Frequently Asked Questions Regarding the Recommendation to Seek Dismissal from the PC(USA) Index

Frequently Asked Questions Regarding the Recommendation to Seek Dismissal from the PC(USA) Revised March 12, 2012 Index About the PC(USA)... Page 4 1. First Pres is a Presbyterian Church. What does it mean to be Presbyterian? 2. What is the PC(USA)? 3. What influence does the PC(USA) have over our church? Reasons for Change in Denomination... Page 5 1. Why does the Session of First Pres feel it is time to leave the PC(USA)? 2. How did we get to this point? 3. Has any particular event triggered the recent crisis and the decision of so many Presbyterian Churches to leave the PC(USA)? 4. Why do we need to make a change? 5. Has First Pres done anything to try and reform the Church? 6. What are some reasons other Churches are giving for making a change? 7. Will our departure from the PC(USA) affect our support of current ministries and missionaries? 8. What about our members living in the Presbyterian Communities of S.C.? 9. What about PADD and Thornwell? Property and Legal Issues... Page 11 1. Who owns our property? 2. What does our real estate deed say? 3. What is the applicable law? 4. How do we leave PC(USA)? 5. What is the Gracious Dismissal Policy? 6. How does the Gracious Dismissal Policy work? 7. What does the Gracious Dismissal Policy say about property? 8. Will a financial settlement be part of the negotiated terms of dismissal? Financial Issues... Page 15 1. What are the budgetary implications of affiliating with a denomination other than PC(USA)? 2. Will there be any additional financial costs associated with leaving? 1

3. What affect with withdrawal have on any debt we incur in connection with the renovations to our church campus? 4. What will the impact be, if any, on our staff s retirement benefits? 5. Will there be any impact on staff s salary? 6. How will the staff s health benefits be affected? About the Evangelical Covenant Order of Presbyterians (ECO)... Page 16 1. What is the Evangelical Covenant Order of Presbyterians? 2. What is the Fellowship of Presbyterians? 3. What is the difference between the Fellowship of Presbyterians and the ECO? 4. Is the ECO recognized as a reformed body? 5. At what stage in the process of organization is the ECO? 6. What is the ECO's vision? 7. What is the ECO's purpose? 8. What is in the name "Evangelical Covenant Order of Presbyterians? 9. Does the acronym ECO have another meaning? 10. What is the ECO's belief on diversity? 11. Has the ECO adopted a specific structure? 12. What is the organizational makeup of the ECO? 13. Will there be a General Assembly to oversee the ECO? 14. Will there be a synod in the ECO? 15. What is the purpose of the Presbytery? 16. Who will make up the membership of the Presbytery? 17. How will membership in the ECO differ from the PC(USA)? 18. What are the categories of membership? 19. What types of changes might we see in our structure if we affiliate with the ECO? 20. Will the General Assembly/Presbyteries dismiss current PC(USA) congregations to the ECO? 21. Does the ECO require a per capita amount to be paid by the congregations? 22. Has the ECO clarified its theological identity? 23. What confessional standards has the ECO adopted? 24. Has the ECO adopted essential tenets? 25. What is the ECO's position on property? 26. Are there other PC(USA) churches in South Carolina joining the ECO? 27. How is the ECO different than the EPC? 28. What is the relationship between the Fellowship of Presbyterians and the ECO? 29. Who can join the Fellowship of Presbyterians? 30. Is there a pension and medical benefits plan for pastors and church employees who seek to be dismissed from the PC(USA) to the ECO? If so, is there a difference in the two plans? 31. Can a congregation be affiliated with the Fellowship and PC(USA)? 32. What is the ECO doing in terms of investing in the future of the denomination? 33. How can I learn more about the ECO? 2

About the Evangelical Presbyterian Church... Page 25 1. What has the Task Force done to discern the direction for First Pres since the passage of Amendment 10 A? 2. What is the Evangelical Presbyterian Church? 3. Where is the EPC headquarters located? 4. How many churches and members make up the EPC? 5. How many EPC churches are there in South Carolina? In Florence? 6. What is governance like in the EPC? 7. How is the EPC organized and governed? 8. Does the EPC have a Book of Confessions? 9. Does the EPC have a Book of Order? 10. What are the EPC core beliefs or "essentials"? revised 3/12/12 11. What does the EPC believe and how is it different from the PC(USA)? 12. What is the EPC s plan for the future? 13. What defines a missional denomination? 14. What is the position of the EPC regarding the property of the local church? 15. How will membership in the EPC differ from the PC(USA)? 16. What types of changes might we see in our structure if we affiliate with the EPC? 17. Is there a per capita requirement in the EPC? 18. Will pastor and employee salaries, pensions or benefits be affected? 19. Do PC(USA) ordained pastors, elders and deacons have to be "re ordained" into the EPC? 20. What is the EPC's position on women serving in leadership roles in the church? 21. Why does the EPC refer to the ordination of women as "Non Essential"? 22. How can I learn more about the EPC? Other Denominations... Page 30 1. Did the Task Force consider other denominations within the Presbyterian body other than the EPC and ECO? 2. What factors did the Task Force consider in the evaluation process of other denominations? 3. What factors precluded the Task Force from recommending the PCA? 4. What factors precluded the Task Force from recommending the ARP? 5. What factors were relevant in the Task Force not recommending other such denominations like the Christian Reformed Church, Reformed Church in America, Orthodox Presbyterian Church, Cumberland Presbyterian Church, Bible Presbyterian Church and Westminster Presbyterian Church in the United States? 6. How can I learn more about the other Presbyterian denominations? 3

Frequently Asked Questions Regarding the Recommendation to Seek Dismissal from the PC(USA) Revised March 12, 2012 We want to hear from you and encourage questions you might have that are not listed below by emailing questions@florencefirst.org. This will allow us to respond to you and continue to build a thorough listing of FAQ s for our members. (Throughout these FAQ s, the terms we, us and our refers to First Pres Church (First Pres), its pastoral staff, session, members, and ministries.) About the PC(USA) 1. First Pres is a Presbyterian Church. What does it mean to be Presbyterian? Presbyterian churches are based on a representative form of government and a connection to other churches. Each congregation appoints elders to sit with pastors on a Session which governs their own church. Each church belongs to a Presbytery, a regional body designed to supervise and serve the local churches in its area. Representatives from each Presbytery come together every other year at General Assembly, a national meeting, where denomination wide policies are created or modified by vote. The next General Assembly will be held in July of 2012. 2. What is the PC(USA)? Presbyterian Church (USA) or PC(USA) is the branch of Presbyterianism to which First Pres belongs. It was born of a merger between two Presbyterian denominations in 1983 to become the fifth largest Protestant denomination in the United States. The PC(USA) is one of nine major Presbyterian denominations in the United States. The national offices are in Louisville, Kentucky. The PC(USA) is governed by its constitution, made up of The Book of Order and The Book of Confessions. For more information visit www.pc(usa).org. 3. What influence does the PC(USA) have over our church? The influence of the PC(USA) over First Pres comes in both how we govern the church (polity) and in our theology. We have a Book of Order which contains sections on church government, discipline and worship. We also have a Book of Confessions which consists of 11 historic confessions of faith that we agree to be guided by. The continuing tension we live under in the PC(USA) is that both of these important documents are subject to change. Many of our differences center on the ongoing proposals for change in The Book of Order and Book of Confessions. 4

Reasons for Change in Denomination 1. Why does the Session of First Pres feel it is time to leave the PC(USA)? The recommendation to leave the PC(USA) has not been a decision that has been entered into lightly by the Denominational Task Force or the Session of First Pres. The words of the Apostle Paul to the Romans, that I have great sorrow and unceasing anguish in my heart (9:2) have taken on a personal meaning for many in our Church. There are those in our Church family who have a rich spiritual history in our denomination. Our pastors and many who are currently on the Session have served the PC(USA) in all of its governing bodies since its inception in 1983. Because of our history, this recommendation has been a very difficult decision to make and one that has not been made without much prayer and the seeking of God s guidance. However, the PC(USA) has changed in many ways since 1983 and it is the responsibility and privilege of the Elders and Pastors to speak God s Word clearly during times of theological confusion. When the Apostle Paul left Ephesus, he charged the Elders to Be on guard for yourselves and for all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers... (Acts 20:28 30). With the recent changes made by our General Assembly and with a long history of a subtle theological shifting away from our reformed heritage, we do not believe that we are leaving the denomination as much as the denomination has left us. It is with a heavy heart and with deep humility in recognition of our own sinfulness that our Session has decided that First Pres must seek a new way to associate with Presbyterians that share our reformed and evangelical understanding of Scripture. We are deeply saddened that our denomination has recently made decisions that have caused so many churches to begin the process of seeking other Presbyterian bodies in which they might serve God. Our Session has, however, decided that we must not dwell on the past and what used to be, but look ahead to the amazing future God has in store for First Pres. In faithfulness and in joy, we rely on the Holy Spirit to guide us as we seek to be faithful in our service to God. It is our prayer that this document will help explain the theological basis of why this recommendation to leave has been made and answer some of the questions you may have regarding these concerns. We believe God calls us to be patient, careful and prayerful as we consider our way forward. It is our desire to walk in a way that is gracious and humble as we seek to contend for the faith (Jude 3 4). 2. How did we get to this point? For many years the PC(USA) has been embroiled with a creeping theological pluralism. By that we mean that what once was accepted as basic theological tenets of faith the singular, saving Lordship of Christ; the authority of the Scripture; the atoning death of Christ; the need for repentance of sin; the regenerating power of the Holy Spirit; are but just a few theological doctrines that have been challenged (within the Presbyterian Church) as the world moves toward an acceptance of all religions as being equal ways to find God. Challenges to the Lordship of Christ and the authority of Scripture have become recurring points of debate within the Church. For the 5

sake of denominational unity, an increasingly diverse theological tolerance has been accepted and defended which has brought the Church to the crisis in which we now find ourselves. 3. Has any particular event triggered the recent crisis and the decision of so many Presbyterian Churches to leave the PC(USA)? Yes. The straw that broke the proverbial camel s back occurred in May of 2011 with the passage by a majority of our Presbyteries of what is known as Amendment 10 A. This amendment changed the ordination standards for those seeking ordination within the Presbyterian Church. No longer are officers required to exhibit fidelity within a covenant of marriage between a man and a woman or chastity in singleness and to live in obedience to the Scripture. The new standard removes any biblical understanding of human sexuality; it removes the definition of marriage as between a man and a woman; and the requirement to live in obedience to Scripture. It simply says, Governing bodies are to be guided by Scripture. Allowing church leaders to openly engage in sinful conduct is neither loving nor kind and can only lead them to settle for passing gratification at the expense of eternal glory. This action has opened the door for Presbyteries to be guided by their own understanding of Scripture and the Confessions, which allows for some Presbyteries to celebrate this lifestyle, choosing to ordain gay and lesbian individuals; and other Presbyteries identifying this lifestyle as sin, and a violation of God s will for humanity. On October 10, 2011, three months after becoming policy in the PC(USA), Scott Anderson, and openly gay man, was ordained a minister in Madison, Wisconsin. With the passage of amendment 10 A, the PC(USA) now officially condones that which our Confessions, the Bible and two thousand years of Christian history calls sin. There will no doubt be continued efforts to redefine marriage, altering the Biblical definition of marriage as between a man and a woman, to allow for the marriage of same sex couples; further dividing the Church. Jesus said, A house divided will not stand (Mark 3:25). 4. Why do we need to make a change? We realize that the secular world sees the division within the Presbyterian Church USA as a fight over sexuality; but this is merely a symptom of a much deeper theological divide. Seven Core Values guide all the ministries of First Pres. The first two Core Values state: Guided by the Gospel, true to the Reformed and Evangelical traditions of the Church and committed to discerning and fulfilling God s purpose for us, we base our ministry on these core values: 1. Christ Centered We believe that Jesus Christ alone is Lord of all and the only way to salvation (John 14:6). Therefore, all that we do will be in joyful response to what God the Father has done in sending Him to be our Lord and Savior. (also see Jn.1:1 18; Acts 4:12; Col. 1:15 23) 6

2. Authority of Scripture We believe that all Scripture is divinely inspired and serves as the final authority in all matters of belief and behavior (2 Tim. 3:16). Therefore, Bible based preaching and teaching will be the foundation of all our ministries. (also see 1 Thess. 2:13; 2 Peter 1:16 20) We believe that our ordination vows call upon us to protect, preserve and proclaim the doctrine that Jesus Christ is the singular and unique way of salvation and we are to live our lives under the authority of Scripture (see B.O. W 4.4003 a, b); and we are to be led by and instructed by our Reformed confessions as we lead the people of God (see B.O. W 4.4003c). Following in the Reformed tradition, we are guided by the historic confessions of the church, which emphasize these and other truths of our faith. Over a long history of theological debate, the PC(USA) has tolerated a growing theological pluralism in direct opposition to our mandate from God to hold fast to the faith and guard against false teachers (2 Cor. 10:5; 2 Tim. 4:1 5; Jude 3). We believe the denomination has compromised its commitment to the unique, saving Lordship of Christ and to the Authority of Scripture. For example: The Lordship of Christ In June 2001, a debate ensued during the General Assembly regarding the means of salvation. Three Presbytery overtures wanted the Assembly to emphasize the historic Christian belief that salvation comes through Jesus Christ alone. The committee on Theological Issues dealing with these overtures failed to recommend them, wanting to be more inclusive and diverse. The Assembly subsequently passed a statement which read in part, for us the assurance of salvation is found only in confessing Christ This implied there may be other means of salvation but for us it is through Christ. The 2002 Assembly tried to correct this confusion with another document entitled Hope In The Lord Jesus Christ. In the most recent Presbyterian Panel Survey only 45% of elders agree or strongly agree in the necessity of belief in Christ for salvation; and only 35% of pastors agree or strongly agree in the necessity of belief in Christ for salvation. (see www.pc(usa).org/resource/religious anddemographic profile presbyterians 20 ) In 2008, a majority of the General Assembly encouraged common worship among Jews, Christians and Muslims. The Scripture is clear that we are to love one another, but to experience common worship with those of other faiths implies that we worship the same god, therefore, nullifying the uniqueness of Jesus Christ. This action is a clear violation of the first commandment. The 2010 General Assembly reversed this theologically confused statement. (see www.pc biz.org/explorer.aspx?id=3101 ) The fact that a debate about the Lordship of Christ is even occurring in the Church is troubling. The Scripture is clear on this matter (Jn. 14:6; Acts 4:12). If the PC(USA) is divided in its belief about 7

Jesus, upon what basis can there be unity? We believe that Jesus is the same yesterday, today and forever (Heb. 13:8) The Authority of Scripture Sadly, there is an increasing acceptance of a wide range of thinking regarding Biblical authority and the interpretation of Scripture within the PC(USA). For example: In 1983, a position paper on the Presbyterian understanding of Holy Scripture was adopted by the General Assembly which said in part:...all theories of the authority of scripture are tested by the effectiveness and usefulness of the interpretation that they involve. (Presbyterian Understanding and Use of Holy Scripture, page 3. Position adopted by the 123rd General Assembly (1983) of the PC(USA), Office of Theology and Worship) This statement became a significant indicator of a shift in the PC(USA) s understanding of authority. The test of Biblical authority has now become its usefulness and effectiveness, rather than whether the interpretation is actually what God intended for us to hear and obey. In its final report to the General Assembly in 2006, The Theological Task Force on Peace, Unity and Purity (PUP) after 5 years of study and reflection produced this statement about biblical authority and interpretation: We who disagree on some matters can learn much from one another as we mine together the Scriptures we love. This is further reason for Presbyterians, who share such rich traditions of biblical interpretation, to continue together in fellowship. (PC(USA) Peace, Unity and Purity Report, p.18; www.pc(usa).org/preaceunitypurity/ ) This statement affirms a shared love for the Scriptures, but trivializes disagreements in essential matters. It acknowledges the end of a common view of Scripture as central to our life together within the PC(USA). The PUP report concludes that it s best to prioritize harmony over truth and to make Christian fellowship and mutual learning the glue that holds us together. The 2010 General Assembly heard a report from a special committee to study issues of civil union and Christian marriage that highlights this conflicted witness as to Scripture. The preliminary report included the following statement: We acknowledge that our interpretations of Scripture lead us to different conclusions regarding homosexual behavior and same gender partnerships. We all confess that Scripture holds to a transforming hope of radical change in Jesus Christ that requires us to be dead to sin and alive to all that is good. However, 8

for some of us, that makes faithful, mutually loving, marriage like unions of same gender couples unacceptable; for other of us, that makes faithful, mutually loving, marriage like unions of same gender couples acceptable. (see Special Committee to Study Issues of Civil Union and Christian Marriage, Draft Preliminary Report to 219th General Assembly (2009), p.27) There is no logical way both of these interpretations of sin and transformation can be true; they simply contradict each other. There is a clear effort to remove the Biblical understanding of marriage to that of a union of man and woman, to that of a union of two people. The Bible is clear about all matters of human behavior, and seeking to adapt Scripture to culture instead of allowing Scripture to transform culture diminishes the Authority of God s Word. Christians and partner churches around the world have challenged the PC(USA) s interpretation of Scripture with the passage of amendment 10 A. The Presbyterian Church of Mexico has severed their relationship with the PC(USA) and our PC(USA) missionaries are no longer able to serve in Mexico. Our witness of Jesus Christ to the world has been compromised. The Scripture and our Confessions have not changed, but the growing tolerance for theological pluralism and lack of discipline for those who do not adhere to the standards has allowed for theological interpretations well beyond the bounds of our biblical and reformed heritage. As a Session, we feel compelled to act because of this creeping pluralism within the PC(USA) which has altered the historical understanding of what constitutes sin, and has created a conflicted witness to its members and to the world. The Christian faith believes life with God begins with our repentance from sin (Luke 5:32; Acts 2:38; 2 Cor. 7:10). It is here where we are forgiven and where God exchanges our old self for a new one (2 Cor. 5:17; Gal 2:20). But in a church or denomination that cannot agree as to what constitutes sin, it will have some people coming for confession of the exact behavior others are celebrating. This can only lead to confusion among its members, and eventually undermines the very idea that one should confess sin, for fear that one s confession of a behavior might offend a fellow parishioner not so inclined to consider the same behavior as wrong. This is the place at which the PC(USA) finds itself. Ironically, and sadly, the PC(USA) has shown itself committed to unity only around the idea of theological diversity (i.e. disunity). In so doing, it has subverted the Lordship of Jesus Christ and challenged our Reformed understanding of Scripture. 5. Has First Pres done anything to try and reform the Church? Yes. First Pres has for the past twenty years been actively involved at all governing levels of the church seeking to reverse this theological slide. We have been involved in local, state and national gatherings; and we have financially supported renewal groups in an effort to strengthen our voice on a national level. 9

In the mid 1990 s the Session signed a relief of conscience which excluded any of our medical benefit dues from paying for abortions, which are covered by the church insurance plan. The Session joined the Confessing Church movement in 2001 affirming (1) Jesus Christ is the world s singular saving Lord. No one comes to the Father but through Him. (2) The Bible is God s holy Word. (3) Christians are called to live a holy life, which includes the Biblical standard of chastity in singleness and fidelity in marriage. On September 26, 2006, the Session adopted a Resolution reaffirming the Biblical standard of fidelity and chastity for ordination and installation of ministers, elders, and deacons (Section G 6.0106b, 2005 2007 Book of Order). The Session created a task force in 2008 which presented the congregation with information in Jan. of 2009 regarding the state of the denomination, particularly property issues related to FPC. On July 22, 2008, the Session voted to withhold per capita funding from the PC(USA) General Assembly as a matter of conscience in regards to actions taken at the 2008 General Assembly. Reconstituted a denominational task force in June of 2011 in response to the passage of amendment 10 A. This resolution included options for FPC to seek dismissal from the PC(USA). (see www.florencefirst.org/article143578.htm) The Session wrote and overture to the 2010 GA that was adopted by our Presbytery and debated at the 2010 General Assembly. Unfortunately, the overture was defeated. We believe this was the first overture ever submitted from New Harmony Presbytery to the General Assembly. Our pastors and elders have for many years attended renewal meetings in Atlanta, Orlando, San Diego, and Minneapolis in an effort to help bring reform to the denomination. In short, First Pres has been heavily involved in seeking to bring about needed reform within the PC(USA) and to maintain our biblical and reformed standards. With the recent passage of Amendment 10 A, First Pres and many other churches in our denomination have grown weary and disillusioned of this struggle. While our Confessional documents are biblically sound and the Scripture has never changed, it is clear that a growing number within the denomination, both lay and clergy, no longer follow the clear, historic teachings of our faith. The Session feels it is now time to associate with another Presbyterian body that adheres to the principles of faith that we have held to since our inception in 1861 and thus remain faithful to what we believe the Scriptures teach. 6. What are some reasons other Churches are giving for making a change? We have stated our primary reasons relating to the Authority of Scripture and the Authority of Christ as they relate to a compromising of the Gospel. Presbyterian Churches around the country are identifying similar reasons for leaving the denomination. We are not alone in our efforts to be faithful to the Gospel. We have included an attachment from First Pres Church in Tacoma, Washington stating Five Reasons to Consider Leaving the PC(USA) which they shared with their congregation. (see www.fpctacoma.com/tp40/page.asp?id=272201) 10

7. Will our departure from the PC(USA) affect our support of current ministries and missionaries? No. The Session determines who receives our benevolence dollars. We will be able to continue to support and contribute to those ministries that fulfill our mission and further spread the Gospel of Jesus Christ. 8. What about our members living in the Presbyterian Communities of S.C.? A change in denominational affiliation will have no bearing on the status of our members who live within the Presbyterian Communities. The fee structure or ability to receive charitable care, if necessary, will not be affected by this change. 9. What about PADD and Thornwell? Again, our affiliation with another Presbyterian body will have no impact on our ability to support these ministries. Property and Legal Issues 1. Who owns our property? The PC(USA) Book of Order states our church property is held in trust for the denomination. This is commonly referred to as the trust clause. Your Session understands that the trust clause is being interpreted and applied by PC(USA) in other states to assert ownership or control over the property of churches that are trying to leave the denomination. We respectfully disagree with the position of PC(USA) that the trust clause gives it authority over our property. Based upon the language of our real estate deed and applicable South Carolina law, your Session believes that our property is owned by First Pres Church, not by the denomination. We believe that the trust clause is void and unenforceable as a matter of law. Therefore, the trust clause gives the denomination no ownership, authority, or control over the property of First Pres Church. 2. What does our real estate deed say? The real estate deed to First Pres Church (dated June 23, 1948) clearly and purposefully states who the property belongs to and, perhaps more importantly, who it does not belong to. To quote from the deed, the property is conveyed to: First Pres Church of Florence, South Carolina for the absolute, sole, and exclusive use and benefit of the congregation and members [present and future] [Further] no Presbytery, Synod, General Assembly, or denomination has or shall ever have any right, title, interest, or estate, either legal or equitable, in the property [unless authorized by ¾ of membership] 11

3. What is the applicable law? Unlike many other states, South Carolina has adopted what is called the neutral principles of law approach to issues of ownership of church property. This means that South Carolina courts will not defer to denominational interpretation of legal principles that govern ownership of church property, such as the PC(USA) s interpretation of the trust clause. Nor will our courts defer to laws of other states. Instead, neutral principles of South Carolina law in the areas of property, trusts, and nonprofit corporations will be applied to determine issues of ownership of church property. A very favorable South Carolina Supreme Court ruling was issued in 2009 in a case involving a dispute over ownership of church property between an Episcopal church and the Episcopal denomination. In short, the Supreme Court ruled that the local church, not the denomination, owned the property. This result does not guarantee the same outcome in our case because each case must be determined based upon its own set of facts. Nevertheless, based upon the favorable law from that case and the strong language of our real estate deed, your Session believes that the trust clause is not enforceable under the laws of South Carolina and that First Pres owns it property outright. 4. How do we leave PC(USA)? First Pres must be dismissed by the Presbytery to another Reformed Body. The Evangelical Presbyterian Church (EPC) and Evangelical Covenant Order of Presbyterian (ECO) appear to be our two best options at this time. However, no recommendation is currently being made as to which option to choose. To be clear, however, your Session has voted to begin the process of dismissal from PC(USA) to another Reformed Body, to be determined, via the Presbytery s Gracious Dismissal Policy. 5. What is the Gracious Dismissal Policy? In 2008, the PC(USA) General Assembly approved a resolution expressing its will that each Presbytery adopt a dismissal policy for churches desiring to leave the denomination. In July, 2011, our Presbytery adopted its dismissal policy. This is the policy commonly referred to as The Gracious Dismissal Policy. 6. How does the Gracious Dismissal Policy work? The Gracious Dismissal Policy is designed to work as follows: i. The Session initiates the dismissal process by inviting the Presbytery to form Presbytery Response Team (PRT). The PRT is made up of a chairperson nominated by the Presbytery and trained in conflict resolution plus 4 other members, 3 of whom are chosen by the Presbytery and 1 of whom is agreed upon by the Session. ii. The purpose of the PRT is to engage the Session in discussions about potential resolution or dismissal to another Reformed body for identified reasons of conscience. 12

iii. The PRT will: Hold an initial meeting with the Session to address its concerns that led to the request to form a PRT. Promptly report the results of the initial meeting and its recommendations to the Presbytery. Work to make assure that before the issue of dismissal is brought before the congregation it has been addressed fairly and accurately. Encourage on going dialog with the church in the hope of resolution. iv. The PRT will not determine the merits of the concerns raised by the Session. v. The Session calls a congregational meeting for the purpose of hearing from members and discerning, possibly by a non binding, secret, and written straw ballot, how many members desire that, should the way be clear, the congregation be dismissed to another Reformed body. The Session hopes to hold this meeting in May, 2012 vi. The quorum of the meeting is 50% of active members. If a 50% quorum is not present the process does not go forward. vii. If the PRT believes that a significant portion of those members present at the meeting wish to be dismissed (if a straw ballot is taken, that is estimated to be more than 75% or more of those present and voting) the dismissal process continues and the PRT will: Meet with members who wish to remain loyal to PC(USA) to best strategize how to continue an existing mission presence by maintaining the existing congregation, incorporating members into nearby Presbyterian Church (USA) congregations, or create a new entity. Begin to negotiate terms of dismissal with those members who wish to leave viii. At the conclusion of negotiation of the terms of dismissal, the congregation will meet again. The purpose of this second meeting is to vote on dismissal to a specific Reformed body pursuant to the negotiated terms. It appears that the specific Reformed Body to which dismissal is sought must be decided in advance of this meeting. ix. A 50% quorum, secret ballot, and 75% affirmative vote is required for approval of the terms of dismissal to the specific Reformed body. x. If the vote is affirmative, the Presbytery must then meet to vote on whether to accept the terms of dismissal and to dismiss the congregation to the other Reformed body. No amendments of the negotiated terms are allowed. 13

xi. In case of a no vote by the Presbytery, continued dialog will be sought. 7. What does the Gracious Dismissal Policy say about property? The Gracious Dismissal Policy restates the trust clause from the Book of Order. It also states the Presbytery s interpretation of the trust clause. Specifically, it states that through the trust clause the Presbytery has an abiding interest in the location and facilities of the member churches. Further, The Presbytery understands that property is maintained and administered locally by the congregation on behalf of the denomination and the Presbytery will not abdicate all decisions regarding property to the local congregation. Your Session understands that these interpretations of the trust clause are consistent with the PC(USA) s interpretation of the trust clause in property disputes with other churches in other states. These interpretations may also be correct under the laws of other states which defer to the same denominational interpretations. However, as stated above, issues of ownership of church property in South Carolina are to be decided by application of neutral principles of South Carolina law, not by application of denominational interpretation or application of laws of other states. Your Session believes that the laws of South Carolina lead to the conclusion that First Pres Church, not the Presbytery and not PC(USA), owns our property. Therefore, we respectfully dispute the authority of the Presbytery to make any decisions concerning our property even though that power is given to it in the Book of Order and has been assumed by it in the Gracious Dismissal Policy. The Gracious Dismissal Policy also states how the trust clause will not be used by the Presbytery in any dismissal process. These provisions appear to be consistent with the stated spirit and intent of the Gracious Dismissal Policy that the Presbytery act with consistency, pastoral responsibility, accountability, gracious witness, openness, and transparency in dealing with churches and their congregations that desire to leave PC(USA). To state the matter more specifically, the Gracious Dismissal Policy says the Presbytery will not use the trust clause to: act in an adversarial manner to a church constrain local congregations in their ability to do mission and ministry shackle a church to the PC(USA) if that church genuinely desires to depart threaten civil litigation against a congregation initiate civil litigation against a congregation; but if a church initiates the litigation, the Presbytery will defend its position on the trust clause. 8. Will a financial settlement be part of the negotiated terms of dismissal? Possibly; a financial settlement as part of the terms of dismissal is contemplated under the Gracious Dismissal Policy. However, any financial settlement will be used by the Presbytery to maintain or to re establish a mission of the PC(USA) in our locale, for new church development elsewhere in the Presbytery, or for other mission work of the Presbytery. 14

Financial Issues 1. What are the budgetary implications of affiliating with a denomination other than PC(USA)? We are currently paying approximately $102,774 to PC(USA), through our local Presbytery New Harmony, for administrative and program related expenses. A portion of these funds are for the per capita, which is a fixed, per member, cost for our affiliation with PC(USA), our regional Synod (South Atlantic), and our Presbytery (New Harmony). The vast majority of these funds, however, are for our undirected, general benevolences and for direct support of our missionaries and supported organizations. Although terminology in the EPC and ECO are a little different, we would make contributions similar to our per capita to both organizations. The EPC suggests a voluntary contribution of 1% of the church s annual donations. The ECO requires a 1% contribution of the church s annual budget. Despite the use of different terms by the EPC and ECO, the 1% is the same number $15,000. Due to the fact that a portion of the 1% we would pay to the EPC (and presumably the ECO) would go towards benevolences, we would not have an additional contribution for general benevolences if we were affiliated with the EPC (we presume the same to be the case with the ECO). Our affiliation with either the EPC or ECO should not affect our direct support of missionaries and supported organizations. Consequently, in the absence of any new expenses incurred as a result of dismissal, our affiliation with either the EPC or ECO would result in an annual savings of approximately $51,000. 2. Will there be any additional financial costs associated with leaving? Costs over and above those we are currently paying, if there are any at all, would not be known until we have negotiated our terms of dismissal with our PC(USA) Presbytery, New Harmony. Additional costs could potentially include payment of the EPC or ECO s per capita (in addition to the per capita already paid to PC(USA)) and payment to PC(USA) of some amount for general benevolences for a period of time after our withdrawal. At this point, however, we cannot say whether any of these additional costs would be applicable because they would be negotiated under the terms of our dismissal. We may also choose to incur additional costs in connection with contributions to our pastors and staff s retirement plans. These costs would be incurred in order to offset the reduction in benefits our pastors and staff may experience as a result of their transition from a pension (defined benefits) plan to a more traditional retirement (defined contribution) plan. 3. What affect with withdrawal have on any debt we incur in connection with the renovations to our church campus? As per the motion approved by the congregation in November, no debt will be incurred nor will additional construction or renovation begin until such time as it is approved by the congregation. 4. What will the impact be, if any, on our staff s retirement benefits? Withdrawal from PC(USA) will reduce the level of retirement benefits that would otherwise be available to our pastors and several members of our staff. The reduction in benefits, however, is 15

something that can be addressed if necessary. Both denominations our Session is currently considering affiliation with (EPC and ECO) have retirement plans that we would, at a minimum, make contributions to that are at the level we are making today. The retirement plans offered by the EPC and the ECO are 403(b) plans as opposed to the pension plan sponsored by PC(USA). 403(b) plans are essentially the same as 401(k) plans offered by most employers whereas a pension plan provides for a fixed monthly retirement benefit based, in large part, on years of service. Currently, we make retirement plan contributions on behalf of our pastors to PC(USA) s pension plan. Our pastors retirement benefits that have accrued to date under the pension plan are fully vested and our pastors would be entitled to receive them regardless of what denomination we affiliate with. Due, however, to the fact that we would be leaving PC(USA) prior to the time at which our pastors are of retirement age, the amount of their future monthly pensions would be reduced. If a decision to withdraw from PC(USA) is made, the Session will evaluate the impact of the reduction in our pastors monthly pensions on their overall retirement benefits package. The Session may then recommend different options to maintain our pastors and staff s overall retirement benefits at a level comparable to the current PC(USA) plan. 5. Will there be any impact on staff s salary? No. Staff compensation is determined by our local congregation so there would be no impact from the change to EPC or ECO. 6. How will the staff s health benefits be affected? Both the EPC and the ECO have an array of health care plans with an array of benefits that are similar to those provided by PC(USA). The annual costs associated with both the EPC and ECO will be approximately $20,000 $60,000 more per year depending upon which plan options are purchased. About the Evangelical Covenant Order of Presbyterians (ECO) 1. What is the Evangelical Covenant Order of Presbyterians? The Evangelical Covenant Order of Presbyterians (ECO) is a movement toward a more missional church with less institution and hierarchy with a desire to develop a more covenantal relationship among congregations. The ECO is a movement toward adaptive change in our church as opposed to a movement away from something. The ECO believes in (a) Kingdom Vitality whereby congregations should vigorously reproduce new missional communities to expand the Kingdom of God; and (b) Thoughtful Theology whereby we believe in theological education, constant learning, and the life of the mind; celebrating this as one of the treasures of our Reformed heritage. 2. What is the Fellowship of Presbyterians? The Fellowship of Presbyterians was a movement started by seven pastors from some of the largest PC(USA) churches in the United States. In 2010, these prominent pastors began discussing the idea of a better way of reaching out and being a more missional church. In February of 2011, the pastors sent a letter to the PC(USA) stating that the "church" is deathly ill and suggested that it was time for 16

something new. In May of 2011, subsequent to the actions at the General Assembly, specifically with the passage of Amendment 10 A, the movement became more active leading to the planning and organization of a gathering in Minneapolis in August 2011. Approximately 1900 people attended the Minneapolis conference and after much prayer and discernment, the Fellowship began drafting essential tenets and a refined polity for a new reformed body. A second gathering was held in Orlando, Florida in January 2012 when the Fellowship unveiled the new reformed body, ECO, along with the essential tenets and polity. 3. What is the difference between the Fellowship of Presbyterians and the ECO? The values of the Fellowship and the values of the ECO are identical. Congregations will be able to affiliate with either group. Those affiliating with the Fellowship will strive to live into these values within the PC(USA). Those affiliating with ECO will strive to live into these values outside of the PC(USA). The Fellowship has been designed to allow those congregations to join a covenanting partnership with others that are unable to disaffiliate with the PC(USA) for whatever reason. The ECO is wholly separate and distinct from the PC(USA) and those congregations affiliating with the ECO will seek dismissal from PC(USA). 4. Is the ECO recognized as a reformed body? The ECO is in the process of seeking recognition from the World Alliance of Reformed Churches as a legitimate reformed body. It is the hope of the ECO that the World Alliance will recognize the ECO as a reformed body by May 2012. 5. At what stage in the process of organization is the ECO? The ECO is a valid 501c(3) corporate entity and currently has a governing board, two full time employees and one part time employee. The ECO has developed an operating budget and will have available for all church staff within the ECO a medical plan in April. The ECO has also unveiled a Board of Pensions plan and a referral service for pastors within the ECO. The ECO and the Fellowship of Presbyterians will share board members until August 2012, when a separate board for the ECO is established. Currently, there are eleven members serving the Fellowship for Presbyterians Interim Board. 6. What is the ECO's vision? The ECO has described itself as a movement toward "adaptive change" and a movement toward a more "missional church." The ECO is committed to growing and planting flourishing churches that make disciples of Jesus Christ. The ECO invites followers of Jesus who share a reformed, Presbyterian heritage to reclaim a sense of covenanted Biblical community. The ECO has published eleven characteristics regarding its polity and vision as follows: (a) Defined core theology and behavioral expectations One of the main concerns for many individuals and congregations considering ECO is that the PC(USA) has not defined essential theology and behavior requirements and will not allow congregations and presbyteries to define these requirements either. In the theology section of the ECO constitution the behavioral and 17

theological core is established and all officers must "receive, adopt, and be bound by" these essentials. (b) ECO is concerned with ecclesiastical matters and therefore property is not held in trust There are a couple of reasons for this. First, as we have seen, when property is held in trust it can be used as leverage against congregations wishing to maintain theological integrity. Secondly, when presbyteries have interests in property an inordinate amount of time can be spent in property management. (c) Voting is done in parity at all levels and only when people are connected with a local congregation ECO polity does not see mission and ministry happening primarily as a result of voting. When there is the need for voting at the presbytery and synod councils, within each counsel there is a requirement for a 1 1 parity between elders and pastors. Only pastors connected to a local congregation are eligible to vote. A pastor in validated service or honorably retired will only vote if they are an "assistant pastor" connected to an ECO congregation. In this instance the "assistant pastor" would be equivalent to what the PC(USA) calls a "parish associate". (d) Church is redefined ECO polity defines "church" wherever believers are gathered in the name of Jesus. Church can be lived out in small groups, accountability groups, ministry teams, house churches, and mission teams to name just a few. (e) Elders and deacons can be deployed for greater ministry Because "church" is considered to be the gathering of believers in the name of Jesus n a variety of contexts it is appropriate for the sacraments to be administered in these contexts. Elders and deacons who have been properly trained can be authorized to celebrate the sacraments in various settings. Therefore, not only can communion be celebrated in these various expressions of church but, if someone comes to faith through these expressions of church, they can be baptized by the officers who are charged with shepherding these groups. Elders and deacons can also be commissioned by the presbytery to serve as the pastors of congregations and new church developments for the mission and ministry of the presbytery. (f) Emphasis on the role of members as covenant partners ECO polity now names members as "covenant partners." Congregations may choose to use difference language if they wish, but this designation is designed to emphasize that individuals aren't joining an organization. When they say yes to membership in ECO, individuals are covenanting with one another in God's redemptive mission as expressed in, through, and beyond the congregation. (g) Greater local flexibility There is much within the PC(USA) Book of Order that congregations may wish to continue to affirm, but there will be significant flexibility in these areas. Here are a few examples: 18

Deacons Deacons may serve as part of a board or be commissioned on an annual basis. Since deacons do not have oversight within a congregation, a congregation may choose to continue to elect deacons in congregational meetings or can choose to have the session appoint deacons. Elders Elders in the PC(USA) serve three year terms and can serve no more than two consecutive terms. Many ECO congregations may wish to continue this practice. But a congregation may choose to design their elder election and rotation. For example, they may wish to have elders serve only one 4 year term. In some cultures it is shameful for a person to be rotated off of the elders' board. Congregations may wish to allow elders to serve an unlimited number of terms. The local ECO congregation continues to be governed by elders and the congregation must elect them, but their terms of service can have flexibility. Pastors A few different categories of pastors are defined. For example, ECO polity has reinstated the office of assistant pastor, hired by the session rather than called by the congregation. This again allows for greater flexibility in pastoral leadership. (h) Presbyteries also have greater freedom In ECO polity, the role of the presbytery is to support, encourage, and resource local congregations. ECO presbyteries are required to have three committees; the Committee on Ministry which can include oversight of candidates, a Permanent Judicial Commission, and a governing council which has the same role and responsibilities of most PC(USA) presbytery councils. Other committees and task forces may be formed as they are necessary for the mission of the presbytery. Presbyteries also have flexibility as they guide congregations in the call process. A typical PNC may be established or a congregation may allow the session to serve this function. However they are called, the congregation must ultimately elect installed pastors. (i) Missional Affinity Network Missional Affinity Networks are networks of congregations in similar ministry settings and facing similar challenges and opportunities. These networks are outside the presbyteries. They could be comprised of congregations near universities or colleges, congregations in urban settings, multiethnic congregations, those who are actively planting worshiping communities, congregations of various sizes, etc. These Missional Affinity Networks have no judicial authority but can be beneficial in a variety of important ways. (j) Accountability, support, and encouragement ECO polity affirms that accountability between congregations is vitally important. Pastors should share with one another where they have seen God most visibly at work as well as what they are discerning as their part in God's future mission. ECO pastors are expected to covenant to be accountable to one another, ensuring they are living balanced lives and being good steward of the multiple responsibilities God has given them. Accountable relationships, called "peer reviews," can take place within the presbytery or within the Missional Affinity Networks. (k) Flatter structure with an emphasis on God's work within the local congregation There are three layers to the ECO polity structure; session, presbytery and synod. Synod is the widest council in 19