Presbyterian Outlook Editor Teri McDowell Ott met with Rev. Jihyun Oh on April 1, 2025, during her visit to Union Presbyterian Seminary in Richmond, Virginia. Over the course of an hour, they discussed the stated clerk’s public statements, the rationale behind recent program cuts, and a new employee covenant that the denomination asked mission co-workers to sign. Here are some of the highlights.
On public statements
Oh stepped into the role of stated clerk of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) in August 2024. Since the Trump administration took office in January, many Presbyterians have called on the stated clerk to issue public statements on behalf of the denomination. The Covenant Network of Presbyterians, in particular, urged her to “speak an unequivocal and prophetic word confronting the federal government’s actions as they affect transgender and non-binary people.”
During the Outlook’s interview, Oh clarified that the stated clerk does not speak on behalf of the denomination as a whole, but on behalf of the General Assembly (GA), interpreting and publicly articulating its actions and policy decisions.
Eight months into the role, Oh said she’s still discerning when and how to make public statements. When advocacy committees like the General Assembly Committee on Representation (GACOR) issue statements, Oh feels it’s not always necessary for her to release an additional one. “These committees should be able to make a statement and have it carry the weight of speaking on behalf of the General Assembly,” she said. She’s also considering when action is needed, what that action might be, and where her time is best spent. For instance, should she join discussions with other denominations in a lawsuit, or should she craft a statement?
Oh acknowledged the church’s waning public influence, but she believes the Christian voice still has a unique and needed witness in this moment. She’s currently drafting a statement addressing Christian leadership, power and authority that she says “feels really important at this particular time.”
She’s also working to balance different historical expectations of the stated clerk role from the Northern and Southern churches. “As I understand it, the Northern church expected the stated clerk to be a bit more ahead [of the General Assembly], to be more prophetic — to not just speak for, but to the assembly about the things that were needed,” Oh explained. “For the Southern church, it was more about speaking for, not to, [the assembly.]”
To increase flexibility in future public engagement, Oh has asked the Advisory Committee on Social Witness Policy (ACSWP) to draft broader policy statements, since General Assembly overtures tend to be more specific in scope. She says this would give future stated clerks more leeway when addressing issues.
On program cuts
Responding to the recent denominational cuts in program areas like Peacemaking, Theology and Worship and Global Mission, Oh said the rationales for the program cuts were not all the same, even though the timing overlapped. The process involved questions like: What is the ministry’s impact? Can it be expanded beyond its current audience? Could this work be reimagined in a new form? Does this position need to be retained to carry that vision forward?
Within the constraints of a unified budget for the Interim Unified Agency (combining the Office of the General Assembly and Presbyterian Mission Agency), Oh said leaders asked: What can we cut now that won’t limit future possibilities? The Unification Commission needed to meet budget cuts of $3 million by the end of 2025 and $2 million more by the end of 2026, while still leaving the door open for new directions.
“In the unified budget process, we talk a lot about transversals — the throughlines we want to carry across our work,” Oh said. “Could peacemaking be a throughline? Could theology be a throughline? What does that actually mean for us to, in some ways, decentralize from a single position to something that’s really more of a throughline throughout the denomination? And how [do] we support that work? Those were some of the things that we were trying to weigh.”
Oh also acknowledged the grief these decisions caused and the difficulty of not being able to clearly articulate what comes next. “People would’ve felt better if we could actually tell them what the beyond was – or at least hint at its shape – as the cuts were happening,” she said. “But some of the budgetary commitments had to be made before we could fully imagine what that future looked like.”
She emphasized that these cuts do not mean the PC(USA) is abandoning peacemaking, global missions or theological education.
On Global Mission and decolonialization
Oh addressed criticism that the Global Mission cuts felt “abrupt, colonial, and imposed.” She pointed to a longer history behind the decisions, noting that conversations about mission strategy began years before she took office.
“This is the hard part in today’s environment, where everything feels immediate and timelines are so compressed,” Oh said. “Some global consultations date back to 2008, to what they call ‘the Dallas one.’ The next round happened in 2018. So these conversations have been ongoing for over a decade.”
Although those consultations predated Oh’s role in the Office of the General Assembly, she emphasized the scale of outreach. “Our partner list is massive,” she said. “When we sent emails to inform them of what we were imagining, the distribution was huge.” Oh said a partner survey was also sent out, but it received few responses. “We tried to shorten it,” Oh said, “but it still required long-form answers.”
When partners were asked how the PC(USA) could continue moving toward a decolonial model for global partnerships, Oh said the consistent message was: “You have to do your own work. You can’t keep asking us what this looks like.”
Other reactions from global partners varied. Oh said responses ranged from “We’re praying for you” and “We’re hopeful about this new model,” to “We’re restructuring ourselves, so we get it,” and, understandably, “Oh, no.”
A particular point of pain was the March layoffs of long-serving mission co-workers. That pain was compounded by an employee covenant sent on January 27 for co-workers to sign, detailing that employees are not to “publicly criticize missional and operational decisions of the Interim Unified Agency or its leadership.” After co-workers learned that their jobs were in jeopardy on February 3, some felt the covenant resembled a non-disclosure agreement more than a mutual commitment.
Oh acknowledged the critique, saying the covenant’s intent was to guide expectations during a time of transition and create shared understanding. While open to revisiting the document and its wording, Oh emphasized the goal was to introduce accountability in an organization where, historically, that hasn’t been a strength.
“What does it mean for us to actually follow through on ethics policies? To be accountable to job expectations? I now have a brand-new job description as of the last Unification Commission meeting. So what does it mean for me to be accountable to the goals they’ve set — and for everyone to be accountable to the goals we set together?”
Oh emphasized that the covenant was not a non-disclosure agreement, but more akin to a non-disparagement or anti-defamation clause. “There’s a difference,” she said, “between expressing your opinion and posting misinformation or partial truths. Social media makes it easy to share something that seems accurate but doesn’t tell the whole story, even when there’s no ill intent.”
“There’s a difference between expressing your opinion and posting misinformation or partial truths. Social media makes it easy to share something that seems accurate but doesn’t tell the whole story, even when there’s no ill intent.”
Finally, Oh spoke about the challenge of being both the church and a corporation. “We are a church-related organization, but we’re also employees,” she said. “Because of the size of our organization, there are HR rules we must follow.”
She closed by recognizing how one-sided the covenant may feel. “I get why people feel it’s unilateral,” she said. “But the truth is, I can’t say anything about [the employees and former employees] either. The non-disparagement cuts both ways.”
