The Same-Sex Crisis
and How We Got Here

By Don Fortson
TE, Presbytery of the Central Carolinas

The EPC is facing a major crisis regarding the ordination of candidates who experience same-sex attraction, identify as gay, or claim a fixed homosexual orientation. The question is: how did we get here and when did we stray from our Biblical and confessional standards? A key factor behind the crisis: the EPC’s Position Paper on Homosexuality (PPH) has been ignored.

On December 6, 2022, Stated Clerk Dean Weaver issued a document titled “Guidance from the Stated Clerk” (GSC) — a response to questions about the inquiry of Rev. Greg Johnson and Memorial Presbyterian Church in St. Louis for membership in the EPC’s Mid-America Presbytery. As word got around the EPC about Johnson and Memorial, there was an outcry of resistance to entertaining any thought of accepting this pastor and congregation into the EPC.

Johnson is a celibate same-sex attracted (SSA) pastor, who has publicly owned his homosexual orientation, and written a book explaining his version of gay theology.¹ Memorial Church is known for its ministry to gays (which is admirable), but the congregation has sponsored the controversial Revoice conferences that articulate unbiblical concepts about homosexuality. Johnson and Memorial caused massive disruption in the PCA and there was legitimate concern that the same thing would happen if they were admitted into the EPC.

At the beginning of the GSC was this question: “What is the EPC’s position on ordination for same sex attracted persons?” The Stated Clerk’s response to this question was disturbing. The guidance specified:

“It is the guidance of the Stated Clerk that same-sex attraction by itself does not disqualify a candidate from consideration for ordination.”

Given the fact that the catalyst for this guidance was the request by pastor Greg Johnson and Memorial Church to be received by Mid-America Presbytery (EPC), it is unmistakable that the Stated Clerk’s intention was to encourage the reception of Memorial and Johnson into the EPC. Instead of a red light, Mid-America was given a green light by the Stated Clerk.

It was perplexing that the GSC made no reference to the PPH, which is the denomination’s only position paper that specifically addresses the question of ordination and its relationship to homosexuality. It is likewise puzzling that the PPH is nowhere cited in the Ad Interim Committee (AIC) revised report — especially since numerous EPC elders pointed out this oversight in the AIC’s request for feedback this past summer. Why was the position paper most directly addressing the question at hand considered irrelevant? It can be argued that one reason the GSC and AIC ignored the PPH is that it would have steered them in a direction they did not want to go. The AIC report mirrors the GSC in its recommendation that SSA candidates may be examined for ordination in the EPC. All this effort by the AIC and we end up right back to the Stated Clerk’s original advice?

Both the GSC and the AIC report endorse changing the EPC’s historic position on homosexuality and ordination. The EPC’s position is openly expressed in the PPH which we will examine below.

Position Paper on Homosexuality

If one looks for the PPH on the EPC website, it is not there. Here’s the backstory:

In 2014-2015, EPC churches from around the country were contacting the Office of the General Assembly looking for protection from anti-discrimination lawsuits filed by local authorities. Legal counsel provided language for churches to insert into their bylaws or articles of incorporation. The NLT discussed the public visibility of the PPH which was on the website. Meanwhile, in 2016 the General Assembly approved the preliminary Position Paper on Human Sexuality and recommending “that the current position paper on Homosexuality be removed from our EPC website and made available upon request.” There was a motion to remove “making the position paper available upon request” but it was defeated. Apparently, some in the EPC wanted the PPH to be gone, but the majority of the Assembly wanted continued access to the PPH, as it remained the position of the EPC on this issue.² If the EPC no longer agrees with a position paper, it can rescind it. For example, the Position Paper on Capital Punishment was rescinded in 1995.³ The PPH has never been rescinded by the General Assembly.

The original PPH was written in 1986. A second iteration in 1994 highlighted an appendix, “Christian Ministry to Homosexuals.”⁴ The founders believed that the EPC should take a strong stand on homosexuality in light of what was happening in the culture and the PC(USA) and also be intentional in ministry to homosexuals. The old UPCUSA (northern church) had completed a two-year study on homosexuality in 1978. There was a majority liberal report affirming and a conservative minority report. It forbade practicing homosexuals from ordination, but allowed celibate homosexuals into ministry. The minority report was approved by the GA, but the nose of the camel was already in the tent. By 1980 the UPCUSA GA had approved a Gay Caucus. Bart Hess and Ward Church listed this as one of their reasons for leaving the UPCUSA and helping found the EPC in 1981 as a Presbyterian alternative.

Scripture is the Standard

The text of the PPH begins with a statement that the Bible is our moral authority:

“The question of what is moral has become a confused issue in our society. Even some Christian churches and their leaders are granting moral legitimacy to homosexuality … . The EPC asserts that God’s law alone as revealed in the Holy Scriptures is to be our basis for morality.”

Neither scientific studies nor personal experience can form the basis of morality for the Christian Church. The Word of God alone is sufficient for the task of defining what is moral and what is immoral. “Thy word is truth” (John 17:17).

In its overview of Biblical teaching, the creation story is foundational in the PPH as its authors describe the Genesis account as “God’s perfect design for marriage and sexual expression.” Commenting on Genesis chapters 1 and 2, the PPH states:

“Here we find the very foundation of human sexuality and discover the distinctives that give man and woman their God-ordained sexual identities.”

SSA individuals claim a homosexual identity of some sort, which is contrary to what Scripture teaches about humanity’s creation. Even after the fall, when men and women are born in bondage to sin, they still retain their created complementary identities as male and female. After conversion, a person’s pre-Christian self-perception as SSA, gay, or homosexual is transformed by the Gospel. New converts learn from Scripture that they were created with a complementary sexual identity as either male or female, and they renounce a pre-Christian false identity as a homosexual person. A believer claiming to have continuing SSA and identifying as gay is confused and has not fully understood or experienced the good news of the transforming grace of Christ.

Addressing homosexuality in Old Testament texts, the PPH quotes the Leviticus 20:13 reference of the “destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, two cites given over to homosexual lust and murderous hostility.” The PPH rebuffs vain attempts to discredit the straightforward meaning of Genesis 19:4-18 by those falsely claiming that Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed for their inhospitality. The PPH rightly terms this fanciful reinterpretation as “absurd” and “inexcusable.” The Old Testament is clear in its condemnation of same-sexuality; the PPH does not try to hide, soften, or explain away these texts. This clarity is what the contemporary Church requires in an age of confused and twisted man-made sexualities.

In discussing New Testament texts, the PPH underscores how Jesus did not dismiss the Old Testament law but “authoritatively interpreted the Mosaic Law” and “strengthened it.” It’s not enough to refrain from outward acts — “Jesus declared that everyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.” (Matthew 5:27-28). Of course, this principle applies to homosexual lust as well.

In Jesus’ ethic, sinful desires and sinful acts are inseparable — each making one guilty before God’s law. Claims that SSA is not the same thing as homosexuality simply do not square with Scripture. Unnatural sexual desires, i.e., sexual desires for someone of the same gender, is not less of a perversion of God’s design in nature than acts of sexual perversion. As Jesus’s words imply, to have lust for someone of the same sex is to have committed sexual acts in the heart with that person.

The PPH fully quotes Romans 1:26-27 and 1 Corinthians 6:9-11. Commenting on the Romans text, the PPH states: “Romans 1:26 points back to the relations God established at the dawn of human history, that of husband and wife being one flesh.” Romans 1:26 describes how men and women “exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones.” Natural relations are those intended by God from creation and cannot be equated with the unnatural desire of same-sex attraction. 

Victory Over Sin

The PPH states,

“… redemption from homosexuality is mercifully offered in the atoning work of Jesus Christ. The word of hope that the church presents is that through the death and resurrection of Christ, God offers sinners both the forgiveness of sin and the power to live a life pleasing to him (Romans 8:1-4).”

This statement underscores that Scripture speaks of both forgiving grace and transforming grace. The distinctive Reformed understanding of sanctification is about overcoming, not being permanently stuck in ongoing patterns of sin — including SSA. The Westminster Confession states:

“Although the old nature temporarily wins battles in this warfare, the continual strengthening of the sanctifying Spirit of Christ enables the regenerate nature in each believer to overcome. And so the saints grow in grace, perfecting holiness in the fear of God.” (WCF. 13.3)

Growing in grace by the sanctifying Spirit of Christ would be an expectation of anyone aspiring to be a Deacon, Ruling Elder, or Teaching Elder in a Presbyterian congregation.

The PPH states,

“As Christians who are ourselves sinners redeemed by the grace of God, we must reach out to those persons who are struggling with homosexuality, offering them the word of hope that is the Gospel to the end that they may experience true wholeness through the freeing, renewing grace of God in Jesus Christ. ‘So if the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed.’ (John 8:36).”

How could a professing Christian claiming a gay identity and ongoing unnatural sexual desires claim to be experiencing “true wholeness through the freeing, renewing grace of God in Jesus Christ”? Christ indeed sets us free, which is what the new birth is all about. A Christian brother or sister with continuing struggles in understanding their sexuality biblically is not suitable to be a Deacon, Elder, or Pastor. Could a SSA person say “follow my example” like Paul? Members of our Christian family with persistent sexuality confusion need love and discipleship, not the recklessness of being ordained into leadership positions.

Ordination and Homosexuality

The first generation of EPC elders were concerned about standards for ordination as it related to homosexuality. The original 1986 PPH concluded:

“Since the practice of homosexuality is incompatible with Christian lifestyle, and since officers of the church must be “examples to the flock” we cannot condone the ordination of practicing homosexuals to Deacons, Ruling Elders, or Teaching Elders.”

The 1994 revision of the PPH expressed it this way:

“Unrepentant homosexual behavior is incompatible with the ordination vows for the offices of Deacon, Ruling Elder, and Teaching Elder.”

At the end of the PPH is a summary of Biblical teaching on homosexuality:

“The witness of God’s Word in both the Old and New Testaments is clear, declaring that the practice of homosexual behavior, including lust, is a grievous sin, and that any who continue to engage in such activity face the consequences of God’s condemning judgment.”

Note the linking of homosexual lust (SSA) with homosexual behavior as equally grievous sin in God’s sight. The PPH is reiterating the Westminster Larger Catechism answer to question 139: “the seventh commandment forbids: adultery, fornication, rape, incest, sodomy, and all unnatural desires ….” The L.C.Q. 139 proof texts for “sodomy and all unnatural desires” are Romans 1:24, Romans 1:26-27, and Leviticus 20:15-16.⁵

Though not stated explicitly in the AIC report, there seems to be an assumption that SSA is so deeply rooted it is beyond one’s control or the sanctifying power of the Holy Spirit. Notice that on page 14 of the August 27 edition of “Pastoral Letter, Comparison, Presbytery Distribution” in the left (current Pastoral Letter) column you will find the AIC deletes the following: “In some cases, SSA persons experience a transformational healing of orientation.” In its place the AIC proposes, “In some cases, those who experience SSA will not only grow in resisting same-sex desires, but may be open to biblical marriage and/or develop opposite-sex sexual desires.” Seeing these two statements side by side, any reasonable person would conclude that the AIC’s change is minimizing the transforming power of the Spirit.

According to the AIC, as long as a person is not yielding to unnatural desires they experience, they should be able to serve in church leadership. In other words, SSA is OK provided one is abstaining from homosexual relations. This assumption runs counter to what Scripture teaches about homosexuality. According to the Bible and historic Christian teaching, homosexual desires are intrinsically disordered, i.e., diametrically opposed to God’s creative design for the sexual complementarity of male and female. You are in fact your biology in God’s eyes. A professing follower of Christ experiencing ongoing SSA has significant spiritual and emotional problems that need pastoral and psychological counseling. Contrary to our culture’s lie that homosexuality is normal, SSA is a distortion of personal sexuality and identity and would therefore be disqualifying for ordination. Our culture tells us that homosexuality is an unchanging fact of our nature, but Jesus says to us: “If anyone is in Christ he is a new creation: the old has gone, the new has come.” (2 Corinthians 5:17).

Conclusion

The final report from the AIC will be available in Spring 2026. Given the amount of negative feedback across the EPC to the AIC report, we hope the final report will reject the conclusion of the 2022 GSC “that same-sex attraction by itself does not disqualify a candidate from consideration for ordination.” Instead, the AIC could uphold historic orthodoxy and restore unity to the EPC through a final version of their report consistent with Scripture, the Westminster Standards, and the Position Paper on Homosexuality — all of which provide clarity on the question of SSA and ordination. The clear answer is “No.” That should have been the counsel offered in 2022.

 ____________________

¹ Greg Johnson, Still Time to Care: What We Can Learn from the Church’s Failed Attempt to Cure Homosexuality (Zondervan, 2021).

² See Minutes of the 36th General Assembly of the EPC, p. 54.

³ See Minutes of the 14th General Assembly of the EPC, p. 95

4 All quotations from the Position Paper on Homosexuality are taken from the 1994 edition, unless otherwise noted.

⁵ All quotations from the Westminster Standards are taken from The Westminster Confession of Faith and Catechisms in Modern English (Evangelical Presbyterian Church, 2004).