On September 12, 2021, the Mid-America Union Conference (MAUC) Constituency Session, under the leadership of Gary Thurber, voted to approve and recognize the ordination of women to the gospel ministry (WO) within its territory. In doing so, it (MAUC) effectively made profound changes to the organizational structure of the Seventh-day Adventist Church.
The Seventh-day Adventist Conference in Minnesota held their statewide constituency meeting yesterday on Sunday, May 15.
One of the agenda items was a formal letter sent to the Conference from the Crookston SDA Church. This church asked the Conference to affirm the following 11 points:
Actions and Requests
1. Shall Not Recognize―The Crookston Seventh-day Adventist Church shall not recognize the ordination of women to the gospel ministry nor recognize a woman conference president before a General Conference Session decides to do so, regardless of whatever any lower entity votes. We request the Minnesota Conference to take the same or similar action.
2. Perplexing Questions―We call upon church leaders to address these questions that perplex us: (a) If lesser entities are free to do as they please, regardless of what higher entities decide, why cannot the constituency of each local church determine its own tithe policy, without repercussions? (b) At what point does membership in a conference or union that is in active rebellion against the Seventh-day Adventist Church constitute grounds for church discipline by qualifying as “Adherence to or taking part in a divisive or disloyal movement or organization” (Church Manual, p. 62)? (c) At what point would an organization in open rebellion become a de facto independent ministry, and the return of tithe to such an organization become an impermissible return of tithe to an independent ministry? (d) How do credentials show local churches that the bearer is in harmony with the Seventh-day Adventist Church, and thus able to stand behind the pulpit, if those credentials are issued by an entity that has intentionally chosen to be out of harmony with the Seventh-day Adventist Church? (e) What accommodations will be made for members and churches that choose not to participate in the rebellion against General Conference Session decisions? We ask the Minnesota Conference to echo this call.
3. Clarify Language of Church Manual, p. 40―We request that p. 40 of the Church Manual, and GC and NAD WP where necessary, be clarified such that a refusal to participate in the rebellion of a conference shall not be misconstrued as rebellion against that conference. We ask the Minnesota Conference to endorse this request.
4. Our Right to Appeal―If the Minnesota Conference votes to rebel against the General Conference Session decisions, we shall exercise the right afforded us on p. 29 of the Church Manual: “When differences arise in or between churches and conferences ..., matters that are not mutually resolved may be appealed to the next higher organization. If the matter does not get resolved at this level, the aggrieved entity may appeal to successively higher levels of organization. An organization to which an appeal is forwarded may choose not to hear the matter, in which case the decision of the highest organization involved in the dispute shall be final.”
5. GC and NAD WP V 09 05 5.c―We request that V 09 05 5.c either be waived in instances where members choose not to financially support entities in rebellion against General Conference Session decisions, or that it be recognized that such tithe is not being returned to loyal entities “for purposes of anonymity.” Doing so might (a) assist the NAD in bringing renegade unions into line, (b) avoid potential issues of returning such tithe to a different local church in a different conference, and (c) avoid the treating of tithe as non-tithe funds if such tithe is instead marked “World Budget,” thus ensuring that tithe funds are not used in impermissible ways. We ask the Minnesota Conference to endorse this request.
6. Organization of Conferences and Union Conferences―We request that conferences and union conferences be organized in which churches and conferences loyal to the Seventh-day Adventist Church may hold membership. This would ensure that no church or member is forced to participate in any rebellion against the Seventh-day Adventist Church, under threat of dissolution or confiscation of local church assets. It has long been shown that more than one conference can occupy the same state or territory in peace. We ask the Minnesota Conference to endorse this request.
7. Reconsideration―We request the MAUC Executive Committee and constituency to reconsider their decisions on this matter due to the reasons raised heretofore. Since the proponents of WO have no problem reconsidering as often as possible previous decisions to the contrary, they ought to expect and appreciate requests at least as frequent to reconsider pro-WO decisions, from now till Jesus comes. However, in this instance, this is a request to reconsider and rescind their decision to rebel against the Seventh-day Adventist Church, a decision based on indisputably false information. We ask the Minnesota Conference to endorse this request.
8. WP B 15 15―We call upon the church to determine what officers and administrators are fomenting or encouraging this rebellion, and to remove them from office in compliance with GC and NAD WP B 15 15: “Those who show inability or unwillingness to administer their work in harmony with policy should not be continued in executive leadership by their respective constituencies or governing boards/committees.” We ask the Minnesota Conference to echo this call.
9. Unsolicited Propaganda Material―We request that issues of publications promoting rebellion against General Conference Session decisions or attacking church organization as historically understood (including that the General Conference Session is the highest authority on earth under God), without a dissenting voice or voices in the same issues, not be sent to our members and attendees who have not requested such issues.
10. Are the Old Views Still Acceptable?―We request that the world church affirm as not being incompatible with church membership the interpretation of the relevant Bible passages published in Seventh-day Adventist journals from the 1850s till at least 1901, that Paul’s counsel permitted women to preach and teach in the church but not to rule. We ask the Minnesota Conference to endorse this request.
11. The Underlying Hermeneutical Concerns―We request that the world church resolve the underlying hermeneutical concerns so that the pro-WO position cannot be used as an entering wedge for knowingly hiring and employing ministers engaged in sexual perversions or teachers promoting evolution, or for the acceptance by our churches of sexual perversions. We ask the Minnesota Conference to endorse this request.
In response to this letter, the Minnesota Board of Trustees wrote a statement regarding the Conference’s attitude towards women’s ordination. The Trustee’s letter acknowledged that the Minnesota Conference ‘leadership’ supports women’s ordination. They also reject the rebellious spirit by which several Unions and Conferences have defied the world church’s decisions to not ordain women to the gospel ministry. Here is a copy of the Board of Trustees letter:
This agenda item was discussed and a motion was made to table both documents. The vote passed and both items were tabled.
Commentary
Because of efforts by the Pacific Union and the Columbia Union to ordain women in defiance of three world church decisions, the rebellion has turned into a cancer and spread throughout the Seventh-day Adventist denomination, particularly in the North American Division.
This rebellion, left unchecked, raises a legitimate question. If General Conference Session decisions are openly scorned by church entities, what guarantee does the church have that subsequent decisions will not be also scorned? Why should we go through the cost and effort to make worldwide church (GC Session) decisions if they are flouted without consequence?
Union and Conference leaders who violate the GC decision on WO should forfeit their right to vote in subsequent Session decisions. After all, by their rebellion they are saying they do not respect the decision-making process of the church. Our response should be “You will not be given a voice or vote in a process that you are helping to wreck." Working policy B 15 15 calls for them to be terminated from their positions in such cases. This is where the NAD is culpable in this rebellion.
In the same way that numerous Democrat governors in 2020 allowed their cities to be ravaged by riots and lawless mobs, the North American Division is allowing defiant actions to occur in the unions. The Division is protecting this rebellion.
This places General Conference leaders in the unenviable position of having to explain to the laity of the Seventh-day Adventist Church why GC decisions still matter. Regretfully, IF they can be flaunted openly without consequence, they don’t.
Pray that men of courage will implement the proper discipline process on this rebellion at the GC Session in Saint Louis. May God forgive us for our inaction. May He expose and condemn pride in our church. And may it begin with us.
****
“But they rebelled and grieved His Holy Spirit; So He turned Himself against them as an enemy, and He fought against them” (Isaiah 63:10).