Thursday, July 05, 2007

5 Reasons Why:

The Evangelical Presbyterian Church Is Not For Me...
And Should Not Be For You

I attended the now defunct Faith Presbyterian Church, EPC in Fredericksburg, VA from April 1999 to July 2001. Now looking back at that experience and through research I have done for friends interested in the EPC I am of the opinion that the Evangelical Presbyterian Church is not a viable destination for those in the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) who are truly looking for an Orthodox and Reformed Presbyterian Denomination. Below are listed 5 reasons (of which there may or may not be more) why I believe this to be so. By this time next week you will have a fully annotated and detailed critique of each point I have listed. This listing is not exhaustive and is open to instruction, clarification, and disagreement. However, I do hold that the items presented below are an adequate and truthful representation of the positions, polity, and practice of the Evangelical Presbyterian Church. I hold with good conscious that my critiques are accurate both in spirit and in letter. It is not the purpose of this analysis to denigrate or cast into doubt the witness of the EPC but to say that the Evangelical Presbyterian Church in its current form does not fully represent Reformed and Presbyterian orthodoxy as exemplified in the confessions, practices, and theology of Reformed Orthodoxy.

1) Local Option is Still Local Option

2) Tolerance of Charismatic Gifts

3) A Free and Unordered Worship Service

4) A Disordered and "Open" Interpretation of Reformed Theology

5) Presbyterian Polity in Name Only






6 comments:

Reformed Catholic said...

I'm looking forward to your discussion on this, for based on the info that NWAC has been handing out, it made it seem that the EPC was the perfect fit for conservatives who feel that the PCUSA has become apostate.

One item they always point out is that the EPC requires full acceptance of the Westminster Confession. Now you could call that subscription which in some circles is a bad word, but acceptance of the Westminster does hold up some form of agreed upon standards.

And your comments on 'local option' is also going to be interesting to at least one person we're both acquainted with.

Drew said...

When I was preparing for ordination in the EPC (I'm PC(USA)now), they made it clear that I could declare scruples with the Westminister Confession. I haven't heard any NWAC people speak of this--which is funny since that is one of the things that they don't like about the PUP.

The have downplayed the local option for women's ordination. They've said there wouldn't ever be one for homosexuals, but to not have a local option they would have to declare sexuality an "essential of the faith" which seems a bit overreaching. I can't wait to see what happens.

Gary said...

You better hurry if you're going to have your annotated list done by Thursday ;)

Benjamin P. Glaser said...

Well Said Gary... Gave me a good laugh. Life has a way of getting in the way of the best laid plans. I have all 5 done they just need posted and linked.

Rev. Brian Carpenter said...

In 2001, when I was attempting to lead the PCUSA church I shepherded out of the denomination, we had a gentleman from the EPC down to talk to us. My impression was that they would be a perfect fit for the conservatives in the PCUSA... not that Reformed, not that interested in Reformed theology, and more like the broad evangelicalism that dominates America. I do not wish to be unkind, and I know there are good men in the denom, but my impression was that they are very flabby on the Westminster Standards.

Anonymous said...

"I know there are good men in the denom,.."

My goodness. This is sexist. Good start, bpglaser. Blog on.

Check out http://memorialparkchurch.blog.com for other oppossing opions on the EPC.