she added honor/glory to him. She was created for the beneft of man, not man
for her beneft, because he was created before she was created. For Paul and Genesis this is
the very foundation for gender diferentiation. Tis argument is used by Paul to indicate that
when a woman participates in worship she should cover her hair in order to give glory to God,
not to man. When doing this she also avoids self-glorifcation because her hair is her glory (v. 15).
In frst-century culture, it was traditionally understood that the womans glory, and
especially her hair, should be covered in public in order to avoid bringing shame by immod-
estly displaying it to those outside her family. In such circumstances this would have been
especially important in a worship service, to avoid distraction from giving glory and worship
to God alone. Note that, following the summary of his instruction in verse 10, Paul balances
his argumentation in verses 11-12 by making it clear that, ever since creation, it has been the
woman whom God has placed frst, as source, for it is she who has given birth to every man
since Adam.
In summary, 1 Corinthians 11:2-16 makes a clear distinction between male and female
in the manner of dress, in harmony with Deuteronomy 22:5, and calls on wives to act in ways
that do not dishonor their husbands. Tis passage is not about a prohibition of women serv-
ing in leadership roles, nor is it about a universal headship of men over women. Paul does not
read back into Genesis 1-3 a principle never before noticed or expressed. He uses the passage
to demonstrate that from the beginning the wife enriched the life of and brought honor to
the husband and that this should continue to be the case during worship in the context of a
fallen world. Paul is using the reference to creation as an explanation for his argument, not as
the cause for a universal standard of relationship between men and women. Tere is nothing
in the context that would support the idea that in church the elder is the head of the woman.
1 timothy 2:9-14. Tis is one of the most disputed passages in the womens ordi-
nation debate. Since our specifc passage deals with questions related to women we will pay
particular attention to what its immediate context (the Epistle to Timothy) says about them.
Context. A careful reading of 1 Timothy demonstrates that Pauls letter was written in
response to false teachings that threatened to destroy the work of God in Ephesus. From the
very outset of his letter, Paul charges Timothy to oppose the false teachers whose misguided
doctrines were undermining the genuine work of the gospel (1:3). Instead of proclaiming
the power of the Risen Christ that transforms human lives (cf. 1:5; 12-16), these individuals
were proclaiming an exclusive gospel that consisted of nothing more than sensational ideas
(cf. 1:3-4; Titus 1:14; 3:9). In the second half of the letter, Paul further describes the nature
of the false teachings (4:1-5; 6:3-10) and contrasts them with the type of behavior that should
characterize a life lived in harmony with the truth of the gospel. Te letter then closes with an
appeal to stand frm against false doctrine (6:20, 21).
Te false teachings were also making extensive inroads among a number of the believing
women. Te extent to which the false teachings were negatively infuencing them is indicated
in the prominent attention Paul gives to women in his discussions against false teachings. He
is concerned with the conduct of women in worship (2:10-15), with widows (5:5, 6, 10, 11,
14), and with women who were going from house to house saying things they should not
(5:13, EXB). Te fact that Paul describes these women as saying things they should not
suggests they were connected to some extent with the certain persons Timothy was charged
to keep from teaching a diferent doctrine (1:3, ESV). Te connection of these women with
the false teachers can also be seen in that their desire not to marry and bear children (5:11-16)
coincides with the false teachers advocacy of celibacy (4:1-3; 5:9, 10). It was the connection
of these women with the false teachers and their heretical doctrines that lay at the heart of
Pauls prohibition.
Learn in Silence and be Submissive. Te context of the passage provides the reason for
the statement that women are to learn in silence. Instead of listening to false teachers they are
to be taught in church by those well-versed in Christian doctrine. As good students, women
are expected to learn in silence, that is to say they are not to interfere with the teaching pro-
cess. Besides that, they are to be submissive to the teacher and the Christian teachings.
Women Forbidden to Teach. Women are forbidden to teach because of the infuence
the false teachings are having over theman infuence that may have not only afected their
behavior, but that likely involved their promotion of the false teachings as well. Te women
in Ephesus were not ft to teach not because they were women, but because they had been or were
being deceived by the false teachersjust as Eve had been deceived by the alluring words of the
serpent (cf. 1 Tim 2:14; 2 Cor 11:3, 4). Under these circumstances, these women were in no
position to teach; they frst needed to become learners (2:11).
To Have Authority Over. Te verb authentein in 1 Timothy 2:12, translated to have au-
thority over, does not refer to ofcial teaching authority. Careful examination of the usage of
the verb shows that there is no frst-century warrant for translating authentein as to exercise
authority.
18
Tis type of authority is usually expressed through the verbal form of the com-
mon Greek word that Paul uses elsewhere to refer to authorityexousia (e.g., Rom 9:21; 13:3;
2 Cor 13:10; 2 Tess 3:9). He instead uses the unusual verb authenteinonly found here in
the New Testament, but a term that also has negative connotations associated with it. It refers
to a domineering or controlling form of behavior. Tis indicates that the problem in Ephesus
was rooted in the domineering and controlling manner in which the women were teaching
or, most probably, to their attitude toward those who were instructing them. Paul prohibits
this inappropriate behavior in verse 12, and then explains the reason for the prohibition with
a reference to the creation order in verse 13.
18 Linda L. Belleville, Teaching and Usurping Authority: 1 Timothy 2:11-15, in Discovering Biblical Equality: Complementarity without Hier-
archy (ed. Ronald W. Pierce and Rebecca M. Groothuis; Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 2004), 216.
Adam and Eve. It is important to notice that Paul does not explain what he means
when he says, For it was Adam who was frst created, and then Eve. And it was not Adam
who was deceived, but the woman. . . (vs. 13, 14). Consequently, diferent explanations have
been given (e.g. Eve usurped Adams headship). But Paul is contrasting the priority of Adam
in creation with Eves priority in sin in order to indicate that deception is not inevitable
Adam, although created frst, was not deceived. Deception is in both cases associated with
false teachers and if women stop listening to them they would not be deceived. Tis inter-
pretation of the text within its immediate context is supported by 1 Corinthians 11:5, where
Paul specifcally acknowledges the right of women to pray or prophesy in churchactivities
that were not only done aloud but also included an element of public teaching.
Understood from this perspective, Pauls prohibition is best seen as a temporary injunc-
tion specifcally related to the false teachings that were troubling the believers in Ephesus.
Like all of Scripture, the passage has universal authority for the church today. But to be faith-
ful to Scripture, the passage must only be applied to similar situations within the church
situations where under the infuence of false teachings the behavior of certain individuals,
whether women or men, threaten to undermine the proclamation of the true gospel (Gal
1:7-9). Te context indicates that this passage is not about the ordination of women to the
ministry or about the headship of church elders over women. Neither is it about the headship
of the husband over the wife.
nature of christian ministry
jesus and christian ministry. Te nature of Christian ministry was unquestion-
ably manifested and established by Jesus through His teaching ministry and sacrifce: For
even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom
for many (Mark 10:45). Self-giving service is the greatest expression of Christian ministry
as manifested in the incarnation and death of the Son of God. He who was by nature divine
became a servant to the point of giving His life for us (Phil 2:5-8). His exaltation was based
on His incommensurable service to others. He also taught this to the disciples when He said to
them: You know that those who are recognized as rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them;
and their great men exercise authority over them. But it is not this way among you, but who-
ever wishes to become great among you shall be your servant; and whoever wishes to become
great among you shall be your servant (10:42, 43).
Jesus theology of ministry is based on service, self-sacrifce, and humility, and not on a
power struggle, rank, status, or gender. Jesus was reestablishing in His church the divine prin-
ciple of order that ruled over His cosmic kingdom before the origin of sin, namely divine love
manifested in service to others. Positions of leadership were then assigned on the basis of a life
of service and not on the basis of priority in creation or gender. Jesus does not qualify what
He says on the basis of gender as if the service of females was always to be of an inferior nature
than that of the males. Leadership positions, He says, are assigned to all on the basis of service.
ministry in the church. Following the instructions of Jesus, the NT writers envi-
sioned all ministry as service (diakonia) and applied the term to the service of all believers,
both those who exercise leadership roles as well as those who fulfll other ministerial roles in
the church (Rom 16:1; Phil 2:5-7; Col 1:7; 1 Pet 4:10). In his letters to the churches, Paul used
the same words to describe his ministry and that of his co-workers, including female co-work-
ers (Rom 16:3; 1 Tess 3:2). Together they were servants (diakonos) and slaves (doulos) of the
gospel and of Christ (Col 1:7, 4:7, 12; Eph 6:21). Te kind of authority exercised by Christian
believers is thus diferent from that seen in the world at large. Rather than being conceived in
terms of ruling over, or having authority over (Mark 10:42), the purpose of all Christian
ministry is to encourage, empower, enable, and provide a vision so that the body of Christ
may be built up (Eph 4:12, NIV) and its mission brought to completion. Te biblical prin-
ciples for exercising authority challenge every human culture in some ways. It is essential to
acknowledge that culture has a powerful shaping infuence on every person. Seventh-day Ad-
ventists believe that all ecclesiastical authority should be exercised in a spirit of humble service
to God and His people (Matt 20:24-28; 1 Pet 5:1-4).
Troughout Gods Word, ministry is conceived as service, and as such it is the calling
of every person who accepts Christ as Savior and Lord and becomes part of His body. All
followers of Christ are called to represent Him to the world, to act on His behalf, and to min-
ister to others according to their gifs (2 Cor 5:20; 1 Pet 4:10). Tus one does not fnd in the
New Testament a distinction between spiritual ministry (or clergy) and a secular laity. Every
follower of Christ is a minister or servant and is called to fulfll a ministry according to the
will of the Holy Spirit.
the gifting of the spirit
the spirit for men and women. To establish order in the church on the basis
of the cosmic order established by God, all church memberswomen and menreceived
at Pentecost the power of the Holy Spirit. Tus was the mission of the church inaugurated.
Trough the Spirit, Christ made provision for each believer to participate in His ministry. He
continues to empower believers by providing them with spiritual gifs, the purpose of which
is to edify and serve the Christian community and to facilitate its missionary endeavor (Rom
12:6-9; 1 Cor 12:6-11; Eph 4:7, 11-13). In giving loving service to one another and to the
world, believers demonstrate their obedience to Jesuss command (Matt 22:37-39; 28:18-20).
gifts are gender inclusive. Te New Testament teaching on spiritual gifing in-
dicates that the Holy Spirit bestows gifs upon all Christians regardless of race, gender, or
social status. All believers receive some gifs for the edifcation of the Christian body and for
mission and ministry in the world. Tis fact is evident in that all Christians (men and wom-
en) are given gifs and encouraged to desire the best gifs (1 Cor 12:7, 11, 31). Each follower
of Christ, without exception, therefore has a special and unique contribution to make to the
well-being and mission of the church. Since it is the Holy Spirit who both originates and
sanctions all Christian ministries, the followers of Christ can expect to receive His calling
and are encouraged to embrace the particular ministry to which they are called. Based on the
prophetic words of Joel 2 and Peters reapplication to the events of Pentecost, Seventh-day
Adventists consistently afrm that all spiritual gifs are gender inclusive, including gifs such
as leadership, prophecy, evangelism, pastoral ministry, and teaching.
members and ministers: no essential difference. Finally, the spiritual gif-
ing of each member suggests that there cannot be any essential diference between members
and ministers in the church. Any form of clericalism (i.e., the idea that there is a class divi-
sion in the church where some possess a higher spiritual status than others) is foreign to the
thought of the New Testament (1 Cor 12:22-25). Instead, every believer, under the guidance
and leadership of the Holy Spirit, is called to fulfll a ministry according to his or her spiritual
gifing (Acts 1:6-8; 1 Cor 12:4, 11). Any exclusive claim to these gifs or denial thereof based
on race, social class, or gender is precluded because their distribution is determined by the will
of the Holy Spirit and not by men (1 Cor 12:11).
In conclusion, Christian ministry is gender inclusive and positions of responsibilities are
given on the basis of a divine call and a life of love manifested in service to God and to others.
Adventists believe that the gifs provide all abilities and ministries needed by the church to
fulfll its divinely ordained functions (Fundamental Beliefs, 17). However, the priesthood
of all believers and the spiritual gifing of every believer does not rule out the idea that, in
order for the church to carry out its mission efectively, some structure or organization is nec-
essary (Acts 15:1-15; 1 Cor 14:33, 40). For this reason, the New Testament also supports the
idea of specialized leadership ministries.
gifts and offces
While Christ did not provide detailed information on how the church should be orga-
nized, He allowed the church, with the guidance of the Spirit and Scripture, to organize itself
and fnd ways of best fulflling its mission.
god takes the initiative. Te biblical witness is clear that to fulfll His mission
on earth God chose some of His followers to serve and lead in the church according to the
spiritual gifing they received by the Holy Spirit (Rom 12:8; Eph 4:7, 11). In all cases of min-
istry God is the One who initiated the call, qualifed them for their ministry, and through
the church gave them authority to perform their duties and functions. In the Old Testament,
these leaders included the Levites (Num 8:5-26), Aaron and his sons (Exod 28, 29), the 70
elders (Num 11:10-25), Joshua, judges, and the prophets of Israel.
As in the Old Testament, the New Testament also provides a variety of ways in which
someone was appointed to an ofce or task. In all cases, the initiative for a call to any form of
ministry resides with God. Tose who gave their whole time to Christian service were entitled
to material support by the Christian community (Matt 10:10; 1 Cor 9:3-14; 1 Tim 5:17, 18).
the twelve apostles. Among the leaders of early Christianity, the apostles played a
special role. Jesus appointed these twelve men from larger groups of disciples (Mark 3:13-19;
Luke 6:12-16) to be apostles (Matt 10:1-4; Mark 3:13-19; Luke 6:12-16). He chose them as
eyewitnesses of His ministry (Acts 1:21, 22) and gave them the ministry of faithfully pro-
claiming and interpreting His words and testimony, the gospel. Afer His death and ascen-
sion to heaven (Acts 2:1-4; Mark 3:13, 14; Matt 28:18-20), He entrusted to these individuals
the exercise of authority in the church (cf. Matt 16:19; 18:18). As eyewitnesses, directly ap-
pointed by Christ, the apostles occupy a unique position in the church. As Paul says, they are,
with the prophets, the foundation on which the church is built (Eph 2:20). Teir ministry is
unique and not replicable in the church. Te appointment of the Twelve is considered to be
the beginning of the Christian church and of Christian ministry. Later, afer the ascension
of Jesus, the disciples selected from among them another apostle, Matthias, to replace Judas.
Tis appointment was also done in a spirit of prayer, and the casting of lots between Matthias
and Joseph Barabbas was seen as the will of God (Acts 1:15-26). In the New Testament the
term apostle is also used to designate what appear to be missionaries (e.g. Acts 14:14; 1 Cor
4:6, 9; 1 Tess 1:1, 2:6).
specialized gifts. In early Christianity, we fnd various individuals called and en-
dowed by God with certain gifs of the Holy Spirit that allowed them to function in spe-
cialized avenues of leadership. Referred to as apostles, evangelists, pastors, and teachers (Eph
4:11), these individuals acted as leaders who helped the young Christian church fulfll its mis-
sion more efectively. Tey were charged with preparing Gods people for works of service, so
that the body of Christ may be built up (Eph 4:12, NIV).
beginning of appointive leaders. Te beginning of appointive ministry roles
in the church is recorded in Acts 6. When the apostles found themselves distracted from
their mission by administrative issues, they asked the church to elect seven men to take over
the daily distribution of food. Teir selection by the assembly was completed by a prayer and the
laying-on of hands, the frst reference to this ceremony in the New Testament (Acts 6:1-6).
Tis event marks the beginning of a church-appointed ministry in distinction from a minis-
try appointed by Jesus or from others whose ministry depended only on a direct divine call
(e.g., prophets and teachers). Both the apostles and the Seven were said to be doing service or
ministry for the church: the apostles were doing the ministry of the Word while the Seven
were doing the ministry of tables. Tis division of labor was not absolute, for the Holy Spirit
used at least two of the seven, Stephen and Philip, to teach the gospel in a powerful way in
subsequent chapters of Acts (6:8-10; 8:5, 36-40; 21:8).
Although the word deacon (diakonos) does not occur in the book of Acts, elder
(presbyteros) appears several times, both accepting funds for distribution (11:30) and acting
in a leadership role with the apostles (15:2-4, 22; 21:18). Paul and Barnabas were teachers in
the church of Antioch and were also set apart for missionary work by prayer and laying-on of
hands by their church (Acts 13:1-3). During their missionary journey, they appointed elders
in the local churches they established (Acts 14:23). However, the New Testament speaks also
of some appointments to various functions in less formal ways, such as Philips daughters and
Agabus (Acts 21:8-10). Te frst clear evidence of a two-rank appointive ministry of deacons
and elders is the salutation in Philippians 1:1, but the distinction is clearest in 1 Timothy 3:1-
13. Trough Gods protective guidance and loving concern, patterns of ministry, fuid at frst,
were thus established in the early church.
deacons and elders. As indicated, the diaconate originated in the appointment of
the Seven in Acts 6. It was probably a matter of time for the churches in diferent places to
appoint their own deacons as ofcers in the church. Paul gives specifc instructions on this
matter (1 Tim 3:8-13). Also included among those who exercised gifs of leadership were the
appointive leaderselders/overseers and deaconselected by the community and afrmed
by the apostles. Recognizing the gif of leadership in these individuals, and the inflling of the
Holy Spirit in their lives (Acts 6:3), the church chose them for the task of spiritual oversight,
protection of the community (shepherding), teaching, and preaching (Acts 20:28; 1 Tim 5:17).
Gifs and ofces should not be drastically distinguished because elders were appointed
to their ofce on the basis of having received gifs that qualifed them for this specifc posi-
tion. For instance, among the gifs of the Spirit we fnd the one for pastor (poimn; Eph 4:11)
which is used as a synonym for elder/overseer (1 Pet 5:1-4; Acts 20:17, 28). Te functions of
elder and overseer are also synonymous with each other (Acts 20:17, 28; Titus 1:5, 7). Te
gif of teaching is also described as a responsibility of an elder/overseer (1 Tim 2:2; Titus 1:9).
Tese roles (pastor/teacher, elder/overseer) were not clearly distinguished. Te spiritual gifs
of pastor/teacher, which are gender inclusive in the Adventist teaching of spiritual gifs, are
thus equivalent with the appointed position of elder or overseer.
laying-on of hands in scripture
Te current practice of ordaining church leaders through the laying-on of hands ritual
is largely based on the NT accounts of Acts 6:1-6 and 13:1-3. Scripture does not provide us
with a detailed liturgical description or its theology, nor does it limit the use of this ritual to
the installation of church leaders alone. Like many other Christian practices, however, the
laying-on of hands has its roots in the Old Testament and Judaism.
laying-on of hands in the old testament. Te rite occurs in the Old Testa-
ment in a variety of contexts, such as in blessings, sacrifces, or stoning for blasphemy (Gen
48:14; Lev 4:4; 24:14). Only two instances, however, can be interpreted as precursors of the
NT rite of laying hands on leaders: (1) the induction of the Levites (Num 8:10) and (2) the
commissioning of Joshua (Num 27:23). Both instances utilize the Hebrew phrase samak yad
(literally, pressing the hand/s upon). Te Levites were called to perform a special priestly
service on behalf of the people. Te ceremony of laying-on of hands involved the entire con-
gregation of Israel and was done only once at the inauguration of their service (Num 8:10).
Tere is no biblical evidence that any succeeding generations of Levites were ordained or that
this event was to be repeated. It was a unique event.
Te induction of Joshua (Num 27:23; Deut 34:9) came at a critical juncture in the histo-
ry of Israel and carried signifcant symbolism. In the eyes of the people, he was now their shep-
herd and leader (Num 27:17), a man chosen by God to fulfll a critical task. It is important to
note, however, that while the imposition of hands by Moses symbolically signifed a bestowal
of authority, God had already flled Joshua with all the spiritual gifs needed for the fulfll-
ment of the task (Num 27:18). Te laying-on of hands was a confrmation of the presence of
the Holy Spirit, who grants wisdom for leadership, and a recognition of Joshuas capacity to
lead the nation of Israel, along with the reception of the authority to do so. Tis was also a
unique event because before the time of the kings no other leader was anointed.
laying-on of hands in the new testament. As in the Old Testament, so also
in the New Testament the laying-on of hands ritual was used in a variety of circumstances.
Two phrases, epitithein tas cheiras and epitheseos ton cheiron (laying-on of hand/hands), are
used more than 20 times to indicate such events as blessing, healing, or reception of the Holy
Spirit at baptism (e.g., Matt 19:13-15; Mark 6:5; Acts 8:17; 9:17; 19:6). Only two unequivocal
instances of the laying-on of hands relate directly to installing believers into leadership posi-
tions: the appointment of the Seven in Acts 6 and the commending of Barnabas and Saul
to the grace of God in Acts 13:3, prior to their missionary journey (Acts 14:26).
In the case of the Seven in Acts 6, they were selected (vs. 3, 5) by the Christian commu-
nity according to the necessary qualifcations laid out by the apostles (of good repute, full of
the Spirit and of wisdom, v. 3). While they stood before the apostles, they prayed and laid
hands on them (v. 6). Unfortunately, it is not made clear who they were. Tese could have
been the whole community, or it could have been only the apostles. If the church was follow-
ing OT precedent of Num 8:10 (the sons of Israel shall lay hands on the Levites), this would
support the frst interpretation.
signifcance of the rite. Whether the apostles or the whole congregation laid
hands on the Seven, the laying-on of hands did not sacramentally impart a gif they did not
have before. Tey were already full of the Spirit and of wisdom (Acts 6:3) and thus had the
necessary spiritual gifs to fulfll the ministry to which they were called. Tat is why they
were chosen. Te same interpretation is also valid for the commissioning of Barnabas and
Paul. Te gesture signifed that in their new responsibilities the seven men and Barnabas and
Paul had the full support, blessing, and afrmation of the church; their new ministry and
authority to pursue it was exercised in the name of the church. By this ritual, these NT com-
munities acknowledged the presence of the calling of the Holy Spirit and gave to the Seven,
Barnabas, and Paul, and later to the other leaders in the church, the authorization to serve in
their functions.
What, then, are the implications of our study of the laying-on of hands for the womens
ordination issue? At the very least it has to be said that the Church may legitimately and on
the basis of Scripture choose to lay hands on those (or ordain) whom it recognizes as having
received the call of God and the appropriate spiritual gifing for pastoral ministry, irrespective
of gender. Te fact that there is hardly any signifcant diference between gifs and ofces (the
gifs equip one for the ofce) indicates that considering gifs to be gender inclusive but not
ofcesthus excluding women from the ofcesis not supported by the New Testament.
qualifcations for leadership
While leaders are expected to be more mature in Christian character, many of the qual-
ifcations for leadership ministry described in 1 Timothy 3:1-13 are, in reality, the same as
those expected of all Christians. As we will see, these leadership qualifcations are not gender
exclusive. Tis biblical fact has ofen been overlooked because of the inclusive use in Scripture,
as in many languages and societies even in modern times, of gendered (usually male) language
to refer to both men and women. Pauls list of qualifcations for leadership framed in the mas-
culine gender does not exclude women from serving in these ministries and ofces any more
than the masculine gender throughout the Ten Commandments and other OT laws (Exod
20; see esp. v. 17) exempts women from obedience.
female deacons. Te New Testament mentions two specifc ofces in the Christian
church, namely elders and deacons. As in the case of elders, deacons carried very important
leadership responsibilities in the apostolic church. It is also important to observe that although
the qualifcations for deaconate are gender specifc, they are not gender exclusive (1 Tim 3:8-
10, 12, 13). Tere is evidence, or at least hints, in the New Testament indicating that there
were female deacons in the apostolic church (1 Tim 3:11; Rom 16:1). First, in the discussion
of the qualifcations for deaconate Paul inserts a brief list of qualifcations for the wives
of the deacons (1 Tim 3:11; NIV), which in Greek reads, Women likewise dignifed. . .
Paul appears to be referring here to women who were deacons. Second, a female deacon is
explicitly mentioned by Paul in Romans 16:1: I commend to you our sister Phoebe, who is a
servant [diakonos] of the church which is at Cenchrea. We have here the common elements
of Greco-Roman epistolary commendations:
19
It includes the name of the person who is being
commended (Phoebe), the relationship with the person (our sister), the status/role of the
person (a diakonos of the church in Cenchrea), and a request (receive her. . . and give her
any help).
Tird, Ellen G. White supports the reading of these passages as referring to female dea-
cons who were ordained through the laying-on of hands to that ofce. She writes,
Women who are willing to consecrate some of their time to the service of the Lord
should be appointed to visit the sick, look afer the young, and minister to the ne-
cessities of the poor. Tey should be set apart to this work by prayer and laying on
of hands. In some cases they will need to counsel with the church ofcers or the
minister; but if they are devoted women, maintaining a vital connection with God,
they will be a power for good in the church. Tis is another means of strengthening
and building up the church.
20
Church leaders, including her son W. C. White, interpreted this statement to mean
that women could be ordained to the ofce of deaconate. Consequently they began to ordain
women as deaconesses.
21
What was hinted at in the New Testament is made explicit through
19 See Robert Jewett and Roy David Kotansky, Romans: A Commentary (HermeneiaA Critical and Historical Commentary on the Bible,
Minneapolis, Min: Fortress Press, 2006), 941-942.
20 RH, July 9, 1895.
21 A number of women were ordained as deaconesses during Ellen Whites Australian ministry. On August 10, 1895, the nominating committee
at the Ashfeld church in Sydney rendered its report, which was approved. Te clerks minutes for that date state: Immediately following the
election, the ofcers were called to the front where Pastors Corliss and McCullagh set apart the elder, deacons, [and] deaconesses by prayer and
the laying on of hands. Several years later, in the same church, W. C. White ofciated at the ordination of the church ofcers. Te minutes of the
Ashfeld church for January 7, 1900, state: Te previous Sabbath ofcers had been nominated and accepted for the current year, and today Elder
White ordained and laid hands on the elders, deacon, and deaconessesAdventist Review, Jan. 16, 1986. (Exhibits Relating to the Ordination of
Women, a paper presented at the ministerial meeting at the 1990 General Conference session. Prepared by the White Estate staf).
Jerry Moon commented on the statement by Ellen White: Tree responses to this appeal are known. Shortly afer this was written, the
Ashfeld church in Sydney, Australia, not far from where Ellen White was then working, held an ordination service for newly elected church
ofcers. Pastors Corliss and McCullagh of the Australian conference set apart the elder, deacons, [and] deaconesses by prayer and the laying
on of hands. (Minutes of the Ashfeld SDA Church, Sydney, Australia, Aug. 10, 1895, cited by A. Patrick; cf. DG 249). Notice that identical
terminology is used for all three ofces. Another record from the same church fve years later (1900) reports the ordination of two elders, one
deacon, and two deaconesses. Tis time the ofciating minister was W. C. White, whose diary corroborates the church records (see Patrick). A
third example comes from early 1916, when E. E. Andross, then president of the Pacifc Union Conference, ofciated at a womens ordination
service and cited Ellen Whites 1895 Review article as his authority (DG 253-255). Both the internal evidence of Ellen Whites 1895 article and
the responses of those close to her at the timethe Ashfeld church; her son W. C. White; and E. E. Andross, president of the Pacifc Union
Conference during her Elmshaven yearsconfrm that Ellen White here approved the ordination of women to a role then associated with the
ofce of deaconess in the local church (Jerry Moon, Ellen White, Ordination, and Authority, [Teology of Ordination Study Committee,
July 2013], 33).
the prophetic ministry of Ellen G. White. Tis is clearly supported by Ellen G. White and led
some of our pioneers to ordain female deacons. Tis fnding, as we will see, is very signifcant.
female elders. Tere is clear evidence indicating that even though the language used
in listing the qualifcations for eldership is gender specifc (masculine), it is not gender exclu-
sive. First, the preface to Pauls list of qualifcations begins with the statement, If anyone
(Greek tis) aspires to a position of oversight (episcop). . . , not, If a man (anr) aspires . . .
(1 Tim 3:1). In Greek, tis is an indefnite pronoun that as such is not interested in defning
gender. Te use of this pronoun indicates that Paul is not interested in gender but that he is
commending the ofce of an overseer as worthy of aspiration. Tis fnds support in the fact
that the apostle is primarily interested in the character of the overseer as a spiritual leader
rather than in his duties. Terefore when Paul says anyone he means anyone. Tis is the
plain meaning of the text. It is true that the noun elder in Greek is masculine but this is also
the case with the Greek term diakonos. Terefore even though both terms are gender specifc
they are not gender exclusive.
Second, the phrase the husband of one wife (literally a one-woman man) does not
mean that only a man can be an elder. Te same phrase is used to refer to both deacons and el-
ders (1 Tim 3:1, 12) and it is now clear that a woman can occupy the ofce of a deacon. Tere-
fore, although the phrase is certainly gender specifc it is not gender exclusive because there
were female deacons. Te emphasis of the phrase is on moral purity rather than on gender
(cf. 5:9). Within a prevalent cultural context of temple prostitution, Paul uses masculine lan-
guage to present sexual purity and monogamy as a qualifcation of deacons and elders whether
they are men or women. Elders and deacons are to be sexually pure. Again, this instruction
identifes a moral attribute that also qualifes women since Paul also teaches that a faithful
elder-widow is a wife of one husband or a one-man woman (1 Tim 5:9, ESV).
Tird, that elders are expected to manage their household well does not exclude wom-
en from this ofce. Te same qualifcation is required from deacons (3:12) and as we saw a
woman can function as a deacon. Women were expected to manage well their household
too (5:14). We fnd a good example of this in the experience of Lydia (Acts 16:15). Te main
purpose of this requirement is to assure that the elder and deacon have good administrative
experience. It is clear that none of the other qualifcations for elders and deacons were intend-
ed to exclude women from these roles.
In brief, Paul uses gendered (male and female) language in specifc situations to commu-
nicate principles that are relevant for men and women in leadership ministries. Tis indicates
that even when the qualifcations are phrased in gender-specifc language, they are not gender
exclusive, since they are the same for all Christians. Terefore, women can occupy the posi-
tions or ofces of deacons and elders even if we do not fnd in the New Testament any woman
appointed as an elder in the church. Te biblical text allows for this, indicating again that
God does not discriminate against any human being. Any person who has received and devel-
oped the required gifs of the Spirit can be used by Him in any position in the church.
conclusion
Within the community of faith established by Jesus, leadership positions are not to be
based on race, class, culture, or gender. Te central element is allegiance to Christ alone and
to the fulfllment of His mission in the world through a love that manifests itself in service.
Paul intentionally dismantles all systems of ordering human relationships that are built on
the inherited understandings of value based on racial or cultural origin, economic status, and
gender and replaces these with a system of value built exclusively on the gifs given by the Holy
Spirit to individual members of the body of Christ. Te former ways of relating to each other
are replaced by a new relatedness in Christ (Gal 3:28, 29; Col 3:11). God wants to restore on
earth the same cosmic order that He established on earth in the beginning. In this commu-
nity all have equal worth as members of the body of Christ because all have experienced the
risen Christ. Tey all are gifed with a variety of spiritual gifs, including the gifs of ministry
and leadership, which are to be used for the beneft of the believers, the global mission of the
church, and for the holding of the ofces of deacons and elders (Rom 12:1-8).
As this mission approaches its fulfllment, men and women in the persecuted end-time
church are declared to have been made by Christ kings and priests to their God (Rev 5:10;
cf. 1:6; 20:6; Exod 19:5, 6; 1 Pet 2:9, 10). Tis order of an inclusive priestly ministry to God in
the church characterizes the book of Revelation as a whole (in fulfllment of Isa 61:6). With-
out gender-distinction, Christ has saved men and women (Rev 1:5, 6; 5:9, 10), called them to
minister and proclaim the kingdom of God until He comes (14:6-13), and promised that they
will rule the world with Him as priestly rulers (20:4-6). Tus, the priesthood of men and
women is a characteristic of the remnant church.
ellen g. white and women in ministry
Ellen G. White emphatically and repeatedly invited women to be trained and employed
in various forms of ministry, and even to ordain some to these ministries. Tat she support-
ed the involvement of women in various forms of ministry is well known and documented.
Many publications have helped Adventists to be more conscious of her thoughts on this sub-
ject, and today women are involved in all forms of ministry in our church.
A careful consideration of Whites thought on the role of women in the church, taken in
its 19th-century context, supports the case for the ordaining of women today. Te perspective
we draw from Whites writings encourages us to move ahead and stretch the boundaries of
our understanding of ministry and ordination, to step out in faith, and to respond to Gods
leading in the full participation of women in all aspects of ministry. Five simple words can
best describe Whites perspective on women in ministry and the ordination of women.
silence
Ellen G. White is completely silent regarding some key texts and concepts used to pre-
vent women from serving in ministry. Anecdotes from Whites ministry illustrate that 150
years ago women were not as involved in social or religious public life as they are today. In fact,
it was sometimes inappropriate and indecent to see a woman speak in an assembly. And, based
on a traditional reading of Pauls admonitions in 1 Corinthians 14:34, 35 or 1 Timothy 2:12,
many objected to hearing women speak at religious meetings. However, White never com-
mented on these two key texts. Her silence on these texts speaks volumes to the importance
we should give them in our discussion of women in ministry today. Her male Adventist col-
leagues, however, did comment on these texts and sometimes used Galatians 3:28 to state that
what Paul wrote about women not speaking in public was within a cultural context that does
not have universal application today. Tey also referred to many of Pauls female co-workers
to state the obvious conclusion that Paul was therefore not speaking against women in min-
istry. One of the clearest such responses came from G. C. Tenney, president of the Australian
Conference, in 1892.
Te difculty with these texts is almost entirely chargeable to immature conclu-
sions reached in regard to them. It is manifestly illogical and unfair to give to any
passage of Scripture an unqualifed radical meaning that is at variance with the
main tenor of the Bible, and directly in confict with its plain teachings. Te Bible
may be reconciled in all its parts without going outside the lines of consistent in-
terpretation. But great difculty is likely to be experienced by those who interpret
isolated passages in an independent light according to the ideas they happen to
entertain upon them. Tose who were brought up to believe it to be a shame for
women to speak in meeting, look no further than these texts, and give them sweep-
ing application. Critics of the Bible, critics of womankind, as well as women who
are looking for an excuse for idleness, seize these passages in the same manner. By
their misuse of these texts, many conscientious people are into a misconception of
what Paul meant to teach.
22
22 G. C. Tenney, Womans Relation to the Cause of Christ, RH, May 24, 1892, pp. 328-329.
inclusiveness
Ellen G. White believed in including women in all aspects of service and ministry. In
1893, even though some men did not feel comfortable with women serving in ministry along-
side their husbands, and being fairly remunerated for this work, she argued, Tis question is
not for men to settle. Te Lord has settled it. God is calling women to engage in ministry and
in some instances they will do more good than the ministers who neglect to visit the fock of
God. Emphatically she stated, Tere are women who should labor in the gospel ministry.
23
In 1879, she addressed a difcult situation in South Lancaster, Massachusetts, and
stated, It is not always men who are best adapted to the successful management of a church.
If faithful women have more deep piety and true devotion than men, they could indeed by
their prayers and their labors do more than men who are unconsecrated in heart and in life.
24

In this inclusive statement, her understanding of ministry embraces management of a church,
a ministry that women can receive.
In 1880 she invited young people to engage in literature evangelism because it can serve
as a good education for men and women to do pastoral labor.
25
Twenty years later, in 1900,
she again encouraged women to do ministry: It is the accompaniment of the Holy Spirit of
God that prepares workers, both men and women, to become pastors to the fock of God.
26
In
1887, while discussing the need to provide good education to Adventist youth in our schools,
she exhorted administrators to do their best to train young women with an education ftting
them for any position of trust.
27
Although she was aware that in her day there would be limitations on what women
could do or be employed for by the church, she did not limit the options available for women
and never used the concept of male headship to limit women in ministry. If somehow Ellen
White believed that there should be limits on ministry options for women, she had plenty of
opportunities to clarify her thought. She never did. Instead, her encouragements to young
women are consistently open ended and inclusive.
And what about ordination?
variety
She understood ordination to be for a variety of functions. A number of passages in her
writings give us some signifcant illustration about what she understood ordination and the
laying-on of hands to mean. Ellen G. White earnestly believed that the ordained pastoral
ministry alone is not sufcient to fulfll Gods commission, but that God is calling Christians
23 Te Laborer Is Worthy of His Hire, Manuscript 43a, 1898, 5MR 324-327.
24 Ellen G. White to Brother Johnson, n.d. (Letter 33), 1879, 19MR 56.
25 4T 390.
26 6T 322.
27 FCE, 117-118 (emphasis added).
of all professions to dedicate their lives to Gods service. She thus invited the church to branch
out in its understanding of forms of ministry to include non-traditional roles beyond those
of the ordained pastor, elder, and deacon we fnd in the New Testament, in order to meet the
needs of the church. She even advocated ordaining people in these roles.
In 1908, to encourage the mission of Adventist medical institutions, White wrote that
medical missionaries should be as sacredly set apart for [this] work as is the minister of the
gospel.
28
In a similar context, in 1895, she wrote a long article about the work of lay people in
local churches. She counseled:
Women who are willing to consecrate some of their time to the service of the Lord
should be appointed to visit the sick, look afer the young, and minister to the
necessities of the poor. Tey should be set apart to this work by prayer and laying on
of hands. In some cases they will need to counsel with the church ofcers or the
minister; but if they are devoted women, maintaining a vital connection with God,
they will be a power for good in the church. Tis is another means of strengthening
and building up the church. We need to branch out more in our methods of labor.
29
Here she counseled that God is leading the church in setting apart women for these
forms of ministry.
In these two recommendations, White clearly had in mind a broader understanding
of ordination than some in her day, and saw ordination as a form of afrmation serving a
variety of functions and purposes. We do not fnd explicit biblical precedents for these two
recommendations of ordination that she is advocating. Tis is probably because White did
not understand ordination to be a form of sacrament limited only to certain gender-specifc
functions. From a mission perspective, it seems obvious that in her counsels, all these func-
tions are gender inclusive.
commissioning
In Ellen G. Whites thought, ordination is the same as commissioning. Tese last two
examples refect a non-sacramental understanding of the laying-on of hands. Ordination is,
frst of all, a form of afrmation and commissioning to a task. In fact, it is accurate to say that
in her writings ordination and commissioning equal the same thing.
30

28 Ev 546 (emphasis added).
29 Te Duty of the Minister and the People, RH, July 9, 1895 (emphasis added).
30 Very early in Seventh-day Adventist history, the leading pioneers of the movement felt concerned about the confusion and false teachings that
were sometimes manifested among the small group of Sabbatarian Adventist believers. Following the example of New Testament apostles who
had set apart elders to oversee local congregations against false teachings and to administer the ordinances of baptism and the Lords Supper,
these early Adventist leaders selected promising men and set them apart with prayer and laying-on of hands. Te criterion for their ordination
was the full proof evidence that they have received their commission from God. By ordaining them, the group of believers would show the
sanction of the church to their going forth as messengers to carry the most solemn message ever given to men (EW, 100-101). Te ordination of
these early Adventist itinerant preachers served as a rite to authorize them to speak on behalf of the church and to preserve order in the emerg-
ing church. It is interesting to note that in this passage Ellen White does not use the word ordination, but rather refers to this rite as a setting
apart and a commission. Tis indicates that she uses these words and concepts synonymously.
In 1873, John Tay joined the Seventh-day Adventist Church and soon felt called by God
to volunteer his time as a missionary in the South Pacifc. In 1886, he landed on the island
of Pitcairn, and succeeded by Gods grace in converting the entire population. Not being an
ordained minister, however, he did not feel authorized to baptize these converts. Ten years
later, Ellen White commented on this event and had this to say.
It has been a great mistake that men go out, knowing they are children of God,
like Brother Tay, [who] went to Pitcairn as a missionary to do work, [but] that man
did not feel at liberty to baptize because he had not been ordained. Tat is not any
of Gods arrangements; it is mans fxing. When men go out with the burden of the
work and to bring souls into the truth, those men are ordained of God, [even] if
[they] never have a touch of ceremony of ordination. To say [they] shall not baptize
when there is nobody else, [is wrong]. If there is a minister in reach, all right, then
they should seek for the ordained minister to do the baptizing, but when the Lord
works with a man to bring out a soul here and there, and they know not when the
opportunity will come that these precious souls can be baptized, why he should not
question about the matter, he should baptize these souls.
31
It is instructive that White says that the idea that a lay person cannot perform a baptism
in special circumstances because he is not an ordained minister is not any of Gods arrange-
ment; it is mans fxing. Perhaps some will say she overstated her response to what happened.
Tere is nonetheless an aspect of her understanding of ordination that leads her to say this.
Ordination by the church is viewed as an afrmation of Gods prior spiritual ordination and
commissioning to ministry. Human beings simply recognize what God has already blessed.
In fact, in 1851, when she wrote about the ordination of the frst Adventist ministers, she
called this ceremony a commissioning, not an ordination. Forty-fve years later, in 1896, she
still had the same concept of ordination.
mission
Ellen G. White believed we all have a part in the Adventist mission to the world. She
urged the church to recognize Gods call to men and women by the laying-on of hands to a
variety of functions so that the mission of the church might be more diversifed and complete.
She was passionate about saving the lost, and she felt strongly that all Adventist men and
women should be active in ministry. Adventist history is also informative on the practice of
ordination. George Butler became president of the Iowa Conference in June 1865 but was or-
dained only in September 1867. Uriah Smith served as editor of the Review and Herald from
31 Remarks Concerning the Foreign Mission Work, Manuscript 75, 1896 (emphasis added).
1855, and secretary of the General Conference from 1863. He was ordained in 1874. Trough
time, our understanding of ministry changed, and we began to ordain men who were not only
evangelists. Tis was a way to recognize other gifs of ministry. We expanded our views of
ministry to include more persons serving in a variety of ministries. Why should we not do the
same for women? Isnt White still urging us to branch out in our forms of ministry to reach
out to a lost world? She encouraged women to be active in many functions and ministries, and
believed that with the proper education women could occupy any position of trust.
White was willing to encourage women in her day, in a society and context in which
women were not encouraged to be active in society, because she believed in a broad gender-
inclusive ministry to warn a dying world of Christs soon coming. If we are to follow her
lead, ordination must be connected with mission and spreading the gospel, not with the
establishment or preservation of an exclusive male ministry. To restrict what women can do
in the church today to the same activities and limited functions the church allowed women
to do in the 19th century is to miss the enduring validity of Whites message. She encouraged
progressive and innovative approaches to ministry and mission.
We must note that White was not interested in displacing men from the traditional
roles they have held in the family, church, and society. She asked the church, however, to allow
women to serve in the broad functions of gospel and pastoral ministry, and in any position
of trust for which they are qualifed, even including the management of the church. Tus
she appealed to the church to include women with gifs of leadership, pastoral ministry, and
teaching (all the same biblical functions occupied by pastors, teachers, elders, and overseers),
and to ordain them for these positions, as men are ordained for the same positions.
appointment to offces in the seventh-day
adventist church
In the Seventh-day Adventist Church, appointment to ofces and functions combines a
number of the attributes we see in Scripture. Most appointments are done through a process
of selection done by committees that the faith community appoints to make or recommend
decisions for appointments. Te authority to exercise these functions is thus granted at the
moment the constitutive committees, boards, or assemblies make the decisions for appoint-
ments. Following a decision to appoint someone to an ofce or function by the respective
church boards or conference/union executive committees, some ofcers are installed or or-
dained through a ceremony of prayer and laying-on of hands, as in the case of deacons, elders,
and pastors. Other ofcers are appointed to their ministry or function simply by the vote of
a committee or board (e.g., directors of departments; college and university presidents), and
others by the vote of a general assembly of believers (e.g., Conference, Union, Division, and
General Conference). During the ordination of deacons, elders, and pastors, the ceremony of
prayer and laying-on of hands is a confrmation or symbolic representation of a decision made
prior to the ceremony to give them authority.
Seventh-day Adventists do not believe that ordination confers any spiritual power or
status. Te ceremony of laying-on of hands is a form of blessing in which the community
recognizes the calling of God in the life of the individual. Trough the laying-on of hands,
the Church acts to grant representative authority for the exercise of the ministry of deacon/
deaconess, elder, or pastor.
conclusion
Our study has shown that even though there seems to be a biblical pattern of male lead-
ership among Gods people, God was always willing to point to a better waya way that
would not exclude women from such important positions based on their gender. We believe
that our most important task is rightly dividing the word of truth (2 Tim 21:5, NKJV),
incorporating the Bibles principles, and applying the Bibles teachings to daily life. We do this
sacred task shaped by the interpretive methods that emerge from the Word of God itself, re-
jecting extra-biblical agendas and social trends imposed upon the text. By careful, systematic
study of the Word, comparing scripture with scripture, we arrive at the fullest understanding
of its meaning, aided by the Spirits promised insight.
Our very nameSeventh-day Adventisthighlights our deep commitment to the
Word that reveals Christ as Creator, as well as announcing our anticipation of the re-creative
act by which He will make all things new (Rev 21:5, NKJV). From the Genesis account
of Christs creation of man and woman we understand the essential equality for which He
formed them and the mutuality for which He designed them. In the Apostle Johns vision of
heaven, we glimpse the redeemedwithout distinctions of rank, race, or genderworship-
ping and following the Lamb wherever He goes (Rev 14:4).
Te mission of God revealed in both the Old and New Testaments richly illustrates
His willingness to use all personsnow divinely unclassifedto build up His kingdom and
serve His people (Gal 3:28). Both men and women are called, gifed, and equipped by the
Spirit for ministries that enact Gods mission to save lost humanity. No role serving Gods
people is categorically excluded from any believer surrendered to Christ (cf. Joel 2:28, 29), for
one and the same Spirit works all these things, distributing to each one individually as He
wills (1 Cor 12:11). Within such a community, distinctions of race, class, culture, or gender
are rendered secondary to a central and primary allegiance to Christ alone and to His mission
in the world. Te biblical record is thus replete with instances of both men and women serv-
ing Gods people as leaders, judges, witnesses, and prophets.
Te clarity of Gods ideal to empower women and men to service and ministry is an
interpretive key that helps us correctly place difcult or unclear passages in historical context,
including certain of Pauls counsels to specifc NT congregations (cf. 1 Tim 3:1-13; 1 Cor
14:26-34). Headship authority in the church is reserved only for Christ, and it is the duty of
His people to afrm in one another the gifs that He has sovereignly assigned. Te laying-on
of hands, or ordination, conveys no special powers and implies no extra worth. With elegant
simplicity, this afrmation manifests the agreement that ought always to exist between Jesus
and His church (Matt 18:19).
Seventh-day Adventist history also amply testifes to the gifing of both men and women
for service to Gods people. Ellen G. White, who exercised the biblical gif of prophecy during
more than 70 years of public ministry, taught and urged that both men and women could and
should function in all ofces and roles within the body of Christ. Instructed by her emphatic
call to service and inspired by her example, Adventist men and women continue to answer
Gods call to ministry as pastors, leaders, and teachers, humbly confdent that by so doing
they are being deeply obedient to Gods will.
While we as Seventh-day Adventists agree on the equal value of women and men and
their call to bear the image of God together, we recognize that other sincere Seventh-day
Adventists may difer with us about the Bibles teaching on whom to ordain. We remind all
believers of the obligation to make every efort to keep the unity of the Spirit through the
bond of peace (Eph 4:3). To that end, we urge that decisions about the biblical understand-
ing of the ordination of women to the ministry should not be made by majority vote. In cases
where the Spirit has not created within the world church a consensus on the teaching of the
Bible, a decision of a majority would result in the imposition of the religious views of the
majority on others who sincerely believe that the Bible teaches the opposite (cf. Rom 14:5). In
the setting of diference of opinions on a subject that is not part of the message and mission
of the church, we reafrm our constant unity in Christ and our commitment to the message
and mission of the church (John 17:20-23).
answers to some questions about
ordination
Does the priesthood of all believers allow for women to be ordained as pastors?
First, although in the Old Testament women were excluded from the priesthood, the
NT teaching of the priesthood of all believers includes both male and female believers. Te
Levitical law is now freed from tribal and ethnic limitations. It is true that although in the
church all are priests not all are elders or deacons. Second, we should keep in mind that in
the Old Testament the use of tithe was exclusively used for the Levites and no other Israelite
was to receive itwhether male or female. In the Christian church the law of tithing is freed
from gender constraints. Now, as Ellen G. White indicated, the tithe should go to those who
labor in word and doctrine, be them men or women (1MR 263). Tis is based on the fact
that it is the accompaniment of the Holy Spirit of God that prepares workers, both men and
women, to become pastors to the fock of God (6T 322). Te priesthood of all believers does
allow for women to be ordained as pastors.
Did Jesus establish a hierarchy that excluded women from ordained ministry?
Tere is not a single verse in the gospels that even implies that such was the case. Te
specifc criterion Jesus established for the assignment of leadership positions in the church
was whoever wishes to become great among you shall be your servant (Mark 10:43). No
one should dare to suggest that this command from Jesus was limited to the apostles. It has a
universal application within the church in any epoch and any place. Any position of authority
or leadership in the church is available to those who, under the infuence of the Spirit (be they
male or female), are true servants of Christ and of His church.
Does head/headship in 1 Corinthians 11:2-16 mean source?
Te use of the Greek term kephal clearly and unquestionably indicates that it can mean
source. Te fact that one Greek dictionary does not include this meaning does not mean
anything. Other dictionaries include it.
32
Terefore both meanings are linguistically possible
in 1 Corinthians 11:2-16. Te best possibility is source because that passage deals with the
concept of source: For man does not originate from woman, but woman from man. . . . For
as the woman originates from the man, so also the man through the woman (vs. 8, 12). Paul
describes them in the passage as being interdependent (v. 11). Te context of this passage does
not support the idea that in the church a male church elder is the head of the woman.
Does the New Testament support the idea that women in church are under the head-
ship of church elders?
According to the New Testament the only head of the church is Christ. Ellen G. White
writes, Let it be seen that Christ, not the minister, is the head of the church.
33
It is only at
home, in the husband-wife relationship, that a man is described as the head of his wife (e.g.
Eph 5:22, 23). Tis idea is never transferred to the relationship between elders and women in
the church.
32 E.g. TDNT, 6:673; NIDNTT, 1:157. Te meaning source is quite common in Greek literature; see Phillip B. Payne, Man and Woman, One
in Christ: An Exegetical and Teological Study of Pauls Letters (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2009), 117-137. He provides a list of Greek
lexicons from the earliest to the present that establish the meaning source for kephal (123, footnote 35).
33 ST, January 27, 1890.
Does 1 Timothy 2:12-14 apply only to a local situation in Ephesus?
No. Te passage has a universal application and is very instructive for us today. Paul is
obviously addressing a local situation otherwise the order for women to be in silence would
not only be universal but absolute. What we need to establish, afer a careful study of the
context of the passage, is its universal content. Several things are universal: (1) Te church is
expected to teach the message of salvation to all, men and women. (2) Te teaching is to be
done by people who are properly qualifed. (3) Tose who are students should not be allowed
to teach or to question the authority of the instructor or the content of the teaching. Up-
setting the teaching process is not to be tolerated. Otherwise we would have conficts in the
church. Te church is a place of order.
Does the fact that in the Bible leadership is primarily in the hands of men exclude
women from ordination to the ministry?
We have argued in this paper that this is not the case. Tere is not a single biblical pas-
sage in which a divine command is given permanently establishing that only the male mem-
bers of the people of God should be ordained and occupy the highest positions of authority.
Te pattern of male leadership was very ofen altered by the Lord Himself by appointing some
women to the highest positions of authority among His people (e.g. prophet and judge). In
the New Testament this is much more visible and abundant (e.g. we fnd co-workers of Paul
who are female; prophetesses; and with respect to church ofces we fnd female deacons). In
other words, the common practice of having male leaders was never ofcially instituted by the
Lord through a divine command. Tus, He provided for us examples that we can follow in
ordaining women to the ministry. In doing this we would not be violating a divine command
because there is none.
Should we ignore the question of religious liberty when dealing with this topic?
In a sense it could be ignored because the deeper issue is a slightly diferent one. It sur-
faces when the possibility of deciding the biblical position through a majority vote is placed
on the table. If this were to be done the question would no longer be whether we should
ordain women or not but whether we should be loyal to Fundamental Belief # 1. Te issue is
a very complex and important one for those of us who have always upheld the message and
mission of the church as summarized in our Statement of Fundamental Beliefs. Our message
was established through the study of the Bible and the guidance of the Spirit through Ellen
G. White. Te result was the formulation of a consensus among Gods people. No vote was
needed because the Bible and the Spirit instructed the church. Te Statement of Fundamen-
tal Beliefs is a summary of the message and mission that the Lord gave to His church and
it unifes us as a people. Te question we now face is: What should we do with the topic of
the ordination of women to the ministry in the absence of a consensus based on the study of
the Bible and the guidance of the Spirit? If we go for a majority vote we would have denied
Fundamental Belief #1. Biblical truth would no longer be defned on the basis of the Bible
alone but on the basis of what a majority believes that the Bible teaches on this topic. Ten,
the vote of the majority would be imposed on those who may have sincerely concluded that
the Bible teaches something else (freedom of conscience?). We would have by de facto created
an ecclesiastical magisterium (a majority of delegates to the Session) that would decide for
the rest of the church whatever the Bible teaches on a particular topic and what the church
should believe. Te ordination of women to the ministry should remain what it has always
been among us, namely a subject about which we have diferent opinions (like the question of
the human nature of Christ). Tese diferent views have been tolerated by the church. Tere
has never been a consensus on this topic and consequently it has never been raised to the level
of a Fundamental Belief. Tis topic should not be solved at any cost.
Introduction ....................................................................................................................................................99
Theological Background ..................................................................................................................................99
Nature of the Trinity ...........................................................................................................................100
Pre-Fall Roles for Man and Woman ......................................................................................................100
Post-Fall Family Headship ..................................................................................................................100
Male Ecclesiastical Leadership ...........................................................................................................100
Christ is Head of the Church ...............................................................................................................100
Gifts versus Offces ............................................................................................................................100
Male Spiritual Leadership in the Church ............................................................................................. 101
The Role of Trajectory Arguments........................................................................................................ 101
Hermeneutical Concerns ................................................................................................................... 101
A Proposed Way Forward .................................................................................................................................101
Expansion of Opportunities for Women in Ministry ..............................................................................102
Male Responsibility and Leadership in the Home ................................................................................102
The Offce of Elder, the Criteria of Gender, and the Divine Command/Ideal Distinction .........................102
A King in Israel .......................................................................................................................104
The Daughters of Zelophehad ..................................................................................................106
Deborah and Barak .................................................................................................................106
King David and the Moabite Restriction .................................................................................. 108
David, the Showbread, and Christ ............................................................................................109
The Jerusalem Council: Differences Over Divine Ideals .............................................................. 110
Ideal and Variation in the Writings of Ellen White ...................................................................... 112
Determining When to Vary the Divine Pattern ........................................................................... 113
Application and Conclusion ............................................................................................................................114
position summary #3
outline
position summary #3
introduction
Te Seventh-Day Adventist Church has spent signifcant time formally discussing the
question of ordination to the pastoral ministry and its relationship to gender. Afer a year and
a half, having completed its eforts and reaching a consensus on a general theology of ordi-
nation, the Teology of Ordination Study Committee (TOSC) has not reached a consensus
on the question of whether it is appropriate for women to fll the ofce of ordained minister.
Despite using similar hermeneutical methods and appealing to Scripture rather than to hu-
man cultural norms, members of the Committee have reached widely divergent conclusions.
We are now faced with the question of how to move forward as a church, given the ex-
isting diversity on the underlying questions. What follows is an attempt to outline a way for-
ward that takes seriously the main concerns identifed thus far, while preserving the principle
of the authority of Scripture and church unity.
Te Bible calls every Christian to mutual submission, submitting yourselves one to an-
other in the fear of God (Eph 5:21).
1
By its very nature, mutual submission involves a certain
sacrifce by all, for the greater good and unity of all. With the guidance of the Spirit, however,
we believe that the central concerns within the various positions in the ordination discussion
can be afrmed without sacrifcing principle, while still maintaining the unity of the body of
Christ.
We begin with a brief overview of our main theological principles, on which we build the
justifcation for our proposal moving forward. Tese principles are set out in nine paragraphs
below, with scriptural references to support the theological points.
2
Te second and largest
part of this paper outlines our proposal for moving forward, and includes a biblical-theological
exposition, which demonstrates the scriptural foundations for a key point in our proposal.
Te fnal part of this paper draws conclusions from the biblical exegesis and applies them to
our current situation.
theological background
During the course of the TOSC meetings, we heard many papers ofering a variety
of views on the questions of ordination to the gospel ministry. While we agreed with some
points made by both groups, we found ourselves unable to fully commit to either because of
1 Unless otherwise noted, Bible quotations are from the King James Version.
2 A fuller discussion of these and other scriptural references relevant to the moderate theological position can be found in Minority Report on
Ministry, Ordination, and Gender of the Seventh-day Adventist Teological Seminary. Tis is available online at www.freedom-law.com.
diferences on key points. Tus, we feel the need to set out our own statement of how we view
the main biblical and theological issues on the ordination question.
nature of the trinity
We believe that Christ is co-existent and co-equal with the Father and the Spirit from
eternity. Tus, we do not believe in the eternal subordination of the Son, as some presenters
opposed to womens ordination have proposed (Deut 6:4; Isa 9:6; Mic 5:2; Matt 28:19; John
8:58; John 17:24; Phil 2:6; Heb 1:8-12; 2 Cor. 13:14).
pre-fall roles for man and woman
We believe there existed meaningful roles for men and women before the Fall that,
while not hierarchical, did involve responsibilities for distinct, but complementary, servant-
leadership roles. We do not believe in the idea of male headship prior to the Fall, insofar as
that involved authority over Eve (Gen 2:15-25; 3:9, 16-20; 1 Cor 11:8; 15:22).
post-fall family headship
Afer the Fall, God instituted a male headship role in the family that, while loving,
self-sacrifcing, and service oriented, gives the male an oversight responsibility for his family
that is of continuing validity (Gen 3:16; 18:12, 19; 1 Pet 3:1, 6; Eph 5:22-24).
male ecclesiological leadership
We believe that there is a biblical model of male ecclesiological leadership that has valid-
ity across time and culture. We see this in Pauls invocation of the creation order and the Fall
in discussing the ofce of elder, in the predominate fact of male institutional spiritual leader-
ship in the Old Testament, in the actions of Christ when choosing twelve male disciples, and
in the NT examples of apostles and elders (1 Tim 2:12, 13; Num 3:10, 38; Matt 27:55; Acts
1:21-23; Titus 1:6, 7).
christ is head of the church
Tere is no basis, we believe, to suggest that men have a general headship in the church,
exercising husbandly or paternal authority over women or anyone else. Only Christ is head in
the church. His statement that we should call noman. . . father (Matt 23:9) was intended to
prevent a human, paternal headship in the church (1 Cor 11:3; Eph 1:22, 23).
gifts versus offces
We see an important distinction between spiritual gifs, which are given by sovereign
action of the Holy Spirit, where gender considerations are not a biblical concern, and church
ofces, chosen by the church membership according to biblical qualifcations, and where gen-
der is mentioned, such as the ofce of elder (1 Cor 12:4-11; Eph 4:11, 12; Acts 6:5-7; 1 Tim
2:12; 3:1, 2; Titus 1:6-8).
male spiritual leadership in the church
We believe that Pauls statements about a preferred role for a male in the ofce of elder
(the equivalent of our ordained minister) are a functional, ecclesiastical norm meant to fur-
ther church order, discipline, and mission. We view, however, the gender qualifcation of elder
as one characteristic among many, and as not absolute over all the others. We do not think
we should make this point of ecclesiastical order paramount over other more important doc-
trinal concerns, such as the mission and unity of the body of Christ (1 Tim 2:12-14; 3:1-7; 1
Cor 11:2-5; Titus 2:2-8).
the role of trajectory arguments
We believe that positions based on trajectory arguments can be biblically valid. For
example, while Scripture regulates slavery to restrain its evils, no Scripture asserts that slav-
ery is part of a divinely created order or integral to the nature of humanity. However, unlike
slavery, maleness as a qualifcation for the ofce of elder is derived from Pauls inspired un-
derstanding and teaching regarding the creation, human nature, the Fall, and the incarnation
(Gen 1:27; Gal 3:28; Titus 2:9, 10; 1 Tim 2:12-14; 1 Cor 11:3-5).
hermeneutical concerns
We believe that the hermeneutical methods that some who support womens ordination
use to exegete the New Testament gender texts could create problems in dealing with passages
regarding sexual standards. Nevertheless, we believe the issue of maleness as one qualifcation
for ordination is not in the category of moral absolutes, such as the Ten Commandments or
consistent and of-repeated biblical moral commands, including those dealing with sexual
behavior (Exod 20:14; Lev 18:1-30; 20:10-21; Acts 15:28, 29; 1 Tim 2:12, 13; Rom 1:18-27;
Gal 3:28).
a proposed way forward
As a practical way forward, we propose that the world Church afrm three biblical prin-
ciples as a basis for denominational policy on ministry, male and female roles, and the ofce
of ordained minister. Tese are linked because, as TOSC discussions made clear, the three
issues are interrelated. Te frst two principles build on arguments made by others in TOSC,
but the fnal principle is our unique contribution. For that reason, it is set out at some length,
including an exposition of its biblical basis.
expansion of opportunities for women in ministry
We believe that the best way forward is to start with and build on those things that all
positions have in common. In TOSC, a consensus has emerged on the vital importance of
empowering Adventist women everywhere, regardless of ordination, to greater involvement
in a wide range of ministries. Initiatives both afrming women in ministry and supporting
them with education and resources would begin to rectify our failure to do so over much of
the last century, in disregard of prophetic counsel.
3

male responsibility and leadership in the home
We afrm the concept of male responsibility and spiritual leadership in the home. Most
members of TOSC agree that, afer the Fall and the entry of sin, men were given a special role
of responsibility in the home. For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the
head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body (Eph 5:23).
Tere is ongoing discussion over how to understand the extent and signifcance of this
leadership role. Tere is a generally shared view, however, that married men have a responsi-
bility to care for and support their families that has been overlooked and is being neglected in
many parts of the world. Tis is an opportune moment to defne this role with care, stressing
that it should be a loving, self-sacrifcing, servant-leadership like Christs. Husbands, love
your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it (Eph 5:25).
Such leadership in the home should never be used to oppress or abuse. Rather, all men
should strive for the ideal of partnership and consensus decision-making, and should provide
spiritual leadership within the family, rather than devolving this to their wives.
Wives should respect and encourage their husbands in this role of spiritual leadership
and responsibility. Te Church should provide for more education and training programs to
help educate men in their roles as caregivers, fathers, and spiritual leaders, enabling them to
learn better how to model the leadership of Christ in their families.
the offce of elder, the criteria of gender, and the divine
command/ideal distinction
Now we come to the most challenging issue: the question of how to understand the
roles of men and women in relation to the ofce of pastoral ministry. We do not believe that
the headship of the man in the home extends without limits to the church. Such a position
would imply a role of authority for all men in the church over all women. We simply do not
fnd support for this in the Bible.
3 E.g., If there were twenty women where now there is one, who would make this holy mission their cherished work, Ellen White wrote in
1879, We should see many more converted to the truth. Te refning, sofening infuence of Christian women is needed in the great work of
preaching the truth. (Ev 471-472; see also DA 568.)
Indeed, to the contrary, Christ commands that we call no man father, which we read
as denying to any human a paternal role of authority in the church (Matt 23:9). Quite simply,
the only head the Bible identifes in the church is Christ (Matt 23:10; Eph 5:23). For this
reason, it would go against our Protestant, biblical heritage, we believe, to identify any merely
human fgure as fulflling a headship role in the church.
Still, the Bible does identify more limited roles of leadership (of representative and dele-
gated authority) to help provide order in the church, the primary one being the ofce of elder
(1 Tim 3:1-7). One of the several stated criteria of that ofce is maleness (1 Tim 2:11-15; 3:1-
7). Tis gender preference is not, in our view, an implementation of male headship in the
church. Te authority of the elder in the church is diferent both in kind and in extent from
that of the father in the home. However, both leadership roles are based on similar principles,
rooted in Creation and the Fall; this emerges from Pauls discussions of leadership in home
and church (1 Cor 11; 1 Tim 2).
Nevertheless, we are persuaded that the Bible teaches that the ofce of ordained min-
ister (the functional equivalent of the New Testament ofce of elder),
4
with its gatekeeping
responsibility in the churchoverseeing the implementation of ecclesiastical standards and
discipline in relation to all membersshould ideally be carried out by men. Tis does not pre-
vent a woman from preaching, teaching, and otherwise providing both spiritual counsel and
leadership in a church setting. But maleness is a stated qualifcation for the ofce of ordained
minister, and while an important quality (cf. 1 Tim 2: 11-14), it is only one among a number
of qualifcations. We see no basis in the text for treating this one qualifcation in an absolute
fashion, or as outweighing all the other criteria combined.
Tis understanding of the relative importance of the gender criteria is based on the dif-
ference between 1) Gods absolute moral commands and eternal truths, and 2) His ideals
5
for
organizing His people. Te former include the Ten Commandments, the pillar doctrines of
Christianity, and consistently articulated scriptural limits on personal moral behavior. Te
latter, we believe, deal with ritual, ceremonial, organizational, or legal practices and precepts,
whose intention is to bring order to the community of believers, safeguard the identity of
Gods people, and enhance the churchs mission. Such ideals are important, but because they
have an ecclesiological function and a missional purpose, the Bible indicates that they can in
certain circumstances be modifed and adapted. Tis distinction between eternal commands
or truths and ecclesiological ideals can provide, we believe, a key insight that can help the
Church move forward in unity, if not uniformity, on this question.
4 Cf. Consensus Statement on a Seventh-day Adventist Teology of Ordination (TOSC, voted July 23, 2013).
5 Using the word ideal to describe these continuing organizational norms does not mean to imply that any deviation from this standard will
necessarily be inferior and secondary. Te reality is that an ideal may be varied because specifc circumstances mean that another approach may
be better or even necessary for some period. Tus, the deviation from the ideal becomes itself a situational ideal, and accordingly should not
be considered inferior or secondary. A profound example of this is the incarnation of Christ, which was a situational response to the non-ideal
circumstances of the entrance of sin and the necessity of a redeemer.
When the adaptation of a divine ideal occurs in Scripture to meet local needs, foster
mission, or promote unity it usually occurs in one of three ways:
i. God Himself endorses the adaptation
ii. A biblical prophet confrms it
iii. Te community of believersthe churchagrees upon this variation from the di-
vine pattern
It is crucial to emphasize that adaptation in Scripture is not the norm, that it never ap-
plies to Gods absolute moral commands and eternal truths, and that He allows it only under
certain circumstances. But within these limits, there are a number of instances in the Bible
where God allows for the modifcation of His initial plans for the Israelites in relation to mat-
ters of leadership and/or gender, such as we are currently discussing. A brief review of a few
examples of such adaptations would help us understand the important distinction between
commands and ideals.
None of these episodes are directly analogous to the situation in which we currently fnd
ourselves, and they should not be scrutinized for exact parallels with the ordination question.
Rather, these stories all illustrate two simple, yet critical points. Te frst is that a distinction
exists between Gods absolute moral commands and eternal truths on the one hand, and di-
vine organizational and ecclesiastical norms on the other. Te second point is that God at
times allows for variations in these organizational ideals in response to the circumstances,
needs, and even desires of His people. How this happens difers from case to case, and thus
a review of a number of these stories is important to achieve a balanced overview of how this
operates scripturally.
a king in israel. Te Scripture makes it apparent that Gods ideal plan for the nation
of Israel was not that of kingship (1 Sam 8:10-20). He wanted them to be led by a combination
of prophets, judges, priests, and elders. Still, when the time came that Israel desired a king,
God accommodated this desire, even though the choice was prompted by the surrounding
society and culture. Te Lord answered [Samuel], Listen to them and give them a king
(1 Sam 8:23).
At that point, not only did the kingship become acceptable to God, the king himself be-
came the Lords anointed, literally, when Samuel poured oil on Saul (1 Sam 10:1). Tereafer,
kings were frequently anointed by prophets or high priests as a sign of divine appointment
(1 Sam 16:13; 1 Kgs 1:39, 45; 2 Kgs 9:1-6; 2 Chr 23:11; cf. 1 Kgs 11:35-37).
Te fact that the kingship was ofen a burden to Israel and that individual kings fell into
sin did not change Gods endorsement of the institution. Indeed, from then on, it became a
mark of loyalty both to Israel and to God to accept and support the new king (e.g., Saul also
went to his home in Gibeah, accompanied by valiant men whose hearts God had touched
[1 Sam 10:26, NIV]). Tose who did not support the new king are described in Holy Writ
as some troublemakers, who despised him and brought him no gifs (1 Sam 10:27, NIV).
Tis story of the king is instructive on a number of points. First, it shows that God
is willing to vary His organizational ideal to accommodate cultural circumstances and the
desires of His people, even when those desires caused the people to have rejected God and
His will on a particular issue (1 Sam 8:7). Since God was not willing to reject His people for
rejecting one of His organizational ideals, it should cause us to seriously refect on how we
relate to one another when there are diferences in understanding such ideals.
Second, these new plans become just as much a part of His work and will, as had His
original plan. Te new leader is the Lords anointed just as much as the previous leadership
had been. Tird, if individual Israelites opposed Gods adaptation of His ideal, they were in
danger of opposing God Himself.
As noted earlier, adaptation is not possible where a universal moral imperative or eternal
truth is at stake. In the event that adaptation of the Ten Commandments, a core doctrine
such as Creation or the Sanctuary, or clear and of-repeated scriptural restrictions on personal
moral behavior were proposed, then Gods people should resist and if need be institute refor-
mation. But the choice to alter Israels leadership plan and go with a king did not justify such
a responsejust the contrary.
Some will note that already in the book of Deuteronomy God himself had made allow-
ance for the variance of kingship (Deut 17:14-20). Tis passage does indeed talk about Israel
having a king at some point in the future. But the language used indicates that this is not
Gods plan, but the peoples. It was the people who would say, I will set a king over me, like
as all the nations that are about me (Deut 17:15).
Gods prediction of the varianceHis foresight of Israels departure from the divine theo-
cratic templatedid not make it any less a variance from the ideal, as both the prediction and
the fulfllment reveal. Deuteronomy notwithstanding, Samuel denounced the Israelites, declar-
ing, Your wickedness is great . . . in asking a king for yourselvesand they accepted their guilt,
confessing, We have added to all our sins the evil of asking a king for ourselves (1 Sam 12:18,
19, NKJV). But Gods response to the people, transmitted through Samuel, is striking: Do not
fear. Samuel reveals that, despite their departure from His ideal plan, the Lord will not forsake
His people (1 Sam 12:20, 22, NKJV). God accepts even very signifcant variation in His orga-
nizational ideals, and we should not be quick to condemn others whom we view as departing
from such ideals.
Te Bible also reveals that not all variances need to be predicted or revealed by God
ahead of time to be appropriate. Adaptations might come about in spontaneous response to
circumstances and human requests. Tis unexpected adaptability is revealed by a story con-
nected with the modifcation of Gods laws of property inheritance.
the daughters of zelophehad. In ancient Israel, sons were intended by divine
law to inherit property, with a double portion going to the frst-born son (Deut 21:15-17).
But the four daughters of Zelophehad had no brothers and, once their father died, his name
and property would be dissipated among the people. Te daughters petitioned Moses that, in
the absence of brothers, they be allowed to inherit property. Moses brought the case to the
Lord, Who said that the daughters of Zelophehad speak right: thou shalt surely give them a
possession of an inheritance among their fathers brethren (Num 27:7).
Again, in this instance the Lord explicitly approves the adaptation, but He does it in
response to a human need and a human request. Tere was nothing in the law prior to the
daughters entreaty that suggested adaptation or variation of the law was permissible. Rather,
God modifed His law, His civil statutes, at the request of not just important community
leaders, but of young, unmarried girls in a highly patriarchal culture. Te story thus indicates
that there is an important role for the community of believers in adaptations of Gods plans
for ordering His people.
In addition, however, we also have a biblical story that shows the adaptation and varia-
tion of an ideal is possible without a recorded explicit divine command. Tis story is found in
Judges 4 and 5, and concerns Deborah and Barak.
deborah and barak. Te story of Deborah the Judge is ofen told in the context of
the ordination discussion to prove that women can hold positions of spiritual institutional
authority, similar to that of elder. But the story is more complicated than this, and actually
helps illustrate the moral command/ideal dichotomy in the context of leadership and gender.
Judges in ancient Israel had spiritual, legal, and military roles in the community.
6
Tese roles
can be seen in the lives of Ehudthe assassin of Eglon, king of MoabGideon, and Jephthah
(Judg 3, 6, 7, 11, 12).
Deborah led or judged Israel, and held court under a palm tree, where she decided
the disputes of the Israelites (Judg 4:4, 5). Even though the Hebrew word used to describe
Deborah as a judge is the same as is used for all the other judges, there are indications in the
story that a female judge was a rare and unusual event. Deborah is the only woman recorded
in the Bible to have been a judge of Israel.
7
Tis apparent pattern of exceptionality is support-
6 In ancient Israel, judges did not have purely civil roles. In a theocracy, those who carried out the role of judging were also intimately involved in
religious matters, as seen in their role of keeping the people from spiritual corruption (Judg 2:16-19). Of course, Deborahs prophetic role only
enhanced the spiritual aspect of her work.
7 Some have considered Hulda the Prophetess to be a judge in Israel, but the Bible does not call her that. Rather, she is called a prophetess,
nabiah in the Hebrew, which is a feminine form of nabi, which is a speaker or prophet. She gives counsel to King Josiah, but that counsel is a
prophetic, spiritual message, and not any kind of legal decision that a judge would render (2 Kgs 22:14-20).
ed by Ellen Whites comment that in the absence of the usual magistrates, the people had
sought to her [Deborah] for counsel and justice (YRP 260).
Further, when it came time to mount a military campaign against Sisera and his army,
rather than take command as most judges did, Deborah called on a warrior, Barak, to lead
the troops. He was unwilling to assume the command unless she came along to support him
at the battle. Tis she agreed to, but in a rebuke of his unwillingness to carry out his role as a
man, she told him that the glory for the victory would go to a woman (Judg 4:9). Te story of
Deborah shows that women, when they played the role of judge, were expected to play a more
limited role than that of a male judge. Tey were not ideally to be involved in or lead out in
combat.
Deborahs role as judge and military escort was unusual, made necessary by circum-
stances including the failure of men to accept their expected roles. Tus, the Deborah story
contains at the same time pointers towards the general biblical ideal of male spiritual institu-
tional leadership, but also biblical evidence of its variability.
Tis story makes at least three important points about ideals and their exceptions. First,
it suggests that certain leadership roles are meant to be flled by men. Second, it also shows,
however, that certain circumstances may call for the involvement of women in positions they
do not usually fll, including even attending and observing a battle. Tis ideal of women not
playing combat roles is stretched further, and even broken, when the story ends with Jael
killing the enemy general Sisera with a hammer and nail (Judg 4:21, 22). Tis act is subse-
quently praised in a hymn of Deborah, who rejoiced that the most blessed of women be Jael
(Judg 5:24, NIV). Whether or not Jael was inspired, there is no doubt that Deborah was
called of God to exercise spiritual authority.
Tird, and fnally, unlike the king in Israel and the daughters of Zelophehad, the story
is silent regarding any divinely given directive regarding these exceptions and modifcations.
However, the Bible is clear that the Lord routed Sisera and that God subdued the enemies
of His people (Judg 4:15, 23, NIV), demonstrating divine endorsement of the atypical leader-
ship of Deborah and Barak. Tus, circumstances of national peril called for a response, which
was then taken in light of the organizational and missional needs of Gods people, and the
response that varied from the divine ideal then received divine blessing. Te narrative of the
story itself, along with Deborahs hymn, reveals that the gender and leadership variants the
story records were part of Gods providential plan.
king david and the moabite restriction. Te laws of purity and organization
that God gave Israel could even be modifed to allow a forbidden outsider to play the most
powerful leadership roles in the land, as the reigns of David and Solomon and the genealogy
of Jesus demonstrate.
Because the Moabites had seduced the Israelites into idolatry, God had commanded
that a Moabite shall not enter into the Assembly of the Lord; even to the tenth generation
shall none belonging to them enter into the assembly of the Lord for ever (Deut 23:3, ERV).
Tis was relevant to David because his great-grandfather was Boaz, who married Ruth, the
Moabite (Ruth 4:16-20), but had done so in defance of a Mosaic prohibition that had been
repeated by Joshua (Deut 7:3; Josh 23:12).
Under a strict application of the Levitical code, Boazs marriage to Ruth was illegiti-
mate. She and her descendants should have been forbidden from playing any formal roles in
the nation of Israel until ten generations had passed. Tis would have excluded David from
being king. Te entire book of Ruth, which we generally treat as a sort of pious love story, can
be seen as an extended defense and legal argument as to why Ruth was really a Jewess, and no
longer a Moabite.
8
Her famous soliloquy, where you go I will go, and where you stay I will stay. Your people
will be my people, and your God my God (Ruth 1:16, NIV), takes on a whole new signif-
cance when this larger context is understood. So does the story of her redemption by Boaz,
and their subsequent marriage. Te argument is made in alternate ways: she is an Israelite
because she lef Moab and chose Israel and Israels God; she is an Israelite because she is re-
deemed by an act of sacrifce by Boaz, an act of grace which transfers rights and identity;
fnally, she is an Israelite because she marries a faithful, conscientious, law-abiding Israelite.
Fittingly, the book ends with a short description of the genealogy of Ruth leading to David
(Ruth 4:16-20).
Once one understands the truly spiritual nature of Jewish identity, all these arguments
work. Obviously they worked in their historical context, as a majority of Israel and Judah
accepted David as king. But an important point for our purposes is that none of these excep-
tions to the Mosaic prohibition can be found in the law itself! Tey were all created by the
circumstances of the story, as Israels legal and spiritual expositors and leaders wrestled with
the meaning of Gods laws and the spirit behind them in a particular concrete context.
God did not provide a shortcut. A prophet could have stated, God has said this is okay,
or We can make an exception for David. If this had happened, the book of Ruth would not
8 Tat the purpose of the book of Ruth is to promote the interests of David and his dynasty is the position of a large consensus of modern
interpreters: Robert Hubbard, Te Book of Ruth in Te New International Commentary on the Old Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans
Publishing, 1988), 37. Further, a number of these have seen the central focus of the book as dealing with and making acceptable the identity of
Ruth as a Moabite: see ibid., 40-42; Murray Gow, Te Book of Ruth: Its Structure, Teme, and Purpose (Leicester, UK: Appollos, 1992), 132-36
(Gow notes that both the Babylonian Talmud and the Midrash on Ruth reference ancient arguments made against Davids legitimacy based on
his Moabite ancestry); Kirsten Nielsen, Ruth: A Commentary (London, UK: SCM Press Ltd, 1997), 23-28.
have been needed. But it was needed, for as Gods people seek to understand, apply, and adapt
divine leadership ideals, God regularly guides through the sanctifed prayer, Bible study, and
discussion of the community of faith. It is notable that the decision to accept Ruth was taken
by the elders of Bethlehem (Ruth 4:9, 11). Te story shows how integrative and open God and
His people were on matters of mission and organizational rules. Te story of Ruth and Boaz is
one of the Old Testament forerunners of Acts 15, where the community submitted lesser or-
ganizational ideals to more weighty and important issues of mission for God and His church.
david, the showbread, and christ. Sometimes God even works through the
reason and faith of individuals who fnd themselves in exceptional circumstances, as he did
with David and the showbread (1 Sam 21:1-8). Davids act in eating the showbread is one of
the most famous examples of a divine ideal (in this case a ceremonial/ritual command) giving
way to the larger spirit behind these laws. Fleeing from Saul, David in his haste to escape had
lef without sufcient provisions or weapons. Arriving in Nob, he asked Ahimelech the priest
for bread to eat. Ahimelech said that the only available food was the showbread, which was
reserved by the law for the priests (Lev 24:5-9).
Due to Davids pressing circumstances, however, Ahimelech was willing to allow David
and his men to eat the bread, as long as they were ritually clean from sexual relations (1 Sam
21:4). It is intriguing that Ahimelech was willing to break one ceremonial rulenon-priests
eating the showbreadbut desirous of keeping another ruleritual purity from sexual rela-
tions.
Tis partial application is characteristic generally of individual and spontaneous human
attempts to adapt and modify ritual or organizational laws to new or exceptional circum-
stances. One only alters the original as much as needed to deal with the exigent circumstance.
It is evidence that the exception granted was a spontaneous human-devised alteration, and
not one found in the original law itself or some other legislatively created standing law.
Tis nuanced caveat is what one would expect from a human agent engaged in ethical/
legal refection, thinking about how he would explain his conduct to others. Well, I did give
him the bread, but it was an emergency, and also I made sure he was ritually pure. Te story
ultimately shows that Gods ritual and organizational ideals are expected to be applied in a
common-sense manner by proper ecclesiastical leaders, such as Ahimelech, in a way that fur-
thers the larger values, mission, and unity of the community.
Strikingly, too, that is how Christ understood the story, for the story of David and the
showbread makes a notable appearance in the New Testament. Christ justifed both Davids
acts as well as those of his disciples in the face of criticism from the Pharisees that his disciples
did not keep the Sabbath properly because they plucked ears of corn to eat (Matt 12:3, 4;
Mark 2:25, 26; Luke 6:3, 4).
While the context of the Pharisees remarks is Sabbath observance, the Sabbath com-
mand itself was not an issue. Tere is nothing in that command or its application in the Torah
that would forbid plucking corn to eat it on the Sabbath. Rather, it was the rules and tradi-
tions of the Pharisees and elders that had been constructed to safeguard the Sabbath that the
disciples were accused of violating. Still, in responding to the Pharisees, Christ called upon a
counter-example that did involve an undoubted law of the Torah: the limitation of showbread
to the priests.
David was justifed, Christ said, in eating the showbread, in violation of an explicit di-
vine rule, to preserve life and health. So how much more are His disciples justifed in eating
corn on the Sabbath, which merely violates a man-made rule of the Pharisees? Te import-
ant point for our purposes is that Christ ratifed human ability to adapt and modify divine
rules that provide ecclesiastical order in pursuit of higher principles of the preservation of life,
health, or well-being of the community and its members.
9

the jerusalem council: differences over divine ideals. Circumcision was a
vitally important act for every male Israelite. It was a sign of Gods everlasting covenant with
Abraham to be kept for the generations to come; in fact, those who were not circumcised
were said to have broken the covenant (Gen 17:9-14). Mosess failure to circumcise his son
was seen by God as so great a failure as to justify his death (Exod 4:24, 25). So essential was it
to the Israelites covenant with God that, afer the prolonged and complete failure to circum-
cise male children during the 40 years in the wilderness, it was felt essential for Joshua to cir-
cumcise all the adult males of the children of Israel afer crossing the Jordan River (Josh 5:1-
7). Circumcision was considered essential to the identity of Israel as Gods covenant people.
Understanding this background, it is not difcult to understand why some Jewish
Christians argued, Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses you cannot
be saved (Acts 15:1, Phillips). Tis strict requirement caused a great deal of dissension in the
local churches at Antioch.
Ultimately the issue was referred to a council of leaders gathered in Jerusalem. Delib-
erating together, the church came to the conclusion that circumcision and other ceremo-
nial provisions of the Old Testament were unnecessary for Gentile believers. Tey were to
abstain from things polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from things strangled and
from blood(Acts 15:20). In light of the cross, and to preserve the unity and mission of the
church, the Jerusalem Council, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, altered a divine orga-
nizational/identity marker that had been practiced by Gods people for centuries.
9 Te portion of the story where Christ discusses the activity of the priests in the temple is less relevant for our purposes. Te priests were follow-
ing the divine law in ministering on the Sabbath, and thus by defnition were not defling the Sabbath when they carried out that which was
commanded by the Lord of the Sabbath. But in eating the showbread, David was not acting according to any explicit, written divine command.
Ellen G. Whites comment on the prevailing attitude of the Jews is insightful: Te Jews
could not believe that they ought to change the customs they had adopted under the special
direction of God.
10
It was difcult for these Jewish Christians to allow for a variance in what
they believed to be Gods ideal for all believers. Yet in the end, the unity of the Christian
church was preserved in the midst of diversity. Jewish Christians continued practicing Jewish
customs while Gentile Christians did not feel compelled to adopt them. Te broad and far
reaching decisions of the general council brought confdence into the ranks of the Gentile
believers and the cause of God prospered.
11

We do not believe that circumcision and ordination are the same kind of issue in all
respects. Circumcision was an ethnic marker, instituted during the time of Abraham, that
lost its central meaning when the borders of Israel became defned by those of spiritual Israel.
Leadership and gender roles go back to Eden. Tat biblical model should, we believe, still be
taken into account today. But Paul elsewhere indicates that organizational ideals, even com-
mands, of the Lord that are of continuing validity may be varied from. In 1 Corinthians
9:14, Paul acknowledges the Lord commanded that those who proclaim the gospel should
get their living by the gospel. Yet, in the next verse he says, but I have made no use of these
rights (1 Cor 9:14, 15, ESV).
Te command to support ministers from the tithe could be varied on an individual
basis, Paul demonstrates, if the minister himself chooses to do so. Tis individual choice,
however, did not do away with the general rule. Other organizational principles that afect
the church more broadly must be agreed to more widely. We believe that the Jerusalem Coun-
cil highlights four vitally important principles that should be taken into account whenever
organizational guidelines of broad impact on the church, such as qualifcations for ordina-
tion, are being applied or adapted by the church. Tese principles are:
First, an issue of church order and organization fracturing the unity of the church
should be decided by a representative council of the church. Second, the decision, though
taken collectively, may not require uniformity of action on the part of all, as the Jerusalem
Council allowed Jews and Gentiles to approach circumcision and ritual diferently. Tird,
the decision should foster both the unity and mission of the church within the framework of
biblical principle. Fourth, the decision should foster unity, just as the NT church, composed
of Jewish and Gentile believers, was united in Christ through the Holy Spirit on the eternal,
unchanging truths of Gods Word. Tey shared, as we should, an all-consuming desire to
reach the world with the message of His grace. But they were not always united in the partic-
ulars of ecclesiastical practice. In Christ, however, they were able to live with these diferences,
and so should we.
10 AA 192
11 AA 197
ideal and variation in the writings of ellen g. white. Ellen G. White
showed a distinct awareness of the variable nature of organizational ideals. She was support-
ive of church order and the need for pastoral ordination, but she was very clear that such
organizational rules should not stand in the way of the mission of the church. In 1896 she
wrote about an un-ordained worker and his mistake in not being willing to baptize when no
ordained pastor was available:
It has been a great mistake that men go out, knowing they are children of God, like
Brother Tay, [who] went to Pitcairn as a missionary to do work, [but]. . . did not feel
at liberty to baptize because he had not been ordained. Tat is not any of Gods ar-
rangements; it is mans fxing. When men go out with the burden of the work and
to bring souls into the truth, those men are ordained of God, [even] if [they] never
have a touch of ceremony of ordination. To say [they] shall not baptize when there
is nobody else, [is wrong]. If there is a minister in reach, all right, then they should
seek for the ordained minister to do the baptizing, but when the Lord works with a
man to bring out a soul here and there, and they know not when the opportunity will
come that these precious souls can be baptized, why he should not question about the
matter, he should baptize these souls
12
.
In this single quotation we have both the acknowledgment of the ideal (they should
seek for the ordained minister to do the baptizing) and the variation or adaptions (to say
they shall not baptize when there is nobody else, is wrong). Whites clear and urgent overrid-
ing concern was for the ministry and mission of the Church. Organizational guidelines have
their place, but should give way when they impede mission.
In another instance, White described how an apparently clear statement of her own
regarding school order and restrictions should be set aside based on reason from common
sense. She met with a group of parents and educators who were considering starting a kin-
dergarten. Some of these conscientious Adventist believers opposed it, as they had read her
counsel regarding not sending children to school until they were eight or ten years old.
13
Whites response is quite instructive. She acknowledged her earlier statements about
students and age, but said that rather than being lef loosely supervised, it would be much
better for the young children to be in a well-run Adventist school. She explained her response
in terms of a wider principle, one that should command our attention: God wants us all to
have common sense, and He wants us to reason from common sense. Circumstances alter
conditions. Circumstances change the relation of things.
14
12 MS 75, Nov. 12, 1896, pp. 1-2
13 Parents should be the only teachers of their children until they have reached eight or ten years of age. . . . Te only schoolroom for children
from eight to ten years of age should be in the open air (CE 8).
14 3SM 217
Here again White demonstrates her ability to distinguish between Gods moral impera-
tivesHis divine commandsand divine ideals, which are subject to adaptation. Te divine
ideal of the parents teaching their children for the frst eight to ten years does not forbid,
under some circumstances, those children attending school. Neither did it forbid the church
to start a kindergarten. For parents in other circumstances, the ideal continued to be that they
instruct their children till eight or ten. It is surely instructive that White was very comfort-
able living in a denomination that could take into account local circumstances when applying
these ideals.
determining when to vary the divine pattern. We believe that the biblical
examples we have discussed collectively show that any decision to adapt the divine organiza-
tional or ecclesiastical norms ought not to be taken individually, unilaterally, or rashly. Rath-
er, the church should engage in such application and adaptation collectively, carefully, and
deliberately, guided by those who have been duly appointed to exercise servant-leadership of
Gods people. While none of the illustrations discussed above on their own would justify a
modifcation of the qualifcations for elder, we believe that the collective principles embodied
in them support such an outcome.
Tree of the storiesthe king in Israel, Deborah, and Davids Moabite heritageshow
Gods willingness to allow, and even endorse, deviation from leadership norms in the orga-
nization of His people. Two of the storiesthe daughters of Zelophehad and Deborah
show again an adjustment of regular rules and practices in connection with gender. Another
storythat of David and the showbreadshows Gods willingness to allow the adjustment
of organizational and ritual norms based on need and pressing circumstances without a spe-
cial word from the Lord or a prophet. At least two of the storiesDeborah and David and
the showbreadshow that a deviation or modifcation can happen without it doing away
with the underlying general rule: the variation does not become the new norm. Finally, the
Jerusalem Council provides the primary model for how variation and modifcation should
most frequently and properly happen in the era of the church, though the story of Ruth is also
relevant here.
How then, can we today know when God has allowed the community to adapt or modi-
fy an ideal? When we see that the Holy Spirit has led Gods duly authorized servant-leaders of
the religious community to move forward on the basis of good order and process; when there
has been a collective study of the Scriptures; and when a decision is made by those duly chosen
to represent the community to make changes in organizational, ecclesiological, or leadership
issues; then we risk opposing God if we continue to openly and disruptively work against
what the community of believers has, with proper order and procedure, so decided.
Stories such as the sons of Aaron and the use of common fre in the sanctuary, and
Uzzahs presumption in steadying the ark reveal that individual decisions made haphazardly
and based on personal preference to vary ritual or ceremonial commands are presumptuous
and can incur divine wrath (Lev 10:1, 2; 2 Sam 6:6-8, 1 Chr 13:9-11). We do not today have
a Moses, a Urim and Tummim, or an Ark with the special presence of God to speak to us
directly and approve our variance of an organizational norm. God today can verify adaptions
of his non-moral organizational ideals by the way in which He speaks and acts through His
people when they pray and study together: as they did at Jerusalem (Acts 15), as early Adven-
tists did in Bible conferences, and as we do when representatives of the world Church gather
in a General Conference Session.
application and conclusion
As the above examples show, God in His love and grace accommodates His divine ideal
throughout Scripture and salvation history. Again, this reasoning does not apply to universal
moral commands or truths. None of the examples set out abovewhether the king in Israel,
or inheritance laws, or Deborah and Barak, or David and the showbread, or the Jerusalem
Council, or Ellen G. Whites counsel on the age of children attending schoolinvolved vari-
ations or deviations from Gods moral laws, whether it be the Ten Commandments or pro-
hibitions against sexual immorality such as adultery or homosexuality. Careful and limited
modifcations of Gods organizational, ritual, or ecclesiastical ideals create no precedent for
any attempt to vary or adapt Gods moral laws.
But Gods organizational ideals are somewhat diferent. Tey should not be lightly or
cavalierly disregarded. But neither should they be allowed to hinder the mission of Gods
church. Tese types of standards are created to further Gods primary desires of the unity of
His church and for His people to be focused on their divinely appointed role as instruments
in Gods mission of seeking and saving the lost (Matt 18:10-12, Luke 19:10, Matt 28:18-20).
Organizational and ritual norms, even those that point to abiding principles, are sometimes
adapted to further these ultimate goals of salvation.
In the family, where the responsibility of male leadership applies most directly, the fa-
ther may be dead, absent, spiritually uncommitted, or otherwise irresponsible, so that the
wife must assume the role of spiritual leader. In a local church, the men who are available,
even if committed Adventists, may lack some or all of the qualifcations or gifs for the ofce
of local elder.
Would it be wise to place a male in the ofce of elder if he had only one or two of the
listed qualifcations, when there were women available with most of the qualifcations, but
were simply not male? It is possible to extrapolate from such a hypothetical situation on a
local scale to the larger world Church. Te reality of demographics within certain cultures is
such that the divine ideal regarding gender and leadership may stand in the way of the mission
and unity of the Church if maleness becomes the sole criterion or absolute ideal of leadership.
Accordingly, the world Church could develop a comprehensive position on ordination that
would allow for the proper authorities in a region or area (such as a conference, union, or di-
vision) to be given the freedom to seek the Holy Spirits leading in applying and adapting the
divine pattern to their local situation.
Many who adhere to the biblical ideal of male spiritual leadership will agree that some-
times women may need to assume the role of spiritual leader or elder in the absence of qual-
ifed men. Tus, they do not view the prohibition of women leading out as being based on
sacramental concernsthat women somehow cannot make efcacious ecclesiastical rituals or
rites (e.g., the position of the Roman Catholic Church). Tere are those who would typically
limit this exception to very extreme cases. But the fact that nearly everyone agrees that women
can carry a primary role of spiritual leadership under certain circumstances (e.g. as currently is
happening in China) is signifcant. Te key, of course, is how those circumstances are under-
stood and defned.
We propose that the world Church acknowledge the general ideal of male leadership
in the ofce of ordained minister, but that it also allow for women to be ordained, where
local circumstances may make that ideal difcult or impractical to implement, to further the
unity and mission of the Church. Te Church should also recognize that biblical principles
of religious liberty mean local organizational units and regions should be able to deal with
their cultures in applying these principles in ways that will most efectively advance the gospel
mission of the Church in their felds.
Such an approach, mutually agreed upon, prayerfully and carefully thought through,
and appropriately carried out, would leave our hermeneutics and theology uncompromised.
It would afrm the Jerusalem Councils principles of unity and interdependence in Church
decisions being taken together, even when allowing for diversity. It would take seriously what
Paul says about the ideal for church leadership. But it would recognize the missional nature
and fexibility of that principle: that it is not one of the Ten Commandments, nor an issue of
salvation, nor a doctrinal pillar identifed by our pioneers.
Some may interpret and apply these organizational ideals diferently than others, but
under biblical principles of mutual Christian liberty we should grant tolerance and forbear-
ance to each other (Gal 2:3-5). Under these same principles of freedom, no organizational
unit or employee should be required either to support or to promote ordained female pasto-
ral leadership should they conscientiously object to it. If the united community of believers
agrees both to afrm a divine organizational and ecclesiastical ideal, yet also to allow its ad-
aptation for the sake of mission and unity, then church members should accept the mutually
agreed diversity that will result. We should respect views with which we disagree, submitting
[ourselves] one to another in the fear of God, and forbearing each other and forgiving one
another (Eph 5:21, Col 3:13). As Ellen G. White wrote:
Let us all remember that we are not dealing with ideal men, but with real men of
Gods appointment, men precisely like ourselves, men who fall into the same errors
that we do, men of like ambitions and infrmities. No man has been made a master,
to rule the mind and conscience of a fellow-being. Let us be very careful how we
deal with Gods blood-bought heritage . . . . Of us He says, Ye are laborers together
with God: ye are Gods husbandry, ye are Gods building. Tis relationship we
should recognize. If we are bound up with Christ, we shall constantly manifest
Christlike sympathy and forbearance toward those who are striving with all their
God-given ability to bear their burdens, even as we endeavor to bear our appointed
burdens.
15
A fnal issue that needs addressing is that of the 1984 allowance for women to be or-
dained as local elders. A rollback on this point would be extremely destructive to the Church
and its unity, and is inconsistent both with the interpretation of Scripture set out above and
with a conservative reading of the New Testament. Te position of elder, as it is currently
carried out in most local Seventh-day Adventist congregations, is in practice more akin to the
biblical ofce of deacona role that most people agree the Bible permits women to hold. In
Adventist ecclesiological practice, it is the ordained minister who more closely flls the biblical
position of elder.
16
In conclusion, this is not a call to compromise biblical beliefs. Rather, it is an appeal to
listen to the Bible itself on how it applies its various standards and teachings. It is an appeal
to unite in Christ on divine, unchangeable truths, applied in the spirit of Gods Word, and
to focus on the mission of reaching lost people for the Kingdom. It is also an invitation to
follow the biblical principles of charity, mutual submission, and Christian freedom within
the Church on matters that are not salvifc or pillars of the faith, for the sake of the mission,
integrity, and unity of the body of Christ.
15 TM 495
16 See footnote 4. Although at times the local elder may carry out some of the functions of the New Testament elder, we believe that we could deal
with the core of Pauls teaching on the ideal of men leading out in providing spiritual accountability and discipline for other men by recom-
mending a guideline such as the following: In those instances where a head elder is a woman, there should be a male co- or vice-elder who can
handle those circumstances where the head elder needs to lead out in the ecclesiastical discipline of a man.
way forward
statements
section vi
119 Section VI: Way Forward Statements
way forward statement #1
To remain faithful to Scripture, to reafrm and further promote women in ministry,
and to preserve Bible-based unity in the Church, we recommend the following for consider-
ation by the General Conference in full session: (1) Reafrm and encourage, with public rec-
ognition and licensure, women whom God has called to gospel work; (2) Provide enhanced
access to educational opportunities for women in gospel work and ensure fair and just treat-
ment upon their placement in ministry; (3) Promote the greater development of various lines
of ministry for women, according to their spiritual gifs, including but not limited to person-
al and public evangelism, teaching, preaching, ministering to families, counseling, medical
missionary work, departmental leadership, etc. While increasing opportunities for women in
ministry, we also recommend that the Church (4) Retain the scriptural practice of ordain-
ing/commissioning only qualifed men to the ofce of pastor/minister throughout the world
church in harmony with the consistent example of Christ, the apostles, and the Adventist
pioneers; and (5) Return to the biblical practice of electing and ordaining only men to the
ofce of local elder throughout the world Church, while providing for women to serve as
un-ordained church leaders under certain circumstances.
support and other considerations:
God calls women to both full- and part-time ministry (DG 20, 110; Ev 472). Te lines
of service in which women may work are broad and far-reaching (Exod 15:20; Judg 4,
5; Acts 9:36, 39; Rom 16:1-12; Titus 2:3-5; 9T 128-129; ChS 68). For its mission, the
Church must make full use of the indispensable role of women in the ministry of the
Church. Women can do in families a work that men cannot do, a work that reaches the
inner life. Tey can come close to the hearts of those whom men cannot reach. Teir
work is needed (ChS 27). Te Church should issue an appropriate license with equita-
ble compensation to qualifed women although the hands of ordination have not been
laid upon them (MS 22, 1892; Ev 491-493; 12MR 160; GW 452).
Although both men and women are called to various lines of ministry, the Bible consis-
tently assigns the ofce of local elder or pastor/minister to faithful men who satisfy the
scriptural requirements. See the examples of Jesus and the early church as well as Pauls
instruction (Mark 3:14; Acts 1:21-26; 6:3; 1 Tim 3:1-7; Titus 1:5-9). Tis assignment,
rather than being based on culture, is grounded by Paul in the male spiritual leadership
role established at Creation and reafrmed afer the Fall (1 Tim 2:13, 14; 1 Cor 11:3, 8,
9). While spiritual gifs include pastoral care, this is not equivalent to the biblical ofce
of elder that is today ofen referred to as pastor.
Ordination involves a call from God (Acts 13:2) and recognition by the church regional-
ly (Acts 13:3) in harmony with the church globally (LP 43). Ordination to the ofce of
pastor/minister (1 Tim 3:1-7; Titus 1:1-9) grants full ecclesiastical authority to establish
new churches, ordain local elders, baptize converts, and lead out in the ordinances of the
church in cooperation with the local conference (AA 160). In certain circumstances,
a woman may serve as a local church leader (CM 75, 76) without being ordained as an
elder (19MR 56).
Allowing regionally established beliefs or qualifcations for ordination would fracture
the church, create confusion and disunity, and set a dangerous precedent. It would re-
move an important protection from non-biblical cultural infuences (see AA 95-96) and
move the church toward becoming an association of national churches instead of a unit-
ed world church.
Global church unity can be preserved only by yielding to the plain and obvious mean-
ing of Scripture (GC 268, 599, 521, 54), rejecting higher criticism (Ed 227) or other
methods of Bible study that give the reader authority over the divinely inspired text (2
Tim 3:16; Luke 24:27).
Jesus is our example of servant leadership. His life expresses the loving authority and
submission that exist in Gods family in heaven and on earth (1 Cor 11:3; 15:28; Matt
6:10).
the way forward #2
Aware of our high calling as Seventh-day Adventists, we eagerly anticipate the soon
coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. We passionately believe that God will have a people upon
the earth to maintain the Bible, and the Bible only, as the standard of all doctrines and the
basis of all reforms (GC 596). Te scriptural afrmation that God shows no partiality (Gen
1, 2; Gal 3:26-28; Col 3:11-17; 1 Peter 2:8-10; Acts 10:34) and the urgency of our mission
(Matt 28:18-20; Matt 24:14; Rev 14:6-12) drive us to include all believers, both men and
women, in using the gifs God has given them and appropriately afrm them in their min-
istry. God created men and women in the image of God (Gen 1:26-28) and, although this
ideal was disrupted by sin, Christ restored the ideal, and in the New Testament we see both
men and women ministering. God works continuously to complete this restoration. We see
the restoration of this ideal in: (1) Pauls afrmation of the restoration of equality (Gal 3; Eph
2:14-22; cf. Rev 5:10); (2) participation of women in the ministry of the early church (Luke
8:1-3; Rom 16:1, 2, 7; Acts 18:2, 26); and, (3) the Spirits working in the ministry of women
in the church today.
Te recently adopted consensus statement on ordination declares, Ordination is an act
of commissioning that acknowledges Gods call, sets the individual apart, and appoints the
person to serve the church in a special capacity. Furthermore, it is an invocation of Gods
blessing upon those chosen to the work of ministry. Tis understanding of ordination is
consistent whether we ordain a deacon or deaconess, an elder, or a pastor.
Troughout Adventist history we have ofen faced theological and ecclesiastical issues
that have caused diferences among us. Despite vigorous debate at times, we have remained
united as one body under Christ pursuing our unique God-given mission. We cannot then
take a position that the unity of the church consists in viewing every text of Scripture in the
very same light. Nothing can perfect unity in the church but the spirit of Christ-like forbear-
ance (11MR 266).
Fundamental Belief #14 on Unity in the Body of Christ states that distinctions of
race, culture, learning, nationality, and diferences between high and low, rich and poor, male
and female, must not be divisive among us. We are all equal in Christ, who by one Spirit has
bonded us into one fellowship with Him and with one another. We are to serve and be served
without partiality or reservation. On the basis of this Fundamental Belief, the General Con-
ference has established policies regulating responsibilities within the Church including em-
ployment practices recognizing women in leadership roles (see GC Working Policy BA-60).
Tese policies refect our convictions on the doctrine of spiritual gifs: that the Holy Spirit
calls both men and women to service and that all spiritual gifs are gender inclusive (1 Cor
12:11; Joel 2:28, 29; Acts 2:17-21). Te Church has taken action to allow for the ordination
of deaconesses and female elders and the commissioning of female pastors. Although these
church policies and practices are implemented diferently throughout the world, the Church
has remained a unifed, worldwide organization pressing together in mission and message.
Following the Bible and the counsel of Ellen G. White, the Church acknowledges the
need to adapt its practices to the needs of the people it seeks to reach. Regional diversity in the
practice of womens ordination will ensure that no entity will be compelled to do so against
the will of its constituency. As in other matters, faithfulness to Scripture and mutual respect
for one another are essential for the unity of the Church.
Terefore, because we accept the Bibles call to give witness to Gods impartiality and
believe that disunity and fragmentation will be the inevitable result of enforcing only one
perspective in all regions, we propose that:
Each entity responsible for calling pastors be authorized to choose either to have only
men as ordained pastors or to have both men and women as ordained pastors. [Tis
choice will be protected by guarantees in the relevant documents of each union, division
and the General Conference, so that no entity can be directed against its will to adopt a
position other than the one to which the collective conscience of its constituency points.]
Te union, at which organizational level decisions for ordination have historically been
made in the Seventh-day Adventist Church, be enabled by its division to make the deci-
sion as to whether to approve the ordination of both men and women to gospel ministry.
We hereby rededicate our lives to God and pledge allegiance to His Word as we fulfll
the Great Commission the Lord has entrusted to His Church. Maranatha.Come, Lord Jesus.
the way forward #3
1. We afrm the need to provide more opportunities and resources everywhere in the world,
regardless of ordination, for women in ministry and leadership, including preaching,
evangelizing, Bible work, and teaching at all levels of education (Num 11:29; Joel 2:28;
Acts 2:4, 6-18; 6T 322; RH, December 19, 1878; WM 145; Ev 471; see Deborah, Hulda,
Anna, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary, Priscilla, the daughters of Philip, Phoebe,
and others [Judg 4-5; 2 Kgs; 2 Chr 34; Luke 2:36-38; Matt 28:1-7; Acts 18:2, 3, 18, 26,
21:9; Rom 16:1-4, 1 Cor 16:19; DA 568; AH 204]).
2. We afrm the need to educate all members on the loving, humble, self-sacrifcing,
servant-leadership role that men since the Fall have been called to as spiritual heads in
their homes (Gen 18:19; Eph 5:21-23; 1 Peter 3:7).
3. We afrm that Christ is the only head of the church (Eph 5:23; Col 1:18).
4. We afrm the biblical pattern of male leadership, under the headship of Christ, in the of-
fce of the ordained minister (1 Tim 2:12-14; 3:1-5; Titus 1:5, 6). However, we do not see
this pattern as a moral absolute or universal divine command, or of sacramental or salv-
ifc signifcance. Although based on important aspects of human nature, it is primarily
meant to promote order in the church and further its mission.
1
Based on a wide range of
biblical precedents, we acknowledge that, in certain circumstances, God permits divine
patterns for ecclesiastical organization to be adapted or modifed in order to promote the
mission, unity, and welfare of the church (1 Sam 8:10-23; Judg 4; 1 Sam 21:1-8; 1 Cor
9:19-22). Tis is in contrast to absolute moral commands and eternal truths, which can
never be humanly abrogated or adapted.
In light of the priority of mission, the importance of church unity, and the princi-
ples of Christian liberty, we recommend that denominational leadership at a proper level
be authorized to decide, based on biblical principles, whether such an adaptation may be
appropriate for their area or region.
2
It would take a collective decision by the worldwide
church to authorize the principle of regional diversity of practice (15MR 130). Also based
on principles of Christian freedom, no pastor, church employee, organizational unit, or
local church shall be required or compelled to support such diversity (Rom 14; Gal 5:13;
1 In 1 Corinthians 14, Paul has a lengthy set of instructions concerning the public worship service at Corinth, including that women keep silent.
He sums up all those instructions in terms of church order, not as absolute commands. But all things should be done decently and in order (1
Cor 14:40, ESV).
2 Te Acts 15 council did not demand uniformity of practice on the church even though circumcision was not to be forced on Gentiles. Tus Paul
circumcised Timothy (Acts 16:3), but not Titus (Gal 2:3). It is signifcant that one party in the Acts 15 dispute saw circumcision as an absolute
moral and salvifc issue, while the majority of the council did not.
8T 236). Such regional adaptations, wherever they are allowed, should not negate the
general pattern of male-ordained leadership as understood and practiced by the world
Church.
General Conference administration, along with the leadership of its world divi-
sions, would need to carefully consider the implementation of this proposal, given our
historical and current view of ordination as a sacred calling, not for one local feld alone
but for the world church (WP L 45 05).
vote of affirmation
and commitment
section vii
127 Section VII: Vote of Afrmation and Commitment
voted, to affrm that in spite of the
differences of opinion on the subject of
womens ordination, the members of the
theology of ordination study committee
are committed to the message and mission
of the seventh-day adventist church, as
expressed through the 28 fundamental
beliefs.

Final Tosc Report

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Final Tosc Report

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Final Tosc Report

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

general conference

study committee report

You might also like