Reformed Presbyterian Minutes of Synod 1993

150 1993 MINUTES OF THE SYNOD OF THEmay have been party to it.4) "The promise of abstinence in Query #8 has never been sent downin overture for the approval of the sessions." In 1980, Synod declared thatthis set of queries must be signed by all ordinands and licentiates and thisrequirement was overtured and approved. And even though the content ofQuery #8 may never have been isolated to be sent down in overture, Synodand the overturing elders approved it.5) "Enforcement of this requirement would continue the dichotomybetween faith and practice which has been growing in the Church." Werecognize the dichotomy. We strongly urge the Church to change the vowso as to be in harmony with the teaching of Scripture. We are attemptingto see that necessary change is pursued through orderly, rather thandisorderly, processes.6) "The requirement of total abstinence for officers is in tension withthe principle governing ordination vows adopted by Synod in 1981." Seeour comment regarding argument #2 above.The Presbytery of the Alleghenies, finalappeal is, "... that Synodwould not require the Presbytery of the Alleghenies to exercise disciplinein this matter, unless and until Synod itself, and the Church it represents,can come to agreement on the positive biblical reasons for making a vowof abstinence a condition for holding office in the Church." The problemwith allowing such release of the clear requirements of Synod andoverturing elders to stand is that it undermines the biblical principle oforderly change and proper oversight of the Church. If this were to begranted, it says to any individual or group within the denomination, "Youmay continue to operate independently of all that the courts of the Churchdeclare. If you disagree with overtured decisions, you may lodge yourappeal and do as you desire until the Church agrees with you." Such astandard can only result in an anarchic position, where congregationalindependency and a denial of the authority of Christ in His Church reign.We view it as a very serious enor, and we cannot approve of such a course.And because we believe that ordinands can take Query #8, binding theirpresent behavior without binding their consciences, we believe that sucha course of action is unnecessary.ACTION BY SMITHS FALLS SESSIONWithin the two presbyteries, St. Lawrence and AUeghenies, threesessions were involved: Smiths Falls, Oswego, and Grace Presbyterian(State College). Information needs to be given to the Synod concerning theaction of one them, the Smiths Falls session, dated August 29, 1992. Onthat date Christian Adjemian, moderator, presented a letter to the sessionwhich contained the following observations and appeal, the recommenda-