Quote:
Originally Posted by Presbyterian Deacon  Quote:
Originally Posted by Southern Presbyterian Quote:
Originally Posted by Presbyterian Deacon Contrary to the Book of Church Order, and contrary to the Scripture, IMO  | And there is the rub. Why would the study committee not study the question in relation to Scripture rather than the BOC?  | Thank you! My thoughts exactly. I mean, sure the BCO is useful, but the Scripture is of first importance (Or at least, it should be!).
By the way, the PCA BCO already allows individual Sessions to "select and appoint godly men and women of the congregation to assist the deacons in caring for the sick, the widows, the orphans, the prisoners, and others who may be in distress or need." (BCO 9-7).
Thus BCO already allows for women to engage in diaconal service, but that service is to be at the direction of the Elders, and under the supervision of the ordain diaconate. This overture seems to me to indicate more of a motive of pride than service. Those who speak of a desire to be of service to the church often seem to be more interested in the office or title, than the actual service itself.
Now, before everyone jumps on me...I know I'm overstating the case, but hopefully to make the point.
No change is needed in the BCO. The BCO already provides for women to be involved in diaconal service. It simply does not provide that the OFFICE is open to women. |
I hope there's enough boiling water in this pot for two.
Seriously though, it does seem to be a pride or power issue. What God fearing church and it's elders would say to any member, male or female, you can't visit the sick, you can't feed the hungry, you can't voluntarily clean the fellowship hall bathrooms because you're not a deacon(ess)? Obviously none would. So if a person (again, male or female) feels lead of the Lord to serve his/her fellow man is such ways why is the title deacon necessary? I see no command in Scripture that requires a title for us to serve one another.
*getting off my
now.*