Two new deaconess overtures for the PCA General Assembly

[Philip]

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.