Written by Anugrah Kumar

Urging Presbyterian Church USA to “repent and be restored to fellowship,” the National Black Church Initiative (NBCI), which represents 34,000 churches from 15 denominations, has declared it has severed ties with PCUSA after it amended its constitution changing their definition of marriage to include same-sex couples.

“NBCI and its membership base are simply standing on the Word of God within the mind of Christ. We urge our brother and sisters of the PCUSA to repent and be restored to fellowship,” NBCI President Rev. Anthony Evans said, according to Charisma News.

“PCUSA’s manipulation represents a universal sin against the entire church and its members. With this action, PCUSA can no longer base its teachings on 2,000 years of Christian scripture and tradition, and call itself a Christian entity in the body of Christ. It has forsaken its right by this single wrong act,” added the head of the coalition, which represents 15.7 million African-Americans.

Last year, PCUSA approved a vote on an amendment to change their official definition of marriage from “a man and a woman” to “two people, traditionally a man and a woman.” And earlier this month, the proposed change to PCUSA’s Book of Order got the necessary number of presbytery votes.

“Apostle Paul warns us about this when he declared in Galatians 1:8 that there are those who will preach another gospel,” Evans said.

“No church has the right to change the Word of God. By voting to redefine marriage PCUSA automatically forfeits Christ’s saving grace,” he added. “There is always redemption in the body of Christ through confession of faith and adhering to Holy Scripture.”

Evans said PCUSA “deliberately” voted to change the Word of God and the interpretation of marriage between one man and one woman. “This is why we must break fellowship with them and urge the entire Christendom to do so as well.”

At the PCUSA General Assembly held in Detroit, Michigan, last June, a majority of delegates voted for a recommendation to amend the Book of Order regarding marriage definition.

“A proposed amendment to change the constitution to include same-gender marriages in the church’s constitution passed the General Assembly but must be ratified by a majority of the church’s 172 regional presbyteries,” explained PCUSA in a FAQ document. “Presbyteries have one year to vote on the proposed amendment. If a majority ratifies the amendment, it would take effect June 21.”

This is not the first time that PCUSA has hit the headlines on its move toward greater acceptance of homosexuality within the church.

In 2010, the PCUSA General Assembly approved a measure that allowed for presbyteries to approve the ordination of noncelibate homosexuals – after which more than 150 congregations voted to disaffiliate from the mainline denomination.

This article was originally posted on the ChristianPost.com website.

Although the tempest surrounding World Vision’s policy change and abrupt reversal of policy change on hiring men and women in homosexual unions recognized legally as “marriages” has died down, the trickier issue of trust restoration remains.

For many theologically orthodox Catholics and Protestants, trust cannot be restored unless there are leadership changes at World Vision U.S. Those board members who voted to allow the U.S. branch of World Vision to hire men and women in legal homosexual “marriages,” need to resign in order for many Christians to believe that the policy reversal reflects biblical orthodoxy rather than financial considerations.

In addition to the many troubling comments from World Vision U.S. president Richard Stearns in the Christianity Today article that revealed the policy change, subsequent information suggests the need for clearer evidence of path-straightening that will likely come only from board changes.

The Washington Post reports that in 2013 World Vision received $145 million from the federal government, which many fear contributed to the decision to hire “married” homosexuals. Many Christians justifiably fear the corrupting influence of government money on World Vision’s decisions. (Don’t be surprised if homosexual activists now set their sights on World Vision’s government funding, because for them, everything—including the welfare of impoverished children—takes a backseat to normalizing sexual perversion.)

We should be concerned with the effect of de facto government subsidies on not just World Vision but on all churches and parachurch organizations, which in the future will likely be compelled either to lose their tax-exempt status or lose the freedom to teach the whole counsel of God on matters related to homosexuality and gender confusion.

Supporters (and former supporters) of World Vision are also concerned about the theological commitments of board members. Following the reversal of policy, board president Richard Stearns was asked in an interview what “kind of church” he attends and whether his church has shaped his views on same-sex “marriage.” Stearns provided the kind of evasive response one would expect from a politician and the kind of dismissive response one would expect from a theological liberal: “It’s a Presbyterian Church (USA) in the Seattle area, but I don’t want to drag them into this. I’m not telling people where I stand on same-sex marriage because I don’t think it’s relevant.”

The issue of whether same-sex “marriage” can in reality exist is, indeed, relevant to any purportedly Christian organization and it’s at least as relevant to the Christian life as premarital abstinence, which the board saw fit to retain in employment policy even while they jettisoned the requirement regarding homoerotic activity. But it shouldn’t surprise anyone that a member of the notoriously liberal PCUSA church would find the biblical understanding of marriage irrelevant to a Christian organization or Christian mission.

Stearns is not the only PCUSA member on the World Vision board. Dr. Stephen Hayner president of Columbia Theological Seminary, which is a PCUSA seminary, also serves on the board.

In August 2012, the liberal Columbia Theological Seminary in Georgia announced that it would “allow same-sex student couples to live in campus housing designated for married students following a year-long effort by gay-rights advocates.”

The new policy states that “’Students, their qualified domestic partners (e.g., those in civil marriages, civil unions, or domestic partnerships as established by the laws of any state, the United States or a foreign jurisdiction), and their children are eligible to live in campus housing.’”

Hayner said this about the housing policy change: “[O]ur community is committed to being a place of open theological and Biblical inquiry and hospitality for all who attend.” I wonder if Hayner believes that “being a place of open theological and biblical inquiry and hospitality” requires the school to allow polyamorists to live in campus housing. Wouldn’t intellectual consistency demand that they be shown the same kind of “hospitality” that homosexuals in legal but ontologically non-existent “marriages” are shown?  

Yet another World Vision board member, Reverend John Crosby, is also member of the liberal PCUSA denomination. His vote in favor of the disastrous and now defunct policy change is curious in that he strongly opposed his denomination’s decision to ordain openly affirming homosexuals three years ago, arguing  that “’We [the Presbyterians] have tried to create such a big tent trying to make everybody happy theologically. I fear the tent has collapsed without a center.’”

Although Crosby opposed his denomination’s decision to ordain homosexual clergy, he voted for World Vision’s anti-biblical policy change, arguing implausibly in Christianity Today that “the issue of theology and how to interpret Scripture should be left to the local church.” Is he actually arguing that theology and how to interpret Scripture on all issues should be left to the local church? If that were the case, then why did World Vision maintain policy regarding abstinence outside of marriage? Shouldn’t theological issues regarding fornication be left to local churches as well?

We can hope and pray for a return to theological orthodoxy and subsequent restoration of public trust in World Vision, but we should also prepare ourselves to witness more apostasy within not only our parachurch organizations but within our churches too. And as individuals we should prepare for the persecution that we are promised will come to those who claim to be cross-bearers.

Then Jesus told his disciples, “If anyone would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me. For whoever would save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for my sake will find it. For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world and forfeits his soul? Or what shall a man give in return for his soul? For the Son of Man is going to come with his angels in the glory of his Father, and then he will repay each person according to what he has done (Matt. 16: 24-27).

Become a monthly supporter of IFI.  Click HERE for more information.

From Christian Newswire

As of May 10, 2011, a majority of the presbyteries in the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) have decided to remove from our constitution the ordination requirement of “fidelity in the covenant of marriage between a man and a woman, or chastity in singleness.” These words reflect the clear teaching of Scripture from beginning to end, and are affirmed by our Reformed confessions. They are affirmed also by the Church throughout history and around the world.

Some interpretations given to the substitute language* assume that the change opens the way for the ordination of persons living in relationships — including homosexual relationships — outside the bonds of marriage between a man and a woman.

The vote, however, does not change the will of God expressed in Scripture. As Presbyterians, we proclaim our ultimate allegiance is to Jesus Christ, as he is revealed in Scripture, and our intent is to be obedient to him. We recognize that we are accountable to the Lord of the Church for our behavior, including our sexual behavior, and that the Church is responsible for including this truth in its proclamation.

We declare that individually and corporately, we Presbyterians are called to a life of fidelity to God, in accordance with his will revealed in the Word of God (e.g. Gen. 2:24; Exod. 20:14; Jude 3-8; Heb. 13:4; Rom. 1:26-27; Rom.13:12-14; 1 Cor. 6:9-11; 1 Cor. 6 18-20; 1 Cor. 5:1-13; Eph 5:1-10; Matt. 15:17-20; and others); and that, as officers of the church, we “accept the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments to be, by the Holy Spirit, the unique and authoritative witness to Jesus Christ…”; (Directory for Worship, W-4.4003b)

We further declare that we Presbyterians who are officers of the church, have voluntarily promised to “receive and adopt the essential tenets of the Reformed faith as expressed in the confessions of our church as authentic and reliable expositions of what Scripture leads us to believe and do…”, (Directory for Worship, W-4.4003c) and that the confessions call us to lives of sexual holiness; (4.087; 4.108-4.1099.47; 7.247-7.249;)

We further declare that we Presbyterians are called to repentance from every form of idolatry and from every other sin that seeks to rule us individually or corporately, including sexual sin and the temptation to accept sexual sin as permissible behavior;

We further declare that we Presbyterians are called to hold each other accountable to the standards, the teaching, the grace and truth, of the Scriptures and the Confessions, even when the councils of the church err.

We choose to obey God, as revealed in Jesus Christ through Scripture.

As grateful recipients of Christ’s mercy, we choose to proclaim the Gospel to those in error on this matter, even in our own denomination, and to seek their repentance and restoration to life in our Lord Jesus Christ.

As Presbyterians committed to following Christ, we call the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) to repent of this recent action that conforms to the desires of the flesh rather than yielding to and upholding the transforming power of the Holy Spirit, by which she is conformed to Christ.

* From an interpretation provided to the Presbytery of St. Augustine by its Stated Clerk, also a member of the Advisory Committee on the Constitution: “If a candidate is presented to the session for examination, and that candidate acknowledges that he or she is sexually active outside marriage, the session must (1) examine the candidate and hear the answers he or she makes to specific questions about faith, discipleship, and manner of life, (2) hear any objections of conscience to provisions of the Constitution the candidate may offer, and 3) determine if those objections constitute in its view a violation of an essential element of Reformed faith or polity. Only then can the session determine whether or not it believes that the candidate, in light of his or her statements, has ‘the ability and commitment to fulfill all the requirements as expressed in the Constitution.'”

Signed by the following members of the Presbyterian
Renewal Network:

Elder Marie Bowen, Executive Director
Presbyterians Pro-Life

Elder Sylvia Dooling, Executive Director
Voices of Orthodox Women

The Rev. Sue Cyre, Executive Director
Presbyterians for Faith, Family and Ministry

The Rev. Dr. Paul Detterman, Executive Director
Presbyterians For Renewal

The Rev. Carmen Fowler, President & Executive Director
Presbyterian Lay Committee

The Rev. Melany Hamilton, Executive Director
Presbyterian Elders in Prayer

Mrs. Sarah Hill, Coordinator
Presbyterian Coalition

The Rev. Dr. Zeb Bradford Long, Executive Director
Presbyterian-Reformed Ministries International

The Rev. Sid Rice, Executive Director
Literacy & Evangelism International

Elder Terry Schlossberg, Renewal Advisor
Presbyterian Coalition

Elder Alan F.H. Wisdom, Vice President for Research and Programs
Presbyterian Action for Faith and Freedom

The Rev. Bill Young, Executive Director
Presbyterian Frontier Fellowship