Category Archives: General Assembly

Update from General Assembly

Posted on by
Reply
As I logged into my blog to write this update, I realized my last post was from back in April.  My apologies! I know I have had several new subscribers to the blog and no new content.  All I can say is I hope to do better, but life has been a whirlwind as of late.

The 45th General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in America is officially concluded, and early at that, so as I have an entire day in the airport waiting for my flight home, I thought I’d give you an update on the events of GA.  In a nutshell I’ll say this: This General Assembly is why I joined the PCA!  The worship was God-centered, the preaching Biblical, informative, Spirit-filled, and convicting, the deliberation passionate yet collegial, and the results were encouraging.  My first two experiences at General Assembly left me frustrated and dismayed, but this year there seemed to be a different attitude among the commissioners, and I believe God was glorified in the work of His church.

The greatest concern of this Assembly was the very low turn out of Ruling Elders.  In a congregation that was established with the understanding of a plurality of elders, a shared authority of Ruling and Teaching Elders, there is not a staggering disparity in the Assembly.  There were 1,400 commissioners this year, but only 300 were Ruling Elders.  We need to pray and work for a way to include more Ruling Elder in the Assembly in coming years.

The biggest and most profound outcome of the Assembly is the decision to give a portion of the Directory of Worship’s instruction on Marriage full constitutional status.  In case you are unfamiliar with the government of the PCA, our Book of Church Order includes a Directory of Worship, that is given as an “approved guide” but without the force of law (except for the chapters on Baptism and the Lord’s Supper).  Leading up to the Assembly, there were several overtures to give the chapter on marriage full constitutional authority. Their reasoning was, among other items, 1) in a culture that is currently redefining marriage, the church needs a clear, constitutional definition of marriage, and 2) giving constitutional status to the chapter on marriage would provide clarity and protection for our military chaplains.

As is our procedure with all overtures, these overtures were sent to the Overtures Committee who for review and recommendations to the Assembly.  Surprisingly, the committee recommended that the Assembly answer in the negative, essentially denying the changes.  Now please understand, this would not have meant that the PCA was changing it’s position on marriage, only that the chapter on marriage would not be given full constitutional authority.  Again, there were a variety of reasons why they recommended answering in the negative, most having to do with the finer details in procedures and records of marriage in the chapter, none having to do with the actual definition of marriage.

When the Committee presented their report and recommendation to the Assembly, there was also a minority report, that sought to refine the original overtures. What came out on the floor, then, was the reality that there was a third way.  The Assembly recommitted the overture to the committee, who then met and came back with the following recommended overture:

“Marriage is only to be between one man and one woman (Gen 2:24, 25; Matt 19:4-6; 1 Cor 7:2), in accordance with the Word of God. Therefore ministers in the Presbyterian Church in America who solemnize marriages shall only solemnize marriages between one man and one woman.”

This paragraph was approved by the Assembly and given full constitutional status.  The vote was an overwhelming 764-12.  The next step will be for all of the Presbyteries to vote on this overture, and if it passes a supermajority of Presbyteries, it will be voted upon again at the next Assembly.  This is really good news!

In other business, there were several overtures that sought to give organizations in the PCA, such as RidgeHaven, Covenant College and Covenant Theological Seminary and others, the ability to open a minority of seats on their boards of directors to unordained men and women.  Currently, those boards are comprised of Teaching and Ruling Elders or Deacons of the Church, and are seen as extensions of the Church in ministry.  These overtures were an avenue to allowing women to serve in official capacities on the Boards.  While it was made clear that there are many ways that women give advice and counsel to these boards, the church maintains that these ministries are extensions of the Church, and as such, under the leadership of ordained officers of the Church.  The committee recommended the overtures be answer in the negative, and the Assembly agreed.

The other major discussion on the floor of the Assembly had to do with the review of Presbytery records, particularly one Presbytery that had examined a minister, heard his differences with the Westminster Standards, ruled that his differences did not “strike to the heart of the religion,” but then ruled that, while he could hold his views, he was not allowed to teach them.  While I cannot say that I understand the full ramifications of the action or discussion, I did find it concerning that the Assembly would seek to make a judicial ruling on an action of a Presbytery without any process. In the end, the Committee of Review received their minutes with an exception on this matter, which requires the Presbytery to give a response explaining their decision.

Overall, it was a very encouraging week in Atlanta.  New friendships were formed, and old ones renewed.  I was particularly moved by the worship service on Thursday evening and the preaching of Joe Novenson, I’ll be ordering a copy for those who are interested in checking out and listening to it. I thank you for your prayers, especially those of my congregation who have graciously provided me the opportunity to attend and be a part of such a great experience in the Church.

Pray for a safe flight home!

Grace and Peace

General Assembly Follow Up #2 -A Study Committee

Posted on by
Reply

One of the biggest news items coming from the 44th General Assembly of the PCA was the formation of a Study Committee on the Role of Women in the PCA in local Church, Presbytery, and Assembly levels. This item of business caught me off guard, as I hadn’t read anything about it in the preliminary material, and it generated quite a bit of political drama on the floor of the Assembly. Allow me to give a little background to the story here, as best as I can, describe the nature of the debate, then explain the decision. Bear with me.

The recommendation for a study committee on women in ministry began with a group called the Cooperative Ministries Committee (CMC). The CMC is made up of the chairmen of the ten standing Assembly committees as well as the six most recent moderators of the General Assembly. The CMC’s responsibilities primarily deal with long-range planning for the overall mission and ministry of the PCA, giving recommendations, not to the General Assembly, but to the appropriate committees in dealing with particular issues facing the church.

The Administrative Committee received the suggestion of the CMC, and recommended to the General Assembly to form a committee to investigate: 1) the biblical basis, theology, history, nature, and authority of ordination; 2) the biblical nature and function of the office of deacon; 3) clarification on the ordination or commissioning of deacons/deaconesses; and 4) should the findings of the study committee warrant changes to the Book of Church Order – propose such changes to the General Assembly.

When the General Assembly meets, each committee gathers to prepare their report to the Assembly. These committees are made up of Teaching and Ruling Elders who have been nominated and elected by the Assembly. Each committee also has a Committee of Commissioners, Teaching and Ruling Elders who have been nominated by their presbyteries to review the work of the Committees and make necessary recommendations for correction or improvement of the work of the committee. (How many times can I write “committee” in a paragraph?) The Administrative Committee’s Committee of Commissioners reviewed their proposal to form a Study Committee and recommended the General Assembly vote down the action.

This is where the debate got rather passionate. There were those who advocated for the Study who argued that this is something that every church is dealing with, that we must find a way to articulate in a positive manner the role and responsibilities of women in the church. Several spoke to the point that highly educated and able women were relegated to menial tasks simply because they were women and could not serve in ordained ministry as Elders or Deacons.

Those who spoke against the Study made it clear that they wanted to affirm the role of women in ministry, but had fundamental disagreements with the way the action originated and with the parameters of the study. If this were something that every church were dealing with, why did the recommendation for the study have to come from the Cooperative Ministries Committee rather than from a Presbytery? We are a denomination that is governed by the elders and Presbyteries, not from the top down – so it is interesting that this recommendation came from a small group of committee leaders and moderators rather than from churches and presbyteries.

Likewise, the parameters of the study encompass quite a bit of territory; investigating the biblical basis and authority of ordination; the office of deacon; and the ordination or commissioning of deacons/deaconesses. That’s quite a bit of area to cover as a Study Committee, and the fear expressed on the floor of the Assembly is that this committee would lead to the recommendation of ordaining women to the office of Deacon and Elder in the PCA.

In the end, the recommendation was passed by a vote of 767-375 and the Study Committee was formed. I don’t know how often the committee will meet, or if they will give their final report at the next General Assembly, but I would presume that would be the case.

My personal take…
First, I am not afraid of a Study Committee. I welcome the opportunity for the Church to faithfully study the Word of God as it leads us to understand the offices of Elder and Deacon in the Church, and as we understand the particular calling of men and women to serve the church together. I think it would be helpful to have a positive statement in the Church on the role of women in ministry. Simply saying “you can’t be an Elder or Deacon” is not encouraging women to serve, nor does it begin to exhaust the expanse of possible ways in which women are called and gifted for service in the church. A positive, biblically faithful report on women in ministry can only help, not hurt, the ministry of the Church.

Second, I have spent the first year here in Lennox getting to know my congregation, visiting with the women and men of the Church. I have listened well, and I have not heard the women of the church complaining that they cannot serve because they cannot be ordained as a Deacon or Elder. In fact, I have heard just the opposite. The women of the church a glad to see men take up the mantle of their God-ordained responsibility, as they lead in prayer, in the proclamation of the word, as they lead the church in compassion and enthusiasm. I have come from churches where this is not the case, where men refuse to serve, requiring the women to pick up where the men have abdicated their responsibilities. I would hate to see the church waver from the Word of God, giving the men of the church license to reject their calling, and causing more confusion and trouble in an already confused and troubled generation.

Finally, while I want to uphold the high calling in scripture to the office of the Elder as a spiritual overseer in the Church, and that of Deacon as one called to the ministry of compassion and care, I think it is problematic when we tell people, especially the women of the church, that unless they have the title of Elder or Deacon their ministry is somehow less important or invalidated. Why must we have a title to serve? Do you have to be ordained to care and show compassion? Perhaps the problem stems from the way that we have exercised leadership in the past, lording it over others rather than using the office to become a servant to all. In this way, a study on ordination is warranted, and the correction, as always, is to come back to the Word of God.

Just to wrap things up, here are a few key passages to consider on the issue of Elders, Deacons, and ministry in the church.

Titus 1:5–9
“This is why I left you in Crete, so that you might put what remained into order, and appoint elders in every town as I directed you— if anyone is above reproach, the husband of one wife, and his children are believers and not open to the charge of debauchery or insubordination. For an overseer, as God’s steward, must be above reproach. He must not be arrogant or quick-tempered or a drunkard or violent or greedy for gain, but hospitable, a lover of good, self-controlled, upright, holy, and disciplined. He must hold firm to the trustworthy word as taught, so that he may be able to give instruction in sound doctrine and also to rebuke those who contradict it.”

1 Timothy 3:1–7
“The saying is trustworthy: If anyone aspires to the office of overseer, he desires a noble task. Therefore an overseer must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, sober-minded, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, not a drunkard, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money. He must manage his own household well, with all dignity keeping his children submissive, for if someone does not know how to manage his own household, how will he care for God’s church? He must not be a recent convert, or he may become puffed up with conceit and fall into the condemnation of the devil. Moreover, he must be well thought of by outsiders, so that he may not fall into disgrace, into a snare of the devil.”

1 Timothy 3:8–13
“Deacons likewise must be dignified, not double-tongued, not addicted to much wine, not greedy for dishonest gain. They must hold the mystery of the faith with a clear conscience. And let them also be tested first; then let them serve as deacons if they prove themselves blameless. Their wives likewise must be dignified, not slanderers, but sober-minded, faithful in all things. Let deacons each be the husband of one wife, managing their children and their own households well. For those who serve well as deacons gain a good standing for themselves and also great confidence in the faith that is in Christ Jesus.”

Mark 10:42–45
“And Jesus called them to him and said to them, ‘You know that those who are considered rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great ones exercise authority over them. But it shall not be so among you. But whoever would be great among you must be your servant, and whoever would be first among you must be slave of all. For even the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.’”