After the debate on the deaconesses concluded, a similar theological issue, with nuances, came up a report or two later.  This was in the review of presbytery records.

In particular, the minutes of Northern California Presbytery, in an examination of a TE, (I missed if this was for ordination or membership) the man being examined is recorded to have stated exceptions that “A woman may do anything in worship that a non-ordained man may do.”  This means not only reading scripture, but teaching on it by preaching, which would be against the Westminster Standards.  Based on this, and other comments, a closely divided commissioner committee led to a minority report that proposed having these records noted with not just exception, but with an exemption that needed to be answered by the presbytery.  The rational was that this would have opened the way for dialog with the Presbytery to further investigate the subtleties and specifics of the man’s comments.

The debate was marked by a number of interesting comments.  One from a TE from that Presbytery noted the man was no longer in the Presbytery.  This was answered by the observation that this was a procedural matter now, not a specific of this examination.  There was a comment from TE Tim Keller that many members of the PCA might share this exception relative to letting women preach.

The minority report was defeated and that item was referred, that is recommitted, back to the committee since it was such a close committee vote.  The remainder of the Presbytery minutes were approved outside of that item.

Part of the comments in the minutes indicated that the TE being examined would commission men and women as deacons rather than ordain only men.  It was noted in the latter part of the debate that while the decision on the deaconess overtures was to work it out at the presbytery level, in this case there was an unsatisfactory exception because the presbytery did work it out at the presbytery level.  There was an amendment proposed that the exemption be changed from “unsatisfactory” to “satisfactory” in light of this but the change was defeated. 

UPDATE 6/16/08:  Thanks to those who have helped me out where I missed, by omission or comission, the details of the debate here.  However, TE Lane Keister from the blog Green Baggins delivered the minority report on this one and he has now discussed this part of the GA in a post on his blog.  Thanks Lane and now after seeing you on the webcast I can put a face with the name.