16 Jul GS 2016 art 89
GS 2016 Article 89 – NAPARC (North American Presbyterian and Reformed Council)
1. Material
- 1.1 Report from the Committee for Contact with Churches in north America (CCCNA) – section North American Presbyterian and Reformed Council (NAPARC) (8.4.2)
- 1.2 Letters from the following CanRC: Cloverdale (8.3.2.3), Guelph-Emmanuel (8.3.2.4), Toronto-Bethel (8.3.2.22)
2. Observations
- 2.1 GS 2013 (Art. 77) gave the CCCNA the following mandate in regard to NAPARC:
- [4.2] To mandate the CCCNA to continue to represent the CanRC at NAPARC and to continue its active involvement in it;
- [4.3] To mandate the CCCNA to raise in discussion at NAPARC what may be perceived as a tension between Article 4 of the NAPARC constitution on “The Nature and Extent of Authority,” and the last sentence of 5.2 on “Membership,” namely, “Those churches shall be eligible for membership … [which] maintain the marks of the true church (pure preaching of the gospel, the Scriptural administration of the sacraments, the faithful exercise of discipline).”
- 2.2 The committee participated in the annual meetings of NAPARC.
- 2.3 In 2013 the rotating chairmanship fell to the Rev. P.H. Holtvlüwer and the 2014 meeting of NAPARC was hosted by the Grassie-Covenant CanRC.
- 2.4 The CCCNA continues to see the benefit of being involved with NAPARC as a forum for discussion of issues of common concern and particularly issues which promote unity among member churches. It helps to exchange insights and consider ways in which we may become closer. Hearing reports from the member churches is both encouraging and motivating. Meeting with these churches gives us a clearer understanding so that we know better how to pray for each other’s church federations. It is edifying to see how the Lord helps the member churches battle against our three sworn enemies: the devil, the world and our own flesh. Mission work and particular projects sometimes connect or overlap between member churches and sharing this information at NAPARC can be the beginning of good cooperation in such endeavours. Membership also allows for efficient use of time and funds since it is possible to meet with the Inter-Church Relations committees of the Reformed Church of Quebec (ERQ), Orthodox Presbyterian Church (OPC), Reformed Church in the United States (RCUS), and the Reformed Presbyterian Church in North America (RPCNA).
- 2.5 Br. Les Vanderveen of sub-committee West presently serves on the Interim Committee of NAPARC which prepares the agendas for the upcoming meetings.
- 2.6 There are a number of changes to the Constitution and Bylaws of NAPARC which must be approved by GS 2016.
- 2.7 The changes to the constitution as recommended by GS 2013 in the mandate have been made.
- 2.8 Cloverdale supports the committee’s recommendation to accept the revised constitution.
- 2.9 Guelph-Emmanuel has a concern about the application of the “‘Golden Rule’ Comity Agreement”. Their concern is that some NAPARC churches are starting church plants and doing home mission work in each other’s “backyards”. They would like the NAPARC churches to be reminded of this rule at the next NAPARC meeting.
- 2.10 Glanbrook-Trinity has concerns about the application of the “Agreement on Transfer of Members and Congregations”. This is especially in regards to the transfer of members under discipline. They would like the NAPARC churches to be reminded of this agreement at the next meeting of NAPARC.
- 2.11 Toronto-Bethel has some concerns with the lack of definition for the terms “Member Church” and “Unit Vote” in the revised constitution of NAPARC.
- 2.12 The work of the CCCNA often overlaps with the work of the Committee for Church Unity (CCU) and the Committee for Relations with Churches Abroad (CRCA) when having discussions with the various church federations.
3. Considerations
- 3.1 The CCCNA has been active in representing the CanRC churches at NAPARC.
- 3.2 Membership in NAPARC is an efficient use of resources in contacting churches in EF and promoting discussions toward unity among NAPARC members.
- 3.3 It would be proper for local consistories/sessions to contact each other if there is a perceived conflict in either the application of the “‘Golden Rule’ Comity Agreement,” or the “Agreement on Transfer of Members and Congregations.” Local consistories can also contact the CCCNA for assistance with this.
- 3.4 It would be helpful for the churches if the application of the “‘Golden Rule’ Comity Agreement” and the “Agreement on Transfer of Members and Congregations” would be discussed again at NAPARC.
- 3.5 Toronto-Bethel’s concerns about the lack of definition for the terms “Member Church” and “Unit Vote” should be considered by the CCCNA.
- 3.6 The CCCNA, the CCU, and the CRCA should communicate with each other about their interactions with the various church federations.
4. Recommendations
That Synod decide:
- 4.1 To thank the Committee for Contact with Churches in North America (CCCNA) for representing the CanRC at meetings of the North American Presbyterian and Reformed Council (NAPARC);
- 4.2 To approve the changes made to the revised constitution and bylaws of NAPARC;
- 4.3 To mandate the CCCNA:
- 4.3.1 To continue to represent the CanRC at NAPARC and to continue its active involvement in it;
- 4.3.2 To convey to NAPARC the approval of the changes made to the revised Constitution and Bylaws of NAPARC;
- 4.2.3 To raise in discussion at NAPARC, the application of the “‘Golden Rule’ Comity Agreement” and the “Agreement on Transfer of Members and Congregations” as a reminder for the Member Churches;
- 4.2.4 To assist the local churches when asked about conflicts with the “‘Golden Rule’ Comity Agreement” and the “Agreement on Transfer of Members and Congregations”;
- 4.2.5 To address NAPARC about a lack of definition for the terms “Member Church” and “Unit Vote” in the revised Constitution of NAPARC.