Question for PCA Elders and the topic of Female Deacons

travis · #1 (**permalink**) 06-03-2008, 09:49 AM

Out of curiosity, for those that are elders in the PCA (both teaching and ruling, I guess), what will you do if the PCA were to approve the ordination of female deacons? Or, if they were to say that deacons are no longer to be ordained, but only commissioned and can include both males and females?

***greenbaggins*** · #2 (**permalink**) 06-03-2008, 09:55 AM

I am quite sure that the denom will not go in the last named direction. The laying on of hands is explicit in Acts 6. I imagine it could very easily cause a church split. That is what I fear, anyway. I think, though, that the most likely direction is that the BCO will remain unchanged.

KenPierce · #3 (**permalink**) 06-03-2008, 10:42 AM

Having grown up in the RCA and left it over the necessity of submission to female elders (which is but a symptom of a denial of Biblical authority), female deacons are, to me, a tertiary issue.

But, from recent experience with "our" churches in San Diego and Denver, I fear that much of what is lurking behind the skirted deacons argument is egalitarianism, pure and simple. That is why the existence of female deacons in the ARP and RPCNA does not trouble me. I don't believe the motivation there to have been egalitarian.

So, I am more frightened of the ideas lurking behind, admittedly a slippery slope argument, but nonetheless we ought to be looking at the whole worldview that gives rise to this stuff.

raekwon · #4 (**permalink**) 06-03-2008, 10:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by travis

Out of curiosity, for those that are elders in the PCA (both teaching and ruling, I guess), what will you do if the PCA were to approve the ordination of female deacons? Or, if they were to say that deacons are no longer to be ordained, but only commissioned and can include both males and females?

Pray for unity in our churches, presbyteries, and denomination (even within disagreement on this issue).

Stephen · #5 (**permalink**) 06-03-2008, 02:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by travis

Out of curiosity, for those that are elders in the PCA (both teaching and ruling, I guess), what will you do if the PCA were to approve the ordination of female deacons? Or, if they were to say that deacons are no longer to be ordained, but only commissioned and can include both males and females?

Are you assuming that the PCA is going to decide for the ordination of deaconesses? There is no move in that direction of which I am aware. There are two overtures before the PCA General Assembly to form a study committee to further explore the issue of deaconesses. The study committee would be required to make a recommendation to the GA before any decision is made. The study committee would still have to do its work and could even decide that deaconesses are not Biblical. I think it is premature to wonder what elders will do until a decision is made whether to form a study committee or not.

travis · #6 (**permalink**) 06-03-2008, 02:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stephen

Quote:

Originally Posted by travis

Out of curiosity, for those that are elders in the PCA (both teaching and ruling, I guess), what will you do if the PCA were to approve the ordination of female deacons? Or, if they were to say that deacons are no longer to be ordained, but only commissioned and can include both males and females?

Are you assuming that the PCA is going to decide for the ordination of deaconesses? There is no move in that direction of which I am aware. There are two overtures before the PCA General Assembly to form a study committee to further explore the issue of deaconesses. The study committee would be required to make a recommendation to the GA before any decision is made. The study committee would still have to do its work and could even decide that deaconesses are not Biblical. I think it is premature to wonder what elders will do until a decision is made whether to form a study committee or not.

I am just asking 'what if'. Like "I wonder what the world will look like in 2020". I understand the process that needs to take place and never specifically mentioned the GA.

Zenas · #7 (**permalink**) 06-03-2008, 02:23 PM

It might not be so great to speculate on what could possibly be a highly controversial and emotional issue for some before anything worth getting exicted over has happened.

raekwon · #8 (**permalink**) 06-03-2008, 02:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zenas

It might not be so great to speculate on what could possibly be a highly controversial and emotional issue for some before anything worth getting exicted over has happened.

Unfortunately (?), this speculation is already happening all over the place. Travis just put it in visible print.

Stephen · #9 (**permalink**) 06-03-2008, 02:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by raekwon

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zenas

It might not be so great to speculate on what could possibly be a highly controversial and emotional issue for some before anything worth getting exicted over has happened.

Unfortunately (?), this speculation is already happening all over the place. Travis just put it in visible print.

No, I am not sure it is happening all over the place. Their may be some that are sympathetic to deaconesses and some congregations have deaconesses (not ordained), but this is not widespread. There is certainly the potential for a problem down the road, but as fallen creatures we are always prone to error. The current issue before the General Assembly is to clarify the position. There are always a few that like to push the envelope but this will always be the case.

KenPierce · #10 (**permalink**) 06-03-2008, 02:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stephen

Quote:

Originally Posted by travis

Out of curiosity, for those that are elders in the PCA (both teaching and ruling, I guess), what will you do if the PCA were to approve the ordination of female deacons? Or, if they were to say that deacons are no longer to be ordained, but only commissioned and can include both males and females?

Are you assuming that the PCA is going to decide for the ordination of deaconesses? There is no move in that direction of which I am aware. There are two overtures before the PCA General Assembly to form a study committee to further explore the issue of deaconesses. The study committee would be required to make a recommendation to the GA before any decision is made. The study committee would still have to do its work and could even decide that deaconesses are not Biblical. I think it is premature to wonder what elders will do until a decision is made whether to form a study committee or not.

Stephen, brother, I think you will be shocked (as I was) to find out just how broad the movement in this direction is.

I wish I thought you were right.

Presbyterian Deacon · #11 (**permalink**) 06-03-2008, 05:52 PM

AVT · #12 (**permalink**) 06-03-2008, 05:52 PM

I'm not an Elder and only have been following this in my denomination. Our Pastor is on the Overtures Committee and is in favor of the study committee but has shown no signs (ever) of wanting to establish women in ecclesiastical authority over men.

The original overtures are to study scripture and report recommendations (which could be changes or no changes). While I may be overly optimistic, I do not anticipate a majority report recommending to ordain women deacons based on Scripture exegesis because at the very best, Scripture is unclear on this. Maybe a divided report, say 5 to 2 with the majority affirming the value of the office of Deacon, ordained, elected, authoritative, worthy of honor, open to men only according to Scripture.

Again, maybe I'm too optimistic but I think it more likely recommendations from a Study Committee would be for Book of Church Order provisions that actually clarify further the Board of Deacons oversight, maintenance with responsibility and authority for mercy ministry in each local church. Maybe even a provision that allows the Board of Deacons to appoint men and women to assist them in mercy ministry. A strengthening and clarification of the office of Deacon and its administrative authority. It is even remotely possible of recommending creation of an "office" of servant widow strictly in accordance with I Timothy 5 (nonordained, under the authority of the Elders and Deacons) with the biblical requirements there (age 60, widow, served well, etc.) for those churches that wish to try that.

Also, I expect virtually unanimous result of ending of this practice of not having the office of Deacon and substituting for it instead, a "commissioned" group of women who take similar vows and perform similar functions.

Even if a majority of the Study Committee were to recommend changes to our Book of Church Order, I do not expect it would be adopted by the General Assembly. Changes to our Book of Church Order would require 2/3 of Presbyteries to ratify changes. I just do not see any signs of that happening or even being remotely likely.

Having said that we need to *pray, pray, pray* for a biblical process and result!

HaigLaw · #13 (**permalink**) 06-03-2008, 06:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stephen

Are you assuming that the PCA is going to decide for the ordination of deaconesses? There is no move in that direction of which I am aware. There are two overtures before the PCA General Assembly to form a study committee to further explore the issue of deaconesses. The study committee would be required to make a recommendation to the GA before any decision is made. The study committee would still have to do its work and could even decide that deaconesses are not Biblical. I think it is premature to wonder what elders will do until a decision is made whether to form a study committee or not.

Two regular posters, at least, on PB are members of the PCA bills & overtures committee, one of whom is the convenor, which by this time next week, will probably have voted on the issue of whether to propose such a study committee.

Reepicheep · #14 (**permalink**) 06-03-2008, 06:50 PM

I'm on the Overtures committee this year. While I personally do not find it necessary to have a study committee on this issue, I suspect I will be in the minority.

***fredtgreco*** · #15 (**permalink**) 06-03-2008, 06:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reepicheep

I'm on the Overtures committee this year. While I personally do not find it necessary to have a study committee on this issue, I suspect I will be in the minority.

Tony,

I'll see you Monday! As someone pointed out, I'm the convener.

**DMcFadden** · #16 (**permalink**) 06-03-2008, 10:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KenPierce

Having grown up in the RCA and left it over the necessity of submission to female elders (which is but a symptom of a denial of Biblical authority), female deacons are, to me, a tertiary issue.

But, from recent experience with "our" churches in San Diego and Denver, I fear that much of what is lurking behind the skirted deacons argument is egalitarianism, pure and simple. That is why the existence of female deacons in the ARP and RPCNA does not trouble me. I don't believe the motivation there to have been egalitarian.

So, I am more frightened of the ideas lurking behind, admittedly a slippery slope argument, but nonetheless we ought to be looking at the whole worldview that gives rise to this stuff.

Ken,

That is an incredibly insightful organizational observation. As one who graduated from a school where you cannot even submit a paper for grading now that is not fully "inclusive," and belonged to a denomination that viewed dissent from ordaining women as the unpardonable sin, your insights seem quite sound. The liberals bought into egalitarianism in the 60's/70's. The "progressive evangelicals" got on board in the late 70s/80s. The mainstream evangelicals found common cause in the 80s/90s. It is just about time for the conservative evangelicals and conservative Reformed bodies to start fighting over the issue too. Judging from my friends in the PCA, however, I would be surprised if your assessment of the current strength of this movement is totally accurate. The feminist juggernaut is clearly moving the direction you describe. The only question is where it currently stands in its progress.

[If you want to play a discouraging head counting game, list the mainline seminaries that are not off the chart in their PC gender politics. Then, name ANY "evangelical" seminaries that do not take at least a tentatively pro-women's ordination stand (hint: start with Masters as one of the few who take a firm anti-feminism position). Then, list the Reformed seminaries that do not have some measure of controversy on the subject. Finally, consider the percentage of seminary grads in America that are not reflexively pro-ordination of women.]

Reepicheep · #17 (**permalink**) 06-03-2008, 11:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fredtgreco

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reepicheep

I'm on the Overtures committee this year. While I personally do not find it necessary to have a study committee on this issue, I suspect I will be in the minority.

Tony,

I'll see you Monday! As someone pointed out, I'm the convener.

Fred, I look forward to seeing you my hometown brother! I know you will do a great job as the convener.

We may be the only former Buffalo Catholics ordained in the PCA?

KenPierce · #18 (**permalink**) 06-04-2008, 09:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DMcFadden

Quote:

Originally Posted by KenPierce

Having grown up in the RCA and left it over the necessity of submission to female elders (which is but a symptom of a denial of Biblical authority), female deacons are, to me, a tertiary issue.

But, from recent experience with "our" churches in San Diego and Denver, I fear that much of what is lurking behind the skirted deacons argument is egalitarianism, pure and simple. That is why the existence of female deacons in the ARP and RPCNA does not trouble me. I don't believe the motivation there to have been egalitarian.

So, I am more frightened of the ideas lurking behind, admittedly a slippery slope argument, but nonetheless we ought to be looking at the whole worldview that gives rise to this stuff.

Ken,

That is an incredibly insightful organizational observation. As one who graduated from a school where you cannot even submit a paper for grading now that is not fully "inclusive," and belonged to a denomination that viewed dissent from ordaining women as the unpardonable sin, your insights seem quite sound. The liberals bought into egalitarianism in the 60's/70's. The "progressive evangelicals" got on board in the late 70s/80s. The mainstream evangelicals found common cause in the 80s/90s. It is just about time for the conservative evangelicals and conservative Reformed bodies to start fighting over the issue too. Judging from my friends in the PCA, however, I would be surprised if your assessment of the current strength of this movement is totally accurate. The feminist juggernaut is clearly moving the direction you describe. The only question is where it currently stands in its progress.

[If you want to play a discouraging head counting game, list the mainline seminaries that are not off the chart in their PC gender politics. Then, name ANY "evangelical" seminaries that do not take at least a tentatively pro-women's ordination stand (hint: start with Masters). Then, list the Reformed seminaries that do not have some measure of controversy on the subject. Finally, consider the percentage of seminary grads in America that are not reflexively pro-ordination of women.]

Aw, shucks, thanks! :-)

I am a glass-half-empty type of guy, and this is one issue I would love to be wrong about.

I guess I have just dealt too much with the guys in the PCA echelons of power, and the new progressive wing of big churches, (and the Bayly brothers good blog) to think that this is almost inevitable, and will happen at light speed.

For one thing, it is getting ever more impressive and vocal advocates. Witness the Carolyn CUSTIS James, the wife of the president of RTS-O, and Reggie Kidd, the much beloved NT prof there.

Even RTS and Covenant allow women in the MDiv program. Why? Methinks the lurking motivation is $$$.

So, let's pray that, in a week and a half, I come back from Dallas, hat in hand, and say, "Brother Dennis, you are right; I was wrong. Forgive me!!"

***Joshua*** · #19 (**permalink**) 06-04-2008, 09:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KenPierce

Even RTS and Covenant allow women in the MDiv program.

DavidinKnoxville · #20 (**permalink**) 06-04-2008, 09:56 AM

Me being

....Kind of:

Quote:

Even RTS and Covenant allow women in the MDiv program. Why? Methinks the lurking motivation is $$$.

So, let's pray that, in a week and a half, I come back from Dallas, hat in hand, and say, "Brother Dennis, you are right; I was wrong. Forgive me!!"

Which is one of the reasons that Christian education should be free.

Josiah · #21 (**permalink**) 06-04-2008, 11:04 AM

Quote:

Even RTS and Covenant allow women in the MDiv program. Why? Methinks the lurking motivation is $$$.

These are excellent seminarys. Why would they need to offer the MDiv program to women? Is it really that profitable for them to do?

**DMcFadden** · #22 (**permalink**) 06-04-2008, 11:04 AM

After a couple of the posts about women in seminary, I am feeling guilty. Full disclosure: while my wife holds several college and seminary degrees (including a D.Min.), she did not seek ordination (even though our mainlline denomination at the time ordains women) mainly because she is a complementarian and does not approve of women in that role. Her rueful comment on the spate of women seeking senior pastoral positions is that they are mostly a group of angry women, with problems with the men in their lives (esp. their fathers), who have horrible attitudes toward the church. She just shakes her head and says: "Paul was right."

***fredtgreco*** · #23 (**permalink**) 06-04-2008, 11:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reepicheep

Quote:

Originally Posted by fredtgreco

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reepicheep

I'm on the Overtures committee this year. While I personally do not find it necessary to have a study committee on this issue, I suspect I will be in the minority.

Tony,

I'll see you Monday! As someone pointed out, I'm the convener.

Fred, I look forward to seeing you my hometown brother! I know you will do a great job as the convener.

We may be the only former Buffalo Catholics ordained in the PCA?

I think that is right. Funny how God works!

KenPierce · #24 (**permalink**) 06-04-2008, 11:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DMcFadden

After a couple of the posts about women in seminary, I am feeling guilty. Full disclosure: while my wife holds several college and seminary degrees (including a D.Min.), she did not seek ordination (even though our mainlline denomination at the time ordains women) mainly because she is a complementarian and does not approve of women in that role. Her rueful comment on the spate of women seeking senior pastoral positions is that they are mostly a group of angry women, with problems with the men in their lives (esp. their fathers), who have horrible attitudes toward the church. She just shakes her head and says: "Paul was right."

My wife is also a seminary (CE) grad, and I am grateful she is. But, she is also the strongest complementarian I know. She has been insulted by a prominent PCA minister who said, "Our women are tired of being just housewives and mothers."

That, dear brethren, is where we are headed. Women tired of their Biblical roles, and the men that enable them.

Backwoods Presbyterian · #25 (**permalink**) 06-04-2008, 11:11 AM

The men who enable them by not being men.

Josiah · #26 (**permalink**) 06-04-2008, 11:25 AM

Quote:

She has been insulted by a prominent PCA minister who said, "Our women are tired of being just housewives and mothers."

I havnt heard this type of hurtful rhetoric since I left the Assemblies of God church

. Perhaps this is just a restless minority in the PCA that needs to give serious thought to jumping over to the EPC?

Stephen · #27 (**permalink**) 06-04-2008, 11:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HaigLaw

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stephen

Are you assuming that the PCA is going to decide for the ordination of deaconesses? There is no move in that direction of which I am aware. There are two overtures before the PCA General Assembly to form a study committee to further explore the issue of deaconesses. The study committee would be required to make a recommendation to the GA before any decision is made. The study committee would still have to do its work and could even decide that deaconesses are not Biblical. I think it is premature to wonder what elders will do until a decision is made whether to form a study committee or not.

Two regular posters, at least, on PB are members of the PCA bills & overtures committee, one of whom is the convenor, which by this time next week, will probably have voted on the issue of whether to propose such a study committee.

I am on the overtures committee also, and that is the task of the OC to vote for or against a study committee. The OC could still vote against the study committee. Noone knows what will come out of the OC, so it is premature to say. It is certainly an issue that is on the minds of many, but we must be praying that the Lord will give the OC wisdom. I certainly need wisdom.

Backwoods Presbyterian · #28 (**permalink**) 06-04-2008, 11:28 AM

for the OC

Stephen · #29 (**permalink**) 06-04-2008, 11:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KenPierce

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stephen

Quote:

Originally Posted by travis

Out of curiosity, for those that are elders in the PCA (both teaching and ruling, I guess), what will you do if the PCA were to approve the ordination of female deacons? Or, if they were to say that deacons are no longer to be ordained, but only commissioned and can include both males and females?

Are you assuming that the PCA is going to decide for the ordination of deaconesses? There is no move in that direction of which I am aware. There are two overtures before the PCA General Assembly to form a study committee to further explore the issue of deaconesses. The study committee would be required to make a recommendation to the GA before any decision is made. The study committee would still have to do its work and could even decide that deaconesses are not Biblical. I think it is premature to wonder what elders will do until a decision is made whether to form a study committee or not.

Stephen, brother, I think you will be shocked (as I was) to find out just how broad the movement in this direction is.

I wish I thought you were right.

No, brother, I will not be shocked because nothing surprises me, especially when it comes to the PCA. Granted there are a number of congregations that may have strong leanings toward egalitarianism, but I do not think that is the general consenses. Some may genuinely believe that there is a need for women in diaconal work, but not all of them would advocate the ordination of women, especially giving them ecclesiastical authority. I don't believe that there is a strong united front in the PCA for the ordination of women. That is not to say there is not a minority that have leanings in that direction. I understand that some elders coming from groups like the RCA or the PCUSA may have greater concerns, but it is my opinion that we do not have the same situation in the PCA. There is always the slippery slope because of the feminized culture, but we have to respond to the issue and not simply ignore it.

KenPierce · #30 (**permalink**) 06-04-2008, 11:50 AM

Stephen,

I think we agree in principle, and we will have to see the outcome. I pray you are right.

But, remember, one of the most profitable things Rushdoony ever said was that history is not made by majorities but by minorities who act on their convictions (paraphrase). That is a sword that, sadly, cuts both ways.

Stephen · #31 (**permalink**) 06-04-2008, 11:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KenPierce

Quote:

Originally Posted by DMcFadden

Quote:

Originally Posted by KenPierce

Having grown up in the RCA and left it over the necessity of submission to female elders (which is but a symptom of a denial of Biblical authority), female deacons are, to me, a tertiary issue.

But, from recent experience with "our" churches in San Diego and Denver, I fear that much of what is lurking behind the skirted deacons argument is egalitarianism, pure and simple. That is why the existence of female deacons in the ARP and RPCNA does not trouble me. I don't believe the motivation there to have been egalitarian.

So, I am more frightened of the ideas lurking behind, admittedly a slippery slope argument, but nonetheless we ought to be looking at the whole worldview that gives rise to this stuff.

Ken,

That is an incredibly insightful organizational observation. As one who graduated from a school where you cannot even submit a paper for grading now that is not fully "inclusive," and belonged to a denomination that viewed dissent from ordaining women as the unpardonable sin, your insights seem quite sound. The liberals bought into egalitarianism in the 60's/70's. The "progressive evangelicals" got on board in the late 70s/80s. The mainstream evangelicals found common cause in the 80s/90s. It is just about time for the conservative evangelicals and conservative Reformed bodies to start fighting over the issue too. Judging from my friends in the PCA, however, I would be surprised if your assessment of the current strength of this movement is totally accurate. The feminist juggernaut is clearly moving the direction you describe. The only question is where it currently stands in its progress.

[If you want to play a discouraging head counting game, list the mainline seminaries that are not off the chart in their PC gender politics. Then, name ANY "evangelical" seminaries that do not take at least a tentatively pro-women's ordination stand (hint: start with Masters). Then, list the Reformed seminaries that do not have some measure of controversy on the subject. Finally, consider the percentage of seminary grads in America that are not reflexively pro-ordination of women.]

Aw, shucks, thanks! :-)

I am a glass-half-empty type of guy, and this is one issue I would love to be wrong about.

I guess I have just dealt too much with the guys in the PCA echelons of power, and the new progressive wing of big churches, (and the Bayly brothers good blog) to think that this is almost inevitable, and will happen at light speed.

For one thing, it is getting ever more impressive and vocal advocates. Witness the Carolyn CUSTIS James, the wife of the president of RTS-O, and Reggie Kidd, the much beloved NT prof there.

Even RTS and Covenant allow women in the MDiv program. Why? Methinks the lurking motivation is $$$.

So, let's pray that, in a week and a half, I come back from Dallas, hat in hand, and say, "Brother Dennis, you are right; I was wrong. Forgive me!!"

Ken, I was not aware that RTS and Covenant allowed women in the MDiv program. Nothing coming from RTS-Orlando would surprise me. I do not brush shoulders with PCA ecclesiastical executives,

so I would not know about that. I do not know of any in my circles that would advocate the ordination of women, but I do know some that favor deaconesses, which are two different issues. I do agree with Dennis, but if I am wrong too, I will be happy to take you to dinner at General Assembly. If you are a teetoter I will refrain and drink tea,

Stephen · #32 (**permalink**) 06-04-2008, 12:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Backwoods Presbyterian

The men who enable them by not being men.

Amen, preach it brother.

There I go again with my latent charismatic overtones. Women will naturally take the lead because men have abrogated their responsibilites. Do not get me started on this issue.

Stephen · #33 (**permalink**) 06-04-2008, 12:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KenPierce

Quote:

Originally Posted by DMcFadden

After a couple of the posts about women in seminary, I am feeling guilty. Full disclosure: while my wife holds several college and seminary degrees (including a D.Min.), she did not seek ordination (even though our mainlline denomination at the time ordains women) mainly because she is a complementarian and does not approve of women in that role. Her rueful comment on the spate of women seeking senior pastoral positions is that they are mostly a group of angry women, with problems with the men in their lives (esp. their fathers), who have horrible attitudes toward the church. She just shakes her head and says: "Paul was right."

My wife is also a seminary (CE) grad, and I am grateful she is. But, she is also the strongest complementarian I know. She has been insulted by a prominent PCA minister who said, "Our women are tired of being just housewives and mothers."

That, dear brethren, is where we are headed. Women tired of their Biblical roles, and the men that enable them.

I hope you rebuked your fellow elder for making such an absurd comment.

Stephen · #34 (**permalink**) 06-04-2008, 12:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KenPierce

Stephen,

I think we agree in principle, and we will have to see the outcome. I pray you are right.

But, remember, one of the most profitable things Rushdoony ever said was that history is not made by majorities but by minorities who act on their convictions (paraphrase). That is a sword that, sadly, cuts both ways.

Oh, brother what a man for you to quote considering he was a theonomist

That is a true but sad quote to consider. You may be right after all on the direction of the PCA, but I still believe that there are enough strong elders who will take the lead. I have had more concern about the direction of the PCA in other areas, but I will stick with this topic, or I may get arrested.