Reformed Presbyterian Minutes of Synod 1993

146 1993 MINUTES OF THE SYNOD Ub THEcontinue to burden the Church, it would seem, endlessly! We therefoconclude that the individual conscience is not the only concern. If thechurch is not to splinter into a million fragments (something clearly out ofharmony with God's revealed will) there must be a way in which theconscience of the individual and the conscience of the body may functiontogether in harmony and peace.THE "IMPASSE"It is your committee's conviction that an understanding of thesedistinctions is absolutely vital to the resolution of the impasse. It is clearthat many individuals presently ordained or seeking ordination within theRPCNA have felt a high level of concern about the promise before Godtotally to abstain, that is required in Query # 8. Some have refused to takeit, others in taking it have qualified away its stated promise. Presbyterieshave brought these issues to the Synod. The Synod, having debated theissue several times, voted in 1986 (See Minutes, pp. 159-160), and again in1990 (See Minutes, p. 133) by two-thirds majorities, to send query changesdown in overture. These overtures did not receive the required two-thirdsapproval of the sessions of the denomination. Synod has instmctedPresbyteries to require their congregations to yield to the Church'scorporate conviction not to approve a query change. Yet two presbyterieshave failed to yield to the eldership of the denomination in its overture andin its specific declarations.Two issues are at stake here. One is the issue of individual conscience,the other that of denominational authority. The problem pits the individualconscience (in this case many individuals) against the conscience of thewhole mling body of the Church.Your committee believes that the integrity of our presbyterian order isat stake here. Individuals, sessions, and even presbyteries have taken astand that is in resistance to orderliness and orderly change in biblicalchurches. We believe that this can, and must, be repudiated and repentedof before God. To do otherwise is to invite chaos and unbiblical congregationalindependence. At the same time we also believe that the denominationhas failed before God to realize the sanctified intensity of theconscientious convictions of many of its godly leaders, especially many ofits teaching elders, and that a change in the query is absolutely essential.Courts of Synod, charged with the responsibility of overseeing and mlingthe Church, and making decisions pursuant to that goal, only to findthatthe "larger Synod," the larger body of elders charged with overtures,months later vote in opposition to their stand, face anachronistic confusion.Is the Synod, constituted in Christ's name, and bearing His authority,to be in conflict with the larger body of elders not meeting together as the