Assistant Pastor (PCA) origins; what biblical basis?

[NaphtaliPress]

Recently a couple has started coming to our church due after the husband was "let go" from his position as assistant pastor from another local PCA church. The other thread about another situation started today reminded me of this. If I'm reading the historical Book of Church Order at PCAHC correctly, it would seem this office of assistant pastor was invented in the 1973 PCA BCO, so my first question is, is that correct? My main question is, how is this position biblical on a jus divinum (by divine right; a scripture prescribed) presbyterianism? I see no defense of the office in the BOCO. Was it defended in 1973; has it been defended; and what is the argument from Scripture?

 

[Polanus1561]

To refine things, is Associate pastor different from Assistant pastor from your point of view?

 

[NaphtaliPress]

To refine things, is Associate pastor different from Assistant pastor from your point of view?

Not just my pov; it is different in the PCA; the associate has all the calling and oversight of his position in presbytery.

 

[Edward]

The PCUS had assistant pastors before the split. So "invented" isn't the correct word to use. I'd have to go back and look at how things worked then, and whether or not they had votes on the session. I was a good bid younger in those days, and only beginning to get interested in church issues.

this office of assistant pastor was invented in the 1973 PCA BCO, so my first question is, is that correct?

Editing to add that the position does not seem to appear in the 1933 PCUS Book of Church Order, so I'm not sure when it came into use. I do know I attended a church with a pastor and an assistant pastor in the mid-1960s.

Further editing to add that in a conversation with Paul Settle some years ago, I got a strong impression that he thought Assistants should have a vote on the session. But the conversation was largely on other topics, and I didn't dig on this issue.

 

[NaphtaliPress]

The PCUS had assistant pastors before the split. So "invented" isn't the correct word to use. I'd have to go back and look at how things worked then, and whether or not they had votes on the session. I was a good bid younger in those days, and only beginning to get interested in church issues.

Okay; so Wayne hasn't linked up the historical bits for that passage then?

 

[NaphtaliPress]

Neither Assistant and Associate are detailed in the 1879 PCUS BOCO, so that is why no links. The came later; be interesting when and if any debate.

 

[Edward]

OK, I found you this "helpful" study of the issue:

"Sometime between 1933 and 1973, the PCUS did introduce a provision for “Assistant Pastors,”

Tension in Our Polity: A History of the Assistant Pastor

By Adam Parker | October 9, 2023 Image Credit: Vibe Images via Adobe Stock Is it possible that the Presbyterian Church in America (PCA) has had, since its inception, provisions in its Book of Churc…

pcapolity.com

I think this statement there actually hits on the real reason that the PCA has them:

" It appears that some churches coming into the newly formed PCA had Assistant Pastors already, and so the provision which included them had to be added in to account for their existence."

 

[NaphtaliPress]

Okay; another thing to blame on the libs that continuing presbyterians retained, e,g., OPC, PCA, like ecclesiastical holy days because they liked it. Reading that article, it is an embarrassment that after so solid committee work that this practice was retained.
There is this old thread from 2012 I see.

 

[Edward]

From the my post on the old thread: "My memory from the membership class when I was 12 may be a bit foggy these days, however."

It's even foggier now than it was a dozen years ago.

 

[iainduguid]

Just to add to the confusion, the different denominations have different terminology: an assistant pastor in the OPC = associate pastor in the ARP and PCA. An OPC Assistant Pastor is a member of the Session. As I understand it, the arguments in favor of Assistant pastors (PCA style) are largely pragmatic: a position that may be temporary and need to be dissolved without the hassle, or a network of church plants which wanted a single session but didn't want the RE's to be drowned in TE's.

 

[ZackF]

Incidentally, or maybe not, assistant pastors are easier to get rid of.

 

[Charles Johnson]

Recently a couple has started coming to our church due after the husband was "let go" from his position as assistant pastor from another local PCA church. The other thread about another situation started today reminded me of this. If I'm reading the historical Book of Church Order at PCAHC correctly, it would seem this office of assistant pastor was invented in the 1973 PCA BCO, so my first question is, is that correct? My main question is, how is this position biblical on a jus divinum (by divine right; a scripture prescribed) presbyterianism? I see no defense of the office in the BOCO. Was it defended in 1973; has it been defended; and what is the argument from Scripture?

Having a second pastor at a church dates at least to the Scottish Reformation.

 

[NaphtaliPress]

Having a second pastor at a church dates at least to the Scottish Reformation.

But not pca's assistant pastor. See the issues noted in the linked article by Edward.

 

[fredtgreco]

This is a complex issue. I think an unintended consequence of doing away with the PCA's Assistant Pastor position will be that a great many men will not be ordained after graduating from seminary. Churches will simply move to create more unordained "director" positions. There are very few men in their mid-20s who will be deemed capable of voting on a Session.

 

[iainduguid]

This is a complex issue. I think an unintended consequence of doing away with the PCA's Assistant Pastor position will be that a great many men will not be ordained after graduating from seminary. Churches will simply move to create more unordained "director" positions. There are very few men in their mid-20s who will be deemed capable of voting on a Session.

Hi Fred,
This argument sounds strange to me. After all, if he is ordained, will he not have a vote at Presbytery? Why should he be capable of voting at Presbytery but not at the local Session? In most cases, churches that have Assistant Pastors tend to be a reasonable size, so he will be one vote among many in both contexts. And if he lacks the wisdom to vote on a Session - or to recognize that he is out of his depth on a particular issue and so should simply listen and not vote - why is he being ordained? Maybe he should serve as an unordained director for a while, until he develops sufficient wisdom to be ordained and serve on a Session. I would point out that neither OPC nor ARP churches have found the lack of such a position a problem. Perhaps that is simply because most of our churches are smaller. But speaking personally, I would be very hesitant to vote for the ordination of someone I thought lacking the wisdom to vote on a Session, even though I can see other reasons for arguing for an Assistant Pastor position.

 

[SolaScriptura]

Hi Fred,
This argument sounds strange to me. After all, if he is ordained, will he not have a vote at Presbytery? Why should he be capable of voting at Presbytery but not at the local Session? I

Does it really sound strange? After all, the kinds of things voted on at the Presbytery level are not nearly as intimate and pastorally focused as the things discussed and voted on at a local church Session meeting.

 

[TylerRay]

This is a complex issue. I think an unintended consequence of doing away with the PCA's Assistant Pastor position will be that a great many men will not be ordained after graduating from seminary. Churches will simply move to create more unordained "director" positions. There are very few men in their mid-20s who will be deemed capable of voting on a Session.

If they aren't "deemed capable of voting on a session," they aren't qualified for the ministry.

Ordaining unqualified men straight out of seminary without a call from a congregation sounds like the perfect way to have a load of uncalled and unqualified men in the ministry.

 

[MChase]

If they aren't "deemed capable of voting on a session," they aren't qualified for the ministry.

Ordaining unqualified men straight out of seminary without a call from a congregation sounds like the perfect way to have a load of uncalled and unqualified men in the ministry.

There seems to be an implicit (or maybe explicit) assumption that ministers need not hold all of the qualifications in life and wisdom that ruling elders do. Just because a men possesses an MDiv does not mean that they are qualified for office.

Does it really sound strange? After all, the kinds of things voted on at the Presbytery level are not nearly as intimate and pastorally focused as the things discussed and voted on at a local church Session meeting.

Yes it does; presbytery is the radical court of the church. It makes no sense to allow someone a vote in a higher court that you would not allow at a lower.

 

[SolaScriptura]

There seems to be an implicit (or maybe explicit) assumption that ministers need not hold all of the qualifications in life and wisdom that ruling elders do. Just because a men possesses an MDiv does not mean that they are qualified for office.



Yes it does; presbytery is the radical court of the church. It makes no sense to allow someone a vote in a higher court that you would not allow at a lower.

I’m sorry, this is where I’m gonna back out… The higher the level of court the more general and less pastorally sensitive the issue.

I know some here want to be pure idealist, but there is great wisdom in having assistant pastors instead of associate pastors. There are indeed times where what you need is simply someone to perform a ministerial function, but they are not serving as a shepherd of the flock.

 

[MChase]

you need is simply someone to perform a ministerial function, but they are not serving as a shepherd of the flock.

From where I sit, that is a self contradictory statement.

 

[jfhutson]

There are indeed times where what you need is simply someone to perform a ministerial function, but they are not serving as a shepherd of the flock.

This seems fine, except you have ordained him to an office for which the functions include shepherding, and given him a title that means shepherd.

If you read the PCA polity article linked above, a committee report noted that this need can be covered by licentiates. That seems like the correct title: a man licensed to preach, but not a pastor/shepherd.

 

[Alan D. Strange]

The OPC has no pastoral function in the office of "minister" other than "pastor." In other words, according to the Form of Government, there is no office of associate pastor or assistant pastor. There's just "pastor," with the recognition that more than one man can be called to be such in any given congregation and can be called with the understanding that he's not "lead" but "associate" to the one who is. He, of course, is a member of the session (as duly called by the congregation) and is also, obviously, a member of the presbytery.

Functionally, then, we do style some ministers as a senior or lead pastor and others, in certain congregations, as associates, perhaps even further identifying them as an "associate pastor of evangelism and visitation" or the like. The real point is that we have no office of assistant pastor, who serves as a creature of the session at its pleasure and is not called (or approved) by the congregation in any sense.

I simply observe this and do not here choose to comment on the PCA's practice as I understand the role that it's come to have in the life of that church (as Fred and Ben note). I have the same instinctual drawback from such a position that others have, but I understand the place that the assistant pastor has come to have in the life of a larger church with some larger congregations. There is a Hodgean/Thornwellian irony here, but I'll not expatiate on that now.

Peace,
Alan