Thread by @presbyterianpew

OC Afternoon Session 2

Motion to reconsider Overture 31 (for additional amendment to language).

Y: 70
N: 48
A: 2

https://twitter.com/presbyterianpew/status/1937199377371533706

Amendment to change "2/3 of the voting members" to "2/3 of members present and voting at the meeting"

Against amendment: quorum for called meeting of Presbytery is 3 REs and 3 TEs which could essentially gut the intention of this Overture.

Voting on amendment:

Y: 70
N: 49
A: 3

Amendment to add parenthetical phrase "not counting abstentions". Passed by voice vote.

Reconsidering motion to recommend approve O31 as amended

Y: 110
N: 12
A: 2

Discussion of O5 - make BCO 60-63 constitutionally binding (chapters of DFW)

Motion to postpone discussion of 5 until after discussion of Overture 26.

Against motion: if we can approve this, it will minimize the amount of work study committee would have to do.

In favor of motion to postpone: moves to constitutionalize sections of DFW don't do what we seem to want because language is permissive not requirements; amendments needed, shouldn't be done in pieces

Motion to postpone discussion of 5 until after 26 passes by voice vote.

Discussion of O12 - limit distribution of communion to officers

Motion to answer in the affirmative: Discussion of historical ways to distribute, intent of original language. Serving/distributing are acts of ordained men; passing is not part of the authoritative act...

...shouldn't be a problem for mission churches, pastor can distribute elements. Objection that we shouldn't lay down rules on forms, speaker believes this is an element, not a form.

Substitute to answer in the negative: these are matters of circumstance of worship, to be ordered by the light of nature and Christian principal, all we're told in Scripture doesn't outline how the elements are distributed. Other ways to exercise pastoral care than ...

... limiting distribution to officers.

For Overture: members who have visited other churches have had questions about what they've seen: non-ordained people at the front of church, wondering if they are officers.

In favor of substitute (to answer in the negative): If church members are confused, it is the responsibility of the session to teach the difference between administration and distribution, elements and forms....

Bad precedent to make amendments based on the misunderstanding of people who haven't been educated about these matters. We are in murky waters when we seek to guard the sacraments in ways God hasn't guarded them.

Amendment to add "in their shepherding capacity" to clarify that this isn't about whether we come forward or pass, but to focus on who oversees who takes communion. Pastoral opportunity.

Against the amendment (and Overture): doesn't help the confusion. Where does the magic start and stop? Unless we're coming up, at some point the plate gets passed. Are we drawing a line between "administration" and "distribution" in an arbitrary place.

Against the amendment: "in their shepherding capacity" might create more confusion by conflating offices of elder and deacon.

Amendment "in their shepherding capacity" fails by voice vote.

For the substitute (to answer O12 in the negative): many different (administer, preside, distribute, minister, serve etc.) words used interchangeably. What if someone handing a plate is saying something only elders should say. Do we discipline them? What is the remedy?

For O12: Nothing magical but something mysterious about the Lord's Supper, minister acting as a representative of Christ, distribution is acting a representative of pastor.

For O12: important to have officers participating in serving so officers can report back about who did or didn't take the supper, a level of shepherding involved in distributing, adds gravity to the sacrament, good and necessary consequence that elders distribute

For the substitute (answer O12 in the negative): sympathetic to shepherding aspects of distributing Lord's Supper. [not sure I can summarize the rest accurately, sorry]

Against the substitute: distributing the elements is an act of authority
Against the substitute: we're dealing with sessions who have chosen non-officers and specifically women who are not officers distribute. The reason you do it is that you are trying to make a point.

Point of order that speaker is questioning the motives of other PCA elders. Not ruled out of order, but chairman cautions speakers not to question motives of other churches in their speeches.

For substitute: churches can communicate a variety of things in the way that they handle communion (whether they come forward, gather around a table, etc.) Overture is unnecessary as BCO already says elders should gather around the table and ...

...if sessions decide to have help from other members under the authority of the session, that is their discretion.

For O12: members may have to refrain from taking the supper if someone not ordained is distributing it.

For the substitute (answer O12 in the negative): Yes, white responsibility for shepherding rests with the session, the session is able to equip and train others to participate in the shepherding. Other speakers may have tipped their hands by discussing ...

... men vs women not just officers vs non-officers.

Motion to call the question (re: substitute motion) passes by voice vote.

Y: 107
N: 16
A: 3

Vote on substitute motion (answer O12 in the negative):

Y: 49
N: 78
A: 0

Substitute (to answer O12 in the negative) fails.

Amend O12 to change distribution from "officers" to "under the oversight of the officers". Encouragement to session to take this seriously and watch over congregation without requiring HOW a congregation does this.

Point of order: amendment is out of order as it has same net effect as substitute that just failed. Chair sustained. Chair was challenged. Vote on whether the chair should be sustained.

Y: 75
N: 49
A: 2

Previous amendment is ruled out of order. Move the question.

Move the question:

Y: 100
N: 22
A: 2

Vote to recommend O12 in the affirmative:

Y: 78
N: 49
A: 1

Discussion of O33 - guidelines for interviewing young people for membership

Substitute to answer in the negative: BCO says this must be left to the prudence of the session, character and nature of examination must be left to the lower court...

... O33 might cause more confusion than it solves. BCO 57-5 only says that the minister "may" use these vows, so can we require people to be examined on vows pastors may not require them to take? Is there a scandal over children being admitted prematurely? And if so ...

... have sessions and Presbyteries already dealt with this before making an Overture? The bar to come to Jesus is very low. Are we adding extra requirements to come to faith?

For O33: common sense guidance, phrase "credible profession" is never codified in our BCO - needs to be added, do not want to put vulnerable children in danger of eating and drinking judgement, do they understand vows they take?

For O33: it is our duty as elders to shepherd and care for the covenant children entrusted to us and to stop them coming to the table until they make credible testimony, language describes the basic requirements of anyone who would come to the Lord's table

Notice of intent to file a minority report on O12.

For O33: this language will be helpful for parents to understand what will be expected of children when they come to be examined for membership and help their children to be prepared.

For O33: speaker's prior objection was "we already do this" but having heard from others, there is confusion on how to evaluate a young person's and even if we already do this, the language is clarifying and useful.

Note on Minority Report: RAO 15-6 minority report oral intent, 1 hour after session ends, intent filed with stated clerk, signatures from 10% of voting membership, 4% TEs and 4% REs

Substitute (answer O33 in negative) fails by voice vote

Vote to answer O33 in the affirmative
Y: 101
N: 23
A: 4

Discussion of O8 - require elders and deacons to state exceptions to WCF

Amendment to require sessions to record these differences in their minutes.

Vote on amendment:
Y: 64
N: 47
A: 10

Substitute to answer O8 in the negative. Agreement with the intent, but timing is bad. If there is a sentiment that something might be used against someone, they might be more hesitant to share. Assembly seems to be on a trajectory of reaching farther to question ...

... exceptions that were formerly acceptable under good faith subscription. It seems that more and more exceptions are being flagged. Therefore, not keen to expose ruling elders, deacons, and sessions to judgement. Would prefer a context of mutual trust, but for now will vote no.

Against substitute: experience of an officer who made an exception that was not caught and this O would have avoided that problem.

Substitute (to answer O8 in the negative) failed by voice vote.

Amendment to change "officers" to "elders" to remove the requirement for deacons to state difference.

Against amendment: deacons take the same vows, not a different standard, differences of deacons should also be required.

Against amendment: discussion about officers distributing sacraments. If they are going to distribute should also be required to state differences.

Amendment fails by voice vote.

Vote to answer O8 in the affirmative

Y: 97
N: 31
A: 0

Motion to postpone O10 until after the order of the day tomorrow (author is detained in travel). Passes by voice vote.

Discussion of O22 - clarify "regular standing" and minimum voting age. Lengthy argument in support based on lengthy rationale. One important point: perhaps we can't understand WHY a church would need minimum voting age but church may have special situations and should decide.

Substitute to answer O22 in the negative. This conflates the civil idea of "age of majority" with the spiritual concept of readiness to partake of the Lord's Supper.

My apologies. It's been a long day and I'm getting tired. Speaker is opposed to the Overture because he worries about unintended consequences, but I lost the thread.

In favor of Overture: children should be at play, not voting in a congregational meeting.

In favor of substitute: children learn how to participate in and vote in congregational meetings by being present with their parents and participating in the life of the church.

In favor of substitute: this is a major change, really long rationale, needs more consideration and/or work.

In favor of substitute: has 4 children, helps them to think about and prepare children for what will be discussed. It's incumbent on elders and parents to shepherd.

Previous question was called. Passed by voice vote.

Voting on the substitute (answer O22 in the negative) passes by voice vote.

Substitute (answer O22 in the negative) is now the main. Voting on the main.

Y: 88
N: 36
A: 3

The chairman says he is tired and drifting. I feel validated. 🤪

We are adjourned for the day!

Quick visual recap:

@threadreaderapp unroll, please