... ON THE ORDINATION OF WOMEN


The Evangelical Presbyterian Church does not believe that the issue of the ordination of women is an essential of the faith. The historic Reformed position on the scriptural doctrine of government by elders is believed to be that form needed for the perfecting of the order of the visible church, but has never been considered to be essential to its existence.

The Westminster Confession of Faith makes it clear that the church catholic is sometimes more, sometimes less visible according to the purity of the church at a particular time. Also, the purest churches under heaven are subject both to mixture and error.

Nonetheless, in spite of such failures to be all God wants His church to be, the Westminster Confession of Faith affirms that “…there shall always be a church on earth to worship God according to his will.”

Thus, while some churches may ordain women and some may decline to do so, neither position is essential to the existence of the church. since people of good faith who equally love the Lord and hold to the infallibility of Scripture differ on this issue, and since uniformity of view and practice is not essential to the existence of the visible church, the Evangelical Presbyterian Church has chosen to leave this decision to the Spirit-guided consciences of particular congregations concerning the ordination of women as elders and deacons, and to the presbyteries concerning the ordination of women as ministers.

It is in this context that the Evangelical Presbyterian Church states in its Book of Government, Chapter 7, titled “Rights Reserved to a Particular Church” that ”The particular church has the right to elect its own officers” (7-2). This right is guaranteed in perpetuity.

Finally, the motto of our church summarizes our stance: “In essentials, unity; in non-essentials, liberty; in all things, charity.”
 

... ON ABORTION

The Evangelical Presbyterian Church is convinced that the Bible strongly affirms the dignity and value of every human life.
 

“Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you; I appointed you a prophet to the nations.” (Jeremiah 1:5)

“My frame was hidden from Thee when I was being made in secret, intricately wrought in the depths of the earth.” (Psalm 139:15)

“Listen to me, O coastlands, and hearken, you peoples from afar. The Lord called me from the womb, from the body of my mother He named me.” (Isaiah 49:1)

“For he will be great in the sight of the Lord, and he will drink no wine or liquor; and he will be filled with the Holy Spirit while yet in his mother’s womb.” (Luke 1:15)

“And when Elizabeth heard the greeting of Mary, the babe leaped in her womb; and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit.” (Luke 1:41)

The Westminster Shorter Catechism, a confessional statement shared by most Reformed churches, forbids the taking of life while demanding the preservation of life:
 

“The Sixth Commandment requireth all lawful endeavors to preserve our own life, and the life of others.” (Question 68)

“The Sixth Commandment forbiddeth the taking away of our own life, or the life of our neighbor unjustly, or whatsoever tendeth thereunto.” (Question 69)

Scripture teaches that we are not merely to avoid involvement in injustice. God’s people are called upon to speak for the oppressed and defenseless. The Scripture passages cited above are evidence that God accords human value and dignity to the unborn child.

The 6th General Assembly of the Evangelical Presbyterian Church affirms that the Bible does not distinguish between prenatal and postnatal life. It attributes human personhood to the unborn child.

Because we hold these convictions concerning unborn children, we urge the promotion of legislation that brings our judicial and legal systems into line with the scriptural view on protecting the poor and weak.

Christians are called to be good citizens by impacting the state in positive ways. All citizens, Christians and non-Christians alike, must have freedom of conscience on all private moral and ethical issues, since God alone is Lord of the conscience. But the issue of equal protection of life under the laws of the state is not a private but a public matter.

The Bible teaches that all persons and nations are responsible before God for their ethical decisions, including those which relate to the preservation of human life.

In addition to prayers and general assistance, that the General Assembly urges that the following steps be implemented by individuals, congregations, and judicatories in an effort to provide substantial support for those impacted by problem pregnancies:
 

1. Women facing problem or unwanted pregnancies should receive support, love, acceptance and counsel from pastors, counselors, physicians and Christian friends both during and after the decisions they face. The Church must provide compassionate biblical and spiritual guidance to these persons.

2. The men involved who respond with indifference must be confronted with their responsibilities and role in such crises.

3. The Church must support and nurture women who decide to carry an unwanted pregnancy to full term.

4. The Church must seek ways to support and care for all children who result from unwanted pregnancies.

5. The Church must serve as a therapeutic community to those who have experienced physical, emotional, or spiritual wounds from abortion or giving up a child for adoption.

6. Both individual Christians and the Church should oppose abortion and do everything in their power to provide supportive communities and alternatives to abortion.

7. The Church should declare to the world and teach its members that abortion must never be used as a convenience or a means of birth control.

The purpose of this statement is pastoral. It is best proclaimed by those who are profoundly aware of their continuous need for the mercy and forgiveness of God. The Church must always follow the compassionate example of Christ who said, “Neither do I condemn you. Go and sin no more.”

... ON THE HOLY SPIRIT

Included in the logo of the Evangelical Presbyterian Church is a descending dove, the traditional symbol of the Holy Spirit. It also raises the question, “What does the Evangelical Presbyterian Church believe about the Holy Spirit?”

In our doctrinal statement of faith called “The Essentials of the Faith,” we read, “The Holy Spirit has come to glorify Christ and to apply the saving work of Christ to our hearts. He convicts us of sin and draws us to the Savior. Indwelling our hearts, He gives new life to us, empowers and imparts gifts to us for service. He instructs and guides us into all truth and seals us for the day of redemption.”

Our beliefs about the Holy Spirit, drawn from Scripture, are summarized in the Westminster Confession of Faith, where the following description of the nature of the Holy Spirit is found: “The Holy Spirit, the third person of the Trinity, proceeding from the Father and the Son, of the same substance and equal in power and glory, is together with the Father and the Son, to be believed in, loved, obeyed, and worshiped throughout all ages (Chapter 34, ‘Of the Holy Spirit”).

Therefore, we believe the Holy Spirit to be God, just as we believe the Father and the Son to be God in the mystery of the Trinity. The Holy Spirit remains, however, the least understood of the three. God the Father has a title that helps us define Him, and the Son took to Himself a body like ours. But the Holy Spirit by name seems less comprehensible to us and is therefore subject to greater misunderstanding than either the Father or the Son. How, then, does the Evangelical Presbyterian Church understand the Holy Spirit?

As previously stated, we understand Him to be fully God. His primary function in this age is to glorify Christ by reconciling lost humanity to God. “The Holy Spirit, whom the Father is ever willing to give to all who ask Him, is the only efficient agent in the application of redemption. He regenerates men by His grace, convicts them of sin, moves them to embrace Jesus Christ by faith (Westminster Confession of Faith, Chapter 34:3).

The activity of the Holy Spirit accomplishes what Jesus declared to Nicodemas as the only means by which an individual is able to enter the Kingdom of God, through the new birth. Jesus said, “I tell you the truth, unless a man is born again, he cannot enter the Kingdom of God (John 3:3-5).

In our redemption, the Holy Spirit accomplishes several things. He convicts us of sin and brings repentance. He enables us to believe, confessing Jesus Christ as Lord. He seals the believer unto the day of redemption. “In Him, you also, after listening to the gospel of your salvation, having also believed, you were sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise who is given as a pledge of our inheritance, with a view to the redemption of God’s own possession to the praise of His glory.” (Ephesians 1:13, 14 NASV).

The Holy Spirit functions within the life of the believer, unfolding and expressing the life of Christ in ever deepening, life-changing ways. This is the process of sanctification by which the believer is enabled to grow in grace throughout his lifetime. Sanctification is never complete short of glorification. Some Christians believe that ‘the baptism in the Holy Spirit” is a second work of grace, subsequent to the new birth. What is the position of the Evangelical Presbyterian Church in this matter?

As a denomination in the Reformed tradition, we subscribe to the ancient affirmation of orthodox Christian faith and believe in “one Lord, one faith, one baptism” (Ephesians 4:5). This baptism, while visibly expressed in the covenant sacrament that bears its name is invisibly the work of the Spirit that takes place at the time of the new birth. Paul expresses this truth in I Corinthians 12:13, when he tells the Corinthians “…we were all baptized by one Spirit into one body…”

Thus, we hold to the concept of the baptism in or with the Holy Spirit as the act of the Spirit that takes an unregenerate individual and, through the new birth, adopts him into the family of God. All the works of the Spirit that follow, then, are because of this initial baptism rather than separate from it.

Since Christians are called to “…be filled with the Spirit…” (Ephesians 5:18) all believers in Christ having been baptized into His body by the Holy Spirit should seek to experience the fulfillment of this command. We believe that Christians are called upon to proclaim a grace that reaches out to forgive, to redeem and to give new spiritual power to life through Jesus Christ and the infilling of the Holy Spirit.” (Book of Worship, 1-3).

Regardless of what term is used, we recognize this deepening work of the Holy Spirit in the life of the believer as being both valid and necessary, producing evidences of His presence in the process. What do we believe to be these evidences of the Holy Spirit in the life of the believer?

Some would require that Christians manifest a particular gift, such as speaking in tongues, as evidence of a deeper work of the Spirit within. Others would have us believe such a gift is no longer available or acceptable. As a Reformed denomination, we adhere strongly to our belief in the sovereignty of God, a belief that does not allow us either to require a certain gift or to restrict the Spirit in how He will work. Rather, we call upon all Christians to open their lives unto God’s Spirit to fill, empower, and “gift” as He sees fit.

The Holy Spirit is evidenced, then, in part through the giving of spiritual gifts. Some of these gifts are listed in I Corinthians 12, Romans 12, Ephesians 4, and I Peter 4. Our position with regard to the gifts is best summarized in the publication

“Questions Most Often Asked About the Evangelical Presbyterian Church” where we read:
 

Q. How does the EPC view the gifts of the Holy Spirit?

A. The EPC affirms the gifts of God’s Spirit as biblically valid for today, and counsels that they be exercised under the guidance of God’s Word and the authority of the local Session. Since the Holy Spirit is the source of Christian unity, we must ever guard against any use of the gifts which would lead to division within the Church. We also affirm the priority of the fruit of the Spirit over the gifts in the Christian life.

Because of our affirming of the validity of spiritual gifts in the Church today, we are sometimes asked if we are a “charismatic” denomination. The publication just referred to answers this question well.
 

Q. Is the EPC charismatic?

A. If you mean are we pentecostal, the answer is no. If you mean are we open to the gifts of the Holy Spirit, the answer is yes.

We believe that the word “charismatic” should not be limited to specific manifestations of the work of the Holy Spirit, such as speaking in tongues, but “charismatic” does refer to the fact that every Christian receives a gift, or gifts, from the Holy Spirit (I Corinthians 12:7,11). In Romans 6:23, Paul states “…the wages of sin is death, but the gift (charism) of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.” This means that all who are born again, receiving the gift of life in Jesus Christ, are by virtue of the gift “charismatic” in the broadest sense of the word (Ephesians 4:7).

What is the purpose of the work of the Holy Spirit? Obviously, it is to bring individuals to new life in Christ for their own sake, but it does not end there. When Jesus spoke of the coming of the Holy Spirit to empower His followers individually and the Church corporately which occurred on the day of Pentecost, He said that the Spirit’s power would have a particular purpose: “But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you, and you shall be my witnesses…to the ends of the earth.” (Acts 1:18)

Because of this primary function of the Holy Spirit to bring men and women to saving faith in Christ, the Evangelical Presbyterian Church sees the evangelization of the world as an urgent priority:

“The Lord Jesus Christ commands all believers to proclaim the Gospel throughout the world and to make disciples of all nations.” (The Essentials of the Faith).

Basic to all we have said here is our conviction that all Scripture is inspired by the Holy Spirit (II Timothy 3:16), and that He illumines our minds to understand the truths of God’s Word (John 14:26; 16:13).

In summary, what does the Evangelical Presbyterian Church believe about the Holy Spirit?
 

1. We believe that He is God, one with the Father and the Son.
    

2. We believe that He is the inspirer of Scripture and the enlightener of the believer.
    

3. We believe that His primary function in this age is to bring lost humanity to a saving knowledge of Jesus Christ through the new birth.
    

4. We believe that subsequent to the new birth and because of it He manifests the life of Christ in the believer in a variety of ways that include both fruit and gifts.
    

5. We believe that the power and gifts of the Holy Spirit are given to the believer to enable God’s people to do what otherwise they could not do; namely, fulfill the Great Commission through missions and world evangelization and build up the Body of Christ on earth.

To these basic beliefs about the Holy Spirit we commit ourselves. We invite others of like mind and spirit to join us, to the end that on the day of His appearing, “every knee shall bow and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord.”

Amen

Back to Start of Position Papers
 

... ON THE VALUE OF & RESPECT FOR HUMAN LIFE

There are certain theological positions taken within the Reformed tradition which include such issues as abortion, capital punishment, euthanasia, and participation in war which rests on the same basic premise. It is essential that this premise be fully understood.

God has an infinite value and unequivocal love for human life. After the fall of mankind as indicated in Genesis 3, the remainder of the biblical story is the story of God’s loving pursuit to reestablish at-one-ment. That atonement is finally and fully established in the birth, life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.

God’s unequivocal love is manifested in the ministry of Christ where we see revealed the ultimate ground for the valuing of human life. The persons most rejected by human society, most despised by men, are the very ones to whom Jesus reached out with tender love and concern. Above all, His sacrifice on the cross affirms God’s love and concern for us as human beings as being of great value, precious in His sight.

In many respects, God’s love and concern are made explicit in the Sixth Commandment, “You shall not murder.” (Exodus 20:13 NIV) This commandment is expanded and enlarged by supporting scriptural references. As God deeply values human life, so he commands us to reflect that value in our relationships with one another.

Historically in the Reformed theological tradition, the extent of God’s command has been expressed in both the Shorter and the Larger Catechism.

In the Shorter Catechism, we have the following statements:
 

Q. 68 What is required in the Sixth commandment?

A. The Sixth commandment requireth all lawful endeavors to preserve our own life and the life of others.

Q. 69 What is forbidden in the Sixth Commandment?

A. The Sixth commandment forbiddeth the taking away of our life, or the life of our neighbor unjustly, or whatsoever tendeth thereunto.

In the Larger Catechism, we find these obligations considerably expanded, for there we read as follows:
 

Q. 135 What are the duties required in the Sixth Commandment?

A. The duties required in the Sixth Commandment are: all careful studies and lawful endeavors, to preserve the life of ourselves and others, by resisting all thoughts and purposes, subduing all passions and avoiding all occasions, temptations and practices which tend to the unjust taking away the life of any, by just defense thereof against violence; patient bearing of the hand of God, quietness of mind, cheerfulness of spirit, a sober use of meat, drink, physic, sleep, labor and recreation; by charitable thoughts, love, compassion, meekness, gentleness, kindness; peaceable, mild, courteous speeches and behavior, forbearance, readiness to be reconciled, patient bearing and forgiving of injuries, and requiting good for evil, comforting and succoring the distressed, and protecting and defending the innocent.

Q.136 What are the sins forbidden in the Sixth Commandment?

A. The sins forbidden in the Sixth Commandment are: all taking away from the life of ourselves or of others, except in the case of public justice lawful war, or necessary defense; the neglecting or withdrawing the lawful or necessary means of preservation of life, sinful anger, hatred, envy, desire of revenge, all excessive passions; distracting cares; immoderate use of mean, drink, labor and recreation; provoking words oppression quarreling, striking, wounding and whatsoever else tends to the destruction of the life of any.

From these obligations we may discern three basic prohibitions. First, we are, in a passive sense, to do no willful harm. Second, in a positive sense, we are to promote the well-being of others and therefore, to protect from harm. Third, we are not unjustifiably or unlawfully to take a life.

It is immediately apparent that these three responsibilities may come in conflict with one another. For example, the duty to do no harm to someone who might be attacking another person with malicious intent may come in conflict with the duty to protect from hard the one being attacked. Within the Reformed tradition, historically there has been weight towards the obligation to protect from harm when that duty is in conflict with the obligation to do no harm. This has been based on the judgment that protecting from harm is ordinarily more in keeping with respect for life.

It is on that judgment, for example, that when an attacker is threatening the life of another who is innocent or does not seek to do harm, we are not permitted the luxury of non-action or of pacifism, for that is not consistent with respect for life that is in keeping with God’s ordering.

Again, there may be some irreducible conflict between the duty to do no harm and the duty to protect from harm in case of defending oneself, or in the case of war. Thus, where both duties cannot be followed, and where God’s command requires action, the duty to protect from harm seems to be favored and is most in keeping with respect and reverence for life.

Above all, the overriding obligation and the paramount duty is to seek to determine and then fulfill that which is most consistent with respect for human life. Since such a decision may, in fact, result in the taking of a life in a manner considered justifiable, such an action would not be a violation of the Sixth Commandment. Indeed, such an action may be more consistent with the obligation to respect life.

In considering our obligation to show respect for human life even as God shows infinite and unequivocal love for human life, we must at the same time recognize that human life has certain limitations. In seeking to show respect for human life, it must be done in the context of those limitations. These include such things as the reality of death and the limitation of life because of death, the limitation we have in our ability to endure pain and suffering, the limitation of our knowledge and our ability to know, and the limitation we have to bear emotional pressure and stress.

These are considerations that we must understand when we consider important decisions of life and death. For example, in consideration of our death limitation, doing no harm may mean permitting a terminally ill person to die. Or again the depth of pain may be such that protecting from harm might mean refusing to intervene in the prolongation of life. However, it is to be clear that our human limitations never permit us to be in violation of a clear command of God.

We see, then, that our duty to do no harm and to protect from harm may be modified by those limitations that are part of our humanness. Thus, in considering specific issues, these duties and these limitations will play an important part I the decision making process. This position paper on the value of and respect for human life will serve as background material for consideration of important issues previously mentioned and which include among others, such matters as abortion, suicide, euthanasia, war and capital punishment.

The fundamental biblical principle that man is made in the image of God establishes the profound value and sanctity of human life. Because of the Fall, all humans are subject to suffering and death. While suffering is an intrusion into life, it is not without divine purpose, for it provides the opportunity for Christian witness, service and godly character development as we share in the sufferings of Christ.

Advances in medical science have greatly improved healing and relieved suffering, but have also presented many new dilemmas for patients and their families which must be faced in the light of God’s Word.

Because of the value and sanctity of human life, we stand against any effort such as suicide, assisted suicide and euthanasia which seek to terminate innocent human life outside natural processes, even though the motive for such efforts may be a misdirected kindness. When faced with medical situations that could call for heroic measures, Christians should make a distinction between treatment that may prolong life in hopes of recovery and that which will only prolong the dying process. As Christians deal with difficult choices surrounding life and death, they should seek the support and counsel of the Church that should reach out with compassion and the truth of God’s Word.


I. INTRODUCTION
We live in a day of profound ethical dilemmas as we consider such issues as suicide, assisted suicide, euthanasia, abortion, reproductive technology, and capital punishment. The view one holds regarding the value and dignity of human life will determine where he stands on all of these issues. It is imperative that we fully understand the biblical principles that establish an ethical framework that will enable us to have confidence that we are following God’s direction as we encounter these dilemmas.

We bear a tremendous responsibility to make biblically informed choices under the Lordship of Jesus Christ. One day ‘we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ.” (II Cor. 5:10) since we must all answer to God for the decisions we make concerning these life and death matters, we dare not act autonomously or base our decisions on what we think is right independently of God. (Isa. 55:8KJV, “’For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways,’ saith the Lord.”)


II. BIBLICAL PRINCIPLES
 

A. The Image of God (Imago Dei): The stamp of the image and likeness of God has set apart human life as unique, distinctive and profoundly valuable. God demands that we preserve human life because it is the only form of life that He created in His own image. “Then God said, ‘Let us make man in our image, in our likeness…” (Genesis 1:26,27 NIV) Only human life can walk, talk and fellowship with the Creator, because it is the only life that possesses the image of God. This is the source of man’s great value and dignity, made astonishingly “a little lower than God and crowned with glory and honor.” (Psalm 8:5 NAS)

The value that we place on human life cannot be determined by one’s productiveness to society or by any other arbitrary standard set by man. The tendency of a technological culture to assign value to an individual based on his or her function (what he or she can do, rather than who he or she is) is totally unacceptable. We must look to our Creator’s declaration in Gen. 1:31 (NAS) “God saw all that He had made and behold, it was very good.”

God reaffirms the value and dignity of all human life through the incarnation of Jesus Christ “who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bondservant, and being made in the likeness of men. And being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross.” (Phil. 2:6-8) The death and resurrection of Jesus Christ on behalf of His people and the empowering presence of the Holy Spirit who now abides within all Christians also attest to the supreme value God has placed on human life. Can anyone doubt the dignity God has bestowed on human life, since He declares that the human body of believers is actually the dwelling place of God the Holy Spirit? (I Cor. 6:19-20 NAS “…your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit who is in you, whom you have from God…you were bought with a price…”)
 

Back to Start of Position Papers

B. The Right of God as Creator to Rule Over Life and Death: God, as our Creator, is the giver and sustainer of all life. Since God is the giver of life, He reserves to Himself along the right to take it: ‘It is I who put to death and give life.” (Deuteronomy 32:39) “The Lord gave and the Lord has taken away.” (Job 1:21) In Psalm 139:13 & 16 (NAS), David acknowledged the sovereignty of God in numbering the days of his life: “For Thou didst form my inward parts; Thou didst weave me in my mother’s womb…in Thy book they were all written, the days that were ordained for me, when as yet there was not one of them”

Former Surgeon General Dr. C. Everett Koop sums up the problem of a culture which no longer looks to the Bible for its values: “Our society, having lost its understanding of the sanctity of human life, is pushing the medical profession into assuming one of God’s prerogatives, namely, deciding what life shall be born and when life should end.”1 The eternal Word of God declares that life is a sacred and priceless gift, beyond the purview of mere human beings to decide its beginning or end.

God, as our Creator, has given life to us as a gift and a sacred trust. Therefore, it should be received with thanksgiving and protected from those who would seek to usurp God’s control of life and death through abortion, suicide, assisted suicide and active euthanasia.

C. The Prohibition of God: “You shall not murder.” (Ex. 20:13 NAS): Question and answer 136 of the Westminster Larger Catechism points out our obligations in fulfilling the Sixth Commandment:
 

Q. What are the sins forbidden in the Sixth Commandment?

A. The sins forbidden in the Sixth Commandment are: all taking away the life of ourselves, or of others, except in case of public justice, lawful war, or necessary defense; the neglecting or withdrawing the lawful or necessary means of preservation of life; …and whatsoever else tends to the destruction of the life of any.

The Sixth Commandment clearly rules out the lawfulness of suicide, assisted suicide and active euthanasia. Suicide is the direct and intentional taking of one’s life: murder of self.3 Assisted suicide is the enabling of one to take his own life and is considered assisted murder. Active euthanasia is the willful and active taking of someone’s life and is clearly a violation of this commandment.

D. The Problems of Suffering, Death and Dying: Some argue that the motive of alleviating suffering justifies suicide, assisted suicide or euthanasia. But we can never justify the taking of life on the basis of suffering. The church must oppose any effort to terminate innocent life outside the natural process even though the motive may be a misdirected kindness.

Because we live in a fallen world (Gen. 3), suffering is a harsh reality. But as we examine the healing ministry of our Lord Jesus, we can only conclude that God is on the side of healing. We have a God-given drive to resist suffering and death and to seek to alleviate physical and emotional pain. It is right to seek to lessen the sting of suffering through pain-killing medications which help make those who are suffering as comfortable as possible. It is permissible in the case of terminal illness to use painkillers which carry the risk of shortening life, so long as the intent is to relieve pain effectively rather than to cause death. (Prov. 31:6 “Give strong drink to him who is perishing.”) The proper application of medical science, as demonstrated by much of our hospital and hospice care, can in most cases enable patients to live and die without extreme suffering.

Hope and meaning in life are possible even in times of great suffering. As Christians, we must entrust our lives to a wise king and loving heavenly Father who has promised that “all things work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose.” (Rom. 8:28) While suffering is an intrusion into our lives, it is not without divine purpose; for it provides the opportunity for Christian witness, service, and godly character development as we share in the sufferings of Christ. (I Peter 4:12-13 & Philippians 3:10). Suffering often becomes the means by which Christians demonstrate to others the sufficiency of God’s grace. (II Cor. 12:9 NIV “My grace is sufficient for you, for My power is made perfect in weakness.”)

When death is likely to occur within a short period of time, we can look to the example of the patriarchs. When Jacob saw that he was in the dying process, he gathered his sons around him to deliver his final blessings and instructions (Gen. 49: 1-33). When Joseph was about to die, he also called for his brothers and reminded them of God’s promises (Gen. 50: 24-26).

It is rare in our times to witness this kind of deathbed gathering. Why? Because in the United States today, three out of four people die in a hospital or a nursing home surrounded by strangers. Technological intervention in the process of dying could very easily undermine important ministerial functions of the terminally ill in a misguided zeal to prolong life at all costs. One of the great fears of dying patients is their being left alone or neglected. The environment of noisy machines and blinking lights of intensive care units is often substituted for the intimacy of loved ones.4

Since past generations did not have the technology to keep people alive artificially, most deaths occurred at home. Surrounded by family and friends, dying people were invited to repent of their sins, bless their children, ask forgiveness, bid farewell, and make recommendations. Of course, death remained then, as now, the most stressful of human events, but it “occurred as a natural experience, expected and understood.”5

Even though we now have the technological means to make dying easier, our society is increasingly seeking to make active euthanasia more palatable. Euthanasia, until recently, was commonly understood to refer to the practice of passively allowing the dying process to take place. Today, proponents of the “Right to Die” movement seek to differentiate euthanasia by blurring the distinction between “passive” and “active.” Passive euthanasia has never really been a moral problem, for it is simply allowing the process of dying to take its natural course as the medical team seeks to provide adequate pain management. Active euthanasia, on the other hand, means intervention that would hasten the patient’s death. The church must speak out against active euthanasia as it rapidly gains popular approval.

Advocates of active euthanasia, suicide, and assisted suicide continue to point to man’s need to die with dignity. They argue that the lack of physical or mental abilities precludes death with dignity since they assume that man’s dignity is derived from mental and physical abilities. But the word of God clearly reveals that man possesses dignity and honor by virtue of the fact that he was created in the image of God. Man’s dignity does not depend on his mental or physical condition. Each person, no matter how infirm or socially useless he or she may appear to be, deserves to be accepted as a person of dignity created in the image of God.

At one extreme we find the proponents of active euthanasia, and at the other extreme we find vitalists who demand that in each and every case, life must be preserved at all costs. A biblical perspective of death and dying must be established in order to counter these extreme views.

Question 85 of the Larger Catechism asks: ‘Death, being the wages of sin, why are not the righteous delivered from death, seeing all their sins are forgiven in Christ?” The answer gives us a wonderful summary of the theology of the death of believers in Christ:

The righteous shall be delivered from death itself at the last day, and even in death are delivered from the sting and curse of it; so that, although they die, yet it is out of God’s love, to free them perfectly from sin and misery, and to make them capable of further communion with Christ in glory, which they enter upon. (WLC 85, emphasis added)

Revelation 14:13 also tells us of the blessing of Christians when they die: “Blessed are the dead who die in the Lord from now on! ‘Yes,’ says the Spirit, ‘that they may rest from their labors, for their deed follow with them’” The curse of the fall of Adam and Eve has been turned into blessing because of the death, burial and resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ.

The Apostle Paul tells us that he was willing to be absent from the body in order to be present with the Lord (II Cor. 5:8), for that is very much better” (Phil. 1:23) than continuing to live on this earth. Paul, already experiencing a deep and rich fellowship with Christ, clearly indicates that personal fellowship with Christ will be magnified at the death of the saints. Of course, this does not mean that one is not to seek to live out his life to its full extent as long as God gives the opportunity. Paul’s longing for that “much better” estate does not undercut the value and significance of the present life or by death. For Paul to live on in the flesh means fruitful labor for him, and he is convinced that it is “more necessary” for his fellow Christians for him to continue his early ministry. In the same way, we must regard this present life on earth as a great gift from God to be lived to its full extent in fruitful labor in serving others.6

Unlike spiritual death, which is an absolute evil, physical death is only a relative evil in a fallen world. Physical death for the Christian is not an enemy always to be fought at all times. The conviction that physical life must be preserved at all times in fundamentally idolatrous from the standpoint of biblical theology. God tells us in Hebrews 9:27 that “it is appointed for men to die once and after this comes judgment.” In Ecclesiastes 3:1,2 the Preacher says, “There is an appointed time for everything…a time to give birth and a time to die.” Thus, there is no moral or biblical obligation to prolong death when one is clearly in the dying process. There is a time to resist death, but there is also a time to cease resisting. As Stewart Alsop said, “A dying man needs to die, as a sleepy man needs to sleep, and there comes a time when it is wrong, as well as useless, to resist.”7

The Bible teaches that we can glorify God by death as well as by life. According to Philippians 1:20 our ultimate purpose in life or in death must be the glory of God. The first question and answer in the Westminster Shorter Catechism demonstrates this beautifully:

Back to Start of Position Papers

Q. What is man’s primary purpose?

A. Man’s primary purpose is to glorify God and to enjoy Him forever.

Our Lord Jesus Christ, in willingly laying down his life for His people, gives us the greatest demonstration and example of a death which was motivated by love and the glory of God. (John 12:27; 15:13)
 

III. HEROIC MEASURES

A. Definition: “Heroic measures” refers to the use of extreme emergency measure to prolong a patient’s life when vital processes cease to function. Few topics in medicine are more complicated, more controversial, and more emotionally charged than the decision of whether or not to forego life-sustaining treatment for the hopelessly ill.

B. Problem: Because of our technological advances in the medical field, we now encounter perplexing moral question that earlier societies never had to face. Heroic measures may extend the life of the patient, but it may also extend the suffering of the patient and family members. Financial debt and a difficult legal climate add to the complexity of this situation. We are faced with profound ethical dilemmas. For example, does God demand, in every situation, that all medical options available be used to extend the life of one who is dying? Or would God have us, at times, to refuse extraordinary medical procedures and allow the patient to die? If a person is taken off a respirator and allowed to die, has the Sixth Commandment been violated? The answers to these dilemmas depend upon a clear distinction being made between prolonging life when there is hope of recovery and postponing the dying process when it is hopeless.

On the one side, heroic measures are indispensable to the practice of modern medicine. Many individuals have been restored to health by their application. On the other side, this technology may be applied thoughtlessly with the tragic consequences of lengthening the dying process and adding unnecessary suffering and expense for the patient and family.8

C. Guiding Principles

1. We cannot provide simple formulas and conclusions that fit every encounter with heroic measures. On the contrary, we find that it is impossible to give a specific direction for every conceivable circumstance, and we realize that decisions will differ. We can be sure that “God is our refuge and strength, a very present help in time of trouble.” (Psalm 46:1) God has promised to give us wisdom if we will ask in faith. Ministers should be consulted to pray with and for the patient to help him to determine God’s will in the application of heroic measures. Often God will give us the wisdom we need through the counsel of caring doctors. The patient and family should prayerfully and carefully weigh any decision to go against the counsel of the trusted physician since he would be expected to have the best advice in these situations. In many situations a distinction can be made between treatment that will heal, improve or restore the patient to health and treatment that will only prolong the dying process. The patient and family should ask appropriate questions to obtain this information, since for various reasons a physician may not make this distinction when various options of medical treatment are presented. Pastors or other elders should be consulted as patient and family carefully and prayerfully consider these options.9

2. Necessary means of preservation of life must not be withheld from the patient. Negative judgments about the “quality of life” of an unconscious or otherwise disabled patient have led some to propose withholding nourishment in order to end the patient’s life. Medical treatment that is clearly efficacious to heal, improve, or restore must not be refused.

3. The Bible does not teach that people are obligated morally always to accept treatment that would sustain life artificially. For example, there does not seem to be an absolute moral obligation to undergo chemotherapy or to receive kidney dialysis in certain cases. In the case of irreversible diseases (like certain forms of cancer), the patient may in good conscience refuse treatment that may briefly lengthen his life if he believes that his quality of life would be greatly impaired.

A decision to withdraw medical support from a patient is terribly difficult, especially when it seems likely that death will be hastened by that decision. Nevertheless, a decision to withdraw life support is more often based upon better evidence than a decision to initiate life support. These heroic measures are often begun in an emergency situation when physicians must make decisions quickly about patients, but with limited information. Over the next few days, or weeks with continued observation and additional information, however, they may discover that utilization of a respirator or feeding tube would be futile treatment which would only prolong the dying process. Initially thee procedures were started when there was some reasonable hope of the patient’s recovery.10

Although heroic measures have been started, they do not necessarily have to be continued. Since there is “a time to do,” it is morally permissible to discontinue life support when doctors agree that there is no hope of recovery.

4. Physicians should be chosen with these principles in mind. It is possible to have your doctor know your desires for each family member. “Do Not Resuscitate” orders are often an appropriate way to avoid heroic measures, because hospitals are required to resuscitate all patients who die suddenly unless such orders are on the patient’s chart.11

5. The advantages and disadvantages of available legal measures should be explored with a trusted lawyer if possible. This action can prevent many of the dilemmas that occur with terminally ill patients.

6. Our Lord Jesus gave us two helpful guidelines. First He enunciated “The Golden Rule:” Do to others as you would have them do to you (Luke 6:31), and the great summary commandment, “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Mark 12:31). Numerous surveys have demonstrated the fact that most people do not want extraordinary treatment for themselves when there is no real hope of recovery. Nevertheless, when faced with a decision on behalf of close relatives or friends, they often want more for others than they would do or want done for themselves. Love for our neighbor demands that ‘in proxy decision making, we should apply the same biblical standards of justice, mercy and faithfulness to others that we want and expect to be applied to ourselves.”12

We encourage spouses and family members to draw upon the biblical and theological principles outlined above as they seek to discern God’s will in regard to heroic measures. After appropriate biblical reflection, we urge that families pray together and openly discuss what they desire concerning the various choices of medical treatment before being confronted with the actual experience of such a decision. We also encourage families to meet with their minister, Christian friends and physician about their concerns regarding care and to become educated about their conditions in order to permit informed decision-making. Sooner or later each one of us, either directly or indirectly, will face decisions regarding our own or a loved one’s medical condition(s).

Back to Start of Position Papers

IV. RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CHURCH REGARDING THE SANCTITY OF LIFE
 

1. It is incumbent upon our churches to address the temptations of suicide, assisted suicide and active euthanasia. The greatest deterrent to these evils is to introduce those at risk to a saving knowledge of Jesus Christ. Only then will they experience the abundant and meaningful life that our Lord came to give (John 10:10 “I came that they might have life and have it abundantly.”)

2. In recent years the incidence of suicide, especially among teenagers and young adults has become alarming. We can blame the media’s glorification of alcohol, drugs and sexual promiscuity, but we must see to it that our churches are ready to provide practical help. Perhaps the incidence of suicide can be reduced if we seek to help those in our communities to attain a strong sense of belonging in their families and churches. As Peter tells us, ‘Love covers a multitude of sins.” (I Peter 4:8) Both the Old and New Testaments encourage the building of strong interdependent families in which each family member is treated with dignity as one who has profound value and worth to God. If adequate support by the covenant community of the church, the family and competent pastoral care givers is provided, the mental suffering of loneliness, fear, depression and anguish, which is often more painful than physical suffering, can be alleviated. This support can significantly reduce the number of those at risk for suicide, assisted suicide and euthanasia. Those who have a strong sense of belonging to family and church which provide love, care and biblical morality are much more secure and are able to cope with suffering far better than those who lack similar nurturing.

3. We must not deliberately end the life of an individual through medical or any other means. But when the God-given powers of the body to sustain its own life can no longer function and physicians conclude that there is no real hope for recovery even with life support instruments, a Christian may in good conscience withhold heroic measures and “let nature take its course.” To try desperately to maintain the vital sings of one for whom death is imminent is not consistent with a Christian ethic that mandates respect for the dying, as well as for the living.

4. Families should discuss the option of bringing the irreversibly terminal patient home to die. This will enable the patient, the family, and loved ones to experience the meaning, blessing and convenience of being in the place they are most comfortable and familiar. Often home care is superior to that of an institution. Patients will normally get better attention and have more interaction in their own home.

Editor Paul Gilchrist lists other benefits. Serious infections that are a hazard in institutions are avoided. The patient will get more rest away from the frequent intrusion of needles, pills, tests, noisy instruments, and other interruptions that often continue twenty-four hours a day. Numerous studies indicate that hospital care, and even intensive care units, provide little or no medical benefit for some conditions. Careful discernment is needed to determine when to use these facilities and when not to.13

Most communities now have some type of hospice movement. Hospice is an agency designed to help patients and/or their families adjust to the idea of a loved one having a terminal illness. This group of dedicated individuals serves as an aid —physically, emotionally, and psychologically—to help individuals cope with the process of dying. Our local churches are encouraged to participate in this much needed ministry.

5. As the statesman Edmund Burke said, “All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.” We urge Christians to make known in the marketplace their convictions o the value of and respect for human life. As Christians, we should make this biblical position known by whatever means possible as we seek to be salt and light to our culture in the present confused state of affairs surrounding euthanasia, suicide and assisted suicide. By God’s grace we may be able to help shape public opinion and formulate appropriate legislation regarding medical ethics and practices that will be in harmony with the teachings of the Bible.

Adopted at the 15th General Assembly
June, 1995
Back to Start of Position Papers

... ON HOMOSEXUALITY

One of the issues currently troubling the people of God is the increasing acceptance of homosexual behavior. We of the Evangelical Presbyterian Church believe there is a need to state clearly our understanding of the biblical teaching about homosexual practice. It is also our desire to set forth our position regarding the appropriate response of Christians and the church to this critical issue. As will be developed below, the conviction of the Evangelical Presbyterian Church is that 1) homosexuality is a sin; and 2) God forgives repentant sinners.

The Bible: 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 prevailing ethic in the minds of many has become a “genetically-based morality.” In recent years, various scientific studies have been put forth which claim to prove that homosexuality is a matter of orientation at birth rather than moral choice. If this is the case, it is argued that homosexuality cannot be immoral in that it is part of one’s genetic makeup.

The EPC finds such moral logic to be significantly flawed. First of all, the studies cited to “prove” genetic orientation are tenuous at best. We dispute the premise which would base morality on scientific study. As important as the debate regarding homosexuality is, it is but a single battlefield upon which a much larger question is being contested: How are we to determine what is right and wrong? While we affirm scientific study, we assert that an illegitimate form of moral reasoning to suggest that one can reason from what “is” to what “ought to be.” History has proved that science makes for poor ethics. Human frailty being what it is, it is all too easy to reinterpret scientific findings in such a way as to justify our moral (or immoral) desires.

The EPC asserts that God’s law alone as revealed in the holy Scriptures is to be our basis for morality. We reject attempts to base morality on scientific study. The Bible teaches that since the fall of man, mankind has been born with a sinful nature. The Bible teaches that greed, lust, envy strife, etc., are characteristic of fallen man, and in that sense are our orientation from birth. But while they may be our natural orientation, they are still sin. Simply put, the Old and New Testaments consistently condemn homosexual practice and repeatedly affirm that God forgives the repentant sinner.

The Bible: What It Teaches
We believe the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments to be the infallible Word of God, the final authority on all issues to which it speaks. Therefore sexual attitudes and behaviors are to be judged in the light of the Bible, rather than the Bible being reinterpreted, modified or overturned by current cultural trends in thought and behavior.
 

Men and Women in the Image of god
Today we see the folly of modern man attempting to deal with human sexuality without a true understanding of who he is. The result is often a confused and fragmented view of the nature of man and woman. Historically, Reformed theologians have accurately reflected the biblical position that man’s nature is not self-enclosed, but must be understood in terms of his relationship to God. Man as created in the image of God is affirmed in Genesis 1:27 which states, "“So God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him: male and female He created them.”1

An understanding of biblical sexuality begins with the opening chapters of Genesis, which introduce the prototype family, Adam and Eve, God’s perfect design for marriage and sexual expression. How beautifully simple and yet profoundly revealing is Adam’s own description of Eve when God brought her into Adam’s presence: “The man said, ‘This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called woman for she was taken out of man.’” (Genesis 2:23)

God’s commentary follows, spelling out the sanctity and intimacy of marriage, and the bonding of male and female in physical oneness: “For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh.” (Genesis 2:24) This statement is reaffirmed by Jesus (Matthew 19:5) and by Paul (Ephesians 5:31).

Here we find the very foundation of human sexuality and discover the distinctives that give man and woman their God-ordained sexual identities. In the benediction that follows, we have not only God’s provisions for the complementary relationship of male and female, but also His plan for the propagation of the human race: “God blessed them and said to them, ‘Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it…’” (Genesis 1:28) When God saw that Adam was alone and needed something beyond all the wonders of the beautiful animal creation, He observed, “It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him.” (Genesis 2:18) The result was woman, not another male companion, a woman with her likeness to man but with all her beautiful distinctiveness.

Therefore, homosexual practice is a distortion of the image of God as it is still reflected in fallen man, and a perversion of the sexual relationship as God intended it to be.

Homosexual Behavior in the Old Testament
The Old Testament views homosexual behavior as serous sin along with other perversions of human sexuality. For example, Leviticus 20:13 states: “If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.” Genesis 19:4-18 recounts the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, two cities given over to homosexual lust and murderous hostility.

In recent years, an attempt has been made to minimize the charges that homosexuality was the cause of God’s judgment on those cities. Some commentators contend that the word yadah rendered “know” in Genesis 19:5 and 8, is used more frequently to mean “to be aware of.” This view states that here we have a group of citizens who in a brash manner tried to “get acquainted with” Lot’s guests. Such an interpretation is absurd in the face of Lot’s pleas to the mob, begging them, “Don’t do this wicked thing” (Genesis 19:7) and his efforts to protect his angelic guests by offering instead his virgin daughters, “who have never slept with a man…” to do with as they pleased (Genesis 19:8). To confuse such activity with a desire to be “hospitable” is inexcusable.

Homosexual Behavior in the New Testament
Jesus did not refer directly to homosexuality. However, our Lord made clear that He came not to destroy the Law, but to fulfill it. He not only fulfilled it, He strengthened it. For example, it was not enough to refrain from the act of adultery. Jesus declared that everyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart (Matthew 5:27,28). He authoritatively interpreted the Mosaic Law, rather than dismissed it, as some exegetes content. Thus Jesus affirmed the continuing validity of the Old Testament moral law, including prohibitions against homosexual behavior.

The Pauline epistles include specific statements which speak directly to the issue: Romans 1:26ff, I Corinthians 6:9 and I Timothy 1:10. The Roman’s passage is the most detailed. Paul begins with the phrase, “Because of this…’ which refers back to the previous verses 24 and 25. These verses trace immorality and self-destructive behavior, which is described as having exchanged God’s truth for falsehood (shades of Satan in the Garden) and having turned to idolatry which is the worshiping and serving of the creature rather than the Creator.

“Because of this, God gave them over shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way, the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.” (Roman’s 1:26,27)

Some Bible interpreters have sought to bypass the clear meaning of Paul’s words. Some contend that for those engaged homosexual practice, such practice can be considered ”natural” and therefore pleasing to God. Using the same rationale, heterosexual persons could say, “It’s ‘natural’ for me to be promiscuous; therefore, I feel that in God’s eyes, promiscuity is approved for me.” God rejects this kind of rationalization. Romans 1:26 points back to the relations God established at the dawn of human history, that of husband and wife being one flesh.

In I Corinthians 6, Paul warns, “Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither the sexually immoral nor idolators nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the Name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God (I Corinthians 6:9-11).

Back to Start of Position Papers

Redemption from Homosexual Behavior
The spiritual impact of homosexual practice is no different from any other sin. All sin is judged by Almighty God. However, as from all sin, 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 to sinners both the forgiveness of sin and the power to live a life pleasing to Him (Romans 8:1-4).

The attitude of Jesus is that of one who consistently loved and embraced the sinner without condoning the sin. John 8 recounts our Lord’s gentle response to the woman caught in the act of adultery. He affirmed her value as a person without approving her behavior. In mercy He forgave her and at the same moment told her, “Go and sin no more.” Mercy is no less available to the one engaged in homosexual practice.

Summary of the Biblical Teaching
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. However, God’s grace offers love, forgiveness, hope and a new life. The necessary response to this offer is a true repentance, including turning from homosexual behavior, and commitment to a faithful obedience to the Lord according to His Word.

CONCLUSION
In light of the biblical witness, the Evangelical Presbyterian Church concludes:
 

1. The Bible clearly states that homosexual behavior as a sin.
    

2. God forgives repentant sinners. As Christians who are ourselves sinner 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) (See Appendix: “Guidelines for Christian Ministry to Homosexuals.”)
    

3. Unrepentant homosexual behavior is incompatible with the confession of Jesus as Lord, which is required of members of the EPC.
    

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

Scripture quotes are from the New International Version, © Bible Society, 1973-84 (Note: For a discussion of the AIDS crisis, see the Position Paper on AIDS/HIV.)

GUIDELINES FOR CHRISTIAN MINISTRY TO HOMOSEXUALS

Education
Through sermons, classes and study groups, the understanding of human sexuality as part of God’s image in us from a biblical perspective should be taught to lay the groundwork of understanding. Church members can also learn how to relate in a constructive, caring way toward those trapped in homosexuality Those seeking answers to their sexual confusion can likewise begin the journey towards wholeness through reading, teaching, and discussion.

Friendship
The incarnation of God in Christ is our constant reminder of the absolute necessity of a genuine identification with those we try to reach. Homosexuals need to know an acceptance of their person beyond the sexual concerns they bring with them, and that the church views their sexuality as only a part of their total being. The basis for friendship must be a recognition of our common need of the grace of God.

Healing Resources
Healing in the area of sexual identity and behavior comes through a number of channels which individual Christians and local churches can offer. These include worship, small group and one-to-one relationships, pastoral counseling, prayer, and the services of committed Christian psychologists. Local church programs can draw on the resources of other groups which focus on this area of ministry as they seek to establish ministries to homosexual people. As individuals seek to move away from homosexuality in thought and act, they need the regular availability of caring and supportive Christians who can be trained by the local church for such ministry.

Intercession
The value and place of prayer cannot be overstated. Combined with education, friendship and therapeutic resources, prayer declares to all involved that the risen Lord has power to redirect individual lives and to heal personal images of sexual identity. Both prayer with individuals and private intercessory prayer for individuals function in the mystery of the work of God to free, redeem and heal.