[Mins] [Bulletins] ICRC decision

[Geoff van Schie]

Greetings to everyone from Pretoria, Sth Africa

No doubt you have been awaiting word as to the outcome of the decision of the International Conference of Reformed Churches concerning the CRCA application for membership.

We were warmly welcomed at the conference and it was plain that all should go well.

However, we missed out by one vote re the two thirds majority required - 15 in favour, 8 against and 3 abstentions. Sadly, concerns of the Presbyterian Church of Eastern Australia which were strongly taken to both the committee screening our application as well as with the meeting as a whole, caused a big delay in the final voting of this matter, right until just before lunch on the last morning of the conference. Discussion the night before almost took up the entire session with other items that night having to be postponed.

We would have had the 2/3 majority even with such a late vote but a number of delegations which would have been favourable to us had already left the gathering, including one of our sponsors. We ended up with 23 votes to be reckoned ( it was announced abstentions would not be used in the calculation of the (percentage) so we fell just one vote vote short, sitting on 65%.

The concerns of the PCEA were two fold:
1) Our application was not in 12 months ahead of the required time - it arrived 10 months before.
2) Had they known we were applying for membership they would have raised concerns they had with us they believed needed to be cleared up first. they thus felt they had been denied this opportunity.

As the delegate of the CRCA, I was given the floor on a number of occasions, each time being invited to reply.

In response to the PCEA's concerns, out of pastoral concern for all concerned, the application committee after a very positive report, recommended granting observer status for the next four years.

On the floor of the full assembly there was strong debate over this recommendation. In short, the meeting ruled the application to be admissible and therefore properly on the agenda. I learned from the clerk later, the rule as to its timing is an old one ad makes allowance for 'snail mail', giving the clerk time to receive and send out by mail the agendas and supporting documents. As it was, the constitution allows the assembly to rule papers admissible even if deemed late.

On account of the strong debate against granting deferring full membership as urged by the PCEA, the application committee agreed to take the report back and rework it for decision the next morning. A number of delegates, besides our two sponsors, strongly spoke against the views expressed by the PCEA.

As to not having time to speak to us about concerns, it was pointed out by various delegates, the PCEA did not need to know about our application, but if it had concerns, being a church with friendly ties and exchanging fraternal greetings at each others synods, it had time to do this over many years. Your delegate pointed out that while we have formally requested full ecumenical relations with the PCEA we have never from their synod received a request to meet to discuss any concerns they might have nor have they officially raised any concerns with us when bringing fraternal greetings.

A further point raised the night before was that while the report from the application committee was very positive, the recommendation that came was opposite what one might have expected having read the report. As one delegate said, it did not add up.

The next morning the committee came back with a positive recommendation to accept us a full members. Again this was strongly argued against by the PCEA.

Unfortunately due to a misunderstanding as to when the conference finished, I had to leave just before the vote was taken. This meant I was not there nor a few other member delegates who the clerk told me had a similar misunderstanding.

Missing the vote of one of our sponsors we fell short by one vote.

I have received emails of encouragement since that vote was taken, to not give up but to have meetings with the PCEA to solve any concerns they might have with the CRCA. It is clear to some the ICRC do desire us to be members, also the PCEA. The next opportunity to apply will be in Ontario, Canada in 2017.

I am awaiting an official letter from the ICRC as to what if any status we will have until then, the observer status having been rejected by the assembly in favour of a recommendation for full membership.

This is most disappointing but we respect the final decision and will discuss where to from here as a Committee for Ecumenical Relations and in due course report to our synod in 2015.

In closing I wish to emphasise that the delegate churches of the ICRC were most welcoming and we were very warmly received. They do want us to join them.

Blessings in Christ
Geoff van Schie










Sent from my iPad
_______________________________________________
Bulletins mailing list
Bulletins at crca.org.au
To manage subscription settings - http://crca.org.au/mailman/listinfo/bulletins_crca.org.au