Classis Reps Visit First CRC, Toronto

by Gayla R. Postma

In January, Classis Toronto heard from the representatives (known as “church visitors”) it sent to the council of First Christian Reformed Church, Toronto.

That visit was mandated by Synod 2004, which instructed the classis “to investigate the allegations . . . regarding persons living in same-sex committed relationships.” Synod directed Classis Toronto “to urge First CRC to act in accordance with the guidelines of the [synodical] reports on homosexuality of 1973 and 2002” (Acts of Synod 2004, p. 632).

Synod took that action after a decision by First CRC in 2002 to allow gay and lesbian members living in committed same-sex relationships to be nominated to the offices of elder and deacon, which is contrary to the denomination’s position. The church later rescinded that decision and promised to bring a position paper to classis by September 2004. Classis Toronto has not yet received that paper.

Visitors Rev. Erick Schuringa, Rev. Martin Benckhuysen, and elder Henry Hengeveld stated in their report, “The council expressed how they have been hurt by the strong condemning language of much of the communication they have received from Classis and Synod . . . . Others expressed that they find the stigma of being labeled a ‘gay church’ hurtful.”

The report states that the council expressed a longing to stay a part of the CRC and that some members of council reflected “they have already made many compromises,” including a commitment not to install practicing homosexuals as officebearers. According to the report, council members said “they long for the freedom to continue to explore how they can truly embrace everyone who comes into their midst.”

The council told the church visitors that its position paper on the issue is in its third draft but will not be made public until it has been approved by the whole congregation. The council asked that the classis create more time for open discussions.

Some delegates to Classis Toronto were not satisfied with the outcome of the visit. However, a motion to send a second set of visitors and another motion to instruct First CRC to present its position paper were both defeated.

Author

Gayla R. Postma