Deputies representing the churches have sent the following letter to church councils regarding the current uncertainties within the church.
Once again, the deputies' representatives address your assembly. The press has announced a response from the deputies to the outcome of the convention in Veenendaal, held on 29 November. Deputies, who for reasons of prudence prefer not to respond to press releases, have received the letter that was sent on 2 December to the churches that were represented there. In recent weeks, the deputies have reflected on the outcome. They do not consider it appropriate to respond via the press without first informing the church councils directly of their response.
Deputies have taken note of the decision to hold a ‘general meeting’ on DV 21 March 2026. There will be (ongoing) discussions about a ‘renewed ecclesiastical community’ and a classical reorganisation that should serve this purpose. A committee will therefore be appointed ‘to engage in dialogue with that part of our churches that does not wish to remain bound by the aforementioned fourfold structure, or that does feel bound by it but for certain reasons is unwilling or unable to support the Rijnsburg initiative’. The aim of these discussions should be ‘to consider whether, and if so, how various joint activities can be continued or wound up’.
The steering group that prepared the convention is now emphatically stating that no schism took place on 29 November. They refer to the decision to close the 2024-2025 synod prematurely. No calling church was appointed for the next synod, and the local churches would now again be responsible for shaping church life.
Deputies representing the church feel at least embarrassment, sadness and confusion about this. They want to avoid using big words. They want to assume that the intention is not to split the church, to separate, or whatever other definitive characterisation one might choose. At the same time, deputies have little defence when others argue that the initiative for a renewed synodal coexistence does indeed constitute a split and the emergence of a new church association. In any case, they themselves see the split becoming increasingly clear de facto. Even in the steering group's own letter, there seems to be little room left for anything more than a discussion about ‘whether, and if so, how all kinds of joint activities can be continued or wound up’.
Now, such a conversation is certainly preferable for deputies than a ‘divorce battle’, which they say they want to avoid. Deputies will never be able to decide for themselves whether or not to continue joint activities. That authority truly belongs to the synod alone. But deputies do not want to hide the fact that they desire to meet primarily with the steering group in light of what Scripture and confession teach about the church of Christ. Whether or not we are called, or even obliged, to hold on to each other on that basis. Perhaps not in the same way as we have done until now, but still. Anyone who wants to conclude from this that the deputies are not immediately ready to prevent a messy divorce is correct. They find it very difficult to accept the divorce and to have to work to prevent a messy divorce without the divorce having been officially pronounced. And not on formal grounds; our connection to the churches that gather around Rijnsburg is simply too deep for that. It gives the deputies hope that the steering group itself is apparently also having difficulty pronouncing the divorce.
The deputies also do well to note that the steering group's letter speaks of ‘pain, embarrassment and shame’ and of ‘moments of humility and acknowledgement of guilt’ at the convention. The deputies expressed the same attitude in their previous letter to the churches. And they did so in their service to the churches as a whole, where no part can escape guilt before the Lord and one another. On the other side, there is a continuing deviation from synod decisions and irreversible developments that are de facto deepening the rift. In the same loving solidarity, the deputies also note this with sadness. We must all look honestly in the mirror of Paul's question: ‘Is Christ divided?’ But, the deputies wonder, would that not also give us a lowly reason to first ask ourselves even more collectively before the Lord how (if necessary) our church union should continue? Recently, the poignant question was asked publicly, ‘How will heaven judge this?’ Deputies realise that this question could have been asked much earlier, given the situation in our churches, but they certainly do not consider it any less relevant now.
Shortly after the turn of the year, the deputies and steering group hope to meet. In the meantime, the deputies will continue their work with a view to the general synod in Hoogeveen. They remain convinced that this is where the Christian Reformed Churches come together. And that, from a church law perspective, this is how the responsibility of local churches for church-wide coexistence takes shape.
The deputies are aware that the legality of this is disputed, but they know they are supported by experts in canon law and by our own deputies for church order and canon law. The civil court has also issued an opinion to Hoogeveen that confirms the position of the deputies. The deputies did not request this opinion. In light of 1 Corinthians 6, there is also something deeply shameful about this. That is why the deputies urge the churches not to take any further legal action. Incidentally, they do understand the consideration to do so, if local churches find that the church orderly procedure towards Hoogeveen is being obstructed for them. The deputies are also hearing disturbing rumours about this.
Representatives to the synod in Hoogeveen will soon have to be elected in the usual manner through classes and private synods. We hope to return to this later. We already urge that, even in classes where normal church life has completely broken down, no obstacles be put in the way that would frustrate the church's path to Hoogeveen. If calling churches, for whatever reason, do not consider themselves able to convene a classis, they should return their mandate as soon as possible to the moderamen of the last classis meeting, so that another church can be asked to perform the service of calling church.
The question may also arise as to whether brothers from church councils who were represented at the convention as participants or observers can be delegated to the general synod of Hoogeveen. Deputies have submitted this question to deputies for church order and church law. It is possible that brothers from these church councils could also be delegated, as long as they are part of the church association. Deputies would also like to see this happen. However, it is complicated if the church council in question does not consider the General Synod of Hoogeveen to be a legitimate higher assembly. It seems advisable that the classis seek clarity on this point in a discussion with these churches prior to the election, and that it can also provide clarity at the meeting.
In the same vein, the question can be answered as to how local churches can influence the agenda of the Hoogeveen synod. Deputies already wrote something about that agenda in their previous letter. To add to this: all church councils that are part of the church association have at their disposal the instrument of instruction, to be submitted to the classis. In this instrument, questions can be asked of the wider church association, constructive suggestions can be made, etc., whatever is considered important for the whole of our churches. Article 46 of the church order stipulates that you must first check whether what you wish to raise has not already been dealt with in synodical decisions. However, the classis will also consider this. If the classis endorses the content of an instruction (possibly amended), it will forward it to the general synod for consideration. Such an instruction could very well contain thoughts about the situation and future of our church association.
In the meantime, the deputies hope that you will soon be able to celebrate a blessed Christmas with your congregations. We also hope that your congregational life will continue to progress well, if we are granted the start of another new calendar year. The matters of the church association will also require your attention, time, and energy in the new year. However, we hope that you will continue to experience that the heart of church life beats in the local congregation. If you are doing well there, around the proclamation of the Word, may that protect you from possible internal tension. For our part, we are – in addition to being seriously concerned – also deeply amazed at all the good things that the Lord still gives us throughout our congregations. That too motivates us to remain courageous, and we pray for you in all our meetings.
With warm fraternal greetings on behalf of the deputies,
Rev. J. Oosterbroek
