A Response to the North American Division Ordination
Request
© P. Gerard Damsteegt
Introduction
The following is my response to the North American Division
ordination request on July 5, 1995. I was asked by the General
Conference President to speak on the topic "Why am I not in favor of
the North American Division's request." Besides the oral presentation
I prepared a printed graphic outline that was distributed to each of
the delegates after the discussions. During my oral address I
presented all my arguments with Scripture and Spirit of Prophecy
quotations via computerized video projection to a large jumbo screen.
Because all my references were projected, in my spoken presentation I
did not give the exact reference to each of the Scriptural and Spirit
of Prophecy quotations. The graphic outline that was passed out to
all delegates also included full documentation along with a few
additional points that were omitted because of the time restraints.
(I had exactly 20 minutes allotted.) In the following presentation
these items have been included so readers will have the benefit of
the oral as well as the written materials that were shared with the
delegates.
The General Conference Address
It is a privilege for me, brothers and sisters, to address you on
this awesome occasion. Let us pray.
Lord, send Your Spirit. Touch our hearts. And whatever we do, may
it be to Your glory, and may the words of my mouth and the meditation
of my heart be acceptable in Your sight, O Lord and Savior, our
Redeemer. Amen.
Let me first of all state that I strongly support the involvement
of women in God's work. Women have unique gifts needed to finish its
mission. They have done a great work in the past and we need them
even more today. They can reach people men can never reach. We must,
therefore, develop new strategies to attract them to participate in
the work of God.
The dilemma of the church
Even though I cannot agree with the North American Division (NAD)
request, I truly and deeply sympathize with them. What is the dilemma
the church is facing?
In 1989 the Annual Council voted that women ordained as elders can
perform all the duties of ordained ministers. However, they cannot be
ordained as ministers. Of course the result was a very unhappy
situation. No one really likes this solution. Some accuse the church
of unfairness, discrimination and injustice. Some threaten to ordain
women with or without the church's permission. How can we now
together solve this dilemma and preserve the unity of the church?
Two options were cited by the NAD president (Adventist Review,
February 1995) 1. To go back and acknowledge that it was a mistake to
begin ordaining women as elders. 2. To press on and request that each
division have the freedom to ordain women as ministers. The NAD
leadership has chosen the second option. They sincerely believe that
this is the way to preserve unity and prevent open rebellion in
certain areas.
Why can' t I support this request? It is conflicts with three of
our biblical doctrines: the doctrine of the church, the doctrine of
the Holy Scriptures, and the doctrine of unity in the body of Christ.
Implications of the request
To understand this fully we have to see the full implications of
the NAD request. It's not simply a matter of laying on of hands.
There is good counsel in the Spirit of Prophecy that women be
ordained for a special work, and they could do a tremendous work. But
the issue here is: ordination to what?
If the present request is approved it presents a major change in
the structure of church leadership. It rejects the generally held SDA
position that the Bible teaches clear differences in function between
men and women within the church. It assumes that the Bible allows
women to occupy positions of spiritual headship in the church such as
head of a local church, conference president, union president, and
General Conference president.
How to judge the request
What is the test for new doctrine or practice? The Bible clearly
reveals in Isaiah 8:20: "To the law and to the testimony! If they do
not speak according to this word, it is because there is no light in
them" (NKJV). Now we, as Adventists, are very fortunate, because
about 100 years ago, in 1888, we had a General Conference with lots
of tensions. There the Lord revealed that "The Bible must be our
standard for every doctrine and practice .... It is the word of the
living God that is to decide all controversies" (Ellen White, 1888,
pp. 44, 45).
The ordination issue that faces us here deals with a significant
practice -- the practice of appointing ministerial leadership in
Christ's church. It is clear that God's Word must be our focus. We
are a Bible church.
The Scriptures are plain
The statement is often made that the Bible doesn't say anything
about the ordination of women and therefore we can just go ahead with
it. I would like to ask "Does the Bible speak to the question of the
right of women to occupy positions of leadership with full
ecclesiastical authority? I mention "full ecclesiastical authority"
for that is a phrase that the Spirit of Prophecy uses to describe the
result of the ordination to church leadership positions (Acts of the
Apostles, 161).
Is there any light from Jesus on this question? Yes there is!
Let me illustrate this from the history of our church. Early
Adventists were strongly reform-minded. During the second half of the
19th century there were three major reform movements: abolition of
slavery, temperance, and women's rights. Ellen White strongly
supported abolition of slavery and temperance. She, however, strongly
opposed the movement for women's rights. One of her reasons for
rejecting this movement was that it conflicted with Scripture. The
prophet warned that "those who feel called out to join the movement
in favor of woman's rights ... might as well sever all connection
with the third angel's message. The spirit which attends the one
cannot be in harmony with the other. The Scriptures are plain upon
the relations and rights of men and women" (Testimonies, vol. 1, p.
421). So does the Bible address this issue? Very clearly it does. And
so let us look how this request conflicts with three of our
doctrines.
It conflicts with the doctrine of the church
The request is out of harmony with the statement in Fundamental
Belief 11 that "The church derives its authority from Christ, who is
the incarnate Word, and from the Scriptures, which are the written
Word"
This doctrine deals with the question of authority in the church.
Therefore we need to investigate what the Bible teaches on relations
between men and women.
The Bible teaches true equality of nature and worth before God.
Regarding the equality in nature Genesis clearly reveals that men and
women are created in "the image of God" (Gen 1:27). On the equality
in worth the Jesus reveals that before God we are all exceedingly
precious. God "shows no partiality" (Acts 10:34) because we are all
"one in Christ Jesus." Therefore "there is neither Jew nor Greek,
there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female"
(Gal 3: 28, NKJV). On this both sides of the ordination issue fully
agree.
Are men and women the same in every sense? It is clear that the
Bible affirms that they have the same value and standing before God,
but it also teaches that men and women are different in their
functional roles. The North American request overlooks this
fundamental Biblical teaching. 1 Timothy and Titus clearly present
this teaching which speaks directly to our situation. Unfortunately
the Women's Study Commissions in Mohaven, Washington D.C. and Cohutta
Springs never grappled in a focused way with this Biblical counsel.
Therefore there is no better time to study it than at this time.
The message of 1 Timothy
Let us look at the message of 1 Timothy because it is a timeless
message for the church. Timothy was instructed "to teach no other
doctrine, nor give heed to fables ... which cause disputes rather
than godly edification" (1 Tim 1: 3, 4, NKJV). And so the Lord
provided counsel on how to preserve His church from heresy, confusion
and divisions. Inspiration gave Timothy God's plan for the structure
and operation of the church during the Christian era: "I am writing
these instructions to you so that...you may know how one ought to
behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living
God, the pillar and bulwark of the truth" (1 Tim 3:14, 15, RSV).
This book of the Bible reveals the principles of authority in the
church. The early Christians had to face some of the same problems we
are facing today. Certain women interpreted the freedom of the Gospel
as freedom to exercise the spiritual headship role in the church.
Paul's response was swift: "I do not permit a woman ... to have
authority over a man" (1 Tim 2:12, NKJV). Was his reasoning based on
culture? Women in the culture of that time served as priestesses. Why
should they not have the same rights in the Christian religion?
The answer to these questions is found in what the Bible teaches
about God's plan for spiritual headship. This plan is based on three
biblical reasons. The first reason against women having spiritual
authority over men Paul bases on the order Christ established before
the fall into sin: "Adam was formed first, then Eve" (1 Tim 2:13,
NKJV). What conclusion does Paul draw from this? Jesus wanted men to
be the spiritual leaders. It is significant to notice that this
creation order reflects Jesus' actions. It has nothing to do with
culture.
The second reason against women having spiritual authority over
men is based on Christ's order after the Fall. Alluding to the order
of transgression, Paul states, "Adam was not deceived, but the woman
was deceived and became a transgressor" (1 Tim 2:14, RSV). After sin
entered the world Jesus reaffirmed the role distinctions between men
and women before the Fall (Gen. 3:16). Again we see that this has
nothing to do with culture.
The third biblical reason is Christ's order after the cross. The
previous role distinctions Jesus instituted are not canceled by His
redemptive work at the cross. Many years after His resurrection God's
Word proclaimed: "The head of every man is Christ, the head of a
woman is her husband, and the head of Christ is God" (1 Cor 11:3,
RSV). Thus the priestly headship of the man in the home and church is
still in effect during the Christian era.
Biblical qualifications for the position of elder or overseer
Now let us investigate what the Bible has to say about the
qualifications for an elder or overseer ( 1 Tim 3:1-7). What are the
requirements for spiritual headship?
Immediately after his admonition that women are not to have the
spiritual authority in the church Paul points to who is to have the
spiritual headship role. It is the elder the church. What are his
characteristics?
First, an elder must be blameless. Second, he must be the "husband
of one wife" (I Tim 3:2, NKJV). It doesn't say spouse of a husband!
He is to be of the male gender. Here the word "husband" in Greek is
"aner" which is always a man, not a woman. To appoint a woman as
elder is not Biblical. Third, he must have proven his leadership in
the home. An elder must be "one who rules his house well, having his
children in submission with all reverence" (1 Tim 3: 4). Why? "For if
a man does not know how to rule his own house, how will he take care
of the church of God?" (1 Tim 3: 5, NKJV).
The Spirit of Prophecy also emphasizes distinctive roles in family
and church government (Adventist Home, p. 321). Men are to exercise a
caring, sacrificial headship in home and church (Eph 5:22-24, 28; 1
Cor 11:3). Women are called to supportive leadership while respecting
the headship of men. This is not as a cultural custom, but as a
divinely ordained principle ("as to the Lord," Eph 5:22, NKJV).
If we would like to summarizing the structure of authority in the
doctrine on the church we notice that Fundamental Belief 11 affirms
that "the church derives its authority from Christ, who is the
incarnate Word, and from the Scriptures, which are the written Word
.... The church is the body of Christ, a community of faith of which
Christ Himself is the Head." So the authority structure in the church
is based on the Bible. How does this work? It's is very simple. Jesus
as the head of the church delegates His authority to leaders of the
church in harmony with the Bible. Then, in full harmony with His
created order, Jesus has assigned the position of elder, or overseer,
to men, not to women. Any change in this divine plan for His church
will result in confusion, disunity, and derailment of a
mission-driven church.
It conflicts with the doctrine of the Holy Scriptures
My second objection is that the request is in conflict with the
Fundamental Belief of the doctrine of the Holy Scriptures. This
doctrine states that "The Holy Scriptures are the infallible
revelation of His will" and "the test of experience" (Fundamental
Belief 1)
When one presents the teachings of 1 Timothy to object against the
ordination of women as elder or minister ordination advocates
frequently reply that Paul's advise was influenced by his culture and
that his view merely reflects that of the society of his day. Was
Paul's counsel culturally biased or is it God's truth?
The question really is, "Can we fully trust the Bible writers?"
Yes, because God is the author of the Bible, and therefore the Bible
is "the infallible authority ... as a rule of faith and practice"
(Great Controversy, p. 249). It is not affected "by human prejudice
or human pride" (Patriarchs and Prophets, p. 596). The Bible,
therefore, is trustworthy and unbiased.
Now the question is "How should we interpret the Bible?" Simply
follow the counsel of the prophet: "The Word of God is infallible;
accept it as it reads" (Ellen White in Review and Herald, Feb. 11,
1896, p. 81). Ellen White strongly warned against the danger of
modifying God's instructions. Said she: "The very beginning of the
great apostasy was in seeking to supplement the authority of God by
that of the church. Rome began by enjoining what God had not
forbidden, and she ended by forbidding what He had explicitly
enjoined" (Great Controversy, pp. 289-290). "True faith consists in
doing just what God has enjoined, not manufacturing things He has not
enjoined" (That I May Know Him, p. 226). Modifying God's instructions
has devastating consequences because it undermines the authority of
the Scriptures "as the infallible revelation of His will"
(Fundamental Belief 1).
One of our greatest needs as SDAs is submission to the Word of
God, not reinterpretation. We should repent of the unbiblical view
that relegates Jesus' creation order to a bygone era, irrelevant for
the Remnant church. We are the Remnant church, and that church is a
movement at the end of time that still is to reveal the
characteristics of the New Testament church, even in the authority
structure of church leadership.
It conflicts with the doctrine of unity in the body of Christ
The doctrine of unity states that "Through the revelation of Jesus
Christ in the Scriptures we share the same faith and hope, and reach
out in one witness to all." (Fundamental Belief 13). This makes it
clear that our unity of faith and evangelistic witness is rooted in
the revelation of Jesus in the Scriptures. What would be the result
of the approval of the request? It would seriously jeopardize the
unity of the church. Why?
Approval of the request would allow the use of two conflicting
methods of Biblical interpretation for Seventh-day Adventists. One
method follows the NT church, the Protestant Reformation and the
Advent pioneers, including Ellen White. This approach favors a plain
meaning of the Bible and its regulations for church leadership. The
other method follows the approach adopted by the fallen churches of
Babylon since 1844. This new approach to the Bible is strongly
influenced by the trends of today's western culture that has very
little appreciation for male spiritual headship. It sees the Biblical
passages on male headship as culturally conditioned. Thus the plain
meaning of the text is not the norm for 1995.
What are the effects of those conflicting methods of Bible
interpretation? It establishes two conflicting theologies of church
leadership that will dominate specific geographical areas of the
world. Consequently ordination will not have worldwide validity any
longer. Some fields will not recognize the leadership from other
fields. Approving conflicting theologies and practices leads toward
division, not unity; toward national churches, not a world church;
and ultimately toward congregationalism. For unity, therefore,
Seventh-day Adventists must follow the Bible.
My personal response to the vote
The question may be asked "What will I do if the assembly votes
for this proposal? I will always remember that God calls for unity in
Christ. I, therefore, will stay with the church. Where else should I
go? The Messenger of the Lord advised to stay with the ship, for it
will go through. Although it may be heavily damaged, it will go
through. I will stay with the ship, for there is no better place
outside of it. The future is bright for Bible believing Seventh-day
Adventists. Let me share with you a promise: "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. The opinions
of learned men, the deductions of science, the creeds or decisions of
ecclesiastical councils, as numerous and discordant as are the
churches which they represent, the voice of the majority--not one nor
all of these should be regarded as evidence for or against any point
of religious faith. Before accepting any doctrine or precept we
should demand a plain 'Thus saith the Lord' in its support" (Great
Controversy, p. 595).
Some arguments in favor of ordination
What about arguments in support of ordination one frequently
hears? First, women's ordination is for the good of the church. It
will preserve its unity. Reply: Friends, unity cannot be kept by a
policy contrary to Scripture. It brings confusion and drives people
to independent ministries.
Second, some women testify that they have a "call" or a spiritual
gift to be a minister of a church. Reply: We must remember that not
every call or gift comes from God. The Bible states, "Test the
spirits to see whether they are of God" (1 John 4:1, RSV).
Third, allowing women to be ordained as ministers establishes
fairness and justice in ministry. Reply: Remember the Bible must be
our standard to judge what is fair and just. We must follow the
Bible, not the standards of society.
Conclusion
And so in summary, why can I not support the NAD request? Because
it is out of harmony with three Seventh-day Adventist Bible
doctrines. First of all it conflicts with the doctrine of the church
by instituting an unscriptural structure. Second, it violates the
doctrine of the Holy Scriptures by not accepting Scripture as it
plainly reads. And third, it destroys the doctrine of unity in the
body of Christ by introducing a practice that violates the conscience
of many and nullifies the worldwide validity of ordination.
Remember, friends, that we have always considered ourselves the
continuity of the Protestant Reformation. Is this still so today?
When Luther, the great reformer, was confronted with a choice between
human opinions and the Bible he said, "Unless I am convinced by the
testimony of Scripture, or by the clearest reasoning--unless I am
persuaded by means of the passages I have quoted ... I cannot and
will not" change my views, "for it is unsafe for a Christian to speak
against his conscience." From their humble beginnings Seventh-day
Adventists have had the same conviction. Will they still continue as
successors of the Reformation and bring it to a grand and glorious
climax? The actions of this afternoon will reveal the true spirit of
the Reformation in our church. May God help us.
| 
