Office Bearers | GS 1986 art 128

01 Dec GS 1986 art 128

Posted at 16:43h in CanRC, GS 1986 by Roy Janssen

The discussion continues.

– Agenda , VIII , J, 1, point C.

A motion , duly seconded, reads:

To replace recommendations 3 and 4 as follows:
- 3. To charge the committee to continue the discussion on divergencies, which are an issue of mutual concern, and to report on this to the next synod.
- 4. To express the hope that this continued discussion will remove obstacles to full correspondence.

This motion is ADOPTED. The amended point C reads now:

C. Synod 1983 gave the mandate to “evaluate the reaction of the CEIR of the OPC regarding the divergencies, and come to the next synod with recommendations (cf. C. Considerations I, a).”

1. The committee has evaluated the reaction of the CEIR regarding the divergencies as given in its letter of October 25. 1983.
2. The committee notes that although some points of difference were clarified ” this letter, however, did not bring us much closer to a uniformity of opinion with regard to the divergencies under discussion” (p. 46, b).
3. The committee states that “we seriously doubt whether it will serve a useful purpose to continue this discussion of divergencies on a committee level” (p. 46, e).
4. The committee recommends to synod:
- a. To accept this evaluation of the reaction of the CEIR of the OPC regarding the divergencies.
- b. To continue the committee with the mandate to continue the contact with OPC taking into account the rules for ” Ecclesiastical Contact” which include ” continued discussion ” on ” issues of mutual concern. “
- c. Not to charge the committee to continue the discussion on the divergencies between the confessional and church-political standards of the Canadian Reformed Churches and the Orthodox Presbyterian Church.”

1. It is regrettable that after so many years of discussion we have not come closer to uniformity of opinion.
2. Although the doubt expressed by the committee as to the usefulness of continued discussion may perhaps not be unfounded, this is not sufficient reason to discontinue this discussion on a committee level.
3. Despite similar objection in the past, previous synods have vigorously continued the mandate to discuss the divergencies. (Synod of 1971, Art. 92, p. 44; Synod of 1974 , p. 58, Cons. 4, b and Recom. 3, b; Synod of 1977, Art. 91, p. 42, Cons. 4; Synod of 1980, Art. 152, D, 2, b, c, & e; Synod of 1983, Art. 55, C, 2, and Recom. d, c)
4. Synod of 1983 expressly tied the evaluations and discussions of the divergencies to the new developments (Synod of 1983, Acts, Art. 55, C, 2, a), and the committee itself stresses that the doctrinal issues re Blue Bell “are almost precisely the same as the confessional and church-government divergencies which we have been discussing with the OPC for some time now” (p. 13).
5. Despite the given recognition which the Canadian Reformed Churches granted the OPC (Synod of 1977), it has been deemed necessary that “rules for Ecclesiastical Contact can serve as a basis for further discussion with the Orthodox Presbyterian Church with the hope and intent that eventually full correspondence expressing the unity of true faith can be established” (Synod of 1977, Art. 91, Cons. e, p. 42).

Synod decides,

1. To take note of the reaction of the CEIR of the OPC regarding the divergencies but also to express disappointment that the letter of the CEIR did not bring us “much closer to a uniformity of opinion.”
2. To continue the committee with the mandate to continue the contact with the OPC taking into account the rules for “Ecclesiastical Contact” which include “continued discussion” on “issues of mutual concern.”
3. To charge the committee to continue the discussion on divergencies, which are an issue of mutual concern, and to report on this to the next synod.
4. To express the hope that this continued discussion will remove obstacles to full correspondence.

The recommendations re point C are ADOPTED.

D. Synod 1983 gave the mandate to: “complete the discussion and evaluation of relationships which the OPC has with other parties, especially the RES, the CRC, and the PCA (see C. Considerations 3, b).”

1. Concerning the OPC’s contact with the Christian Reformed Church (CRC) the committee recommends “that this relation be kept a topic of discussion and concern in our mutual contacts” (p. 5, The CRC).
2. Concerning the invitation of the PCA, the committee sees “that the OPC is not unanimous even in its committee on this important matter. There is concern that the reformed character of the OPC will be swallowed by a ‘southern Presbyterianism’ and ‘evangelicalism.’ We note these concerns with thankfulness, and we urge that our churches remember the OPC in prayer as they struggle to come to a decision” (p. 7, top).
3. Concerning the RES, the committee states that it “can appreciate the leader ship which the OPC and its delegates took in discussion and action . . . yet we lament this decision of continued membership in the RES” (p. 8, middle).

1. The relationships which the OPC entertains with other parties (esp. RES, CRC, PCA), has had the serious and ongoing concern of the committee. The commit tee made various submissions and contacts concerning these matters.
2. It is to be noted that many of the issues with respect to these matters were not resolved and that synod shares the concerns of the committee.
3. It has been the stand of the Canadian Reformed Churches since 1971 (Acts, Art. 149, Cons. 5, p. 44) that the relationship of the OPC with the CRC and membership in the RES are impediments to reach full correspondence. This is a stand which has never been repealed while the concerns about these very matters were maintained (c.f. Acts 1983, Art. 55, C, 3).
4. The committee considers that in case the OPC joins and is received into the PCA there are “provisions for continuing OPC” and that “we might be able to continue our contacts with OPC churches” and this may indeed be possible and desirable, but in case the OPC joins and is received into the PCA the official contact with the OPC will not be transferrable to the PCA.

Synod decides,

1. That the Committee for Contact OPC continue the contacts about the relation ships which the OPC entertains with others expressing the following concerns:
a. that the relationship of the OPC with the CRC and their membership in the RES remain stumbling-blocks in reaching full correspondence;
b. to inform the OPC that in the event that the OPC joins and is received into the PCA, the official contact with the OPC is not transferrable to the PCA.
The committee should continue to solicit clear commitments from the OPC concerning these matters.
2. To advise the churches to remember the OPC in their prayers as “they (the OPC) struggle to come to a decision” (re: invitation of PCA).

After one round of discussion a motion to vote is ADOPTED. T

he recommendations re point D are ADOPTED.