The bottom line is that evaluating candidates and judging differences is not an empirical question, but a theological one. Each court has the right to declare the terms of admission into its membership (Preliminary Principle #2). Simply because a stated difference is commonly granted as an exception does not mean the same difference must be granted an exception in every presbytery. Conversely, simply because a stated difference is uncommon does not necessarily require that the exception may not be granted. It is also appropriate at this point to consider how helpful it may be – not only to the purity and unity of the church, but particularly for the candidate being examined – for presbytery not to grant an exception on a first examination, and instead to ask the man to consider further study. 

Good Faith Subscription (GFS), the practice of allowing a man to assent to most of the Westminster Standards in “good faith” while allowing him to state minor differences in parts, has been practiced in the Presbyterian Church in America (PCA) for almost 20 years.
The practice was officially amended into the PCA’s Book of Church Order when Overture 10 passed at the 31st General Assembly (see 2003 GA minutes, pp. 50-51, 54-56). This amendment required each candidate for the gospel ministry in the PCA to state in his own words any differences with the Westminster Standards (the Confession of Faith, together with the Larger and Shorter Catechisms, as adopted by the PCA). Presbyteries are permitted to grant differences as “exceptions” to the Standards if the court determined that the difference “is neither hostile to the system nor strikes at the vitals of religion.”
Overture 10 from the 31st GA and overtures since adopted (see 2011 GA minutes, p. 25; 2012 GA minutes, pp. 63, 75, 105-107; 2013 GA minutes, p. 17) are unequivocally concerned with GA’s oversight of the peace, purity, and unity of the Church. However, to my knowledge, no one has systematically attempted to document how widespread the practice of “being granted exceptions” is or which Standards the practice touches, information that should be critical to GA’s oversight.
As a glorified bean counter, I turned to a basic skill on which I often rely to help make sense of a situation: counting. The purpose of this exercise is not for me to express an opinion on the merits and demerits of GFS, but rather to provide empirical insights to inform the conversation on so-called Good Faith and Full Subscription. Some may read these findings with great encouragement that GFS is working well and that clear distinctions are drawn between exceptions that do or do not strike at the vitals. Others may be concerned with the extent to which teaching elders in the PCA hold differences with the denomination’s constitutional standards. Hopefully, there will be helpful insights for those on both sides of the issue.
Methodology
In the absence of a census of stated differences, the only denomination-wide data on exceptions are in the reports to GA of the Committee on Review of Presbytery Records (RPR). According to the PCA’s Rules of Assembly Operations 16-3, whenever presbytery examines a candidate, presbytery must record any stated differences the candidate may have in his own words, as well as presbytery’s judgment of those differences. If a clerk fails to record any of these details, presbytery’s minutes may be flagged by RPR as an exception of substance. For example, RPR may note that the record of a teaching elder’s transfer exam was incomplete. During the subsequent year, presbytery may respond to RPR’s exception of substance by providing the missing elements of the transfer exam, including the teaching elder’s stated differences (if any) and the specific Standards with which he stated a difference. This process makes it possible to gain a generalizable sense of exceptions in the PCA, even if the RPR reports are a “fuzzy proxy” for stated differences across the PCA.
I want to make explicitly clear that I intend no judgment against presbytery clerks through this exercise. Indeed, exchanges between presbyteries and RPR have proven healthful for clarifying BCO language (see Overture 2 for the 51stGA) or for clarifying whether these differences can be taught (as in the cases of Calvary, Northwest Georgia, and Ohio Valley, see 2021 GA minutes, pp. 529-534, 592-594, 594-596). The kinds of mistakes that could lead to RPR flagging an item are the kinds of mistakes I likely make on a weekly basis, if not more frequently. Because they are such easy mistakes to make, it can be believed that this method approaches plausibly representative estimates for the denomination.
For this analysis to be generalizable, it must be believed that such a mistake is essentially random. Clerks are not picky about how they make mistakes. Rather, a mistake could be made just as easily for recording a Second Commandment exception as for a Fourth Commandment exception, or for a man stating no differences as for a man stating several. Random events in large enough samples should produce roughly representative data (e.g., 100 coin flips should yield roughly 50 heads and 50 tails).
The RPR reports from 2003 (the first year affected by the GFS overture) to 2023 provide a large enough sample that I believe we can accept them as reasonably representative. If anything, exceptions may be undercounted in my analysis. For example, Korean Language Presbyteries had twice as many flagged items as other presbyteries, but were three times as likely to have a man stating no differences. If KLPs are overrepresented in this sample, men who state no differences may be overrepresented as well.
Furthermore, it is likely that the Sabbath exception is undercounted. Pacific Northwest Presbytery, for example, mentioned that it was its practice not to record “the typical exception to the Standards’ definition of Sabbath sanctification” (see 2013 GA minutes, p. 465). If it is the case in some presbyteries not to record this exception, the relative prevalence of differences on the Fourth Commandment will be conservatively estimated by this method.
Findings
What did I find after reading these RPR reports? First, approximately 4 exceptions are granted (to other candidates) for each man who states no differences with the Standards. Second, the most common differences are related to the Westminster Standards’ teachings on the Fourth Commandment, the Second Commandment, and Creation. Third, exceptions to the Standards’ teaching regarding the Fourth Commandment touch the Standards in more places than do other exceptions.
Read More
Related Posts:

O15 was one of three overtures presbyteries considered in 2022-23 on the topic of sexuality. Overture 29 (O29) and Overture 31 (O31) passed in a supermajority of presbyteries and will come to the floor of GA this summer, where a simple majority vote of commissioners will amend the BCO with their language. Two sexuality overtures—Overture 23 (O23) and Overture 37 (O37)—failed to reach the two-thirds threshold in 2021-22.

With the Presbyterian Church in America’s 2023 General Assembly quickly approaching, I thought I’d take one final look at the presbytery votes on Overture 15 (O15). In total, 81 presbyteries have recorded votes on O15, with the overture receiving a majority vote in 48 presbyteries, 11 shy of the two-thirds threshold needed to bring O15 to the floor of GA this June.
Comparing O15 votes to last year’s sexuality overtures
O15 was one of three overtures presbyteries considered in 2022-23 on the topic of sexuality. Overture 29 (O29) and Overture 31 (O31) passed in a supermajority of presbyteries and will come to the floor of GA this summer, where a simple majority vote of commissioners will amend the BCO with their language. Two sexuality overtures—Overture 23 (O23) and Overture 37 (O37)—failed to reach the two-thirds threshold in 2021-22.
A scatter plot is a helpful graph for quickly considering how a vote on one overture compared to a vote on another overture. The figure below plots six scatterplots, with each dot representing a presbytery. Presbytery votes on the 2021-22 overtures are plotted on the horizontal y-axis: O23 in the first column and O37 in the second column. Presbytery votes on the 2022-23 overtures are plotted on the vertical y-axis: O31 in the first row, O29 in the second row, and O15 in the third row. The red diagonal line indicates parity; presbyteries falling on this line voted exactly the same on one of last year’s overtures as they did on one of this year’s. Presbyteries above this line had a greater percentage of officers supporting one of this year’s overtures relative to either of last year’s overtures.

Two quadrants are of greatest interest. The top left quadrant (with green dots) plot presbyteries that voted against an overture last year, but flipped to support it this year. The bottom right quadrant (with red dots) plots presbyteries that voted in favor of an overture last year, but flipped to oppose it this year.
By the number of green dots, it is clear that O29 and O31 were highly regarded, even by presbyteries voting against sexuality overtures last year. With only one exception (Platte Valley, which passed O37 last year but did not pass O31 this year), presbyteries either had the same outcome or flipped to support this year’s overtures.
O15 did not follow the same pattern as O29 and O31. Presbyteries landed much closer to the parity line, indicating that many voted on O15 similarly to how they voted last year. The plot also features a mix of green and red dots, revealing that there were many presbyteries that changed their vote from last year’s overtures to O15.
A Sankey plot is useful for visualizing trends for how presbyteries may have shifted votes. It shows the proportion of presbyteries passing sexuality overtures in each year, as well as the paths presbyteries took from year to year. The plot below shows that votes on O15 were largely predictable. Presbyteries that supported both O23 and O37 last year tended to pass O15, while those that opposed both O23 and O37 tended not to pass O15.

Minority Report signers and recorded negative votes
Previously for The Aquila Report, I examined O15’s progress based on commissioners who recorded negative votes against O15 at PCA GA 2022, as well as commissioners on the Overtures Committee who signed the Minority Report that brought O15 to the floor of GA. The bar graph below replicates my previous analysis, but with final data.

Over four-fifths of presbyteries with Minority Report signers (in favor of O15) passed O15, while just less than half of presbyteries without a Minority Report signer passed O15. In contrast, just less than half of presbyteries with a recorded negative vote (against O15) passed O15, while four-fifths of presbyteries without a recorded negative vote passed O15. The data, in my opinion, reveals two competing opinions within the PCA on whether the sexuality issue among ordained officers has been resolved.
Looking ahead to GA 2023
This summer, the Overtures Committee will consider five overtures that take up the issue of sexuality.

Overture 9 from Arizona Presbytery would amend the BCO by adding the following paragraph to Chapter 7: “Men who deviate–whether by declared conviction, self-description, lifestyle decisions, or overt practice–from God’s creational intention for human sexuality are disqualified from holding office in the Presbyterian Church in America.”
Overture 16 from Catawba Valley Presbytery would amend the BCO by adding the following paragraph to Chapter 7: “Men who describe themselves by any biblical sin (such as listed in 1 Cor. 6:9-10, ‘Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God.’) are disqualified from holding office in the Presbyterian Church in America. Instead, they describe themselves by 1 Cor. 6:11, ‘And such were some of you. But you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God.’”
Overture 17 from the Session of Meadowview Reformed Presbyterian Church would amend the BCO by adding the following paragraph to Chapter 7: “Men who refer to a particular sin struggle as descriptive of their personhood, being, or identity are disqualified from holding office in the PCA.”
Overture 23 from Mississippi Valley Presbytery would amend the BCO by adding the following line to 8-2: “He should conform to the biblical requirement of chastity and sexual purity in his descriptions of himself, his convictions, character, and conduct”; and the following line to 9-3: “conforming to the biblical requirement of chastity and sexual purity in their descriptions of themselves, their convictions, character, and conduct.”
And finally, Overture 24 from Chesapeake Presbytery would amend the BCO by adding the following line to 8-3: “As those who are to be examples to God’s flock that is under their care, and who are to watch their life and doctrine closely, elders are to understand, describe, and define themselves in light of their union with Christ as justified and holy children of God. They are to guard against setting a damaging or confusing example to the flock by describing or defining themselves by their sinful desires (e.g., from 1 Corinthians 6:9,10 (ESV)… ‘the sexually immoral, nor idolators, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers,…’ etc.), but rather are to endeavor by the grace of God to confess, repent of, and mortify sin and sinful desires, and to present themselves and those entrusted to their care as instruments of righteousness to God.”

Overtures 9, 16, and 17 follow the pattern of O15 this past year by seeking to add a paragraph to BCO 7. Pray for the men of the Overtures Committee (as well as the PCA!) as they take up these matters in June.
Matthew Lee is a ruling elder at Covenant Presbyterian Church (PCA) in Fayetteville, AR.
Related Posts:

With respect to membership, PCA churches with schools are significantly larger. The average PCA church has 230 members on its rolls on average. Churches with schools average 630 members, while those without average 190. They have both more communicant members (500 vs. 148) and non-communicant members (131 vs. 41).

Among many of the Overtures that passed at PCA General Assembly last year was Overture 22 from Northwest Georgia Presbytery, which made statistical data digitally accessible. The statistics reported include data on church-led schools. As someone whose professional and personal interests include education and Reformed theology, this of course piqued my interest. What did I learn about schools in the Presbyterian Church in America?
Comparing churches with and without schools
Of the 1,669 churches reporting data, only about nine percent (150) report having an education ministry affiliated with their church. The churches with schools are significantly different from churches without schools in several meaningful ways. In short, they have more members, more elders and deacons, and more income and expenses.
With respect to membership, PCA churches with schools are significantly larger. The average PCA church has 230 members on its rolls on average. Churches with schools average 630 members, while those without average 190. They have both more communicant members (500 vs. 148) and non-communicant members (131 vs. 41). However, even churches with schools had wide variation in membership. Half of the churches with schools had between 50 and 400 members.
With respect to membership changes, PCA churches with schools tend to gain and lose more members than churches without schools. In the most recent year of reporting, churches with schools gained 42 members in the past year (vs. 14). As churches with education ministries may be addressing a growing need in their congregations, it is perhaps unsurprising that many of these new members came by way of child’s profession of faith (7.3 vs 2.5) and infant baptism (6.9 vs. 2.9). Interestingly, churches with schools on average experienced net negative growth, losing about 0.8% of their rolls, while churches without schools experienced net positive growth, adding about 2.1% to their rolls.
As expected with larger memberships, churches with schools had more elders and deacons as well. The average PCA church reported 5.5 elders and 6.1 deacons. Those with a school had roughly 13 elders and 13 deacons, while those without had roughly 5 elders and 5 deacons.
Finally, with respect to church finances, churches with schools had more income and expenses. In the most recent year reporting, the average PCA church had just over $700,000 in total income. Those with schools averaged $2.5 million, while those without averaged just over $500,000. Churches with schools had more expenses as well, including more benevolence, more budgeted expenses, and more building fund expenses. Again, even churches with schools had wide variation in finances. Half of the churches with schools had total income less than $1.2 million, and one-quarter of these churches had total income less than $500,000.

Table 1. PCA churches with and without schools

Has school?

PCA
Yes
No
Diff
Sig.

Membership

Communicant members
180.0
499.9
148.3
351.6
*

Non-communicant members
49.4
130.6
41.4
89.2
*

Total members
229.7
630.4
189.9
440.6
*

Membership changes

Added
16.5
42.0
14.0
28.0
*

Profession of faith (child)
3.0
7.3
2.5
4.8
*

Infant baptisms
3.3
6.9
2.9
3.9
*

Lost
14.5
43.4
11.7
31.8
*

Net growth (added minus lost)
2.0
-1.5
2.3
-3.8

Growth % (Net growth / Total members)
1.87%
-0.82%
2.14%
-2.96

Morning worship attendance
149.8
352.8
128.0
224.8
*

Leadership

Ruling Elders
5.5
12.7
4.7
8.0
*

Deacons
6.1
13.0
5.3
7.7
*

Finances (in thousands)

Total church income
$716.5
2,509.2
540.9
1,968.3
*

Total benevolence
$99.4
402.6
69.7
332.9
*

Total budgeted expenses
$534.6
1,572.6
433.4
1,139.1
*

Total building fund
$108.6
303.7
84.2
219.5
*

n
1669
150
1519

Notes. * indicates statistically significant difference between samples, p < 0.001. Examining the schools of PCA churches Of the 150 churches in the PCA data that reported having a school, I was able to find information on 116 of them. The most common education ministry is a standalone early education program, that is, a school serving only pre-kindergarten and/or kindergarten, roughly 45 percent of all PCA schools. Nearly 90 percent offer pre-K, three-fifths offer kindergarten, half offer elementary, half offer middle school, and a third offer high school. By presbytery and geography, churches with schools are concentrated in the southeast. The presbytery with the greatest number of church-led schools is Evangel with ten. Chesapeake and Southeast Alabama each have seven schools. Florida leads the states with 25 schools, followed closely by Alabama with 24. Eleven states have only one PCA school each, and 23 states and the District of Columbia have zero PCA schools. Table 2. PCA schools by presbytery Presbytery Churches with Schools Evangel 10 Chesapeake 7 Southeast Alabama 7 Central Florida 6 Gulf Coast 6 Nashville 6 Mississippi Valley 5 Missouri 5 South Florida 5 79 presbyteries 4 or fewer each With respect to tuition, for simplicity, I examined the highest level of tuition charged by each school, as reported on their website. The average PCA school charges just under $8,000 in tuition per year. Tuition is much lower at standalone EE programs at $3,700 compared to those offering elementary, middle, or high school grades ($10,700), but tuition for standalone EE programs can rise to as high as $11,484. The most expensive PCA school is Christ Presbyterian Academy, a ministry of Christ Presbyterian Church in Nashville, TN, at $24,925 for upper school tuition. Next, I considered enrollment, as reported in the PCA statistical data. The average PCA school enrolls around 240 students. Similar to tuition, enrollment tends to be lower at standalone EE programs (83 students on average) than at schools serving other grades (373 students on average). The largest PCA school by enrollment is Briarwood Christian School, a ministry of Briarwood Presbyterian Church in Birmingham, AL, with 1,659 students. School enrollment and church membership tend to be positively correlated, while school tuition and church budget are weakly correlated. Table 3. PCA school characteristics Pre-K and K only? Overall Yes No Tuition Average $7,777.63 3,734.28 10,665.73 Minimum $290.00 290.00 3,000.00 Maximum $24,925.00 11,484.00 24,925.00 Enrollment Average 243.2 83.1 373.4 Minimum 14 14 27 Maximum 1659 285 1659 Grades Offered Standalone Pre-K or K 44.8% Pre-K 87.1% K 61.2% Elementary 52.6% Middle 46.6% High 34.5% n 116 52 64 The most common accreditations and school memberships include the Association of Christian Schools International (my employer) and the Association of Classical Christian Schools, though many schools were accredited by Cognia or some state or regional organization. The American Association of Christian Schools, Council on Educational Standards and Accountability, and Christian Schools International were also represented. Many schools are unaccredited, including a handful of homeschool co-ops or hybrid schools in the sample, including Covenant Christian Middle School and High School, a ministry of Covenant Presbyterian Church in Issaquah, WA. Doctrinally, virtually all schools mentioned affiliation with their church and many explicitly identified the Westminster Standards as their doctrinal standards. Some even require faculty to indicate agreement with the Westminster Standards, for example, Covenant Day School, a ministry of Christ Covenant Church in Matthews, NC. Final thoughts This preliminary report does not capture the full extent of the work of PCA churches in ministering to families through education. Some churches with closely related schools are not represented in the PCA data (for example, Westminster Christian Academy and Westminster Presbyterian Church in Huntsville, AL). Other schools did not have information readily available on their websites. Still, this article provides some helpful descriptive information, especially as many churches consider beginning their own education ministries with the expansion of school choice across the country. Finally, I continue to keep The Covenant School and Covenant Presbyterian Church in my thoughts and prayers. I am grateful for the work of the PCA Foundation in establishing The Covenant Fund. Please consider donating to The Covenant Fund or to the March 27 Fund. Matthew Lee is a ruling elder at Covenant Presbyterian Church (PCA) in Fayetteville, AR and director of research at the Association of Christian Schools International. Related Posts:

Patterns of voting on O15 indicate a divide between how REs and TEs, broadly speaking, view O15. If ever there has been a clarion call for ruling elders in the PCA to be engaged in their sessions, presbyteries, and at General Assembly, it is now.
Recently, I shared my analysis comparing Overture 15’s dissenters to their presbyteries’ votes on O15. It’s also possible to consider presbytery votes on O15 by the Minority Report on O15’s signers.
The PCA’s Rules of Assembly Operations allows a plurality of elders to file a minority report when disagreeing with a committee’s recommendation (see RAO 15-6). The original recommendation by the Overtures Committee was for O15 to be answered in reference to Overture 29. However, a motion to make O15 the main motion carried by a vote of 1094-1044 and this new motion was adopted by a vote of 1167-978, bringing O15 to the presbyteries. (See the GA Minutes, p. 80.)
Just as recording a dissent may indicate more impassioned opposition to O15, it is reasonable to think that signing the Minority Report may indicate more impassioned support for O15.
Who are the signers of the Minority Report on O15?
The Minority Report on O15 came out of the Overtures Committee (OC). The OC provides for a parity of ruling and teaching elders to be represented, one of each from each presbytery, a total of 176 commissioners representing 88 presbyteries. At the 49th GA, 80 presbyteries were represented on the OC, with 68 presbyteries represented by both an RE and a TE, ten represented by only a TE, two represented by only an RE (RE Michael Harnish representing Philadelphia Metro West and RE David Talcott representing West Hudson). Eight presbyteries did not have a commissioner present (Korean Eastern, Korean Northwest, Korean Southern, Korean Southwest, Korean Southwest Orange County, Pacific, Philadelphia, and Rio Grande).
In total, 148 commissioners served on the OC, including 70 REs (47 percent) and 78 TEs (53 percent).
The Minority Report on O15 was signed by 46 commissioners, including 24 ruling elders and 22 teaching elders. Here, the overrepresentation of ruling elders is noteworthy. Ruling elders composed 31 percent of the General Assembly and only 22 percent of dissenters against O15. REs were overrepresented on the Minority Report, even compared to their representation on OC, constituting 52 percent of the Report’s signers.

Which presbyteries did these signers represent?
The 46 commissioners who signed the Minority Report on O15 represented 31 presbyteries.
Both representatives from 15 presbyteries signed the Minority Report: Canada West, Central Georgia, Chesapeake, Chicago Metro, Eastern Pennsylvania, Evangel, Fellowship, Gulf Coast, Houston Metro, Illiana, Northwest Georgia, South Florida, Suncoast Florida, Susquehanna Valley, Westminster.
Only a TE from seven presbyteries signed: Central Carolina, Grace, Iowa, New Jersey, North Texas, Pee Dee, Tennessee Valley.
Finally, only an RE from nine presbyteries signed: Blue Ridge, James River, Lowcountry, North Florida, Palmetto, Rocky Mountain, Siouxlands, Southeast Alabama, Southwest Florida.
There is some overlap between the presbyteries with Minority Report signers and presbyteries with dissenters. Thirteen presbyteries have a Minority Report signer, but no dissenter. Forty presbyteries have a dissenter, but no signer. Eighteen presbyteries have both. Seventeen have neither.
What is the status of these presbyteries with respect to Overture 15?
Of the 31 presbyteries with Minority Report signers, 24 have voted on O15 (as of February 1, 2023), which is passing in 79 percent of them (19-5). In contrast, O15 has only passed 45 percent of presbyteries without a Minority Report signer (18-22). Although the presbyteries do not perfectly overlap, these numbers are identical to votes in presbyteries with dissenters (passing in 45 percent, 18-22) and without dissenters (passing in 79 percent, 19-5). Overall, 58 percent of all presbyteries have passed O15 (37-27). If three more presbyteries fail to pass O15, the amendment will not reach the two-thirds threshold to be brought to the floor of GA at Memphis.

Does size matter?
Following the analysis on last year’s Overture 23 votes by the fine folks at Presbycast, I also considered whether presbytery size was related to O15 votes. It is not.
According to their classifications of large (81 or more voters), medium (41-80), and small (40 or fewer) presbyteries, O15 has passed in roughly three-fifths of presbyteries, regardless of size. Vote counts are recorded for 57 presbyteries on The Spreadsheet. O15 has passed in 60% of large (3-2), 61.5% of medium (16-10), and 57.7% of small presbyteries (15-11).

Concluding Thoughts
The year 2023 marks the 50th anniversary of the PCA, as well as the 100th anniversary of J. Gresham Machen’s Christianity and Liberalism, in which he describes the theological liberalism of the PCUSA that ultimately led to the formation of the Orthodox Presbyterian Church. The founding of the PCA is marked by similar concerns of overtures to theological liberalism, which often coincided with ruling elder disengagement.
The Concerned Presbyterian newsletter, for example, published articles in 1969, 1970, and 1972 expressing distress over proposed amendments that would make it difficult for ruling elders to remain involved at presbytery and general assembly. According to Kenneth S. Keyes, president of the Concerned Presbyterians, liberals were able to gain control both because “conservative ruing elders were gradually rotated off” church sessions and because “ruling elders simply did not take their responsibility seriously enough.”
Patterns of voting on O15 indicate a divide between how REs and TEs, broadly speaking, view O15. If ever there has been a clarion call for ruling elders in the PCA to be engaged in their sessions, presbyteries, and at General Assembly, it is now.
Matthew Lee is a ruling elder at Covenant Presbyterian Church in Fayetteville, AR.

Related Posts:

To date (January 25, 2023), 51 presbyteries have voted on Overture 15, with 30 voting to pass and 21 voting not to pass, under the two-thirds threshold to bring the amendment to the floor of the 50th General Assembly. Overture 15 has passed in 81 percent of the presbyteries without a dissenting commissioner (17-4), while it has only passed in 47 percent of the presbyteries with a dissenting commissioner (14-16).
 
Recording a dissent is an important feature of presbyterian polity. It allows officers to disagree respectfully with their fellow elders, expresses solemn opposition to a position held by a majority, and provides transparency and accountability in public record. While I’ve voiced my own approval of Overture 15, nonetheless I am grateful for the men who had the conviction to record their dissent, as well as for the process that allowed them to do so.
Although members of a court agree to submit to the outcome of a vote, the Presbyterian Church in America’s Book of Church Order allows for members of a court to record a dissent or protest (BCO 45-1). A dissent is “a declaration on the part of one or more members of a minority, expressing a different opinion from the majority in its action on any issue before the court, and may be accompanied with the reasons on which it is founded” (BCO 45-2).
Recorded in the minutes of the 49th General Assembly are the names of the commissioners who recorded their dissent from the majority that passed Overture 15 (see pp. 80-85 in the GA minutes).
Although the reasons for a dissent may be recorded to accompany the names of those dissenting (BCO 45-2), so long as it is “couched in temperate language” (BCO 45-5), no reasons accompany the names of those dissenting in the minutes. Since that time, various individuals have published their opinions and reasons for dissenting in writing.
Who are the dissenters?
Altogether, 199 commissioners representing 58 presbyteries recorded their dissenting vote. Ruling elders (44, 22%) were disproportionately underrepresented among dissenters relative to their presence in the court (663, 31%), while teaching elders (155, 78%) were disproportionately overrepresented by the same comparison (1499, 69%).

The data seem to suggest that REs are more likely than TEs to support the passage of Overture 15, though of course more research would be needed to confirm such a hypothesis. Given this pattern, it is also interesting to note the presbyteries where the number of REs dissenting exceeded the number of TEs dissenting (Evangel, Southern New England, Southern Louisiana, and Philadelphia, each with one more RE than TE dissenting).
Which presbyteries did dissenters represent?
Nashville presbytery had the greatest number of dissenters with 19 (7 REs, 12 TEs). Evangel (6 REs, 5 TEs) and Metropolitan New York (1 RE, 10 TEs) each had 11 dissenters, Missouri presbytery (3 REs, 7 TEs) had 10, and Northern California (1 RE, 7 TEs) had eight. Five other presbyteries had six dissenters each. Another 48 presbyteries had five or fewer, including 20 each with one dissenter.

Thirty presbyteries did not have a single commissioner recording a dissenting vote. They are: Arizona, Ascension, Canada West, Columbus Metro, Fellowship, Grace, Gulf Coast, Heartland, Heritage, Illiana, Iowa, James River, Korean Northeastern, Korean Northwest, Korean Southern, New Jersey, New River, Northern New England, Northwest Georgia, Ohio, Pee Dee, Philadelphia Metro West, Platte Valley, Providence, Savannah River, Siouxlands, Southeast Alabama, Southwest Florida, Warrior, West Hudson.
What is the status of these presbyteries with respect to Overture 15?
As recording a dissent indicates more impassioned opposition to Overture 15, it is reasonable to believe that these commissioners may be playing a role to that effect in their presbyteries. To date (January 25, 2023), 51 presbyteries have voted on Overture 15, with 30 voting to pass and 21 voting not to pass, under the two-thirds threshold to bring the amendment to the floor of the 50th General Assembly. Overture 15 has passed in 81 percent of the presbyteries without a dissenting commissioner (17-4), while it has only passed in 47 percent of the presbyteries with a dissenting commissioner (14-16).

Concluding Thoughts
As I’ve already stated, I have great respect for presbyterian polity, and the processes by which men debate issues at hand, vote, and even express disagreement with outcomes. It is therefore important for men elected to office to engage with the issues and participate in the process. This includes both teaching and ruling elders. Given some of the disparities on those dissenting, for good or for ill, ruling elders are the tillermen who will help steer the direction of the PCA by their participation or lack thereof.
Matthew Lee is a ruling elder at Covenant Presbyterian Church in Fayetteville, AR.
Related Posts:

Sabbath-keeping does not come naturally to me. It does not fit with my sensibilities; I much prefer believing that I may refresh myself in any way I please on the Lord’s Day. But as the Spirit has sanctified me to put my Sabbath-breaking to death, I am learning to delight more and more in it. Keeping the Sabbath teaches me to remember God’s covenant, to make him my delight, to express to others my resurrection hope, to declare God’s lordship over my life, and to demonstrate love for my neighbor. The Sabbath is vital to the Christian religion.

Presbyterians hold a distinctively high regard for the Sabbath, but officers of the Presbyterian Church in America regularly take exception to the Westminsterian view of the Sabbath. Men taking this exception may not see it as the mistake it is. To be clear, Sabbath-keeping does not come naturally to me, either. But I have learned to delight in the Sabbath and to see more clearly how it is the straight teaching of Scripture. The Sabbath has taught me to remember God’s covenant, to make him my delight, to express to others my resurrection hope, to declare God’s lordship over my life, and to demonstrate love for my neighbor. As such, I am now more convinced than ever that the Sabbath is vital to the Christian religion.
I. Remembering God’s Covenant with His People
First, the Sabbath is vital because by honoring the Sabbath, we remember God’s covenant with his people. In Exodus 31:12-13, the LORD instructs Moses to say to the people of Israel, “Above all you shall keep my Sabbaths, for this is a sign between me and you throughout your generations, that you may know that I, the LORD, sanctify you.”
The fact that God singles out the Sabbath “above all” other commandments should be reason enough to esteem the Lord’s Day highly. But we ought to delight in the Sabbath not merely because God commands it, but because covenantal blessings are associated with keeping the Day.
The Sabbath is a day laden with blessings for God’s people, for God instituted the Sabbath as a covenantal sign between him and his people. For his people “throughout your generations,” the Sabbath is a distinguishing sign that sets apart his elect people from all others. We ought to take great delight in the day knowing that it is emblematic of his compassionate love for us.
II. Making God Our Delight
Second, the Sabbath is vital because by honoring the Sabbath, we learn to make God our delight. That God commands his people to lay aside their own pleasures is not an indication that he is a joyless deity, but rather an invitation that we might make him our greatest joy. The smallest child in our pews can likely tell us that our chief end in life is to “glorify God and enjoy him forever” (WSC 1). The Sabbath is instrumental to this chief end.
While we may be tempted to claim or believe that we delight in God through our hobbies and recreations, Scripture tells us just the opposite. Calling the Sabbath a delight means turning back from “going your own ways,” “seeking your own pleasure,” and “talking idly” (Isa. 58:13). It is precisely by honoring the Sabbath as God’s holy day that we learn to delight in God. “If you honor it, not going your own ways,” Isaiah 58:13 begins, “then you shall take delight in the LORD,” Isaiah 58:14 concludes.
Do we desire to be in God’s temple more than any other place (Ps. 84:10)? Do we rejoice in his day above all other days (Ps. 118:24)? Do we delight to be with his people above all other people (Ps. 16:3)? The Sabbath instructs us in all of these regards. To avert our gaze from an incomparable God (Ps. 86:8) and to draw pleasure from any other well dishonors God and does us no good.
III. Expressing Our Resurrection Hope
Third, the Sabbath is vital because by honoring the Sabbath, we express our resurrection hope. As Paul writes to the Corinthians, “If in Christ we have hope in this life only, we are of all people most to be pitied” (1 Cor. 15:19). But in fact we have great hope that Christ is “the firstborn from the dead” (Col. 1:18) and that “we shall certainly be united with him in a resurrection like his” (Rom. 6:5).
Against the objection that Sabbath-keeping is legalistic, if we truly keep the Sabbath, then we cast aside our legalism, resting not only from works, but from works-righteousness. The author of Hebrews helps us understand how the Sabbath helps us express our resurrection hope: “whoever has entered God’s rest has also rested from his works” (Heb 4:10). The Sabbath reminds us that our only hope for the life to come is in the finished work of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.
We do not get a foretaste of eternal Sabbath rest by mere inactivity on Sundays. According to the author of Hebrews, we ought to “strive to enter that rest” (4:11). Thus, the Sabbath is an opportunity for us to experience heavenly bliss through worship (Rev. 5:13; 19:6-8), fellowship with other believers (1 Thess. 4:16-18), and service to God (Rev. 22:3).
In contrast, by clinging to the things of this world, we make ourselves to be pitiable, living as though we do not have a resurrection hope. By casting aside that which is lawful on other days, we demonstrate that we are eagerly awaiting the life of the world to come, rather than desperately clinging to the trifles of this world.
IV. Declaring God’s Lordship over Our Lives
Fourth, the Sabbath is vital because by honoring the Sabbath, we declare God’s lordship over our lives. The Westminster Divines note that the Sabbath has “less light of nature for it” (WLC 121). We can perhaps by appealing to reason or another extrabiblical authority more easily conclude that murder, adultery, or theft are impermissible. Indeed, the laws of many ancient Near East peoples reflect such sensibilities (e.g., Gen. 26:10). But it may be less apparent to our reason why we must keep the Sabbath.
When the Ten Commandments are first given in Exodus 20, the reason appended to the Fourth is that “in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy.” God pronounces his creative sovereignty over the day and commands his people to keep it holy.
The New Testament affirms God’s sovereignty over the Sabbath. Christ did not come to abolish the Sabbath, but to fulfill it (Matt. 5:17) and in doing so proclaimed his lordship over it (Matt. 12:7; Mk 2:28; Lu. 6:5).
If our obedience to God’s commandments is limited to what we feel is reasonable, we are in danger of creating a God in the image of our reason or sensibilities, but not worshiping the God of the Bible. The connection between the Sabbath and creation (Ex. 20:11) cannot be diminished without also weakening other biblical teachings rooted in creation, including gender and marriage (Gen. 1:27, 2:18).
V. Demonstrating Love for Neighbor
Finally, the Sabbath is vital because by honoring the Sabbath, we demonstrate our love for neighbor. To keep the Sabbath is to love our neighbors by inviting them to share in Sabbath rest. In contrast, to reject the Sabbath is to hate our neighbors by oppressing them.
When the Ten Commandments are repeated in Deuteronomy 5, the list of those to whom Sabbath rest is to be extended is expanded and clarified. The reason for the commandment also differs. We keep the Sabbath “that your male servant and your female servant may rest as well as you” and that we might remember God’s redemptive work in rescuing his people out of slavery in Egypt (Deut. 5:14-15; cf. Ex. 20:10, 23:12).
Though I doubt anyone reading this keeps a servant in his employ, it is nonetheless true that a leadership principle is implicit in the Fourth Commandment. The commandment to keep the Sabbath “is more specially directed to governors of families, and other superiors” because they may, directly by employment or indirectly by example, hinder or help the Sabbath-keeping of those under their charge (WLC 118). Thus, nobles (Neh. 13:15-17), princes (Jer. 17:20-22), and priests (Ezek. 22:26) are particularly directed to keep the Sabbath and see to it that those under their charge are enabled to keep the day as well.
As part of the moral law, the Fourth Commandment is not circumscribed to believers. We are all superiors in the sense that we may command the labor of another through the promise of payment. We should not believe that we would remain guiltless by having another commit murder, steal, or bear false witness on our behalf. We should not deceive ourselves that the Sabbath is a unique exception in this regard.
Imagine the positive influence Christians could have on culture if we were committed to loving our neighbor in this way. As it stands, ignoring the Sabbath is most oppressive for workers in the service industry who end up working seven days a week. But if restaurants and big box stores discovered fewer patrons on the Lord’s Day, we could love even our unbelieving neighbor by helping him mortify this sin and partake in the blessings of the Day.
Conclusion
Sabbath-keeping does not come naturally to me. It does not fit with my sensibilities; I much prefer believing that I may refresh myself in any way I please on the Lord’s Day. But as the Spirit has sanctified me to put my Sabbath-breaking to death, I am learning to delight more and more in it. Keeping the Sabbath teaches me to remember God’s covenant, to make him my delight, to express to others my resurrection hope, to declare God’s lordship over my life, and to demonstrate love for my neighbor. The Sabbath is vital to the Christian religion.

Matthew Lee is a ruling elder at Covenant Presbyterian Church in Fayetteville, Ark.
Related Posts:

God has already taught our family much. Our daughter’s rare condition does not make her enigmatic, but precious (Genesis 41:38; Proverbs 31:10). Her missing segments don’t make her incomplete, but our family would be incomplete without her. She is and ever will be, as her middle name Dorothy suggests, a gift from God.

A few days after she was born, our daughter was transported by medical helicopter to the children’s hospital in Little Rock. Two weeks later in the NICU, she was diagnosed with a rare genetic disorder caused by missing segments of her 15th chromosome. She is, medically speaking, “missing a piece.”
The combination of advancements in prenatal genetic screening and the ubiquity of abortion has led nations to celebrate the disappearance (read: eradication) of certain congenital conditions. As long as the tragedy of legalized and normalized eugenics continues, it is possible that children with genetic disorders will become more common among Christians—who view all children as made in the image of God and gifts from Him—than in the general population. Since the Roman Empire, it has been the practice of faithful Christians to rescue the “weak” and “frail” children discarded by the pagan world (Craven 2010).
Congenital conditions are not the only reason for special education. But if the prevalence of children with disabilities among Christians rises relative to the general population, special education will increasingly become the exclusive concern of the Christian community.
What kind of education do I hope my daughter can receive? And why is my hope rooted in my faith?
Bearing the Image of God
Christians should deeply care about special education because all people bear the image of God. As Dutch theologian Herman Bavinck once wrote, “But among all creatures, only man is the image of God, the highest and richest revelation of God, and therefore head and crown of the entire creation” (qtd. in Hoekema 1986, 12; cf. Genesis 1:26-31). God continues to be intimately involved in the creation of each person who is formed, knitted together, and fearfully and wonderfully made by God, as Psalm 139:13-14 makes clear.
My wife and I take comfort in the knowledge that our daughter’s condition is not the product of a random transcription error, but that she is known by God, precisely and purposefully created “that the works of God might be displayed” in her (John 9:3). We believe that her condition can only be explained as coming from God’s hand, and since it comes from His hand, it can only be for our good (Psalm 119:71; Jeremiah 29:11) and for his glory (Psalm 118:23).
Christians who affirm the Imago Dei cannot but be deeply concerned for special education, for what reason could we justify the training up of some image bearers but not others? We learn from Genesis 1 that each image bearer is endowed with authority over all creation, created in fellowship with God and each other, and commanded to be responsible for filling the earth with God’s glory. What do our special education practices teach our children and profess to an unbelieving world about our reliance on the sovereignty of God and the belief in the dignity of all people?
Read More
Related Posts: