The message seems clear: the national leadership can communicate as it wishes, while the rest of us should practice restraint. For commissioners who care deeply about the EPC’s future, this feels less like a call to unity and more like an attempt to avoid dealing with the real issues. It is an approach that risks dividing us further instead of drawing us together.

Recently, EPC churches have received a letter written by three members of the National Leadership Team (NLT). This so-called “encyclical”1 seeks to reassure us that all is well and nothing has changed in the EPC. In reality, this letter does exactly the opposite: it demonstrates the alarming change that has taken place in the leadership and direction of our denomination. Although it is intended to inform, this letter raises far more questions than it answers. Out of deep love and concern for the EPC, we offer the following response to the issues raised in this letter.

Length of the letter

The length of this letter is extraordinary, running 14 pages. It is, by far, the longest letter ever written to EPC Presbyters for the purpose of answering questions and concerns. If it takes 14 pages to address these issues, it surely points to a crisis in the EPC. Never before in our 43-year history has such a letter been necessary.

Use of “CEO and President” as a title

Since taking office three years ago, our Stated Clerk, Dean Weaver, has assumed the title of “President and CEO” of the EPC. Defending the use of this title, the authors of the encyclical claim it was a practical necessity for communicating with those outside the church who don’t understand the title of stated clerk. And yet, for 39 months neither the NLT nor the Stated Clerk found it necessary to inform the EPC about this major change. In our 43-year history, no stated clerk has found it necessary to claim the title of CEO. If the pastor of a local congregation claimed the title of CEO, the congregation would surely protest. There is only one head of the church and that is Jesus Christ (Ephesians 5:23; Colossians 1:18; 1 Corinthians 11:3; Ephesians 1:22). As teaching and ruling elders, why were we not informed of this major change?

Financial Transparency

The authors claim that the financial reporting to the 44th General Assembly was “almost the same” as the last eight years “with one exception.” And yet, the authors acknowledge there was a deliberate omission of actual giving and expenses in their written FY25 budget presentation. Not only that, but commissioners with basic questions about actual giving and expenses received no answers from the NLT standing committee or on the floor. As a result, commissioners voting on the budget at General Assembly were in the dark, having no knowledge of the fiscal health of the church. Even more troubling, the encyclical claims that this financial misinformation was deliberately withheld because the NLT had received numerous questions about the budget in the past and believed that “… leaving those out would simplify things and be less confusing.” When important financial information is deliberately withheld from the General Assembly, it does not “simplify things” but creates mistrust and suspicion. This lack of financial transparency and accountability is without precedent in the EPC. 

Election of the Stated Clerk 

The encyclical claims that the vote to re-elect the Stated Clerk “occurred on Tuesday instead of at the end of the assembly as we have in the past.” (italics added for emphasis). When the re-election of the stated clerk was moved, a commissioner asked what the norm has been for past re-elections. In response, platform leadership claimed they did not know what the norm had been. The platform leadership included a Teaching Elder who has held a staff role at General Assembly for more than 30 years and a Teaching Elder who has attended General Assemblies since 2007. How is it possible that they did not know the historic practice on such important business? The encyclical also claims that the Stated Clerk was re-elected by “an overwhelming majority of the 900 commissioners present.” What the authors fail to note is that this vote was unprecedented. In the past, re-election of the Stated Clerk has always been unanimous.

Read More