The signatories of this document wish to register the following Protest against the action taken today by West Tennessee Presbytery regarding the Resolution. Accordingly, we ask, a) that this Protest be entered into the minutes of West Tennessee Presbytery, and b) that this Protest be referred to the Committee on Judicial Concerns, as provided for in Section 5.64 of the Presbytery Manual of Operation and approved by the 158th General Assembly—or failing that, to the Synod of Great Rivers as provided for in Section 4.304 of the Rules of Discipline—with a request for a review and ruling as to the Constitutional and/or Confessional merits of our Protest. Our Protest is multi-faceted, being concerned with both the procedural legality of the Resolution and its disregard for our heritage—the very DNA—of the Cumberland Presbyterian denomination. Procedural Objections The Resolution, in its opening paragraph, establishes the “1996 Statement of the General Assembly on Homosexuality” (“Statement”) as its starting point, and proceeds immediately to quote those parts of the Statement that support the Resolution’s intent, exclusive of the final paragraph of the Statement. In its subsequent Whereas statements, the Resolution goes on to affirm selected parts of our Confession of Faith, and uses passages of scripture that are interpreted in such a way as to support the intent of the Resolution. The excluded Statement passage (endorsed by 1996 General Assembly as part of the rest of the Statement), while inconvenient to the purpose of the Resolution, reads as follows: “This statement is to be understood as a theological and social statement and not to be understood as a rule or principle for ordination but never to usurp the authority of presbytery or session to ordain.” 1. While we have no quarrel with the freedom of conscience the Resolution’s author(s) have exercised in arriving at

Delegates at the June 2017 meeting of West Tennessee Presbytery received a “Statement on Homosexual Activity and Marriage in the Cumberland Presbyterian Church” and referred it to the October 7, 2017, meeting for discussion and consideration. The statement requested that ministers and elders who are “unable to agree with these statements” should “state their disagreements and be prepared to defend them, as we are....” This response is our attempt to answer that request. We do so, not because we need to justify our differences of opinion and insight to the signatories of the Statement, but because we share their concern for the unity of the church. REGARDING THE UNITY OF THE CHURCH The Statement notes, correctly we think, that the related issues of acceptance of LGBTQ+ leadership in the church and same-sex marriage clearly have been a source of controversy and divided opinion. The advisory statement adopted by the 1996 General Assembly did not produce the “unity and clarity” that was perhaps intended. Neither do we think the adoption of this Statement by West Tennessee Presbytery is likely to produce unity and clarity. Unity in the church is not accomplished by the adoption of position statements. In truth, seeking to bind the consciences of members of our church family by force of vote leads to disunity and damages the very relationships essential to our mission, relationships we hope to preserve. Our Confession of Faith says, “The church is one because her Head and Lord is one, Jesus Christ. Her oneness under her Lord is manifested in the one ministry of word and sacrament, not in any uniformity of covenantal expression, organization, or system of doctrine.” (5.02) It is worth noting that even the 1996 General Assembly statement affirmed that presbyteries and sessions have the authority to come to their own

A Theology for Inclusion of the LGBTQIA+ Community in the Cumberland Presbyterian Church (CPC) by Rev. Chris Warren The inclusion of the LGBTQIA+ community in Christian Churches is an important topic for the Church of the early 21st century. Many have chosen a “side” and have become entrenched. Something like a battle line has been drawn. For the traditionalist, a common sense reading of scripture is clearly against same-sex relationships. For the progressive the whole arc of scripture is clear about inclusion. A careful, culturally-sensitive reading of scripture, sensitive to the culture when scripture was written and the cultural meaning given to similar words in modern usage, must be taken into account before excluding an entire community of people. This paper supports the inclusion of the LGBTQIA community in the Cumberland Presbyterian Church. Its purpose is to introduce readers who may be unfamiliar with cultural and biblical studies to alternate understandings of passages that have been used to exclude this community from full fellowship in the Church. Examples from the Church’s History The Cumberland Presbyterian Confession of Faith (COF) reads in section 1.07: “In order to understand God’s word spoken in and through the scriptures, persons must have the illumination of God’s own Spirit. Moreover, they should study the writings of the Bible in their historical settings, compare scripture with scripture, listen to the witness of the church throughout the centuries, and share insights with others in the covenant community.” The Introduction to the 1883 Confession of the Cumberland Presbyterian Church, the first independent confession of faith created by the church reads, “God alone is Lord of the conscience, and has left it unfettered by the doctrines and commandments of men [sic] which are in any thing contrary to his word. The right of private judgment, therefore, in respect to

I’ve been thinking a lot about fear recently. I suspect I haven’t been alone. In the last couple of years especially, we’ve had ample reasons not only to think about and observe its insidious and repressive power to subvert what is right and good, but for too many of us, to actually *experience* it as a part of daily life. Prominent elected officials at every level of government have become adept at weaponizing fear, conjuring imaginary threats to our health, safety, and privileged status from people—“others”—who simply wish to live *without* fear, and to be treated with the same respect and dignity that each of us cherish—and often take for granted. Their actions have divided us as a society perhaps more than ever—certainly more so than many of us can remember. Fear of people who don’t look, speak, worship, or love as we do (“we”, as in white, English-speaking, Christian, heterosexuals more often than not) has led to policies—both real and proposed—that seek to intentionally dehumanize and exclude “others” as a societal norm. From the perspective of a people who have traditionally (and constitutionally) opened their arms to the oppressed, hurting, and marginalized of the world, to characterize this trend as a tragedy would surely be an understatement of incredible proportion. The truly tragic thing, however, is that we have also seen the ravages of fear-mongering make their way into the institutional church. Fear of other faiths, fear that we are somehow being deprived of our right to pray and worship in our own faith as we feel led, and again, fear of siblings in the family of God who do not look, act, interpret scripture, or experience their sexuality in the same way we do seems to be driving us inexorably toward such decidedly un-Christian activities as wall-building and

Today, we're learning about the variety of groups that make up the rainbow community of people. The identities illustrated in this graphic help us to understand the differences or variations—the diversity—that exists in the arena of human sexuality. Through awareness of and respect for this diversity, we come to recognize people who are often too excluded and made invisible. According to the Cumberland Presbyterian Confession of Faith, “The church recognizes and ministers to people living in a variety of family patterns, including those persons who by choice or circumstances are single. It seeks to EMBRACE each person and all groups of persons within the family life of the covenant community.” COF 6.16 To “EMBRACE”, according to Merriam-Webster, is to hug, to cherish, to love, to welcome, to take in or include as part of an inclusive whole. What does it mean for the church to embrace all persons, including those who are lesbian, gay, bi, trans, queer, questioning, intersex, asexual, and pansexual? First of all it means cultivating and nurturing an appreciation for the vast diversity of God’s work in creation. It means loving all the members of every group represented in the rainbow community. It means befriending people who may be different from us, eschewing legalism and judgment. It means humbly putting ourselves in the shoes of the other. It means listening in order to understand, rather than listening in order to prepare our next argument or rebuttal. It also means recognizing that members of the rainbow community are faithful members of the body of Christ. Oftentimes we are blinded to their presence because of prejudicial attitudes and discrimination, even as the number of persons identifying with one or another segment of the LGBTQIA+ community within the Cumberland Presbyterian Church, as a reflection of the broader human race, likely

To: The Unified Committee on Theology and Social Concerns From: A grassroots body of concerned Cumberland Presbyterians advocating for the freedom of conscience bequeathed to all of us by our founders, specifically concerning a denominational position on human sexuality Pursuant to the granting of its request (from the 189th General Assembly) for more time to consider the issues surrounding the development of a denominational statement on human sexuality, the Unified Committee of Theology and Social Concerns has solicited input from Cumberland Presbyterians as they consider the task before them. It is no secret that passionate debate on this topic has consumed a significant amount time at meetings of Presbyteries, meetings of Sessions, and in private and public conversation among faithful Cumberland Presbyterians. A concern we wish to highlight with this communication is that in much of the debate, a critical detail concerning an essential element of Cumberland Presbyterianism—a detail that arguably has defined who we are to countless Christians who have come to faith precisely because of the freedom we encourage to be open to new understandings of scripture and growth through the influence of the Holy Spirit—has been neglected. As a reminder, on 4 February 1810, almost 210 years ago, Reverends Samuel McAdow, Finis Ewing, and Samuel King drafted a document organizing a new presbytery within the Presbyterian denomination to which they belonged after that body had failed to address grievances for which they had previously sought relief. Among other precipitating disagreements they had with their denomination was one over the doctrine of predestination, which they viewed as a form of fatalism. In their document establishing Cumberland Presbytery, our founders laid out certain conditions that those who wished to become members of the new body would have to meet. Significantly, one doctrinal condition was that “all candidates for the

June 28, 2021 Dear Members of the Committee on Theology and Social Concerns and Unification Task Force, First, I want to thank you for your dedication and attention to this matter. I know that many in our churches have pushed for a quick answer or a hurried response, and I am heartened and grateful for your deliberateness and careful consideration of each person’s voice. Attached to this note is the Cumberland Presbyterian Youth and Young Adult Statement on Inclusion. It is not affiliated with or endorsed by the Ministry Council or any other official body of the Cumberland Presbyterian Church. It is also not meant to be representative of all youth or young adults in the Cumberland Presbyterian Church. Rather, it seeks to capture the voices of those who have not been previously heard--a contingency of people who yearn to see a full affirmation of all people in our church. As of June 28, 2021, 164 people have signed this statement. Of those who reported their age, 71% of the respondents were between the ages of 13-30. Among the 143 people who listed a presbytery, 15 different presbyteries were represented, including Andes and Medellin Presbyteries. As a representative of the signatories, I hope that you will prayerfully and earnestly consider our words. Our beliefs are based upon the teachings and scripture we learned in our CP churches, at church camp, and in youth group. We were taught by our leaders that each person is welcomed in church, loved by God, and called to serve God, including by serving as church leaders; we are now seeking to live out that teaching. Contrary to some characterizations of this view, our statement is drawn from Christ’s message of love and grounded in our reading of Scripture. While we may disagree, I ask that

Randy Eddy-McCain & Gary Eddy-McCain In 1995 I was fired from my position as Minister of Music and Assistant to the Pastor at a Cumberland Presbyterian Church. The reason for my dismissal? Being gay and in a loving committed relationship with my spouse, Gary Eddy. The pastor of the church knew about our relationship and had even attended our wedding. He promised to stand with me when I decided to come out to the elders of the church. Yet when push came to shove, he became distant and did not fight for me. A member of the national headquarters for the Cumberland Presbyterian Church begged me to resign and not put the church through the agony of firing me. He confessed that he did not think my loving committed relationship was a sin but that a trial before the elders would most likely cause irreparable damage to the church. “Randy it is not the time for this battle to be fought.” “So when will it be time?” I asked. “You sir may not get the calls I do from precious young people who are gay and have become suicidal because the church, the last place they felt they could run to for safety, turned them away. Perhaps you have not dealt with the pain of knowing about the ones who didn’t call and did succeed with ending their lives. When will it be time for the church to deal with this?” My pleas did nothing to change his mind. He attended the meeting where the elders were gathered to vote on keeping me or firing me. He addressed the elders “I want to say that I know there is a lot of love for Randy in this church. I know his ministry has been appreciated by many of

Report shared by Rev. Carolyn Smith Goings, PhD, Joint Committee on Theology and Social Concerns, New Hopewell (CPCA) and West TN (CPC) Presbyteries Cumberland Presbyterians gathered on 6 November 2016 and on 22 January 2017 for a two-part forum, “Cumberland Presbyterians and Gay Christians,” held at Bethel University and Memphis Theological Seminary, respectively. The purpose of the forum, hosted by the Joint Committee on Theology and Social Concerns of the West Tennessee Presbytery (CPC) and the New Hopewell Presbytery (CPCA), was to provide two opportunities for listening, learning, and sharing. Rev. Byron Forester welcomed attendees, a variety of interested Cumberland Presbyterians (CPC and CPCA) mostly from the two presbyteries, with one or two from the university and seminary. Rev. Lisa Anderson welcomed the forum speaker, Rev. Dr. Roy Hall, author of God So Loved: A Pastoral Reading of the Cumberland Presbyterian Confession of Faith recently published by the CPC/CPCA Historical Foundation. She introduced Dr. Hall as a theologian and thinker who cherishes “honest and difficult” conversations that “challenge us to really listen and hear each other.” Hall then presented a comparison of critical scholarship on homosexuality and the Church, condensing into the forum’s limited timeframe the two main approaches typically employed in mainline denominations when debating the question of homosexuality and the Church.  Dr. Hall noted that those who consider it a closed question (the traditional view) do so for three reasons. First, marriage of a man and a woman has been tradition in the Church and culture for more than 2000 years. Second, Jesus endorsed male-female marriage. Third, a group of biblical texts are seen as thoroughly negative about same-sex activity. Dr. Hall cited Richard B. Hayes’ defense of the traditional view in The Moral Vision of the New Testament in which Hayes describes the Gospel as entirely disapproving

An open letter from Mark J. Davis to those in the Cumberland Presbyterian LGBT community who publicly revealed their orientation on National Coming Out Day, 11 October 2015: First of all, I need to make it clear that in expressing the affirmation, support, and encouragement I will express here, I do not do so as a spokesperson for my denomination--I do so solely on the basis of my own Christian faith. It grieves me deeply to have to start off with that disclaimer, but at this point it is still a sad necessity. Having said that, I want you to know that you are a source of inspiration. There are many of us who admire you--many more than most people in our community of faith imagine. I realize that for some of you, the decision to publicly embrace the person whom God created you to be was not an easy one. I am all too aware of the environment of hostility you may be entering, and indeed, may already have entered. But I want you to know that your courage has not gone unnoticed. I want you to know that there are many of us who affirm you simply as you are, as the person God created you to be--as a beloved and unique child of God. While we are already seeing efforts to deny some of you an opportunity to answer God's call to service, I also want you to know that there are plenty of others who support you in your efforts to answer that call--again, a lot more than you've likely imagined. There are plenty of us who are not afraid of who you are, and in fact see the face and hand of God in your commitment to try to live as Jesus himself lived, feeding