Our Sister Church in Abbotsford (3)


In this article we will continue with the coming into being of the Liberated Reformed Church at Abbotsford (LRCA).

Marks of the church

In our own country we have seen how in a church-orderly way for instance: ‘one sentence in an old sermon’ about the hallowing of the Sabbath (as one of the ministers in the GKv disdainfully called it) revealed a background of decline. 1) By binding the churches to the so-called ‘freedom’ to regard Sunday rest no longer a commandment of God, false doctrine and errors were permitted. Through this the marks of the church were at stake.

Were the issues in the Canadian Reformed churches just about ‘a couple of decisions regarding a few sister church relationships’ or did these decisions affect the marks of the church?

On their path to liberation from the CanRC, our brothers in Abbotsford came to the realization that the decisions concerning sister church relationships meant that in the CanRC itself false doctrines and errors were permitted. When ministers of the OPC and the URCNA are permitted to lead worship services in the CanRC, the pulpits in the CanRC are opened to their doctrine.
When members of the OPC - a church where there is no personal binding to the confession - (‘confessional membership’), see previous article - or members of the URCNA are admitted to the Lord’s Supper table in the CanRC, then it can no longer be determined that only members are admitted who are healthy in doctrine and walk of life. Even those who adhere to a baptistic and evangelical line of thought can be Lord’s Supper participants since they are welcome as members in the OPC.

And when the practice of an ‘open Lord’s Supper table’ is no longer regarded as an issue that concerns the confession (although it was decided by CanRC synods in the ‘90s still to be a confessional issue) it proved that a more ‘open’ Lord’s Supper table is acceptable in the CanRC when several local Canadian Reformed churches allowed guests to partake in the Lord’s Supper without attestations.

Our brothers in Abbotsford therefore considered that the decisions regarding sister church relationships affect the keys of the Kingdom of heaven (Lord’s Day 31) and the marks of the church (Belg. Conf., Art.29), since the doctrine and the administration of the sacraments are at stake here.

Overall deformation

Could one say that there was a broad deformation in the Canadian Reformed Churches?
The concerned brothers in Abbotsford (and other places) asked this question and had to answer it in the affirmative.

In the first place, the brothers at Abbotsford affirmed that ‘sister church relationships’ (an improper term for this situation because Art. 50 of the Church Order (Book of Praise) deals with foreign churches!)(a) have been established in the same country. In a considerable number of places there is a geographical overlap especially with the URCNA. For that reason there is evidence of a great influence in the Canadian churches because of regular pulpit exchange and guests partaking in the Lord Supper table, etc.

Secondly, our concerned brothers have pointed out, for example, that the ‘ open Lord’s Supper table’ could be seen as an ‘isolated’ subject, but that therein lies another doctrine about the church:
- pluriformity of the church which is not in agreement with what Art.28 and 29 of the Belg. Conf. teach about the church;
- the absence of a confession as a form of unity, and the absence of the binding to the confession;
- encroachment on church discipline. 2)

Decisive was whether church decisions were according to the Word of God. And, additionally, whether the deviations are fundamental (in the course of which the marks of the church have been compromised) and whether everything has been attempted in the church orderly way to bring repentance.

Return

In their liberation the concerned brothers were convinced to have followed a way of faithfulness to the Scriptures and confession. It was not about judging churches such as the OPC, URCNA or other churches as ‘not being of God’; ‘Again, we are definitely not saying this. [The CanRC] have not properly tested the spirits to determine if churches like the URC and the RCUS are truly “of God” ’ 3)

For the brothers in Abbotsford the critical question was not whether these churches honored some or even many ‘good viewpoints’. But the question was: can these churches in confession and practice be distinguished, diligently and with great carefulness, as true churches according to Art. 29 of the Belg. Conf.? The brothers at Abbotsford judged that in the CanRC this Scriptural testing had not taken place sufficiently. They saw their liberation as a return to the Scriptures and confession, also regarding the church.

The ecclesiastical way

The liberation of the brothers in Abbotsford cannot be understood without having observed this background of deformation which our brothers at Abbotsford did notice in the Canadian churches. In the previous articles we have already seen that the development regarding the sister church relationships have a lengthy history in the Canadian churches. In the magazine Reformed Polemics, members of the Canadian Reformed Churches have also warned, from 1994-2004, against the development with regards to the sister church relationships. In our own well-known magazine Reformanda the affinity between both magazines has been pointed out, both having to deal with developments originating ‘out of the same spirit’. 4)
Nevertheless, developments in the church are, as such, never a reason for secession or liberation. The LORD is, after all, merciful and gracious and He forgives transgressions and sin (Ex. 34: 6,7). The question is: will the church legitimize sin, and not turn back from it?
Therefore, the questions were: was this all about sins which have been documented in decisions? And: have these decisions sufficiently been appealed in the church orderly way?
The brothers in Abbotsford were convinced that this was the case and that against the background of this broader deformation, grounds for liberation emerged.

Liberation

Since the 1980’s appeals have been sent to every synod against decisions such as the recognition of the OPC as a true church in 1977, and church relationships with other churches, etc. At the CanRC General Synod Chatham 2004 a number of requests for revision were submitted against the decisions made by General Synod 2001 pertaining to sister church relationships. In fact, even the Canadian Reformed church of Abbotsford also still submitted a revision request! However, all requests for revision were denied with the result that the ecclesiastical way had come to an end. 5)

Nevertheless, the concerned brothers in Abbotsford still continued sounding the call to reformation to the end. They did that by calling on the consistory not to ratify the synod decisions in which their request for revision was denied.
However, the consistory of the CanRC of Abbotsford had abandoned her former request for revision to General Synod 2004 and gave notice to the concerned brothers that it had by then accepted this decision of synod.

When a brother in the CanRC of Abbotsford, because of his public call to reformation among others via the web site www.calltoreform.com, was placed under discipline and other concerned members were faced with the prospect of being placed under discipline, the brothers and sisters liberated themselves. That’s how the Liberated Reformed Church of Abbotsford came about in 2007.

The actual events, the lengthy struggle of the brothers and sisters in Abbotsford, their way to the major assemblies and the unjust exercise of discipline you will find extensively recorded in the Acts of the General Synod of Emmen 2009-2010, Report 2 of the Deputies for Contact with Churches Abroad (appendix IX, nl. pgs. 110-122 with the Act of Liberation and the questions asked by our deputies to the LRCA), and in the Acts of General Synod Groningen 2014-2015, and the committee report (pg. 330-342). Here you will also find the grounds of the liberation of the LRCA further explained. To receive a good understanding one could use these reports.

In a following article D.V. we will continue to go further into the development of the LRCA.


1) Hereby is meant the sermon by Rev. D. Ophoff in the city of Nieuwegein in The Netherlands in 1996 in which the Sunday rest is named as a human ordinance. Citation in: P.van Gurp, ‘Some voices about the call to reformation’ , Reformanda, nr. 13-3 (2003), p. 24.
2) See www.calltoreform.com/Questions.htm, v&a 13 and 14.
3) See www.calltoreform.com/Questions.htm, v&a 3.
4) P.van Gurp, Reformed polemics’ , Reformanda, nr. 12-44 (2002), pp. 537-538.
5) Acts General Synod Chatham 2004, art. 86, 96,and 97.