(corrected January 31, 2026)
Sister Churches – Admission to the Lord’s Supper and Pulpit Exchange
In the first article, the sister churches (EF churches) of the Canadian Reformed Churches (CanRC) were mentioned. Among these sister churches is also the Reformed Church in the United States (RCUS), which maintains a pronounced pluriform view of the church (see their “Principles of Church Unity 1999, Special Committee Report of the RCUS [1999] https://rcus.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/RCUS-Position-Church-Unity-1999.pdf). The RCUS classification into visible and invisible church, as well as into pure and less pure churches, is applied to various denominations and is derived from the ecclesiology of the Westminster Standards. This doctrine is not in accordance with the Three Forms of Unity. This also applies to the ERQ, which has female deacons.
All members of churches with an EF relationship may participate at the Lord’s Supper table of the CanRC. This often takes place without attestations, when these are not used in their own churches (OPC, ERQ, RCUS) or are neglected (URC). This creates a tension between, on the one hand, members of CanRC sister churches (within the federation itself), from whom an attestation is required, and, on the other hand, members of EF churches, who are not required to show this. A personal testimony suffices in the CanRC.
GS Mariënberg 2005 made a pronouncement about this with reference to Scripture and confession: John 5:31 makes clear that a self-testimony about one’s life is invalid. The church also confesses that the table of the Lord must be kept holy. The administration of the sacraments is also a mark of the church of Christ (Article 29, Belgic Confession). In the absence of supervision and discipline at the celebration of the Lord’s Supper, Scripture teaches that the wrath of God comes upon the congregation when discipline is neglected (1 Cor. 11:17–34) (GS Mariënberg 2005, J.4).
NAPARC Churches and ICRC Churches
The above-mentioned Lord’s Supper practice became even more pluriform when the CanRC joined NAPARC (North American Presbyterian and Reformed Council) and the ICRC (International Conference of Reformed Churches) in 2008. Members of churches affiliated with NAPARC or the ICRC, who are not sister churches (EF) of the CanRC, are also permitted to participate in the Lord’s Supper in the CanRC. For NAPARC this concerns the following churches: The Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church, The Free Reformed Churches of North America, The Heritage Reformed Congregations, The Korean American Presbyterian Church, The Korean Presbyterian Church in America (Kosin), The Presbyterian Church in America, The Presbyterian Reformed Church, The Reformed Presbyterian Church, The Reformed Presbyterian Church of North America.
These churches have recognized one another as true churches of Christ. However, the specific criteria underlying this determination are not stated. Our Reformed confession, Article 29 of the Belgic Confession, states:
“We believe that one ought diligently and carefully, by the Word of God, to discern which is the true church, because all sects that exist in the world today wrongly claim for themselves the name of church.”
In practice, questions can already be raised about being a “true church.” Within the Presbyterian Church in America (PCA), theistic evolution is taught, which is in contradiction to God’s Word. The “Reformed” churches that are members of NAPARC have their doctrine of passivity and experientialism (Free Reformed Churches, Netherlands Reformed Churches, Heritage Reformed Churches). There are also churches with female deacons (Reformed Presbyterian Churches of North America, ERQ). According to a statement of NAPARC, all six Presbyterian churches have no mandatory catechetical instruction for their own members and require no binding to a confessional document.
Pluriformity Ecclesiastically Sanctioned
The most recent synod of the CanRC at Aldergrove in 2025 adapted the Church Order and the guidelines for relations with other churches to the pluriform practice (see Article 73 of the Acts [page 59f; https://canrc.org/documents/11428]). Article 50 of the Church Order (Article 47 of the Dutch Church Order) was amended so that there is no longer a distinction between foreign sister churches and domestic sister churches. In this way, the new Church Order of the CanRC legitimizes pluriformity within Canada (compare GS Leeuwarden, Acts Article 93, pages 85–86).
In addition, the same synod adopted new guidelines for relations with other churches with a Reformed confession. These guidelines include, among other things, the possibility for members of domestic sister churches (EF, ecclesiastical fellowship) or members of domestic churches that are members of NAPARC and ICRC to participate in the Lords’s Supper, as well as the possibility for ministers of these churches to lead worship services in CanRC churches.
It was also decided that members of non-sister churches that are not members of NAPARC or ICRC, but that do have a Reformed confession, may in principle also participate in the Lord’s Supper. Even their ministers are welcome in the pulpit, provided the classis consents.
In its guidelines, the synod did not include the confessional requirement that the CanRC must with great care investigate whether the church with which contact is made meets the marks of the true church. Nor is it required that members be bound to the Reformed confession. Furthermore, no mention is made of the necessity of attestations (see Article 61 CO in the Book of Praise; identical to Article 60 KO in the Netherlands).
Non-Closed (Open) celebration of Lord’s Supper in the CanRC
The long-standing practice of celebrating the Lord’s Supper in a pluriform context has now been sanctioned by synodical decisions. The current practice, moreover, is already that many church councils no longer require an attestation for participation in the Lord’s Supper.
This means that the still-valid Church Order Article 61 (Netherlands Article 60 KO) is ignored with impunity. This article states: “The consistory shall admit to the Lord’s Supper only those who have made profession of faith according to the Reformed doctrine and lead a godly life. Those who come from sister churches shall be admitted on the basis of a good attestation concerning doctrine and life.”
The question, however, arises how this provision can be maintained when the CanRC does not apply confessional criteria in admitting members from a wide range of other churches. In some cases, only adherence to the Apostles’ Creed is required, or recognition of the Bible as the Word of God. A self-testimony regarding doctrine and life is then considered sufficient. In other cases, completing a form suffices. As evidence of such practices, several names of CanRC congregations that have introduced this are listed below, insofar as known to the author. This list is, however, far from complete.
British Columbia:
Langley Canadian Reformed Church (form)
Pathway Christian Church Abbotsford (see video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m1CCSMb11GM, section: 2:58–4:33)
Ontario:
Grimsby, Living Light, Canadian Reformed Church
Hamilton Blessings Christian Church
Hamilton Streetlight Christian Church (no oversight at all by the consistory: see video, https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=BfGwTkAOkPk
These practices can be interpreted as an expression of profound decline, over which one risks the wrath of the LORD (1 Cor. 11:17–34).
Binding to the Confession
With the legitimation of pluriformity by Synod Aldergrove 2025, the decision to change the text of the promise made at public profession of faith and at the baptismal promise also becomes questionable.
The original text read (translated): “Do you sincerely believe the doctrine of the Word of God, which is summarized in the confessions and is taught here in this Christian church?”
The synod changed this to: “Do you sincerely believe the doctrine of the Word of God, which is summarized in the Apostles’ Creed and is taught here in this Christian church?”
“Summarized in the confessions” was thus replaced by “summarized in the Apostles’ Creed.”
Although the latter text is defensible from a historical perspective and has long been customary in the Netherlands, one must ask how this text will be interpreted and applied. In a context without pluriformity, the expression “as taught here in the church” corresponds with the Reformed doctrine (referring to Articles 57 and 60 of the Church Order, respectively Articles 58 and 61 CO, Book of Praise).
However, in a pluriform environment, where binding to the church confessions is not self-evident, the new wording leaves room for another interpretation. The danger is that in “and as taught here in this Christian church” one does not read a reference to the other confessional documents including the Forms of Unity. That danger is particularly great where binding to the Apostles’ Creed is considered sufficient for participation in the Lord’s Supper.
Obligation of Sister-Church Relationship
In the first article of this series, attention was given to the history of our contacts with the CanRC. It was observed that our sister-church relationship with LRC Abbotsford has provided us with deeper insight into developments within the CanRC. These developments have been the subject of discussion with CanRC deputies for several years.
We are now sister churches of the CanRC. In the Acts of the General Synod Groningen-Korhorn, however, a confessional substantiation for this is lacking. That is strange, given that the CanRC has long been vague about essential matters concerning the nature of the church.The only thing mentioned is that the practices within the sister churches of the CanRC (practice of admission to the Lord’s Table and binding to the confession) do not apply to the CanRC itself. This implies that deputies have not made use of the extensive information about the CanRC provided by LRC Abbotsford and previous BBK deputations.
The most recent information from LRC Abbotsford concerning the CanRC was addressed to the General Synod (GS) Lutten 2021; see Acts of GS Lutten 2021, available on the website of the Reformed Churches Netherlands (https://www.geref-kerken.nl/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/Acta_generale_synode_lutten_2019_en_2022_deel-3.pdf, pages 266–375).
Entering into a sister-church relationship with a federation that has not shown itself faithful to the principles of truth and unity is a matter that concerns us all in GK. Not only a GK synod, but also consistories and individual church members bear shared responsibility for this decision. The same applies, moreover, to the breaking of the sister-church relationship with LRC Abbotsford.
In addition, by entering into a sister-church relationship with the CanRC, GK itself also bears shared responsibility for developments within the CanRC. In accordance with the rules for sister-church relationships, as established at GS Leeuwarden 1990 (Rules for Sister-Church Relationships, Acts Article 93, pages 85–86), the following applies:
There may be no acquiescence in a situation in which there is more than one church federation in a country, because of Christ’s command to unity (rule 2.3).
The churches shall mutually watch over one another that in doctrine, church government, discipline, and worship no deviation occurs from the Reformed doctrine (rule 3.1).
(End)