CanRC General Synod Edmonton 2019 (4)

The synod finished last week Thursday evening and all the acts are now available here.  As before, let me just review a few of the highlights from where I’m sitting.

Article 85 dealt with overtures from both regional synods regarding licensure of seminary students.  They both proposed that students be permitted to speak an edifying word after two years of seminary, as opposed to the current three.  The synod decided to give the green light for that under certain conditions.  One of the conditions is that students licensed under these provisions have to preach under the supervision of a mentor for a full summer immediately following.  But another condition is that the Pastoral Training Plan funding is still going to cover only one full summer internship, and usually that’s the internship following completion of the third year at CRTS.  I guess the students will have to sort out how this is going to work in practice.

Remarriage after divorce is often a contentious issue in Reformed churches.  In article 93, the synod considered an appeal from a couple concerning their consistory’s decision to pray for God’s blessing on such a marriage.  The appeal went up through classis and regional synod, and thus landed on Synod 2019’s table.  The appeal was denied.  One of the grounds was that there is exegetical freedom in the CanRC on this matter.  This is the way it should be, in my view.

Another appeal was considered in article 130.  Blessings Christian Church appealed a decision of Regional Synod East regarding article 55 of the CanRC Church Order.  In CO article 55, the churches agree that they will only sing “the metrical psalms adopted by general synod as well as the hymns approved by general synod.”  A proposal was adopted by a Classis Central Ontario to revise article 55 to read as follows:

The 150 psalms shall have the principal place in public worship.  The metrical psalms and hymns adopted by General Synod, as well as songs approved by the consistory that faithfully reflect the teaching of Scripture as expressed in the Three Forms of Unity, shall be sung in public worship.

This proposal then went to a Regional Synod East where it was defeated.  But this synod still ended up dealing with it via the appeal of Blessings.  However, the synod decided to deny it.  There are several grounds, some of which deal with the question whether it is a matter for the churches in common.  Synod decided that it remains so.

Article 139 dealt with the perennial topic of the United Reformed Churches.  Synod decided not to reappoint the Committee for Church Unity.  The process towards a merger is now officially on hold from both sides.  However, the CanRC and URNCA will continue as sister churches.

Finally, they left one of the most interesting items almost to the very end.  A Regional Synod West submitted an overture regarding the Trinity Psalter Hymnal (TPH) jointly developed by the OPC and URCNA.  The overture asked the TPH be adopted for public worship in the CanRC per Church Order article 55.  This overture was dealt with in article 142 of the Acts.  Essentially the overture was denied — but some of the substance of it was reworked.  The Standing Committee for the Book of Praise was mandated to consider improvements for both the psalm and hymn sections of the Book of Praise:

4.2  Mandate the SCBP:

4.2.1 Concerning the Psalms:

     4.2.1.1  to seek input from the churches as to which non-Genevan renditions of the Psalms could be added to enhance the Psalm section of the BoP.

4.2.1.2  to compile a list of suitable Psalm renditions for possible inclusion in the Book of Praise, using the TPH as a primary resource.

4.2.2 Concerning the Hymns

4.2.2.1  to seek input from the churches concerning replaceable and additional hymns for the 2014 Book of Praise, using the TPH as a primary resource.

4.2.2.2  to compile a list of such hymns keeping mind that at this time the final number of hymns in the Book of Praise should not exceed 100 (as per GS 2004) and being flexible with the structural template (Apostles’ Creed) of the hymn section of the 2014 Book of Praise.

4.2.3  To send, at least 18 months before the next general synod, an explanatory report to the churches together with a provisional list of songs for immediate testing, in the worship services if so desired, so there can be well-considered feedback to the next general synod.

To sum it up, you can be sure that the CanRC Book of Praise will still exist four or five years from now, but it will look quite different to the way it does now.  Additionally, it is going to be quite different to the Aussie Book of Praise which is probably going to appear in the next year or so.  I suppose change is inevitable — as long as it’s change for the better.  I do think that expanding the hymn section is warranted — there are some sections of the Book of Praise hymnary that are thread-bare.  For example, there could definitely be more hymns that are directly about the cross and Christ’s sufferings there in our place.  Expanding the hymnary carefully, looking to the TPH, and with a limit of 100 hymns seems a good way forward.

The Book of Praise’s Uncertain Future

For several decades the Book of Praise: Anglo-Genevan Psalter has been the exclusive song book of both the Canadian Reformed Churches and the Free Reformed Churches of Australia.  It’s something we’ve agreed upon in our Church Order.  Here in Australia, our last synod decided to move towards an Australian version of the Book of Praise.  It will have the extra 19 hymns in the 2014 CanRC Book of Praise, the FRCA Church Order, Australian spellings (like ‘baptise’), and a few other bits and pieces unique to the FRCA.  Overall, however, it will still be the familiar songbook.

In Canada, the Book of Praise is facing an uncertain future.  There were two recent proposals at regional synods which illustrate some changes afoot in the CanRC.  While only one of the proposals passed and will move on to the General Synod in Edmonton next year, the existence of these proposals demonstrates that there are questions in the CanRC about whether the hegemony of the Book of Praise is a sure thing going into the future.

Classis Central Ontario of September 6-7, 2018 adopted a proposal from the Fellowship CanRC in Burlington regarding a change to Church Order article 55.  The proposed reading was as follows:

The 150 Psalms shall have the principal place in public worship. The metrical Psalms and hymns adopted by General Synod, as well as songs approved by consistory that faithfully reflect the teaching of Scripture as expressed in the Three Forms of Unity, shall be sung in public worship.

This proposal was then forwarded to Regional Synod East of November 14, 2018.  The hope was that RSE would adopt it and then send it on to General Synod 2019.  However, RSE didn’t adopt the proposal.

On the other side of the continent, Classis Pacific East of February 22, 2018 adopted a proposal from the Aldergrove church dealing with the Trinity Psalter Hymnal recently published by the Orthodox Presbyterian Church and the United Reformed Churches.  This proposal stated that the psalms and hymns of the TPH also be approved for worship in the CanRC.  The proposal went to the Regional Synod West of November 5, 2018.  This was RSW’s decision, as reported in the press release:

RSW decided to forward the various submissions about the Trinity Psalter Hymnal to General Synod
with the recommendation that, in addition to the adopted Book of Praise, General Synod Edmonton 2019
approve the Psalms and Hymns of the Trinity Psalter Hymnal (TPH) for use in public worship as per Church Order Article 55. Along with this recommendation it added the following remarks:
6.1 Those letters which were submitted as appeals were received as letters of the churches interacting
with the overtures.
6.2 The overtures demonstrate a commonality in speaking about the Trinity Psalter-Hymnal (TPH) and
its merits in addition to the Book of Praise (BoP).
6.3 The purpose is not to replace the BoP but to enhance the unity in worship between us as sister
churches in North America by allowing the churches to also sing from the TPH.
6.4 The language of the overtures and the other materials received by RSW demonstrates that this is a
topic that lives in our churches. In addition, the material shows that some of the arguments either
supporting or opposing these overtures are subjective.
6.5 There is great value in maintaining the principle of a federative approach to corporate worship.
While not wanting to make exceptions the rule, RSW acknowledges the uniqueness of certain
congregations in their circumstances (e.g. mission churches).
6.6 The SCBP’s (Standing Committee for the Publication of the Book of Praise) evaluation process of
suggestions for new hymns from the churches is perceived as not sufficiently responsive to what the
churches through decisions of general synods have requested. It is debatable whether the SCBP is the
appropriate forum to evaluate the TPH.
6.7 In order to have the churches appreciate the quality of the TPH, the churches should have ample
opportunity to interact meaningfully with its contents, as has happened in the past with the introduction of the Augment.

So this matter will be going to the General Synod in Edmonton next year.  They will have to decide whether the Book of Praise will continue to be the exclusive song book of the CanRC.

What are my thoughts on this?  I haven’t actually seen the Trinity Psalter Hymnal, so I’m in no position to judge its contents or quality.  I do, however, place a lot of stock in trusting my brothers and sisters in the OPC and URCNA.  They’re not theological slouches.  So, that’s one thing.

Another thing is whether the exclusive use of the Book of Praise is necessary or helpful.  Is it required of us by God or is what’s agreed upon in our Church Orders a matter of convention that may or may not be helpful?  Obviously the latter.  It’s not the “law of the Medes and Persians which can never be changed.”  Circumstances can change, church sub-cultures can change (in matters indifferent), and therefore so can what we might agree on as our collection of songs for public worship.

Moreover, there’s also the question of adding more hymns.  I once held to exclusive psalmody.  When I became convinced that biblically based and biblically sound hymns fit within biblically regulated worship, then I also became convinced we should sing the best hymns.  If we’re going to sing hymns at all, then we should have the best collection of hymns in our songbook.  The 1984 Book of Praise had 65 (actually 66) hymns, but there were gaps in the selections, and other issues.  The 2014 Book of Praise has 85 hymns and there is improvement in expanding some of the sections (notably, with the resurrection of Christ).  But there is still the question of whether this is the best we can do in terms of our hymnody.  After all, shouldn’t we offer to God our best in worship?  Therefore, in principle, I’m open to the idea of adding more, carefully vetted, hymns to what we sing in public worship.

Finally, a word about the Genevan psalm melodies.  I love them, at least most of them.  I grew up with them and still sing them daily.  But I’m not stuck on them as the be-all-and-end-all of psalm singing.  Some of them are challenging to sing, especially for new comers to our churches.  Still, most people get used to them and even start to enjoy them.  The Genevan psalm melodies are used in Reformed churches around the world, in many different cultures (which is rather amazing!)  However, we need to keep all this in perspective.  The psalms themselves are far more important and precious than the tunes to which they’re sung.  If there’s a way for certain psalms to be sung and appropriated by God’s people more effectively by using a different tune than the Genevan, then we ought to be open to that.

I’m sure the Book of Praise will continue to be used in the CanRC for the foreseeable future.  Yet the inescapable reality is that the days of its sole primacy are numbered.  If the change doesn’t happen at General Synod 2019, it will surely happen further down the track.

CanRC Proposal to Approve Trinity Psalter Hymnal

For several years, the Canadian Reformed Churches were working with the United Reformed Churches to produce a joint song book.  Progress was slow, but steady.  However, eventually the URC abandoned the joint venture with the CanRC and later decided to work with the Orthodox Presbyterian Church instead.  The OPC and URC are now on the verge of releasing the Trinity Psalter Hymnal.  Apparently it’s supposed to be available around the beginning of May.

The CanRC have been watching these developments closely.  At Classis Pacific East of February 22, 2018, the Aldergrove church presented a proposal to adopt the psalms and hymns of the Trinity Psalter Hymnal.  It was presented as a proposal for synod, with the hopes that classis would adopt it and forward it on via the next Regional Synod West.  According to the press release, Classis Pacific East did what Aldergrove asked.  So the proposal is going to the next Regional Synod West.

A similar proposal was floated in the east last year.  A Classis Central Ontario brought a proposal to Regional Synod East of November 8, 2017.  However, Regional Synod East was not convinced.  We’ll see what West will do later in the year.

These are developments for the Australian Free Reformed Churches to watch too.  As I mentioned earlier in the week, we have a Synod coming up with weighty decisions to make about our song book.  We’ll be debating whether to add the 19 new hymns from the 2014 CanRC Book of Praise.  Meanwhile, the CanRCs have moved on to debate whether to add dozens more.

Synod Dunnville 2016 (7)

Photo: Rev. D.M. Boersma

Today I’m going to review some of the highlights from Day 7 of Synod Dunnville, the proceedings of Wednesday May 18.

• Synod junkies observers have especially been keen to see what would be decided about the Reformed Churches in the Netherlands (RCN).  A lot was discussed and considered and I’ll do my best to put the end result in an easily-digestible format for you — if you want the full details, see article 104.  The Canadians have had a number of items of concern such as the teaching of the Theological University in Kampen, women in office, and relations with the Nederlands Gereformeerde Kerken.  Synod considered (3.2) “with sad and heavy hearts” that there is no evidence of returning to the full authority of Scripture on such items of concern and, in fact, things have actually gone further down the “course of deformation.”  However, Synod 2016 decided not to fully go the route proposed by the committee (see here).  While continuing ecclesiastical fellowship with the RCN, rules 4 and 5 have been suspended.  These rules have to do with accepting attestations and allowing ministers on the pulpits.  These things are no longer automatic.  As for the future, rather than having the RCN Synod 2017 decide by repenting or not, the continuance of EF is something that will have to be determined at the next CanRC Synod in 2019.  This approach is similar to that being taken by the Free Reformed Churches here in Australia.  Finally, it should be noted that Synod Dunnville did recognize with gratitude that there are still faithful believers in the RCN.  There are brothers and sisters who are still trying to right the ship.  Yet, sadly, it cannot be denied that there is increasing evidence of “tolerance of deviations from Scripture and the confessions.”  We will have to wait another three years to see whether the CanRCs will take the final step of breaking off EF with the RCN.  Before then, in 2018, the next FRCA Synod will meet on this side of the world.  Given that the Canadian approach appears to be more or less following the Australian, that may be the more defining moment.
• Article 111 features the decisions regarding the Committee for Bible Translation.  The gist of it:  the ESV continues to be recommended for use in the CanRCs.  However, Synod 2016 also noted that a general synod may not forbid the churches to use the NIV2011 if they so desire, even if it’s not possible to recommend that translation.  As I see it, the reasoning applied there actually opens up the possibility for local churches to use whatever translation they desire.
• In article 122, the question of how to bring in new hymns was discussed and decided upon.  GS 2013 said that churches had to “go the ecclesiastical way” and propose new hymns via classis and regional synod.  GS 2016 says, “No, you can send your proposals directly to the Standing Committee for the Book of Praise.  They can evaluate and bring forward whatever they think is worthy of consideration.”  Another course reversal.
• The question of theological students has been raised, specifically:  should they be connected to their “home church”?  Should they be examined by their “home classis,” rather than having all the (licensure/candidacy) examinations basically done in one classical region?  A proposal came from Regional Synod West 2015 to change the way things are done.  Synod Dunnville (article 112) decided to maintain the status quo.  A student comes to Hamilton, becomes a member of one of the local churches, and consequently will be examined in that classical region — which means, more often than not, Classis Ontario West.

Synod Dunnville 2016 (4)

The Acts of day 5 of the Synod have just been published — but I haven’t yet had the opportunity to review them.  In the meantime, a related video has been posted online.  In this video, Rev. George van Popta makes a presentation of the 2014 Book of Praise on behalf of the Standing Committee for the Book of Praise.  He explains the history of the Book of Praise, including the reasons why the CanRCs didn’t go with an “eclectic Psalter,” but rather chose to use Genevan melodies exclusively for the Psalms.  After the presentation to Rev. Richard Aasman (the chairman of Synod Dunnville), you can also hear the singing of two stanzas of Psalm 22.