The Presbyterian Church in America is holding the 37th General Assembly here in Orlando this year. Since it's in town, there has been lots of buzz about it around the seminary, and if I get the chance I think I'll drop by to see what's going on. As far as the agenda goes, there isn't too much of great significance, save that ubiquitous issue of women and the ministry of the Church. This seems to be an issue that is not about to go away anytime soon.

I've written about the ordination of women before, and would generally side with the complementarian (for lack of better term) understanding of the respective roles of men and women in ministry. Increasingly, especially in the Protestant world, I’m in a minority on this issue. Over the years, I have heard and read lots of arguments in favor of a more egalitarian understanding of ordination and ministry, those ranging from absolute rubbish to moderately decent. The former are arguments that tend to be based on cultural values. I am very hesitant to give much credence to those arguments since Christianity is not to be shaped by culture, but is itself supposed to shape culture. Those of the latter sort are based on an honest effort at biblical exegesis, although as of yet I have found none persuasive enough to make me change my position.

I know there are those who defend the position that women should not hold ordained office only on the grounds that Paul explicitly says they should not. I also know there are those who defend the position that they should be permitted to be ordained only on the grounds that they feel Paul’s teaching is historically-conditioned. But neither of these is sufficient—the former is a proof-texting argument, and the latter is cultural.

Conversely, this discussion goes much deeper. It is, at the root, an anthropological discussion. Any question of the role of men and women in the Church must begin with a discussion of what God intended man and woman to be when He created them. The differences between men and women are not societal constructs, as so many today want to believe, but instead are normative and established in the created order. Will the Church mold itself to a deficient cultural understanding, or engage the issue in an effort to redeem a proper, holistic understanding of what it means to be human? Both these are huge struggles. Our culture has profound influence on our ecclesiology and anthropology, and that contributes in part to the incredible difficulty of dealing with the question of what it means to be human and what that in turn means for this issue.

On that note, many are bothered with the way the PCA has dealt with the matter. As I understand it, they feel that the issue has been sidelined and that no helpful teachings on how women can serve in the Church and how they can use their gifts most effectively has been presented. I haven't been in the PCA long enough to know all the ins and outs of the discussion, but I'm sure those are fair accusations. It sounds as if the denomination has sought to avoid the problem of cultural concession while neglecting to fully answer the question of what a truly biblical anthropology says to the issue.

What will come of it? I'm not sure. I am hoping the PCA continues to uphold its position on ordination. But I am also very sympathetic to those who want more clarity and understanding on what the role of women in the Church should be. God has blessed our churches with many faithful, godly women who are incredibly gifted and can add so much to the ministry of those churches. I hope the PCA engages in a thorough study of what the Bible teaches in regards to women using their gifts in service to the Church in order to build up the body of Christ and to fulfill the mission of the Church. Additionally, I hope it will serve to strengthen the unity of our denomination.

If you want to know what's going on this week, Twitter users will be updating on what's happening at General Assembly, and you can follow it all by clicking here.