PrayFirst.ca

BOARD OF DIRECTORS 

Discussion of Ordination & Licensing
As it Pertains to the Possibility of
The Ordination of Women
In The Christian and Missionary Alliance in Canada

The Issues

The Board of Directors (BOD) is responding to those in the Family of Churches who have requested the BOD discuss in an in-depth manner the question of the ordination of women and to do so within the context of the policy and practice of The Christian and Missionary Alliance in Canada. As part of this discussion the Board has itself learned a number of things and wishes to share them. The following paper has been discussed at length by the Board and the Canadian Leadership Team (all District Superintendents, College Presidents and Vice-Presidents) and adopted by the Board and is sent to you to clarify and define the issue being discussed in the Alliance Family of Churches.

This question is raised now as part of a discussion on the role of our women workers in ministry. Perhaps a brief overview – in a summary fashion – of this historic discussion might prove to be helpful.

At the beginning of what is called “autonomy,” that is when the Canadian Alliance established its own identity; the question of women as elders was raised. This question arose again at subsequent Assemblies and as a result a task force was appointed to bring in a report, which they did in 1988 at General Assembly in Saskatoon. The resulting Assembly action was ambiguous and so in 1998 the issue was again brought to the floor of General Assembly and the following actions were taken.

·       Women could serve on The Board of Directors

·       Women could serve on District Executive Committees

·       Women could perform marriages, conduct funerals, supervise the rites of baptism and communion

·       The issue of women as elders was referred to Assembly 2000.

At General Assembly 2000 in Calgary it was decided that women could be elders in a local church if the church voted to do so by a 2/3’s vote.

In subsequent years the Board of Directors began to deal with the question of fully honoring and equipping our women workers. In 2008 General Assembly discussed at Round Tables the question of “How may we more fully empower women in our churches?”

As a result of that discussion the Board, having heard the constituency, asked the President to present a plan for a process to discuss the issue of the ordination of women. The President did so. Step one in that process was to determine if the Family of Churches wished to have this discussion. By vote Round Tables at General Assembly 2010 indicated to the Board that they wished the discussion to move ahead.

Subsequently the Family of Churches has had the following venues for discussion:

·       Papers for discussion sent to all workers

·       An electronic forum which has been actively used

·       Round Table discussions at every District Conference with reports on the discussions submitted to the Board of Directors by the respective District Superintendents

Current Status of the Discussion

All who have entered into this discussion over the past four years have learned a great deal. The Board of Directors wishes to clarify some points of the discussion as it currently stands. We believe it is appropriate for the Family of Churches to discuss any issue that has to do with the Bible, Theology, and our practice. However, the Board of Directors cautions that the current issue needs to be framed in terms that are consistent with the question: given the Canadian Alliance’s definition of ordination, is there anything that should prohibit the ordination of women?

The on-going discussion has raised several questions and the Board of Directors wishes to address them.

Question: If women are ordained, does that mean they may become senior pastors?

Women may be senior pastors now even though they are not ordained. Through the past thirty-two years (since autonomy) the Canadian Alliance has moved to various “spots” throughout its history on this issue of whether or not the position of senior pastor is limited to men, as well as various other rules on ordination and licensing. For those interested we have tracked this movement in separate documents which come to you as separate attachments. Current policy does not forbid women to be senior pastors. Further, a close reading of the definition of ordination helps us to understand that, in Alliance policy and practice, ordination is not directly connected with senior church leadership. Local churches, under the authority of the District Superintendent, chose their senior pastor and thus ordaining women would not change any practice that is in place right now in reference to who may or may not be a senior pastor.

Question: Is there not something given at ordination which is prohibited to women?

In the Board of Directors Statement on The Meaning of Ordination (Sent to Workers in December 2011 and attached again) the following Scriptural references were set forth and discussed in reference to ordination, under the following sets of words from the Alliance’s definition.

Set Apart: Acts 13:2; 2 Timothy 2:3,5; 1 Timothy 4:16;

Charged: 2 Timothy 4:1;

Called Already: Acts 13:2; (Already)

Equipped for Ministry: Acts 13:2; Acts 6:4; Ephesians 4:11-13;

Through Laying on of Hands: Acts 13:3, 1 Timothy 4:14.

The Board of Directors recognizes that there is a variance of opinion in the constituency on what ordination provides. The Statement on the Meaning of Ordination is the foundation for this current paper and the Board urges the careful reading of both. The Board wonders if the following items might further assist in thinking through the above question.

The Board of Directors believes that current thinking on ordination among Alliance Workers may be represented as a scale between two polarities. The Board of Directors  notes that because of its missional core identity, when faced with other polarities the Alliance has frequently sought to establish itself in an equilibrium in between the extremes (divorce/remarriage, Calvinism/Arminianism, various eschatological stances are examples). The following represent the current extremes on the issue of ordination.

On the left the minimalist view, espoused historically at the extreme by the Plymouth Brethren, the Church of Christ (and the Restoration Movement cluster, currently articulated by Allen Hirsch). On the extreme right the maximalist position which would be held by the ancient churches, Roman Catholic and Orthodox in various forms.

Moving along the minimalist continuum we would find opinions that see less and less distinction between lay and clergy, fewer and fewer church functions reserved for clergy, and frequently the need to train clergy and the need to hold clergy accountable for doctrine and practice is minimized until at the edge it vanishes. On the other side one sees various church functions reserved for clergy until at the extreme only ordained clergy within that particular communion may preach or officiate at the Lord’s Table, perform marriages, etc. For this reason the title “reverend,” meaning that this clergy person, because of their ordination is to be revered, and other titles of honour, are more widely and seriously used as one moves toward the maximalist pole.

The Board of Directors contends that the historic on-going development of the Alliance view of ordination has had as its guiding light, so to speak, a preservation of our missional core identity. To accomplish this we have recognized the need to identify, train/equip, examine and hold accountable, people whom we identify as called to ministry. On the other hand, there has been a desire to protect the flame of Simpson’s vision to send forth people who are an anointed army of irregulars as he put it, so that the gospel might spread with increased rapidity through the nations.

Thus we, the Alliance, have searched and continue to search for a dynamic middle ground where those called are examined, affirmed and put into a formal accountability structure, but where the distance between our clergy and our lay workers is kept as narrow as possible.

An example of this trajectory which has been guided by a concern that we remain a missional movement is that in 1949 the District Superintendents established the protocol of giving a license to preach with a two year waiting period. In so doing we separated ministry function from ordination, locating authority to function in the license and not in ordination, which was we believe a move away from the maximalist side.

To assist you the Board of Directors humbly presents this chart which displays the ramifications of ordination, licensing and authority as it is currently practiced by us, The Christian and Missionary Alliance in Canada. These elements have been directly taken from the BOD approved definition of ordination which was mentioned above.

We note the biblical practice of setting people aside for vocational ministry with a rite. However, there is no Biblical content given for ordination. Hence, every denomination has the right to define ordination for itself.  For example, Roman Catholics have a policy and practice of declaring ordination to be a sacrament so that upon ordination a man becomes a priest and can turn wine into the blood of Jesus and bread into the body of Jesus. Reformed churches, like the Presbyterians (the denominational background of A.B. Simpson) have a policy and practice that, “Entry into the ministry of Word and Sacraments takes place with ordination by a presbytery” (Presbyterian Church in Canada) which means that one may only perform those ministries after ordination.

With the decision to implement a two year period in between licensing and ordination, the Alliance intentionally refrained from moving in the direction of requiring ordination before authority was granted to perform ministry function (preaching, administration of the sacraments, etc.). Instead, ministry function came with licensing. The Board of Directors currently affirms this historic stance because of these three values:

1. The value of the priesthood of all believers.  As a movement, the early Alliance resisted the urge to increase the distinction between the ordained and non-ordained so that many could do these ministries in the power and gifting of the Holy Spirit and not a select few.

2. The freedom of the local church.  We have sought to operate in such a way that local churches are granted as much freedom as possible to make decisions about who their leaders will be within the broad boundaries that the Family of Churches, speaking together, outlines. 

3. The value of missional action.  As a movement, we have always longed to have as few “hoops” as possible for people to be required to jump through before engaging in their calling and giftedness.  The urgency of Simpson and his contemporaries to finish the Matthew 24:14 commission (“And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come.”) was a razor-sharp knife that cut through the strongest of red tape.  An example of this missional instinct is the ordination of A.W. Tozer who, because of his lack of formal education, might not have met the requirements to be ordained in most other denominations of the time but who found a welcoming place in the Alliance family.

Question: What is the true nature of ordination in the Alliance?

The definition approved by the Board of Directors says that ordination in the Alliance is the conclusion of a time of preparation for ministry that began when the individual was licensed for vocational ministry with a Portable License.  This conclusion of preparation indicates that the skills, gifting and calling (vocation) for ministry are affirmed and the candidate is set aside for a life of ministry.

What can we compare this to?  Every profession follows a procedure whereby those entering the profession have a time of functionality but are not yet recognized as fully confirmed in their profession. Thus, lawyers go through a time where they article, physicians have internship, etc. All through that period they are observed, evaluated, and at the end examined. Then lawyers are “admitted to the bar,” and other moments of confirmation exist in some other professions. For clergy this moment is ordination. It is an affirmation by the church corporate that this person has been tried, observed and tested and that under the authority of Christ the church agrees with the Holy Spirit as to calling and fitness and as a symbol of that lays on hands and then prays for a greater enduement of power.

The Board of Directors believes that this is a proper and holy ritual which should be respected by all and continued to be practiced among us.

Unlike many denominations, the things the candidate will do after ordination are the same things they did before their licensing was confirmed through ordination.  Ordination does not add any new functionality into their ministry but rather confirms them in what they have demonstrated to be their gifting and God’s calling.

Question: How does the question of the ordination of women fit into the discussion of the “true nature of ordination”?

As things stand right now, women who are licensed in the Alliance do not have the opportunity for their skills, gifting and calling into ministry to be confirmed in the process that we call, “ordination.”  Given the fact that ordination in the Alliance has a “licensing confirmed” function and not an “approved for senior church leadership” function, there are many who believe it is inconsistent to license women for ministry in the Alliance without giving them the opportunity to have that licensing (their skills, gifting and calling) affirmed. 

It is essential to understand the nature of ordination and the authority it does and does not confer because the issue of women’s ordination naturally causes the issue of the role of women in ministry to be raised.  In the past it would seem that what is now denoted as “complimentarian vs. egalitarian views of the role of women guided this and other related policy discussions, and it may have been that the phraseology of certain parts of policy statements were based on, or even worded as an attempt to entrench one side or the other. Nonetheless, it is the conviction of the Board of Directors that if we understand the definition of ordination to be the confirmation of the skills, gifting and calling of a licensed worker in the Alliance and not related to the confirmation of senior leadership or headship in a local church, that it is unwise to frame the issue of women’s ordination in “egalitarian vs. complimentarian” terms.

Question: Are there any other issues?

The Board of Directors believes that there is a justice issue in this discussion for both men and women. Women, who are called and anointed and who in obedience to Christ and in the power of the Holy Spirit have carried out great ministries of evangelism and church planting both in Canada and around the world are denied the moment of affirmation by the Church and the prayer for further spiritual enduement. On the other hand, men who are minimalist in their view of ordination are nonetheless forced, by policy, to undergo the rite. This is a core inequity in our denomination.

Question: Do we need more study?

Sometimes in the discussion of women’s ordination there will be someone who raises the question of whether the Bible allows women to hold positions of senior leadership in a local church.  Again, these questions are valid and these discussions are valid where the issue of senior leadership is under consideration.  However, we maintain it would be unwise to import that conversation into an issue that is about confirming the licensing of an individual and not about placing an individual into a role of senior leadership in a local church.

 In other words, imagine having a robust discussion on Assembly floor about women’s ordination and framing that conversation in terms of whether women can hold positions of senior leadership in a local church.  A question we need to pose is simply: Would it be responsible to do so when the definition of ordination in the Alliance, based upon our policies and historic practices, is not directly connected to the granting of authority to be a senior leader in a local church?

Summary: Core Statements

Statement #1:  What Ordination is NOT: "Approval for Senior Church Leadership"

While this is not universally understood by the Alliance family, the nature of ordination in the Christian and Missionary Alliance in Canada (based upon historical and current policies and procedures) is not connected with senior church leadership.  In other words, ordination in the Alliance does not confer the right to exercise authority over others, does not authorize the person to supervise the sacraments, does not grant authority to preach and teach the Word, is not linked to spiritual headship and does not grant authority to be a senior pastor[1]. To be clear, the positioning of a licensed Alliance worker in Canada into the role of senior church leadership is a decision made by the local church elders with the approval of the District Superintendent and is not determined within the ordination process.

Statement #2:  What Ordination Is: "Licensing Confirmed"

The nature of ordination in the Christian and Missionary Alliance in Canada is the public confirmation by the church corporate of the skills, gifting and calling of a portable licensed worker for career ministry in the Alliance and the prayer for enduement with spiritual power.  In other words, the Portable License is reserved for people who are in ministry for “the long haul,” and therefore the two years are a time when skills, gifting and calling are watched and examined and then at the end confirmed, not just by the local church, but by the Family of Churches. This confirmation is for all kinds of callings and positions (nationally and internationally) and includes but is not in any way limited to senior pastoral leadership.

Therefore, the following issues are being offered to be considered.

1.     Given what ordination is and is not in the C&MA in Canada, and given what ordination does and does not do, is there anything about ordination in the Alliance that should make it gender specific?

2.     Should the denomination consider changing ordination so that all licensed workers, regardless of gender, have the opportunity for their licensing to be confirmed through the process that we call ordination?

Up until this point in this discussion document, we have sought to invite you to come with us on our journey of understanding the true nature of ordination and the ramifications for discussing the question of allowing women to be ordained.  We hope that you will join us by carefully re-reading this document and the Statement on Ordination. We further hope that you will join into the discussion as we have sought to frame it: is there anything in our Alliance understanding of ordination which makes ordination gender specific? And finally, we hope that you will exercise the discipline of carrying this discussion on without framing it in complimentarian vs. egalitarian terms. In so doing we believe that we can speak to each other in a manner that draws us together.