If you attended the 44th General Assembly, you are aware of the controversy surrounding an overture from New River Presbytery (NRP). Passed unanimously by the 39 churches of NRP, the overture recommended adding the following language to the Book of Order:
“Men and women who identify as homosexual, even those who identify as homosexual and claim to practice celibacy in that self-identification, are disqualified from holding office in the Evangelical Presbyterian Church.”
Instead of coming to the Assembly for a vote, the issue was referred to an Ad Interim Committee for two years of study. This decision was based on a ruling by the Permanent Judicial Commission (PJC). However, when GA commissioners learned that the NRP overture would not be coming up for a vote, there was protest and pushback.
Dr. Jeff Jeremiah, our former Stated Clerk for 15 years, stood to oppose the PJC ruling, claiming they had exceeded their authority and acted in a manner that was unconstitutional. In an extraordinary development, Dr. Jeremiah succeeded in getting the GA to overrule the Moderator, potentially clearing the way for debate on the NRP overture.
A GA floor debate on the overture never happened. In the end, the PJC ruled that the NRP overture was unconstitutional. And yet, the PJC offered no explanation for finding the overture unconstitutional. It has been reported that the PJC decision was not unanimous; a significant minority of the PJC was convinced that the NRP overture was constitutional but the Assembly never knew this fact. While the majority of the PJC may have had good intentions and reasons for their decision, their lack of transparency and the ultimate outcome give the impression that prejudice against the NRP overture was their primary motivation.
The ruling by the PJC declaring the NRP overture unconstitutional led to an agreement between EPC leadership, Mid-America Presbytery and a few leaders of the New River Presbytery who were persuaded to withdraw their overture and join in a new, consolidated overture that directed the formation of a two-year study committee in which both sides would be represented.
The formation of the committee was presented as a wonderful compromise, but it was extremely disappointing for those who came to GA expecting to vote in favor of the NRP overture. For some members of New River Presbytery, formation of the interim committee was simply the best possible option given the level of political maneuvering and prejudice against the overture.
What was clear to many commissioners at General Assembly is that some of our Teaching and Ruling Elders are in favor of allowing homosexual pastors into the EPC. Mid-America Presbytery appears to be willing to bring Greg Johnson and Memorial Church into their presbytery. Another motivation for resisting the New River overture may be that we already have same-sex attracted pastors serving in the EPC and there is a desire to protect them.
One obvious way that the EPC, under its current leadership, is acting in a way that reminds one of the heavy-handed tactics of the mainline is the way in which opposing views were shut down at the 44th Assembly. Every attempt to get the NRP overture on the Assembly floor for debate was rejected by the Stated Clerk, Moderator and Parliamentarian. These actions betrayed an intent to stifle the NRP overture even before the GA began. Again, prejudice against the NRP overture by leadership was transparent to many at the Assembly.
All of this raises some disturbing questions: if an overture approved unanimously by one of our Presbyteries can be so easily sidetracked by political maneuvering and strong-arm tactics, what is the point of bringing overtures to General Assembly? If overtures can be so easily derailed, why bother? If the voice of our presbyteries can be so easily squelched, doesn’t this violate our Presbyterian values and heritage? If GA commissioners cannot be trusted to debate a serious Biblical, theological, and moral issue, what does this say about the state of our denomination?
For churches that are worried about the direction of the EPC and seeking clarity on this issue, two years is a long time to wait. Some churches may not wait that long before making their exit. In the meantime, we must pray for the study committee with hope that it will produce a strong majority report that will uphold a Biblical, orthodox view of sexuality along with the recommendation for a constitutional amendment making it clear that only heterosexuals may serve as officers in the EPC.
Leave a Comment