NAPARC

I see a few denominations that we recognize as sister churches are already members; I suspect that might have something to do with the decision for the CanRC to join. I see that the constitution mentions the Westminster Confession and Catechisms; I wonder what that will mean for us? I also notice with a certain amount of interest that the Christian Reformed Church is listed as a founding member in the constitution, but they aren't listed as a member denomination on the home page.

Rev. Schouten mentioned the NAPRC in tomorrow's litury sheet too. He also mentioned that the Reformed Church of Quebec and the Reformed Church of New Zealand have been escalated to sister church status. Discussions with the Free Reformed Churches of North America are being abandoned due to lack of interest from their side.

For those keeping score at home, I guess this is the complete list now:

• Gereformeerde Kerken in Nederland
• Free Reformed Churches of Australia
• Free Reformed Churches of South Africa
• The Free Church of Scotland
• The Presbyterian Church in Korea
• Orthodox Presbyterian Church (NAPARC member)
• Reformed Church in the United States (NAPARC member)
• United Reformed Churches in North America (Phase 2)
• Reformed Church of Quebec (NAPARC member)
• Reformed Church of New Zealand

I would think the Reformed Churches in Brazil should be on that list too, but I can't find any mention of them in the Yearbook; seems a little odd.

The Canadian and American Reformed Churches are already a member of the International Conference of Reformed Churches. Some of the other churches on the NAPARC member list are also on the ICRC member list.

Part of me thinks that NAPARC will do about as much as ICRC, meaning that you'll rarely hear much about what's going on. Part of me hopes I'm wrong. I may not be as gung-ho about ecclesiastical unity as some other people, but I think that I'm probably more in favor of it than most. If they're just as much a true church as we are, should we not be in the same federation? Forming these membership-type group is a great step, but it doesn't feel quite as official as a sister church, and even a sister church doesn't feel official enough to me. I was told once that the reason we don't unify with our sister churches in Australia, for example, is because the travel costs for Synod delegates would be prohibitive. But then here we have denominations like the URCNA and RCUS that have congregations right here in our own backyard. I understand that this will take time, but part of me wonders if things could be sped up a little bit by having more frequent meetings? Sometime last year, as an interesting exercise, I plotted every CanRC and URCNA place of worship in Google Earth. There was a bit of overlap, but especially interesting was the lack of overlap. Most of us tend not to move too far away from a congregation in our denomination, though there are always exceptions. Full federative unity would open up a lot more possibilities for many people. I might take a look at the ERQ next; we have zero coverage in Quebec, and I doubt they have coverage outside of Quebec.