There’s something rotten in the Evangelical Covenant Church (ECC). It’s rotting from the inside due to the presence of wolves in sheep’s clothing like Peter Hawkinson, pastor of Winnetka Covenant Church; Michelle Clifton-Soderstrom, North Park Theological Seminary professor; and Judy Peterson, the recently removed chaplain of North Park University. Their theological drift away from orthodoxy is indicative of what is taking place in many denominations that are supplanting Scripture with personal experience and desire as the lens through which to read and interpret Scripture.

Hawkinson has been drifting in the direction of heresy for several years, but kinda, sorta started “coming out” in baby steps—always wearing sheep’s clothing—over the past two years beginning with the church leadership presenting to the congregation “a motion inviting the church leadership to propose to the congregation a specific program of purposeful discernment for addressing the issue of LGBTQ inclusion.” I kid you not. That’s what a December letter to the congregation said.

It’s a dense thicket of ambiguous, evasive double-talk rhetoric through which to wade in order to purposefully discern the heretical end game toward which Hawkinson has been leading his congregation, but I’ll give it the old college try.

Please note the use of distinctly unbiblical rhetoric. Rather than using biblical language to refer to erotic relations between two people of the same sex or to people who assume an opposite-sex persona, this statement uses Leftist jargon (i.e., “LGBTQ”) that embodies affirmation of these behaviors.

After the approved motion, came a 6-member task force to organize the “program of purposeful discernment,” a series of 7 meetings to which all church members were invited but only a minority attended. Then the task force organized a pack of 12* to write the “Welcome Statement” that Hawkinson all along desired. Here is that heretical statement, a statement that violates the ECC position, which calls homosexuality “sexual sin”:

We welcome you to Winnetka Covenant Church. We are a community of diverse history and ethnicity, gender identity and sexual orientation, status, ability, and challenges. We invite you to join us wherever you are on your spiritual journey and to participate fully in the life of the church.

So many things wrong, so little time.

First, please note again the secular “progressive” terms “gender identity” and “sexual orientation.” These are devious rhetorical constructs intended to confuse, deceive, and muddy the theological waters.

“Gender identity” is intended to render equivalent the experience of men and women who accept their biological sex and those who reject their sex. The Bible is clear that men and women are not to adopt the cultural conventions of the opposite sex in order to pretend to be the sex they are not.

The term “sexual orientation” is similarly intended to confuse, deceive, and muddy ideological and theological waters. It is intended to suggest that heterosexuality and homosexuality are flipsides of the sexuality coin, whereas, in truth, homosexuality is a disordering of the sexual impulse resulting ultimately from the Fall. The Bible is clear that God abhors homosexual activity and relationships even as he loves those who experience disordered same-sex attraction.

Second, Hawkinson (et al.) includes the sins of sexual impersonation and homosexuality in a list of non-behavioral and, therefore, morally neutral conditions like history, ethnicity, and disability. In doing so,  he reveals his view that homoeroticism and sexual impersonation are morally neutral acts, whereas, according to Scripture, they are serious sins that if not repented of jeopardize one’s eternal life.

Third, churches should welcome all people, but welcoming people does not—indeed, must not—include affirming sin as good. Moreover, inviting people to “participate fully in the life of the church” must include calling them to repent of their sins.

Hawkinson has suggested in the past that these are issues on which Christians can disagree. Theologically orthodox religious leaders beg to differ—strenuously. The morality of sexual impersonation and homoerotic activity and an understanding of the nature of marriage are to theologically orthodox faith leaders theological deal breakers.

Sam Allberry, British theologian who works for Ravi Zacharias International Ministries and the Gospel Coalition UK and who experiences same-sex attraction, writes this:

[Homosexuality] is a gospel issue. When so-called evangelical leaders argue for affirmation of gay relationships in the church, I’m not saying they’re not my kind of evangelical, I’m saying they are no kind of evangelical…. [W]e must never allow ourselves to think of this as just another issue Christians are free to differ over.

Theologian Denny Burke shares Allberry’s view:

A church either will or will not accept members who are practicing homosexual immorality. A church either will or will not discipline members for homosexual immorality. A church either will or will not ordain clergy who are practicing homosexuals. There is no middle ground between these practical polarities. If you are in a church that allows both points of view…, then functionally your church is no different from a fully “affirming” congregation.

Even former evangelical/current heretic David Gushee believes that churches cannot sensibly maintain mutually exclusive views on homosexuality:

I now believe that incommensurable differences in understanding the very meaning of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, the interpretation of the Bible, and the sources and methods of moral discernment, separate many of us from our former brethren…. I also believe that attempting to keep the dialogue going is mainly fruitless. The differences are unbridgeable.

Hawkinson isn’t the only heretical religious leader in the ECC. North Park Seminary, the seminary affiliated with the ECC, has professor Michelle Clifton-Soderstrom, who teaches young seminarians that homoerotic activity and relationships please God. And at the end of April 2017, North Park University chaplain, Judy Nelson, officiated at a same-sex faux-wedding between two men in defiance of the ECC’s (and Jesus’) position that marriage is the union of one man and one woman.

In my mind’s ear, I can hear the gasps of some who will find it unseemly that I would refer to people as “nice” and “kind” as Hawkinson, Clifton-Soderstrom, and Nelson as wolves. The real problem, however, is that too few Christians recognize that these faith leaders are wolves. It’s as if Christians who have read Scripture still do not recognize that ravenous wolves will look like sheep.

A ravenous wolf may be someone who knows that his or her teachings are false, or it may be someone who believes that what he or she is teaching is true. What distinguishes a wolf (or false prophet) is that he or she teaches lies. You can recognize them not by how they appear but by whether their teaching or preaching comports with Scripture.

If Christian leaders who affirm that which Scripture says is an abomination to God are not wolves and false prophets, who are? If Christian leaders who affirm a form of marriage that contradicts the very words of Jesus Christ are not wolves and false prophets, who are?

“See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ.” ~ (Col. 2:8)

*Pack of 12:

Karen Bowen
Peter Hawkinson (pastor)
Gary Isaacson
Nadia Jimenez
Gladys Johnson
Brian Madvig (church chair)
Mary Beth Molenaar
Maria Moreno
Arthur A.R. Nelson (pastor emeritus)
Mary Olson
LoAnn Peterson
Sue Samuelson

Listen to this article read by Laurie:

https://staging.illinoisfamily.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/Heresy-Infecting-the-Evangelical-Covenant-Church.mp3

IFI depends on the support of readers like you. Donate now

-and, please-

Three years ago, sensing that his pastor at an Evangelical Covenant Church in a Chicago suburb was moving away from theological orthodoxy on homoerotic activity, same-sex relationships, and marriage,  a regular attendee initiated a conversation with his pastor that this past April culminated in the pastor’s  troubling—though not surprising—admission that he no longer affirms either biblical orthodoxy or the Covenant Church’s position on these critical issues.

Yet more troubling still, this pastor—let’s call him Rev. X—revealed that those in authority over him were aware of his rejection of theological orthodoxy as well as the denomination’s position on these matters but were doing nothing. In other words, no church discipline.

Moreover, Rev. X has not yet revealed his abandonment of orthodoxy to his congregation.

Instead last month Rev. X embarked on a quest to lead his flock away from Scripture while claiming he merely seeks to make the church a “welcoming” place for those who identify as homosexual and to make the church a place in which “diverse” theological views are represented.

Rev. X’s transformation from orthodoxy to heresy and his unholy efforts to lead his congregation astray offer important lessons for Christians of every theological stripe because efforts to normalize homosexuality (and gender dysphoria) in and through the church will eventually sully every church’s sanctuary.

Here are just a few thoughts generated by the abandonment of orthodoxy by Rev. X and increasing numbers of church leaders on matters related to homoeroticism:

1.)  Revisionist pastors and theologians claim their goal is to make the church “welcoming” and “inclusive,” but as “progressives” so often do, they use language to dissemble. Rev. X’s church has always been a welcoming and inclusive church if by welcoming and inclusive one means welcoming and including sinners. All sinners are welcome and included at this church and always have been. Rev. X is not really seeking to ensure that those whose besetting sin is homoerotic activity are welcomed and included at his church. Rather, he no longer believes homoerotic activity is sin. He seeks to make those who place their unchosen homoerotic attraction at the center of their identity feel welcome and included by telling them that homoerotic activity is not sinful. Rev. X wants his church to welcome homosexuals by telling them there is no need to repent of homoerotic activity because it is not now nor ever has been sinful. Apparently, in Rev. X’s view, scholars throughout the first two thousand years of church history (and continuing to the present) made one huge exegetical blunder. It took Leftist scholars immersed in a culture polluted by the sexual revolution to discover that God has never disapproved of homoerotic activity.

2.)  “Progressives” toss around the word “love” a lot without a close examination of what true love is. They rightly assert that Christians should be Christ-like, but the portrait they paint of Christ is in reality a self-portrait. They begin with a faint outline of the biblical Jesus and fill in the details with their own desires. The Jesus “progressives” worship is a Jesus separate from his holiness. It’s a fictional Jesus whose love does not demand that our old selves die.

True love of one human for another, like Christ’s love for man, entails desiring that which is objectively good for others, and, therefore, Christ-like love requires knowing first what is true. We learn about truth from Scripture. Deeming good that which the Old Testament moral code condemns as wicked is wicked. Affirming that which the apostle Paul teaches will result in eternal damnation is the antithesis of love. We cannot be more Christ-like by condoning and affirming sin as righteousness.

3.)  Rev. X believes that the “theology of welcome commanded by Christ” is “to reach out in love to all people, beginning with the love of Jesus, trusting it will do its work among those who come to him by faith.” But Christ’s love is not separate from his expectation that those who come to him must repent. And repentance from sin is hampered when shepherds call sin righteousness.

4.)  It was only during the latter half of the latter half of the 20^th Century that any theologian arrived at the conclusion that Scripture does not condemn homoerotic activity. Both a plain reading of Scripture and deep, careful exegesis reveal that God condemns all homoerotic activity—not just temple prostitution or other exploitative activity. It is only tortured exegesis prompted first by human desire that leads to the conclusion that neither the Old nor New Testaments mean what they clearly say.

5.)  Marriage is a picture of Christ and his bride, the church. To argue that marriage can be composed of two people of the same sex necessarily means there is no difference in function or role between Christ and his church, which is surely heresy.

6.)  Those who embrace heresy repeatedly claim that the church should be a place where diverse theological positions are permitted. But is this an absolute claim? Are there any issues on which Scripture plainly speaks and which do not permit diverse interpretations? If not, what constitutes heresy? Historically, diversity has been tolerated on issues on which Scripture is unclear. Scripture is clear on the ontology of marriage and the immorality of homoerotic activity.

7.)  It is not possible for a church to embrace both the belief that homoerotic activity, same-sex relationships, and same-sex “marriage” are pleasing to God and the belief that they are abhorrent to God. That kind of contradiction cannot be sustained. Those who reject two millennia of teaching on homoeroticism and marriage are embracing heresy. Those who affirm heresy are wolves in sheep’s clothing.

8.)  Every year heretical theologians in many denominations (e.g., North Park Seminary professor Michelle Clifton-Soderstrom) are working like the devil to lead leaders astray who then lead their flocks astray. Any denominational or nondenominational church leader who decides to embrace heresy in the service of the “theology of welcome” should be encouraged to welcome Dr. Robert A. J. Gagnon, arguably the world’s foremost scholar on the topic of the Bible and homosexuality, to discuss and debate the topic—you know, in the service of diversity and inclusivity.

In November, Rev. X initiated a discussion  series on “LGBTQ” inclusion led by himself and another heretic and chief author of a petition that Rev. X and 114 other Evangelical Covenant Church leaders signed in January of 2015 urging the Evangelical Covenant Church to allow churches to reject theological orthodoxy on matters related to homosexuality. Since Rev. X includes the “T” for “transgender” in his discussion series, some intrepid adherent to orthodoxy should ask Rev. X if inclusivity demands that men who pretend to be women be permitted to use the women’s facilities at his church.  Should men who pretend to be women be permitted to teach children’s Sunday School classes? And should they be permitted to be camp counselors for girls?

Those who confront heretical church leaders like Rev. X will be accused of undermining unity and promoting schism. During those painful moments of division and strife, they should remember that unity never trumps truth.

Theologian and pastor Doug Wilson provides some clarity about the issues of heresy, schism, and the critical importance of church discipline:

Scripture teaches us to attack divisiveness with discipline. We don’t answer division with unity; we answer division with discipline. Divisiveness and heresy need to be addressed in local congregations every bit as much as adultery and embezzlement do. And when we separate from a schismatic, we are not being schismatic. We are not doing the same thing he is doing….

[T]here is another kind of future unity that we are supposed to grow up into (Eph. 4:13), when we finally arrive at the perfect man, in the unity of the faith. When we have arrived there, it will have been because we have rejected various winds of doctrine, the sleight of mind, and the cunning craftiness of false teachers (Eph. 4:14). In other words, in order to grow up into the truth, we have to reject the liars. And we do so while speaking the truth in love (Eph. 4:15). Identifying and rejecting the liars, the divisive, the sectarians, and the schismatics is therefore the path to catholicity. It is not part of the harvest—it is removing rocks from the fields during the plowing and planting.

Rev. X is not really advocating for tolerance, inclusivity, or diversity. He is sowing the seeds of heresy in his church and denomination. He is incrementally leading his flock astray. If he believes homoerotic activity and same-sex unions can be holy and pleasing to God, it makes no rational or moral sense for him to long tolerate the belief that homoerotic unions are intrinsically and profoundly wicked. It is  morally incumbent upon any church leaders who believe committed same-sex unions please God to denounce the belief that God condemns homoerotic activity and unions.

What Rev. X is now teaching will harm in incalculable ways the temporal and eternal lives of those whom he seeks to welcome by calling sin holy. His teaching will harm children and families. And his teaching will harm the Christian witness. Rev. X stands with those shining artificial light on the broad road that leads to destruction. In pursuit of a worldly understanding of “inclusion,” Rev. X and his accomplices are leading Christians to eternal exclusion from God’s glorious presence.

Join IFI at our Feb. 18th Worldview Conference

We are excited about our third annual Worldview Conference featuring world-renowned theologian Dr. Frank Turek on Sat., Feb. 18, 2017 in Barrington. Dr. Turek is s a dynamic speaker and the award-winning author of “I Don’t Have Enough Faith to be an Atheist”

Join us for a wonderful opportunity to take enhance your biblical worldview and equip you to more effectively engage the culture:

Click HERE to learn more or to register!

I received two thoughtful messages in response to an article I wrote about heresies related to homosexuality making inroads into churches. The men who wrote were concerned that the list of denominations I included could be misinterpreted as suggesting that the Presbyterian Church in America (PCA) has adopted the unbiblical positions of the Presbyterian Church of the United States (PCUSA). Their concerns are justifiable, and I would like to offer both an apology and a clarification.

My intention was neither to criticize the PCA—a denomination which I deeply respect and appreciate—nor to mislead readers about the PCA’s positions on sexual morality and marriage. My goal was to warn readers that attacks on orthodoxy are coming to every denomination—including even the steadfastly orthodox.

I thought this statement made clear that I wasn’t accusing all the denominations mentioned of abandoning orthodoxy:

[S]ubversive heresies are dividing Protestant denominations, including the Episcopal, PCUSA, PCA, United Methodist, Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, and Evangelical Covenant denominations. In some cases, while the denomination still affirms orthodox theological positions, particular pastors ordained by these denominations have abandoned them…. 

Evidently I was wrong about clarity, and I want to humbly apologize for my carelessness.

I should have created two different lists: one that included denominations that have already embraced heresy and one that included denominations that remain orthodox but have experienced challenges from within to orthodoxy. In the latter category, I would place the PCA, Evangelical Covenant Church, and the Southern Baptist Convention.

Both the PCA and the Southern Baptist Convention have responded properly to these challenges. The PCA’s challenge came from former PCA pastor Fred Harrell who several years ago rejected the PCA position on women’s ordination, foreshadowing perhaps his more recent theological mischief. Because the PCA steadfastly maintains its biblical view regarding women’s ordination, it allowed Pastor Harrell’s church to leave the PCA and affiliate with the liberal RCA. More recently, Harrell announced the decision of his church to permit homosexual practice within homosexual faux-marriages.

Last year, then-Southern Baptist pastor Danny Cortez announced his rejection of orthodox views of homosexuality. He sought to remain affiliated with the Southern Baptist Convention, proposing a “third way,” which would allow members the freedom to embrace heresy. Wisely the governing board rejected such a proposal and voted against this church’s continued membership in the Southern Baptist Convention.

Another worrisome signal of potential challenges to PCA orthodoxy include the decision of a PCA-affiliated club to remain a Vanderbilt University-sanctioned student organization following the edict by Vanderbilt that no clubs may discriminate in membership or leadership based on “sexual orientation.” The vast majority of Christian ministries at Vanderbilt refused to sign the “anti-discrimination” agreement. The PCA-affiliated group was one of the two that did sign it.

Moreover, in the a September, 2014 issue of the PCA magazine, byFaith, Tim Geiger, executive director of Harvest USA, a ministry that works with “sexually broken people,” shared that “roughly 70 percent of young people in the PCA (under age 30) don’t have a biblical view of homosexuality.” Harvest’s founder and president John Freeman explained that “their sociology now interprets and defines their theology about homosexuality rather than the other way around.” This theological problem among so many millennials–and not just among PCA millennials–will necessarily result in challenges to orthodoxy.

The Evangelical Covenant Church seems to have a more troubling relationship with heresy. More than one pastor and at least one professor at North Park Theological Seminary embrace heresy on matters related to homosexuality, though many Covenant Church members have no knowledge of the division these leaders are fomenting.

Professor of Theology and Ethics at North Park College Seminary, Michelle Clifton-Soderstrom, advocates for the embrace of heresy in liberal Jim Wallis’ religion journal, Sojourners. Her articles are titled “In Over My Head: Freedom and LGBT Inclusion” and “In Over My Heart: Friendship and the LGBT Church.”

Clifton-Soderstrom’s ambiguous, oblique, heartstring-yanking rhetoric masks some deeply flawed arguments that are contributing to the dissension building within the Evangelical Covenant Church. This dissension remains concealed from many Covenant Church members but is evident at annual leadership conventions. There are now pastors who align theologically with Clifton-Soderstrom but are not sharing their revolutionary doctrinal evolution with their congregations.

Just two weeks ago, Clifton-Soderstrom spoke on “Faithful Dissent” at a conference sponsored by the pernicious Reformation Project founded by Matthew Vines, author of God and the Gay Christian. Here is the stated mission of the Reformation Project:

The Reformation Project exists to train Christians to support and affirm lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people. Through building a deep grassroots movement, we strive to create an environment in which Christian leaders will have the freedom to take the next steps toward affirming and including LGBT people in all aspects of church life.

The keynote speaker was Dr. David Gushee, an Evangelical ethicist who created a teeny tiny splash last year after he fell into the rainbow-hued pool in which so many Americans are drowning. He had leaned leftward for so long, he could no longer hold himself upright. Kersplash he went.

Concerns about attacks on orthodoxy extend even to Evangelical bulwarks like Wheaton College (full disclosure, two of my children and their spouses graduated from Wheaton.) One Wheaton is a group of homosexual alumni and students who seek to undermine theological orthodoxy at Wheaton College. Yes, it’s a small group, but so too was the group of homosexual agitators who started the riots at Stonewall in 1969, and look at the harm they’ve wrought. A few foolish but impassioned subversives can grow in number and influence, leaving destruction and suffering in their wake.

Attacks on orthodoxy start in contexts that most church members rarely encounter or even hear about. The signs are first found at the fringes of culture or within our ivory towers. So, here are some tips to help you track the rise of heresy:

• Find and read articles written by theologians.

• Pay attention to the Fred Harrell/Danny Cortez stories.

• Ask your pastors if any debates or controversies are bubbling up in their assemblies, conventions, and conferences.

• Take note of shifts in rhetoric, including the use of “progressive” diction or arguments in favor of using only language that tickles the ears of secularists.

• Think critically about the embrace of the term “gay celibate Christian,” which both recent Wheaton College Ministry Associate for Pastoral Care Julie Rodgers and well-respected conservative theologian Wesley Hill use to identify themselves.

• Talk to others about whether this statement by Wheaton ministry associate Rodgers is theologically problematic: A “gay orientation” is “merely an expression of diversity, a unique way of experiencing art and beauty and community.”

• Ask your pastors and other church leaders direct questions about their theological beliefs.

Again, my sincere apologies to faithful, courageous, and wise leaders and members of the PCA for any confusion or offense I caused.

Please support IFI!