Talk:Evangelical Presbyterian Church (Ireland)

Clarella
Hello to the original author and all editors of this page, thank you for the interest and research you've put into this. Please excuse my editing at first without discussion or explanation - I've only just found how to use this talk page!

The EPC Code is not online (yet); I have a hard copy, but as it isn't published, I accept that it therefore can't be used as a source.

Wallace Thompson is not the current Convenor of the Public Morals Committee, and is at present no more a 'leading member' of the church than any other elder of one of its congregations. Even if he were, his private membership of other organisations totally unconnected to the church is completely irrelevant to an article about the EPC.

Worship: neither 'minimalist' nor 'regulative' appears in the Westminster Confession, but 'regulative principle' is an accepted term leading straight to a Wikipedia article, whereas 'minimalist conception of worship' is a more subjective term. Therefore I respectfully submit that 'regulative' better communicates the sense here.

International links: The page you cite about the EPC and the Dutch church actually says: "The REC has lost a number of conservative member churches upset by the council's refusal to expel the Gereformeerde Kerken in Nederland-synodaal despite the 1979 decision of the GKN-s to allow the ordination of practicing homosexuals." It doesn't specify the EPC (which I think left earlier than that, but have no written backup); further down on the page it says: "Other ICRC members which were formerly in the REC include the Evangelical Presbyterian Church of Ireland", not linking it with any particular issue.

The following article makes it clear that the homosexual issue was only one of several, and that the root of the objection was a different attitude to Scripture: http://www.reformedreflections.ca/articles/th-trouble-for-ecumenical-synod%20.html Therefore I would be happy to leave in your reference to the homosexual issue, but include further clarification based on this second source. Would you be okay with that?

I have taken out the word 'small' describing the denominations connected to the Caleb Foundation, as many of them are not - e.g. Baptists have 94 congregations, Free Pres 61, Congregational 25.

Clarella (talk) 00:29, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you for engaging here. Your points re regulative principle accepted. On Wallace Thompson, the ref to his role in the EPC was sourced, but I have reworded on the assumption that your (unsourced) statement that he no longer holds that role is correct. However, I believe that the references to his other associations - all sourced - help the reader to put the EPC in context. On the breakaway from the ICRC, the only cited source refers to the GKN-s issue but any other reliable source explaining the EPC's disaffiliation would be helpful. An individual's blog does not meet the criteria of WP:RS. On the word "small", my understanding is that the 2011 denomination data are not yet published but the 2001 census showed all churches outside the 'main four' as accounting for 6.1% of the population, so that it seems reasonable to describe the various Caleb-aligned churches as "small". Brocach (talk) 23:27, 26 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Could you please clarify for me your sources for stating that WT is a member of the Ind. Orange Order & Apprentice Boys? Sorry if I'm missing something, I can only find refs to Caleb in notes 7&8. (I'm not saying he isn't.)


 * You say that WT's private memberships of unconnected organisations "help the reader to put the EPC in context." This makes the assumption that the rest of the church, or its leadership, condone or support his choices, or that his affiliations officially represent the EPC in some way - have you sources for this? Otherwise the mention of his affiliations (and no-one else's) gives a wrong impression.


 * I'm working on sources for the REC breakaway issue.


 * I will be adding information gradually to give what I hope will be a fuller picture of the EPC. You have taught me the importance of sources - thank you! You can pull me up if I transgress again. Clarella (talk) 23:34, 27 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Source added re WT's affiliations. He seems to be the only EPC member with a relatively high profile in public life at the moment, but if I find anything that suggests his links are not condoned or are unrepresentative of the wider EPC I will amend. Brocach (talk) 15:20, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

I disagree - I believe the references to WT's affiliations should be removed until you can prove that they are relevant to giving a neutral, balanced picture of the EPC. Otherwise the impression given is that the EPC has a distinct political tone, for which you have no evidence.

Clarella (talk) 23:02, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
 * There is a paragraph stating explicitly that the EPC is not affiliated to any political party. This is sourced. The statements concerning the affiliations of one of its leading representatives are also sourced. They are neutrally worded, factually accurate and can of course be balanced by any sourced references to the contrasting affiliations of other leading EPC members. Brocach (talk) 18:23, 19 March 2013 (UTC)