Woman Ordination Issue by Demographics and not by Exegesis: Analysis of Patricia Conroy’s 2015 position


In an article by California Family-Law Lawyer Patricia Conroy in July of 2015, she discussed Woman Ordination going through all the processes and environmental history of the Seventh-day Adventist about this issue. It was published as a winner essay competition Patricia Conroy, "Great Disappointment 2015: The Struggle of Adventist Women to Achieve Equality in Ministry," Priscilla Papers Volume 29, No. 4 (Autumn 2015: 7-13). It is online available for free download from academia.edu.

The data by this liberal slanted researcher is important since it provides the evidence for the non-biblical, non-SDA doctrine position of Woman Ordination. Admitted by this liberal. It also provides the key players in the liberal debate including A. Rodriquez of vicarius filii dei denial fame in 2001 Sabbath School Quarterly. This denial sparked off energy for SDA historian Edwin de Kock to come out with a 1000 page research on vicarius filii dei in Catholicism history setting aside all objections by Catholic scholars, Adventist scholars [Froom, Bacchiochi, Rodriquez, Stefanovich, Paulien et al] about this matter. Yet, every now and then the liberals continue to spin the old objections without knowing the data of De Kock’s 2011 research. A magnus opus ignored.

A number of problems exists with Conroy and one can list them as headers:


American Jurisprudence is a-biblical and Conroy is part of this philosophy

As a Californian Lawyer, Conroy was or is obliged to submit an oath to defend the trans-sexual rights of citizens of the USA at all costs which means a non-biblical position is entertained. It goes so far as to confront biblical fundamental interpretation educational institutes who do not want to house these people. Equality before the law of all is a procedural principle for all until found skew by evidence of the court or public statements. Then established as skew [non-biblical a-moral] separation and distance is necessary. But not in the California equality is all legal understanding. Equality is pushed to the absolute and so is freedom of choice for all. The individual’s gender choice is put above God’s decrees or God’s birth results and if the individual choose to challenge God, society of California must defend the individual. To solve the problem you must throw out the baby and the bathwater. Conroy’s bathwater is dirty for a starter. She is obliged to sign-up for it. Julius Nam is a California Judge and the first thing he had to do was to promote homosexual’s rights otherwise he could not be a Judge. As anti-biblical the position is, he did choose the skew culture above the straight Bible. She also side with this skew ratio dicidendi as the lawyers’ jargon says.


Woman Ordination is by the Liberals and is an “inroad in Adventism issue”

Citing a study on the religious right movement of the 1970’s to 1980’s by Colleen Curran in 1913 she is aware of the society trends of that period in the USA history. It happen to be the same time that Gerhard Hasel was tasked to root out the Troyan Horse of Liberalism at Andrews University by the Church Administration. A number of professors were sent to California. The mouth-piece of these liberal thinkers was Spectrum and later Adventist Today.

(Colleen Curran, “Preservation of Tradition: The Emergence of the Religious Right in the 1970s and 1980s,” History Scene (Sept 20, 2013), http://www.ushistoryscene.com/uncategorized/religiousright/. Citation Conroy 2015: 13 footnote 30).

The issue is admitted by Conroy as non-Adventist doctrine. Positions (1) and (3) are seen as non-SDA doctrine by her. Here are the three listed positions on Woman Ordination:

“Position 1 rests primarily on Gen 1-3, 1 Tim 2:13-14, 1 Tim 3:2, and 1 Cor 11. Position 1 accepts these texts as absolute, applicable to all times, and not to be interpreted based on culture or context. Headship of males is interpreted as applicable in both the home and the church.”

Position 2 is the most pro-ordination, finding no theological impediment to the ordination of women. This position argues that context must be considered in interpretation. It relies on Gen 1:27, that both man and woman are made in the image of God, and discusses the leadership roles that women served in Israel and in the NT. It rejects the doctrine of headship, as it applies to the church.

With respect to husband/wife relationships, Position 2 asserts that Eph 5:21-23 is “not about the unconditional obedience of the wife to the husband and much less about coerced submission. The reference to the husband being the ‘head’ of the wife (v. 23) must be understood in relation to the nature of Christ’s headship described in the same verse.”

Position 3 takes a middle-ground. It states that male ecclesiastical leadership is preferred, but denies that men have general headship in the church. It leaves room for local jurisdictions to ordain women, if necessary to carry out the mission of the church. Position 3 asserts that men and women had complementary, non-hierarchical roles before the fall, and that male headship existed in the family, after the fall, but does not exist in the church. It also differentiates between gifts and offices in the church further asserts that God makes accommodations to his divine plan and that we can rely on study and guidance by the Holy Spirit to determine when such variances are indicated”

Then Conroy’s choice: “One concern about Positions 1 and 3 is that they both contain elements of male headship which are not currently in SDA doctrine. Now that headship has been made the subject of substantial study and attention, there is the possibility that it may find its way into official doctrine, especially considering that the greatest growth in the church is occurring among more conservative cultures.” (Conroy 2015: 11).


Success of the Woman Ordination issue is not whether it is biblical or not but whether demographics of the Admin and appeal to join the a-biblical view can succeed

Listen to her future prognosis of the Woman Ordination: “What is the future of women in the SDA Church? There is no question that this issue has deeply divided the denomination and polarized its members throughout the world. The vote, however, has not ended the struggle. Those deeply and optimistically committed to equality have already begun to prepare for the next General Conference in 2020, where possible changes in church administration could create a more favorable climate for ordination of women. One interim goal is developing strategies for educating those who may not have had an opportunity to study the issue prior to the vote in San Antonio. Only time will tell whether the Global South, which now controls the SDA Church, will make room for those who are committed to equality.” Winning by biblical exegesis? No. Winning by vote count if they can convince the Bible-keeping South to join the North in their liberal non-biblical siding with modern [and ancient] Jurisprudence which is against the Torah Jurisprudence of God and vote Woman Ordination in