26 Aug GS 2007 art 74

Posted at 16:32h in CanRC, GS 2007 by

GS 2007 Article 74 – Committee for the Official Website

The revised advisory committee report was given into discussion. It was moved and seconded to replace in Consideration 3.5 and in Recommendation 4.1.3.3 the word ‘consistories’ with ‘churches’. The amendment was defeated.

It was moved and seconded to add in Recommendation 4.1.3.3 the words:

These restriction should be lifted after synod has dealt with them. This amendment was adopted.

The amended proposal was adopted as follows:

1.      Material

  • 1.1     Report from the Committee for the Official Website
  • 1.2 -6 Letters from the following five churches:
    • Guelph, Hamilton. Burlington Ebenezer, Fergus Maranatha, Fergus North

2.      Observations

  • 2.1     The report included as an appendix to these Acts serves as observations.
  • 2.2     The committee recommends that synod give the committee the following mandate:
    • 2.2.1    To maintain the existing website and associated technical functions.
    • 2.2.2    To revise the content of the website whenever necessary, in particular ensuring that the text of the Book of Praise is the same as that most recently adopted and revised by general synod.
    • 2.2.3    To provide web services and email services to the churches and serve the churches with advice with regard to the possibilities of setting up their own websites.
    • 2.2.4    To contact the website committee of the URC to see if cooperation between the committees is possible and to discuss the impact of future church unity between our federations on the work of the website committees.
    • 2.2.5    To serve Synod 2010 with a report to be sent to the churches at least six months prior to the beginning of synod, including a financial statement and a proposed budget, and any recommendations regarding new content to be added to the website.
  • 2.3     The committee also recommends that General Synod Smithers 2007 decide:
    • 2.3.1    To approve the annual budget of $750.00.
    • 2.3.2    To agree with the committee that members should usually be reappointed for only one more term of three years unless there are special circumstances which make an appointment for another term of three years necessary or desirable. The committee recommends this due to workload and other commitments.
    • 2.3.3    To appoint two new members to the committee.
  • 2.4     The committee further recommends that:
    • 2.4.1    No new content be added to the website.
    • 2.4.2    Synod recommend to the local churches to make use of the website to present the churches and the message of salvation on the internet.
    • 2.4.3    The current composition of the committee (3 members with advanced technical abilities, the librarian of the Theological College, 1 minister) be maintained.
  • 2.5     Guelph recommends that synod decide:
    • 2.5.1    To include more information about each local church, including physical mailing addresses and bulletin addresses, and remove items for a local church only when directed by that church.
    • 2.5.2    To include contact information for committees and address churches once appointments are made at general synod.
  • 2.6     Guelph, Hamilton, and Fergus North all recommend timely publication of official reports to general synod on the official website for general access.
  • 2.7     Burlington Ebenezer also requests timely publication of official reports to general synod on the official website, but also requests security measures to restrict access to these reports.
  • 2.8     With respect to cooperating with the URC website committee, the church at Guelph recommends that no joint information is published until official decisions are made by both federations regarding that information. Fergus Maranatha recommends cooperating with the URC website committee only after coming closer to federative unity.

3.      Considerations

  • 3.1     The website has proven to be a valuable tool for many to find information about the Canadian Reformed Churches, and to present the federation to others.
  • 3.2     It is important for the churches to maintain the website and keep it up to date.
  • 3.3     The suggestions of Guelph in Observations 2.5 are beneficial. It would be good to have contact information of each local church on the web. For those churches that do not maintain their own website the committee should provide this information on the official website, with the concurrence of the local church involved.
  • 3.4     The committee continues to provide useful web services and email services to the churches. It is beneficial that the committee be available for those churches without websites with advice regarding the possibilities of setting up their own web sites.
  • 3.5     Timely publication of the official reports of the synodical committees on the website would be beneficial for the churches to review these reports as they become available. The reports of the synodical committees, however, ought to be dealt with by the consistories and synod first before being made publicly available on the website.
  • 3.6     Regarding cooperating with the United Reformed Churches on an official website, the committee offers no clear benefits that would result from this. In fact this could be premature as suggested by the church at Fergus Maranatha.
  • 3.7     The committee has shown good stewardship and the churches receive good value for the cost associated with the website services.
  • 3.8     While most synodical committees have terms of nine years, reducing the term for members of this committee to six years should not reduce the effectiveness of the committee.

4.      Recommendations

Synod decide:

  • 4.1     To mandate the committee:
    • 4.1.1    To maintain existing website and associated technical functions.
    • 4.1.2    To revise the content of the website whenever necessary, in particular ensuring that the text of the Book of Praise is the same as that most recently adopted and revised by general synod.
    • 4.1.3    To include on the website:
      • 4.1.3.1  Contact material about each local church, either via links or directly on the website, subject to concurrence of the local church.
      • 4.1.3.2  Contact information for committees and churches appointed by general synod for specific mandates.
      • 4.1.3.3  Publication of the official reports of the synodical committees in a standardized format (e.g., pdf) with security measures restricting access only to consistories. These restrictions should be lifted after synod has dealt with them.
    • 4.1.4    To provide web and email services to the churches, and be available upon request to serve the churches with advice with regard to the possibilities of setting up their own websites.
    • 4.1.5    To serve Synod 2010 with a report to be sent to the churches at least six months prior to the beginning of this synod, including a financial statement and a proposed budget, and any recommendations regarding new content to be added to the website.
  • 4.2     Synod decide:
    • 4.2.1    To thank the committee for the work done.
    • 4.2.2    That synod recommend to the local churches to make use of the website to present the
    • churches and the message of salvation on the internet.
    • 4.2.3    To approve the annual budget of $ 750.00.
    • 4.2.4    That members as a rule do not serve more than two three-year terms.
    • 4.2.5    To replace two members of the committee.

ADOPTED

Print page