As the Evangelical Presbyterian Church (EPC) approaches its General Assembly from June 16-18, the issue of ordaining individuals who identify as “same-sex attracted” continues to be a flashpoint — or “red line” — within the denomination.
Attorneys Yvonne K. Chapman (left) and Robert Flores (right) warns EPC of proposal’s hidden risks
Two attorneys believe the proposed changes could produce unintended consequences along with legal and financial risks for the denomination and its congregations.
At the 44th General Assembly in June 2024, the moderator appointed an Ad Interim Committee on Same-Sex Attraction and Ordination Standards.
“This committee was *not* formed to study the permissibility of homosexuality or to reassess the EPC’s position on the topic,” the website for the committee states. “Rather, the committee was formed to address how the EPC should consider the expectations for penitence and sanctification of someone who experiences ongoing same-sex attraction but remains committed to the historic and orthodox biblical sexual ethic, and then to address in what circumstances such a person would be qualified for ordained office in the EPC.”
Of particular concern to several hundred teaching and ruling elders in the denomination is the pastoral letter being advanced by the denominational leadership. It states in part that churches “may consider for ordination candidates whose ongoing experience of [same-sex attraction] is a corrupted sin nature unindulged, repented of, and mortified; a temptation not entered into, but rather fled; a weakness not embraced, but rather mourned as they rest upon the grace and strength of the Lord.”
The letter then offers a series of questions for the candidate about his or her identity in Christ as a new creation and about how he or she would counsel those who may struggle with same-sex attraction.
Recently, two attorneys with the EPC wrote an article explaining what they believe to be the unintended legal and financial consequences if the EPC decides to adopt the Ad Interim Committee (AIC) recommendations about same-sex attracted individuals in ministry.
“The AIC’s recommendations erode the ministerial exception and may expose congregations who choose not to ordain unsuitable candidates to potential liability,” Yvonne Chapman and Robert Flores wrote.
The firm where Flores works, Gammon & Grange, represented World Vision in its successful defense of its right to hire employees who agree with its religious beliefs and mission.
The ministerial exception is a doctrine based on First Amendment protections for religious organizations in which courts do not tread into internal affairs of churches.
However, the authors believe that, if adopted, the AIC recommendations could cloud the position of the EPC and expose it and its congregations to risk of litigation. Some congregations may choose not to ordain same-sex attracted individuals while others agree to do so. The division within the denomination could cloud a court’s view of the governance structure and provide an opening for litigants.
The article also cites two additional “hidden” consequences: first, safety risks for missionaries working in Muslim countries, and second, the exodus of additional churches from the EPC.
If it is discovered that EPC missionaries working in Muslim-majority countries are part of a denomination that affirms homosexual clergy, the authors believe it could increase safety risks and thus additional safety and insurance plan costs.
According to Nate Atwood, a longtime EPC pastor in the Central Carolinas Presbytery, the denomination is already losing churches because of the proposed changes. He says if the General Assembly adopts the proposals, the number of churches that may leave the EPC will not be “inconsequential.”
He also penned an article taking issue with the “sanitized” language in the AIC’s report that refers to the individuals in question as “same-sex attracted.”
“Sodomy is the Bible’s language when it comes to homosexuality,” Atwood wrote. “The AIC report may call it same sex attraction, but the Bible calls the act behind that attraction sodomy.”
Atwood believes that substituting sodomy into the language of the report clarifies the stance being presented. “To be blunt rather than ‘winsome,’ the AIC report affirms ordination of those attracted to sodomy; that is, who have an inner desire to either sodomize or be sodomized by another man.”
A group of conservative leaders within the EPC, the Presbyterian Plumb Line and its supporters, cite the committee’s pastoral letter as leaving “wiggle room” for presbyteries to ordain a person who describes themselves as same-sex attracted but celibate.
The critics have authored a “Red Line Statement” that has garnered over 300 signatures of teaching and ruling elders in the denomination.
“[N]either a person who self-identifies as a ‘gay Christian,’ nor one who continues to experience ongoing same-sex attraction—regardless of how they label it—should be considered a qualified candidate for ordination in the EPC,” reads the Red Line Statement.
Andrew Brunson, an EPC pastor and missionary who was imprisoned for his faith in Turkey for two years, weighed in about the controversy earlier this year.
“I am specifically concerned that our witness and fidelity to Scripture are in danger of being compromised,” Brunson wrote. “Rather than providing clarity, [the report] introduces ambiguity and confusion. Compromise formulations have too frequently led to a drift away from orthodoxy, with irreversible consequences.”
Five of the 16 EPC presbyteries have adopted an alternate overture for the General Assembly to consider that reaffirms the historical position of the denomination that homosexuality is sinful in both desire and behavior and the biblical definition of marriage between one man and one woman.
According to the Plumb Line, Greg Johnson, the Presbyterian pastor of Memorial Presbyterian Church in St. Louis who says he is homosexual but celibate, is the source of the controversy. He left the Presbyterian Church in America in 2022.
His church inquired about joining the EPC. “That has stirred up all kinds of controversy because we’ve got some in the EPC that appear to be very open to bringing him into the EPC, and we’ve got other groups that are absolutely opposed to him coming into the EPC,” Donald Fortson, professor of church history and pastoral theology emeritus at Reformed Theological Seminary and long-time EPC member, told Christianity Today.
Victor Jones, the chairman of the EPC’s national leadership team, did not respond to a MinistryWatch email inquiry before publication asking whether the legal and financial risks identified in the Chapman and Flores article had been discussed and whether he had a response.
TO OUR READERS: The mission of MinistryWatch is to help Christian donors become more faithful stewards of the resources God has entrusted to them. Do you know of a story that will help us fulfill our mission, or do you want to give us feedback about this or any other story? If so, please email us at info@ministrywatch.com.
Access to MinistryWatch content is free. However, we hope you will support our work with your prayers and financial gifts. To make a donation, click here.