Office Bearers

GS 1965 ARTICLE 212: Reformed Ecumenical Synod

As its proposals on the Reformed Ecumenical Synod (Article 205) are dealt with, Advisory Committee III responds in more detail to comments made.

The following proposals are adopted:

  • “1. To inform Dr. Paul G. Schrotenboer, Secretary-General of the Reformed Ecumenical Synod, that the invitation to send an observer to the Fifth Reformed Ecumenical Synod was received too late, so that it could not be considered and answered by a General Synod of our Churches before that Reformed Ecumenical Synod held in 1963.
  • 2.    To offer our apologies to Dr. Schrotenboer of the Edmonton Church’s failure to communicate this to the Calvin Christian Reformed Church.
  • 3.    Not to accede to the proposal of the Church at New Westminster, because it is not the calling of this Synod to explain why the Synod of Hamilton 1962 should have decided not to send delegates or observers to the Fifth Reformed Ecumenical Synod, if that request had been directed to the Synod of Hamilton.
  • 4.    Not to deal with the suggestion of the Church at Burlington to consider if we, for the Lord’s sake, should consider the question whether to accept this invitation, since the invitation received does not and because there is no request to send an observer to the Reformed Ecumenical Synod to be held in The Netherlands in 1968.”

Press Release version ARTICLE 40: Reformed Ecumenical Synod.

Re: Reformed Ecumenical Synod. Synod decides:

  • “1. To inform Dr Paul G. Schrotenboer, Secretary-General of the Re­ formed Ecumenical Synod, that the invitation to send an observer to the Fifth Ecumenical Synod has been received too late, as a result of which it could not be dealt with and answered by a General Synod of our Churches before that Reformed Ecumenical Synod of 1963.
  • 2.    To apologize to Dr. Schrotenboer for the fact that the Church at Edmonton failed to inform the Calvin Christian Reformed Church about this fact.
  • 3.    Not to comply with the request of the Church at New Westminster, since it is not the duty of this Synod to explain why the Synod of Hamilton 1962 should have decided not to send delegates or observers to the Fifth Reformed Ecumenical Synod, if that request had be m sent to the Synod of Hamilton.
  • 4.    Not to carry into effect the suggestion of the Church at Burlington, to consider the question whether for the Lord’s sake we have to accept this invitation, since the received invitation cannot be accepted, and since there is no invitation to send an observer to the Reformed Ecumenical Synod which is to be held in The Netherlands in 1968.”