GS 1983 art 157

GS 1983 ARTICLE 157Appeal br. H. DeJong

Committee I presents its report on the appeal of br. H. DeJong of Edmonton against a decision of Regional Synod West (September 1983):

A.  MATERIAL – Agenda VIII, J,8

Appeal br. H. DeJong of Edmonton against a deci­sion of Regional Synod West of September 1983. with appendices.


  • Brother H. DeJong requests General Synod to judge that:
    • a.   Rev. S. DeBruin. by teaching that the Lord Jesus gathers His Church in the communion of the same faith also in sects and false churches, is contradict­ing Scripture. Lord’s Day 21. Articles 27 through 32 of the Belgic Confession, as well as the Articles 53 and 54 of the Church Order.
    • b  By maintaining this doctrine, Rev. S. DeBruin has broken his promise made in the Subscription Form for ministers of the Word, and thus is worthy of sus­pension.
    • c.    The Consistory, Classis and Regional Synod involved have tolerated the abandonment of the binding nature of the Belgic Confession, as it is described in Articles 53 and 54, and in the Subscription Form, and have thereby blocked the road to unity in the Church.
    • d.    Through this tolerance the doors of the Canadian Reformed Churches are now wide open for freedom of doctrine to enter.
  • 2.  Brother H. DeJong requests General Synod to decide that:
    • a.   Rev. S. DeBruin, by maintaining the deviant doctrine contained in the ser­mon and the Hand Out, has made himself worthy of suspension.
    • b.   The consistory is to act accordingly, since this is its calling.
  • 3.  Regional Synod West. September 20-22, 1983. considered. among other things. that the “Presbytery of the Immanual Canadian Reformed Church” at Edmon­ton “does not really go into the complaint that brother H. DeJong has laid at the door of the Presbytery”; and that in the light of this fact “it is not within the province of the Regional Synod to deal with the sermon on Lord’s Day 21. Br. DeJong should receive a response from the Presbytery. assess it,  and then if he is still in disagreement with the position of the Presbytery, appeal the matter further.”
  • 4.  The Regional Synod decided that:
    • a.   The Presbytery of the Immanuel Canadian Reformed Church instead of re­ questing br. H DeJong to bring to their attention any remaining complaints he may still have after the decision of Classis, should as yet respond fully to the charge he has made.
    • b.   Br. H DeJong’s withdrawal short-circuits the appeal process laid out in the Church Order, and as such. he should request readmission to the Church and follow the church orderly way.
    • c.   Br. H. DeJong’s requests a. b. c. cannot be answered in the manner that he puts them due to the aforementioned considerations.
  • 5.  Br. H. DeJong writes in his appeal to General Synod “None of my objections against the preaching in general. and particularly concerning Lord’s Day 21, has ever been answered by the consistory…”


  • 1. From the observations it is clear that. although brother H. DeJong was not sat­isfied with the answer received from the consistory, he did not appeal this an­swer to Classis.
  • 2. From this it is evident that Regional Synod indeed did not have the right to enter into the substance of his complaints regarding the preaching of Rev. S. DeBruin.


General Synod decide:

  • 1.  Not to accede to brother H. DeJong’s requests;
  • 2.  To inform brother H. DeJong that, if he cannot accept the Consistory’s response to his objections, he should address himself to Classis.

The Recommendations 1 and 2 are