The majority of delegates of the North Pacific Union Conference (NPUC) have acted in contravention to the thrice-made decision of the world church. By sophistry of policy they have contrived to open the way so that they may submit candidates for ordination matching a different standard than that enacted by their brothers and sisters in other parts of the globe. While the practice of the world church has been that only spiritually-qualified males are to be ordained, the NPUC appears to be following its own rainbow. Its Executive Committee is now compelled to consider for ordination names “as submitted by the respective local conference Executive Committees.” On August 23, 2026 this action was voted:
The North Pacific Union Conference recognizes the right and responsibility of each local conference to prepare and recommend names for ordination and will consider all candidates recommended for ordination as submitted by the respective local conference Executive Committees.
In practice, this means that if Oregon Conference (by all accounts the chief energy behind this move arises in OC) submits names of female pastors for ordination, the NPUC is compelled to consider those names even though this places the Union in the position of locally contravening the global authority of the world church.
Listening to reasons given in support of the motion in the floor debate on August 23, one is struck by the absence of Scripture and the presence of assertion. A basic argument offered amounted to “because equality.” The Church Manual importantly reminds us,
'“In Seventh-day Adventist Church structure, no organization determines its own status, nor does it function as if it had no obligations to the Church family beyond its boundaries. (Church Manual, 2025 ed., p. 29)”
But some members of the body do not accept this humble aspect of unity. One delegate stated the following:
“I’m wondering if by delegating this decision to the General Conference we are choosing to ignore the difference of cultures throughout the world. There’s a vastly different method that’s effective in Rwanda or China than probably is effective in the Pacific Northwest. Because of the way our Church is structured, the majority of our members who then send delegates to the General Conference Session are from these other countries, and are we going to subject ourselves to what might be termed the tyranny of the majority? Are we going to limit methods that might be effective in the Northwest because of the culture that exists in other parts of the world? So, I would pray that we would look at freedom, that God would want us to have freedom to be effective in our own culture, to use the tools that are best in place that we can use that might not be effective there and not be limited by those in other places in the world.”
Is this individual suggesting openly that (more advanced) cultures are being held back by (less advanced) cultures? For the body to work in a united way is a tyranny? His argument is wholly utilitarian. “Let’s do what works.”
But what if the culture in the Pacific Northwest is not as advanced as the culture in Glendale, California? What if names are brought for ordination who are practicing same-sex sin? The utilitarian argument ignores the Bible as including transcendent principles. Utilitarianism inherently has no guardrails. Argument can always be made justifying practices “because” currently popular worldview appears in the moment to work, and in that moment facile, culturally captive imaginations blindly adopt current tenets. This decision of the delegates places the NPUC in the position of making the Church a theological eBay, picking and choosing which directives to follow.
When one part of the Church is bullying the other parts, it becomes harder to speak with one voice unless you are in submission to the bully. This is not unlike a neighboring congregation giving a grant of authority to its church officers to act officers in your own congregation without your congregation agreeing to it. That would be a transgression of entity boundaries. No authority is given for such a practice. One congregation does not elect officers for another congregation. Again, for a Union unilaterally to invent its own practice when the world church has consistently refused to grant that very authority to it, is to cross into the space of other entities.
Decisions to approve candidates who do not fit world church criteria are usurpations, transgressions by the Union into authoritative spaces its parent body has not allotted. Shall we coddle bullying in our midst?
Do not be mistaken; I treasure workers with whom I disagree on this question. But if unity, order and truth in the Church are the sacrifices that must be made to accommodate the very righteous advocates of women’s ordination, the price is too high.
It is incumbent upon Church leaders in the North American Division to intervene and restore order on this question by upholding the three previous world church decisions in their various ways not to ordain women to the gospel ministry, and by acting in concrete ways to stop the usurpation of world church authority now occurring in certain entities in North America which are inculcating congregationalism at the union level. The Bible has the last word; if the NPUC wishes to invent its own practice, it can take its utilitarian approach, make its separation official, and launch its own thing as an entirely separate entity, a different church.
(See Church Manual 2025 ed., pp. 32-38; L 34 Qualifications for Commissioning or Ordination to the Ministry, pp. 447-453; and C 48 10 Official Position, note, p. 118 NAD Working Policy 2025-2026)
****
Larry Kirkpatrick serves as the Executive Secretary of the Northern New England Conference of Seventh-day Adventists
