One Year Later

Former EPC Pastor Describes Transition to PCA

By Joseph Yerger
TE, Ohio Presbytery (PCA)

Ed. Note: The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the Plumb Line Editorial Board.
 

As churches in the EPC consider their future, I would like to offer my own perspective as one who left a year ago to join the PCA. I hope that by sharing my experience it will help to guide and inform others who might be facing a similar transition.
 
Although the decision to leave the EPC was relatively easy, deciding where to go was much less so. Our congregation was established in 1815, and its history can be traced through the old PCUSA (the “Northern Church”) to the merger with the UPCNA in 1958 (the “United Presbyterian Church”), to reunification and the creation of the modern PC(USA) in 1983. However, because of its changing cultural perspectives regarding homosexuality, we left the PC(USA) and joined the EPC in the mid-2010s.
 
Meanwhile, we had been an egalitarian congregation for decades. Over time, some began to realize that we were only egalitarian as a congregation by necessity (due to a lack of qualified, capable, and willing men to serve as officers) rather than firm conviction. When the question of homosexual ordination began to plague the EPC, we knew that we did not want to go through this story again because we know how it ends — so we left, and then we began our search for where to go.
 
Like good Presbyterians, we created a Search Committee. We chose two Ruling Elders, two women and another member-at-large (male) to consider our options and make a final recommendation to the congregation. They considered 10 options: six Presbyterian denominations,¹ three Reformed (but not Presbyterian) denominations,² and independence. Each option was evaluated according to a consistent set of questions:
 
Doctrinal Positions

• Confessional?
  • Which? The Westminster Standards or the Three Forms of Unity or The Second London Baptist?
  • Subscription? Must clergy subscribe (affirm) the standard entirely or are they able to take exceptions (scruples)?
• Denominational Statement of Faith or “Essentials”?
• Published Social Positions
• Position on the ordination of women
• Position on the ordination of homosexuals
• Position on gender and sexuality
• Position on “Christian Nationalism” and “Theonomy” (the regulations of Scripture taking priority over those of the wider culture and society; forceful imposition of Christian morality and ethics on culture)
• What are the requirements for ordination?
• What Missions do they support as a denomination?
• Any preferred eschatological position? (favoring pre-Mil Dispensationalism, post-Mil Reconstructionism, position not considered essential?)
  • The most important things are that they affirm: bodily resurrection of all the dead, the physical return of Jesus Christ, a time of judgment, and “God Wins.” The “Hows” of getting through there are less important than the fact that we will get through there.
• Any preferred position on Creation?
• How is evangelism defined and prioritized?

Authority

• What authority does the denomination have over the local church?
• What authority does the local church have upon the denomination?
• How quick do/can changes be made to/in the denomination?
• How long (# of pages) is its Polity? (more/less; structure/flexibility)
• How involved is the denomination with the local church?
• What other denominations and organizations do they have relationships with (fraternal relations between denominations, membership in other organizations)?

Property ownership

• Does each individual church own their property or is it owned by the denomination (trust clause; held in trust)?

Membership

• Is the denomination growing or shrinking (overall membership and number of congregations)?
  • Why?
• Are there any “celebrity pastors” or well-known teachers/preachers/authors within the denomination?
  • Who?
  • Denominational Publications?
  • School/Seminary affiliations?
• Requirements for congregational membership?
• General expectation of members?

As attractive as being independent initially sounds, they quickly reaffirmed the importance of church connectivity and relationships to the broad work of ministry. They also recognized that being independent would have a negative long-term effect in being able to attract a future pastor, since there would be no network to help advertise or to vet candidates. They also realized that future pastors might not be attracted to an independent congregation because of that lack of relational connectivity or the security found in having Presbytery membership. Meanwhile, the three Reformed denominations were quickly dismissed because the committee agreed that, as a congregation, we really were “Presbyterian Christians”³ and not merely “Reformed.”
 
At that point, we were able to rank the six Presbyterian options according to their specific distinctives and peculiarities. Vanguard was too small a denomination and too doctrinally restrictive, requiring the affirmation of “Six, 24-hour day Creation” as the key test of orthodoxy.⁴ Similarly, the RPCNA was too small. It was also too regional, although it was geographically close to us. Another negative against them was their “exclusive psalmody” and lack of musical instrumentation. Our congregation highly values the divine beauty and majesty that may be found in the diverse varieties of sacred music.
 
Despite being larger, the ARP also was too regional. Like Vanguard, the OPC seemed too doctrinally and culturally restrictive, more because of their orthopraxy than their Westminsterian orthodoxy. Furthermore, both the OPC and the ARP retain a form of “trust clause” within their polity⁵ and this, following our experience with the PC(USA), was an absolute “deal-breaker.” The final challenge was choosing between ECO and the PCA. The decision between these two denominations came down to two determining points: Having now exited two denominations on account of their (perceived) liberal or progressive drift, we should not choose to go further “leftward” on the denominational spectrum. As one of the committee members (a self-avowed, convicted egalitarian) observed when making the ultimate recommendation to the congregation, almost every denomination that has engaged in the ordination of women elders has eventually supported, encouraged, and endorsed the ordination of homosexuals.⁶
 
After considering all these options, the PCA was honestly our only viable choice. At the time, we had two women serving on/with Session; one of whom had been our Clerk of Session for decades. Yet, both women agreed that Biblical faithfulness and fidelity in the realm of sexuality (opposing the affirmation of homosexuality or homosexual officers, even if celibate) was more important than women’s ordination. So, they willingly resigned once the recommendation to petition the PCA for reception was made. Nevertheless, the congregation was not unanimous on this vote.
 
When we held our congregational meeting to hear, discuss, and decide on the recommendation, we had some members argue for the validity and necessity of women’s ordination. When we voted, they voted with their conscience and graciously accepted the result, agreeing that the will (and good) of the body is more important than their personal preferences. After we were received into the PCA, we did not lose any of our members over this issue. Therefore, since the congregation made its decision we have continued to remain united.
 
After the EPC
 
Our congregation left the EPC in November 2024. Our Denominational Search Committee spent three months evaluating 10 different options. But after several members of the committee had attended a local PCA Presbytery meeting, they agreed that this was the only reasonable choice for our congregation.
 
We petitioned the Presbytery for membership. Both I (as Teaching Elder) and our Ruling Elders were examined by the Presbytery (our Ruling Elders were examined by the Presbytery Candidates & Credentials committee acting as a Commission of Presbytery) as to our knowledge of Scripture, our understanding of Theology and Church History (including the history of the PCA), and our own particular views about assorted “hot button” topics. In May 2025 we were received as a congregation of the PCA and in June 2025 I attended my first PCA General Assembly.
 
1. The first significant difference that we have experienced is the culture of earnest prayer within the PCA.
 
Although the EPC considers itself a “praying denomination,” the character and quality of prayer in our new denomination is vastly different. Prayer is offered at the beginning and end of every report, Presbytery action, or activity and they do not feel pro forma or like someone is merely “going through the motions.” These prayers are not “empty words” nor “religious puffery,” neither do they seek to recreate The Valley of Vision. Every prayer is offered with reverence and the confidence that it is heard, and with the hopeful desire that it would be found pleasing to the LORD.
 
During every Presbytery meeting we set aside a time for prayer requests and to pray for one another, our respective congregations, and their specific petitions. Each prayer is offered with the expectation that it is heard and that it shall be answered, as the LORD wills. Building off of this practice and example, our congregation has adopted the habit of establishing a rotation of prayer for each congregation in our Presbytery. Furthermore, during this year’s General Assembly, the ordinary docketed business was interrupted on at least three occasions by requests for urgent and intentionally specific prayer: on account of severe weather, a family tragedy, and medical concerns. Such things emphasize our belief that prayer matters and that prayer works.
 
2. The second difference concerns Elder participation in Presbytery.
 
Previously, we belonged to one of the largest (if not the largest by number of congregations) presbyteries in the EPC. Attending Presbytery was ordinarily a 3-hour drive each way. Power and influence was concentrated in a small percentage of the Presbytery and I will charitably suggest that this was principally because of their close and central proximity to one another. Across the Presbytery committees and leadership, Ruling Elder participation at the Presbytery level was minimal, with most Elders being selected from this same stable of congregations. While there was a stated desire for greater participation, there was little action towards encouraging that as a reality. Furthermore, between the travel time required and the minimal business of a substantial nature, there was little reason for Ruling Elders to want to become more engaged. Despite my regular participation and attendance, because of our lack of proximity (as well as my lack of “alignment” and “contrariness”) I was never recommended to serve at the Presbytery level.
 
However, now the central area of our Presbytery is only a 1.5 hour drive, with the furthest extreme (for us) being just over 2 hours away. We usually receive our Presbytery packet a week in advance (unlike our previous Presbytery where we were fortunate to have it 24 hours in advance) and we are expected to have read and become familiar with the material. Our reports are written, with the verbal report serving as a supplement and opportunity for questions and clarification. Business is conducted, while opinions and views are shared through vigorous debate as both discussion and disagreement are considered healthy. Meanwhile, both our Clerk of Session and I are already actively serving on significant Presbytery committees. Additionally, we have filled both of our Ruling Elder Commissioner spots for each Stated Presbytery Meeting.
 
3. A third difference has been the character of our worship as a Presbytery and at the General Assembly.
 
We gather together for a full worship service. We sing hymns and psalms. We offer prayers of confession and receive the assurance of our pardon. We hear the Scriptures read and preached by an ordained Elder and, whenever we have a ministerial candidate needing to preach, they also preach. Our time of worship is reverent and regulative, without innovation or novelty. When we gather together as a Church Court, worship is as much a part of our business as reports and motions.
 
Considered together, the difference found in these three experiences lead me to conclude that our Presbytery and, by extension, the PCA is more of an “ordinary means of grace” body than the EPC. Our practice evidences our earnest belief that God does work in the world through His Word, the sacraments, and by prayer. These are what we lead with in our ministry, then we can supplement them with the other gracious providences and wisdom that God has given to us: Ad Interim Committee studies, forms of research and social analysis, alternative means of presenting information, and so forth.
 
Lastly, when we joined the PCA, we felt the expectation that we should conform more closely to their norm. As a result, we have been very intentional about transforming ourselves into a PCA congregation. We are very grateful that they accepted us as we were and were very gracious in helping us become more fully integrated and involved.
 
A Final Reminder

Since I have been speaking about our specific experiences with our Presbyteries, I know that the experience of other congregations with other Presbyteries will vary. However, I am confidently hopeful that they will not vary much or vary towards the negative.
 
Before joining the PCA, my Ruling Elders and I spent the prior year getting to know our Presbytery by regularly attending the Presbytery meetings as guests. We were able to begin building relationships with our fellow presbyters and sister congregations before we had the opportunity to begin active participation. I believe that this helped us get “ahead of the curve” with our engagement.

 ____________________

¹ The Presbyterian denominations considered were the Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church (ARP), the Presbyterian Church in America (PCA), Vanguard Presbyterian Church, the Orthodox Presbyterian Church (OPC), the Reformed Presbyterian Church of North America (RPCNA), and the Covenant Order of Evangelical Presbyterians (ECO).

² The Reformed denominations considered were the Christian Reformed Church in North America (CRCNA), the Conservative Congregational Christian Conference (CCCC; “4 Cs”), and the Communion of Reformed Evangelical Churches (CREC).

³ Presbyterian is meant as an adjective expressing adherence to the Westminster Standards and the general system of Presbyterian polity, not as an “identity.”

⁴ https://vanguardpresbyterianchurch.com/commitments/

⁵ https://opc.org/BCO/FG.html#Chapter_XXIX (Form of Government, Chapter XXXI.5); https://arpchurch.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/FOG-Sept-2023.pdf (Form of Government 3.12, 3.13)

⁶ The United Church of Christ, Presbyterian Church (USA), The Episcopal Church, the United Methodist Church.