Over the last week, two competing narratives emerged surrounding the excommunication of Stephen Nichols from Saint Andrews Chapel, the former home of RC Sproul. The publicly circulated letter notifying of excommunication led to much speculation as Nichols had also been announced to be transitioning out of Reformation Bible College. He has since updated his profile to announce that he is a Former Teaching Fellow at Ligonier.
After this began to circulate, Stephen Adams, a former Associate Pastor at Saint Andrew’s Chapel, released his side of the story, in which he accused Nichols of slander, harassment, and stalking, yet did not give specifics to support his account. The whole thing was adding more confusion while expanding the timeline of the scandal.
Evidently, there was another side to the story which has emerged: that of Stephen Nichols, who in a public statement, has accused Adams of sexually abusing his daughter.
Any season of transition can be difficult. The narratives and communications circulating about us on social media over the past few days have made this season even more difficult for us and our family.
We want to express our deep gratitude for the twelve years we spent at Reformation Bible College and Ligonier Ministries. We are thankful for that time and for the people we had the privilege to serve. We also appreciate that both RBC and Ligonier have conducted themselves in an amicable, gracious, and honorable manner during this season of transition, and we have sought to do the same.
Since others have shared their version of events, we believe it is appropriate to share ours.
In January 2024, we learned from the counselor of our daughter, Grace, that he had submitted a report to the Florida Department of Children and Families of suspicion of sexual abuse of Grace by Stephen Adams. On January 10, 2025, we reported suspicion of sexual abuse of our daughter by Stephen Adams to Saint Andrew’s Chapel. Over subsequent meetings, we realized that we were at an impasse with our church and that we had different perspectives on how to handle this situation. On April 21, 2025, we notified a pastor at Saint Andrew’s that we would begin the process of finding a new church. We notified him again on July 20, 2025, that it would be our last Sunday (and it was). We each received separate indictments two days later, July 22, 2025. We were accused of slander, unresolved anger, collusion to deceive, failure to follow session directives, and breach of membership vows. There was never a trial, and our case was never adjudicated.
After Saint Andrew’s Chapel voted to disassociate from the PCA on December 14, 2025, we immediately resigned our memberships. On Sunday evening, December 14, we joined New Hope PCA in Eustis, Florida, by testimony. On January 27, 2026, Saint Andrew’s found us guilty of contumacy, which is the failure to submit to the authority of the church and refusal to appear before the church. Afterwards on February 25, 2026, at their request, we met with a committee of the session to answer any questions and hopefully bring some resolution to our differences. On March 10, 2026, Saint Andrew’s excommunicated us, not on the underlying indictments, but for contumacy.
We remain members in good standing at New Hope and are grateful for the love, care, and support of our pastors and our church during this season.
We reported suspicion of sexual abuse of our daughter, we ended up indicted, and we ended up excommunicated.
We are deeply saddened by all that has taken place and grieved for everyone involved. Our prayer and hope is that the central issue will not be lost. At the heart of this issue is the suspected sexual abuse of our daughter.
—Stephen and Heidi Nichols
This is a serious claim that has been made by Nichols, one which adds context to the underlying claims made by Stephen Adams. For instance, Adams accused Nichols of slander, of which a report of sexual abuse could be interpreted as the context from the accused. Moreover, the words of an aggrieved father to the abuser of his daughter could be described as harsh and unfriendly to say the least. One might call such exchanges, whether via text or in person, expected behavior.
Compared to Adams, Nichols gives a precise timeline of events and when they take place. The allegation of abuse was not stated as one of his creation, but the result of mandatory reporting by a counselor of sorts. He further provides an accusation that the church failed to address the accusation adequately (from his perspective), resulting in his eventual resignation from the church. As speculated in the initial article in which the excommunication circulated, he had already withdrawn from membership at the time the church excommunicated him. What makes it more extreme is that the church did so eight months after he had stopped attending. As rumored on the internet, he withdrew membership formally after the vote to leave the PCA. This could have coincided with being received into membership at New Hope PCA, as they might have required such formality as a condition of membership into their church.
The indictment against the Nichols, as described by Nichols, is functionally the church accusing him of slandering Adams by bringing forth the allegation. This likely led to the charge of collusion and “unresolved anger.” Perhaps telling other members of the church about the allegation constitutes collusion or a breach of the Session’s directives. Based on his description, the charges appear illegitimate, as if the church is retaliating against him for wanting the church to take his claim seriously. It should be noted that Adams resigned from Saint Andrew’s Church amid the circulation of “slander” against him. Evidently, that “slander” would be an allegation of sexual abuse, which is perhaps why he withheld the most pertinent information in his article.
The one interesting inconsistency in his narrative is that he was informed in January 2024 but only told the church a year later. Perhaps Nichols was personally investigating Adams, which he described as a “campaign of harassment and stalking, accompanied by vile and wicked slander.” The counselor only reported suspicions of sexual abuse, not a confession by the daughter, so this further complicates the veracity, or the pursuit thereof, of the information.
Overall, Steve Nichols has given the clearest account of what happened at Saint Andrews Chapel, with dates and specifics as to the charges of which he and his wife were indicted by the church. His account aligns with the evidence that has been presented, both by himself and parties clearly in his opposition. This does not mean the allegation of sexual abuse by Stephen Adams was true, as Adams has not been charged, but it would explain the conduct of Nichols in that he sincerely believed the allegation to be true. Again, that he has not been charged after two years could undermine the legitimacy of the sex abuse claim, but either the report was submitted to the state of Florida, or Nichols is lying. And it was Steve Nichols who provided the details in his defense.
More layers emerging in this scandal do not paint a pretty picture for Saint Andrews Church. That this scandal is independent of their departure from the PCA and the cloud that surrounds Burk Parsons only adds to the mess that is Saint Andrews Church. Ultimately, this is a bad image for the church and the ministries like Ligonier that are reputationally tied to Saint Andrew’s Chapel.
Powered by RedCircle
