GS 1971 ARTICLE 59 – Letter R. F. Boersema
Committee I presents:
Material – Agenda 8
S, 4 – Letter R. F. Boersema, Toronto, Ont.
Observations
- 1. Br. Boersema “would like to appeal the decision of Synod 1968 to make the ruling of art. 171.”
- 2. For his statement that he does “not feel that it is correct to ask that students be able to present a certificate from our own College,” he adduces the following reasons:
- a. “From the Acts it is not evident that either the Church at Burlington or the one at London gave a reason for their overture and request. If they did the Synod did not include it in their ‘considerations’.”
- b. “Synod 1968 only points out a continuity but does not give rea sons. Synod 1958 did not give reasons for differentiation.”
- c. “A man should be admitted to the ministry on the basis of his abilities, his learning and his confession, regardless of how or in which way the Lord has provided him with these.”
- d. “It is the duty of the Classis to examine the candidate.”
- e. It is beyond the Doctors’ and Professors of Theology’s duties “to take care of ecclesiastical examinations if in their capacity as Doctors or Professors of Theology.”
- f. “This decision could lead to great difficulties in the future when possibly students may be expected to be accepted merely because they have a certificate from our own College.”
- g. “This decision tends to place the doctrinal direction of our Churches in the hands of a small group of men which is not healthy for the life of the Churches.”
Considerations
- 1. It is irrelevant whether the Churches at Burlington and London gave any reason for their overture and request or whether Synod 1968 included such reasons, if given, in its considerations, since someone who feels himself to have been wronged by a decision of a general synod has to do only with that decision and the grounds given for it.
- 2. It is incorrect to state that Synod 1968 only pointed out a continuity, for
- a. The proposals of the Churches mentioned were in the line of previous decisions;
- b. Synod came to the conclusion that the wording of the decision of Synod 1958, Acts Art. 151, should be changed.
- 3. The Churches have made provisions which acknowledge the different ways in which it may please the Lord to bestow the gifts, necessary for the ministry, as may appear from Orangeville, 1968, Acts art. 171, and from Article 8 of the Church Order.
- 4. No Synod has ever changed Art. 4 of the, Church Order in this sense that the examination which opens the way to the pulpit should be taken away from the Classes.
- 5. Br. Boersema confuses the issue, since the certificate required does not open the way to the pulpit but only to the Classical examination.
- 6. The decision of Orangeville, 1968, art. 171 does not grant the Faculty of our College the right to conduct an ecclesiastical examination, but asks of them that they make sure that someone who presents himself for an ecclesiastical examination has the qualifications which the Churches demand of every one, who does present himself for such an examination.
- 7. Br. Boersema again confuses the issue when he makes his statement quoted under Observation 2 f.
- 8. Br. Boersema again confuses the issue when he makes his statement quoted under Observation 2 g.
Recommendation
Synod decide not to accede to the request to change the decision of Synod Orangeville 1968, as recorded in Article 171.