Presbyterian Church in America (PCA) pastors Dominic Aquila and Fred Greco sat down in early September 2021 to discuss overtures 23 & 37 which are related to the Revoice/SSA officer controversies. They explained the background to them, answered questions posed about them, and clarified why these amendments should be passed.
Watch the video here.

The Intent of the BCO Amendments

BCO 16-4 Deals with Standards for Ordination for Church Officers.
BCO 21-4 and 24-1 Deal with Standards for Examinations For Church Officers.
There amendments do not deal with communicant members, their views and their membership in the church.
The General Assembly approved the wording on Overture 23 (which is the wording for BCO 16-4) by a vote of 77%. The vote for Overture 37 (the wording for BCO 21-4 and 24-1) was approved by a vote of 62%.
These BCO amendments add specific wording because of current issues in the culture that require clearer definitions of qualities like “above approach,” “a good reputation,” and “respected.” It is the nature of the development of creeds, confessions and internal church orders, that clarifying wordings may be added to affirmations in light of current issues.

The Proposed Amendments to the PCA’s Book of Church Order as approved by the PCA General Assembly

BCO 16-4. Officers in the Presbyterian Church in America must be above reproach in their walk and Christlike in their character. Those who profess an identity (such as, but not limited to, “gay Christian,” “same sex attracted Christian,” “homosexual Christian,” or like terms) that undermines or contradicts their identity as new creations in Christ, either (1) by denying the sinfulness of fallen desires (such as, but not limited to, same sex attraction), or (2) by denying the reality and hope of progressive sanctification, or (3) by failing to pursue Spirit-empowered victory over their sinful temptations, inclinations, and actions are not qualified for ordained office.
BCO 21-4 e. In the examination of the candidate’s personal character, the presbytery shall give specific attention to potentially notorious concerns, such as but not limited to relational sins, sexual immorality (including homosexuality, child sexual abuse, fornication, and pornography), addictions, abusive behavior, racism, and financial mismanagement. Careful attention must be given to his practical struggle against sinful actions, as well as to persistent sinful desires. The candidate must give clear testimony of reliance upon his union with Christ and the benefits thereof by the Holy Spirit, depending on this work of grace to make progress over sin (Psalm 103:2-5, Romans 8:29) and to bear fruit (Psalm 1:3; Gal. 5:22-23). While imperfection will remain, he must not be known by reputation or self-profession according to his remaining sinfulness, but rather by the work of the Holy Spirit in Christ Jesus (1 Cor. 6:9-11). In order to maintain discretion and protect the honor of the pastoral office, Presbyteries are encouraged to appoint a committee to conduct detailed examinations of these matters and to give prayerful support to candidates.
BCO 24-1. In the examination of each nominee’s personal character, the Session shall give specific attention to potentially notorious concerns, such as but not limited to relational sins, sexual immorality (including homosexuality, child sexual abuse, fornication, and pornography), addictions, abusive behavior, racism, and financial mismanagement. Careful attention must be given to his practical struggle against sinful actions, as well as to persistent sinful desires. Each nominee must give clear testimony of reliance upon his union with Christ and the benefits thereof by the Holy Spirit, depending upon this work of grace to make progress over sin (Psalm 103:2-5; Romans 8:29) and to bear fruit (Psalm 1:3; Gal. 5:22-23). While imperfection will remain, he must not be known by reputation or self-profession according to his remaining sinfulness, but rather by the work of the Holy Spirit in Christ Jesus (1 Cor. 6:9-11). In order to maintain discretion and protect the honor of church office, Sessions are encouraged to appoint a committee to conduct detailed examinations into these matters and to give prayerful support to nominees.

Reasons to Vote in Favor of Approving These Amendments
The focus is on church officers with an emphasis on their developing a Christlike character. The amendments recognize that it is possible for a man’s character to undermine or contradict the focus on Christlikeness in a number of ways, which may become hinderances to being qualified as a church officer, EITHER

By denying the sinfulness of fallen desires (such as, but not limited to, same sex attraction); or
By denying the reality and hope of progressive sanctification; or
By failing to pursue Spirit-empowered victory over their sinful temptations, inclinations, and actions

Why Are These Statements Important?
“By denying the sinfulness of fallen desires (such as, but not limited to, same sex attraction).”

The Westminster Standards teach the all-encompassing reality of the Fall and its effects on all mankind (WCF 6). Sin affects our total being such that we are dead in sin, and wholly defiled in all parts and faculties of soul and body and inclined to all evil.
WCF 6.5 states, “This corruption of nature, during this life, does remain in those that are regenerated; and although it be, through Christ, pardoned, and mortified; yet both itself, and all the motions thereof, are truly and properly sin.” No professing believer is perfect in this life and because it is possible for remaining sin to prevail in a professing believer’s life, church courts should examine men for church office carefully in life as well as in doctrine.

“By denying the reality and hope of progressive sanctification.”

WCF 13.2 states, “This sanctification is throughout, in the whole man; yet imperfect in this life, there abiding still some remnants of corruption in every part; where arises a continual and irreconcilable war, the flesh lusting against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh.”
Since professing believers are not perfect, the Scripture teaches and the Standards affirm, that their growth in grace is progressive. Those being considered for church office should demonstrate a maturity of life by a regular pattern of growth in Christlikeness. Even the most mature church officer continues to progress regularly in his sanctification and maturity in his life and faith.

“By failing to pursue Spirit-empowered victory over their sinful temptations, inclinations, and actions.”

WCF 13.3 states, “In which war, although the remaining corruption, for a time, may much prevail, yet, through the continual supply of strength from the sanctifying Spirit of Christ, the regenerate part does overcome; and so, the saints grow in grace, perfecting holiness in the fear of God.”
Professing believers are incapable by their own strength to overcome the effects of remaining sin; they must depend on the sanctifying work of the Holy Spirit to put to death the works of the flesh and by the Spirit put on the character of Christ. Church courts are to examine candidates for church office to inquire into how they put off the old and put on the new by the sanctifying work of the Holy Spirit.
Professing believers can say, “I was once a sinner struggling with—-, but Christ washed me. Some corruption remains, but the Spirit enables me to put it off the old and to put on its Christlike opposite.” If this is our true understanding for all professing believers, it is just as true for church officers.

The Amendments Will Guide Church Courts
These amendments are beneficial to guide church courts in their duty to examine church officers with respect to their Christian character. These amendments provide the following:

Amplify the Scriptural requirements for church office found in many passages, such as in 1 Timothy 3 and Titus 1.
Encourage courts to be diligent in examining both theological views as well as character. “Watch your life and doctrine closely. Persevere in them, because if you do, you will save both yourself and your hearers” (I Tim 4:16). “Keep watch over yourselves and of all the flock of which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers” (Acts 20:28).
Encourage courts to ask appropriate questions on a variety of areas: such as, marital issues, child abuse, racism, sexual purity, use of time, friendships, and financial management.
Use the language of “reputation,” which is in line with the Pauline language, and touches on qualifications such as to be “respected” (1 Tim 3:2), “well thought of by outsiders” (1 Tim 3:7), and “above reproach” (Titus 1:7).
Apply our biblical understanding of our theology and practice to church officers.
Define general moral thinking and behavior specifically to reflect and apply current realities facing the church.
Understand and apply the teachings of the Westminster Standards, especially as delineated in Larger Catechism questions 138 (What are the duties required in the seventh commandments?) and 139 (What are the sins forbidden in the seventh commandment?).

While the debate on questions about biblical sexual ethics gave rise to these amendments, the intent and content of the amendments cover the whole spectrum of character qualities for church officers.
As one outside observer noted: Seen in the context of the 2,000-year history of the church, the PCA’s deliberations were hardly revolutionary. But in 2021 cultural revolutionary America, the language commissioners proposed be added to the PCA’s Book of Church Order ring with Christian bravery before a hostile world:
Those who profess an identity (such as, but not limited to, “gay Christian,” “same-sex attracted Christian,” “homosexual Christian,” or like terms) that undermines or contradicts their identity as new creations in Christ, either by denying the sinfulness of fallen desires . . . or by denying the reality and hope of progressive sanctification, or by failing to pursue Spirit-empowered victory over their sinful temptations, inclinations, and actions are not qualified for ordained office. 
Watch the video here.

As America has moved from a Christian nation to a post-Christian nation, the meaning of words have changed.  Gay no longer means gay.  Equity no longer means equity.  Rather than equity being defined by God’s law ensuring biblical justice, it now is a wealth redistribution scheme mediated through the force of law or through guilt-manipulation.

Recently, talk-show host Bill Maher asked Senator Bernie Sanders what the difference between equality and equity is.  Sanders responded that he did not know. It was a humorous exchange between the celebrity and the senator who is a socialist leader in modern politics.  It was also very revealing.
The word equity is being used as a weapon in the modern woke and cancel-culture movement, but no one seems to be able to define what the word means. Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) officers are everywhere to ensure equity, so someone needs to define it.  Even in the church there is an absence of knowledge about the meaning of the word.  I think this is because the meaning has changed over the last 20 years, and the church has not kept abreast of a world that is being transformed right before her very eyes.
The meanings of words do change.  For example, the word gay used to mean happy and delighted. The Flintstones were gay – both Fred and Wilma.  Every episode was introduced by their theme song that invited us to participate in a gay experience. “We’ll have a yabba-daba-do day.  We’ll have a gay old time.”   However, today the word gay refers to sexual perversion.  Similarly, my mother used to tell me to stand up straight; “don’t slouch,” she said.  Today, that might be considered an inappropriate directive.
The meaning of the word equity has changed. There is the old meaning and a new meaning. The dictionary tells us that it means “even, fair, and impartial,” but that is not enough to capture the use of a word in any society. We always need a reference point or a context.
Historically and traditionally in a Christian society, the meaning of the word equity was rooted in the Bible. It appears at least ten times in most modern English translations.  An important text is Psalm 99:4 where the Psalmist says, “The strength of the King loves justice.  You have established equity. You have executed justice and righteousness in Jacob (NASB).” Equity was equated with treating people fairly, justly, and righteously in accordance with the Law of God.
For example, regarding crime and punishment in the Old Testament, equity was mandated.  If a man steals another man’s property, he is not to be put to death or sentenced to ten years in prison.  He is to pay back double.  This is equity (fair) according to God’s law.  If a man steals business property, then he is to pay back more than double, not just to restore the that which was stolen, but to compensate for lost income. This is equity (fair) according to God’s Law.
My wife and I watch old British movies on Britbox, and invariably the story involves someone who is put in prison for 10 years for the theft of something like a few items of clothing.  This is not biblical.  It is not fair. Old Britain might have been considered a Christian nation, but they drifted too far from the biblical concept of equity.  In some societies the punishment for theft is to have your hand cut off.  Horrible!  Unjust! The same could be said for horse thievery in early western America.
If a man murders another man the punishment is not probation or life imprisonment, but death.  “Whoever sheds man’s blood, by man shall his blood be shed (Gen. 9:6).”  Murder was a capital offense, when verified by two or three witnesses. We could go on with many other examples, but I hope you understand something of the old concept of equity.  It was rooted in the Bible, especially in God’s law.
Also, it should be noted that justice or equity must not consider race, gender, or economic status in judgment.  Lev. 19:15 says, “Do not pervert justice, do not show partiality to the poor or favoritism to the great, but in righteousness you shall judge your neighbor.”  The symbol of Lady Justice who is blindfolded is appropriate and biblical.
Since we have become a post-Christian society, the meaning of the word equity has changed.  It has been hijacked. Maybe this is the reason Senator Sanders could not define the term.
The modern meaning of equity is probably derived from the world of finance. For example, if you purchase a $500,000 home and pay $100,000 as a down-payment, then you have $100,000 of owner’s equity in the home.  You own one-fifth and the bank owns four-fifths.  In a sense, if it has five bathrooms, you own one of them and the bank owns the other four.  Thus, the word equity has been popularized to refer to wealth.
In modern parlance, equity has come to mean the transfer of wealth due to injustice in the past which has resulted in disparity between different groups of people. This transfer is accomplished by either force (government statute or corporate directives), or simply by guilt-manipulation.
It should be noted that wealth is more than just money. Wealth can include positions of power or privilege. Certain other symbols of wealth such as talents and godly parents cannot be transferred, but this does not stop the woke movement from transferring all they can. The goal of modern equity is to right every social wrong by the transfer of wealth, without any reference to biblical law or ethics.
Modern equity is a redistribution of wealth scheme which must first be enforced by civil government.  For example, in the City of San Francisco, shoplifting of merchandize under the value of $950 has been decriminalized, and any retailer that seeks to apprehend such thieves can be sued. You can walk in a store, steal property, and walk out and go home.  No one is allowed to stop you.  You don’t have to go before a judge.  You don’t have to return the merchandise.  Theft is now considered to be an act that creates equity, not disparages it.  It is a state enforced equity in direct opposition to the definition of biblical equity.
The Supreme Court recently declared Affirmation Action as unconstitutional.  Again, this was a law that sought to promote the redistribution of wealth based on race or minority status rather than on merit.  Remember that wealth is more than money.  It includes position and power.
Also, the forgiveness of student-loan debt was another equity scheme to transfer wealth by law from one sector of society (many of those who chose not to go to college) to another sector (students in debt).  Reparations is one more scheme to transfer wealth from one class of society to another – again by force of law.  From a biblical perspective, reparations is just another form of theft – sanctioned by government force.
In addition to the implementation of modern equity by the force of law, the other major scheme to transfer wealth is simply guilt-manipulation.  Because some white men owned slaves in the South, all white men today are perpetrators of injustice or inequity.  If you can make another person feel guilty, they will become putty in your hands.  This seems to be the goal of the modern social justice movement.  Guilt is associated with the color of your skin or into what family you were born.  White men are guilty, period!
I must admit, that as a white man I am privileged, but this privilege comes by the grace of God, and not because there is any inherent goodness in me more than what exists in any others.  We are all wretched sinners because of our connection to Adam.
It is also interesting to note that within the structure of the white race there are inequities. I was raised in Appalachia where the sun hardly shined (because of the mountains), and where there were few dentists.  We wanted to improve our way of life, but we never wanted to do it with handouts from the civil government or by the force of law.  The Peace Corps was never welcome in our town.  We wanted to climb out of our poor condition, but only through merit and hard work.
As America has moved from a Christian nation to a post-Christian nation, the meaning of words have changed.  Gay no longer means gay.  Equity no longer means equity.  Rather than equity being defined by God’s law ensuring biblical justice, it now is a wealth redistribution scheme mediated through the force of law or through guilt-manipulation.
The gospel is the only answer to this change in America.  Only the gospel can right what is wrong.  Only the gospel can put fathers back into the home.  Only the gospel can give men the drive to use their gifts to the fullest for the glory of God.  Only the gospel can give privileged men humility and give marginalized men a hope of advancement in a society such as ours.
It appears that the church is choosing to avoid the cultural battles of our day because we have left the public square, and because we have retreated from leading our people in understanding the issues in the modern culture wars.  Understanding the hijacking of the word equity is necessary in order to participate in that war.
Larry E. Ball is a retired minister in the Presbyterian Church in America and is now a CPA. He lives in Kingsport, Tenn.
Related Posts:

Written by Ian J. Vaillancourt |
Thursday, June 8, 2023
All throughout the Pentateuch we’ve got these pointers to Jesus. And the New Testament often shows us how Jesus fulfilled these things. We, as readers, often are so much less familiar with the Pentateuch, while being more familiar with the New Testament. But I hope we can dive deeply into the Pentateuch, be equipped to read it on our own, and notice some details. 

The easy answer to that is everywhere. Immediately after the fall into sin, Yahweh God is speaking to the serpent and cursing the serpent. But before he does that he says, I’m going to put enmity between you and the woman and her seed.
He’s saying that there are going to be two lineages, two seeds: one of the woman and one of the serpent. Ultimately, the seed of the serpent is going to bruise the heel of the seed of the woman. I like to ask my kids, How does a poisonous, slithering snake kill a person? Well, they slither up to the heel and bite and inject poison.
The seed of the woman is going to crush the head of the serpent. If my wife sees a snake outside—which doesn’t happen very often—it’s not pretty. If I go up and cut off its tail or cut it in two, the front half will just slither away. The way to kill a snake is to crush its head, or cut off its head. And in a similar way, this is an image of two lineages that are going to come and they are going to be in conflict with one another.
Read More
Related Posts: