NR #1995-074: Synod Rejects Two Efforts to Require 1996 Ratification of Women
in Office Decision

 Synod rejected two attempts today to require 1996 ratification of Monday's
decision to allow classes to declare parts of the church order prohibiting
women elders, ministers, and evangelists "inoperative." Synod voted in both
cases to overturn the chair's ruling that the attempts were legally before
synod with the result that synod never considered the possibility of revising
its decision.

NR #1995-074: For Immediate Release
Synod Rejects Two Efforts to Require 1996 Ratification of Women in Office
Decision

by Darrell Todd Maurina, Press Officer
United Reformed News Service

GRAND RAPIDS, Mich. (June 21, 1995) URNS - Synod rejected two attempts today
to require 1996 ratification of Monday's decision to allow classes to declare
the church order's prohibition of women in office to be "inoperative."

 The first attempt by Rev. Rich Blauw of Classis Illiana asked synod to
declare that the change to the church order supplement was a "substantial
alteration" to the prohibition of women in office in Article 3 and that it
therefore fell under the church order revision provisions of Article 47. This
article specifies that "the task of synod includes the adoption of the
creeds, of the Church Order, of the liturgical forms, of the Psalter Hymnal,
and of the principles and elements of the order of worship, as well as the
designation of the Bible versions to be used in the worship services" and
that "no substantial alterations shall be effected by synod in these matters
unless the churches have had prior opportunity to consider the advisability
of the proposed changes."

 "The action we have taken does, in effect, change Church Order Article 3,"
said Blauw. "This is a very curious thing to put something in a supplement
which says something in the church order is inoperative."

 However, other delegates argued that Blauw's proposal constituted a request
for reconsideration of the earlier synodical decision, which, according to
synodical rules, can only be made for "weighty reasons." When asked to
declare whether Blauw's reasons were "weighty," synod president Rev. Cal Bolt
declared that they were "weighty." Bolt's decision was then challenged and on
a 91 to 83 roll call vote was not sustained - with the result that Blauw's
motion never came to the floor for discussion.

 Later in the evening, Classis Arizona delegate Rev. John Westra, a supporter
of women in office who voted in favor of that position on Monday, moved to
reconsider synod's earlier decision on the grounds that it was unfair to
opponents of women in office. "If we are going to declare this insubstantial
and put this in a supplement, we make a mockery of 23 years of debate," said
Westra. "The conservatives will view the decision of Synod 1995 as
substantial and they have the right to make their case through the
ratification process."

 However, Classis Toronto delegate Elder Wietse Posthumus argued that the
grounds for Westra's motion would have had to be unavailable at the time of
the initial vote. Bolt again ruled that Westra's motion was legally before
synod, followed by a challenge from Classis Grand Rapids East delegate Rev.
Morris Greidanus. Synod voted again not to sustain the chair, thus defeating
two attempts to say that allowing women in office is a substantial matter as
defined by the church order.

Contact List:

Mr. Tim Penning or Mrs. Bonny Wynia, Christian Reformed Synodical News Office
 Calvin College, 3201 Burton St. SE, Grand Rapids, MI  49546 * O: (616)
957-8652 * FAX: (616) 957-8551

To Reach Delegates During Synod: (616) 957-6000
Pre-Recorded CRC Synod Hotline: (616) 957-8654



------------------------------------------------
file: /pub/resources/text/reformed: nr95-074.txt

.