Thread by @derekradney

🧵on #pcaga re: what’s happened w/ the overtures on ordination & same-sex attraction (SSA), what's it mean, how did we get here, & what do I think. I was on the overtures committee (OC), helped craft the final language of O23, & contributed to the minority report of O37.
1/

First: What happened at #pcaga?
GA passed 2 overtures to change the PCA Book of Church Order (BCO). This is step 1 of 3. Step 2 requires 2/3 of the presbyteries to approve the changes by majority vote before next GA, & step 3 a majority vote next GA. Nothing has changed, yet.
2/

Overture 23 deals with the qualifications for officers in the PCA, amending BCO 16 on church orders & the doctrine of vocation to church office by adding a 4th paragraph. (more below)
3/

Overture 37 deals w/ the examination of officers by amending BCO 21 on ministers (teaching elders) & BCO 24 on ruling elders & deacons, requiring men be examined in a number of areas (sexual immorality, finances, abuse, etc.) but also makes a vague requirement for ordination.
4/

Second: What does this all mean?
The PCA is demonstrably not in danger of a theological drift left & despite the vocal warnings by those in @gospelrefnet & the Greenville Theo. Sem. crowd, the #pcaga proves we do not have elders seeking to embrace homosexuality.
2/

The #pcaga also proves we have an overwhelming consensus on doctrine. The AIC Report on Sexuality was commended almost unanimously. However, there is still disagreement abt how ppl should speak abt SSA.
3/

Despite the guidance of the report, there’s still disagreement abt how one should speak abt SSA (many still don't distinguish b/w fundamental identity & experience). Also some (maybe ~5-10% of #pcaga) seem to be against an elder being SSA regardless of language.
4/

I hope this #pcaga put to rest any notion that we have elders that deny our Reformed understanding of sin & think SSA itself is ok as long as it isn't acted on. Also, it should put to rest the idea that there are PCA elders who think God cannot change a person's inclinations.
5/

In short, no one should panic. The side fearing liberal/accommodationist drift is flat wrong that this is a threat. This was crying wolf & the votes prove that. Hopefully, this will calm fears (I'm not sure it will).
6/

The side fearing SSA Christians will be pushed out of office or church membership in the PCA need to slow down & not jump to that conclusion. I know many are hurting right now, but...
7/

...nothing has changed yet, & even if these overtures are eventually adopted, it will depend on how a presbytery reads them. That's problematic, as I hope to show below, but let's not get ahead of ourselves.

Now, let me narrate a bit.
8/

Third: How did we get here?
After a few non-controversial overtures, the OC took up O38 to commend the sexuality report & refer it to CDM to distribute it as a "biblically faithful declaration" (same language as what we said abt the Nashville Statement last GA). Vote 124-3-0.
9/

Many of us assumed that, because the sexuality report said, "Insofar as such persons display the requisite Christian maturity, we do not consider this sin struggle automatically to disqualify someone for leadership in the church," all the overtures abt ordination would fail.
10/

However, debate showed a divergence in the reading. Because the report said that, as a matter of wisdom & maturity, Christians should be encouraged to leave SSA identification language behind, many concluded officers must not use this language as mature persons.
11/

Since the OC did not get to hear the AIC speak to their report, this group did not hear them show this was not their intent.
Others of us, myself included, saw language as a matter of wisdom that should not be regulated, even for officers.
12/

So when we took up O37 on examining officers, there was much debate & many amendments. It became clear there were 3 groups in the OC: the Calvery Pres. / Greenville Theo. Sem. (right), the @gospelrefnet guys (middle), & the missional crowd (left).
13/

The left was able to add words to expand the areas of examination O37 required (child sexual abuse & racism) & further down in the controversial line, barely able to strike (after failing to add other sins) "homosexual desires" as an example of how a person must not be known.
14/

The debate centered around the line "While imperection will remain, [the candidate for office] must not be known by reputation or self-profession according to his remaining sinfulnness, but rather..." The center & left insisted on this line.
15/

The left sought to strike it because it's incredibly ambiguous & introduces language into our BCO that is novel & different from our confessional standards & Scripture (as the minority report would later argue).
16/

The right argued for keeping this line & revealed that many of them believed this wording of "self-profession" was necessary to guard against those who sought to sanction homosexuality in the PCA (which is nobody). I had many conversations in caucus w/ OC members that...
17/

...were shocked when I told them I believed SSA is itself sinful (as WLC Q25 asserts). In their mind, to call one's self an SSA/gay/homosexual Christian, one can ONLY mean that you affirm the desire as ok.
18/

No matter what was said, no one could prevent O37 from being answered in the affirmative as amended without striking the vague language of "must not be known by reputation or self-profession." A minority report was announced after the vote went 84-43-1.
19/

Many of us thought that would be the end of the matter, because the next 2 overtures on the same matter were answered in reference to O37 without much debate.
But then came O23.
20/

Remember, O23 dealt w/ officer qualifications. The overture read: "Men who self-identify as "gay Christian," "same-sex attracted Christian," homosexual Christian," or like term shall be deemed not qualified for ordination in the Presbyterian Church in America."
[more coming]
21/

I don't remember the vote on this overture, but it was still about 2-1 in favor. The center was with the right, and the left announced another minority report.
We dealt with other overtures, and completed our work before worship on Tuesday night.
22/

I signed on to both minority reports, but I was among a group of 3 (along w/ @trevorilaurence & a well known & experienced PCA pastor) taking the lead on the minority report for O37. I also was working w/ the lead on O23. Conversations began b/w us on the left & the center.
23/

@trevorilaurence By Tuesday night, the moderator of the OC emailed us to let us know we were reconvening Wednesday to do more work because some new language was going to be proposed for O23. Both minority reports met Wednesday morning while others were talking w/ leaders in the center.
24/

By the afternoon, we were getting close to new language for O23 that had broad consensus.
"Men who would hold office in the Presbyterian Church in America must be above reproach in their walk and Christlike in their character. Those who adopt an identity that undermines..."
25/

or contradicts their identity as new creations in Christ, or deny the sinfulness of fallen desires (such as, but not limited to, same sex attraction), or deny the reality and hope of progressive sanctification,..."
26/

or fail to pursue Spirit-empowered victory over their sinful temptations, inclinations, and actions are not suitable candidates for ordained ministry."

There was a lot of tweaking the language, so this may be slightly off, but it's close.
27/

The key for me was moving away from personal narrative language towards doctrinal language of Scripture & our confessional standards. The last sentence was critical b/c it sought to define what sort of identity language is & is not a problem.
28/

We sought to address the doctrine of sin (SSA itself is sinful), of sanctification (God can change our desires),& of holiness (God will certainly will bring progress in mortification of temptations, inclinations,& actions). Any identity undermining these things is a problem.
29/

Identity language is difficult & people speak in different ways. We wanted to rule out identity claims that replace our fundamental identity in Christ, but not language that descrives a person's ongoing experience of SSA.
30/

When the OC reconvened, we were barely able to pass a motion to reconsider O23. It needed 2/3 & we won by 4 votes (the right was against but the center joined the left).
31/

There was a lot of debate & pushback from the right. They felt they had "won" & protected the denomination from liberalism. But the center saw a better chance at a consensus in our denomination that still guarded against the real issue.
32/

I was optimistic at this point, but an amendment was passed that added parenthetical language matching the original O23 that passed, which put us close to the same place as before but with clearer doctrinal language.
33/

A few other small amdendments to language were made, but I was torn, as were others on the left. Should we abandon the whole thing & stick with the original, hoping it fails at the assembly or in presbyteries, or improve it so we don't have a bigger loss?
34/

Some on the left decided to support the new O23 despite the parenthetical language against professing an identity such as SSA Christians & the like, which is why the vote seemed so big in favor 106-12-0.
35/

The only minority report left at this point was O37, & we had to decide between asking the #pcaga to answer the whole thing in the negative or to replace the problematic line w/ the language of O23 as an attempt to clear up the ambiguity of "being knwn by self-profession..."
36/

Due to an emergency with the leader from the left, @trevorilaurence & I found ourselves having to take the lead on writing the minority report, & with guidance, we were encouraged to replace the problematic line in O37 w/ O23 language to make it less bad.
37/

On the floor of #pcaga O38 commending the sexuality report was answered overwhelmingly in the affirmative. Again, there is consensus on doctrine.
O23 was affirmed by a margin of 2-1.
The minority report on O37 failed, again, the vote was 2-1.
38/

I won't rehash the arguments in detail, but we argued in the minority report & Trevor argued so eloquently frm the floor that we need to stick w/ our doctrinal language, leave room 4 ppl to speak differently in diff. contexts, & clear up what we're actually guarding against.
39/

Sadly, I believe faithful SSA Christians in our denomination will hear this #pcaga to be saying that they don't belong, & while I don't think these overtures place them outside, I can see why it feels that way. Certainly, some seem to want to do so.
40/

But, even if they clear step 2 &3, both O23 & O37 do not bar SSA Christians from office. They do attempt (though vaguely) to prevent ppl who speak in a particular way from office.
I'm not happy with this outcome. I'm not sure we on the left took the right approach w/ O23.
41/

But as I said above, it is absolutely clear the PCA is not drifting left or going liberal. I daresay that many on the right need to apologize for the way they've waved red flags. I spoke w/ many on the right, & many simply do not understand the distinctions made on language.
42/

Many on the right cannot fathom the idea that a man may describe himself as a gay Christian, not to affirm disordered sexual desire, but to describe his history & ongoing temptations, for numerous reasons, including to relate to & evangelize the gay community.
43/

I may add more thoughts to this later, but for now, I'll take a break.
44/