General Conference General Vice-president, Elder Tom Lemon, just recently made this audacious statement (dated Sept. 24, and published October 10, 2017):
"It is my assertion that the objection toward women’s ordination in the Seventh-day Adventist church is much more than some kind of alleged and/or apparent misogynistic thinking on the part of those who stand resolutely against women in leadership, despite the clear, obvious, and well understood lack of consensus within the biblical material. This resistance belies both a spiritual recalcitrance and a wooden understanding of the history of the church and its traditions, to say nothing of scriptural interpretation" (page 32).
Ethical questions
Amazingly so, this document was disseminated before and/or during Annual Council. This is very unethical for someone who not only serves on the Unity in Mission Oversight Committee, but chaired it! Did Elder Lemon ever open this committee meeting by reciting his above
statement? One wonders how that would go over. "Fellow committee members, Elder Wilson, you are misogynistic and spiritually recalcitrant. Now for the first order of business...."
Should Elder Lemon remain a GC vice president, let alone be a member of said committee, while carrying and employing such beliefs and actions in contravention to the voted actions of the GC? At a minimum, he should have recused himself from the Unity Oversight Committee.
With such a belief, no wonder he couldn't find any rebellion in the various rebellious unions around the world!
Digging Deeper
Elder Lemon states there is a "lack of consensus "within" the biblical material" (which would mean that Paul and Peter were in disagreement on this issue). Or does he mean that there is a lack of consensus "about" the biblical material (which would mean that WE cannot agree on what the Bible says)?
If he meant it as he wrote it, then he is totally not qualified to be an SDA minister. Stating that Bible writers in some way disagree with each other or that they don't have "consensus" on a topic, so we can now go our own way, goes against every thing we believe in.
If the latter, (i.e. "lack of consensus 'about' the biblical material") then how can he deduce that anyone is misogynistic? That is, if the Bible doesn't talk about it, and there is no unity or consensus, then it follows that there's no foundation of belief. Let every man do what is right in his own eyes? Following his logic, if there is a lack of consensus, THEN THAT IS ALL that's needed to go ahead with ANY new doctrine. Huh? The man makes no sense.
Since now ALL who are against women's ordination are lumped into one category, the General Conference votes in Session must now be considered "misogynistic" and "spiritually recalcitrant."
Doug Batchelor is a misogynist. Ellen White is not only a misogynist but even "much more" than a misogynist (whatever that means). Laurel Damsteegt (another woman!) is also "much more" than a misogynist. Elder Ted Wilson additionally is now spiritually recalcitrant and has a wooden understanding of the church and its traditions. And on and on.
Call me a misogynist, that's one thing. Now you call my wife a misogynist too just because she believes the SDA doctrine on this topic? Them's almost fightin' words!
People, what more do we need to see! The spirit of rebellion is alive and well in our church. Elder Lemon should be faithful to his personal beliefs and resign from church employment.
****