Thursday, September 23, 2010
Online Sermons
My weekly Sunday sermons are now online. Under the "Sermons" tab on our church's website, you will find them. www.abbotsfordurc.org/sermons.html
Friday, August 27, 2010
Synod 2010 Recap
Here is a copy of a letter that I wrote to my congregation here in Abbotsford. This is my summary of Synod London 2010.
Beloved Congregation, August 15, 2010
As you may know, Elder John Van Muyen and I attended the URCNA Synod in London, ON from July 26-31. I thought it would be profitable to you if I updated you on our time at Synod. This was my first time to Synod as a minister, so it was a learning experience for me.
Synod met at the the University of Western Ontario in London, which meant that we stayed in apartments on campus. The accommodations were wonderful and the London URC should be commended for putting all things in place for 180 delegates to come and perform the work at hand.
The work of Synod was tiresome and mentally gruelling as we worked from 8:00 in the morning until sometimes past 11:00 at night. I was very encouraged by the feeling of love and commitments to the Lord's church by the brothers there. It was an encouraging time and I am thankful that we got through our 500+ page agenda.
There were a few decisions that I believe should be of interest to you. The first involves our relationship with the Canadian Reformed Churches. We voted to end two of our three Unity Committees that are working with the Canadian Reformed. Synod judged that the work of the Common Songbook and Theological Education committees have done all they can do at this time. The Joint Church Order Committee will continue on with its work. So, what does this decision say about our relationship with the CanRC? It means that a future merger is not as easy as some may have thought. We are continuing to go forward and we are encouraged by the CanRC's commitment and patience to and with us, but for now, we want to take it slowly, so that our churches do not feel like they are being pushed into something. I agree, shepherds ought to lead the flock, not drive them. Unity must begin in local communities and cannot be something a Synod declares, especially if it is not true in the lives of God's people.
There was much discussion about the doctrinal commitment of members of a congregation (can people be members of the URC and disagree with something in our Confessions?). No resolution came and we will have a new report from the committee studying this issue for the next Synod.
A very significant event took place in that Synod voted, without a single dissenting vote, to agree with the recommendation of the Report on Justification and the Federal Vision. The report is sent to the churches for further study and so, without agreeing to every formulation in the Report, we as churches can agree with its main conclusions, meaning that whatever might be taught concerning justification, must be measured according to the pertinent Articles of our Confessions and with the Word of God.
Synod also decided to set up a committee to study the emeritation (retirement) of ministers to answer questions such as: What happens to a minister who is older and the congregation he is serving disbands/closes? Or what if a minister "retires" in one church and moves to another, who is in charge of his needs and oversight? This committee will report to the next Synod.
In terms of our relationships with other federations, we voted to move into Phase 2 relations with the Reformed Churches of New Zealand. It think it was an excellent decision. Closer to home, we moved to Phase 2 (sister church) relations with the Reformed Churches of Quebec (ERQ), but we decided not to vote on the relationship we have with the Reformed Presbyterian Church of North America (RPCNA), seemingly because of their 100 year old practice of having women deacons. The same is true about our relationship with the Reformed Churches of South Africa (GKSA).
In light of some questions some churches have with URC missionaries and a desire by some churches to have a more unified missionary effort a committee was set up to look into this matter of having a more unified Mission Board.
Finally, in terms of our songbook. When I arrived at Synod, I was give three copies of the Hymn section of our future songbook. The churches are supposed to look at this and then reply with feedback to our Songbook Committee. There are 278 hymns in these volumes, so we can see much work has already gone into this. At the next synod, we should receive a Psalm section for inclusion in the new book.
The next synod will be hosted by the Pompton Plains Reformed Bible Church in New Jersey in June of 2012. Notice that is two years away instead of three years as was previously done.
All in all, I had a wonderful and tiring week. If you have any questions feel free to ask me or Elder Van Muyen and we would be delighted to fill you in. The press releases for each day of Synod can be found in the synodical archive at the URC website www.urcna.org . I will close this pastoral letter with two verses that seemed to be the theme of the week.
Psalm 133:1 "Behold, how good and pleasant it is for brethren to dwell together in unity!"
Ephesians 4:1, 4 "I, therefore, the prisoner of the Lord, beseech you to walk worthy of the calling with which you were called...endeavouring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace."
In His Service,
Rev. S. Swets
Beloved Congregation, August 15, 2010
As you may know, Elder John Van Muyen and I attended the URCNA Synod in London, ON from July 26-31. I thought it would be profitable to you if I updated you on our time at Synod. This was my first time to Synod as a minister, so it was a learning experience for me.
Synod met at the the University of Western Ontario in London, which meant that we stayed in apartments on campus. The accommodations were wonderful and the London URC should be commended for putting all things in place for 180 delegates to come and perform the work at hand.
The work of Synod was tiresome and mentally gruelling as we worked from 8:00 in the morning until sometimes past 11:00 at night. I was very encouraged by the feeling of love and commitments to the Lord's church by the brothers there. It was an encouraging time and I am thankful that we got through our 500+ page agenda.
There were a few decisions that I believe should be of interest to you. The first involves our relationship with the Canadian Reformed Churches. We voted to end two of our three Unity Committees that are working with the Canadian Reformed. Synod judged that the work of the Common Songbook and Theological Education committees have done all they can do at this time. The Joint Church Order Committee will continue on with its work. So, what does this decision say about our relationship with the CanRC? It means that a future merger is not as easy as some may have thought. We are continuing to go forward and we are encouraged by the CanRC's commitment and patience to and with us, but for now, we want to take it slowly, so that our churches do not feel like they are being pushed into something. I agree, shepherds ought to lead the flock, not drive them. Unity must begin in local communities and cannot be something a Synod declares, especially if it is not true in the lives of God's people.
There was much discussion about the doctrinal commitment of members of a congregation (can people be members of the URC and disagree with something in our Confessions?). No resolution came and we will have a new report from the committee studying this issue for the next Synod.
A very significant event took place in that Synod voted, without a single dissenting vote, to agree with the recommendation of the Report on Justification and the Federal Vision. The report is sent to the churches for further study and so, without agreeing to every formulation in the Report, we as churches can agree with its main conclusions, meaning that whatever might be taught concerning justification, must be measured according to the pertinent Articles of our Confessions and with the Word of God.
Synod also decided to set up a committee to study the emeritation (retirement) of ministers to answer questions such as: What happens to a minister who is older and the congregation he is serving disbands/closes? Or what if a minister "retires" in one church and moves to another, who is in charge of his needs and oversight? This committee will report to the next Synod.
In terms of our relationships with other federations, we voted to move into Phase 2 relations with the Reformed Churches of New Zealand. It think it was an excellent decision. Closer to home, we moved to Phase 2 (sister church) relations with the Reformed Churches of Quebec (ERQ), but we decided not to vote on the relationship we have with the Reformed Presbyterian Church of North America (RPCNA), seemingly because of their 100 year old practice of having women deacons. The same is true about our relationship with the Reformed Churches of South Africa (GKSA).
In light of some questions some churches have with URC missionaries and a desire by some churches to have a more unified missionary effort a committee was set up to look into this matter of having a more unified Mission Board.
Finally, in terms of our songbook. When I arrived at Synod, I was give three copies of the Hymn section of our future songbook. The churches are supposed to look at this and then reply with feedback to our Songbook Committee. There are 278 hymns in these volumes, so we can see much work has already gone into this. At the next synod, we should receive a Psalm section for inclusion in the new book.
The next synod will be hosted by the Pompton Plains Reformed Bible Church in New Jersey in June of 2012. Notice that is two years away instead of three years as was previously done.
All in all, I had a wonderful and tiring week. If you have any questions feel free to ask me or Elder Van Muyen and we would be delighted to fill you in. The press releases for each day of Synod can be found in the synodical archive at the URC website www.urcna.org . I will close this pastoral letter with two verses that seemed to be the theme of the week.
Psalm 133:1 "Behold, how good and pleasant it is for brethren to dwell together in unity!"
Ephesians 4:1, 4 "I, therefore, the prisoner of the Lord, beseech you to walk worthy of the calling with which you were called...endeavouring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace."
In His Service,
Rev. S. Swets
Saturday, July 31, 2010
Synod London 2010
I just arrived in Michigan after Synod London 2010. I am tired but refreshed by the brotherly spirit of the delegates and I learned much that I trust will be profitable in my ministry.
There were many joys of Synod and some difficult situations. There was a clear-cut division on many things, including the work of our unity committees working with the CanRC with a goal to future merger.
Once I am done with my vacation, I will write a more comprehensive report on Synod, but for now, a couple highlights.
Rev. Ralph Pontier (Neerlandia, AB) was our chairman and he did a wonderful job of leading us through the agenda in such a short period of time.
Our Synod decided to set up a couple study committees, one, in response to overture 2, page 47 in the agenda was what my Pre-Advice committee had to work on concerning the emeritation of ministers. We decided to set up a study to committee to investigate the emeritation of ministers, ministers after Article 11's and the disbanding of a congreation, etc.
We sent back to committee the report on "Church Membership" and whether or not we are to be stricly "confessional" on that.
We did not uphold the appeal of Hills to withdraw the 9 points. This was one of the low points I thought in terms of discussion, because it seemed to me that some men could not separate the "contents" of the 9 points from the "procedural" issues involved.
However, I am leaving Synod London 2010 with a love in my heart for the churches and for my brothers in the URC. We do not see eye to eye on all things, but we are committed to growing together in our love for the Lord, His church, and each other. It was great to catch up with old friends and to make new ones.
I will be on vacation for a couple weeks so you will likely not be hearing from me.
There were many joys of Synod and some difficult situations. There was a clear-cut division on many things, including the work of our unity committees working with the CanRC with a goal to future merger.
Once I am done with my vacation, I will write a more comprehensive report on Synod, but for now, a couple highlights.
Rev. Ralph Pontier (Neerlandia, AB) was our chairman and he did a wonderful job of leading us through the agenda in such a short period of time.
Our Synod decided to set up a couple study committees, one, in response to overture 2, page 47 in the agenda was what my Pre-Advice committee had to work on concerning the emeritation of ministers. We decided to set up a study to committee to investigate the emeritation of ministers, ministers after Article 11's and the disbanding of a congreation, etc.
We sent back to committee the report on "Church Membership" and whether or not we are to be stricly "confessional" on that.
We did not uphold the appeal of Hills to withdraw the 9 points. This was one of the low points I thought in terms of discussion, because it seemed to me that some men could not separate the "contents" of the 9 points from the "procedural" issues involved.
However, I am leaving Synod London 2010 with a love in my heart for the churches and for my brothers in the URC. We do not see eye to eye on all things, but we are committed to growing together in our love for the Lord, His church, and each other. It was great to catch up with old friends and to make new ones.
I will be on vacation for a couple weeks so you will likely not be hearing from me.
Thursday, June 24, 2010
The Federal Vision Discussion Heats Up
If you are interested in the Reformed blogosphere, you likely have not be very bored the last two weeks. The Topic of Interest: The Federal Vision
This coming July, the URCNA will hold their Synodical meeting in London, ON. One thing that will be discussed will be a synodical study committee report on the teaching of the Federal Vision, highlighting the doctrine of justification. We have had this report in the churches now for about a year.
Recently, the URC of Nampa, Idaho produced a 17 page critique of our study committee's report. In their critique, they listed three main criticisms. You can find that report at http://urcnampa.org/resources/interaction.pdf There three criticisms were:
1. Misrepresentation: Here the URC of Nampa argues that the report does not deal with enough of the FV statements and the statements it does deal with, it does not deal with them fairly or charitably.
2. Proving too Much: Here the criticism is that the report condemns pastoral modes of speech.
3. Ways of Being wrong: Here the critique shows three different ways of being wrong. First, is a clear violation of the confession. Second, is to be wrong in a way that some think it is wrong, but is not addressed by the confessions. Third, being in error because of a theological emphasis.
Dr. J. Mark Beach, of Mid-America Reformed Seminary, is in the process of responding to Nampa's report. You can find those responses at Rev. Chris Gordan's blog, the Gordian Knot, as you can see in my blog list.
But, what should we make of this latest news and critique? The question is not what we should make of the Federal Vision. That is not really the debate. I think that the Federal Vision is a theological error. I think it leads to paedocommunion (child communion) inevitably, and if anyone disagrees with the doctrine of justification by faith alone through grace alone, they are standing outside of the scriptures and are no friend to the church of Jesus Christ. However, with that said, that still does not address our report.
I must admit, when the URC decided to write a report I thought, "good, a solid report using the three Forms of Unity." Oh, the report said that the Federal Vision is unorthodox, but did it go about it in the proper way? There are, in my opinion, some weaknesses to our synodical committee's report.
By saying that, I all of a sudden open myself up to all kinds of response of me being a closet FVer or that I should spend more energy attacking the FV, etc. But, that is okay. Anyone who knows me knows otherwise.
My fear with our report is three-fold. First, it uses language that goes beyond our confessions. One example is the use of the language of the covenant of works. You do not have to hold to the Westminster's treatment of the doctrine of the covenant of works to be URC or Reformed. What if there is a URC minister who does not hold to that formulation. What if a CanRC minister is called to a URC? Should they have to say, "Yes, I agree with the covenant of works and the probationary period of testing, and the eschatological end of eternal life, etc." I don't think so. You might disagree, but this is one of the beauties of the three Forms of Unity.
Second, in substance I believe the report is accurate. So, overall, I like it, but in details it is lacking. Things such as dates, full quotations, a lack of treatment of the Joint FV Declaration, etc (some of the criticisms that the Nampa critique brings forward). So, I think that our report could be made better. I think that an FV minister should be able to read our report and then when the FV view is summarized, he should be able to say, "yes, I agree with that, that fairly represents my view." Of course he is not going to agree with the conclusions, and he shouldn't. If he did, then he could see his own error.
Finally, my fear is that this report, if adopted, could prove to have serious negative consequences. I think this report, because of my first two criticisms could push us further from the Canadian Reformed Churches (especially with ecclesiastical/covenant language in the report). I have come to know and love the Canadian Reformed Churches. I think we need them and they need us. Our goal of honouring our Lord in His John 17 prayer will make us, as our name says, those who desire to Unite the true church of God together.
I also fear that this report could be used like the 9 Points of Synod Schererville have been used by some, as a billy-club to beat people over the head, and say, "see, you are not orthodox" when in fact, they may be at complete liberty in ther theological explanation. In that way, it would become an extra-confession statement that all office bearers would be bound to. All you have to do is look at the last 100 years of church history and see how poorly mistaken and detrimental it has been when extra-confessional binding in this way has prevailed (e.g. 1924, 1944, 1951).
Now, there are a couple of overtures coming to Synod, one from Western Canada, that will hopefully protect the churches, if adopted, from this type of binding. So, my worry with that, might be in vain. I hope so!
But, as I sit here, my heart is troubled. I love Jesus Christ, and His bride, the church. I am zealous to preach the gospel and protect the church from wolves. I will defend the truth, by God's grace, until I die. But, because of my love for the Lord, His church, and His law, I cannot, with a clear conscience, allow misrepresentation to undermine our Synod's report. If this report is adopted and it ends up alienating us from our closest Christian friends, we might remember Synod 2010 as a sad day in the churches.
My heart is burdened because I see honest men being attacked for standing up for honesty. But, I guess, at the end of the day, it is before the Lord whom we will be judged. All in all, Colossians 3:17 puts things in perspective, "And whatever you do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through Him."
May God "gather, guard, and protect" His church.
This coming July, the URCNA will hold their Synodical meeting in London, ON. One thing that will be discussed will be a synodical study committee report on the teaching of the Federal Vision, highlighting the doctrine of justification. We have had this report in the churches now for about a year.
Recently, the URC of Nampa, Idaho produced a 17 page critique of our study committee's report. In their critique, they listed three main criticisms. You can find that report at http://urcnampa.org/resources/interaction.pdf There three criticisms were:
1. Misrepresentation: Here the URC of Nampa argues that the report does not deal with enough of the FV statements and the statements it does deal with, it does not deal with them fairly or charitably.
2. Proving too Much: Here the criticism is that the report condemns pastoral modes of speech.
3. Ways of Being wrong: Here the critique shows three different ways of being wrong. First, is a clear violation of the confession. Second, is to be wrong in a way that some think it is wrong, but is not addressed by the confessions. Third, being in error because of a theological emphasis.
Dr. J. Mark Beach, of Mid-America Reformed Seminary, is in the process of responding to Nampa's report. You can find those responses at Rev. Chris Gordan's blog, the Gordian Knot, as you can see in my blog list.
But, what should we make of this latest news and critique? The question is not what we should make of the Federal Vision. That is not really the debate. I think that the Federal Vision is a theological error. I think it leads to paedocommunion (child communion) inevitably, and if anyone disagrees with the doctrine of justification by faith alone through grace alone, they are standing outside of the scriptures and are no friend to the church of Jesus Christ. However, with that said, that still does not address our report.
I must admit, when the URC decided to write a report I thought, "good, a solid report using the three Forms of Unity." Oh, the report said that the Federal Vision is unorthodox, but did it go about it in the proper way? There are, in my opinion, some weaknesses to our synodical committee's report.
By saying that, I all of a sudden open myself up to all kinds of response of me being a closet FVer or that I should spend more energy attacking the FV, etc. But, that is okay. Anyone who knows me knows otherwise.
My fear with our report is three-fold. First, it uses language that goes beyond our confessions. One example is the use of the language of the covenant of works. You do not have to hold to the Westminster's treatment of the doctrine of the covenant of works to be URC or Reformed. What if there is a URC minister who does not hold to that formulation. What if a CanRC minister is called to a URC? Should they have to say, "Yes, I agree with the covenant of works and the probationary period of testing, and the eschatological end of eternal life, etc." I don't think so. You might disagree, but this is one of the beauties of the three Forms of Unity.
Second, in substance I believe the report is accurate. So, overall, I like it, but in details it is lacking. Things such as dates, full quotations, a lack of treatment of the Joint FV Declaration, etc (some of the criticisms that the Nampa critique brings forward). So, I think that our report could be made better. I think that an FV minister should be able to read our report and then when the FV view is summarized, he should be able to say, "yes, I agree with that, that fairly represents my view." Of course he is not going to agree with the conclusions, and he shouldn't. If he did, then he could see his own error.
Finally, my fear is that this report, if adopted, could prove to have serious negative consequences. I think this report, because of my first two criticisms could push us further from the Canadian Reformed Churches (especially with ecclesiastical/covenant language in the report). I have come to know and love the Canadian Reformed Churches. I think we need them and they need us. Our goal of honouring our Lord in His John 17 prayer will make us, as our name says, those who desire to Unite the true church of God together.
I also fear that this report could be used like the 9 Points of Synod Schererville have been used by some, as a billy-club to beat people over the head, and say, "see, you are not orthodox" when in fact, they may be at complete liberty in ther theological explanation. In that way, it would become an extra-confession statement that all office bearers would be bound to. All you have to do is look at the last 100 years of church history and see how poorly mistaken and detrimental it has been when extra-confessional binding in this way has prevailed (e.g. 1924, 1944, 1951).
Now, there are a couple of overtures coming to Synod, one from Western Canada, that will hopefully protect the churches, if adopted, from this type of binding. So, my worry with that, might be in vain. I hope so!
But, as I sit here, my heart is troubled. I love Jesus Christ, and His bride, the church. I am zealous to preach the gospel and protect the church from wolves. I will defend the truth, by God's grace, until I die. But, because of my love for the Lord, His church, and His law, I cannot, with a clear conscience, allow misrepresentation to undermine our Synod's report. If this report is adopted and it ends up alienating us from our closest Christian friends, we might remember Synod 2010 as a sad day in the churches.
My heart is burdened because I see honest men being attacked for standing up for honesty. But, I guess, at the end of the day, it is before the Lord whom we will be judged. All in all, Colossians 3:17 puts things in perspective, "And whatever you do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through Him."
May God "gather, guard, and protect" His church.
Thursday, May 27, 2010
Canadian Reformed Synod- Burlington 2010
I have just finished reading the minutes of the first 10 days of the Canadian Reformed Synod that just ended. If you want to read them, you can find them at canrc.org and if you would like to see a summary of them, you can look at Rev. Wes Bredenhof's website "Yinkadinay".
What are my thought about what I have read so far? I am very pleased. It seems that the Synod made some very important, and to be sure, at times difficult decisions. For instance, concerning their relationship with other church a number of important things stood out to me. They decided not to pursue a relationship with the RPCNA, due mainly to their practice of allowing women to hold the office of deacon. They warned the GKNv about dangers that could be threatening them, and they also decided to ask the URCNA synod, to be held the end of July, whether or not they are still committed to the process of unity. My sincere hope is that Synod London of the URC will respond with a wholehearted "yes."
I was also very surprised as the massive amounts of letters coming in from their churches regarding items on the agenda and appeals, etc. I find that practice could be very helpful in gauging the feeling of the churches on the issues at hand.
I wish the CanRC God's richest blessings. I plan to preach in one of their churches this Sunday, in Lynden.
May God give wisdom to both the CanRC and the URCNA as we strive to serve our God alongside one another.
What are my thought about what I have read so far? I am very pleased. It seems that the Synod made some very important, and to be sure, at times difficult decisions. For instance, concerning their relationship with other church a number of important things stood out to me. They decided not to pursue a relationship with the RPCNA, due mainly to their practice of allowing women to hold the office of deacon. They warned the GKNv about dangers that could be threatening them, and they also decided to ask the URCNA synod, to be held the end of July, whether or not they are still committed to the process of unity. My sincere hope is that Synod London of the URC will respond with a wholehearted "yes."
I was also very surprised as the massive amounts of letters coming in from their churches regarding items on the agenda and appeals, etc. I find that practice could be very helpful in gauging the feeling of the churches on the issues at hand.
I wish the CanRC God's richest blessings. I plan to preach in one of their churches this Sunday, in Lynden.
May God give wisdom to both the CanRC and the URCNA as we strive to serve our God alongside one another.
Wednesday, April 28, 2010
Ordination of Pastor-Elect Gary Zekveld
On Friday, April 30, my friend Gary Zekveld will be ordained and installed as Minster of the Word and Sacraments at the Orthodox Reformed Church in New Westminster, B.C.
I will be giving the ordination sermon on I Timothy 4:12-16 on the subject of "Devoting Oneself Entirely." The ordination will take place at 7:30...you are invited to attend.
I wish God's grace and blessing on Gary and Hannah as they begin their work in the congregation in New Westminster.
I will be giving the ordination sermon on I Timothy 4:12-16 on the subject of "Devoting Oneself Entirely." The ordination will take place at 7:30...you are invited to attend.
I wish God's grace and blessing on Gary and Hannah as they begin their work in the congregation in New Westminster.
Tuesday, April 13, 2010
Teaching in Ukraine
Well, Rev. Moes and I have arrived in Donetsk,
This city of 1,000,000 is a cultural adventure for the both of us. Sometimes we find it quite different to communicate, but have reverted to speaking with sign language.
We are living in a nice little apartment near the city center. We are thankful for our little place.
Teaching is going great. The students are very eager to learn and seem to be quite receptive to our teaching. What a blessing for us to be able to serve God here in this important ministry. When I arrive home I will fill you in more on the work of the school in Donetsk.
Thank you for your prayers. Soli Deo Gloria!
This city of 1,000,000 is a cultural adventure for the both of us. Sometimes we find it quite different to communicate, but have reverted to speaking with sign language.
We are living in a nice little apartment near the city center. We are thankful for our little place.
Teaching is going great. The students are very eager to learn and seem to be quite receptive to our teaching. What a blessing for us to be able to serve God here in this important ministry. When I arrive home I will fill you in more on the work of the school in Donetsk.
Thank you for your prayers. Soli Deo Gloria!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)