Office Bearers | GS 1989 art 169

13 Nov GS 1989 art 169

Posted at 20:11h in CanRC, GS 1989 by Roy Janssen

GS 1989 ARTICLE 169

Committee I presents:

Agenda Items VIII, C, 1, a – l, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6

A. MATERIAL

1. Standing Committee for the Book of Praise Report II (Church Order) and Supplementary Report
2. Letter from the Immanuel Church at Edmonton
3. Letter from the Church at Attercliffe
4. Letter from the Church at Ottawa
5. Letter from the Church at Chilliwack
6. Letter from the Church at Brampton
7. Letter from the Church at Chatham
8. Letter from the Church at Smithville
9. Letter from the Church at Burlington-West
10. Letter from the Church at Orangeville
11. Letter from the Church at Grand Valley
12. Letter from the Church at Cloverdale
13. Letter from the Church at Burlington-East
14. Letter from the Church at Burlington-East re Art.13 C.O. (re Synod 1986, ad. Acts, Art. 95)
15. Letter from the Church at Brampton re Synod 1986, re Acts, Art. 95 ( Art. 13 C.O.)
16. Letter from the Church at Fergus re Synod 1986, re Acts, Art. 95 (Art. 13 C.O.).
17. Letter from the Immanuel Church at Edmonton, re Synod 1986, ad. Acts, Art. 95 ( Art. 13 C.O.).
18. Letter from the Church at Burlington-East, re Acts Synod 1986, ad Art. 95 (Art. 72 C.O.).

B. OBSERVATIONS

1. General Synod 1986 gave the Committee the mandate:
- a. to pass on the linguistic changes proposed by br. R. Wildeboer to the Standing Committee for consideration of incorporation in the next printing of the Book of Praise (Art. 93).
- b. to amend Art. 44 C.O. as given in Acts, Art. 94, D.
- c. to amend Art. 13 C.O. as given in Acts Art. 95 D, p. 39.
- d. to amend Art. 72 C.O. as given in Acts Art. 95 D, p. 40.
2. The Committee submitted two Reports proposing various changes to a number of articles of the Church Order (see Appendix).
3. The second or Supplementary Report was sent in response to reactions to Report 1 from a number of churches.
4. Synod received the following submissions from a number of churches:
- Art. 4:
  - The Church at Chilliwack suggests that the word “not” is a typing error, since it does not belong in the first sentence of Par. B 2.
- Art. 12:
  - The Committee in its Supplementary Report recommends to change the title to : ‘Permanent Release’. The Churches at Chilliwack, Burlington-West and Cloverdale suggest that the title of this article remain “Bound for Life”. Burlington-West further proposes to add the words “to resign from office. He may only be released from office and” between “allowed to” and “enter upon”.
- Art. 13:
  - The Committee proposes, for the sake of clarity, to amend this article.
  - The Churches at Chatham and Burlington-West propose not to accept the Committee’s amendment.
  - The Church at Burlington East objects to the decision of Synod 1986, and proposes: “If a minister of the Word retires because of age, or because he is rendered incapable of performing the duties of his office, due to illness or physical or mental disability, he shall retain the honour and title of minister of the Word.”
  - The Church at Brampton appeals the decision of Synod 1986, and proposes the following: “If a minister of the Word, upon reaching retirement age, does retire, or if he retires because he is rendered incapable of performing the duties of his office due to illness, physical or mental disability, he shall retain the honour and title of minister of the Word.”
  - The Church at Fergus expresses its disagreement with the decision of General Synod 1986, Art. 95, and suggests the following: “If a minister of the Word, upon reaching retirement age, does retire, or if, according to the judgment of the consistory with the deacons, with the concurring advice of Classis and of deputies of Regional Synod, he is rendered incapable of performing the duties of his office, he shall retain the honour and title of minister of the Word. If, however, he desires to remain in active service beyond retirement age, he may do so with the agreement of the consistory with the deacons.”
  - The Immanuel Church at Edmonton requests Synod to rescind the decision of Synod 1986, Art. 95, and to return to the phrasing as originally adopted by Synod 1983.
- Art. 14:
  - The Committee suggests to include an article similar to Art. 14 of the Church Order of our Dutch sister churches. The Immanuel Church at Edmonton, and the Churches of Burlington-West, Cloverdale, and Burlington-East suggest that this is not necessary since the Church Order already provides for this.
- Art. 19:
  - The Committee proposes a number of significant changes. The Immanuel Church at Edmonton opposes the changes in line 2 as suggested by the Committee. The Church at Ottawa objects to the addition as proposed by the Committee and offers its own proposal. The Church at Chatham proposes to follow the wording of our Dutch sister churches. The Church at Grand Valley and Cloverdale accept the Committee’s proposals but wish to retain the word “shall” in the first line.
- Art. 21:
  - The Committee proposes a number of additions, changes, and deletions. The Churches at Ottawa, Cloverdale, and Burlington-East object to the deletion of the lines 3 b and 4 from this article.
- Art. 26:
  - The Church at Ottawa proposes to eliminate the words “and professors of theology”. The Church at Chilliwack proposes to leave the article as it is. The Church at Chatham proposes to follow the wording of the Dutch sister churches.
- Art. 34:
  - The Church at Attercliffe suggests that changes proposed by the Committee fall outside the Committee’s mandate.
- Art. 35:
  - The Committee proposes to restructure this article and to shorten it by deleting “c” and “d”. The Church at Attercliffe suggests that changes proposed by the Committee fall outside the Committee’s mandate.
- Art. 44:
  - The Church at Attercliffe suggests that changes proposed by the Committee fall outside the Committee’s mandate.
- Art. 45:
  - The Committee proposes some deletions. The Immanuel Church at Edmonton, the Churches at Attercliffe, Chilliwack, Brampton, and Cloverdale suggest that the article remain unchanged. The Churches at Ottawa, Chatham, and Smithville come with some proposals.
- Art. 49:
  - The Church at Chatham proposes a linguistic change regarding the wording of Art. 49 to make it consistent with Art. 47.
- Art. 55
  - The Church at Burlington-East suggests to add the word “only” before the word “metrical” as proposed by the Committee. The Church at Cloverdale observes that reasons given for the change to “metrical” are insufficient.
- Art. 57, 58
  - The Churches at Attercliffe, Chilliwack, Orangeville, Grand Valley, Cloverdale and Immanuel Church at Edmonton all make submissions to maintain the present wording of these articles. The Church at Orangeville suggests to change Art. 58 from “ensure” to “see to it” because it is not as strong.
- Art. 63:
  - The Immanuel Church at Edmonton and the Churches at Attercliffe, Chilliwack, Cloverdale, and Burlington-East suggest to leave this article as it is.
- Art. 68:
  - The Church at Burlington-East suggests the use he/she in this article and throughout the Church Order where applicable.
- Art. 72:
  - The Church at Burlington-East objects to a decision of General Synod 1986, Art. 95, where it deleted the word “habitual” before the term “drunkenness”, because drunkenness indicates a possible one-time occurrence which is not necessarily worthy of suspension from office.

C. CONSIDERATIONS

1. The mandate given to the Standing Committee for the Book of Praise by General Synod 1986 was somewhat inconclusive, since br. R. Wildeboer’s proposed changes appeared to include more than strictly linguistic changes.
2. Synod 1986 in its consideration (Acts, Art. 93) noted that br. Wildeboer’s letter warranted a careful examination. Yet this was to occur within the framework of a linguistic revision only. In some respects the Committee may have exceeded its mandate.
3. With respect to the individual articles of the Church Order, Synod considers the following:
- Art. 1
- The Committee’s proposals are acceptable.
- Art. 2
  - The proposals exceed the Committee mandate.
- Art. 3:
  - Better English is: “Only male members who have made profession of faith and may be considered to meet the conditions set forth in Holy Scripture (e.g., I Tim. 3 and Titus 1) shall be eligible for office.”
- Art. 4:
  - The Church at Chilliwack misreads Art. 4 B 2. This paragraph speaks of ministers coming from churches with which we do not have a sister church relationship. The Committee’s proposals are acceptable.
- Art. 5:
  - Committee proposal acceptable.
- Art. 6:
  - Committee proposal acceptable.
- Art. 12:
  - The Committee exceeds its mandate. Synod notes the proposed amendment is essentially covered in Art. 12 C.O. Also, since the Church Order has already been adopted by Synod 1983, and Synod 1986 only allowed for linguistic changes, amendments to the Church Order should be restricted as much as possible.
- Art. 13:
  - Synod considers that the four overtures regarding this article were submitted independently from the Committee’s report. These overtures indicate that Synod 1986’s formulation of Art. 13 was problematic with regard to retirement of ministers in that it left insufficient provision for normal retirement. Consideration C 1 of Art. 95, Synod 1986 is overstated and given without proof. Retiring from service after a commonly accepted retirement age does not interrupt one’s being bound to office for life as Art. 13 says: “.
  - . . he shall retain the honour and title as minister of the Word and retain his official bond with the church he served last.” Synod considers the proposed wording as submitted by the Church of Burlington East to be linguistically and substantially superior to the decision of Synod 1986.
- Art. 14:
  - The Committee exceeds its mandate.
- Art. 16:
  - Committee proposal acceptable.
- Art. 19:
  - The Committee exceeds its mandate.
- Art. 21:
  - To delete the word “also” may be considered a linguistic improvement to the article. The balance of the Committee’s proposal exceeds the Committee’s mandate.
- Art. 22:
  - Committee proposal acceptable.
- Art. 23
  - Committee proposal acceptable.
- Art. 26:
  - Synod notes that the suggestions from the Churches at Ottawa and
  - Chatham fall outside the scope of linguistic changes. The Committee’s proposal is acceptable except the deletion of (s) from “form(s)”.
- Art. 27:
  - Committee proposal acceptable.
- Art. 31:
  - Committee proposal acceptable.
- Art. 34:
  - Synod notes that the Committee’s proposal, although major in scope, falls within the mandate of the Committee and is therefore acceptable.
- Art. 35:
  - The suggestion to delete certain lines from this article fall outside the mandate of the Committee. The essence of point “c” and point “d” is more than what is said in point “b”. The suggestion to restructure the article is valid.
- Art. 36:
  - Committee proposal acceptable.
- Art. 42:
  - Committee proposal acceptable.
- Art. 44:
  - Committee proposal acceptable.
- Art. 45:
  - The Committee exceeds its mandate.
- Art. 46
  - Committee proposal acceptable.
- Art. 47:
  - Committee proposal acceptable.
- Art. 48:
  - Committee proposal acceptable.
- Art. 49:
  - The proposal of the Church at Chatham falls within the scope of acceptable changes.
- Art. 55:
  - Within the context of this article, the suggestion of the Church at Burlington East to add the word “only” before “metrical” is superfluous. The suggestion of the Church at Cloverdale is not necessarily a linguistic improvement. Committee proposal acceptable.
- Art. 57:
  - The Committee’s proposal does not improve the language.
- Art. 58:
  - The Committee’s proposal does not improve the language.
- Art. 63:
  - The Committee exceeds its mandate.
- Art. 68:
  - The suggestion by the Church at Burlington East to use the format he/she
  - throughout the Church Order is linguistically not necessary. Committee proposal acceptable.
- Art. 69:
  - Committee proposal acceptable.
- Art. 71:
  - Committee proposal acceptable.
- Art. 72:
  - Although drunkenness does not become a serious and gross sin only when it is habitual (Acts, Synod 1986, Art. 95, Consideration 1, p. 40), in regard to office-bearers, Scripture speaks about not being a drunkard, 1 Tim. 3:3, Tit. 1:7. Historically the enslavement to drink (Tit. 2:3) has been the main concern of this article of the Church Order, (cf. J. Jansen, Korte Verklaring van de Kerkenordening, 2nd. ed., Amsterdam, 1976, p. 348).

RECOMMENDATIONS

Synod decide:
re Art. 1:
- to accept Committee’s proposal.
Art. 2:
- to reject Committee’s proposal.
Art. 3:
- to read Art. 3 as follows: “Only male members who have made profession of faith and may be considered to meet the conditions as set forth in Holy Scripture (e.g. 1 Tim. 3, Titus 1), shall be eligible for office.”
Art. 4:
- to accept Committee’s proposal.
Art. 5:
- to accept Committee’s proposal.
Art. 6:
- to accept Committee’s proposal.
Art. 12
- to reject the Committee’s proposal re the title. The title “Bound for Life” should be retained.
- to deny the proposal of Burlington-West.
Art. 13:
- to accept the proposal of the Church at Burlington-East, to read Paragraph 1 of Art. 13 as follows: “If a minister of the Word retires because of age, or because he is rendered incapable of performing the duties of his office due to illness or physical or mental disability, he shall retain the honour and title of minister of the Word.”
- to send this adopted proposal re Art. 13 as Synod’s answer to the Churches at Burlington East, Brampton, Fergus and Immanuel Edmonton.
Art. 14:
- not to accede to the Committee’s proposal for an equivalent to the Dutch Art. 14.
Art. 16:
- to accept Committee’s proposal.
Art. 19:
- to reject Committee’s proposal.
Art. 21:
- to accept Committee’s proposal re “also”.
- to reject the Committee’s proposal on all other points.
Art. 22:
- to accept Committee’s proposal.
Art. 23:
- to accept Committee’s proposal.
Art. 26:
- to accept Committee’s proposal except to retain the (s) after “form(s)”.
Art. 27:
- to accept Committee’s proposal.
Art. 31:
- to accept Committee’s proposal.
Art. 34:
- to accept Committee’s proposal.
Art. 35:
- to accept the Committee’s proposal regarding restructuring of the article, but not regarding the deletions of “c” and “d”.
Art. 36:
- to accept Committee’s proposal.
Art. 42:
- to accept Committee’s proposal.
Art. 44:
- to accept Committee’s proposal.
Art. 45:
- to reject Committee’s proposal.
Art. 46:
- to accept Committee’s proposal.
Art. 47:
- to accept Committee’s proposal.
Art. 48:
- to accept Committee’s proposal.
Art. 49:
- to accept the proposal of the Church at Chatham.
- The second paragraph now reads: “If it appears necessary to convene a General Synod before the appointed time, the convening church shall determine the time and place with the advice of Regional Synod.”
Art. 55:
- to accept Committee’s proposal.
Art. 57:
- to reject Committee’s proposal.
Art. 58
- to reject Committee’s proposal.
Art. 63:
- to reject Committee’s proposal.
Art. 68:
- to accept Committee’s proposal.
Art. 69:
- to accept Committee’s proposal.
Art. 71:
- to accept Committee’s proposal.
Art. 72:
- to accept the Committee’s proposal. To insert the word “habitual” before drunkenness.

ADOPTED

Print page