PCA and Its Complementarian Practices
Here’s some interesting information about the PCA and women in leadership from my friend Andy.
The bottom line is that PCA denomination is solidly complementarian — restricting women from being elders and preaching — but they have theologically trained women from their own seminaries who do not know how and where to use their gifts, and they have men who are unhappy with even the limited roles given to women in the PCA. All in all, there are lots of questions and contradictions about how this complementarian view works out in practice.
Females are not allowed to take preaching courses at Covenant Seminary, the PCA seminary. Quote: “Women register for communication courses instead of homiletics practicum courses in keeping with Presbyterian Church in America policy restricting the office of teaching elder or preacher to men.”
There are two recent articles about PCA women in the PCA online magazine from December 2005.
1. Women Theologians: A Spiritual Goldmine for the Church by Carolyn Custis James.
In this article, James discusses how women who graduate from seminary are confused about what to do in the PCA. She gives some biblical arguments that women can do more than housework. She encourages churches to find ways for these women’s gifts to be utilized. She mentions Joni Eareckson Tada (speaker and writer), Nancy Pearcey (writer), Diane Langberg (psychologist), and Susan Hunt (PCA women’s ministry leader) as good examples of PCA women who are using their theological training to do good theological work.
2. The Authority of the Word and the Wisdom of the Church by Dr. L. Roy Taylor.
In this article, Taylor summarizes the biblical argument against women. The first half of the article he explains his position as opposed to those who don’t believe in Scripture. Towards the end, he addresses the evangelical egalitarian biblical arguments for women in ministry as argued by Gilbert Belezikan. This is a decent summary of complementarian arguments. In the last sentence, he encourages churches to allow women to do things within the boundaries.
Addressing this last question mentioned by both James and Taylor, I find Wayne Grudem’s article But What Should Women Do in the Church
the most helpful complementarian article on the subject because the complementarian position gets most difficult when you actually try to put it into practice.
This is one look into official PCA procedures. Still, there is much unofficial resistance to even these limited roles by women. Tim Bayly, pastor of Good Shepherd Church in Bloomington, IN and associated with World Magazine, is a particularly outspoken critic of even this type of dialogue by James within the PCA. See this reaction to the James article. This article has quite an “energetic” discussion among complementarians. Interestingly, the discussion gets a bit more civil, rational and practical at the end once some women start weighing in to the discussion and asking about how this actually looks in practice.
They also reference an accidental 40 seconds of “sermonic material” by a woman in chapel at Covenant Seminary one day. I gotta say I thought the stir created by this incident was hilarious.
Tim Bayly’s Feb 11 post on “Woe to those who call good evil . . .” is again about James who is apparently traveling around spreading egalitarian-like views in PCA circles.
And here is another post by a PCA pastor who complains that James’s article does not mention mothering.
Andy
The Baylyblog has continued to publish posts on James. Actually, most of the time they seem to publish posts attacking egalitarians, often blaming us for every ill in the world. You should read through their their sections on feminism. Egalitarians really are their worst enemies.
I’m an associate member of the PCA (and a member of CBE) and I’m wondering just how much this discussion will affect the unity of the denomination itself. Of course, my hope is that they will become egalitarian someday, or at least, tolerate churches that are. I do believe or hope they will eventually come close though. With the likes of the Baylys, I cannot see this happening without plenty of trouble in the future.
One thing worth noting though, several PCA ministers are willing to go as far as saying that women may do anything in the church that unordained men are allowed to do. This would include reading Scripture, passing the offering, being deaconesses (appointed not ordained, although some want to just use the term deacon instead), etc. Many congregations have been resistant and I’m fairly certain this would not include teaching men in Sunday morning classes. However, women do sometimes team teach with their husbands. I guess that is more palatable. When you consider the vitriolic attitudes of men like the Baylys against James, those that are willing to go this far in the denomination are really taking a stand (even though we would love to see them go further).
I appreciate women like James, who are willing to push for reforms, knowing full well that she will be up against antagonists like this. And I know several pastors that support her mission and are optimistic. Change doesn’t occur over night, but with dedicated people, it can occur.
Well, my sense is that complimentarianism is actually growing or becoming more entrenched in the PCA, a development I personally applaud. This is partly due, if I may be so bold to suggest, to the inability of egalitarians to make their case biblically. Believe me. I know a good many egalitarians are well meaning folks, and I appreciate their commitment to the Lord. Even so, for their position to succeed they are going to have to deal with the many biblical texts that support a complimentarian perspective. I don’t see that happening. Indeed, I am not certain that it can ever happen given the clear meaning of Scriptures on the matter.
Yes, well, my pastor believes the same thing, and I have become convinced that no amount of evidence will be enough for some people. There’s been more written about this subject in the last couple of decades than just about any other theological subject. The egalitarian evidences and arguments convince some and others they don’t. Why is that? AW Tozer blames “cast of mind” when Christians disagree along lines where Scripture can be interpreted in more than one way. Egalitarians are often blamed for being swayed too much by current social currents but the same can be said for others who are raised a certain way or come to believe a set of propositions or presuppositions that are also based on a certain culture-saturated view of “reality.”