At its May 2026 executive committee meeting, a prominent North American Union Conference voted to ask the General Conference session of 2030 to again consider the issue of ordaining women to the gospel ministry, with the goal of giving men and women identical and interchangeable roles in church leadership [1].
On August 23, 2026, the quinquennial constituency session of the same Union voted to empower the Conferences comprising its territory to submit names for pastoral ordination “without regard to gender” [2].
It would seem that certain ones remain determined to insist on this unscriptural practice within the denomination until they either get their way or become sufficiently discouraged that they lapse into silence or simply leave our fellowship. Those who seek faithfulness to Scripture above all else can only hope and pray that the answer from the church’s highest governing body will be so resoundingly negative that the latter option will be the one these agitators choose.
The Biblical Position
As we address this topic again, I invite our readers to consult an article I wrote a number of years ago, titled, “The Bible’s Simple Case Against Women’s Ordination” [3]. This short essay contains a summary of the strongest inspired evidence in favor of male servant-leadership and against giving men and women identical and interchangeable roles in church government.
In reality, this issue is neither complicated nor difficult to articulate from Holy Scripture. In the beginning, “Adam was first formed, then Eve” (I Tim. 2:13), a fact declared by the apostle Paul to be the basis of his refusal to grant to women ministerial positions identical to those held by men (verse 12). It was Adam to whom was given the responsibility of dressing and keeping the Garden of Eden (Gen. 2:15). It was Adam who named the animals (verse 20), and when Eve was formed from a rib in his side (verse 21), Adam named her also (verse 23).
Ellen White is clear that this order of gender authority was designed by God to exist from the beginning, and was not the result of transgression as some believe:
The relationship existing in the pure family of God in heaven was to exist in the family of God on earth. Under God, Adam was to stand at the head of the earthly family, to maintain the principles of the heavenly family. This would have brought peace and happiness [##4|Ellen G. White, Testimonies, vol. 6, p. 236.##].
It is for this reason that when our first parents fell into sin, the consequences thereof were not experienced till Adam had joined his wife in transgression (Gen. 3:7). When the two of them foolishly sought to hide themselves from God, it was to Adam, not Eve, that the Lord called (verse 9). This is why, in the New Testament, Adam is the one identified as responsible for bringing sin and death to the world (Rom. 5:12-19; I Cor. 15:22), even though Eve had been the first to transgress. According to the above passages, this fall on Adam’s part led the world into sin, thus necessitating the coming of a Savior. We note with interest that Christ came to this earth not as the Second Eve, but as the Second Adam.
The apostle Paul writes further regarding the relationship of men and women within the body of Christ:
But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God (I Cor. 11:3).
This relationship begins in the home itself, as the following passage bears witness:
Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.
For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church, and He is the Saviour of the body.
Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing.
Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave Himself for it (Eph. 5:22-25).
Let’s be clear from the outset that equality is not the issue here. The roles of a father and a mother are equally imperative to the building and success of a healthy home. But those roles are not the same—not biologically, nor temperamentally, nor spiritually. As Ellen White has written:
All members of the family center in the father. He is the lawmaker, illustrating in his own manly bearing the sterner virtues: energy, integrity, honesty, patience, courage, diligence, and practical usefulness. The father is in one sense the priest of the household, laying upon the altar of God the morning and evening sacrifice. The wife and children should be encouraged to unite in this offering and also to engage in the song of praise. Morning and evening the father, as priest of the household, should confess to God the sins committed by himself and his children through the day [##5|——The Adventist Home, p. 212.##].
Where From Here?
The world church really has two principal choices in the face of the dilemma raised by this renewed agitation for women’s ordination. First, the General Conference leadership can simply refuse to place this item on the agenda for the 2030 General Conference session. There may well be enormous resistance to the idea of raising this issue again, as the memory of the San Antonio session in 2015 remains fresh in many minds. The church has not experienced significant growth in those territories where this practice is popular, and indeed, those territories where this practice is opposed are the ones growing the fastest. This could help keep the issue from arising again at the church’s next quinquennial session.
A second option would be to allow the issue to be placed on the agenda, and for the current GC leadership to urge its rejection when the debate ensues. This rejection, in my view, should be attended by a clear Biblical statement as to the relationship of gender roles in the divine plan. The pro-women’s ordination stance should then be administered a defeat so decisive that its proponents will recognize their cause to be hopeless.
Another course to consider is the disqualification of non-compliant Unions from participation in the global business of the church, whether at the Annual Council or GC session levels. This could most easily be done by a body functioning as a credentials committee; the GC executive committee or a separate committee could function in this capacity. Any Union choosing to defy General Conference policy in the matter of ordination would be forbidden from participating in denominational business, and would effectively be disenfranchised even without the messy task of disconnecting the world church structure from the territory in question. Any Union thus barred from voting at either the Annual Council or the GC session levels could appeal their case to the larger church body. More than likely, any such appeal would be rejected by the church’s global constituency.
Conclusion: Unfinished Business
It helps to bear in mind that many supporters of women’s ordination are sympathetic to the evolutionary model of natural origins, whose larger implications for the human experience include the belief that time is on the side of progress, and that given enough time, established beliefs and practices will erode and be compromised. The church must stand resolutely against any such course. Without the unerring supremacy of the inspired text, the Seventh-day Adventist Church has no right to exist. Evolution is a lie, pure and simple. God designed the original order of gender authority, and it is the church’s transcendent task to preserve that order, along with every other Biblical mandate.
The struggle against apostasy and sin within the body of Christ will continue till the end-time shaking removes the ultimately non-compliant (unrepentant) from its ranks. The church must steel itself for the recurrence of such conflict, and not permit such struggles to divert it from its mission to the world. At the bottom line, the successful resistance of wrongful practices makes the church’s public witness stronger, not weaker. Some may complain that such issues are a distraction from the church’s mission, but in reality, they are both inevitable features of the continuing controversy with evil and one major means of keeping our message to the world intact.
REFERENCES
1. Stanton Witherspoon, “North Pacific Union Leaders Invite GC to Reconsider Women’s Ordination in 2030,” Spectrum, June 23, 2026 https://spectrummagazine.org/news/north-pacific-union-leaders-invite-gc-to-reconsider-womens-ordination-in-2030/
2. “NPUC Vote Opens Ordination Pathway for Women Pastors,” Adventist Today, Sept. 6, 2026 https://atoday.org/npuc-vote-opens-ordination-pathway-for-women-pastors/
3. Kevin Paulson, “The Bible’s Simple Case Against Women’s Ordination,” ADvindicate, Feb. 11, 2019 https://advindicate.com/articles/2019/2/11/the-bibles-simple-case-against-womens-ordination
4. Ellen G. White, Testimonies, vol. 6, p. 236.
5. ----The Adventist Home, p. 212.
Pastor Kevin Paulson holds a Bachelor’s degree in theology from Pacific Union College, a Master of Arts in systematic theology from Loma Linda University, and a Master of Divinity from the SDA Theological Seminary at Andrews University. He served the Greater New York Conference of Seventh-day Adventists for ten years as a Bible instructor, evangelist, and local pastor. He writes regularly for Liberty magazine and does script writing for various evangelistic ministries within the denomination. He continues to hold evangelistic and revival meetings throughout the North American Division and beyond, and is a sought-after seminar speaker relative to current issues in the Seventh-day Adventist Church. He presently resides in Berrien Springs, Michigan