05 Jul GS 1995 art 44

GS 1995 ARTICLE 44 – Book of Praise

Committee IV presents: Agenda items VIII. D. 1 – 17

I. MATERIAL

• A. Report of the Standing Committee for the Publication of the Book of Praise
• B. Letter from the church at Burlington-East re: General Synod 1983, Art. 174 and General Synod Lincoln 1992, Art. 64.
• C. Letter from br. M. Kampen
• D. Letters from the church at Surrey re: Report
• E. Letter from the church at Aldergrove re: Report
• F. Letter from the church at London re: Report
• G. Letter from the church at Lynden re: Report
• H. Letter from the church at Langley re: Report
• I. Letter from the church at Grand Valley re: Report
• J. Letter from the church at Fergus re: Report
• K. Letter from the church at Chilliwack re: Report
• L. Letter from br. M. M. De Groot re: Hy. 1A
• M. Letter from the church at Guelph re: Report
• N. Letter from John Calvin School re: Hy. 46:2
• O. Letter from the church at Ancaster re: Report
• P. Letter from the church at Houston re: Report

II. OBSERVATIONS

• A. A new printing of the revised edition appeared in 1993. This edition contains several typographical errors which must be corrected. Several of these errors are mentioned by the Committee and the church at Grand Valley.
• B. A proposed introduction to the Church Order was drafted by the Committee according to their mandate. The church at Grand Valley suggests the last sen- tence of the first paragraph read “on the church orders of the reformed church- es in France and Geneva.”
• C. Regarding the historical prefaces to the Canons of Dort and the Heidelberg Catechism
  • 1. The Committee recommends that the Synod refrain from including them in the Book of Praise.
  • 2. The church at Burlington-East overtures that Synod rescind the decision of Synod 1983, Art. 174, and Synod Lincoln 1992, Art. 64, and instruct the Committee not to insert these prefaces in the Book of Praise.
  • 3. The church at Grand Valley supports the recommendation of the Committee.
• D. The Nicene Creed was revised by the Committee.
  • 1. The church at Fergus does not support the change from “I believe” to “We believe” or the alleged change from “Creator” to “Maker”
  • 2. The churches at Burlington-East and Grand Valley overture Synod to delete the words “God of God” since these words are not part of the original Greek text, and since the Creed already contains the words “true God of true God.”
  • 3. The church at Guelph prefers the reading “begotten from the Father before all ages; God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God.”
  • 4. The church at Grand Valley notes that the Committee is not consistent in the translation of the word “and” and proposes the following translation: “he arose on the third day, in accordance with the Scriptures; and ascended into heaven, and is seated at the right hand of the Father; and will come again ”
  • 5. The church at Grand Valley questions breaking the paragraph on the Holy Spirit into three sentences. To retain the unity of the paragraph they suggest that the text read, “We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord and Giver of life, who proceeds from the Father and the Son, who with the Father and the Son is worshipped and glorified, who has spoken through the prophets.”
  • 6. The church at Grand Valley also requests consistency in the capitalization of pronouns referring to God.
  • 7. The churches at Aldergrove, Ancaster, Chilliwack, Fergus, Grand Valley, Lynden and Surrey request that the word “in” be left out of the phrase “We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church.”
  • 8. The church at Guelph recommends the final paragraph read, “We confess one baptism for the forgiveness of sins.”
• E. Regarding the melodies of the Apostles’ Creed
  • 1. The Committee gives an evaluation of the “alternate melody,” the “Teitsma adaptation,” and the “Schoof version” but does not make any recommendations on these.
  • 2. The Committee recommends that Synod give serious consideration to adopt as an alternate melody to Hymn 1A, a rendition of the creed as found in the church book of Martin Bucer in Strasbourg 1539.
  • 3. The church at Burlington-East and Langley overture Synod that the matter regarding an “alternate melody” be put to rest and not to renew this part of the Committee’s mandate.
  • 4. Br. M.M. De Groot informs Synod that he considers himself the owner of the copyright because he commissioned and paid J. Schouten. He grants Synod the permission “to make the necessary changes to the Hymn 1A tune in order to accommodate the text.”
• F. The question of br. L. VanZandwyk regarding the wording of two articles of the Canons of Dort is answered by the Committee. They recommend that the emendations proposed by br. VanZandwyk not be adopted into the Book of Praise.
• G. With respect to future revisions
  • 1. The Committee proposes that a running file be kept of possible improve-ments to all sections of the Book of Praise.
  • 2. The church at Houston agrees with the Committee and proposes that the adopted changes be included “at one time in the publication of a final edition of the Book of Praise at some much later date.”
  • 3. The church at London proposes that Synod
    • a. request the publisher of the Book of Praise to repeat the musical notation when a psalm or hymn continues overleaf for the improvement of congregational singing;
    • b. instruct the Committee to replace the present marginal proof texts to the Canons of Dort with endnotes and the marginal proof texts to the Liturgical Forms with footnotes since this will aid study and under- standing of the Canons and Liturgical Forms.
• H. The church at Chilliwack requests to have a Subscription Form added to the forms in the back of the Book of Praise for the benefit of the general member- ship who will then know what their office bearers subscribe to.
• I. The church at Surrey proposes that Synod instructs the Committee to add the Scripture references to the articles of the Church Order, wherever applicable.
• J. Synod is informed that after many years of service, br. W. Helder and M. Kampen wish to retire from the Committee.
• K. The students of Grade 4a of the John Calvin School of Yarrow ask Synod to change the references to the church in Hymn 46 : 2 from “it” to “her.”

III. CONSIDERATIONS

• A. Synod expresses its gratitude for the many years of service offered by br. W. Helder and br. M. Kampen.
• B. The church at Grand Valley raises a valid point regarding the wording of the introduction to the Church Order.
  • Seeing that two of the basic pillars of Reformed church polity are its opposition to hierarchy and independentism (Art. 31 and 74 C.O.) the statement “At Emden the dominant principle of the church order was expressed in the first article: ‘No church may lord it over another church and no minister may lord it over another minister’ ” is incomplete.
• C. The contents of the prefaces to the Heidelberg Catechism and the Canons of Dort are not readily understandable to one who is not familiar with their historical context. Even though they have historical value, they need not be included in the Book of Praise.
• D. The proposed revision of the Nicene Creed is more than a linguistic revision. It is also a structural change. The Committee has followed the suggestion of Dr. N. H. Gootjes and translated the original text making allowances for English language and theological development. Based on the submissions of a number of churches, it becomes clear that some allowances for the English language have taken away from the flavour of the original text and some of the changes are not convincing.
  • 1. The deletion of the words “God of God” as suggested by the church at Grand Valley is based on a particular text of the Nicene Creed. Other Greek texts of the creed and the received Latin include it.
  • 2. The proposal of the church at Fergus to retain the word “I” instead of “we” is based on their preference and not on any of the original texts of the Nicene Creed.
  • 3. The church at Fergus is incorrect when it suggests that the revised text as proposed by the Committee has changed “Creator” to “Maker.”
  • 4. There is no compelling reason to change “God of God” to “God from God” since both “of” and “from” are good translations of the word used in the original text.
  • 5. “And” has an important structural function in the Nicene Creed and should be retained wherever possible.
  • 6. The Committee’s reasoning is debatable when it says that “one may state that he believes in the church as an indestructible reality, and a life giving divine work present on earth” it may be better to leave out the “in” in the phrase “I believe (in) a holy catholic and apostolic church” to avoid confusion.
  • 7. There is no need to change “we acknowledge” to “we confess” since both are possible translations of the Greek verb and are used interchangeably throughout Scripture as well.
• E. [The matter of the “alternate melody” for Hymn 1A has been a part of the Committee’s mandate for many years. In its report the Committee does not recommend any of the following: the Schoof Melody, Teitsma ‘adaptation’, or Zwart melody. The Committee suggests another melody [the version found in the church book of Strasbourg] but this was not recommended by any of the churches.]
  • (this consideration has been replaced, see below)
• F. Although the Committee dismisses the concerns of br. L. VanZandwyk it does admit that the Latin word “valor” has the nuance of “power” and seeing that the Dutch translation uses “power” (“kracht”) this matter deserves more attention.
• G. New editions (printing) of the Book of Praise should appear as infrequently as possible to avoid financial costs and for the benefit of the church members. In this connection it would be appropriate (as suggested by the Committee and the church at Houston) that a running file of adopted improvements to the Book of Praise be kept by the Committee.
• H. Repeating the musical notation when a psalm or hymn continues on the over- leaf (as is done in the Dutch church book) has merit. The possibility of incorporating these changes into a future revision of the Book of Praise, should be investigated by the Committee.
• I. The church at London does not give compelling arguments to warrant replacing the present marginal proof texts to the Canons of Dort with endnotes and the marginal proof texts to the Liturgical Forms with footnotes.
• J. The character of the Subscription Form is different from the Liturgical Forms. There are different ways in which the members of the congregation can familiarize themselves with what their office bearers subscribe to.
• K. Even though the Church Order is based on Biblical principles, it would be rather difficult to find specific Scripture references for each article.
• L. It is appropriate that requests regarding changes to the wording of psalms and hymns be submitted to the Committee. Seeing that the submission of the students of the John Calvin School has been passed on to the Committee, no further action is necessary.

IV. RECOMMENDATIONS

Synod decide

• A. To acknowledge the work done by the Standing Committee for the Publication of the Book of Praise.
• B. To send a letter to br. W. Helder and br. M. Kampen expressing the apprecia- tion of Synod for the work they did as members of the Committee.
• C. To continue the Committee, consisting of four members and to appoint two members (at least one with musical talents).
• D. To adopt the introduction of the Church Order including the change suggested by the church at Grand Valley but deleting the sentence quoted in CONSID- ERATION B.
• E. Not to adopt the historical prefaces of the Heidelberg Catechism and the Canons of Dort and to rescind the decision of Synod Cloverdale 1983, Art. 174, and Synod Lincoln 1992, Art. 64 regarding this matter.
• F. To adopt provisionally the following revised edition of the Nicene Creed requesting the churches to test it and to send their comments (if any) to the Standing Committee of the Book of Praise for evaluation:
  • We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, of all things visible and invisible.
  • And in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all ages; God of God, Light of Light, true God of true God; begotten, not made; of one substance with the Father; through whom all things were made.
  • Who, for us men and our salvation, came down from heaven and became incarnate by the Holy Spirit of the virgin Mary and was made man. He was crucified for us under Pontius Pilate; He suffered and was buried; and the third day He arose, according to the Scriptures; and ascended into heav- en, and sits at the right hand of the Father; and He will come again with glory to judge the living and the dead; whose kingdom shall have no end.
  • And we believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord and Giver of life, who proceeds from the Father and the Son; who with the Father and the Son is wor- shipped and glorified; who spoke through the prophets.
  • And we believe one holy catholic and apostolic Church.
  • We acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins; and we look for- ward to the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen.
• G. That the question of br. L. VanZandwyk be given further consideration by the Committee.
• H. [That the matter of an alternate melody for Hymn 1A be put to rest and no longer be added to the Committee’s mandate.]
  • (this recommendation has been replaced, see below)
• I. Not to accede to the request of the church at Chilliwack regarding the Subscription Form.
• J. Not to grant the request of the church at London regarding the marginal notes in the Canons of Dort and Liturgical Forms.
• K. Not to accede to the church at Surrey with respect to adding Scripture refer- ences to the Church Order.
• L. To give the Committee the following mandate:
  • 1. to function according to the arrangements for publishing and distribution accepted by General Synod Cloverdale 1983 (see Acts 1983, pages 297- 299);
  • 2. to maintain its corporate status in order to be able to protect the interests of the Canadian Reformed Churches in all matters concerning the Book of Praise;
  • 3. to foster an increased awareness of the existence of the Book of Praise among others promote the availability of a book of harmonizations facilitat- ing the use of the Book of Praise in the English speaking world;
  • 4. to serve as the address to which any correspondence regarding the Book of Praise can be directed;
  • 5. to correct the errors in the present edition of the Book of Praise;
  • 6. to investigate the possibility of repeating the musical notation when a psalm or hymn continues overleaf and to make a recommendation to the next General Synod;
  • 7. to receive comments from the churches on the revised text of the Nicene Creed, to evaluate these comments and to make final recommendations to the next General Synod;
  • 8. to keep a running file of adopted improvements to the Book of Praise for a future edition of the Book of Praise;
  • 9. to implement all Synod decisions regarding the contents of the Book of Praise;
  • 10. to serve the following General Synod with a report to be sent to the churches at least six months before the beginning of this Synod.
• The following motion to amend is made:
  • Synod decide
  • To adopt the suggestion of one of the musical experts advisors to give “the alter- nate melody” (Zwart) a “testperiod” in the churches as also the Strasbourg melody (Bucer) of 1539 recommended by the Standing Committee.
  • Ground:
  • the mandate of previous Synods to provide the churches with a melody which allows for singing the Apostles’ Creed in the form adopted by the churches.
  • This motion replaces CONSIDERATION E and RECOMMENDATION
• H. This amendment is ADOPTED
  • A motion to delay voting on the proposal is DEFEATED.
  • The amended proposal of the advisory committee is

ADOPTED.