08 Apr GS 1983 art 55

Posted at 12:03h in CanRC, GS 1983 by

GS 1983 ARTICLE 55 – Orthodox Presbyterian Church

The discussion on the Report of Advisory Committee II re Contact with the Orthodo x Presbyterian Church is continued.

The recommendations of the Committee are adopted as amended

A.   MATERIAL

–   Agenda VIII, G. 1-8 and J, 13.

B.   OBSERVATIONS

  • 1.  DIVERGENCIES
    • a.   Synod 1980, Acts Art. 97, II. C, 3 decided to give the Committee for contact with the OPC the mandate to publish. for the benefit of our Churches, a de­tailed evaluation of the confessional and church-political divergencies.
    • b.   The Committee however has some objections to this part of the mandate, namely. (Ill Re ” b, 1. 2):
      • i  this detailed evaluation should not be issued by a synodical committee but, ii necessary, by the General Synod which took the decision to rec­ognize the OPC as a true Church. or by the following General Synod which upheld the dec1s1on;
      • ii  the Churches have received an evaluation of the so-called divergencies in the Committee report of 1971 (Acts. 1971. Supplement V, pp. 64 ff.), in the letter of the CEIR of the OPC in April 14. 1976 and in our Committee’s letter of October 13, 1978. That these explanations did not satisfy everyone is evident. but we should not endlessly pursue the matter. since it has been decided already in 1977 that these divergencies. having been discussed in the letter of April 14, 1976 (from CEIR), do not form an impediment to recognize the OPC as Churches of our Lord Jesus Christ (Acts, 1977, Art. 91, 11, Consideration H).
    • c.   The Committee would therefore like to see this part of its mandate eliminated.
    • d.   In a supplementary report the Committee mentions that an official reply from the CEIR of the OPC concerning the apparent divergencies in Confession and church-polity is forthcoming. Unfortunately, the Committee will not be able to complete its study of this reply before General Synod 1983 meets. They hope that Synod will renew this part of the mandate. (In the meantime the Synod received a copy of this official reply.)
    • e.   The Churches of Burlington-South and Lincoln have requested to further eval­uate and discuss the divergencies and to prove that they do not form an im­pediment for unity.
  • 2.  NEW DEVELOPMENTS
    • a.   The Consistory of Lincoln brings to the attention of Synod the so-called “Shepherd case” and requests Synod to charge the Committee with the man­ date:
      • i  to ask definite information why Professor Shepherd was deposed as a professor of the seminary at Philadelphia;
      • ii  to ask what stand the OPC takes concerning this dismissal of Professor Shepherd, who at the same time was a minister in good standing of the OPC;
      • iii  to ask which standpoint the OPC takes in view of the teachings of Pro­fessor Shepherd, since Professor Shepherd has made it quite clear what his views were.
    • b.   The Rev. B.R. Hofford sent a letter to Synod on behalf of the Tri-County Re­ formed Church of Maryland (Washintgon, D.C.) in which he expressed the desire to seek ecclesiastical contact and possible affiliation with our Church­es, because the question of our recognition of the OPC bears directly on their relationship with us. This Tri-County Reformed Church has recently seceded from the OPC because of a dispute over “fencing” of the Lord’s Supper.
    • c.   The Church at Chatham considers this a matter to be looked into by the General Synod, since:
      • i  the matter of “fencing” the Lord’s Supper has been dealt with at the Fiftieth General Assembly of the OPC. The secession took place because of de­cisions taken at that Assembly, that is in the broadest assembly. Therefore our Churches should also look at this matter in the broadest assembly;
      • ii  the matter of admission to the Lord’s Supper is one of the “divergencies” to be studied by deputies of Synod;
      • iii  the admission to the Lord’s Supper concerns Church discipline as well as the doctrine of the Church (e.g. invisible and/or visible Church).
    • d.   The Church at Chatham requests Synod, to instruct the deputies which are to be appointed by this Synod for contact with the OPC, to inquire diligently into the actions of the Fiftieth Assembly in this matter.
  • 3.  PROSPECTS
    • a.   The Committee sees the relationship between the OPC and the Christian Reformed Church “as ‘cool and cooling’ and as understandable in the light of history,” whereas the Churches at Smithville and Lincoln are pointing to the fact that the OPC and the CRC maintain still a close relationship, including exchange of pulpit and accepting each other’s members at the Lord’s Supper.
    • b  We learned from the Committee report that “there are no proposals from either the OPC or the PCA to come to an eventual union. The dismissal of Professor N. Shepherd from Westminster Theological Seminary, and his departure from the OPC was seen as a removal of an obstacle for the PCA to invite the OPC to join them. However, no invitations to join or requests for union have thus far been entertained by either side. This should make the OPC more inclined to intensify its contacts and relationship with the American/Canadian Reformed Churches.”
    • The Church at Smithville lists the following concerns: “despite contrary in­dication in the present Committee Report, the OPC is again entertaining mer­ger proposals with the PCA, and the consequences of this have not been adequately investigated by our Committee.”
    • c. The Report of the Committee recommends that, if the Canadian Reformed Churches decide to participate in the 1985 ICRC, they propose that the OPC be invited to the meeting of the ICRC also, whereas the Church of Smithville requests Synod 1983 “not to decide that the Canadian Reformed Churches invite the OPC to the 1985 ICRC, since the OPC itself should request such participation and the ICRC must decide on that matter on its own.”

C.   CONSIDERATIONS

  • 1.  DIVERGENCIES
    • a.   In respect to the fulfilment of its mandate to give a detailed evaluation of the confessional and church-political divergencies (see B Observations, 1, a) the Committee shows a certain inconsistency. According to its report (Ill Re “b. 1) the Committee was first of the opinion that it was not in its province to evaluate the divergencies concerned (see B Observations 1, b, i); it also ques­tioned the necessity thereof (see B Observations 1. b, ii) and liked to see this part of the mandate eliminated (see B Observations 1, c). However, in its latest communication to Synod (October 26. 1983), in which it informs Synod of the receipt of an official reply concerning the apparent divergen­cies, it requests Synod to renew this part of the mandate.
    • b.   Although we are of the opinion that an evaluation of the divergencies should have been given before Synod 1977 decided to recognize the OPC as a true Church of Jesus Christ according to Art. 29 Belgic Confession, the Commit­ tee should nevertheless have carried out its mandate, given by Synod 1980, to publish, for the benefit of our Churches, a detailed evaluation of the con­fessional and church-political divergencies.
    • c.   The Churches at Burlington-South and Lincoln rightly request (see B Obser­vations 1, e) to further evaluate and discuss the divergencies and to prove that they do not form an impediment for unity.
  • 2.  NEW DEVELOPMENTS
    • a.   With a view to the new developments (see B Observations 2, a and b) there is even more reason to evaluate the divergencies.
    • b.   The Committee should also consider the implications of the so-called “Shepherd case,” as mentioned in B Observations 2. a, i, ii, iii).
    • c.   Because the “Hofford case” has already been dealt with in the Classis Ontario-South, the Committee should also include this development in its evaluation.
    • d.   The Church at Chatham rightly states that the matter of “fencing” the Lord’s Supper and the admission to the Lord’s Supper concerns the Church discipline as well as the doctrine of the Church and should be looked into by the General Synod (see B Observations 2, c, i, ii, iii).
    • e.   The Committee should therefore be instructed to inquire diligently into the actions of the Fiftieth Assembly in this matter (B Observations 2, d).
  • 3.  PROSPECTS
    • a.   We do not agree with the Committee that the relation between the OPC and the CRC is “cool and cooling,” because they still maintain a close relation­ ship, including exchange of pulpit and accepting each other’s members at the Lord’s Supper.
    • b.   We do not agree with the assessment of the Committee that the recent development (see B Observations 3, b) should make the OPC more inclined to intensify its contacts and relationship with the American/Canadian Re­formed Churches.
    • The Church at Smithville rightly mentions that, despite contrary indications in the present Committee Report, the OPC again entertains merger proposals with the PCA, which statement is confirmed by the recent letter of the OPC (dated October 25, 1983, first paragraph).
    • c.   We are of the opinion that, pending the above evaluation, it would not be wise to propose that the OPC be invited to the meeting of the ICRC.

D.    RECOMMENDATIONS

The General Synod decide:

  • 1.  Not to grant the request of the Churches of Lincoln and Smithville, to terminate or suspend temporarily the relationship with the OPC:

ADOPTED

  • 2.  On the basis of the decisions of the General Synod 1980 (Acts Art. 97, II, C, 1, 2, 3) and the mandate of the Committee (Acts Art. 152, II, D) to continue the Committee for Contact with the OPC with the mandate:
    • a.   to continue contact with the OPC, while taking into account the rules for “Ec­clesiastical Contact”;
    • b.   to publish, for the benefit of our Churches, a detailed evaluation of the con­fessional and church-political divergencies, showing proof that these diver­gencies do not form an impediment in recognizing the OPC as a true Church of the Lord Jesus Christ;
    • c.   to evaluate the reaction of the CEIR of the OPC regarding the divergencies, and to come to the next Synod with recommendations cf. C Considera­tions 1, a);
    • d.   to complete the discussion and evaluation of the relationships which the OPC has with other parties, especially the RES, the CRC and the PCA (see C Con­siderations 3, b);
    • e.   to pay special attention to the new developments in the OPC, with respect to the so-called Shepherd case (see B Observations 2, a. i, ii, iii), the Hof­ ford case (see B Observations 2, b) and the “fencing” of the Lord’s Supper (see B Observations 2, c, i, ii, iii, and), and to come to the next Synod with recommendations in this respect;
    • f.  to inform the Churches about the progress made by means of Press Releases;
    • g.   to report on its activities and findings to the next General Synod.

ADOPTED

  • 3.  If the Canadian Reformed Churches decide to participate in the 1985 ICRC, not to propose that the OPC be invited to the meeting of the ICRC, pending the above mentioned evaluations.

ADOPTED

Print page