Metro Atlanta Presbytery: According to Robert’s Rules Chapter 37 “votes cannot be rescinded after something has been done as a result of that vote that the assembly cannot undo.” Several churches used that interpretation to determine how best to organize their diaconates, and rescinding is inappropriate way to deal with our current situation.

In 2009, Metro Atlanta Presbytery, Metro New York Presbytery, Northern California Presbytery, and Philadelphia Presbytery of the Presbyterian Church in America (PCA) each passed a resolution describing six acceptable positions on the matter of deaconesses. The resolution, with slight variations in the introductory wording in each of the Presbyteries read as follows:

Whereas we recognize a diversity of practices among churches of good standing in our Presbytery regarding the statements made below.

And whereas we acknowledge that while certain tensions exist between this diversity of practice and the Book of Church Order,

Therefore be it resolved that the Metro Atlanta Presbytery resolves that these practices are within the historic breadth allowed by this Presbytery and we acknowledge that ministers or sessions may hold and practice the following views below while being “in conformity with the general principles of Biblical polity” (3rd ordination vow, BCO 21-5 & 24-6).
1. Only men are ordained as deacons and they conduct the diaconal ministries of the congregation.
2. Only men are ordained as deacons, yet Sessions select and appoint others— men and/or women—to assist the deacons in their work.
3. Only men are ordained as deacons and women are selected and appointed by the Session to serve as deaconesses who assist the male deacons.
4. Only men are ordained as deacons, yet the congregation elects women with the approval of the session to serve as deaconesses who assist the male deacons.
5. Men are ordained as deacons and women are commissioned as deaconesses without ordination, though both the men and the women are elected by the congregation and serve as equal partners in diaconal ministry.
6. Both men and women serve as equal partners in diaconal ministry and are often described as “deacon” or “deaconess” though no one is ordained to this ministry.

The result of this policy was that three separate complaints were filed in Metro New York and in Northern California.

On September 11, 2009, Metro New York sustained the complaint and rescinded their resolution (though they still nominate deaconesses as officers as you can see here). [Editor’s note: the original URL (link) referenced is no longer valid, so the link has been removed.]

Northern California denied the complaint, and eventually their resolution was overturned by the Standing Judicial Commission, the highest court of the PCA.

In Metro Atlanta Presbytery (MAP) on May 3, 2011, there was further action in regard to this resolution. MAP received at overture at its May stated meeting from The Rock Presbyterian Church requesting that MAP rescind its April 21, 2009 resolution. The overture read as follows:

WHEREAS, Metro Atlanta Presbytery on April 21, 2009 adopted a resolution stating listing six acceptable views and practices regarding the office of deacon which are “in conformity with the general principles of Biblical polity”; and

WHEREAS the Standing Judicial Committee of the Presbyterian Church in America in Case 2009-25 has annulled the action of Northern California Presbytery in adopting the same statement of acceptable views and practices, ruling that no court may make such statements claiming that views and practices in regards to regarding the office of deacon are “in conformity with the general principles of Biblical polity”;

THEREFORE, the Session of The Rock Presbyterian Church overtures the Metro Atlanta Presbytery to rescind its action of April 21, 2009 in adopting the a list of acceptable practices interpretations in regards to regarding the office of deacon claiming that this list provided allowable interpretations of the PCA Book of Church Order (BCO).

Further, that Metro Atlanta Presbytery remind its member churches and officers that they should maintain and/or bring their practices regarding the office of deacon into conformity with the PCA BCO as it has been interpreted by the SJC in Case 2009-25.

The Overtures Committee of MAP recommended that the Presbytery rule the motion out of order. MAP adopted the recommendation of its Overtures Committee with the following reasoning:

a. We deem that the motion from the Rock Presbyterian Church was in order and properly before the Presbytery for its consideration. We also appreciate their intention to help us conform to decisions that have been made since our decision in April of 2009.

b. It was moved to answer the motion in the negative for the following reasons:
MSP to answer the motion in the negative for the following reasons:
· It is our understanding that what we did on April 21, 2009 was to interpret the BCO in response to a request from a church in our Presbytery, presenting a range of possibilities in keeping with the general principle in BCO 9-7. We do not believe that a motion to rescind that interpretation to be appropriate.
· By rescinding the interpretation we revert back to a time when there was a lack of clarity about the issue which prompted the original request.
· According to Robert’s Rules Chapter 37 “votes cannot be rescinded after something has been done as a result of that vote that the assembly cannot undo.” Several churches used that interpretation to determine how best to organize their deaconates, and rescinding is inappropriate way to deal with our current situation.

The resolution stands in Metro Atlanta Presbytery . . . for now.

Wes White is a Teaching Elder in the Presbyterian Church in America. He is currently serving as the Pastor of New Covenant Spearfish Presbyterian Church, Spearfish, South Dakota. This article originally appeared on his web site http://weswhite.net and is used with permission.

Editor’s Note: On the original web site where this article first appeared, a member of the PCA’s Review of Presbytery Records Committee made the following comment which helps put the action of Metro Atlanta Presbytery into context. It was written by PCA Teaching Elder Skip Gillikin of Western Carolina Presbytery:

The Review of Presbytery Records Committee did catch the 2009 and 2010 actions of Metro Atlanta. The committee met last week. After several hours of healthy debate the committee deemed the response given by MAP on the three areas as unsatisfactory. The committee cited many reasons including the concurring opinion of the SJC case dealing with Northern California. Therefore, MAP (if the upcoming GA approves) will need to correct its past actions to comply with the PCA’s standards.

The men on the RPR strive to fulfill the mandate of BCO 40 that presbyteries act in ways that are “regular and in accordance with the Constitution” and that those actions “have been wise, equitable and suited to promote the welfare of the Church.” It is a joy to serve on the RPR.