REASONS WHY MEN SHOULD NOT BE ORDAINED


1. Their physical build indicates that men are more suited to tasks such
as chopping down trees or wrestling mountain lions. It would indeed be "unnatural"
for them to do other forms of work. How can we argue with the intended
order that is instituted and enforced by nature?

2. A man's place is in the army.

3. Men are too emotional to be priests or pastors. This is easily demonstrated by their conduct at football games and watching basketball tournaments.

4. Some men are handsome; they will distract women worshipers.

5. For men who have children, their duties as ministers might detract
from their responsibilities as parents. Instead of teaching their children
important life skills like how to make a wiener-roasting stick, they would be
off at some committee meeting or preparing a sermon. Thus these
unfortunate children of ordained men would almost certainly receive less
attention from their male parent. Some couples might even go so far
as to put their children into secular daycare centres to permit the man to
fulfill his duties as a minister.

6. According to the Genesis account, men were created before women,
presumably as a prototype. It is thus obvious that men represent an
experiment, rather than the crowning achievement of creation.

7. Men are overly prone to violence. They are responsible for the vast
majority of crime in our country, especially violent crime. Thus they
would be poor role models, as well as being dangerously unstable in
positions of leadership.

8. In the New Testament account, the person who betrayed Jesus was a man.
Thus his lack of faith and ensuing punishment stands as a symbol of the
subordinate position that all men should take. The story also illustrates
the natural tendency of all men to be either unwilling or unable to take a
stand. From the Garden of Gethsemane to football locker rooms, men still
have this habit of buckling under the weight of the lowest common
denominator. It is expected that even ordained men would still embarrass
themselves with their natural tendecy toward a pack mentality.

9. Jesus didn't ordain men. He didn't ordain any women either, but two
wrongs don't make a right.

10. If men got ordained, then they wouldn't be satisfied with that; they'd
want more and more power. Next thing most of the Conference leaders
would be men and then where would we be? No. The line must be drawn
clearly now before it's too late.

11. Many, if not most, men who seek to be ordained have been influenced by
the radical "men's movement" (or "masculist movement"). How can they be
good leaders if their loyalties are divided between leading a church and
championing the masculist drive for men's rights? The tract writers
haven't pronounced on it yet, but the masculist movement is probably
profoundly un-Christian.

12. To be an ordained pastor is to nurture and strengthen a whole
congregation. But these are not traditional male roles. Rather, throughout
the history of Christianity, women have been considered to be not only more
skilled than men at nurturing, but also more fervently attracted to it. Women,

the myth goes, are fulfilled and completed only by their service to others.
This makes them the obvious choice for ordination. But if men try to fit into
this nurturing role, our young people might grow up with Role Confusion
Syndrome, which could lead to such terrible traumas as the Questioning
Tradition Syndrome.

13. Men can still be involved in Church activities, without having to be
ordained. They can still take up the offering, shovel the sidewalk, and
maybe even lead the singing on Fathers' Day. In other words, by confining
themselves to such traditional male roles, they can still be vitally
important in the life of the Church. Why should they feel left out?

John, when I said: "Yes, there were articles, and more, . . .," I was including editorials.

Re: "A Signs of the Times editorial, 1878, said, "A woman may pray, prophecy, exhort, and comfort the church, but she cannot occupy the position of a pastor or a ruling elder. This would be looked upon as usurping authority over the man, which is here [1 Tim. 2:12] prohibited." Obviously this editorial, written at the time when James White was editor, would not have been printed if Ellen White was an ordained pastor."

John, have you ever read first-hand the articles written in the early days of our denomination in our early magazines? During a time when I was a pastor in the Potomac Conference I did. I spent time in the records reading many early articles in our magazines.

It is interesting to see the degree of freedom that existed, and what was published.

Yes, there were articles, and more, written in regard to women and the role that they should play in religious life. There were clearly those that advocated that females should neither have the role of a pastor, or of a prophet. There were articles published that directly challenged the role that Ellen White was filling in the SDA Church.

And there were articles published that defended her role, from the Biblical standpoint, and that challenged those who wanted to limit the role that women should play in religious/spiritual life.

Both sides cited Scripture as authority for their positions.

In reality, the arguments of today in many areas differ little from the arguments of those early days.

My point: I differ with you when you say: ". . . would not have been printed if. . . .." I will suggest that the historical records of those days tell us otherwise.

John 317 ...

Regarding your question ... "That being the case, how do you support the view that women should be ordained to the ministry?

I-- and I'm sure many others as well-- would like to hear your strongest Biblically based argument. "

John 317 ... My answer in the Biblical sense would be that Ordaination in not even Biblical . So how do you prove it is Biblical for women if it is not Biblical for men.

That is the strongest Biblical based argument I can come up with to answer your question.

Redwood

Tom, I am reminded of a time when the world was at war. The SDA Church was substantially left without pastoral support as their able-bodied male pastors had been inducted into the military.

Two women decided that God had called them to action. So, they held evangelistic campaigns. The brought converts into the Church. But when it came time to baptize they had to call upon the elderly and disabled male ministers to do that. All in all, in their lifetimes they brought more converts into the SDA Church than the majority of SDA ministers.

Did God call them.

Did God call them to preach and otherwise to the work of evangelists?

Should they have baptized?

While the Bible shows that God picks both men and women for the role of prophet, the NT church never had a woman pastor or elder, and in fact, the New Testament's teachings appear to be opposed to selecting females for those particular positions.