Dallas, Texas – The 36th General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in America, on Thursday, June 12, 2008, found "unsatisfactory" the responses of Northern California and Philadelphia Presbyteries on their having granted exceptions on women serving as deacons or deaconesses serving on diaconates.
 
All PCA Presbytery have to submit their minutes for annual inspection by the GA Review of Presbytery Records Committee (RPRC). At the 35th PCA General Assembly, the RPRC had recommended that the GA cite the Northern California Presbytery for "an exception of substance" for allowing two newly organized churches to "commission Deaconesses contrary to BCO 9-3." It also cited Philadelphia Presbytery with the following, "Diaconate of a new church includes 4 Deaconesses commissioned contrary to BCO 9-3."
 

Northern California Presbytery approved the following response to the 36th GA: "Presbytery respectfully disagrees with the exception (RAO 16-10.b.2). Presbytery approved the organizing pastor’s exception with respect to the diaconate (provided below) upon transfer into Presbytery. The action, thus recorded, is not a matter of substance, but consistent with the approved exception, viz., commissioning of the diaconate."
 
The candidate’s exception approved by Presbytery stated the following:
 
Ordination and obedience to deacons (specifically BCO 24-5, 24-6). Whereas the BCO correctly identifies Deacons as an office in the church, I believe it misinterprets Scripture regarding their ordination. The question to the congregation in 24-5 asks them to yield obedience to Deacons. In 24-6 (and various other places) the Deacons are referred to as ordained in the same manner as Elders. Until the BCO is amended, I intend to elect and install unordained deaconesses. This is allowable under BCO 9-7.
 
The RPRC’s recommendation regarding Northern California Presbytery’s response was adopted by the 36th GAm which was to find the response "unsatisfactory." There was a substitute motion to declare Presbytery’s response as "satisfactory;" this substitute motion failed. The following reasoning of the RPRC was approved:
 
Presbytery’s response does not adequately address the specific issue identified by the 35th GA. The newly installed Session of the particularized church "commissioned" unordained men and women for a body which the Presbytery minutes called the "diaconate" (BCO 9, 19-15, 24-10). However, BCO 9 is clear that only ordained and elected men can be members of a "diaconate." The appeal to BCO 9-7 is flawed because 9-7 addresses people appointed by the Session, not members of a diaconate (Board of Deacons, 9-4). According to BCO 9-3 and 9-4, a diaconate may only include men what are elected, ordained and installed. Therefore, the body referenced in the exception must not be called a diaconate. In addition, this practice, coupled with the minister’s expressed view that he intends not to ordain deacons "until the BCO is amended," denies qualified men their constitutional and biblical right to be considered for this office.
 
Philadelphia Presbytery’s response was also found unsatisfactory. The response stated, "Philadelphia Presbytery respectfully request more information from the RPR. Please clarify how the commissioning of 4 unordained women as deaconesses is out of accord with BCO 9-3."
 
The GA adopted the following rationale of the RPRC:
 
We agree with the Presbytery that BCO 9-3 would not directly apply to the commissioning of unordained women, if they are not considered to be members of the Diaconate. However, the record indicates that "four deaconesses and one deacon were commissioned," and the record of the particularization service refers to "Vows/Commissioning of Diaconate." BCO 9-3 and 9-4 are clear that only ordained and elected men can be members of a "Diaconate."
 
These actions of the General Assembly must be considered by both Presbyteries, requiring a response to the 37th PCAGA.