|
‘Women Deacons’ is not going to happen in the PCA in my lifetime (I’m 77!).
Many years ago I got about four letters to ‘The Rev. Prof.’ Of course, that went out with the 1920 Emily Post. My mother was very proud that I was a minister, so I never broke the news to her that I was really a teaching elder. How important is the Label?
The Lord has blessed us with women who care and who serve. What shall we call them? Does it matter? Personally I just can’t do ‘deaconess.’ That went out a long time ago with ‘poetess’ and ‘authoress.’
Does it matter? Am I a better preacher since I was ordained? Maybe. Sometimes. I should be. An ordination service with all those hands being laid on you is really a grand prayer meeting, after all, and the Lord hears our prayers. (By the way, brace yourself for Korean Presbyterians laying hands on you. They are vigorous in their praying, and will jerk your neck the same way.)
I am fascinated by the PCA Book of Church Order. In one place it’s clear that elders rule and deacons serve. But when it comes to installing the deacons, then the people are asked to agree to ‘obey’ them? What in the world is that about? Somebody should tweak that, and someday that will help.
But right now three years of GA is enough. ‘Women Deacons’ is not going to happen in the PCA in my lifetime (I’m 77!). I just ask my sisters and brothers to take some time to read Ed Clowney’s The Church, pp. 231-234, Bob Strimple’s OPC Minority Report (‘minority’ means it lost in the OPC, too), some Warfield and Calvin and Covenanters, and Paul, and to think about it. No, don’t do anything; that kairos has passed.
Right now all we need to do is figure out the Label for these ‘irregular’ deacons. I repeat, ‘deaconess’ is just tacky. Most others labels are offensive. The last thing we want to do is use any sneaky words, which just give offense.
What I really would like to say is: ‘set apart with prayer these helpers and ask God’s blessing on their service.’ But to say that is truly sneaky. You know what those words mean. It’s in Clowney, p. 234.
It’s just the long way of saying, ordain. So I won’t say that, but I will keep on thinking it, because I think that’s what God’s Word says.
_________________
D. Clair Davis, former professor of church history at Westminster Seminary in Philadelphia, is now teaching at Redeemer Seminary in Dallas, Texas
 |
Secondly, there is a reason Strimple was in the minority report -- that is the weight of the exegesis would point against gunaikos in 1 Timothy 3:11 referring to anything other than "wives." Similarly, Strimple wanted to step away from whether by analogy or actual institution having Acts 6 refer to deacons because Acts 6 would tend to show an authoritative function of an ordained deacon. However, election from the members and public ordination is a vesting of authority and we cannot get around it. That is why 1 Timothy 2:12 and other passages has resulted in the existing position of the Book of Church Order. So whatever may be Dr. Davis' personal feeling or preference on this issue, I think it that our current Book of Church Order has it right.
Note that Calvin derived his idea of a second level, service-only-with-no-authority, deaconess, as distinct from authority-wielding male deacons -- not from 1 Timothy 3:11 but rather from 1 Timothy 5 and the list of widows. Here is where Calvin was in error. This list of widows was not a qualification list for election but rather a list of those who should receive support -- be ministered to by the deacons.
http://www.taiwanchurch.org/linton/expa.html