# Creating Churches that do not Exist



## ChristopherPaul (Nov 30, 2005)

In response to the slight tangent at this thread, in the scheme of things, I question the practicality of some of the arguments that occur here.

Regarding the "minor" issues, I have no choice but to submit to the church I am in fellowship with. I love my church and thank God for the brethren in my area. So many here (at the PB) argue for a particular order of worship, for singing Psalms exclusively and not hymns, using or not using instruments, to appoint or to not appoint women deacons, etc, etc, etc.

If I allowed my conscience to be convicted over everything that is argued for around here, I would be churchless. I mean, you guys create churches that do not exist. If there is one way in the matter of all the "minor" issues, then we are all doomed to be in fellowship of unorthodox churches in some aspect. There are zero RPCGA or RPCNA churches in central New Jersey. There is one OPC, and two PCA, and a ton of PC-USA. So what is one to do knowing that they are a layman living in a state with no orthodox churches? 

Why don't all these "more orthodox churches" actually appoint elders in every city as Paul commissioned Titus? Why not have many, say RPCNA, churches - one in each town, which may result in smaller congregations per each (imagine actually sitting at the Lord's table with the entire church!), but more accessible to all? 

Shall I argue that all churches are to only have one service on a Lord's day morning instead of two or more to accommodate the overwhelming attendance? What good will that do being that many members here faithfully attend confessional Presbyterian churches that have a first and second or more service? What good will it do to bind my conscience to sing only inspired Psalms in worship when all the confessional churches around me incorporate hymns and or gospel songs/praise choruses? Are you convicting me so that I will start a revolt within my own church? Have my pastors and elders considered such arguments? Yes, do they disagree with some of that arguments on these issues? Yes. Do I leave fellowship over it? No. Do I faithfully submit to their guidance and discipline, supporting them with my time, treasures and talents? Yes - gladly.

The Puritan board is a great resource for edification and learning, but my church is who I submit to, not pastors, elders, and laypersons from all across the world who happen to be internet savvy.

Practically speaking, either more room needs to be given on some of these issues, or these churches who believe they have it right need to be much more missional in appointing elders in every city to start churches that are accessible to the people all over the world.

Not all here are teachers. Not all here are ruling elders, not all are apologists, seminary students, etc.

Personally I do not have a defense for or against women being in the deaconate or exclusive psalmody, but I have a stance and it is that which my church and her officers holds because I trust her. What else can I do? I will support the women deacons at my church and I will gladly sing the hymns and praise choruses in one accord with the brethren. Is this wrong? Should I instead grumble and start factions or remain sitting with my arms crossed while they participate in such unorthodox practices?

In grace,


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot (Nov 30, 2005)

Chris,

You raise many interesting issues. However, one question that immediately arises for me is, Is it true that the PCA has women deacons?


----------



## fredtgreco (Nov 30, 2005)

> _Originally posted by VirginiaHuguenot_
> Chris,
> 
> You raise many interesting issues. However, one question that immediately arises for me is, Is it true that the PCA has women deacons?



It does not. Either Chris is mistaken, the church is in blatant violation of the PCA Constitution, or it has gone the "Redeemer route" of pretending that its deacons are not deacons.


----------



## ChristopherPaul (Nov 30, 2005)

> _Originally posted by fredtgreco_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by VirginiaHuguenot_
> ...



Again, I do not know the reasons, but my church is certainly a PCA church and most definitely has women deacons who can only be appointed by the elders.

My pastor is a prominent person within the PCA and certainly has a defense for why the particular church he shepherds allows women deacons. He would be able to give an answer, but not I. Meanwhile I will support my church and will gladly worship under her guidance.


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot (Nov 30, 2005)

> _Originally posted by ChristopherPaul_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by fredtgreco_
> ...



Sure enough. There are four deacons and four "deaconesses" listed on the website for Chris' PCA church.


----------



## wsw201 (Nov 30, 2005)

> _Originally posted by ChristopherPaul_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by fredtgreco_
> ...



And so you should!

I would assume that, as Fred has noted, your church has gone the Redeemer route by "creating" the office of "unordained" Deaconess. Other PCA churches have gone this route as well.


----------



## ChristopherPaul (Nov 30, 2005)

> _Originally posted by VirginiaHuguenot_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by ChristopherPaul_
> ...



The website is severely outdated. As of the last two bulletins, we only had one deaconess listed whereas three weeks ago, we had five.

Can we perhaps start a new thread to discuss this further? My point was more on topic of cheerfully supporting my church rather than breaking fellowship to join something that does not exist.


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot (Nov 30, 2005)

> _Originally posted by ChristopherPaul_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by VirginiaHuguenot_
> ...



Sorry I didn't mean to sidetrack the thread. I was just very surprised to hear that a PCA church had women deacons. 

Hopefully, a moderator can split the thread appropriately. 

I'm still curious -- it is accurate to say, then, that the PCA allows women deacons de facto but not de jure (ie., in practice but not via ordination)?


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Nov 30, 2005)

I noticed in the PCA directory that Chris' church is in the Metro NY Presbytery of the PCA, though on the church's website I didn't see any clear sign that the church id'd itself as PCA (ie links or "we are PCA" etc). Curious.


----------



## ChristopherPaul (Nov 30, 2005)

> _Originally posted by VirginiaHuguenot_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by ChristopherPaul_
> ...



My limited understanding is that the BCO prohibits governing woman deacons, so to have governing women deacons would be in direct violation of the constitution as Fred said.

I assume a case must be presented in some fashion stating that the BCO does not prohibit non-governing deacons and arguing such a case with Phoebe along with two orders of deacons as Geneva did under Calvin - one of governance and one of ministries of mercy.


----------



## wsw201 (Nov 30, 2005)

Christopher,

Getting back on point, you are under the authority of the church in which you are a member. The Elders of your church are the ones that Christ will hold accountable for your soul (Heb 13:17). Neither Matt, Scott, Fred or anyone else on the internet has that responsiblility. So whatever is discussed on this board that start you thinking, I would recommend running it by your elders. That's what they are there for.


----------



## fredtgreco (Nov 30, 2005)

> _Originally posted by wsw201_
> Christopher,
> 
> Getting back on point, you are under the authority of the church in which you are a member. The Elders of your church are the ones that Christ will hold accountable for your soul (Heb 13:17). Neither Matt, Scott, Fred or anyone else on the internet has that responsiblility. So whatever is discussed on this board that start you thinking, I would recommend running it by your elders. That's what they are there for.



I agree completely.

I would also say that it is the right thing to do to be cheerful and willing in your support of the church.


----------



## Me Died Blue (Nov 30, 2005)

> _Originally posted by NaphtaliPress_
> I noticed in the PCA directory that Chris' church is in the Metro NY Presbytery of the PCA, though on the church's website I didn't see any clear sign that the church id'd itself as PCA (ie links or "we are PCA" etc). Curious.



That does not seem to be extremely uncommon, from my experience. The PCA church I attend whenever I visit back in Cincinnati, for instance, does not list PCA affiliation on their site except for a mention of PCA Presbytery that happens to be on the calendar. I've just gotten used to going to the denominational directory to find out about church affiliations in most cases.


----------

