John VanderBilt

This is a good work being done in the denomination, certainly an area of concern that has not been boldly addressed in the past.  I have friends that have been involved in this process from the ground up and am very happy that prayers have been answered.  I believe we are just getting started with addressing abuses and the new code of conduct will be an important part of moving forward.

I am looking for clarity of text included in our recently adopted bylaws.  We sought legal counsel in the state of Michigan to formulate bylaws for our congregation for the very first time.  We have had Articles of Incorporation filed with the State of Michigan since 1902 but never did have any documents that functioned as Bylaws.

With that as our background, what we adopted included a statement "Trustees shall be elected by a plurality of votes cast at any election". The votes cast on every other item requiring a vote requires a majority (Budget, salaries, building projects, etc..)

A question has been raised about the wisdom requiring a plurality of votes for trustees/council members instead of majority.  As with most congregations, we do elect several candidates for each office (elders or deacons) and to require a majority requires that several ballots be cast to arrive at majority.

Any thoughts for providing clarity in the election of elders/deacons?  A plurality of votes or majority?

I don't want to be blunt, but they don't.  I would love to hear what is happening in other congregations when new elders are installed and ordained into office.

Thank you all for your input.  A number of you have taken time to review this question and commented honestly.  I believe the answer is clear and appreciate those who attempt to abide to the intent of these guidelines as set forward in Church Order.

I would like to drill down to Article 53a a bit more.  I am finding that there is an interpretation that a local consistory may on it's own without any interaction from the local classis to permit any person of there choosing to conduct worship services.  Permission is granted by the authority of the local congregation after leadership finds that the individual is reformed in his teaching and may preach/exhort only within the walls of that congregation.  Examination is needed only if he is preaching/exhorting in other churches within the classis.  This interpretation is based on Article 53a period, going no further to what CO may say.  Any thoughts out there???

Thank you Henry, I appreciate your depth of knowledge and understanding of a document we as a denomination have agreed to honor.

The final chapter has been written.  Even though a strict interpretation of church may suggest that an unordained lay member should be examined by classis prior to being licensed to exhort, the route prefered was to embrace the concept that the local council answers to no higher assembly and to "waive" the classical exam and simply review the individuals qualifications and grant permission to exhort. 

Big job with little or no training. It is the clerk who captures the intent of each motion from the floor and it is also his interpretation.

Henry,

You start out with the words "Reformed tradition".  I am quite glued to traditions as they relate to church, family, society as much as if not more than most people.  Traditions are still a product of our own culture and very much man made.  I am more connected with Scripture and what it says.  One illustration of a private audience was a story my father told me about WWII while serving in the Phillipines.  Communion was celebrated by a group of soliders in the field using only bread and water because of the lack of wine.  The celebration was perfomed very much outside the enviroment of a church among soldiers of many backgounds.  Does Reformed tradition discourage this kind of participation of the sacrament or is this what Scripture allows?

John V.

We worshipped at 2nd CRC on-line Kalamazoo, MI