Deaconesses Study Committee Request Denied at PCA 36th General Assembly
Overture 9 from Philadelphia Presbytery requested the 36th General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in America to create a committee to study the “Scriptural teaching bearing on women’s eligibility for election and ordination to the office of deacon.” Overture 15 from Western Canada makes the same request. Overture 17 from Rocky Mountain Presbytery asks that if a study committee is erected that its mandate also include providing parameters for the role of women in the church. The Bills and Overture Committee after 5.5 hours of discussion recommended that the Assembly deny these requests. A minority report was formed in the committee and signed by 26 committee members including Dr. Bryan Chapell, President of Covenant Seminary, who represented the minority on the floor of the Assembly.
Dr. Philip Ryken, Pastor of 10th Presbyterian Church in Philadelphia (successor of Dr. James Boice) with his Session and congregation, are among those who initiated the conversation in the Philadelphia Presbytery resulting in Overture 9. Floor debate produced mostly divided votes and exposed the fear of the Assembly, and perhaps the entire denomination, of a slippery slope. The PCA’s history of departing from the PCUSA to form a new national church 36 years ago over several issues including the ordination of women may have been more influential in squelching the request than a careful argument arising from the biblical text.
I have mostly thought that open discussion of the biblical text on any issue is healthy and so I voted for the minority report to convene the study committee. Some of the Assembly thought that the 10k to pay the study committee expenses was too much money (forgetting the size of the GA budget, no doubt thinking about 10k in relation to a small congregation’s budget or a personal family budget.) Others called for points of order arguing that the request was not made according to the provision in our polity for such a study committee to serve us. Still others argued that in the past our study committees have been commissioned to tackle issues which lack clarity and about which little has been published. This argument included a reminder that Reformed churches have had much to say on several sides of this issue for hundreds of years. Little to nothing was said on the floor about the issue of women serving through diaconal ministries in our congregations. The floor debate was properly confined to our procedures, precedents, and fears - much fear. The concern that may have been most influential and persuasive was that of maintaining the peace we have enjoyed largely in the PCA. Don’t rock the boat. We have tacked several difficult, potentially divisive issues in the past few Assemblies and so this issue, potentially divisive, would rock the peace.
Some argued positively towards conversations and studies in congregations and presbyteries. The result will be a horde of overtures in this coming 37th Assembly and most likely, very little help will arise soon for our denomination who has little self-awareness of our marginalizing the ardent and fruitful work of thousands of women who serve our congregations. At some point in the future we must discuss the roles of women and our task to encourage and empower them as members of Christ’s Church to serve. At some point, we must discuss whether or not we should ordain women to the office of deaconess. Many rightly ordered churches (some Reformed churches included) do so and have done so for a long time. The 36th Assembly was not ready to move the discussion to the level of a study committee of the Assembly. I am all for peace but I lack confidence that the denial of concerted study and discussion is the road to it. Such discussion and possible change of our Standards has never been a threatening prospect to me. Any hint of shutting down biblical study and discussion on any issue scares me. The few on the floor who expressed fear of the world and of change as cause for denial of a study committee concern me deeply. As one independent thinker said on the floor (undoubtedly increasing the fear of many) our 36th Assembly had little to no headlining work but for this one issue. The big action of this assembly proposed was the formation of a study committee (a favorite Presbyterian action step) hardly a substantial missional step. Yet we did not do it. We slipped further into inactivity by deciding to deny the request.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
Nathan: very good reporting and analysis on this. Thank you. It was great to see you again this year. The Lord bless your ministry!
Thanks for your very sane perspective and for pointing to several important problems with refusing this study. One personal concern I have is that it doesn’t seem very Presbyterian to mistrust the judgment of fellow presbyters proposing to search the scriptures on an issue. A humble trust that the Holy Spirit would guide our elders is at the heart of the ecclesiology to which we supposedly subscribe.
It seems that marginalizing a group of fellow believers would be more divisive than forming a group to look into the matter and prayerfully seeking guidance through scripture. Nathan, can you reccomend any good books or articles concerning the role of women in the church?
agreed. read anything you can find by Susan Foh, including “Women and the Word of God: A Response to Biblical Feminism.” If I think of more and when I return home I’ll check my library for more. Go to Monergism.com to see what free literature is available on this topic.
Hi Nathan,
If I may be so bold as to step in whilst you’re on vacation, I’d like to recommend a few resources to Sarah. These are from all perspectives. I ascribe to the theory that knowing what all sides think is important to a well informed decision of thought :). So, I recommend these books/sites that it’s understood that you’ll read things that are in agreement with the stated PCA presbyteries, plus those opposing such views. Here goes:
#1:
http://www.cbmw.org/images/onlinebooks/rbmw.pdf?virtuemart=ae9b6b1aa3d65a141597d055da154879
This is a PDF of “Recovering Bibical Manhood and Womanhood, an Evanglical Perspective.” Very good introductory reading from the Council on Recovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood.
#2:
Two Views on Women in Ministry (Counterpoints: Exploring Theology)
by Linda L. Belleville (Contributor), Craig L. Blomberg (Contributor), Craig S. Keener (Contributor), Thomas R. Schreiner (Contributor), James R. Beck (Editor), Stanley N. Gundry (Series Editor)
A book that represents the egalitarian and the complementarian/hierarchical views of women and ministry.
#3:
Women in the Church: A Biblical Theology of Women in Ministry
by Stanley J. Grenz (Author), Denise Muir Kjesbo (Author)
Grenz is a Complementarian
#4:
Women in Ministry: Four Views
by Bonnidell Clouse (Author), Robert G. Clouse (Editor)
Robert Culver argues for what might be called the traditional view that women should not exercise authority over or teach men. Susan Foh suggests a modified view which would allow for women to teach but not to hold positions of authority. Walter Liefeld presents a case for plural ministry that questions ordination as a means of conferring authority. Alvera Mickelsen defends the full equality of men and women in the church.
There are also many online articles. If these are more accessible to you, post and I’ll try and get those for you.
As for the slippery slope argument, I understand and acknowledge this line of reasoning. In many respects, it’s a valid concern. Men and women are sinners and when given power many want more power. That’s our nature. But, it’s inherent in both the sexes, not just the female.
Therefore, opening up discussion to the biblical application of the scriptures to allowing women deaconesses (which did exist in the New Testament church) seems to be a valid request. Even if this led to further desires/requests for more power in the form of desiring eldership (which doesn’t seem biblical to this humble female), it doesn’t mean it will lead to such a conclusion. Men are deacons and elders, but they don’t typically want to become sole rulers of their congregations or pseudo-emperors…because there are checks and balances.
My main complaint in not addressing the issue is that you have many, many women within the PCA that are functioning as deaconesses, but without the necessary checks and balances. After a number of years in counter-cult minitry, I can assure you that such a condition is much more dangerous! Without the necessary recognition and boundaries of office, anyone, man or woman, will move beyond the invisible line.
Jennifer :)
thanks, Jennifer! We said and the list helpful.
Yes, thank you for the information, I’ll be reading it!