Synod Legana 2009
Wednesday 17th June 2009 - Morning & Afternoon Sessions
Article 26 - Reopening
R Heerema invites all to sing Ps 16:1,5, reads Romans 12, and leads in prayer.
Article 27 - Adoption of Acts
Article 1-20 of the acts are amended and adopted.
Article 28 - Appeal of Mt Nasura re Art. 7 Classis North October 2008
8a - FRC Mt Nasura Appeal re Art 7 Acts Classis North 2008
This item is dealt with in closed session.
Mt Nasura appeals a recent decision of Classis North as recorded in Art 7.1 of the Oct 2008 Acts. This Article reads as follows:
In an appeal a brother requests Classis to decide that the following decisions made by the consistory of Mt Nasura on 7 April 2008 and communicated by letter to the brother on 28 April 2008 are in conflict with the principles of biblical justice and contrary to CO Art 31.
Classis decided to grant the brothers' request
Mount Nasura failed to uphold Classis decisions.
Mt Nasura requests Synod to determine that Classis should not have made the decision above, because Mt Nasura is concerned that this Classis ruling will set a precedent for material relating to objections which were not upheld to be made available outside of consistory. Mt Nasura does not believe this to be conducive to honouring the 6th and 9th commandments.
To deny the appeal.
- Mt Nasura expressed concern regarding the
Classis decision as setting a precedent for material
relating to objections to the election process of an office-bearer. However, the decisions of a classis
are made within the context of a specific matter
and within local circumstances and do not constitute precedence in Reformed Polity.
- The decision on this appeal reached by Classis
is binding only on the specific parties involved. Thus it does not constitute a general pronouncement by which all the church members are bound' (With Common Consent, WWJ VanOene, page 154.)
Delegates previously involved in the matter abstained from voting.
Synod decides that the item can be included in the published acts.
Article 29 - FRC Darling Downs Appeal re Art 76 Synod 2006
8g - FRC Darling Downs Appeal re Art 76 Synod 2006 re Appeal FRC Mt Nasura
Darling Downs proposes that Synod Legana 2009 rescind Article 76 of the Acts of the Closed Session of Synod 2006. Darling Downs is convinced that Synod 2006 incorrectly applied Article 31 of the Church Order and wrongfully declared this appeal inadmissible on the grounds that "the person who could potentially have been wronged by the decision of Synod Rockingham 2003 is the only one who has the right to appeal." (C.f. Article 76 Acts of the Closed Session of Synod, page 4). Darling Downs believes that the admissibility of Mt Nasura's submission to Synod 2006 should have been judged according to Article 33 CO (and not Article 31 CO).
To concur with Darling Downs that Synod West Kelmscott 2006 erred in Art 76 of the Acts of Closed Session.
Although decisions made by major assemblies are only binding on the parties involved in the appeal process, Synod West Kelmscott formulated its decision in universal terms as if a person, who could potentially have been wronged by the decision of Synod Rockingham 2003, is the only one who has the right to appeal.
To add the following words after the word "erred" in the proposal: "in the formulation of the ground"
The amended proposal is put to the vote and adopted.
Article 30 - Mt Nasura Appeal Article 95 Synod 2006
8i - FRC Mt Nasura Appeal Article 95 Synod 2006
Mt. Nasura sent an overture to Synod 2006 requesting that the sister-church relations with the RCN (Gereformeerde Kerken — vrijgemaakt) be put 'under stress'.
Synod 2006 decided, as recorded in the Acts article 95:
Material: Agenda Item 10d — Overture re relations with the Reformed Churches in the Netherlands. Proposal: To defeat the proposal of Mt Nasura.
Grounds: Mt Nasura in effect asks for greater awareness and diligence in considering members and ministers from the RCN that come here. Synod regards this adequately covered in the tasks the consistories already have in the exercise as overseers of the church.
In view of the ground for which this overture was defeated, Mt Nasura requests Synod to recognise that it did not receive a proper hearing, on the following grounds:
- Mt. Nasura's request was not for "...greater awareness and diligence..." as suggested in this ground, but that the sister-church relation with the RCN be put under stress. To help define what this stress would be, Mt. Nasura had proposed various changes to the Rules for sister-church relations.
- While being well aware of local responsibility when receiving members with attestations and inviting ministers from sister-churches to the pulpit, the decisions concerning these relations and their regulations are made by the churches together at synod (see Church Order Article 46) so that there may be unity in action.
- The ground to defeat Mt. Nasura's overture implies that Mt. Nasura or any of the other church is free to put the relation with the RCN under the stress that was proposed without involving the other churches of the bond. This suggests a wrong kind of independence by which the unity of the bond of churches would be undermined. Such action would clearly contravene the Church Order Article 46.
To declare the appeal admissible.
- It was submitted on time
- The appeal claims that the original overture did not receive a proper hearing.
To deny the appeal of Mount Nasura.
- The appeal overlooks the fact that Synod West Kelmscott tabled Mount Nasura's overture not only sub Article 95 but also sub Articles 37, 44, and 47 (as finalized in Article 94). Synod West Kelmscott's decision not to uphold the overture must be read in light of its overall decisions with respect to the RCN.
- Guarding the Lord's Supper table and the pulpit against members and ministers "who practice or promote the identified deviations" is adequately covered in the consistories' task of oversight.
Article 31 - Mt Nasura Overture re RCN
8i - FRC Mt Nasura Overture Article 95 Synod 2006 re RCN
To declare the overture admissible, but limited to the new grounds.
- Under Art 33 CO, matters may be proposed again
provided they are substantiated by new grounds
- The overture is able to be dealt with on these limited grounds as they are clearly defined in the overture.
Article 32 - Reformed Churches in the Netherlands
8e - FRC West Albany Appeal re Art 94 Acts Synod 2006 re Reformed Churches in the Netherlands
8i - FRC Mt Nasura Overture Article 95 Synod 2006 re RCN
8k - FRC Kelmscott Appeal Art 93 & 94 Synod 2006 re RCN
Synod has a general round of discussion on the RCN.
last updated 26 Jun 2009