Prove All Things:
A Response to Women In Ministry

Select Table of Contents

Full Table of Contents

Printable Chapter 2

Order Information

Chapter 2

A Look at the Methods of Interpretation in Women in Ministry

P. Gerard Damsteegt

During the 1995 General Conference session, the Seventh-day Adventist world church delegates voted overwhelmingly (1481 to 673) against a request of the North American Division that would have allowed each division to ordain women as ministers within its territory. An earlier request for women to be ordained as ministers had been soundly defeated at the 1990 General Conference session.

Soon after the 1995 decision several of the disappointed North American Division union presidents met with some of the faculty of the Seventh-day Adventist Theological Seminary and requested help. A major issue had surfaced during the 1995 General Conference. It had become obvious that the significant barrier to women's ordination was hermeneutics, the way people interpret Scripture. The presidents asked the Seminary to investigate the question of women's ordination.

In response, a Seminary "Ad Hoc" Committee was set up. (Ad hoc means "for this one purpose.") Members of the committee were selected so as to avoid the inclusion of well-known opponents of women's ordination. For more than two and a half years the committee met, first assigning topics to various authors, then going over their papers again and again. The result was published by Andrews University Press in October of 1998 as the book, Women in Ministry: Biblical & Historical Perspectives.

As one might have anticipated, given the committee's assignment and its exclusive membership, the committee's conclusion was that the Bible, rightly interpreted, is not opposed to the ordination of women as ministers and that for women to function in positions of pastoral leadership is "a manifestation of God's grace in the church."¹

The press release issued by Andrews University announced the book as a "watershed" that makes a convincing "biblical case for women's ordination."² Both Ministry magazine (January 1999, pp. 28, 29) and Adventist Review (April 15, 1999, p. 29) published positive reviews of the book.

Such powerful claims deserve our attention. In this chapter we will focus on the principles of interpreting the Bible set forth by the book. Since hermeneutical issues were the very reason the book was requested, the underlying interpretive methodology deserves careful review and evaluation.

1. The Principles of Bible Interpretation

In the prologue of the book, Professor of World Mission Dr. Nancy Vyhmeister, the committee's chair and the book's editor, lists the scriptural principles of interpretation that she says lie at the foundation of the book.

The Bible is divinely inspired, she says, and is the authoritative rule of faith, presenting God's word for all people in all times. The different authors, she observes, stress that the Bible must be allowed to interpret itself, one part explaining another. And because the Bible forms an intrinsic unity, the whole Bible must be taken into account before firm conclusions can be made, meaning that Scripture must be compared with Scripture to find the true meaning of any passage.

The prologue further states that although readers do profit from a simple reading of the Bible, the understanding of a passage is enhanced by a study of the literary and historical context of any passage. It cautions against imposing external interpretations on the Bible.

Wisely, the prologue points out that one needs to approach Scripture in faith, with a willingness to obey. For a correct interpretation, one must have the aid of the Holy Spirit, making prayer a necessity.

Finally it mentions that "absolute uniformity of understanding was not possible or desirable."³ On this point the prologue quotes Ellen G. White, who wrote, "We cannot then take a position that the unity of the church consists in viewing every text of Scripture in the very same light. The church may pass resolution upon resolution to put down all disagreement of opinions, but we cannot force the mind and will, and thus root out disagreement. These resolutions may conceal the discord, but they cannot quench it and establish perfect agreement. Nothing can perfect unity in the church but the spirit of Christlike forbearance."⁴

So far, so good. These principles we can fully endorse.

There is, however, a very significant additional "rule" of Bible interpretation that the prologue mentions which raises major questions as to how it should be applied. This additional rule is intended to deal with the question, "What do we do with matters of faith on which Scripture is silent?" In view of the significance of this rule in the reasoning of Women in Ministry, the whole paragraph in which it appears deserves our attention here:

"On matters on which Scripture is silent, one must search for biblical principles that relate to the situation and apply them with sanctified reasoning. For example, the Bible does not prohibit smoking, but it does admonish us to care for the body temple. Church organization is not spelled out in the Bible. In the 1850s and 1860s Adventist pioneers agonized over whether or not to organize the little flock. James White put forth his position: 'All means which, according to sound judgment, will advance the cause of truth, and are not forbidden by plain scripture declarations, should be employed.' While some Christians have taken the position that whatever Scripture does not specially command is prohibited, Seventh-day Adventists have followed James White's thinking. Our committee did likewise."⁵

As the committee was not clear that women were excluded from pastoral leadership, they found this rule helpful in their investigation of the question of women's ordination.

We readily acknowledge that when confronted with such modern problems as incorporating under state law in order to hold property, selection of a name for the church organization, and applying for insurance, James White could not find explicit instructions "spelled out in the Bible." In such cases he did indeed seek out "biblical principles" and apply them with "sanctified reasoning." At the same time, we must ask whether James White found that the Bible did not spell out church organization. More specifically, we must ask whether James White would have used his rule and sanctified reasoning to allow for the ordination (or commissioning) of women pastors.

It is their use of James White's rule that seems to have enabled the authors of Women in Ministry to present their case for women's ordination as elders and ministers. The Seminary committee claims to have done what James White did. Candid attention to the evidence suggests the opposite. This current chapter in Prove All Things examines Elder White's perception of church organization as presented in the Bible and his manner of applying what he found. Women in Ministry attaches great importance to his example. This chapter does also--though from a different perspective.

2. The Misuse of James White's Rule

In the earliest printed Adventist literature, James White, along with his wife, deplored the confusion and disorganization current among Sabbath-keeping Adventists. They appealed for order and unity. As early as 1853, in a series of articles called "Gospel Order" (James White's name for church organization), Elder White showed his strong support for following the biblical model of church organization and leadership.

Elder White wrote that the fundamentals of church organization, or gospel order, were spelled out in the Bible. He urged that "vigorous efforts should be put forth to restore as fast as possible the order of the gospel."⁶ He declared that "the divine order of the New Testament is sufficient to organize the church of Christ" and added significantly, "If more were needed, it would have been given by inspiration."⁷

The New Testament was James White's model for church leadership. First, a minister should be called by the Lord to the responsibility of such a position. Second, he said, the prospective minister must meet the "necessary qualifications" that "are plainly stated in the Word."⁸ These qualifications, Elder White wrote, were listed by Paul in his counsel to Timothy: "This is a true saying," White quoted, "'If a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work. A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach; not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous; one that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity; (for if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?) Not a novice, lest being lifted up with pride he fall into the condemnation of the devil. Moreover, he must have a good report of them which are without; lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil.' (1 Tim. 3:1-7)."⁹

Commenting on the requirements for the office of elder or minister, James White remarked: "Many seem to desire the office of a bishop, or elder, who fail in many points named here by the Apostle. He must be 'blameless,' 'vigilant,' 'sober,' 'patient,' 'not a brawler.' He must rule well his own house. How is it possible that the Holy Ghost should make a man an overseer of the precious flock, to rule over them [Heb. 13: 17], who knows not how, or neglects to govern his children at home?--Here the Apostle appeals to our reason. And it seems the greatest absurdity that such a man should be called to rule the church. God does not call them. He will not trust souls to their care."¹⁰

From these comments it is obvious that Elder White did not believe that church organization is not spelled out in Scripture. He said the Bible was the guidebook for the selection of church leaders. Judging by the specific requirements he quoted from the Bible, he believed that elders or ministers must be persons with one wife who are successful leaders in their home. This obviously disqualified women from serving as elders or pastors. And not just any man could qualify, but only men who had proven themselves to be successful leaders in their own families.

To use James White's rule--that "all means which, according to sound judgment, will advance the cause of truth, and are not forbidden by plain scripture declarations, should be employed"--to allow the ordination of women as elders and ministers violates his plain intent.

By using Elder White's rule out of context, Women in Ministry moves startlingly away from the solid Adventist practice of following the Bible and the Bible only. This departure is seen in the many unwarranted conclusions of the book.

3. What Does James White's Rule Mean?

Women in Ministry emphasizes a point that James White made in 1860 and uses it as an additional rule for interpreting the Bible. We have just seen that Elder White was not arguing in defense of women pastors or for church organization as a whole. So what specific problems did he have in mind? What was the historical setting in which he used this rule? For this we need to go back to the years prior to the official organization of the believers into the Seventh-day Adventist movement.

In 1860 Sabbath-keeping Adventists were wrestling with the issue whether they as a church could legally hold church property. Donations had been made to James White for the operation of a publishing office for which capital of $5000 was felt to be necessary.¹¹ Some held Elder White responsible for handling the money, but he declined, arguing that the publishing office was not his personal property but belonged to the church at large. He said, "We do object to being in any way responsible for money lent to this Office, used in printing books while the Office property is not insured."¹²

To prevent total loss in the case of a fire, the office would have to be insured, and he pointed out that to insure the publishing office the believers would have to be incorporated officially as a religious body under the laws of the state of Michigan. This meant that Sabbath-keepers would have to adopt a name for their organization.

But to some strong-minded individuals among the small number of Sabbath-keepers (we numbered about 3000 at that time), organizing as a church was unthinkable. It would make us just like the other churches that constituted Babylon. And to be legally incorporated as a religious body was out of the question because it would unite God's people with the state--with the United States, the two-horned beast of Revelation 13.¹³

To counteract these objections Elder White asked opponents for clear scriptural proof that it was objectionable to hold church property legally. He could not see that there was anything in Scripture that prohibited it. He pointed out that there were no biblical counsels for having a weekly church paper or a publishing press, yet it was perfectly proper to have these things. This is the setting in which he suggested that when the Bible does not specifically address an issue, we should follow the rule that "all means which, according to sound judgment, will advance the cause of truth, and are not forbidden by plain scripture declarations, should be employed."

To avoid confusion among believers, Elder White invited everyone to examine his rule, saying, "If this rule be defective, let its defects be shown; if right, then let it be adopted, that confusion on this question be prevented."¹⁴

There certainly can be no objection to James White's rule when it concerns matters that the Bible does not address, such as publishing a weekly church paper or owning a printing press. It is obvious that the Bible is silent on these matters. Here we can fully endorse the use of this rule. However, when it comes to applying his rule to the basic structure of church organization that deals with the qualifications for ministers and elders, we find that his rule does not fit at all. Contrary to the suggestion of Women in Ministry's prologue, we have seen that Elder White taught that the Bible does indeed address the basic structure of church organization. The prologue's claim that "church organization is not spelled out" comes as a surprise in view of the many references to church organization in the Bible to be found in the early Adventist literature.

4. The Bible Teachings on Church Organization

In light of the prologue's assertion that the Bible does not spell out church organization, we need to look extensively at what God has said on this subject. To do this, it is appropriate to investigate the testimonies of Ellen G. White, given to protect the remnant church against almost overwhelming last-day deceptions.

In words that have become famous, Mrs. White observed in 1892 that "the church of Christ, enfeebled and defective as it may be, is the only object on earth on which He bestows His supreme regard."¹⁵ Christ is constantly watching His church with "solicitude, and is strengthening it by His Holy Spirit."¹⁶ If God loves His church this much, we ask, would He have left it to develop without operating instructions? Hardly! And throughout the history of the remnant church, the Lord has given abundant counsels on how it should operate.

During the early days, when some were suspicious of organizing, the believers sought God's counsel earnestly, and He answered. Ellen White wrote: "We sought the Lord with earnest prayer that we might understand His will, and light was given by His Spirit, that there must be order and thorough discipline in the church, that organization was essential. System and order are manifest in all the works of God throughout the universe. Order is the law of heaven, and it should be the law of God's people on the earth."¹⁷

Through His Spirit Jesus gave early Adventists testimony after testimony. When the believers accepted this light, they prospered. "Marked prosperity," Mrs. White wrote, attended the progress of the movement. "What is the secret of our prosperity?" she asked. "We have moved under the order of the Captain of our salvation. God has blessed our united efforts. The truth has spread and flourished. Institutions have multiplied. The mustard seed has grown to a great tree. The system of organization has proved a grand success."¹⁸

Among the counsels given by God's inspiration was instruction to study the excellent organization developed by Moses in the Old Testament. As we shall see, we have considerable information to guide us in our quest for organization that follows the Bible pattern.