Synod Baldivis 2015 of the Free Reformed Churches of Australia (FRCA) decided to offer a sister church relationship to the Reformed Churches of New Zealand (RCNZ) in accordance with recommendations of deputies for contact with the RCNZ. For many years the FRCA have seen the RCNZâs sister relationship with the Christian Reformed Churches of Australia (CRCA) as a principle impediment to establishing a sister relationship with the RCNZ. Now that the RCNZ’s sister relations with the CRCA has been discontinued, the way appears open for the FRCA to establish a sister relationship with the RCNZ. However, a study of the Deputiesâ Report leaves one wondering just how seriously Synod Baldivis has taken the principle underpinning earlier synodsâ position in requiring the RCNZ to break with the CRCA before we establish sister relations with the RCNZ.
Admittedly there is no longer a âsister relationshipâ between the RCNZ and the CRCA. It has instead been replaced by a relationship of âEcumenical Fellowshipâ. Why? The CRCA delegate to the 2014 RCNZ synod ânoted that many points of concern kept coming up for discussion between RCNZ-CRCA, and whenever most of them were dealt with, new ones would come up, hence need for new relationshipâ. He expressed the view that âthe closeness remainsâ as well as the love, care and respect.[i] Evidently by establishing ‘Ecumenical Fellowship’ the warm fellowship with the CRCA remains without the need for the RCNZ to have the same responsibility of, for example, expressing concerns or warnings towards the CRCA as happens in a sister relationship. Under the new form of relationship the CRCA no longer needs to cope with letters of complaint from the RCNZ.
Nevertheless, as the new term âEcumenical Fellowshipâ implies, the RCNZ continues in various ways to express unity of faith with the CRCA. This unity of faith is expressed, for example, in that the RCNZ recently sponsored the CRCA to become members of the ICRC.[ii] Such a recommendation could only come about if the RCNZ thought highly of the doctrinal faithfulness of the CRCA.
The RCNZâs unity with the CRCA is also expressed in its continuing links to the Reformed Theological College (RTC) which was established by the CRCA and remains closely affiliated with it. The RCNZ levies its member $20 per confessing member in its financial support of the RTC. The Report notes that 12 of 17 pastors/missionaries/vicars in the RCNZâs 20 churches are RTC trained. Â Summer internships are arranged for RCNZ students despite the fact that âDeputies Students for the Ministry have previously reported concern about the influÂence of the CRCA on the RTCâ. Although there is a perception by some in the RCNZ that the RTC âmight be theologically conservative overallâ, others do express concerns. Our deputies astutely ask âcould it be that in areas like worship it is having an unwelcome influence on the RCNZ that the RCNZ itself doesnât realize or see clearly?â[iii]
Although the RCNZ are willing to forego the responsibilities of a sister relationship âthey want to maintain closeness ⌠a close relationship because of the historyâ.[iv] Moreover, âthe RCNZ state that calling of ministers [from the CRCA] with colloquium doctum will still occurâ. Although they speak of a âpreliminary evaluationâ as a âsafeguardâ itâs clear that âchurches can still consider CRCA ministers for callâ.[v] Pulpit exchanges continue to be allowed after âan examination with the local consistoryâ and CRCA visitors will âbe able to attend Lordâs Supperâ and receive âmembership in the RCNZ ⌠following an interviewâ. Then there are the joint projects in diaconal work, mission work and a joint âChristmas compassionate catalogueâ as well as shared theological training. As the Deputies remark, âthere remains a practical relationship between the RCNZ and the CRCAâ.[vi]
It is evident that the RCNZâs new relationship with the CRCA is a compromise. On the one hand the sister relationship is discontinued, yet on the other hand they âhave not yet been so bold as to say that the CRCA lacks the marks of the true church (Art 29 BC)â.[vii] Our deputies make the claim that âour past synods ⌠have not required the RCNZ to break ties with the CRCAâ and refer to our Synod 2003 which âexpressed appreciation for the manner in which the RCNZ use their relaÂtionship to admonish their erring sister (Art 62, p.33)â. However, this ignores the fact that since 1962 successive synods have clearly stated that the RCNZâs continuing relationship with the CRCA was an impediment to our unity with the RCNZ. What else can this mean but that they must break with the CRCA?
The deputies refer to a 1985 synod decision that states that ârecognizing another church as a true and faithful church of the Lord Jesus Christ âhas as direct consequence that a sister-Church relationship can be established, without disregarding the fact that historical developments may well give cause to several stumbling blocks still lying on the road to a practical realization of unity. (Art. 67, p.40).ââ One might imagine such stumbling blocks to be culturally determined practicalities such as singing of unrhymed Psalms, how ministers are called, how they run synods, etc. Â Deputies, however, make the claim that âFRCA synods have considered the RCNZâs sister-relations with the CRCA to be one such stumbling block that required resolution before accepting their offer for sister-relationsâ.[viii] Thereby deputies have devalued our concerns about the RCNZ relationship with the CRCA to merely an historical stumbling block on the road to practical unity instead of seeing this, as our churches have always seen it in the past, as a matter of Scriptural principle.
That weâve always seen it as a Scriptural principle is evident from the decisions of Synod 1985 which referred back to Synod 1962âs decision which âstated that the Reformed Churches of New Zealand were not faithful because of their relationship with the Reformed Churches of AustraliaâŚâ (Art. 75, p. 49). Moreover, Synod 1998 agreed that the âRCNZâs sister-relations with the CRCA is an impedimentâ which posed âprinciple difficulties regarding third party relationsâ. Ignoring such principle difficulties would âalso flow to practical difficultiesâ (Acts 1998, p.187-189). Indeed, it cited one of the RCNZâs own reports which said that relationships needed to be true in all dimensions:  âThis is being consistent with the principle of a true and faithful church and consequential thinking, as otherwise there would be a triangular problem when A and B establish close relationships while C who already has an intimate relationship with A still has principle objections to Bâ (Acts 1998, Art. 89, p.42-43).
If the RCNZ hold that the CRCA are true and faithful churches, they should not permit the sister relationship with them to be broken. However, if the CRCA are not true and faithful churches, as we believe, the RCNZ do wrong to continue the close relations with them. They have agreed to discontinue the sister relations but by agreeing to a new bond of âEcumenical Fellowshipâ they have not distanced themselves from the CRCAâs theological liberalism and unreformed worship and polity and will continue to be influenced by it. Hence the obstacle to unity between the FRCA and RCNZ has not been removed and the FRCAâs Synod Baldivis 2015 has acted prematurely in establishing sister relations with the RCNZ.
References:
[i] Deputies Reports to the 2015 Synod of the Free reformed churches of Australia, June 2015, p. 252.
[ii] Ibid, p. 252
[iii] Ibid, p. 253
[iv] Ibid, P. 264
[v] Ibid, p. 265
[vi] Ibid, p. 265
[vii] Ibid, pp. 265,266
[viii] Ibid, p. 256
