Main Index Table of Contents Article 1-50 Article 51-94 Article 95 -105 Article 106-130  Appendix I Appendix II Appendix III Appendix IV Appendix V Appendix VI Appendix VII Appendix VIII

Committee II presents:

Agenda items VIII. E. 2, 4,13
 

1. MATERIAL

Letters from sr. C. VanEerden, the church at Burlington-South and the church at Langley.

II. ADMISSIBILITY

Synod declares the letters of sr. C. VanEerden and the churches at Burlington- South and Langley admissible because they present new grounds to reconsider a matter dealt with by a previous Synod (Art. 30 and 33 C.O.). Moreover, members have the right to request a revision of decisions by which they feel aggrieved (Art. 31 C.O.).

Ill. OBSERVATIONS

A. Sr. C. VanEerden requests "to re-establish a committee to study the new grounds and concerns pertaining to the place of women's voting in the elections of office bearers." She adduces as grounds
 
1 . the fact that this matter now lives in the churches as evidenced by the fact that it is discussed in her congregation of Burlington-South, Classis Ontario North of March and September 1991 and Clarion (in Clarion there are recent discussions about the decision of the Synod of Ommen to give voting to women);

2. women's voting is a matter which belongs to the churches in common.

B. The church at Burlington-South endorses the overture of sr. C. VanEerden calling attention especially to the "new grounds (Art. 30 C.O.) such as Synod Ommen's recent decision in the Netherlands and that this issue lives in the churches."

C. The church at Langley overtures Synod: "We believe that the Canadian Reformed Churches would be well served by a new committee studying the issue of women's participation (especially single sisters and widows) in the voting and election of office bearers in the light of developments in the last twelve years. We request Synod Abbotsford (1995) to appoint such a committee." The church at Langley outlines the developments by referring to the discussions of Synods 1977, 1980, 1983, 1986, the Synod of Ommen 1993 in the Netherlands and overtures to this Synod regarding the matter of women's voting.

1 . the obvious lack of consensus on this matter in the churches;

2. the explanations of Scripture passages by the study committee are considered rather unusual and not generally accepted explanations;

3. the Dutch sister churches judged that the submissiveness of women does not allow them an independent vote;

4. various churches indicate that the "matter of 'women's voting rights' does not live in the midst of the churches," and that "granting voting rights would definitely cause great concern and even division."

A. it is debatable whether the matter of women's voting does or does not live
within the churches.

B. Whether women's voting would cause division in the churches is to be assessed by the Synod which is called to make a decision, and not by the Synod which appoints a study committee.

C. The decision of Synod Ommen in the matter of women's voting takes away one essential ground of Synod Cloverdale which opens the way for reconsidering the matter of women's voting (Art. 33 C.O.). It should be noted that the ecclesiastical fellowship with the Dutch churches makes it desirable to consider this change in their voting practices.

Synod decide

To grant the request to appoint a committee to study the issue of women's participation in the voting and election of office bearers with the following mandate:

A. to make use of previous reports of study committees on women's voting;
B. to evaluate the decision of the Synod of Ommen in the Netherlands on this
matter;
C. to serve General Synod 1998 with a report, to be sent to the churches at
least six months prior to the beginning of the next General Synod.

Committee II presents:

Agenda items VIII. E. 2, 4,13

I. MATERIAL

Letters from sr. C. VanEerden, the church at Burlington-South and the church at
Langley, requesting Synod to re-establish a committee to study the new grounds
and concerns pertaining to the place of women's voting in the election of office
bearers.

II. ADMISSIBILITY

Synod declares these requests inadmissible on the grounds:
 

A. that according to Art. 33 C.O. matters once decided upon may not be proposed again unless they are substantiated by new grounds;

B. a new matter which has not been previously presented to that major assembly may be put on the agenda only when the minor assembly has dealt with it (Art. 30 C.O.).

Committee II presents:

Agenda items VIII. C. 19, 20

I. MATERIAL

Overtures from the church at Aldergrove and the church at Langley requesting Synod to appoint a committee to take up contact with the Free Reformed Churches of North America with a view to work towards a union of our respective churches.

II. ADMISSIBILITY

Synod declares these overtures inadmissible on the ground that according to Art. 30 C.O., new matters not previously presented to General Synod should first be dealt with by the minor assemblies. See also Acts of General Synod 1983, Art. 150 C.4., which deals with a request from a church to General Synod to initiate contact with another church federation: "the church at Ottawa introduces a new matter which has not been dealt with at the minor assemblies and therefore has not adequately involved and prepared the churches re its overture."

Committee IV presents:

Agenda item VIII. A. 1

A motion to change in consideration E the words  " ... the fact that such a procedure has been adopted and implemented by the churches in Regional Synod East ... " to: ". . . the fact that such a procedure has been adopted by General Synod 1986 and implemented by the churches in Regional Synod East and Regional Synod West' is DEFEATED

I. MATERIAL

Letter from the church at Winnipeg re: Art. 85, ACTS 1986.

II. OBSERVATIONS

A. The church at Winnipeg appeals to General Synod 1995 to rescind Art. 85 Ill, Acts 1986 because it questions the validity of Consideration 1, namely, that admitting other churches to the federation has always been a matter of local churches with the judgments of classis and the concurring advice of Deputies of Regional Synod.

B. The church at Winnipeg states that Classis Ontario South "dealt with Denver's request in several classis meetings without the deputies" and asks, "why did our classis do the same before its October 1993, even denying the request without the presence of the deputies?"

C. The church at Winnipeg also states that the reference in Art. 85 to "concurring" advice says too much, seeing that the Church Order and the church political commentaries do not give Deputies ad Art. 48 C.O. such "importance."

D. The church at Winnipeg is of the conviction that if rules are needed for admitting other churches than a "minor meeting itself must come with clear proposals" and that in the case of Ottawa's request, that church should have come with a clear recommendation(s).

A. The church at Winnipeg is correct when it questions Consideration 1 which states that the admission of local churches into the federation has always been a matter of classis and the concurring advice of the Deputies ad Art. 48 C.O., seeing that prior to 1986 no clear procedures had ever been adopted by the churches requiring the concurring advice of the Deputies ad Art. 48 C.O. in these matters.

B. The church at Winnipeg is wrong when it states that Classis Ontario South dealt with Denver's request "without the deputies" seeing that the deputies were present but were not asked for concurring advice because Classis referred the matter to Classis Alta-Man. Furthermore, Regional Synod East 1987 ruled that in the admission of the church at Laurel to the federation, Classis Ontario Southshould have followed the procedure mentioned in Consideration 1 and requested the concurring advice of the deputies (Acts Regional Synod East 1987). In addition, Classis Ontario North of March 12, 1987, followed this same procedure when it admitted the church at Lower Sackville.

C. The church at Winnipeg is correct when it says that the Church Order and the Church Polity commentaries of Bouwman and Rutgers are silent on this matter.

D. The conviction of the church at Winnipeg that a "minor meeting itself," such as the consistory of the church at Ottawa, must come to Synod with recommendations on this matter, would have been helpful but was not required seeing that it can be argued that such recommendations belong to the churches in common (Art. 30 C.O.).

E. Although General Synod 1986 neither proved that there was an established procedure for admitting churches into the federation nor that the Church Order requires "concurring" advice, the fact that such a procedure has been adopted and implemented by the churches in Regional Synod East must be given serious consideration. Furthermore, it cannot be said that the adoption and use of such a procedure is in conflict with the Church Order.
 

Synod decide not to grant the appeal of the church at Winnipeg.

Adjournment

Rev. D.G.J. Agema asks all present to sing Psalm 105:1, 3, 4 and leads in thanksgiving prayer. The chairman adjourns the meeting.
ADOPTED
 

Committee IV presents:

Agenda item VIII. E. 7

MATERIAL

Letter from the church at Fergus regarding the appointment by Regional Synod West 1994 of two brothers as delegates to the General Synod 1995.

II. OBSERVATION

The church at Fergus "questions whether these two brothers are suitable delegates to the forthcoming Synod ... (because) these brothers do not agree with and may not abide by the decisions taken by the broader assemblies" on the Denver matter. In addition, Fergus deems it improper for these brothers to take part in discussions and voting.

III. CONSIDERATIONS

A. The church at Fergus fails to take into account that brothers and churches may disagree with the decisions of broader assemblies within the parameters of Art. 31 C.O.

B. The church at Fergus overlooks the provisions contained in Art. 32 C.O. on voting.

C. Synod regrets that the church at Fergus questions the integrity of brothers who are legitimately delegated to General Synod in suggesting, without any further proof, that they intend not to abide by the decisions of major assemblies.

General Synod 1995 decide not to uphold the complaint of the church at Fergus.

ADOPTED

Committee I presents preliminary observations and considerations.
 

Synod is adjourned for committee work.
 

EVENING SESSION - WEDNESDAY, MAY 17,1995

The chairman reopens the meeting. He asks all present to sing Psalm 11 : 1 and 2. Roll call is held. All members of Synod are present.
 

Rev. JJ. Peterson, fraternal delegate of the Orthodox Presbyterian Church, addresses Synod on behalf of the OPC. Elder G.J. Nordeman responds his words. (See Appendix 1, p. 94)
 

Rev. K. Stewart, the fraternal delegate of the Free Church of Scotland, addresses the assembly. Elder H.A. Berends responds to this address. (See Appendix 1, p. 98 )

Committee II presents:

Agenda items VIII. B. 1 - 17, D. 10
The proposal of the Committee is discussed. The Committee takes it back for further
consideration.
 

MORNING SESSION - THURSDAY, MAY 18,1995

Synod is reopened. The chairman requests Synod to sing Psalm 12 : 1 - 5. He reads from Scripture Ephesians 4 : 1 - 16. In prayer a blessing is asked over the work of Synod. Roll call is held and shows that all members of Synod are present.
 

The Acts, Articles 55 - 64 are read and adopted.
 

Committee Ill presents:

Agenda item VIII. A. 5

I. MATERIAL

Appeal from the church at Winnipeg against General Synod 1992, Art. 127.

II. ADMISSIBILITY

Synod decides to declare this appeal admissible.

Ill. OBSERVATIONS

A. The church at Winnipeg asks Synod to note its view on the validity of Denver's request to be admitted into our federation. It is of the opinion that the refusal of admitting Denver on the mere grounds that the Canadian Reformed Churches have recognized the OPC as a true church is illegitimate and that there is an interim situation between the OPC and the Canadian Reformed Churches.

B. The church at Winnipeg requests Synod to judge that Synod 1992 was inaccurate in stating that no church specifically requested Regional Synod that further investigation be undertaken to examine the request from the church at Denver. The church at Winnipeg requested Regional Synod to judge that Denver should be granted "a full and fair hearing!"

C. The church at Winnipeg requests Synod to judge that Synod 1992 was incorrect to send considerations as its judgment on appeals from the churches.

A. Synod is not called upon to note certain views of churches.

B. It is correct that the church at Winnipeg asked Regional Synod West 1992
for a full and fair hearing.

C. General Synod 1992 decided to send considerations to the churches which had appealed this matter. It did this in light of Consideration B (Acts 1992, Art. 127) which reads: "General Synod Lincoln refers in this connection to the consideration that such requests be dealt with 1n open consultation with the ecclesiastical assemblies involved" (Acts 1992, Art. 72,IV,A,2,b, and c,vi). This would imply that such consultation between Classis AB/MB, the Presbytery of the Dakotas, and the Christ American Reformed Church as yet may be beneficial." General Synod refrained from granting or denying the appeals because further consultation was considered beneficial and deemed feasible. On the basis of Art. 30 C.O. General Synod 1992 was correct to sent its considerations as its judgement to the churches which appealed.

Synod decide

A. That General Synod 1992 was inaccurate in Art. 127 1V.B.

B. That General Synod 1992 was correct in sending its considerations as its
judgement on the appeals from the churches.

Committee Ill presents:

Agenda item VIII. A. II
The Committee takes its proposal back for further consideration.
 

Synod meets in closed session.

EVENING SESSION - THURSDAY, MAY 18,1995
 

The chairman reopens Synod and asks that Psalm 13 : 1, 2, 3 be sung. Roll call is held. All members of Synod are present.

Committee II presents:
Agenda items VI I I. B. 1 - 17, D. 10

1. MATERIAL

A. Report of the Committee on Bible Translations which includes ten appendices
and seven text studies; and a Supplement to the Report.

B. Letters from the churches at Port Kells, Chilliwack, Vernon, Guelph, Edmonton- Providence, Neerlandia, Burlington-East, Edmonton-Immanuel, Houston, Chatsworth, Langley and Fergus.

C. Letters from the brs. R. Duker, W. Bredenhof, B. Degier, Rev. H.M.
VanEssen, Rev. R Kingma, T. Kingma, and L. Terpsma.

ADMISSIBILITY

Several letters are from individuals and not from churches. This raises the question whether individual members have the right to address their concerns and views about a report directly to a General Synod, without first addressing them to their local consistory/council for consideration. However, it would be unfair to declare the personal submissions mentioned above invalid for this Synod because past Synods have been inconsistent on this.

Ill. OBSERVATIONS

A. Committee Mandate

The Committee on Bible Translations received the following mandate from Synod Lincoln 1992 (Acts, Art. 35):

1. To do a comparative study of the NASB, NIV and NKJV, making use of past studies, in order to determine which one translation can be positively recommended for use by the churches, whereby the criteria are: faithfulness to the original text and linguistic character of the translation.

2. To investigate the direction of the Bible Societies/Publishers behind different translations and whether there is the possibility to suggest improvements in the translation to the Bible Societies/Publishers which can be incorporated into future editions; as well, to investigate the future availability of the translations.

3. To give due consideration to the decision of Synod Bedfordale 1992, regarding Bible translations.

4. To report to the churches and the next General Synod six months prior to the next General Synod.

1. Faithfulness to the Original Text

a. The Committee reports that the translators of NASB, NIV and NKJV all agree that the Bible alone, in its entirety, is the written Word of God, inerrant and infallible in the autographs.

b. The text type underlying the NKJV is the Textus Receptus of approximately 1600 AD. The Committee has serious reservations about the Textus Receptus.

c. The NASB and NIV are based on an eclectic text. The Committee makes the point that the differences between the types of manuscripts are relatively minor, "scholars from all camps agree that 95-97% of the text is established without doubt or debate." (Report of Bible Translation of the Free Reformed Church of Australia 1990). The Committee recommends that the churches would do well neither to accept or reject any translation simply on the basis of a text type used - except in the case of the Textus Receptus.

a. The Committee considers among the acceptable types of translation the modified literal and idiomatic, and rejects as unacceptable translations the extremes of highly literal and unduly free. With reference to Prof. B. Holwerda, the Committee is of the opinion, and demonstrates in the study of a random sample of texts, that an idiomatic translation is not only more readable and clear but often also more accurate. The Committee concludes, "As God's people have done in the past, so today, they should strive for an idiomatic translation of Scripture."

b. With respect to the NASB the Committee reports that the NASB is very helpful in studying God's Word because often the reader can judge what is happening in the original language by referring to this translation. However the Committee points out that "It is however with respect to its clarity and readability that the NASB is too often found wanting. The translation is simply too stiff, not lucid enough, and fails to use words the way they are used today. Proper sentence structure is often lacking. Young people would encounter numerous unnecessary problems in reading this translation; even adults often will not grasp its meaning."

c. With respect to the NKJV the Committee reports: 1n terms of its clarity and readability it fails short. The English language is given a form which our membership is simply not used to speaking or writing." The Committee also makes the point, "whatever strengths the NKJV has are more than adequately shared by the translation that has had our attention before, the NASB; we see no compelling reason why we should recommend a change in that course now."

d. With respect to the NIV the Committee reports: "Having examined the NIV, it can be concluded that the NIV is more idiomatic than the NASB and NKJV, but at the same time, as accurate as the NASB and NKJV. When all factors are taken into consideration, it can be said that the NIV is more accurate since it more easily communicates the message as the original text did to the original hearers." The Committee emphasizes that the NIV has dynamic equivalent aspects, as do other translations, but that this does not make it a dynamic equivalent translation. The Committee demonstrates in its Report and Supplementary Report that the numerous criticisms voiced against the NIV are predominantly incorrect and often unfair and biased. The Committee points out about the NIV, "That does not mean it is a perfect translation. There are no perfect translations. We have found occasions when the NIV is more free than we believe to be acceptable and on these points the translators really should be called to account on the basis of their own commitment to the authority of Scripture." However the Committee concludes about the NIV that it "is simply the finest translation when all the criteria and the relative importance of the different factors are taken into consideration. Furthermore, this translation takes all of Scripture into account and is true to the Word of God. The clarity and readability of the NIV may spark a renewed interest in personal Bible reading and study among young and old and stimulate anew the exploring of the treasures of God's Word. It is somehow difficult to imagine the English of the NASB and NKJV sparking that kind of response "

e. The Committee reports: "Both the NIV and NKJV have opted for the use of "you" and "your" for God, and it is expected that the NASB will do the same in its next edition.... it must be noted that in none of the original languages of Scripture is any linguistic distinction made between addressing a human being and addressing God. Since Biblical usage is our norm, one cannot have principle objections against the deletion of these archaic forms." Synod notes at this time that the NASB revision is complete and has adopted the use of "you" and "your" for God.

The Committee did an extensive investigation to see how the NASB, NIV and NKJV measured up with respect to criticisms raised against the RSV in studies of previous bible translation committees. The Committee concludes that the three mentioned translations are better than the RSV.

The NKJV is a completed project with no room for future improvements. The NASB has plans for a minor revision and is open to any comments that we might wish to make with regards to this minor revision. The NIV is committed to changing the NIV from time to time and welcomes comments and suggestions for improved translations. Synod observes at this time that the NASB revision is complete.

Synod Bedfordale 1992 appointed deputies to continue studies of the NKJV in comparison with the NIV, to determine whether the NKJV can be endorsed as a final recommendation to the churches. Synod Byford 1994 decided, "to endorse the NKJV as a faithful and reliable translation for use in the churches, as well as for study, instruction and family purposes. To allow the NIV to be used in the church services, and for study, instruction and family purposes." Among the grounds adduced, Synod Byford mentioned, "Since the weaknesses of NIV are the strengths of the NKJV (and vice versa) the NIV should be considered for the use in the churches, and as with the NKJV a period of evaluation should be given before final endorsement. It is highly desirable that all the churches in the bond use the same translation of the Bible. However, since the question of which Bibles translation to use is not one of principle but rather one of preference, room should be left in the churches for a degree of variation."

a. To recommend the New International Version for use within the churches.

b. To remind the churches about the usefulness of the New American Standard Bible for study purposes.

c. To appoint a committee which would receive comments from churches and/or members about passages in the NIV in need of improvement, scrutinize those comments, and pass on valid concerns to the NIV Translation Centre. This committee should also glean from previous Synod reports as well as from this report and its appendices any recommendations for change which need to be presented to the NIV Translation Centre.

1. The church at Port Kells recommends the NASB or the NKJV rather than the NIV because of the more literal approach of the NASB and NKJV Port Kells refers to the Report of the Committee on Bible Translations which reported to Synod 1980 that the NIV lacked exactness and faithfulness for its "free" translation.

2. The church at Chilliwack recommends to retain the use of the present RSV, and to strengthen it by correcting inaccuracies and weaknesses it may contain.

3. The church at Vernon recommends the NIV for use within the churches for a testing period of three years which would allow further testing of this translation.

4. The church at Guelph favours the NIV but with the stipulation that the Committee on Bible Translation recommends to the NIV the Byzantine text for future revisions. The church at Guelph also recommends to involve a larger group of ministers for testing the NIV with a view to future improvements.

5. The church at Edmonton-Providence requests Synod to accede to the recommendations of the Committee regarding the NIV and the reappointment of a Committee.

6. The church at Neerlandia recommends to postpone the adoption of the NIV until more study has been made regarding the criticisms against the NIV

7. The church at Burlington-East supports the recommendation of the Committee regarding the NIV.

8. The church at Edmonton-lmmanuel recommends further study on the NIV
and that imperfections in the NIV be corrected before it is recommended.

9. The church at Houston recommends keeping the RSV until more study is made of the NIV and the NIV is compared to the NKJV and NASB by ministers and study societies.

10. The church at Chatsworth requests Synod not to recommend the NIV for use in the churches and to request the churches that each local church study a specific Bible book to verify whether the NIV is the most reliable translation for use in the churches.

11. The church at Langley recommends the use of the NIV but also leave the local churches free to use the NASB, NKJV or even the KJV.

12. The church at Fergus requests Synod not to adopt Committee's recommendation 1 and to adopt the decision of the Australian churches (see observation 5). It further requests to give opportunity to the churches to make further study of both the NKJV and the NIV

13. The brothers R. Duker, W. Bredenhof, B. Degier and L. Terpsma request of Synod to return to the KJV.

14. Rev. H.M. VanEssen recommends the NASB for use in the churches.

15. Rev. P. Kingma and br. T. Kingma recommend to evaluate and use the 21 St Century King James Version.

A. It is clear from the entire Report that the Committee fulfilled its mandate. By means of the Report, its appendices and also text studies of a random sampling of Bible passages, and the supplementary report, the Committee demonstrates adequately the strengths and weaknesses of the NKJV the NASB and the NIV, coming to the conclusion that the NIV is the best translation of the three.

B. In its calling to proclaim the Word of God to God's people and to the world, the Church has a responsibility to use the Scriptures in the most faithful and understandable translation available. The NIV fulfils the criteria stipulated by
Synod 1992, namely faithfulness to the original text and clarity of language, and does so better than the NKJV and the NASB.

C. The acknowledged weaknesses in the NIV are no decisive ground for not recommending this translation for use in the churches, considering that there is no such thing as a perfect translation. An example is the Greek translation of the OT (the Septuagint) which was the Church Bible from approximately 300 BC to 300 AD, also used by Christ and the apostles and quoted by the NT in spite of considerable difference between the Septuagint and the original Hebrew text.

D. General Synod cannot continue to recommend the use of the RSV since there are better translations available according to the judgment of both the Australian and Canadian study committees. Moreover, as Synod 1992 pointed out, continued usage of the RSV would lead to possible isolation of the Canadian Reformed Churches. (Acts 1992, Art. 35 !!!).

E. It is unacceptable to recommend a return to the KJV because of its lack of clarity and its use of the Textus Receptus. This is a text which is based on only a few manuscripts of the Byzantine text type available at that time and which differs relatively significantly from the Majority Text. The same applies to the 21 St Century KJV.

F A testing period of the NIV with the involvement of ministers and the churches before a final recommendation of the NIV is not necessary since the Committee has already thoroughly studied the NIV, and has come to a conclusion of its strengths and weaknesses. Therefore it can be expected that further testing will only demonstrate the same strengths and weaknesses.

G. It is of importance that the NIV Translation Centre welcomes comments and suggestions for improved translations; the NASB Lockman Foundation indicated they were open to comments, especially in light of the light revision (which is now completed), but give no indication of being open for comments for a future revision; the NKJV is a completed project.

H. It is advisable to continue the Committee on Bible Translation which would receive comments from churches and/or members about passages in the NIV in need of improvement, scrutinize those comments, and pass on valid concerns to the NIV Translation Centre. The committee should also glean from previous Synod reports as well as from the Report and its appendices any recommendations for change which need to be presented to the NIV Translation Centre. The letters which were sent to Synod expressing concerns about certain Bible passages are not of such a nature that they need to be answered before a final recommendation is made and therefore should be sent on to the Committee.

I. It is appreciated that our Australian sister churches desire the same translation for "all the churches in the bond." It is also appreciated that although the Australian churches "endorse the NKJV they also allow the use of the NIV. Since they are awaiting our decision regarding the NKJV and the NIV, we should inform them of our conclusions.

Synod decide

A. To thank the Committee for its work and the Report submitted to Synod.

B. To recommend the NIV for use within the churches.

C. To leave it in the freedom of the churches if they feel compelled to use another
translation.

D. To continue the Committee on Bible Translation which would receive comments from churches and/or members about passages in the NIV in need of improvement, scrutinize those comments, and pass on valid concerns to the NIV Translation Centre. The Committee should also glean from previous Synod reports as well as from the Report and its appendices any recommendations for change which need to be presented to the NIV Translation Centre. The letters which were sent to Synod expressing concerns about certain Bible passages should also be sent on to the Committee.

E. To send a copy of the Report of the Committee on Bible Translation and
Synod's decision to our sister churches in Australia.

Committee IV presents:

Agenda items VIII. C. 2, 3, 4, 34, 46

1. MATERIAL
A. Overture from the Eglise Reformee du Quebec
B. Overture from Classis Ontario North December 9, 1994 re: contact with the Eglise Reformee du Quebec
C. Letter from the church at Burlington-East
D. Letter from the church at Chatsworth
E. Letter from the church at Ottawa
F. Report from the Committee on Relations with Churches Abroad

II. OBSERVATIONS

A. The church at Ottawa submitted an extensive report to Classis Ontario North on their contact with the Eglise Reformee du Quebec (ERQ). Based on this report Classis decided: "The information provided by the church at Ottawa demonstrates that Eglise Reformee du Quebec can be recognized as a true Church of Christ. Therefore, Classis requests Synod 1995 to respond to the request of I'ERQ by mandating the Committee for Relations with Churches Abroad to intensify and confirm the contact initiated by the church at Ottawa with a view to entering a relationship of Ecclesiastical Fellowship."

B. The church at Burlington-East overtures Synod not to deal with this matter since it has not been finished in the minor assemblies. They content that a classis may not place a matter on the agenda of a General Synod.

C. The Committee on Relations with Churches Abroad states "it should be mentioned that from the very beginning the CRCA questioned and debated whether or not this was really a matter for our Committee seeing that, as our name indicates, we are to deal with "churches abroad" i.e. foreign churches."

D. The church at Ottawa urges General Synod to follow through with the consequences of recognizing the ERQ as a true church by agreeing "to enter into ecclesiastical fellowship with Eglise Reformee du Quebec''
The church at Ottawa urges Synod to add the ERQ to the mandate of the CRCA because historical, cultural and linguistic differences make it impossible to work in the same federation.

F. The church at Chatsworth believes the decision of Classis Ontario North to recognize the ERQ as a true church and to recommend Ecclesiastical Fellowship was done without due consideration to a number of points, for example, the relationship of the ERQ to the Christian Reformed Church and the Presbyterian Church in America, the ordination of women deacons, the development of church life, fencing of the Lord's Supper, the possibility of working within the same federation.

G. The church at Chatsworth also requests Synod to appoint separate deputies
with the following mandate:

1. to discuss with the ERQ deputies the differences in Confession, Church Polity and worship which exist between our two federations.

2. to discuss with the deputies their relation with the PCA and the CRC and the need for severing these ties.

3. to further investigate whether it is possible to have the churches of the ERQ become part of the same federation.

4. to keep the churches informed about the ERQ so that their needs as missionary churches can be responded to in a positive manner.

A. According to the Word of God and the Confessions (John 17:11,17, 20, 21; Ephesians 3:14-4:16; 2 Tim. 3:15,16; L.D. 21 H.C. and Art. 27-29 B.C.), true believers and churches have the calling to seek fellowship with those who with them confess the same faith and maintain and practise it in preaching, worship, discipline and government.

B. It belongs to the jurisdiction of the federated churches (Article 27 B.C. and Article 50 C.O.) to seek unity with other federations of true believers. The church at Burlington-East is incorrect when it suggests that a classis was wrong to place the matter of the ERQ on the agenda of a General Synod, since the original request for ecclesiastical fellowship did not come from Ottawa but from the ERQ The federation has its own task and responsibility (in its Synods) to deal with requests from other church federations. Even though it was wise on Ottawa's part to involve the churches in Classis Ontario North, they were not under obligation to do so.

C. The church at Ottawa is to be commended for its extensive submission.

D. Fellowship with other churches should be initiated only after a thorough and serious investigation is made and it is clear that these churches not only accept the Reformed confessions and regulations of Reformed church government but also abide by them (Synod Edmonton 1965, Acts, Art. 141 11).

E. Churches that seek unity with one another and live in the same country normally work toward federative unity in spite of differences in history, culture or language. The history of the Reformed churches indicate that language is not always a barrier for living together in the same federation. The English and French churches in the Netherlands had their own separate Classes within the federation of Reformed Churches during the sixteenth century (see Acts of Synods Emden 1571 and Dordrecht 1578).

F. Even though there is no official relationship with the ERQ, the information provided by the church at Ottawa, which was also evaluated by Classis Ontario North contains sufficient evidence to recommend to our churches that they seriously consider extending financial and other assistance to these churches.

Synod decide
A. To note with gratitude the overture from the Eglise Reformee du Quebec
B. To note with gratitude the contact and developing relationship with the Eglise
Reformee du Quebec as initiated by the church at Ottawa.
C. To ask the Eglise Reformee du Quebec to appoint deputies for contact.
D. To appoint deputies with the following mandate:

1 . to discuss with the deputies of the Eglise Reformee du Quebec the differences in Confession, Church Polity and worship which exist between our two federations;
2. to discuss with their deputies their relations with the Christian Reformed
Church and the Presbyterian Church in America, and evaluate them;
3. to further investigate whether it is possible to have the Canadian Reformed Churches and the Eglise Reformee du Quebec as part of the same federation;
4. to make use of the report submitted by the church at Ottawa and Classis
Ontario North;
5. to keep the churches informed about the Eglise Reformee du Quebec so that their financial and other needs as missionary churches can be responded to in a positive manner;
6. to serve Synod 1998 with a report to be sent to the churches at least six months prior to the beginning of Synod.

Rev. P.G. Feenstra requests all present to sing Hymn 46 : 1, 2 and leads in prayer of thanksgiving. The chairman adjourns the meeting.
 

MORNING SESSION - FRIDAY, MAY 19, 1995

The chairman reopens the meeting. Synod sings Psalm 14 : 1, 2, 5. Scripture reading is Ephesians 4 : 17 - 32. The chairman leads in prayer.
 

The chairman calls the roll. All members of Synod are present.
 

The Acts, Articles 65 - 74 are read and adopted.
 

Committee Ill presents:

Agenda item VIII. A. 11

I. MATERIAL

Appeal from Carman re: Regional Synod West 1993

II. ADMISSIBILITY

Synod declares this appeal admissible (Art. 31 C.0).

Ill. OBSERVATIONS

A. Carman asks Synod to decide "[t]hat Regional Synod West, December 1993 was incorrect in not acceding to the appeals of Edmonton-lmmanuel and Neerlandia because: Regional Synod did not deal properly with the reasons for the appeal, namely, that this ground (General Synod 1986, Acts, Art. 85 Ill B (1)) is not valid because it is part of the consideration and is unsubstantiated."

B. The churches at Edmonton-I mmanuel and Neerlandia had appealed the decision of Classis AB/MB Oct. 1993 to seek advice of the Deputies Regional Synod ad Art. 48 C.O. They considered the ground given by Classis, Art. 85.III.B.1, invalid, because it is a consideration and is unsubstantiated. Regional Synod West 1993 in denying the appeals considered that the consideration of General Synod Burlington-West 1986 formed an integral part of the synodical decision.

C. Classis AB/MB gives as ground for its decision to invite the Deputies for advice: Art. 85.A.III.B. & C. of the Acts of General Synod 1986.

A. The church at Carman, as well as the churches at Ecirnonton-]Immanuel and Neerlandia misrepresented the decision of Classis AB/MB Oct.1993. Carman, Edmonton-lmmanuel and Neerlandia present the decision of Classis as having been grounded solely on Consideration 1 of Acts 1986, Art. 85.A.III.13, whereas the decision of Classis was based on Acts 1986, Art. 85.A.III.B. & C.

B. Regional Synod West 1993 was correct when it answered the appeals of Edmonton- lmmanuel and Neerlandia in considering that this particular consideration of Synod 1986 formed an integral part of the synodical decision.

C. Although General Synod 1986 did not prove that there was an established procedure for admitting churches into the federation, this in itself does not make the decision of Classis AB/MB Oct. 1993 invalid.

Synod decide to deny the appeal of Carman.

Synod meets in closed session.

Committee IV presents:

Agenda items: VIII. C. 1, 1a, 16, 22, 26, 28, 31, 33, 36, 38, 42, 43, 47, 49, D. 10.

The Committee takes the proposal back for further consideration.
 

I. MATERIAL

Report from the church at Carman re: General Fund

II. OBSERVATIONS

A. The church at Carman submits a financial report of the General Fund for the period from December 1992 to February 6, 1995. The income was $24,063.07. The disbursements were $25,860.79. The final balance was a deficit of $1,797.72.
B. The books were audited by two office bearers of the church at Carman and found to be in good order.
C. The church at Carman notes that the churches have already been assessed $2.00 per communicant member to cover the costs of the General Fund.
D. The church at Carman requests Synod to thank br. G. Vandersluis who has taken care of the books for the General Fund.

It is within the mandate of the church at Carman to request more funding from the
churches, if required.

IV. RECOMMENDATIONS

Synod decide

A. To express gratitude to the church at Carman for the administration of the General Fund, to the office bearers who audited the books, and to br. G. VanderSluis for keeping the books.
B. To authorize the church at Carman to collect funds from the churches as required.
C. To discharge the church at Carman of duties completed during the period of December 1992 to February 6, 1995 and re-appoint the church at Carman for the General Fund.
ADOPTED

Committee IV presents:

Agenda item VIII. E. 9

I. MATERIAL

Letter from the church at Burlington-West re: inspection of the General Archives.

II. OBSERVATION

The church at Burlington-West informs Synod that the archives of Synod Lincoln
1992 were inspected by two members of their consistory and found to be in good
order.

Ill. RECOMMENDATION
Synod decide to thank the church at Burlington-West for examining the archives
and reporting to Synod.

Committee IV presents: Agenda item VIIII. E. 10

I. MATERIAL
Report from the address church, the Church at Burlington-East.

II. OBSERVATION
The church at Burlington-East reports on its correspondence as address church.

Ill. CONSIDERATION
The church at Burlington-East has fulfilled its mandate as address church.

IV. RECOMMENDATIONS

Synod decide:

A. To thank the church at Burlington-East for the work done as address church.
B. To reappoint the church at Burlington-East as address church for the
Canadian Reformed Churches.

Synod is adjourned for committee work.
 
 

AFTERNOON SESSION - FRIDAY, MAY 19,1995

The chairman reopens the meeting. Roll call is held. All members of Synod are present.
 

Committee IV presents:
Agenda items: VIIII. C. 1, 1 a, 16, 22, 26, 28, 31, 33, 36, 38, 42, 43, 47, 49, D. 10.

A motion to insert in Recommendation B the words "to promote the unity of Reformed believers who have left the Christian Reformed Church" is ADOPTED.
A motion to remove Consideration B is DEFEATED.

The amended proposal

I. MATERIAL

A. Report of the Deputies for the Promotion of Ecclesiastical Unity, plus a
Supplementary Report.
B. Letters from the churches at Attercliffe, Brampton, Burlington- East, Chatsworth, Chilliwack, Elora, Houston, Lincoln, Neerlandia Watford, and from br. W. DeHaan and Rev. B.R. Hofford,

Several letters are from individuals and not from churches. This raises the question whether individual members have the right to address their concerns and views about a report directly to a General Synod, without first addressing them to their local consistory/council for consideration. However, it would be unfair to declare the personal submissions mentioned above invalid for this Synod because past Synods have been inconsistent on this.

Ill. OBSERVATIONS

A. The Deputies received the following mandate from Synod Lincoln 1992 (Acts
1992, Art. 36):

1 . to make their presence known for the purpose of information and consultation;
2. to represent the churches, whenever invited, at assemblies or meetings for
the purpose of coming to ecclesiastical unity;
3. to report on its activities to the churches and to the next General Synod.

1 . that the Alliance of Reformed Churches is making slow but steady progress toward federation and Deputies consider it important that deputies be re- appointed;
2. they also request the churches to keep them informed in order that they may more effectively speak for the churches in ecumenical settings;
3. the church at Port Kells raises the question as to how far a local church can go after two local churches have recognized each other as true;
4. the deputies thus far have not met together but ask Synod to take into account the budgetary implications of periodic meetings.

1. To approve the work of deputies.
2. To adopt the discussion paper so that future deputies to be appointed can build on this work,
3. To express officially that the Canadian Reformed Churches truly desire a Biblical ecclesiastical unity with the Independent Churches, Orthodox Christian Reformed Churches and all those who wish to be church on the basis of the Scriptures as confessed in the Three Forms of Unity and that Canadian Reformed deputies are available to discuss with them any issues that may form a stumbling block to realize this ecumenical goal.
4. To ask the churches to keep the deputies fully informed of activities or decisions in their discussions with those who have left the Christian Reformed Church.
5. To appoint again Deputies for Ecclesiastical Unity with the following mandate:
a. to make their presence known for the purpose of information and con
sultation where still necessary;

b. to authorize Deputies to officially approach the Orthodox Christian Reformed Churches and the future federation of Independent Christian Reformed Churches with the request that these respective churches appoint deputies for church unity who are mandated by their respective assemblies to speak on their behalf and to meet with their Canadian Reformed counterparts;

c. to receive reports from the Canadian/American Reformed Churches on
local ecumenical developments;

d. to be available to consistories for counsel as necessary in local ecu-
menical discussions or developments;

e. to represent the churches, whenever invited, at assemblies or meetings held for the purpose of coming to ecclesiastical unity;

f. to report on its activities to the churches and to the next General Synod.

E. In a Supplementary Report, dated April 20, 1995, the Deputies describe several additional activities by them and by the churches. They also request that Dr. J. DeJong be appointed seeing that church polity matters will figure prominently in future discussions.

F. The church at Watford, disagrees with the Deputies' request that Synod 11 adopt the discussion paper" and with a reference to Prof. B. Kamphuis in which "covenantal thinking, view of the church, and historic redemptive preaching" are described as "our own specialities."

G. The church at Chilliwack takes issue with the same reference and states that there should be no pulpit exchange, exchange of attestations, and admission to the Lord's Supper, until there is full ecclesiastical unity.

H. The church at Chatsworth informs Synod that it is not in favour of granting any of the requests made by the Deputies. Chatsworth also recommends not to re-appoint the Deputies.

I. The church at Neerlandia appreciates the work of the Deputies but would like the Deputies "to elucidate" on the statement of Prof. B. Kamphuis and explain "how this would function within the parameters of the Three Forms of Unity"
J. Br. W. DeHaan requests Synod to declare that the Deputies went beyond their
mandate in making suggestions about some of the matters mentioned above.

K. The church at Elora objects against both the reference to Prof. B. Kamphuis, as well as the statement "that we stress in our contacts with other Reformed churches and bodies that we do not bind them to our idiosyncracies..." It urges Synod to remove this reference and to "adopt a statement which is informative and instructive, and reflects the thinking of our federation."

L. The church at Burlington-East expresses its appreciation for the work done
by the Deputies.

M. The church at Lincoln also disagrees with the reference to Prof. B. Kamphuis and the use of the word "idiosyncrasy." They also express concern about the Deputies response to the church at Grand Rapids and say that there was no need for the Deputies to respond to this church. Lincoln considers the Deputies request 3 to be "redundant" and wants Deputies to be re-appointed on the basis of their existing mandate.

N. The church at Houston requests Synod to add the following to the Discussion Paper: 'We will not consider providing for pulpit exchange, speaking an edifying word, admitting of their members to another's Holy Supper, and recognizing one another's attestations, until the following situation has developed:

1. that the independents have provisionally federated.
2. and that they have agreed to federative unity."

P. The church at Brampton objects to the reference to Prof. B. Kamphuis.

0. The church at Attercliffe is concerned about the first three requests of the Deputies about Synod approving their work, adopting the discussion paper, an official expression of unity, as well as the wording of their proposed new mandate.

R. The church at Fergus requests Synod to approve the work of the Deputies
but not to re-appoint them.

IV. CONSIDERATIONS

A. It is not normal procedure for a Synod "to approve" the work of its deputies or committees, but "to take note" of the work done and to express thankfulness for their efforts. Seeing that Synod did not mandate the Deputies to produce a discussion paper, the Discussion Paper that has been presented need not be altered or adopted by Synod.

B. The use of the terms "specialities" and "idiosyncrasy" in the Discussion Paper have created controversy and confusion and as such detract from the overall value of the paper. It would also have been better procedure if the Discussion Paper had been used internally and sent to the churches for their comments and interaction and had not become a public document.

C. Because of our Lord's prayer in John 17, it is essential that the unity of the church be promoted and that the Canadian Reformed Churches seek to be one with all those who desire to be church on the basis of the Scriptures as confessed in the Three Forms of Unity. In order to promote this unity, it is fitting that there be deputies who can discuss, on behalf of our churches, issues that may form a stumbling block to realizing this ecumenical goal.

D. While maintaining the task of each local church to pursue unity in its area, there still remains opportunity for contact beyond the local level. It is therefore warranted to continue the Deputies for the Promotion of Ecclesiastical Unity with a carefully defined mandate.

E. The request of the deputies to approach the Orthodox Christian Reformed Churches and a future federation of Independent Christian Reformed Churches, asking them to appoint deputies to meet together, is problematic seeing that the mandate of the deputies was "for the purpose of providing information, consultation and representation on behalf of the Canadian Reformed Churches, whenever invited, at assemblies or meetings, for the goal of achieving ecclesiastical unity" (Acts 1992, Consideration F). Official approaches to other federations should be requested by the churches and conducted by deputies appointed by Synod for that purpose.

F. It is not within the province of General Synod to instruct the churches that they have to send documents to deputies, yet it would be desirable for them to do so.

G. While respecting the initiative of the local church to pursue contacts with churches in their area, it is desirable that as much as possible the churches follow a common approach and make use of the advice of the deputies.

Synod decide

A. To thank the Deputies for their labours.

B. To re-appoint Deputies for the Promotion of Ecclesiastical Unity to promote the unity of Reformed believers who have left the Christian Reformed Church, with the mandate
 

1 . to make their presence known for the purpose of information and consulta
tion wherever necessary;
2. to make themselves available to consistories for advice on local developments;
3. to represent the churches, whenever invited, at assemblies or meetings held for the purpose of pursuing ecclesiastical unity;
4. to report on its activities to the churches and to the next General Synod.
ADOPTED

MORNING SESSION - SATURDAY, MAY 20,1995

The chairman reopens the meeting. He requests all present to sing Psalm 15 : 1 - 3, reads from Ephesians 5 : 1 - 20 and leads in prayer. Roll call shows that all members of Synod are present.
 

The Acts, Articles 75 - 87 are read and adopted.
 

Committee 1 presents its proposal regarding the OPC for discussion. The proposal is
taken back for further consideration.
 
 

Committee Ill presents several proposals with regard to these appeals. After discussion they are taken back for further consideration.
 

MORNING SESSION - MONDAY, MAY 22,1995

The chairman reopens the meeting. He requests that Psalm 16 : 1, 2, 3 be sung. Scripture reading is Ephesians 5 : 21 - 31. In prayer a blessing is asked over the work of Synod. Roll call is held. Rev. J. Visscher is absent with notice.
 
 

The Acts, Articles 88 - 92 are read and adopted.
 

To The Top

©1995 General Synod of the Canadian Reformed Churches. All rights reserved.
Problems viewing this site? Contact the webmaster.