I have lived within the Reformed faith all my life, but this was my very first time directly interacting with the Dutch Reformed tradition. Attending Synod 2026 on Calvin University campus as an elder delegate representing Classis Hanmi, what I experienced was the most powerful among the countless church gatherings I have attended these many years. I would like to share my personal reflections with you.
This Synod was a well-organized event. The worship and prayer services held right before the start of each plenary session were moving and inspirational.
Because the decisions made at Synod carry spiritual authority in guiding the direction of our local churches, I approached every moment of praise, worship, fellowship, and voting with a humble and prayerful heart.
Tips on Synod Life and Administration
- Computers are absolutely necessary: From roll calls and voting to reviewing supplemental materials, everything at Synod is done digitally. There is no paper provided on-site, with the sole exception of the Agenda book. If you find navigating PDFs uncomfortable, I highly recommend securing a physical copy in advance.
- Lodging and Food: We stayed in single dormitory rooms with shared bathrooms, which brought back a fond sense of nostalgia, making me feel like a college senior again. We ate our meals at the student cafeteria, and the food was excellent—mostly healthy and delicious.
Days 1 and 2: Advisory Committee Meetings
The first two days were the most difficult. About two weeks before our arrival, the Synod provided us with a 422-page Agenda book, containing background material for 37 overtures (requests for decisions) submitted by various classes. The Synod formed 9 advisory committees, assigning each delegate to one committee and tasking each committee with reviewing about 4 overtures to draft recommendations. I had not finished reading the Agenda before arriving, so I felt a bit lost at times.
My committee handled each overture with an impressively orderly approach. The members raised meaningful and deeply considered questions, and called in representatives from the Council of Delegates (COD) and denominational staff for questioning in order to better understand the subject matter. The process was meticulous. When drafting the final recommendations, the committee wrote carefully and precisely. The entire process felt simultaneously nerdy yet outward-looking, scholarly yet deeply pastoral. All the while, prayer warriors were silently interceding for us in the back. It was a deeply human, reasonable, gospel-centered environment filled with a prayerful attitude.
Day 3: Sunday
After two days of intense committee work, I spent Sunday worshiping at Grace Christian Reformed Church in Grand Rapids, where Pastor Moonbae Kim ministers. Pastor Kim is a wonderful servant of God. Despite the tight Synod schedule, he continually looked after and encouraged our group throughout the week. He went above and beyond by inviting us to his church, treating us to a warm Korean dinner, and hosting other fellowship events.
Days 4–7: Plenary Sessions
The plenary sessions officially commenced on Monday morning beginning a series of marathon days of morning, afternoon, and evening sessions, with brief one-hour breaks for meals. Each day started at 8:15 a.m. and wrapped up around 8:30 p.m. All sessions were live-streamed and remain available on YouTube.
When the President of the Synod called out an overture, the chairman of the respective advisory committee would step forward to present their recommendation, followed by an open floor discussion. Many delegates spoke with great eloquence, and their words moved me deeply at times. Even when discussing administrative or contentious topics, every speech was rooted in the gospel and served as a testimony of the lives led by the speaker. The difficult "work" of the Synod served to joyously affirm and put on display the intense passion for the gospel.
I was also deeply impressed by the orderliness, controlled passion, and strict adherence to parliamentary procedures. No one shouted, and no one showed disrespect to another. Delegates spoke passionately for their positions, but once a vote was cast and the body had spoken, everyone simply moved on to the next agenda item. Whenever discussions grew contentious, a designated "prayer warrior" would step up to invite everyone into prayer, instantly calming the room. The power of prayer to quiet our restless hearts was profoundly moving.
This is the first part in a series exploring Joseph's experience at Synod. Check back soon for the second half of Joseph's reflection on Synod!
Comments
Thank you for your reflections, Elder Joseph. I have attended 11 synods as delegate and reporter for Covenant for Office Bearers study committee and appreciated each one. There have been moments at two synods when decorum was broken and restored with some friction, but overall respect at the end.
I do take exception to this comment: "I was also deeply impressed by the orderliness, controlled passion, and strict adherence to parliamentary procedures. No one shouted, and no one showed disrespect to another." Perhaps you were referring to no disrespect among delegates, but I witnessed meanness and utterly uncalled for disrespect directed at the the WCRC as a body and at its General Secretary, Philip Vinod Peacock, during the discussion that resulted in the CRCNA leaving that body.
More than two delegates misrepresented the WCRC, using careless words and epithets to discredit the organization and Rev. Peacock. Such comments should have been called immediately out of order by any delegate, the officers or General Secretary King. But there was no such response. Only after the vote to leave WCRC was passed did Vice Chair Buikema make a private apology to Rev. Peacock. Common decency would have been to make that a public apology and to call to order the offending delegates and to order them to apologize.
I do not discount your reflections, Elder Joseph. The event I described may have been an exception to t he conduct of delegates, but I was saddened and appalled at the delegates' uncalled for crude and insulting comments and the inattention to respectful decorum in that debate.
James, I think you are overstating the contention that appeared to be in the room on the live stream, versus what actually took place and how the WCRC discussion and decision was made. I really appreciated the chair of that advisory committee meeting with the Banner podcast crew, and giving a fuller picture of what actually transpired. It sounds like you are interpreting the partial information you were party too, much different from how those in the room, and even in the advisory committee understood the matter.
https://youtu.be/XPUleX5yWXw?si=B0x976Pp9XZqgm4H
Let's Discuss
We love your comments! Thank you for helping us uphold the Community Guidelines to make this an encouraging and respectful community for everyone.