# Two new deaconess overtures for the PCA General Assembly



## ColdSilverMoon

Two new overtures have been submitted for consideration at the 2010 PCA GA. One is explicitly for deaconesses, the other is an exact copy of the Central Carolina overture (as far as I can tell). Here is a summary of the overtures presented thus far:

Overtures #2 and #9 - from Central and Eastern Carolina Presbyteries, respectively. Both of these prohibit commissioning or installing non-ordained deacons/deaconesses, and referring to them as such. As far as I can tell they are exactly the same.

Overture #6 - Evangel's overture would implicitly allow non-ordained deaconesses, but expressly prohibits them from being ordained.

Overture #10 - Northern California Presbytery's overture is the most radical of the bunch and by far the most comprehensive. It would amend the BCO in multiple places, basically inserting the word "ordained" to any reference to deacon as an office of the church. It also adds a new section (9-8) to the BCO that expressly allows for non-ordained deacons an deaconesses, but prohibits ordination of these diaconal assistants.

A few more very brief thoughts:

1. Wow, this is going to be THE topic at the GA this year. Will we finally see a resolution one way or another? Hopefully. The Metro Atlanta Presbytery has an overture of their own in the works - how many more will be submitted?

2. The tally thus far is 2 presbyteries allowing, 2 not allowing non-ordained deaconesses. Assuming Metro Atlanta's overture is eventually submitted, it will be 3-2 in favor of allowing. But the broader tally should be much more concerning to the anti-deaconess crowd. Now 4 presbyteries have rejected the Carolina overtures (Northern California, Evangel, Providence, Metro Atlanta) and both Metro NY and Philadelphia Presbyteries are heavily pro-deaconess. The numbers seem to indicate the Carolina overtures don't have much of a chance. 

3. I still support the Evangel overture above the rest. It is the most moderate and Scripturally sound of the 4 formally submitted.


----------



## Romans922

One thing I can say positively about all these overtures thus far submitted is that they are finally going at this the right way. The are overturing to change the BCO and not just have a study committee which does nothing.


----------



## Scott1

After a quick perusal-

The Eastern Carolina overture is well stated and represents our presbyterian polity well.

This presbytery also (like Evangel) is not an activist presbytery, and is a good indicator of the center of our denomination.

Both Presbyteries, really want to halt the confusion and the trajectory of this because it is a threat to peace and purity of the church.

The Northern California overture is offered in good faith, because it recognizes the radical change of polity, our historical polity and the polity we have vowed to receive and uphold that would be required to have this.

It is a failure of governing leadership (session and diaconate) that our polity is not being expounded, taught and exampled in the congregations under their charge in a few places.

We must face this clearly, the isolated practice of elders teaching and deacons being any kind of lay servant is demeaning of the office of Deacon, and of ordination, and of the vows of officers.

While I disagree with the latter overture, both Scripturally and practically, it lays out on the table what this is all about- a destruction of the high office of Deacon.


----------



## Grace Alone

I have really mixed feelings about this. My bible says that The Greek word for servant, diakonos, is used in Romans 16:1: "I commend to you our sister Phoebe, a servant[a] of the church in Cenchrea." This word is also translated as "deacon" in other passages. I am NOT suggesting that Phoebe was an ordained deacon, but apparently the word diakonos could be translated as deaconess (meaning servant) here.

So on one hand, I do not think we should be more restrictive than scripture itself if it allows for the use of the term deacon or deaconess for an unordained servant.

On the other hand, it strikes me as very prideful for a woman to desire a title for her service in the church. Is "servant" not good enough??? I would never seek a title of deaconess because it would make me feel that my sinful desire for recognition is creeping in. I do think this desire for a title (other than servant) comes from feminism and pride.

So basically, if Phoebe was called a deaconess (diakonos), then I would think that the unordained title might be biblical. Yet I think it would be sad for a woman to desire and use such a title in the church.


----------



## Scott1

Janis,

You may find helpful, one of the best reviews of the Scripture on this, including the original Greek is on the Greenbaggins (Rev. Lane Keister's) blog:


Brief ‘


----------



## Mushroom

Yep. And those who want to stuff this down our throats and thumb their noses at the historical faith are downright giddy about it, aren't they? Why don't all of them just go join the EPC instead of dragging down a denom that is trying to remain faithful? These folks are twisted in the way they glibly justify their attempts to attack the peace and purity of the Church.


----------



## Romans922

Grace Alone said:


> I have really mixed feelings about this. My bible says that The Greek word for servant, diakonos, is used in Romans 16:1: "I commend to you our sister Phoebe, a servant[a] of the church in Cenchrea." This word is also translated as "deacon" in other passages. I am NOT suggesting that Phoebe was an ordained deacon, but apparently the word diakonos could be translated as deaconess (meaning servant) here.
> 
> So on one hand, I do not think we should be more restrictive than scripture itself if it allows for the use of the term deacon or deaconess for an unordained servant.
> 
> On the other hand, it strikes me as very prideful for a woman to desire a title for her service in the church. Is "servant" not good enough??? I would never seek a title of deaconess because it would make me feel that my sinful desire for recognition is creeping in. I do think this desire for a title (other than servant) comes from feminism and pride.
> 
> So basically, if Phoebe was called a deaconess (diakonos), then I would think that the unordained title might be biblical. Yet I think it would be sad for a woman to desire and use such a title in the church.



What Lane does is good, but a simple reminder Janis. Words in the original languages (in Scripture) have multiple meanings. Take Adam for example, it can mean the person Adam, the town Adam, man, mankind, or dust. Diakonos is similar, it can mean the ordained office you see in Acts 6, a minister, or a servant. This is why Christ, I believe, is described with the word diakonos (I am saying this off the top of my head, so if I am wrong about this please correct me). Phoebe can fit into the servant meaning very easily. But was she ordained? No proof of that.


----------



## Grace Alone

I totally agree that there is no proof or reason to think women were ordained deacons. But Andrew, who makes the decision whether to translate "diakonos" as servant, minister, or deacon? Keep in mind that I am not really in favor of calling women deacons. But I am a little confused as to how one Greek word is translated three different ways even after reading Lane's blog.


----------



## Philip

I may note that in most churches I have seen, the functions of a deacon are often undertaken by Godly women without recognition.


----------



## Scott1

This might be helpful for those following and trying to understand presbyterian polity, particularly as it relates to God appointing elders and deacons, confirmed by the congregation, ordained and installed to govern the local church.

This resolution was passed by another Presbytery last year that explains it well. Understand this is not an overture before General Assembly at this moment, but a Presbytery defining polity practice by the PCA constitution by its member churches.

May I humbly suggest that prayerfully be considered by other Presbyteries dealing with constitutionally deviant, even defiant practices in their midst. These practices are a violation of the vows of officers.

The resolution lays out the foundation and the practices that reflect a strong, active, Diaconate (I Timothy 3 examined, men) who govern in their own sphere in the church. Unordained men and women assist them and the Session in many capacities, but do not replace them, nor usurp their title or authority.

Notice the resolution allows for the term 'deaconess' for the unordained women who might assist the Deacons (appointed, not elected). Technically, this might not be against the Constitution. It is against the spirit of it however, because there is no distinction of title, and there is parity between unordained men and women.

When I first began to study this a couple years ago, I was tempted to think this was only about a name of assistants, and allowing women to participate in "mercy."

But understand, the name is NOT AT ALL what this is about, nor the ability to do mercy.

As is being brought out by the N. California overture, this is about a radical change of our polity to something that is not even historically presbyterian. It's about destroying the high biblical office of Deacon and replacing it with a lay group that usurps both the office and function, after a transitory period of mixing the two without distinction. It will become egalitarian, though some do not understand that's where this goes. By that term, we mean a philosophy born of the vanity of the imagination of men, by which man inserts his own ideas rather than biblical principles born of explicit Scripture and the priority relationships in Creation.

Just as Mr. Norman Shephard spent years denying that his doctrines amounted to denying the "imputation of Christ's righteousness" to believers as a basis for salvation, by making sophisticated arguments and qualifications to the contrary, a few years ago he came out and finally said it clearly. He does deny it.

Similarly, that's where this train goes- tearing down the high biblical office of Deacon, the sanctity of vows to uphold it and replacing it with a humanist notion of "fairness" in governing. And men who are being called, appointed by God, are denied it.

We all have "a dog in this fight," whatever biblical reformed denomination we are part of.





> The following resolution was adopted by the Rocky Mountain Presbytery of the Presbyterian Church in America on April 23, 2009:
> 
> Resolution to Rocky Mountain Presbytery
> Regarding Women Not Serving as Deacons or on Diaconates
> 
> Whereas the Rocky Mountain Presbytery at its April 2008 stated meeting adopted the following with respect the office of deacon:
> 
> 
> 1. That the office of deacon is one of the ordinary and perpetual classes of office in the Church (BCO 1-4; 4-2; 7-2; 9-1); and
> 2. That as a perpetual office in the Church, each particular church should elect men only to the office of deacon, unless providentially hindered, in which case the ruling elders will assume those duties (BCO 5-10; 24-1); and
> 3. That the office of deacon "in accord with Scripture is open to men only” (BCO 7-2; 9-3; 24-1); and
> 4. That since the expressed position of the PCA Book of Church Order is that the office of deacon is a perpetual office, is reserved for men only, and is an office for which ordination is to be administered (BCO 5-10; 16-3; 24-6):
> 1. That the Presbytery require its ministers, candidates for ordination and licensure to acknowledge this expressed position in the BCO and promise to conform their practice to this expressed position.
> 2. And further, that Presbytery agrees that stated differences of belief in this area may be allowed as an exception of belief, but not of practice (RAO 16-3 (e) 5).
> 5. And should a member of our Presbytery wish to alter his practice with regard to women and the office of deacon, the proper course to take is to follow the constitutional process for amending the BCO.
> 
> Whereas the 36th General Assembly approved the following motions with respect to the subject of women serving as deacons and on diaconates:
> 
> 
> 1. BCO 9 is clear that only ordained and elected men can be members of a "diaconate." The appeal to BCO 9-7 is flawed because 9-7 addresses people appointed by the Session, not members of a diaconate (Board of Deacons, 9-4). According to BCO 9-3 and 9-4, a diaconate may only include men what are elected, ordained and installed. … . In addition, this practice, coupled with the minister's expressed view that he intends not to ordain deacons "until the BCO is amended," denies qualified men their constitutional and biblical right to be considered for this office.
> 
> 2. We agree with the Presbytery that BCO 9-3 would not directly apply to the commissioning of unordained women, if they are not considered to be members of the Diaconate. However, the record indicates that "four deaconesses and one deacon were commissioned," and the record of the particularization service refers to "Vows/Commissioning of Diaconate." BCO 9-3 and 9-4 are clear that only ordained and elected men can be members of a "Diaconate."
> 
> And whereas BCO 21-5, in the 4th ordination vow, asks ministerial candidates to promise subjection to your brethren (representing the entire PCA) in the Lord and
> 
> Whereas BCO 29-1 affirms that the Confession of Faith and the Larger and Shorter Catechisms of the Westminster Assembly, together with the formularies of government, discipline, and worship are accepted by the Presbyterian Church in America as standard expositions of the teachings of Scripture in relation to both faith and practice and
> 
> Whereas BCO 21-5, in the 2nd ordination vow, presupposes the honor system for ministers with this language: “do you further promise that if at any time you find yourself out of accord with any of the fundamentals of this system of doctrine, you will on your own initiative, make known to your Presbytery the change which has taken place in your views since the assumption of this ordination vow?”
> 
> Therefore the Session of Skyview Presbyterian Church, Highlands Ranch, Colorado, asks the Rocky Mountain Presbytery to remind its ministers and the Sessions of its member churches to bring their practices into conformity with the RMP Resolution adopted at its April 2008 stated meeting and the ruling of the 36th General Assembly with respect women serving as deacons and on diaconates in PCA churches, specifically that:
> 
> 1. Men only are to be elected by a congregation to the office of deacon;
> 2. Women cannot be elected by a congregation to the office of deacon;
> 3. Women cannot be commissioned or ordained to the office of deacon;
> 4. Women cannot serve on the Board of Deacons.
> 5. Women may be appointed by the Session as deaconesses, or as otherwise named, to assist and advise the Board of Deacons in serving and caring for the congregation.
> 
> Adopted by Rocky Mountain Presbytery
> April 23, 2009


----------



## jjraby

Brad said:


> Yep. And those who want to stuff this down our throats and thumb their noses at the historical faith are downright giddy about it, aren't they? Why don't all of them just go join the EPC instead of dragging down a denom that is trying to remain faithful? These folks are twisted in the way they glibly justify their attempts to attack the peace and purity of the Church.



Just a thought, you way want to try and not sound so insulting and demeaning toward fellow Christian denominations. I am not trying to be confrontational. Just sayin'


----------



## lynnie

Are they throwing in any comments that the laying on of hands is a foundational doctrine and you should pray and lay hands on the deacons? Or is it implicit in the word "ordain" that they will be set apart with the laying on of hands?

By the way thanks Mason.


----------



## Mushroom

jjraby said:


> Brad said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yep. And those who want to stuff this down our throats and thumb their noses at the historical faith are downright giddy about it, aren't they? Why don't all of them just go join the EPC instead of dragging down a denom that is trying to remain faithful? These folks are twisted in the way they glibly justify their attempts to attack the peace and purity of the Church.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just a thought, you way want to try and not sound so insulting and demeaning toward fellow Christian denominations. I am not trying to be confrontational. Just sayin'
Click to expand...

Nothing insulting or demeaning towards that denom in my statements, friend. The EPC is a marginally faithful denom that is all for this sort of syncretistic hogwash. It would seem a happy destination for those similarly inclined. What alarms me is that you are a seminarian in my denom who appears to want to defend the EPC's stance on this issue. If that is true, and I hope I'm misunderstanding you, then I would humbly ask that you yourself pursue a career with the EPC, and leave the PCA alone. We are saddled with too many syncretists in our pulpits as it is. If I am misconstruing your intentions, then I will offer my apology, but if I am correct in my assumption, there is nothing to apologize about. Those who would bring destructive doctrines into the Church should be withstood boldly, and I am not gifted in the area of mincing words.


----------



## Kevin

Brad, do you consider the ARP & the RP's to be "unfaithful" denominations?


----------



## Philip

jjraby said:


> Brad said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yep. And those who want to stuff this down our throats and thumb their noses at the historical faith are downright giddy about it, aren't they? Why don't all of them just go join the EPC instead of dragging down a denom that is trying to remain faithful? These folks are twisted in the way they glibly justify their attempts to attack the peace and purity of the Church.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just a thought, you way want to try and not sound so insulting and demeaning toward fellow Christian denominations. I am not trying to be confrontational. Just sayin'
Click to expand...

 
We do need to note that more conservative denominations than the PCA (RPCNA for example) have had deaconesses for a while. Biblically orthodox Presbyterians have differed on this issue for a while.


----------



## jjraby

Brad said:


> jjraby said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Brad said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yep. And those who want to stuff this down our throats and thumb their noses at the historical faith are downright giddy about it, aren't they? Why don't all of them just go join the EPC instead of dragging down a denom that is trying to remain faithful? These folks are twisted in the way they glibly justify their attempts to attack the peace and purity of the Church.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nothing insulting or demeaning towards that denom in my statements, friend. The EPC is a marginally faithful denom that is all for this sort of syncretistic hogwash. It would seem a happy destination for those similarly inclined. What alarms me is that you are a seminarian in my denom who appears to want to defend the EPC's stance on this issue. If that is true, and I hope I'm misunderstanding you, then I would humbly ask that you yourself pursue a career with the EPC, and leave the PCA alone. We are saddled with too many syncretists in our pulpits as it is. If I am misconstruing your intentions, then I will offer my apology, but if I am correct in my assumption, there is nothing to apologize about. Those who would bring destructive doctrines into the Church should be withstood boldly, and I am not gifted in the area of mincing words.
Click to expand...

 

I am in agree with you on all of that. I guess I just misunderstood your tone. The EPC presbytery that is in my area is very conservative and for now, it is against the rules so to speak to ordain women. All I know is, the EPC churches in this area are full of God fearing, generous, loving, and the some of the most spiritual alive churches that I have ever been to. The EPC as a whole, I would have some problems with their stances on some issues, but from an experiential stand point, the EPC churches are more alive than some PCA I have been in. That's just my personal experience. Second Pres in Memphis is a great church, 4th pres in MD, Dan Doriani, even though he is PCA out of bounds. I do understand the problems with all of this. It may just be me. I would never be in favor of ever ordaining women, just for a record. And I agree with some people that the EPC is headed for trouble in the next few decades, maybe sooner over matters such as this.


----------



## Romans922

Grace Alone said:


> I totally agree that there is no proof or reason to think women were ordained deacons. But Andrew, who makes the decision whether to translate "diakonos" as servant, minister, or deacon? Keep in mind that I am not really in favor of calling women deacons. But I am a little confused as to how one Greek word is translated three different ways even after reading Lane's blog.


 
Scripture alone. Context is King. What is the reason for calling Phoebe a diakonos there? To establish her as an ordained deacon, a minister, a servant?


----------



## Grace Alone

Romans922 said:


> Grace Alone said:
> 
> 
> 
> I totally agree that there is no proof or reason to think women were ordained deacons. But Andrew, who makes the decision whether to translate "diakonos" as servant, minister, or deacon? Keep in mind that I am not really in favor of calling women deacons. But I am a little confused as to how one Greek word is translated three different ways even after reading Lane's blog.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Scripture alone. Context is King. What is the reason for calling Phoebe a diakonos there? To establish her as an ordained deacon, a minister, a servant?
Click to expand...

 
Okay, that makes sense. We could assume "servant" and that is the way that the KJV and the ESV translates it. One verse using diakonos in relation to Jesus, I believe, was translated "servant". So to me, why wouldn't "servant" be the most desirable term, especially since Jesus saw himself as a servant? I still think pride is involved in this desire for the title of deacon. Why can't an ordained deacon be the chairman of a mercy ministry committee, for example, and men and women from the congregation can serve on that committee?


----------



## Mushroom

jjraby said:


> Brad said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jjraby said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Brad said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yep. And those who want to stuff this down our throats and thumb their noses at the historical faith are downright giddy about it, aren't they? Why don't all of them just go join the EPC instead of dragging down a denom that is trying to remain faithful? These folks are twisted in the way they glibly justify their attempts to attack the peace and purity of the Church.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nothing insulting or demeaning towards that denom in my statements, friend. The EPC is a marginally faithful denom that is all for this sort of syncretistic hogwash. It would seem a happy destination for those similarly inclined. What alarms me is that you are a seminarian in my denom who appears to want to defend the EPC's stance on this issue. If that is true, and I hope I'm misunderstanding you, then I would humbly ask that you yourself pursue a career with the EPC, and leave the PCA alone. We are saddled with too many syncretists in our pulpits as it is. If I am misconstruing your intentions, then I will offer my apology, but if I am correct in my assumption, there is nothing to apologize about. Those who would bring destructive doctrines into the Church should be withstood boldly, and I am not gifted in the area of mincing words.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I am in agree with you on all of that. I guess I just misunderstood your tone. The EPC presbytery that is in my area is very conservative and for now, it is against the rules so to speak to ordain women. All I know is, the EPC churches in this area are full of God fearing, generous, loving, and the some of the most spiritual alive churches that I have ever been to. The EPC as a whole, I would have some problems with their stances on some issues, but from an experiential stand point, the EPC churches are more alive than some PCA I have been in. That's just my personal experience. Second Pres in Memphis is a great church, 4th pres in MD, Dan Doriani, even though he is PCA out of bounds. I do understand the problems with all of this. It may just be me. I would never be in favor of ever ordaining women, just for a record. And I agree with some people that the EPC is headed for trouble in the next few decades, maybe sooner over matters such as this.
Click to expand...

Then I apologize, brother, for misapprehending your meaning. This is one of the roads those who have a (many times even unrecogizable to themselves) disdain for submission to God tend to try to drive branches of the Body of Christ down, often with results like that of the PCUSA. The EPC seems to be battling at the precipice; we can hope for her deliverance, but entrenched and combative self-justified Jezebels can do a lot of damage, especially when abetted by abdicatory urbane sophists of the male gender.


> Brad, do you consider the ARP & the RP's to be "unfaithful" denominations?


The use of quotation marks would usually indicate that the person addressed had used the word surrounded by them, but I did not. I have limited familiarity with them, but I will state that they are in error on this matter. Usurpation is a common product of the fall in women, as abdication is in men.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Scott1

Grace Alone said:


> Romans922 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Grace Alone said:
> 
> 
> 
> I totally agree that there is no proof or reason to think women were ordained deacons. But Andrew, who makes the decision whether to translate "diakonos" as servant, minister, or deacon? Keep in mind that I am not really in favor of calling women deacons. But I am a little confused as to how one Greek word is translated three different ways even after reading Lane's blog.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Scripture alone. Context is King. What is the reason for calling Phoebe a diakonos there? To establish her as an ordained deacon, a minister, a servant?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Okay, that makes sense. We could assume "servant" and that is the way that the KJV and the ESV translates it. One verse using diakonos in relation to Jesus, I believe, was translated "servant". So to me, why wouldn't "servant" be the most desirable term, especially since Jesus saw himself as a servant? I still think pride is involved in this desire for the title of deacon. Why can't an ordained deacon be the chairman of a mercy ministry committee, for example, and men and women from the congregation can serve on that committee?
Click to expand...

 
Not trying to distract from the response here, but maybe this will help understand this.

Yes, the KJV, NIV, and ESV (and Mr. Calvin's Geneva study Bible) all translate Phebe in Romans 16:1 as a servant of the church in Cenchrea. All these good translations thought this the primary sense of the passage.

Read through the whole chapter (Romans 16:1)- it is commending many, many people, both men and women for their service in the church. This is a list of "thank yous" by the Apostle at the end of a letter.

It is not "didache" (doctrine) about polity or the qualifications of office. I Timothy 3 does that, where it is explicit that Deacon is an office, along with Elder and that the qualifications are very specific. It comports with the analogy of the selection of men for this office in Acts 6, and with the priority in creation going back to Genesis. (As are the other offices- elder, minister and bishop).

Also, in Philippians 1:1, Deacon and Elder (Bishop) are mentioned together in tandem as officers.



> Romans 16
> 
> 1I commend unto you Phebe our sister, which is a servant of the church which is at Cenchrea:
> 
> 2That ye receive her in the Lord, as becometh saints, and that ye assist her in whatsoever business she hath need of you: for she hath been a succourer of many, and of myself also.
> 
> 3Greet Priscilla and Aquila my helpers in Christ Jesus:
> 
> 4Who have for my life laid down their own necks: unto whom not only I give thanks, but also all the churches of the Gentiles.
> 
> 5Likewise greet the church that is in their house. Salute my well-beloved Epaenetus, who is the firstfruits of Achaia unto Christ.
> 
> 6Greet Mary, who bestowed much labour on us.
> 
> 7Salute Andronicus and Junia, my kinsmen, and my fellow-prisoners, who are of note among the apostles, who also were in Christ before me.
> 
> 8Greet Amplias my beloved in the Lord.
> 
> 9Salute Urbane, our helper in Christ, and Stachys my beloved.
> 
> 10Salute Apelles approved in Christ. Salute them which are of Aristobulus' household.
> 
> 11Salute Herodion my kinsman. Greet them that be of the household of Narcissus, which are in the Lord.
> 
> 12Salute Tryphena and Tryphosa, who labour in the Lord. Salute the beloved Persis, which laboured much in the Lord.
> 
> 13Salute Rufus chosen in the Lord, and his mother and mine.
> 
> 14Salute Asyncritus, Phlegon, Hermas, Patrobas, Hermes, and the brethren which are with them.
> 
> 15Salute Philologus, and Julia, Nereus, and his sister, and Olympas, and all the saints which are with them.
> 
> 16Salute one another with an holy kiss. The churches of Christ salute you.
> 
> 17Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them.
> 
> 18For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple.
> 
> 19For your obedience is come abroad unto all men. I am glad therefore on your behalf: but yet I would have you wise unto that which is good, and simple concerning evil.
> 
> 20And the God of peace shall bruise Satan under your feet shortly. The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you. Amen.
> 
> 21Timotheus my workfellow, and Lucius, and Jason, and Sosipater, my kinsmen, salute you.
> 
> 22I Tertius, who wrote this epistle, salute you in the Lord.
> 
> 23Gaius mine host, and of the whole church, saluteth you. Erastus the chamberlain of the city saluteth you, and Quartus a brother.
> 
> 24The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen.
> 
> 25Now to him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began,
> 
> 26But now is made manifest, and by the scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the everlasting God, made known to all nations for the obedience of faith:
> 
> 27To God only wise, be glory through Jesus Christ for ever. Amen.


----------



## Scott1

> OVERTURE 9 from Eastern Carolina Presbytery (to CCB & OC)
> 2 “Revise BCO 9-7 to Prohibit Assistants to the Deacons from
> 3 Being Commissioned or Installed as Office Bearers”
> 4
> 5 1. Whereas the PCA is grateful to God for the outstanding and selfless work done by the
> 6 women of PCA congregations and freely acknowledges that the ability of the church
> 7 to minister to a lost and dying world depends in large part on the self-sacrificing
> 8 volunteer spirit of our female members; and
> 9
> 10 2. Whereas the PCA also believes that, the officers of the Church, by whom all its powers
> 11 are administered, are, according to the Scriptures, teaching and ruling elders and
> 12 deacons (BCO 1-5) and that in accord with Scripture, these offices are open to men
> 13 only (BCO 7-2); and
> 14
> 15 3. Whereas the PCA believes that scripture teaches that the officers of the church are to be
> 16 ordained not commissioned (BCO 17, 12-5, 8-6); and
> 17
> 18 4. Whereas while some RPCES congregations had women on their diaconates, the RPCES
> 19 resolved as part of the J&R agreement with the PCA to "Amend the existing
> 20 doctrinal standards and Form of Government of the Reformed Presbyterian Church,
> 21 Evangelical Synod, by substituting for them the doctrinal standards and Book of
> 22 Church Order of the Presbyterian Church in America" * ; and
> 23
> 24 5. Whereas several churches in the PCA currently elect and commission women to the
> 25 office of deacon and call them by the title deacon or deaconess and allow them to
> 26 serve on the diaconate; and
> 27
> 28 6. Whereas BCO 9-7, which states that women may be selected and appointed by the
> 29 session of a church to serve as assistants to the deacons, is often cited as pretext for
> 30 this practice of electing and commissioning female deacons;
> 31
> 32 Therefore, Eastern Carolina Presbytery hereby overtures the 38th General Assembly to
> 33 amend BCO Chapter 9-7 by adding the words:
> 34
> 35 These assistants to the deacons shall not be referred to as deacons or
> 36 deaconesses, nor are they to be elected by the congregation nor formally
> 37 commissioned, ordained, or installed as though they were office bearers in the
> 38 church.
> 39
> 40 So that the revised version would read:
> 41
> 42 9-7. It is often expedient that the Session of a church should select and appoint godly
> 43 men and women of the congregation to assist the deacons in caring for the sick, the
> 44 widows, the orphans, the prisoners, and others who may be in any distress or need.
> 45 These assistants to the deacons shall not be referred to as deacons or
> 1 deaconesses, nor are they to be elected by the congregation nor formally
> 2 commissioned, ordained, or installed as though they were office bearers in the
> 3 church.



The more I consider the Eastern Carolina Overture, the more I appreciate the way it concisely addresses the issues.

Note that among the constitutional violations and violation of vows by a few high-profile particular churches, is a practice of not establishing an office of deacon at all (e.g. by not ordaining) or by, apparently, calling laymen 'deacons.' 

This is another reason the argumentation being used to support 'deaconess' is so damaging- E.g. [the high biblical office] of Deacon is really only a substitute word for 'helper.'

It also notes, in helping put one of the "Whereas" clauses of the Evangel Presbytery Overture in context, that churches that joined the PCA from the RPCES did so agreeing to submit to, to receive their new constitution (which establishes governance of the church through the office of Deacon and Elder).

---------- Post added at 06:06 AM ---------- Previous post was at 05:49 AM ----------




> 1 OVERTURE 10 from Northern California Presbytery (to CCB & OC)
> 2 “Amend BCO 1-4, 4-2, 5-10, 7-2, 9-2, 9-7 & Add a BCO 9-8
> 3 to Appoint Unordained Men and Women to Carry Out Diaconal Ministry”
> 4
> 5 Whereas the scripture is the only infallible and inerrant rule of life and practice, and has, in
> 6 the New Testament in particular, set forth certain principles for the government of
> 7 the church which include the ministries of both elders and deacons; and
> 8
> 9 Whereas the BCO recognizes these ministries and the men who carry out their work in
> 10 terms of offices and officers, we affirm these shared commitments: men only may be
> 11 ordained to offices in the church (1 Timothy 3), diaconal ministry is an important
> 12 part of the church's mission and work (Acts 6, 1 Timothy 3, BCO 9), teaching and
> 13 ruling elders are called to uphold the Bible fully within their churches and
> 14 Presbyteries (2 Peter 1, BCO Preface II), Sessions are the authoritative court of local
> 15 churches (BCO 4-3); and
> 16
> 17 Whereas various interpretations of the Bible have led to a variety of practices within the
> 18 PCA over the course of its entire history with respect to diaconal ministries. These
> 19 differences have led to confusion and division over these various interpretations and
> 20 practices, particularly in recent years; and
> 21
> 22 Whereas local Sessions have always retained the authority to create, appoint, and oversee
> 23 all biblically valid ministries within their local churches which are guided by
> 24 unordained members of the church (BCO 1-5); and
> 25
> 26 Whereas there is a strong desire to hold firm to the essentials of our faith and practice as
> 27 outlined in scripture and our confession, and the BCO should not unduly bind the
> 28 conscience of a session seeking to structure its diaconate under the authority of
> 29 Scripture (Preface II.7); and
> 30
> 31 Whereas these various interpretations of the Bible clearly exist within the PCA and it is
> 32 desirable that the language of the BCO be more clear as it addresses the various
> 33 practices of the organization and ministry of the diaconate. These changes will
> 34 enable the current practices without opening the BCO to broader interpretation;
> 35
> 36 Now therefore, be it resolved, for the good of the church and the promotion of order and
> 37 peace, that the BCO be amended in the following areas: [Additions bold and
> 38 underlined; strike-though for deletions]
> 39
> 40 BCO 1-4. The ordained officers of the Church, by whom all its powers
> 41 are administered, are, according to the Scriptures, teaching and ruling
> 42 elders and deacons.
> 43
> 44 BCO 4-2 Its ordained officers are its teaching and ruling elders and its
> 45 deacons.
> 1
> 2 BCO 5-10 If deacons are elected, follow the procedures of (1) through (5)
> 3 above. If deacons are not elected, the duties of the office shall devolve
> 4 upon the ruling elders.
> 5
> 6 BCO 7-2 The ordinary and perpetual classes of ordained office in the
> 7 church are elders and deacons. . . .
> 8
> 9 BCO 9-2. It is the duty of the deacons to minister to those who are in need,
> 10 to the sick, to the friendless, and to any who may be in distress. It is their
> 11 duty also to develop the grace of liberality in the members of the church,
> 12 to devise effective methods of collecting the gifts of the people, and to
> 13 distribute these gifts among the objects to which they are contributed.
> 14 They shall have the care of the property of the congregation, both real and
> 15 personal, and shall keep in proper repair the church edifice and other
> 16 buildings belonging to the congregation. In matters of special importance
> 17 affecting the property of the church, they cannot take final action without
> 18 the approval of the Session and consent of the congregation.
> 19 In the discharge of their duties the deacons are under the
> 20 supervision and authority of the Session. In a church in which it is
> 21 impossible for any reason to secure deacons, the duties of the office shall
> 22 devolve upon the ruling elders. In a church in which deacons are not
> 23 ordained, the responsibility for the oversight of diaconal ministries
> 24 shall devolve upon the Session.
> 25
> 26 BCO 9-7. It is often expedient that the Session of a church should select
> 27 and appoint godly men and women of the congregation to assist the
> 28 deacons and/or Session in caring for the sick, the widows, the orphans,
> 29 the prisoners, and others who may be in any distress or need.
> 30
> 31 [ADDITION: BCO 9-8] In a local church which does not have
> 32 ordained deacons, the Session may appoint an unordained body of
> 33 men and women to carry out diaconal ministry. They may care for
> 34 the sick, the widows, the orphans, the prisoners, and others who may
> 35 be in any distress or need. However, these men and women do not
> 36 carry the same constitutional rights as ordained deacons.



Looking at the N. Calif. Overture, it is clear in its approach- a radical change in the presbyterian polity of the PCA.

I appreciate the clarity that it brings to the debate because it shows the radical nature of the changes that would be required to the constitution and vows of officers.

It makes clear that those who are doing these practices now (e.g. nominating, examining, electing, "commissioning" with same or similar vows as Deacon, installing them in joint ceremony with Deacons, etc.) are unconstitutional and a violation of the vows of officers whose congregations are doing this on their watch.

Huge structural problem with this Overture.

It creates a clear distinction between "ordained officers" and officers that are not ordained.

Because the BCO does reflect some doctrine, and has much of it regarding our polity, received as coming from the Scriptures- it needs several new sections to establish the doctrine of non-ordained office and needs to describe the duties, authorities and responsibilities of this new class of persons.

For example, the First Chapter of the BCO establishes the classes of persons in the visible church:



> PART I
> FORM OF GOVERNMENT
> CHAPTER 1
> 
> The Doctrine of Church Government.
> 
> 1-1. The scriptural form of church government, which is representative or
> presbyterian, is comprehended under five heads: a. The Church; b. Its
> members; c. Its officers; d. Its courts; e. Its orders.



From the very beginning, the N. Calif. Overture needs to add a new class for the new polity it proposes: "non-ordained officers."

Then the doctrine of Scripture that supports this needs to be given in the "Preliminary Principles" of the Book of Church Order and then added in more places in the constitution so the biblical role of this class of persons, and their authority is clearly spelled out and reconciled with the other classes.

One can see what a HUGE, HUGE change this is to presbyterian polity.


----------



## earl40

P. F. Pugh said:


> I may note that in most churches I have seen, the functions of a deacon are often undertaken by Godly women without recognition.



Same as with people who are praticing evangelism. They do a pretty dern good job of it.


----------



## Romans922

Here is my critique of No. Cali. Overture. A Profitable Word: PCA 38th General Assembly Overtures 9 and 10


----------



## lynnie

_but entrenched and combative self-justified Jezebels can do a lot of damage, especially when abetted by abdicatory urbane sophists of the male gender._



Hey Brad, I am not for deaconesses. But these are warm, gentle, submissive, helpful, feminine, serving ladies, who do the fellowship meals and clean up the kitchen and pour grape juice into little cups and do a hundred merciful deeds. You are crossing into sinful slander in my opinion. And the men in their lives are fine men, who know Calvin had deaconesses, and want to honor these women for their sacrificial helps ministry. 

Sometimes in progressive sanctification we don't see everything clearly all at once the day we get saved. It does not make us Jezebels and wimps. Your remarks are ungracious.


----------



## Scott1

One other note regarding the earlier Central Carolina Overture and the more recent Eastern Carolina Overture:

The wording appears to be nearly exactly the same. But the Titles are different, perhaps the latter title is more apt to the issue:

“Revise BCO 9-7 to Prohibit Assistants to the Deacons from
3 Being Commissioned or Installed as Office Bearers”

v.

"Amend BCO to prohibit Deaconess"


----------



## Montanablue

lynnie said:


> _but entrenched and combative self-justified Jezebels can do a lot of damage, especially when abetted by abdicatory urbane sophists of the male gender._
> 
> 
> 
> Hey Brad, I am not for deaconesses. But these are warm, gentle, submissive, helpful, feminine, serving ladies, who do the fellowship meals and clean up the kitchen and pour grape juice into little cups and do a hundred merciful deeds. You are crossing into sinful slander in my opinion. And the men in their lives are fine men, who know Calvin had deaconesses, and want to honor these women for their sacrificial helps ministry.
> 
> Sometimes in progressive sanctification we don't see everything clearly all at once the day we get saved. It does not make us Jezebels and wimps. Your remarks are ungracious.


 
I know a couple of deaconesses. They are the most gracious humble women I know. And if their pastors told them they did not think it was proper for them to hold an office, they would step down immediately. They've been nominated and elected by their churches - its not like they fought their way to the position. In their churches, being a deaconness is a way that a woman serves. I'm not saying that having deaconesses is right (I'm actually undecided), but I think we need to be really careful about attacking their character.


----------



## Romans922

Montanablue said:


> lynnie said:
> 
> 
> 
> _but entrenched and combative self-justified Jezebels can do a lot of damage, especially when abetted by abdicatory urbane sophists of the male gender._
> 
> 
> 
> Hey Brad, I am not for deaconesses. But these are warm, gentle, submissive, helpful, feminine, serving ladies, who do the fellowship meals and clean up the kitchen and pour grape juice into little cups and do a hundred merciful deeds. You are crossing into sinful slander in my opinion. And the men in their lives are fine men, who know Calvin had deaconesses, and want to honor these women for their sacrificial helps ministry.
> 
> Sometimes in progressive sanctification we don't see everything clearly all at once the day we get saved. It does not make us Jezebels and wimps. Your remarks are ungracious.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I know a couple of deaconesses. They are the most gracious humble women I know. And if their pastors told them they did not think it was proper for them to hold an office, they would step down immediately. They've been nominated and elected by their churches - its not like they fought their way to the position. In their churches, being a deaconness is a way that a woman serves. I'm not saying that having deaconesses is right (I'm actually undecided), but I think we need to be really careful about attacking their character.
Click to expand...


Shouldn't attack character, but my question is this: does a woman have to be a deaconess before she serves? Does someone need to be ordained or be called a deaconess to serve the Church of Jesus Christ? This whole issue is centered around the office of deacon (an authoritative office), should women be ordained to then have authority over other men? Or must one be ordained to serve?


----------



## Montanablue

Of course not, Andrew. That wasn't my point. My point is that these women may be mistaken, but their motivations are (at least in my experience) good. That doesn't mean that they shouldn't be corrected. It just means that we don't need to engage in vicious attacks.


----------



## Romans922

I know that wasn't your point, I was just stating or asking...


----------



## Montanablue

I see. Since I'm not a Presbyterian, I actually don't particularly care to become involved in the discussion. I was merely putting in a word against undue slander of deaconesses.


----------



## Philip

Brad said:


> The EPC seems to be battling at the precipice; we can hope for her deliverance, but entrenched and combative self-justified Jezebels can do a lot of damage, especially when abetted by abdicatory urbane sophists of the male gender.



You are stereotyping here. I don't think that any of the women involved are wicked or perverse, but people who want to serve. Advantages of having some official role as opposed to an informal one include funding and a creative role in the workings of the diaconate. I'm not saying that they are right, necessarily, just that their motives are not evil.

Also, defaming men who want to recognize and support this kind of service for what it is, is just plain unfair. Just because a man wants a woman's role in the church recognized does not mean that he is abdicating responsibility. For one thing, deaconship is not a role of spiritual authority but of practical value. Therefore, the role of men as spiritual leaders is not at issue here really. This, coupled with the long history of deaconesses in Reformed and Eastern Christianity should make it clear that the issue with regard to Biblical gender roles is not as clear-cut as some would like to think.

In short, let's try and practice charity when it comes to the motives of our brothers and sisters in Christ.


----------



## SRoper

To those who argue for calling women "deacons" because Phoebe was called a deacon, would you also be OK with a multi-site church calling their senior pastor a bishop? After all, bishop is a biblical word. Of course, we understand that the word "bishop" in English has certain connotations and suggests an episcopal church govenment. In the same way the word "deacon" in English has the connotation of the ordained office.


----------



## VictorBravo

Moderation

This thread is all over the place, but at the very least it is *not* about the EPC. Keep comments on point.


----------



## Semper Fidelis

I think this thread has run it's course, Vic. I appreciate you trying to guide it but these discussions are poisoned from the beginning when an ecclesiastical matter is framed as men of good conscience being "anti-deaconess" or a certain position as being "moderate".

I've come to a few personal epiphanies in the past several months and one of those epiphanies is that people like to "template" other folks' scruples or decisions and assume that anything that floats on water must weigh as much as a duck.

This board exists to discuss things with charity. There are times when all of us sin in that regard but the goal of each man when he enters any discussion ought to be an acknowledgement of the effects of indwelling Sin on our thinking. It is easy to escape this if we simply label the other as compromising with the culture or, conversely, being "extreme".

This issue will not be resolved on this discussion board. It is up to Church men to rule on this point and as much as many of us decried outsiders viewing the ARP decision to bring Erskine under control as so much "knuckle dragging", I would remind us all that the judgment we judge by is the judgment by which we will be judged.

I personally am convinced that the Scriptures teach that the Deacon is a male and ordained office. I'm not in the ARP or EPC and, as I noted in another thread, my convictions don't require me to obsess about how other Churches are performing the role of ministry but I am convinced that my view is Biblical and right for the Church in which I serve.

But I'm also not an island and neither are the Elders who will participate in GA this year. It will be a decision of the Church. I'm a Presbyterian and not an Independent.


----------

