Home > About Us > Collaborators > Christian Reformed Church > Resources > Worship

Worship Documents and Resources from the Christian Reformed Church

A HISTORY OF THE EFFORTS TOWARD A UNIFORM ORDER OF WORSHIP
IN THE CHRISTIAN REFORMED CHURCH, 1916-1932
Carl G. Kromminga

Note: The designation "Acts"' refers to Acta der Synode van de Christelijke Gereformeerde Kerk, 1916, 1918, 1920, 1922, 1926, 1928, and 1930, and the Acts of Synod of the Christian Reformed Church, 1932. The abbreviation "Ag." refers to Agendum voor de Synode der Christelijke Geref(ormeerde) Kerk, 1918, 1920, 1922, 1926, and Agenda: Synod, Christian Reformed Church, 1928, 1930, and 1932. "D." indicates that the material quoted or referred to appears in Acts or Ag. in the Dutch language.

[1916]
Synodical action toward the construction of a uniform order of worship for the Christian Reformed Church was initiated by the Synod of 1916 in response to this overture from Classis Illinois: "Synod express the desirability of introducing a uniform order of services in our American-speaking churches, in which the congregation takes a more active part; and exhort these churches to come to an agreement in this matter if possible" (Acts, 1916, p. 30). The committee of pre-advice recognized that more uniformity in the order of worship was desirable and that the order of worship should include more congregational participation. However, the committee judged that if improvement was desirable for the English-speaking congregations, it was also desirable for the Dutch- and German-speaking churches. Change in only one part of the church would disrupt liturgical unity in the denomination as a whole. The committee recommended that Synod should not go into the matter, but that, because the matter was of sufficient importance to engage the attention of Synod, Synod should appoint a committee to reflect on the matter and to present a comprehensive report for guidance to the following Synod. Synod concurred in this advice (Acts, 1916, p. 30, D.). A "Committee to Promote Unity in Our Worship-services" was appointed consisting of the Rev. D. Zwier, Prof. (W.) Heyns, and the Rev. L. Trap (ibid., p. 54, D.).

[1918]
This committee submitted a report to the Synod of 1918 (Ag., 1918, Report Section, pp. 19-23, D.). The report observed that unity in the order of worship did not really exist and that too much in the worship-services was left to the freedom of the liturgete. Congregations were not clearly conscious of the need of constructing an order of worship according to sound liturgical principles. The committee noted that there was not only a lack of unity in the order of worship among the congregations; there was also a lack of unity within given orders of worship. The worship service was not governed by one, dominant idea. The parts of the service were unrelated and their significance was not understood (ibid., pp. 19, 20).

The report discussed the essence, character, and purpose of public worship. It declared that the essence of public worship is to he found in the fact that public worship is an assembling of God with his people. The

[p. 2] meeting-character to public worship comes to expression in the actions of the office-bearer. In preaching, the administration of the sacrament, and in the pronouncement of the benediction, the minister acts for God. However, the minister also acts in leading the people in their acts of confession, praise, thanksgiving, and prayer. This two-fold function is rather clearly sensed with respect to preaching, etc. on the one hand, and prayer and praise on the other. But what of the rest of the elements in worship? A logical and psychological ordering of the service is lacking. The confession of sin and the absolution—elements found in the orders of worship which have come to us from the "Reformed fathers"—are wholly absent. For this reason the Law and the Creed have lost their liturgical value (ibid., pp. 22-26).

In discussing the character of public worship, the committee stresses the fact that worship is corporate; the congregation meets God. This, the report declares, is felt too little—individualism prevails, whereas the hearts of the members should be as so many instruments sounding one note. Moreover, our worship is dominated by the minister. There is too little activity on the part of the congregation; only in the singing does it act directly. The committee claims that the "fathers" also intended the confession of faith to be a corporate act. In addition, so the committee feels, some use of responses could be made in the opening service (ibid., p. 21).

The purpose of public worship is held to be the glorification of God and the edification of the congregation. Both aims are not expressed clearly enough in the initial part of the service. For example, both goals are not clear to many of the members of the congregation when the Law and the Creed are read (ibid., pp. 21-22).

The committee concluded that we did not need new elements in the liturgy. Rather, a carefully considered, logical, principiant, and psychologically sound ordering of the elements was the need of the hour. The mean must be maintained between great arbitrariness and slavish conformity. The legacy of the fathers and the progress made by other Reformed churches in liturgical matters offer sufficient materials for the construction of an improved order of worship (ibid., pp. 22-23).

The committee recommended that Synod appoint a large committee with the mandate to come with developed proposals for improvement to the following Synod. Further, Synod should instruct this committee to designate one or two of its members to write articles for the church papers pleading the cause of liturgical improvement. Finally, Synod was requested to urge ministers to prepare and "mature" the congregations—through preaching and other means--for the reception of an improved liturgy (ibid., p. 23).

[p.3] Synod accepted these conclusions and decided to appoint a large committee, preferably of men living in rather close proximity to each other (Acts, 1918, p. 55, D.). This committee (hereafter called "Study Committee" in this summary) was composed of these men: Prof. W. Heyns, the Rev. H. J. Kuiper, the Rev. L. Trap, the Rev. D. Zwier, Dr. J. Van Lonkhuyzen, the Rev. J. Groen, and Dr. Y. P. De Jong (ibid., p. 92, D.).

[1920]
The enlarged committee (Study Committee) submitted a lengthy and comprehensive report to the Synod of 1920 (cf. Appendix I, below). Orders of worship for three services on the Lord's Day were presented to Synod. This reflects the fact that in the days in which the report was written many of our congregations still had two Dutch services and one English service, or, in increasing measure, two English and one Dutch. The order of worship for the "third service" was recommended to the "American-speaking" churches for use on special days, but an additional order was offered for use on Prayer Day and Thanksgiving Day. Two orders for use on "Communion Sunday" were also presented.

The Study Committee stressed that it was a matter of principle that the order of worship should not be left to the discretion of the consistories. The churches were to express their unity through a common order of worship as well as through the broader assemblies, a commonly held set of doctrinal standards, and a commonly respected Church Order. The Committee sought to base liturgical uniformity on the principle of Reformed polity that those matters which pertain to the churches in common fall under the jurisdiction of Synod (Ag., 1920, Report Section, p. 58). In addition, the Committee strongly pleaded for the inclusion of the absolution in the order of worship for the morning service (ibid., pp. 59, 62, 63, and 65). The controversy in the denomination with respect to a uniform order of worship largely centered about these two elements in the report of the Study Committee.

The committee of pre-advice which reported to the Synod of 1920 was of the opinion that the churches were not ready to make a decision on the material of the Study Committee's report. In order to allow the churches to study the report thoroughly, the committee of pre-advice recommended that Synod present the report to the consistories for consideration, with the request that it be discussed in the classical assemblies. In this way the churches would not be disturbed, the following Synod could reach satisfactory decision, and the churches could also benefit from the decisions of the Gereformeerde Kerken in The Netherlands, since a decision on liturgical matters in those churches was imminent. Synod accepted this advice, continued the Study Committee, and instructed the Committee to inform the membership of the churches relative to the material of the report and to serve the Synod of 1922 with advice (Acts, 1920, p. 26, D.). In addition,

[p.4] Synod decided to appoint separate committees to study three matters which the Study Committee had brought to its attention: the question of the revision of the marriage form, the matter of deciding on the Bible translation to be used in the English-speaking congregations and the question of the desirability of a complete form for public profession of faith (ibid., p. 27, D.).

[1922]
The churches responded to the Study Committee's report with great vigor. Classis Pacific decided not to consider the matter further and to leave it wholly to the discretion of the congregations (Ag., 1922, Overture Section, p. XVII, D.). Classis Pella declared that the concept order would not serve the welfare of the churches because it shortened the ministry of the Word too much and, in addition, too severely limited freedom in the worship service (ibid., D.). Classis Muskegon advised Synod to instruct the Committee to elucidate the whole matter more fully in the church press (ibid., D.). Classis Ostfriesland urged Synod not to adopt the new order because 1) the proposed change was too prolix (or: "cumbersome, troublesome"; "omslachtig" in D.), and 2) the Classis judged that the proposed order would weaken, rather than promote, unity. (ibid., D.). Classis Sioux Center recommended that Synod consider appointing a standing committee with the assignment to argue for the most necessary elements in the report in the church press, and that Synod consider whether, at each Synod, some of the improvements should be recommended to the churches for introduction into the worship services. However, Classis could not recommend the report in its entirety (ibid., p. XVIII, D.). Classis Hudson advised Synod to table the concept order because the churches were not ready for it and, therefore, did not want it; because there was enough unrest in the churches already; and because there were dangerous (or "suspect," "bedenkelijke") elements in the proposed order. Classis further urged Synod to inform the churches more fully in this matter, to purge the concept of its dangerous elements, and to offer the suggested order to the churches in no other way than by way of advice (ibid., D.). Classis Holland judged that the new order should not be introduced because 1) the ministry of the Word would be noticeably shortened, 2) the danger of formalism threatened, 3) the proposed change was too cumbersome (omslachtig), and 4) the introduction of the new order could lead to great difficulties in the churches. Yet, because Synod itself had sensed the need for improvement and because the churches were not ready for the changes recommended by the Committee, Classis suggested that Synod decide 1) to charge the Committee to work in the same direction as indicated in the 1920 report and to serve the churches with a simpler plan, and 2) to take steps, especially through the church press, to inform the membership of the necessity of improvement in the worship services (ibid., pp. XVIII-XIX, D.).

Classis Illinois also criticized the proposed plan and submitted another in its place, but we learn of this action of Classis only from the Study Committee's report to the Synod of 1926 (Acts, 1926, Bijlage XIV, p. 305).

[p. 5] The Committee confirms the fact that this communication of Classis Illinois did not appear in either the Ag. or Acts of 1922. From the Committee's report in 1926, we also learn that it had distributed mimeographed copies of its reply to the contrary overtures in 1922. This report also failed to appear in the printed records.

The committee of pre-advice in the matter to the Synod of 1922 informs us that the Study Committee, in its (mimeographed) report, urged the Synod of 1922 to make a declaration with respect to the principles underlying its report (Acts, 1922, pp. 68-69, D.). The Committee of pre-advice recognized that the matter was urgent, but declared that this was not the time to make a pronouncement on principles nor to institute the new order. Therefore it advised Synod 1) to continue the Study Committee, 2) to charge it to study the matter further and to elucidate it plainly in the church press especially in historical perspective. The following grounds were presented: 1) principiant objections have arisen; 2) the matter has not been elucidated in the church press, and various Classes request that this be done; 3) the matter is not one which requires haste; and 4) too great haste will perhaps damage the cause. Synod concurred in this advice (Acts, 1922, p. 69, D.).

[1924]
In 1924, Classis Grand Rapids West urged Synod to discontinue the Study Committee on these grounds: 1) especially since the discouraging decision of the Synod of Utrecht in similar matters, there appears to be little prospect for the rapid introduction of an improved "Order of Service"; 2) in the present circumstances the Committee cannot progress in its assignment to serve Synod in a short time with a thorough report--and therefore the Committee runs the risk of later hearing the accusation that it did nothing; and 3) in Classis' judgment, the churches can better be served through the study and elucidation offered by individuals on their own initiative (Acts, 1924, p. 105, D.).

The committee of pre-advice urged Synod to continue the Study Committee, but to give it a new mandate: to work for unity and order in our worship service and to serve the following Synod with advice. These two grounds were given: 1) because arbitrariness reigns in our worship services; 2) in order that uniformity may be achieved in our liturgical practices (Acts, 1924, p. 105, D.).

However, Synod did not follow this advice, but accepted a substitute proposal to the effect that the Committee be continued in order to have an opportunity to fulfill its mandate from the Synod of 1922 (Acts, 1924, pp.
105-106, D.).

[1926]
In 1926 the Committee submitted a brief report to Synod in which it reviewed the history of Synodical action in the matter of a uniform order of worship, and explained why the Committee felt the need of one crucial

[p. 6] decision before it could fulfill the mandate of 1922 (Acts, 1926, Bijlage XIV, pp. 304-309). This crucial decision pertained to the question raised by Classis Illinois in the "lost" report of 1922, i.e., whether a uniform order of service was desirable and, more significantly, whether Classis Illinois was correct in maintaining that, with respect to the order of worship, "Synod indeed has the calling to determine the principles of public worship and further to act in this matter in an educational and advisory manner with respect to the concrete application of these principles; but that it would be in conflict with the freedom of the churches to prescribe with binding authority a form of public worship for the churches" (Standing [Study] Committee Report, Acts, 1926, p. 306, D.—trans. mine, C.K.).

The Committee of pre-advice advised Synod as follows:
"a) To express itself as favoring a uniform but flexible order of worship for our churches. Grounds: 2)[1] Denominational unity is expressed by unity of worship as well as by unity of doctrine and of discipline;
2) Our church order contains a number of provisions regarding our public worship which imply the necessity of unity and uniformity in public worship. (Arts. 16, 20, 56, 57, 58, 62, 63, 66, 67, 69, 76, 77, 78);
3) In the past contributions to uniformity in liturgy have been made, such as forms for Baptism, Lord's Supper, etc.;
4) There is a growing sentiment for a better order of worship;
5) The uniformity sanctioned by custom and tradition is gradually being broken.
"b) To instruct the existing Committee to labor in the manner suggested above." (Acts, 1926, pp. 43-44).

This advice was accepted by Synod. The "Grounds" faithfully reflect the argumentation of the Study Committee. However, in a), 4), Synod eliminated the Study Committee's limitation of a "growing sentiment for a better order of worship" to the "American-speaking" churches, cf. Report, Acts, Bijlage XIV, p. 308.

[1928]
The Study Committee presented a very extensive report to the Synod of 1928. The salient features of this report are given in digest form in Appendix II, below. Significant alterations in the plan

[p. 7] of 1922 are indicated there, but we shall summarize them here.

1. The reading of the Law precedes the reading of the Summary (Ag., 1928, Part I, Reports, pp. 97-98). (See Appendix II for argumentation.)
2. Three options are given for the response to the reading of the Law and Summary: prayer of confession, or psalm of penitence, or both, ibid., p. 98.
3. Instead of suggesting that Synod "urge" the churches to introduce the congregational recitation of the Apostles' Creed and the Lord's Prayer, the Committee now proposed that it be left to the judgment of "every individual church" whether to have the minister in charge offer the Lord's Prayer and read the Creed, or "to permit the congregation to join in with him." (ibid., p. 99.)
4. The use of an offertory prayer after the offering has been received is now presented as an option, ibid.
5. The organ offertory is eliminated; the singing of a psalm while the offering is received is substituted for it, ibid., p. 100.
6. A briefer, altered form prayer for the confession of sin is submitted, ibid., pp. 102-103 (cf. Appendix II).
7. The recommendations for the order to be followed on "special" days and in communion services are altered, ibid., p. 105.
8. The Committee registers its objection to the decision of the Synod of 1926 concerning choirs as running counter to the basic principle that liturgical matters of such moment are to be decided by the churches together and not by individual consistories, ibid., pp. 106-107. (This will be clarified below.)
9. Division of order into five parts (Service of Reconciliation, etc.) is omitted. Ibid., p. 95.
Three overtures were presented which relate to the actions of the Synod of 1926 with respect to choirs and to the whole question of changes in the order of worship. Classis Grand Rapids West in effect asked Synod to retain the decision of 1926 relative to choirs over against the complaint of the Study Committee in its report, Ag., 1928, Part II: Overtures, pp. XXXV-XXXVI. Classis Pella urged Synod to rescind the decision of 1926 and asked Synod not to permit the use of choirs in public worship, ibid., p. XXXVI. Classis Hudson objected to the inclusion of the absolution especially, claiming that Scripture did not require this, that the reasons for its introduction were not convincing, that the situation of the visible church was not of such a nature that presumed "enrichment" of the liturgy is fitting, that the use of a form for absolution in the worship services would make it incumbent on one to explain to the point of exasperation that this was not a "forgiving of sins," and that the fact that most of the churches mentioned in the Study Committee's report had dropped the absolution was also of significance, ibid., p. XXXVII.

[p. 8] The Synod of 1928 acted favorably on the report of the Study Committee. The series of decisions is recorded in the Acts of 1928 on pages 49-61. We shall attempt to present these lengthy decisions in orderly form here. When the recommendations of the committee of pre-advice agree wholly with the recommendations of the Study Committee, and when Synod concurs, we shall not reproduce the decision in full, but refer to pp. 10-13 of Appendix II in which the recommendations of the Study Committee are reported in full.

First of all, Synod adopted the recommendation of the committee of pre-advice that Synod "express its high appreciation of the standing committee on the improvement of our public worship for its faithful labor and its exhaustive report." (Acts, 1928, Art. 62, p. 49.)

Synod decided, upon recommendation of the committee of pre-advice, to adopt point "A" of the Study Committee's report in its entirety (A,(1) a) b) c) d) e) (2) (3) (4). Cf. Acts, 1928, pp. 50-51 and Appendix II, page 10 [attached to the present document]).

Synod next considered the objection of Classis Hudson to the inclusion of the "Absolution" in the new order, and the objection of Classis Grand Rapids West to the provisions in the Study Committee report which prevented "hand-shaking" by the minister at the close of the service.

The Committee of pre-advice counselled Synod not to accede to the protest of Classis Hudson (see p. 6, above). These reasons are given:

"1) Ground a) adduced by Classis Hudson is a purely subjective sentiment. [Second item in summary above, p. 6—that reasons for introduction of absolution are not convincing.] 2) Holy Scripture does indeed make reconciliation the center of the Christian's relationship with God. See 2 Cor. 5:11-21. Furthermore the report does not elevate the absolution to the dignify of a sacrament.
3) Ground c) is very indefinite. Classis Hudson does not specify the conditions of the Church to which reference is made. Your Committee knows of no condition of the Church which would make enrichment of the liturgy impossible.
4) The absolution is found essentially in the form used for the administration of the Lord's Supper, and has never necessitated such explanation as Classis Hudson

[p. 9] mentions. (See form for administration of the Lord's Supper, p. 60, second column, third paragraph.)
5) Your Committee after inquiry of Professors Kuiper and Heyns is convinced that the reason for the removal of the absolution as given by the report, p. 91, para. 2, is historically correct." [For last reference, see Appendix II, p. 3, attached.]

This motion and its grounds were adopted by Synod (Acts, 1928, p. 52). The delegates from Classis Hudson and Classis Pacific protested this decision, arguing that the answer of the Committee of pre-advice simply did not suit the issue. Hudson's central contention was that Scripture did not require the absolution as a liturgical element. No one denies that "reconciliation" is the center of our relationship to God, but to argue from this fact in connection with 2 Cor. 5:11ff. to a liturgical action of absolution is "eisegesis" instead of exegesis. Moreover, if this element were required by Scripture, its introduction should not only have been stipulated earlier, but even now it should be insisted upon as a thing not to be excluded or included as it might seem good to each consistory. Hence, because the Scriptural evidence has not been forthcoming, and in harmony with the other objections of Classis Hudson, the protestants wish to go on record as being opposed to the introduction of the Absolution. Synod received this for information (Acts, 1928, D. pp. 52-53).

Synod then proceeded to the consideration of a protest from Classis Grand Rapids East against the part of the Study Committee report dealing with the benediction (Ag., 1928, I, pp. 104-105; cf. Appendix II, p. 8). The argumentation of the Classis is of interest here. The grounds are herewith reproduced in full:
"1) Although it is true that with the benediction the congregation is dismissed, there is no harm done in any way if, after they are formally dismissed, they should sing the doxology. This is the more true because the committee itself does not regard the doxology as essentially necessary for the service.
2) The custom in question has created the confidence of strangers in the church and opened the way many times for personal contact.
3) This custom, when it can be conveniently carried out, welcomes strangers as they ought to be welcomed. We have lost many a family to other denominations because of the coldness with which strangers have often been treated in our churches.

[p. 10] 4) Such a hard and fast rule as is suggested by the committee would be contrary to the best interests of many a small church of the mission type, where strangers often appear, and the work is being carried on among strangers.
5) It is fully in keeping with the dignity of divine worship if the pastor reveals that he has a personal interest in the presence of strangers in his church."
(Acts, 1928, p. 54; Submitted by Classis Grand Rapids East; not found in Ag., 1928.)

Synod proceeded to amend the proposed order of worship under B, (1) (App. II, p. 11) with the addition of this statement: "The place of the doxology in the order of worship shall be left to the discretion of the consistories." The reason given: "The matter of the doxology, being one of minor importance, may well be left to the consistories who will act as is most profitable in view of local conditions." (Acts, 1928, p. 54.) After a few minor amendments (which can be determined by comparing the order below with the order in Appendix II, p. 11), Synod adopted this order of worship for the first service on the Lord's Day:

"1. Votum 1. Psalm 2. Salutation 2. Invocation or Votum [change] 3. Psalm 3. Salutation 4. Reading of the Law (followed by the Summary of the Law in Matthew 22 if so desired) [change] 5. Confession of Sin or Penitential Psalm (or both)
6. Absolution
7. Apostles' Creed (preferably by Minister and Congregation) [change]
8. Psalm
9. General Prayer, concluded with the Lord's Prayer (the latter by Minister only, or by Minister and Congregation)
10. Offering and Psalm
11. Offertory Prayer (optional)
12. Scripture Lesson
13. Sermon
14. Prayer
15. Psalm (with or without Doxology)
16. Benediction
17. Doxology, if desired here" [change] (Acts, 1928, p. 55.)

The committee of pre-advice registered some dissatisfaction with B, (2) of the Study Committee's report (cf. Appendix II, p.11). This part of the report deals with the question of the

[p. 11] services other than the morning service, special services, and the functioning of non-ordained persons, in relationship to the service of reconciliation, The Committee felt that the Study Committee had down-graded the other services, and recommended as a remedy that the Study Committee give thought to organizing the second service around the theme of praise. The service of praise, the committee of pre-advice felt, is a fine liturgical contribution by the churches in "American Christianity." Here was a good element from twentieth century America which could be used to complement the elements revived by the Study Committee from the liturgies of the Reformers. The committee of pre-advice recommended that Synod instruct the Study Committee to prepare an order of worship for the second service on the Lord's Day "in which the service of praise should have a place alongside of the preaching of the Word even as the absolution has in the first service." In addition, Synod was urged to retain the Creed in the second service. Synod decided to refer these suggestions to the Study Committee with instructions to report to the following Synod. (Acts, 1928, pp. 55-57.)

The Committee of pre-advice further advised Synod "to retain the order of worship which ... unordained men employ at the present time." There is no indication as to what this order might be. However, it is plain that, for a time at least, the unordained would not be allowed to utter the absolution. Synod decided to refer this matter back to the Study Committee with instructions to report to the next Synod. (Ibid., p. 57.) Part B, (3) (App. II, p. 11) of the Report (re: Communion service) was also referred back to the Study Committee. Ibid., p. 57.

The protest of Classis Grand Rapids West against the part of the Study Committee's report dealing with choirs, and the overture of Classis Pella seeking the rescinding of the permissive decision of the Synod of 1926 in this matter (Acts, 1926, pp. 69-70) were next in order of consideration. The committee of pre-advice recommended that Synod abide by the decision of 1926. Although seven reasons were given, Synod, in concurring with this advice, used only grounds 1 and 5 in support of its action, Acts, 1928, p. 59. These grounds read: "1. Your Committee believes that one Synod should not revoke the decision of a previous Synod unless a specific instance occurs which proves that the decision was harmful to the churches or proof is offered that the decision is contrary to Scripture or the doctrinal standards of the Church or to the Church Order. Neither the Standing Committee nor Classis Pella have offered these conditions necessary to revoke the decision of 1926." Ground 5 reads: "Your Committee furthermore reminds the

[p. 12] Synod that the decision of 1926 compels no church to introduce a choir. On the contrary, the introduction of choirs was discouraged." (Acts, 1928, p. 58.)

Twenty delegates submitted a protest against this action (ibid., p. 59). They argued that retention of this decision from 1926 conflicted with another decision in 1926 in favor of a uniform, though flexible, order of worship. Flexibility may not be construed so as to exclude uniformity. Further, this decision runs counter to the decisions just taken in which a uniform order was adopted, with all but minor details in the order prescribed. Synod received this for information. (Ibid., p. 59.)

Synod further adopted this recommendation of the committee of pre-advice: "Your Committee advises the Synod to amend the decision of 1926 relative to choirs by adding a warning to the consistories of the churches having choirs that such consistories exercise close supervision regarding the membership of the choir and permit the singing of no songs which are not included in Article 69 of our Church Order" (Ibid., pp. 59-60.)

Synod then proceeded to adopt Section B, (5) of the Study Committee report, except the second paragraph, beginning with the words: "To illustrate the importance...." (See Appendix II, p. 12.) Acts, 1928, p. 60.

Synod adopted Section B, (6) of the Study Committee report regarding the publication of a Directory of Worship, but added that this Directory should be prepared "in the Dutch, English, and German languages." (Acts, 1928, p. 61.) The text of this section is reproduced in Appendix II, p. 12.

The final paragraph of the Report was adopted in this revised form (cf. Appendix II, p. 12, for Study Committee version): "Synod urges our Consistories not to make any changes in their public worship other than those included in the order adopted by Synod and impresses upon them the fact that denominational unity and loyalty require that all the churches shall conform to whatever decisions touching this matter have been taken, unless they shall be proved to be contrary to God's Word; and further insists that consistories which subsequently might desire other changes, should refrain from introducing them by independent action, but make known their desires through the regular channels." (Acts, 1928, p. 61.)

Finally, Synod decided that the entire Report of the Study

[p. 13] Committee should be inserted into the Acts (ibid.). The Report was included as Supplement, or Bijlage, XIV, pp. 276-302 of the Acts of 1928.

[1930]
The action of the Synod of 1928 proved only to be the beginning of the end. The Committee submitted a Report and a revised edition of a Directory (first sent out in the fall of 1928) to the Synod of 1930 (Ag., 1930, I: Reports, pp. 50-68; cf. Appendix III, below). The second section of the Ag. records the reactions of Classes, Consistories, and individuals. Grand Rapids West, Illinois, Muskegon, Sioux Center, Pella, Zeeland, Pacific, Orange City—these Classes responded to the new Order with varying degrees of vigor. Grand Rapids West urged a kind of "cautious haste" in the introduction of the Order. It favored the Order and speedy introduction, but recognized the facts of resistance. Classis Muskegon proposed some changes and options, and cautioned against the use of pressure to compel the acceptance of the Order in part or as a whole—the declaration of pardon, for example, is "nice," but not absolutely necessary in addition to the preaching of the Word, Ag., 1930, II: Overtures, p. XXXV. (The overture from G.R. West is on p. XXXIV.) Muskegon desired permission to retain the organ voluntary in the period in which the offering is received (ibid., p. XXXVII). For the rest, however, the overtures argued—some at great length—against the adoption of the new Order, using these considerations: the peace of the churches had been disturbed, the Synod had really exceeded its bounds in adopting a uniform order of worship and making it binding on the churches, and, most important, the element of a specific liturgical act of absolution would be unnecessary if the preaching of the Word were properly carried out. (Cf. Ag., 1930, II: Overtures, pp. XXXIV-XLIV for details. We have generalized here. Not all of the overtures express strong objections, and some really plead only for a different common Order. But all express dissatisfaction with some aspect of the decisions of 1928.

In addition, Synod received objections from the consistories of Ellsworth, Mich.; Aetna, Mich.; Hull, Iowa; Shepherd, Montana; Ripon, Calif.; and Rock Rapids, Iowa (ibid., pp. XLV-LI). Nine individual protests are mentioned (ibid., p. LI). The committee of pre-advice in the matter for the Synod of 1930 informs us that protests were also received from the Second CRC of Kalamazoo, the Church of Muskegon Heights, and the Rev. Gerrit J. Haan of Kalamazoo (Acts, 1930, p. 155).

After analyzing the classes of objections found in the voluminous material before it (Acts, 1930, pp. 155-158), the committee of pre-advice addresses itself to what it feels are the main objections against the new Order. However, before going into detail in this matter, the

[p. 14] committee is at pains to show that protests against a "Service of Reconciliation" are in order even though Synod in 1928 did not explicitly adopt a "Service of Reconciliation." Materially, the committee maintains, "the name and idea of a service of reconciliation and the particular formula of absolution now in use in a few of our churches have a certain Synodical sanction and are therefore properly brought to the attention of this body...." (Ibid., p. 159.)

The committee of pre-advice discusses at length the following main objections, and indicates its substantial agreement with them by lengthy argumentation which we shall not reproduce here.

1. "The absolution as a separate liturgical element apart from the preaching is nowhere demanded by Scripture." (Ibid., cf. pp. 159-160 for argumentation.)

2. "The service of reconciliation is not needed, since all its elements are now found in the Old Order." (Ibid., p. 160; cf. pp. 160-161 for argumentation.)

3. "A special service of reconciliation has no proper place in the worship of the reconciled Church of Christ." (Ibid., p. 161; cf. pp. 161-166.)

The committee agrees that the new Order tends toward "Romanism" at least from a formal point of view. The committee is also in sympathy with the idea expressed in some of the documents that the new Order does not lessen, but rather increases, the danger of formalism (ibid., p. 167). However, the burden of its objection is stated in point "3" above, and we shall give a quotation here which specifies this objection.

"New Order. A service of reconciliation must take place each Sabbath between God and His people. Therefore the law comes to them to convict them of sin. They must confess their sin and plead for forgiveness and be assured of pardon by a human agent, before they can meet their God in praise and thanksgiving, and engage in other acts of fellowship. After this comes the preaching of the Word, not primarily for the purpose of giving assurance of pardon, but for other purposes.

"Old Order. God meets with His people forever reconciled with Him through the blood of His Son. God presents His law to them as the rule of life for a people thankful for redemption. His people give expression to their love for that law by virtue of the new life wrought in their soul. Then, in the long prayer, they confess their imperfections and implore the forgiveness of a God of Whose love they are ever assured. And, therefore, they can praise and adore Him in the same prayer in which they confess their sins and pray for forgiveness. Then follows the preaching, with its assurance of pardon and its inspiration to consecrated service." (Ibid., p. 166.)

[p. 15] Before presenting its alternate proposal in the matter of the order of worship as such, the committee of pre-advice addressed itself at great length to the polity question at is sue. To the question whether it properly lies in the sphere of Synodical authority to adopt an order of worship and prescribe its introduction in the churches (ibid., p. 173), the committee replied that, although Synod has discretionary power to take decisions binding on the churches which are not demanded directly by Scripture or the Church Order, the prescription of an order of worship does not fall in this class (ibid., pp. 174-176). Synod has advisory power here. But since it is manifest that the safety of the churches and denominational unity are not threatened if one church arranges the common elements of Reformed worship in another manner than does some other congregation, it cannot be held that Synod may make a binding pronouncement in the matter of the order of worship (ibid., pp. 177-178).

A second question of polity had to be considered. Is it in the power of the Synod of 1930 to rescind or revise the decision Of 1928? More specifically, can Synod act in 1930 only if the decisions of 1928 in whole or in part are shown to be contrary to the Word of God or the Church Order? (Ibid., pp. 173, 178, 179.)

Grounds for alteration from Scripture or the Church Order must be adduced, says the committee of pre-advice, only if the original decision rested on grounds of the same class. Although it is true that churches are bound to adhere to discretionary decisions of Synod unless these can be shown to be, in actuality, in conflict with the Word of God and/or the Church Order, this does not mean that a future Synod cannot—on the same class of grounds, i.e., discretionary, change the decision of Synod. "If a decision has been made upon discretionary grounds, with a view to the welfare of the churches, a subsequent Synod, if so overtured, may, upon the very same class of grounds, repeal or revise such a decision, if it judges that the welfare of the churches so requires." (Ibid., p. 180.)

The committee grants that Synod should not change even decisions of this type in haste and without due consideration. But Synod cannot now be blocked by the decision of 1928. It would be blocked and should be hindered from changing the decision of 1928 only if Synod at that time had adduced grounds stating that Scripture requires the new Order or if it had prescribed the Order on the ground that the Church Order warrants such action. "That Scripture demands this New Order has not even been claimed. That our Church Order gives a Synodical body warrant to prescribe an Order of Worship has never been proved." (Ibid., p. 181.) (Note: The committee of pre-advice earlier ruled out

[p. 16] appeal to articles dealing with common forms, the songs to be sung, etc. because these articles, though establishing certain common liturgical practices, are not paralleled by articles requiring a uniform order of worship, cf. ibid., p. 178. The Study Committee—and Synod in 1926—had argued by analogy from articles in the Church Order prescribing certain matters of a liturgical nature. The committee of pre-advice rejects this line and argues from silence; the absence of an "order of worship" article in the Church Order demonstrates that this matter is considered to lie within the province of the "local office," ibid.)

The committee now summarized its opinion in these words:
"(1) As to the material aspects of the question before us, your Committee holds that the fact that the special absolution is not demanded by Scripture, deserves the most serious consideration of Synod, also in view of the disturbance in the Church; that whatever good is found in the various elements of the service of reconciliation was always found in the old order, in law, prayer, and preaching; that there is a flaw in the very idea of a service of reconciliation, since God's people are forever reconciled with their God; that the law comes to them in public worship not primarily as a teacher of sin, but as the rule of Christian gratitude; and finally, that the fear of Romanism and the danger of formalism cannot be summarily dismissed;
"(2) As to the formal aspects of the question before us, your Committee holds:
a) That denominational unity does require unity of worship as well as unity in doctrine and church government, but that this unity of worship does not make it per se imperative that all churches employ a uniform order of worship;
b) that the prescription of an order of worship is a matter for which there is no warrant in Scripture or Church Order;
c) that it may be readily conceded that, other things being equal, uniformity in order of worship is desirable, and that Synod performs a distinct service when it labors to improve public worship and recommends these improvements to the churches;
d) that it must nevertheless be left to the local office to decide in this matter, in entire adherence to the principles upon which we stand united, and in consideration of the needs of the local church;
e) and finally, that the fact that Synod of 1928 has prescribed an Order of Worship, cannot in any way be construed as limiting the power of the present Synod to rescind or revise such decision, if Synod is persuaded that such action is needful." (Ibid., pp. 183-184.)

[p. 17] Synod did not adopt this analysis, but received it as information, ibid., p. 184. However, all the advice of the committee based on this analysis was adopted.

First, the Absolution was eliminated on these grounds: "a) The reconciled Church of Christ has no need of a special absolution, apart from the preaching, as part of a service of reconciliation; b) The Church should no longer be disturbed by the retention of a liturgical element not demanded by Scripture." (Acts, 1930, p. 184.)

Second, "Confession of Sin or Penitential Psalm (or both)" in the Order was changed to "Psalm of Penitence or Devotion," The grounds: "a) The primary response of the Christian to the law is and should be that of oneness with God's will as expressed in His law; b) The element of confession is and should be present in the general prayer." (Ibid., p. 185.)

Third, the Creed was eliminated from the first service. The grounds: "a) It occurs here as part of the service of reconciliation, and has, therefore, lost its intended liturgical significance through the elimination of the absolution; b) It is found in the proposed order for the second service, and it is not necessary that it be found in both morning and evening service." The committee observes that the Study Committee had also taken the position that the Creed need not be found in both services (ibid., p. 185). (The Committee of pre-advice fails to state, however, that the Study Committee allowed for the omission of the Creed from the second service if it had been used in the first. But this "if" receives no further elaboration. Obviously, the Study Committee regarded the Creed as quite essential to the Service of Reconciliation.)

Fourth, the Psalm after the Creed was eliminated. With the Creed eliminated this Psalm was not needed, and retaining it would give the order two Psalms in succession (ibid.).

Fifth, the committee of pre-advice calls attention to the resulting order (reproduced earlier in its report; see below) and commends its work in these words: "Notice that, though the service of reconciliation has been eliminated, the remaining elements form a beautiful, logical whole, coming very close to the old order now in vogue in most of our churches. Several needed improvements are found, however, such as the reading of the Scripture lesson immediately before the sermon; a very definite liturgical place is given to the law, and the conclusion of the long prayer with [sic] the Lord's prayer." Four members of Synod protest the decision on this order, arguing that the decision of 1928 had not been shown to be contrary to the Bible, our Confession,

[p. 18] or the Church Order (cf. Art. 31, C.O.), and pointing out that Synod had taken no steps to "safeguard the peace and welfare of the churches which now use the Order of Worship adopted in 1928." Acts, 1930, pp. 185-186.

Although the Order is not reproduced as a unit in this part of the record, it is quite clear that the outline presented earlier in the report of the committee of pre-advice represented the substance of the final revision of the Order of Worship. We reproduce it here.
1. Votum 1. Psalm 2. Salutation or 2. Invocation or Votum 3. Psalm 3. Salutation 4. Reading of the Law 5. Psalm of consecration and devotion
6. Prayer (including element of confession and concluding with the Lord's Prayer)
7. Offering and Psalm
8. Offertory Prayer (optional)
9. Scripture Lesson
10. Sermon (including declaration of pardon)
11. Prayer
12. Psalm (with or without Doxology)
13. Benediction
14. Doxology if desired here (Acts, 1930, p. 168)

Sixth, Synod rescinded the clauses in the decision of 1928, making the new Order obligatory. Grounds: "(1) It is not to be sustained upon the grounds of Scripture and Church Order, that it lies within the jurisdiction of Synod to prescribe a specific order of worship and to enforce its introduction into the churches; (2) Since neither Scripture or Church Order produce warrant for such an action, our churches should be relieved of the fear of official pressure by removing the element of compulsion." (Ibid., p. 187.) In this connection, Synod further decided to lay the revised Order before the churches with Synodical recommendation but that its introduction be left to each local church, since the rights of the local Consistories to consult the best interests of their congregations is recognized, and a way is left open for Synod to advise and educate the churches with a view to achieving "as great a measure of uniformity as is possible and practicable." (Ibid.)

Synod approved the work of the Study Committee in publishing a Directory in accordance with the requirement of the Synod of 1928, ibid., p. 188. The committee of pre-advice had misgivings about the sharp distinction drawn between the first and second service in the Study Committee's report, expressed the fear that the churches might not find the order for the second service satisfactory and felt a trial period was in order, and further observed that the Gloria Patri and "Hear Our Prayer, O Lord" had never been approved by a Synod. The Order of Worship for

[p. 19] the second service was, therefore, not adopted, but placed before the churches with the request that the churches choosing to use it give the Study Committee the benefit of their experience, and the two additional songs were approved (ibid., pp. 188-189).

Finally, the committee of pre-advice proposed that Synod thank the "Committee on the Improvement of our Public Worship" and to express appreciation for its work, "since we gratefully acknowledge that the work of the Committee has done much to heighten the interest of our churches in liturgical matters, and to lead them to a greater appreciation of their importance." (Ibid., p. 189.) Synod concurred in this advice and continued the Study Committee so that it could work on the order for the second service as contemplated in the decision above, and compose an order of worship serviceable for both services on Communion Sunday (ibid.).

[1932]
Understandably, the Study Committee (Comm. on Improvement, etc.) was not in proper shape psychologically to pursue the tasks assigned after what it termed "this catastrophe," (cf. Ag., 1932, I: Reports, p. 70). At the close of a bitter, though brief report, it asked to be released from further service (ibid., p. 73). Synod concurred. The matter was closed (cf. Acts, 1932, p. 22). The Committee was "honorably discharged" (ibid.).

History of CRC Order of Worship
Appendix I
From: Ag., Report Section, 1920, pp. 57-76 "Rapport IX"; also found in Acts, 1920, pp. 185-204 (Bijlage XIII). Page references in () are from Ag.

(57) REPORT ANENT THE IMPROVEMENT OF OUR LITURGY

To the Synod of 1920,
Esteemed Brethren:— At the Synod of 1916 the Classis of Illinois presented the following overture:
"Synod express the desirability of introducing a uniform order of services in our American-speaking churches, in which the congregation takes a more active part; and exhort these churches to come to an agreement in this matter if possible." (Acta 1916, p. 30.)
This overture was favorably received. The Advisory Committee declared that it questioned the propriety of requesting a uniform order of services for some of our churches only, but nevertheless recommended the matter, in view of its importance, to Synod's consideration and advised the appointment of a committee with the mandate to present a comprehensive report to the next Synod. Synod so decided.
The committee which Synod appointed presented a report to the Synod of 1918 in which it sought to demonstrate the urgent need of improvement in our liturgy, so as to make it meet the requirements of the essence, character and purpose of our public worship (Agendum 1918, p. 19). As regards, however, the preparation of such a liturgy, the committee judged that, should the Synod be convinced of its need, this task should be given to a larger committee. And the Synod showed by appointing such a committee that it was convinced of this need.
Our task is therefore to present to the Synod of 1920 a plan for an improved liturgy, that is to say an improved arrangement of our public services. Before entering upon this it will be nec-(58)essary to give ourselves an account of the principles which should guide us in this matter. They are, we believe, the following:
(1) Inasmuch as the Church in this dispensation, because of the limitations of time and place, cannot exist except as a group of local churches, it behooves her to express and reveal as far as possible her oneness as the body of Christ. She can and should do this, besides through her Broader Assemblies in Classes and Synods and her common Doctrinal Standards and Church Order, by means of a common liturgy, so that each church in its mode of public worship at once reveals itself as one of our churches. Such liturgical unity in all our churches, the Holland-speaking as well as the American-speaking, is therefore a matter of principle and it may consequently not be left to the discretion of the individual consistories to determine upon the mode of public worship as they see fit. It is a matter which belongs to the jurisdiction of the Synod, whose lawful decisions are binding for all the churches, in so far as they do not conflict with the Word of God.

[p. 2] (2) Such a common liturgy must embody especially the fundamental liturgical principle that the essence of public worship lies in the meeting of God with His people. Our public services must be so arranged as to express this fundamental idea. From this principle the following deductions are made: a) Two kinds of acts, or exercises, are essential to public worship: "acta a parte Dei" (acts from God's Side) and "acta a parte populi" (acts from the side of God's people). In the former God approaches His people to bless them with His Word, His sacraments and His Benediction. In the latter the church approaches the Lord to serve Him in Prayer, Song and Offering; b) These two kinds of exercises should succeed one another in an appropriate logical and psychological order; c) These exercises should contain nothing which is mysterious and incomprehensible to those who participate in them, lest it be impossible for them to worship the Lord "in spirit and in truth"; d) These services should be so arranged that the characteristic simplicity of a Reformed church service be maintained. We must guard against the modern tendency to Ritualism in which aesthetic pleasure is substituted and mistaken for spiritual edification, and formalism takes the place of a worship "in spirit and in truth."

(59) Permit us now to present the plan which we have endeavored to draw up according to the foregoing principles.

I. ORDER OF WORSHIP FOR THE MORNING SERVICE
(Organ Prelude) Part I. Introductory Service (see Note below.) A Parte (from the side of) Ecclesiae (the Church)—"Votum"
Dei (God)—Salutation
Ecclesiae—Psalm (Psalm 95, 84, etc.)
Part II. Service of Reconciliation
Dei—Summary of the Law (Matt. 22:37-40)
Ecclesiae—Confession of Sin and Penitential Psalm (No. 140:2)
Dei—Absolution
Ecclesiae—Apostles' Creed
Ecclesiae—Psalm of Praise
Part III. Service of Gratitude (Prayer and Benevolence)
(A Parte:)
Ecclesiae—General Prayer, concluded with "Our Father"
Ecclesiae—Offertory
Ecclesiae—Psalm of Thanksgiving (Ps. 116, etc.)
Part IV. Service of the Word
Dei—Reading of Scripture
Dei—Preaching

[p. 3]Part V. Closing Service
Ecclesiae—Prayer of Thanksgiving
Ecclesiae—Concluding Psalm or Doxology, or both
Dei—Benediction

EXPLANATION.

(1) Announcements. Synod will observe that no provision is made in the preceding outline for the making of announcements. The reason is that these are not an essential part of public worship and should, therefore, be made, where verbal announcements are still in vogue, before the beginning or after the conclusion of the services. We heartily endorse the practise which is being introduced by an ever-increasing number of our churches to issue weekly printed bulletins which should be distributed before or after the services, preferably the latter.

(60) (2) Underlying idea. Since the church service is essentially a meeting of the Lord with His people, in which we serve the Lord and are served by Him, an exchange of greetings should open the services. In the "Votum" the congregation declares its faith in the saving presence of God and in response to it the Lord "salutes" His people. The Psalm is the response of the church to this divine salutation.
(b) "The Votum." The exact words, taken from Psalm 124:8, are as follows: "Our help is in the name of Jehovah, Who made heaven and earth" (American Standard Version). No alterations should be made, since Scripture can not be improved upon. This "Votum" is not meant to be a prayer for divine aid, but rather a solemn declaration that God is in the midst of His people with His saving grace. It is, therefore, the beginning of the service. The organ prelude, which precedes it, merely services [sic] to aid in begetting a worshipful mood in those present. We scarcely need to add that the organist should make this his or her conscious aim and therefore play nothing but sacred music of the best kind, of which there is happily no dearth.
(c) The Salutation. Your committee recommends the use of the Pauline salutation as found in Romans 1:7, and, in literally the same words, in six other epistles: "Grace to you and peace, from God our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ." The phrase: "through the Holy Spirit," which is usually added, is superfluous. All expositors are agreed that the Triune God, not the first person of the blessed Trinity, is meant by the words: "God our Father." The possessive pronoun "our" instead of the definite article "the" before "Father" supports this contention. The doctrinal implication of this salutation is that we have fellowship with the Triune God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, only in the face of our Mediator, Jesus Christ.
(d) Psalm. One should be selected which gives expression to the joy of meeting the Lord in His "sanctuary." Ps. 15, 23, 24, 84, 95, and others, are especially appropriate.

[p. 4] The custom prevails in our American-speaking churches for the congregation to stand while singing. We believe this to be commendable. A frequent change of posture prevents drowsiness; moreover, a standing position means better chest-expansion and is, therefore, conducive to better singing. We would advise (61) Synod, however, to leave it to the discretion of the ministers, in consultation with their consistories, whether or not to introduce this custom in their respective churches. In these minor matters a mere recommendation is better than a hard and fast rule.
We append the remark that it will be more orderly for the congregation to remain seated than to rise for the penitential psalm.
__________

NOTE: Three members of this committee, Prof. W. Heyns, Rev. L. Trap and Rev. H. J. Kuiper, object to the use of the "Votum" and with the consent of the other members, present the following scheme for Part I:
Ecclesiae—Psalm
Ecclesiae—Invocation
Dei—Salutation

Explanation. According to this plan, the service begins not with the "Votum," but with a psalm, which is a call to worship or expresses longing for Jehovah's "courts" (Ps. 48, 66, 84, 95, 100, etc.). This psalm culminates in the invocation which should be a brief petition for the Lord's blessing upon the services. In response to both, the Lord "salutes" His people. If the congregation stands during the singing of the psalm, it should remain standing until the salutation has been given. A brief pause will be necessary while the members take their seats. This marks the transition to the second part of the service.

Reasons: Three members of the committee give preference to this plan for Part I, on the following grounds:
(a) It is more aesthetic to begin the services with a psalm than with a short declaration of 13 words only. Such a beginning is too abrupt.
(b) The "Votum" falls short of the requirement mentioned in 2 (c) of our introduction. It is not self-explanatory. Its advocates emphasize the fact that the "Votum" is not a prayer, but a declaration that God is in the midst of His people with His power and grace, and that the services have begun. The minority asserts that the words of the "Votum" do not naturally suggest this thought, and that everything ambiguous should be excluded from liturgical forms. If, on the other hand, the "Votum" should be interpreted as a prayer, a short invocation better serves the purpose, and is more reverent and edifying.

(62) The committee gladly submits this difference of opinion in its midst to Synod for decision.
__________

[p. 5] 3. PART II. The Service of Reconciliation.

(a) General Remarks
The most important changes which the Committee recommends are found in this part. In our present order of worship this service is missing, though two of its elements, the reading of the Law and the Apostles' Creed, have remained. But having been detached from the confession of sin and the absolution, which are the very core of this service and make it a service of reconciliation, they have lost their liturgical value.
Confession of Sin and Absolution occupied a prominent place in all the great Protestant liturgies of the Reformation period. Fear of the Romish doctrine of unconditional pardon of sins by the Church probably led to their omission. But with the bath we have cast away the child. Such Scriptural passages as Matt. 3:5,6; 16:19; John 20:21-23; Acts 19:18, and James 5:16, prove that the Church has authority to grant a conditional forgiveness of sins. In agreement with this our Heidelberg Catechism speaks in Lord's Day 31 of the keys of the Kingdom of heaven, the one being the preaching of the holy gospel and the other christian discipline. We read concerning the former in Q. 84: "How is the Kingdom of heaven opened and shut by the preaching of the holy gospel? This: when, according to the command of Christ, it is declared and publicly testified to all and every believer, that, whenever they receive the promise of the gospel by a true faith, all their sins are really forgiven them of God, for the sake of Christ's merits; and on the contrary, when it is declared and testified to all unbelievers, and such as do not sincerely repent, that they stand exposed to the wrath of God, and eternal condemnation, so long as they are unconverted; according to which testimony of the gospel, God will judge them, both in this, and in the life to come."
Dr. A. Kuyper, Sr., in Onze Eeredienst (chapter 56), and Prof. W. Heyns in Liturgiek (pp. 159-161, 178-191), strongly advocate the restoration of a special confession of sins and the absolution. The committee is in full accord with their sentiments, and believes that the re-introduction of this ancient service, to (63) which Calvin and other reformers attached such great significance, will be instrumental in begetting a stronger assurance of faith in the believers.

(b) The Name: Service of Reconciliation.
The pith and core of this service, as stated before, is the Absolution, in which the minister in the name of God solemnly assures those who sincerely repent of their sins that they have pardon in the blood of Christ. As an ambassador of God the minister not only summons sinners to repentance, saying: "Be ye reconciled to God," but also announces to all who obey this summons: "Ye are reconciled to God:—your sins are forgiven!"

(c) Summary of the Law.
This summary deserves preference above the law as found in Exodus 20, because its purpose in this place is to serve, not as a rule of life, but as a teacher of sin (compare with Lord's Days 2 and 35 of the Heid. Cat.). Provision has been made for the use of the Decalogue (the entire law) in the second service (afternoon or evening).

[p. 6] The committee has deemed it necessary to compose a short form containing this summary, to make it adaptable to the elements with which it forms an organic whole. Said form is as follows:

[Italics] "Let us now humble ourselves before God on account of our sinful deeds and sinful nature which stand revealed so clearly in the light of God's holy law, of which our Lord Jesus Christ has given us a perfect summary in these words: 'Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the great and first commandment. And a second like unto it is this, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. On these two commandments the whole law hangeth and the prophets.' These words confirm the testimony of our hearts that we cannot render perfect obedience to God's holy law. For by nature we are prone to hate God and our neighbor; and even the holiest among those who are converted to God have only a small beginning of true obedience. If, therefore, the Lord should deal with us according to our merits, He must banish us eternally from His presence; for the judgment once spoken must stand forever; 'Cursed is every one who continueth not in all things that are written in the book of the law to do them.'
(64) "Let us, therefore, hasten to confess our sins before God and with true faith implore His grace." [End italic section]

(d) Confession of Sins, and penitential Psalm.
The prayer which now follows was compiled from our own liturgical prayers, a translation of which, oddly enough, is not found in our English Psalters.

[Italics] "Eternal God and most gracious Father! We confess before Thy divine Majesty, that we are poor, miserable sinners, conceived in sin and born in unrighteousness, incapable of any good and prone to all manner of wickedness. For our consciences accuse us and our sins bear witness against us. Many times and without ceasing we have transgressed Thy commandments, neglecting what Thou didst command us and doing what was clearly forbidden us. All we like sheep have gone astray and are not worthy to be called Thy children, but we repent, O Lord, and are sorry for having provoked Thee, seeking refuge in Thy mercy, which is infinite. We call upon Thee from the heart, trusting in our Mediator Jesus Christ, and pray Thee that Thou wilt forgive us all our sins for His sake. Wash us in the pure fountain of His blood, that we may become pure and white as snow. Cover our nakedness with His innocence and righteousness, unto the glory of Thy Name. Look upon the face of Thine Anointed, and not upon our sins, that Thy face may shine upon us unto our joy and salvation. This we implore Thee, O Father! in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. Amen." [End italic section]

It would be ideal, perhaps, to let the whole congregation recite this prayer, but, since this is impracticable, the singing of one stanza of a penitential psalm immediately after the prayer, as the "Amen" of the Congregation, would be eminently fitting. The same stanza should always be used in order that no announcement of the song, no prelude by the organist and no searching in the Psalter by the congregation may be necessary. The most appropriate words would seem to us to be No. 142:2:

[p. 7] My transgressions I confess,
Grief and guilt my soul oppress,
I have sinned against Thy grace
And provoked Thee to Thy face;
I confess Thy judgment just,
Speechless, I Thy mercy trust.

(65) The first tune for this number is to be preferred to the second. The latter is so closely wedded to the words of a well-known hymn, that it involuntarily suggests them when it is sung. Let the organist play the tune in a subdued, slow and solemn fashion.
The objection may be raised against a penitential song at this place that it is superfluous, since the congregation has just confessed its sin in the preceding prayer uttered by the officiating minister as its spokesman. In reply, however, we would call attention to the following considerations:
(a) A repetition in song of the sentiments contained in a spoken prayer cannot be a meaningless one.
(b) The song gives the members the opportunity of a personal viva voce participation in this particular element of the service.
(c) The words of absolution will have stronger effect after a song than when they immediately follow the prayer of confession, especially because the one is an actum a parte ecclesiae and the other an actum a parte Dei. The transition from the one to the other should be made as obvious as possible.

(e) Absolution.
The form which the Committee has drafted is taken from the liturgies of Calvin and a Lasco, and reads as follows: [Form in italics]

"Unto all who thus repent and seek in Jesus Christ their salvation, I proclaim, on the ground of God's promise, that all their sins are forgiven them for the sake of the merits of Christ.
"On the contrary, unto those that do not repent from the heart, but seek for themselves other means for salvation, I proclaim from the Word of God that the wrath of God and eternal condemnation rest upon them so long as they do not turn unto God with heartfelt repentance."

(f) Credo.
The isolated position which the Apostles' Creed has in our present form of services deprives it of well-nigh all liturgical value. It is found in the liturgies of Luther, Calvin, Zuringli [sic] and à Lasco, and was intended as an expression of the faith of the Church, hence as an actum a parte ecclesiae and not, as some (66) conceive of it to-day, as a means of instruction in the chief articles of the Christian faith. In à Lasco's liturgy it followed the absolution and was, therefore, meant to be the "Amen" of the Church to this absolution. The committee is in full accord with this view, and advises Synod to assign it this place in our revised order of worship.

[p. 8] Calvin urged the singing of the Apostles' Creed by the entire congregation, but the committee feels that preference should be given to the custom prevailing in many American churches to let the congregation recite it in unison. A metrical version of the Creed in the American language is wanting; moreover, one feels instinctively the inappropriateness of singing a creed.
It may be urged that when the officiating minister reads the Creed, he does so as the vox ecclesiae, the voice of the Church, but we believe it to be a liturgical principle that the Church should be given direct participation in all those acta a parte ecclesiae, which, by their very nature, do not preclude such participation. One of the weaknesses of our present form of worship is that the congregation does not take a sufficiently active part in the services, its voice being heard only in the singing. Special mention is made of this in the overture from Classis Illinois quoted above.
It may not be advisable for Synod to impose this custom upon our Churches. We would suggest that Synod go no further than to go on record as favoring it, and to urge the churches to keep it before them as the ideal. As long, however, as a Church has not yet seen fit to introduce it, the consistory should insist that the minister use the following preliminary or one similar to it: "Let us together make a profession of our Catholic, undoubted Christian faith. Let every one speak with his heart thus: I believe," etc. Such a form will at least correct the false notion that the Creed is read simply as a means of instruction in the principal articles of the apostolic faith.

(g) Psalm of Praise.
A Psalm expressing the joy of forgiveness or the assurance of faith is most appropriate at this juncture, as a fitting conclusion for the service of reconciliation.

PART III. The Service of Thanksgiving.

(a) General Remarks.
Even as christian living logically follows christian experience, as in the Catechism Gratitude (67) follows Deliverance, so the service of reconciliation should be followed by the service of thanksgiving. Christian Gratitude consists of two parts: prayer and obedience. So this service also should comprise two elements: the General Prayer and the Offering, as a practical expression of our gratitude to Him who is our Redeemer from sin and evil.
A peculiarity of this service is the absence of all acta a parte Dei.

(b) General Prayer, concluded with "Our Father."
Essential elements of this prayer are Adoration, Thanksgiving and Supplication for the needs of the Church (local and universal), the Kingdom and the World. This prayer, as well as the sermon, is worthy of careful preparation.
We recommend that the general prayer be concluded with the Lord's Prayer. It is true, the primary purpose of the Lord's Prayer is to serve as a pattern for our prayers, as regards both form and contents, but this does not imply that its ipsissima verba should never be used. Being the perfect prayer, which the Lord Jesus Himself has taught, it is a most appropriate conclusion for our

[p. 9] imperfect petitions. Here again we deem it proper for the whole congregation to join with the minister in reciting it, and would advise Synod to recommend this to the churches.
The following words are suggested as a transition to the Lord's Prayer: "We ask all this in the name of Him who taught us to pray: Our Father ..."

(c) Offering.
This should not be a collection for the Budget, Church Debt or whatever fund may exist for defraying the expenses of the local church. We doubt whether this can be called an "offering" in the full sense of the word. In all church-services a contribution should be made to such cases as Benevolence, Christian Schools, Missions, etc., as an offering of thanksgiving to the Lord, our Provider and Savior. The weekly contributions for the support of the local church can be placed in envelopes and deposited, before or after the services, in boxes provided for the purpose.
The offering is an essential part of public worship and should, therefore, not be combined with the singing of a Psalm. Let the organist play an offertory while the congregation gives a practical (68) exhibition of its love for the cause of Christ, on behalf of which it has just made intercessions before God's throne.

(d) Psalm of Thanksgiving.
Psalm 66, 116, and others, express those sentiments which actuate the true worshipper in bringing to God his gifts of thanks, and, therefore, make a fitting conclusion for this part of the services.

5. PART IV. The Service of the Word.

(a) General Remarks.
This part logically follows the preceding. Having received the assurance of pardon and engaged in acts of thanksgiving to God its Savior, the Church now needs the ministry of the Word, that it may persevere in christian gratitude and grow in the knowledge and the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and that also the unconverted may turn to God.
Since this part of the service is purely objective, it contains no acta a parte ecclesiae. The officiating minister is now the mouth of Jehovah to His people.
A new feature of this service is the linking together of the Scripture lesson with the sermon. It is desirable both from an ideal and a practical point of view to let nothing intervene between these two elements. A true sermon is an exposition and application of a portion or portions of God's Word, and since it usually contains frequent references to the chapter which was read, the practical advantage of preaching while the Scripture lesson is still fresh in the minds of the hearers, must be apparent to all.
(c) [b] Scripture reading.
The committee does not favor the practise of Responsive Reading, though it is in vogue in many American churches. This practise, in our judgment, is not in conformity with the fact that the reading of God's Word is an actum a parte Dei. Dividing the reading of Scripture between the minister and the congregation obscures this fact. Responsive Reading impresses us, moreover,

[p. 10] as being a somewhat mechanical device to sustain the interest in the minds of the auditors. We acknowledge that certain portions of Scripture, notably in the Psalms, contain responses to divine declarations, but these responses are also the inspired Word of God, and as such should be read to the congregation by him who (69) represents the Lord in the gathering of the saints. In Public worship the reading of Scripture occurs as an objective act of God.

6. PART V. Closing Service.

(a) General Remarks.
The services should close as they began—with an exchange of greetings, so to speak, between the Lord and His people.
(b) Prayer.
Thanksgiving for the blessings received in the Lord's presence and supplication for a blessing upon His Word.
(c) Psalm or Doxology, or both.
In case both are used, only a brief pause should intervene sufficient to permit the organist to transpose to a new key, if this happens to be necessary.
(d) The Benediction.
This should be the last element in the services rather than the doxology, since it is proper to give the Lord "the last word." The apostolic benediction, found in 2 Cor. 13:14, is ordinarily used, although the first edition of our liturgy (A.D. 1567) prescribes the Aaronitic benediction found in Numbers 6:24-26. Since both enjoy the sanction of historical usage, we would recommend the use of the apostolic benediction in the first and the Aaronitic in the second service. Reverence for God's inspired Word requires that the minister shall not add words or phrases of his own, nor in any way seek to improve (?) upon these inspired benedictions.
__________

II. ORDER OF WORSHIP FOR THE SECOND SERVICE.
(Organ Prelude)
Part I. Introductory Service.
(A Parte)
Ecclesiae—"Votum"
Dei—Salutation.
Ecclesiae—Psalm.
Part II. Service of Thanksgiving (Prayer, Benevolence and Decalogue)
Ecclesiae—General Prayer, concluded with "Our Father."
Ecclesiae—Offertory.
(70) Dei—Decalogue
Ecclesiae—Psalm of Thanksgiving, or Refrain of No. 42 ["O how love I Thy law." Ps. 19, The Psalter—C.K.]
Part III. Service of the Word.
Dei—Scripture Reading.
Dei—Preaching.

[p. 11]Part IV. Closing Service.
Ecclesiae—Prayer of Thanksgiving.
Ecclesiae—Concluding Psalm or Doxology, or both.
Dei—Benediction.

EXPLANATION.

1. General Remarks.
This second order of worship differs materially from the preceding in one important particular; the service of reconciliation is omitted. The morning service is to be regarded as the main service. The only element occurring in the second service, as outlined above, which does not occur in the first, is the reading of the Decalogue, which is incorporated in the Service of Thanksgiving. Hence only four groups of exercises are found in this order over against five in the former.

2. PART I. Introductory Service.
This is identical with Part I of the preceding order. The minority members of the committee give preference, also for the second service, to the following elements:
Ecclesiae—Psalm.
Ecclesiae—Invocatton.
Dei—Salutation.

3. PART II. Service of Thanksgiving.
The only element requiring comment is the Decalogue, to which passing reference was already made in connection with the Summary of the Law in the morning worship. The Ten Commandments occur here not as a teacher of sin, but as a rule of life, and as such are properly placed in the service of Thanksgiving. The formula by which the officiating minister introduces this element should bring out this fact. We take the liberty to suggest the following as a preliminary: "Let us now attend to the law of the Lord, which was given us as a rule of thankfulness and obedience to God our Savior."
The psalm which now follows should be a psalm of thanksgiving. Many portions of Psalm 119 or the second part of Psalm 19 are well suited for this purpose, or, if so desired, only the re(71)frain of No. 42 (Psalm 19) may be used, as a response of the Church to the words of the law.
Parts III. and IV. are identical with Parts IV. and V. of the order for the morning services, and therefore require no further comment, except that the Aaronitic instead of the Apostolic benediction should be used.

__________

III. ORDER OF WORSHIP FOR THE THIRD SERVICE.
(Organ Prelude)
Part I. Opening Service
(A Parte)
Ecclesiae—"Votum"

Dei—Salutation.
Ecclesiae—Psalm.

[p. 12] Part II. Service of Thanksgiving (Prayer and Benevolence)
Ecclesiae—General Prayer, concluded with "Our Father."
Ecclesiae—Offertory.
Ecclesiae—Psalm of Thanksgiving.
Part III. Service of the Word.
Dei—Scripture Reading.
Dei—Preaching.
Part IV. Closing Service.
Ecclesiae—Prayer of Thanksgiving.
Ecclesiae—Concluding Psalm or Doxology, or both.
Dei—Benediction.

EXPLANATION.

Those American-speaking churches which have only a morning and evening service, need not use this outline except in so far as it is offered by the committee as a plan for the special services on Christmas, Old Year, New Year, Good Friday and Ascension Day. This plan differs from the order of worship for the first and second service in the omission of the service of Reconciliation and the Decalogue.
On Prayer Day and Thanksgiving Day the law plan presented may be used with this alteration, that the prayer before the sermon be only a brief petition for God's blessing upon His Word and the main prayer of thanksgiving be offered after the sermon. This will serve to bring out the fact that the main object of these (72) services is not to proclaim and hear the Word, but to invoke the Lord's blessing for material prosperity or to return thanks for such prosperity. The preaching must serve chiefly to prepare the minds and hearts of those present for such supplication or thanksgiving.
NOTE: Since the arrangement for Part I. offered by the committee members which object to the "Votum" includes an invocation, the short prayer before the sermon can be dispensed with. The following arrangement is suggested for the Prayer Day and Thanksgiving Day services.

(Organ Prelude)
Part I. Opening Service.
(A Parte)
Ecclesiae—Psalm.
Ecclesiae—Invocation.
Dei—Salutation.
Part II. Service of the Word.
Ecclesiae—Psalm.
Dei—Scripture Reading.
Dei—Sermon.

[p. 13] Part III. Service of Thanksgiving.
Ecclesiae—Special Prayer, concluded with "Our Father."
Ecclesiae—Offertory.
Ecclesiae—Psalm.
Part IV. Closing Service.
Ecclesiae—Doxology.
Dei—Benediction.
__________

IV. ORDER OF WORSHIP FOR THE COMMUNION SERVICES.

A. THE FIRST SERVICE.
(Organ Prelude)
Part I. Opening Service.
(A Parte)
Ecclesiae—"Votum." | Ecclesiae—Psalm.
Dei—Salutation. | Ecclesiae—Invocation.
Ecclesiae—Psalm. | Dei—Salutation.
Part II. Service of Thanksgiving. (Prayer and Benevolence)
Ecclesiae—General Prayer.
Ecclesiae—Offertory.
Ecclesiae—Psalm of Thanksgiving.
(73) Part III. Service of the Word.
Dei—Scripture Reading.
Dei—Sermon.
Part IV. Service of Communion.
Dei, Ecclesiae—Reading of the Form.
Ecclesiae—Psalm
Dei—Communion (Silent).
Ecclesiae—Form—Post-Communion.
Part IV. Closing Service.
Ecclesiae—Concluding Psalm or Doxology.
Dei—Benediction.

EXPLANATION.

The Committee has refrained from going into details in the arrangement of the communion services in view of the great divergence among us at the present time in the mode of administering this sacrament, though the desirability of greater uniformity in this matter must be apparent to all who have given serious thought to liturgical questions. We have not had the time, however, to go into the matter thoroughly.

[p. 14] The following remarks must be made in elucidation of the arrangement given above:
(a) The service of reconciliation should be omitted, since its essential elements are contained in the Form.
(b) The Lord's Prayer also occurs in the Form, and is therefore omitted from Part II.
(c) The sermon should be very brief. Reasons:
(1) The service should not last longer than an ordinary morning service.
(2) The must prominent element in a communion-service should not be the Word but the Sacrament.
(d) While bread and wine are passed, the minister should be silent, that the Sacrament itself, as a visible sign and seal of the Covenant may engage all the attention of the communicants.
(e) The entire form, including the Post-communion, should be read at this service. The prayer with which it con-(74)cludes takes the place of the Closing Prayer found in the preceding schemes.

B. THE SECOND SERVICE.
(Organ Prelude)
Part I. Opening Service.
(A Parte)
Ecclesiae—"Votum." | Ecclesiae—Psalm.
Dei—Salutation | Ecclesiae—Invocation.
Ecclesiae—Psalm. | Dei—Salutation.
Part II. Service of Communion.
Dei, Ecclesiae—Abbreviated Form.
Dei—Communion (Silent).
Ecclesiae—Psalm.
Ecclesiae—Post-Communion.
Part III. Service of Thanksgiving.
Ecclesiae—General Prayer.
Ecclesiae—Offertory.
Dei—Decalogue.
Ecclesiae—Psalm of Thanksgiving.
Part IV. Service of the Word.
Dei—Scripture Reading.
Dei—Sermon.
Part V. Closing Service.
Ecclesiae—Prayer of Thanksgiving.
Ecclesiae—Concluding Psalm or Doxology.
Dei—Benediction.

EXPLANATION.

The Committee is unanimous in the opinion that our churches need an abbreviated form for this second communion-service and believes that this need is generally felt among us. The following extract is submitted for

[p. 15] approval:

"Beloved in the Lord Jesus Christ, attend to the words .... All those then, who are thus disposed God will certainly receive in mercy and count them worthy partakers of the table of His Son Jesus Christ. Let us now also consider to what end the Lord has instituted His Supper, namely, that we do it in remembrance of Him. As often as ye eat of this bread and drink of this cup you shall thereby as by a sure remembrance and pledge be admonished and assured of this my hearty love and faithfulness (75) toward you, that He, whereas you should otherwise have suffered eternal death, gave His body to the death of the cross; and shed His blood for you, that thereby your hungry and thirsty souls may be fed and nourished with His crucified body and shed blood, as certainly as this bread is broken before your eyes, and this cup is given to you, and you eat and drink the same with your mouth in remembrance of Him.
"That we may obtain all this, let us humble ourselves before God, and with true faith implore His grace:
"O most merciful God and Father .... unto Him in eternity. Amen.
"That we may now be fed with the true heavenly bread, Christ Jesus, let us not cleave with our heart unto the external bread and wine, but lift them up on high in heaven; not doubting ... in remembrance of Him."

Only unavoidable alterations have been made in this abbreviated form. We trust it will find favor in the eyes of Synod.
__________

Herewith we have the pleasure to present to Synod the fruits of our labors as embodied in the preceding pages. We trust that Synod will give careful consideration to our proposals and would suggest that, should a revised liturgy be adopted, it authorize the Publication Committee to print a Manual containing this liturgy, especially for use by our ministers.
We realize that the introduction of a new order of worship will meet with some opposition by members of our churches, and perhaps we ministers also, who, much more in liturgical matters and e.g. in matters of church government, have so far enjoyed almost unlimited freedom, may be somewhat reluctant at first to change customs which we have followed perhaps for many years. But we trust that such possible reluctance may be overruled by the arguments adduced in the introduction to this report, in favor of more unity in our public worship.
Finally, we take the liberty of calling the attention of Synod to the fact that the following liturgical matters are urgently in need of consideration:

[p. 16] (1) Revision of our Liturgical Forms, particularly the Marriage Form.
(76) (2) Adoption of either the Authorized, English Revised or American Revised Version of the Bible as the official version for our American-speaking churches.
(3) The desirability of a more complete form for Public Profession of Faith.

Your Committee,
WM. HEYNS,
H. J. KUIPER,
L. TRAP,
J. VAN LONKHUYZEN,
D. ZWIER,
Y. P. DE JONG.

APPENDIX. In order to save time and expense, the Committee, at the suggestion of the Stated Clerk, has refrained from submitting a Holland translation of this Report for publication in the Agendum, but a mimeograph copy of this translation will be sent upon request to the delegates of Synod. Such request should be made before the 15th day of May to Rev. H. J. Kuiper, 1137 Turner Ave., N.W., Grand Rapids, Michigan.
The signature of Rev. J. Groen, one of the members of the Committee, is missing. The brother was unable, because of sickness, to take part in our deliberations.



History of CRC Order of Worship
Appendix II

From: Ag., 1928, Part I: Reports, pp. 85-111. Digest, with some direct quotations. Page references in () are from Ag.

(85) The Committee reviews the history of denominational action in the matter of a uniform order of worship from 1916 until the present (1928). With reference to the Report of 1920, the Committee declares:
"The controlling idea of that report was that improvement of our worship should not be sought in the addition to our services of adornments and novelties borrowed from other churches but in a return to the worship of Reformation-times and in a restoration of what has been lost in succeeding times of decay. The most characteristic element of the plan which the committee presented for a new order of worship was the Confession of Sin and the Absolution in the morning service—an element introduced in the Reformed Churches in the 16th century by Calvin, à Lasco, Dathenus and others, and generally used in those churches. Your committee deemed the restoration of this element all the more necessary because through its disappearance the reading of the Law and the Apostles' Creed have become isolated elements without liturgical value."

(86) Although the decision of Synod to refer the report back to the Committee (in 1922) was somewhat discouraging, this discouragement was small compared with that caused by the negative reactions of the Classes to the report of 1920. And only Classis Illinois, only one out of many dissenting Classes, took the trouble to prove the validity of their objections. The vagueness with which the other objections were made gave the Committee the feeling that it was fighting "a false conservatism which refused to be convinced." Moreover, the Committee refrained from writing on the subject in the church press because abundant controversy about other and more important subjects made this inadvisable." The Committee was even pleased with the overture presented to the Synod of 1924 proposing that the Committee be discontinued. Synod, however, then reaffirmed the mandate of 1922.

(87) In 1926 Synod clearly rejected the contention of Classis Illinois that, although Synod could "enlighten and advise" in the matter of regulating public worship, Synodical prescriptions in liturgical matters conflict with the freedom of the local church. Synod asserted the validity of its determination of liturgical matters, and called upon the Committee to prepare a "uniform but flexible" order of worship for the churches. The Committee resumed its labors with confidence, and the Rev. D. Zwier wrote a series of articles on liturgical matters in De Wachter. The Committee sought to discover what amendments to its 1920 report would be required if it was to present to the churches "a more acceptable 'uniform but flexible' order of worship." First, the Committee considers the objections which Classis Illinois had registered against the "Service of Reconciliation," especially the Confession of Sin and the Absolution.

[p. 2] (88) The Committee contests the contention of Classis Illinois that the entire worship service is a service of reconciliation, and that, therefore, no separate service of reconciliation is necessary. For Illinois, reconciliation is the material principle of public worship, while the formal principle is that God and his people meet. The Committee replies that the essence of public worship has thus been confused with its basis. The judicial basis of our life in union with God cannot be the whole matter of that life. Illinois had further held that the meeting of God with his people could only be the formal principle of public worship. The Committee maintains that "meeting with God" is not only the formal but also the material principle of public worship, i.e., all of worship consists in acts of fellowship between God and his people in the meeting for public worship. The meeting implies union with God, and the purpose of the meeting is the strengthening of this union. The idea of union with God underlies the whole service; it is more correct to say this than to say that the whole worship service is a service of reconciliation. Reconciliation is a narrower concept than that of union with God. Reconciliation is an aspect or element of that union. "And if ... all the essential elements of our life and communion with God should come to expression in our public worship, it must be admitted that a 'service of reconciliation' is not only an essential but the basic element of such worship, and that it does not receive full and adequate expression in all the other elements of the service."
Comments are made on the "opening service." "In this service the Lord and His people greet each other. After the greeting comes the meeting or the actual exercise of communion. But since God's (89) people are a sinful people, God can have fellowship with them and they with God only on the foundation of divine grace, a grace realized for them in Christ's atonement and bearing fruit in God's reconciliation with them and their reconciliation with God. Hence the service of reconciliation must follow...."
The Committee lists and comments on the elements in the service of reconciliation. Of the reading of the Law, the Committee says: "As the Lord came to Abraham at the establishment of the Covenant with the words: 'I am God Almighty; walk before me and be thou perfect,' so He comes here to His people with His law as the rule of their life and the teacher of sin."
The Confession of Sin "Shall the church remain silent when she hears the law of her God? In our present form of worship she does. There is no response to the Law. Is that proper? ... Abraham fell on his face when he heard the command. Likewise the Church, having heard God's law, falls on her face when she answers, as did the Reformed fathers, in the words of a Form which they left us, with a humble Confession of Sin. This is not at all a strange innovation but a perfectly legitimate practice in Reformed churches."
The Absolution: God will not remain silent when His people confess their sins. Since he has promised to forgive when we confess, and since he wishes us to know the things he has granted to us, "we may expect a divine response to our confession of sin and that response is the Absolution: the divine declaration that all who have sincerely confessed their sins have remission of ...

[p. 3] their sins." This is not an innovation, for absolution is found in the liturgies of Calvin, à Lasco, and Dathenus, "and the forms in which it is embodied still exist for our use...."

(90) The church responds to this good news in gratitude through the use of the Confession of faith and a psalm of praise and thanksgiving. "In the former she testifies to her faith in God the Father as her Creator, in God the Son as her Redeemer, and in God the Holy Spirit as her Sanctifier—hence to her saving faith which responds with a heartfelt Amen! to the gracious assurance of absolution. With this design the Reformers incorporated the Credo in their liturgies. Even apart from this it is eminently proper for the Church to manifest herself as a believing Church in her public gatherings; but where would a formal confession of faith be more fitting than in this connection?"

In the face of the objections registered against the service of reconciliation in 1922, the Committee felt compelled to face the question whether this service should be eliminated. The Committee decided not to drop this service. Three reasons are given, First, without Confession and Absolution, the Law and the Creed can only stand in the liturgy as "unconnected, isolated actions, the significance of which is neither understood nor appreciated by the congregation and as a result of which they have become and will remain mere formalities without liturgical value and edifying power." The early Reformers included Law and Creed for didactic purposes, but when Calvin returned to Geneva (91) from Strassburg he sought to make the Lord's Prayer, the Law, and the Creed organic members of the service. (See also, n. 1, p. 93 of Ag. report.) It would represent retrogression in the liturgy if we were to return to the conditions which later prevailed when these churches lost the Confession and Absolution. Second, these elements must be retained because they "were dropped only under the influence of an unreasonable prejudice against fixed forms of worship." Calvin gave in to the authorities at Geneva on this score only with great reluctance, and à Lasco had both Confession and Absolution in his regulations for worship for the London Refugees Church. In fact, he connected them with the Law and the Creed after the manner indicated by the Committee, (92) though the whole was placed after the sermon. Dathenus also urged the use of admonitions to penitence after the reading of the Law, and these admonitions were to be followed by a proclamation of God's judgment on the impenitent and of his grace to those who repent and confess. Third, our people are afflicted with "the disease of a constant uncertainty concerning their salvation." The Committee argues: "The significance of the Confession of Sin and Absolution as means for the removal of this disease lies in this that it points with all the solemnity characteristic of a liturgical action to the inseparable connection which God in his grace has established between the sinners penitence and faith on the one hand and his certain salvation on the other hand—in accordance with the divine promise: he that believeth in the Son hath eternal life.

[p. 4] Many a person still seeks a ground for his hope (93) of eternal life in various particulars of his emotional experience without finding the assurance he seeks because there is no stability in one's feelings. But how firm a ground for our faith is furnished by such a formula of Absolution as the one given by Calvin, which declares: "To all who in this manner are sorry for their sins and seek their salvation in Jesus Christ, I proclaim the forgiveness of sins, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, Amen!"
The Committee also replies to those who grant the validity and utility of Confession and Absolution, but who feel that the preaching should suffice for building up God's people in the assurance of forgiveness. The answer to these people is this: God does many things to state and re-state his promise of salvation—although a single declaration of his grace would he sufficient, he meets the weakness of our flesh by stating his promise in various modes. God has, for example, not only declared the promise of salvation, but has also given the promise "in the form of a formal covenant-transaction, confirmed with an oath"; and he has added Sacraments to his Covenant. (94) "In this divine example a special liturgical action, whose purpose is the strengthening of the faith of God's people, has its sanction." The Committee claims that the Confession and Absolution would help to remove the disease of spiritual uncertainty, and that no service is complete without the Absolution, "since it is an essential element of the fellowship of God with his people and of his people with Him."

(95) The Committee adds comments on the rest of the order of worship as these have entered the Committee's discussion in the light of its clear mandate (1926). First, the division of the service into five parts, and the designation of some acts as "from the side of God" and others as "from the side of the people" appears to have been confusing. Since the design of this material was only to show the logical and psychological order of the various parts, the Committee now omits "these particulars."

(96) Second, the Committee compares the existing order with the one proposed in 1920, and notes that "with the exception of the Confession of Sin, the Absolution, and the Credo, there is not a single element in the one proposed by us which is not present in the present order." ("Present" order: Votum or Invocation; Salutation; Psalm; The Law; Scripture Lesson; Psalm; General Prayer; Offering, Psalm, or simultaneous; Sermon: Closing Prayer; Psalm [and doxology]; Benediction.) Other differences are only matters of detail: the use of the Lord's Prayer at the conclusion of the general prayer is analogous to its use after the liturgical prayers in the Dutch Psalter, and the reading of Scripture before the sermon is (97) justified because of the close relationship between Scripture and sermon.

The Committee is at pains to point out that there is flexibility in the opening part of the service. Either the order Votum, Salutation, Psalm; or the order Psalm, Invocation, Salutation may be followed.

[p. 5] Classis Illinois had condemned the recommendation of the Committee (1920) that the Summary be substituted for the Law, and the Law be placed in the second service. With respect to the Illinois overture, the Committee states: "It replied to our argument that the Law should be read as the Teacher of Sin by saying that the Law is the Teacher of Sin only as our Rule of Life. This point we concede to Illinois. It is also more in accord with the example of the Heidelberg Catechism to use the Ten Commandments for this purpose rather than the Summary of Matt. 22." Additional reasons make the change advisable: 1) no organic place for the Law can be found in the second service, and 2) the omission of the Law in the first service "might create the impression that your committee is indeed seeking to introduce things new and strange. The Committee insists, however, that the reading of the Law be (98) followed by the reading of the Summary "as a constant reminder of the spiritual character of God's commandments and of their inner unity." "Thus," declares the Committee, "it will be far easier for the worshipper to feel that he is a transgressor of God's Law and in need of the Lord's forgiving grace."

The Committee now recognizes that the use of both a Confession of Sin and a penitential psalm is "in some sense a duplication." Therefore it proposes that it be left to each consistory to decide whether one or both of these elements is to be used.

The Committee recalls that it had recommended the congregational recitation of the Lord's Prayer at the close of the General Prayer, and also the recitation (congregational) of the Creed at the proper place in the second division of the first service. Although there are objections to singing the Prayer and the Creed, (99) "the only objection we are aware of against reciting them is the fact that our people are not accustomed to this." The Committee adds: "They would, however, soon become accustomed to it." The Committee had urged Synod to urge the churches to keep before the people the ideal of congregational recitation. But the Committee now feels that the Holland-speaking churches, especially, would resist, and, therefore, proposes "that it be left to the judgment of every individual church whether to let the minister in charge pronounce the Lord's Prayer and the Credo or to permit the congregation to join in with him."

The Presbyterian custom of allowing the minister to offer a brief offertory prayer after the offering "in which the Lord's blessing upon the gift asked" is gaining favor in our churches. There is nothing in this custom which conflicts with Reformed principles: in fact, in its favor is the fact that it emphasizes that the offering is an integral and indispensable part of the service. The Committee proposes that this matter be left open to the churches to select or reject, with the understanding that those using the "longest possible" form of the first order of worship omit the prayer in order not to infringe on the time or the sermon.

[p. 6] (100) The Committee recalls that the 1920 report had recommended that the offering be received without the accompaniment of any other liturgical action, but that "to make the silence less painful ... the organist should meanwhile play." The Committee now retreats from this position. Experience has shown that the congregation should sing a psalm while the offering is being received. "When the organist plays an offertory the congregation pays far more attention to his or her musical efforts than to the cause to which it is contributing and its solemn obligation of stewardship." The organ offertory should be abolished. "We fear it is stimulating a desire for entertainment in our divine services."

The elements are now drawn together and the new order is presented as follows:

1. Votum 1. Psalm
2. Salutation or 2. Invocation
3. Psalm 3. Salutation
4. The Law and Summary of the Law
5. Confession of Sin or Penitential Psalm (or both)
6. Absolution
7. Apostles' Creed (by minister only or minister and congregation)
8. Psalm
9. General Prayer and Lord's Prayer (latter by minister only or minister and congregation)
(101) 10. Offering and Psalm
11. Offertory Prayer (optional)
12. Scripture Lesson
13. Sermon
14. Closing Prayer
15. Psalm (with or without Doxology)
16. Benediction

The Committee remarks that this order of worship, though a bit more elaborate than the "present" order, has Calvinistic simplicity and is devoid of anything "that smacks of ritualism, that is of symbolism;" that it combines flexibility and logical unity; that, even if all elements are used, only a few minutes are added to the part of the service preceding the sermon; that there are no unconnected elements, since each element is related to the others in its group, and the groups are related to each other; that this plan enables the congregation to take a more active part in public worship.

[We include here the Directory which at this point is inserted in the report, but we shall quote or summarize only those portions which represent a substantial change from the 1920 Report.]

[p. 7] Directory:

Announcements. (Similar to 1920; see App. I, pp. 2-3.)

Votum or Invocation: (See App. I, pp. 3-4.)

Salutation: (See App. I, p. 3.)

Psalm: "One should be selected which dwells on the duty to worship God or the delights of God's courts."

The Law and Summary: "The former is found in Exodus 20:1-17 and the latter in Matt. 22:37-40. We suggest that the minister connect the two by these or similar words: Of this holy law of God our Lord Jesus Christ has given us a summary in the following words: 'Thou shalt love ....' "

The Confession of Sin or a Penitential Psalm or both. Add suggestion of Dutch Psalter, Ps. 51:1; 103:2 (See App. I, p. 6.) "It is hardly necessary to say that the congregation should not rise while singing a single verse, especially not at this place where the connection between the elements is so close." To bring out the connection between the Law and response, the Committee proposes this formula: "(Ital.) This holy law clearly teaches us our sinful deeds and sinful nature, which it behooves us to confess before God with contrite hearts. Let us do this in the words of the Psalmist .... Or: Let us do this as we pray ...." (end Ital.).

Prayer for Confession of Sin (cf. App. I, pp. 5-6.): "(Ital.) Eternal God (Altered) and Gracious Father! We confess before Thy Divine Majesty that we are poor, miserable sinners, conceived in sin and born in unrighteousness, incapable in ourselves of any good and prone to all manner of wickedness. Our sins rise up and testify against us. We (103) have transgressed all Thy commandments in thought, word, and deed. All we like sheep have gone astray and are unworthy to be called Thy children. But we repent, O Lord, and are sorry for having provoked Thee, seeking refuge in Thine infinite grace and mercy. Calling upon Thee from the heart and trusting in the merits of our Mediator, Jesus Christ, we implore Thee to forgive us all our sins for His sake. Wash us in the pure fountain of His blood, that we may become pure and white as snow. Cover our nakedness with His innocence and righteousness, unto the glory of Thy name and the joy of our hearts. This we beseech Thee, O Father! in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. Amen." (end Ital.)

Absolution: (See App. I, p. 6.) Same as 1920, except that "I proclaim, on the ground of God's promise ...." becomes: "I proclaim, on the ground of God's sure promise ...."

[p. 8] Apostles' Creed: "Let us now together profess our catholic, undoubted, Christian faith in the words of the Apostles' Creed. Let every one speak with his heart thus: 'I believe in God....' "

Psalm: (Should express the joy of forgiveness and the assurance of faith.) "A mournful psalm" would naturally be out of place here.

General Prayer and Lord's Prayer: Transition (as in App. I, p. 8) recommended especially when congregation is to recite the Lord's Prayer ("We ask ... in the name of Him who taught us to pray ....")

Offering and Psalm: (104) There will be no conflict in this combination "if a Psalm is selected which expresses the very same sentiments which actuate the true worshipper in bringing to God his gift of thanks."

Offertory Prayer (optional): "In churches where this prayer is in vogue the deacons wait for one another in the rear of the church until the offering is taken, and then walk to the front of the church. They place the collection-plates on the table and remain standing there until the minister has offered a brief prayer."

Scripture Lesson: The fact that in our churches the minister always reads the chapter from which he has selected his text or which ... contains the [Heidelberg Catechism] truth which he intends to preach, shows clearly that the Scripture lesson is regarded as being intimately connected with the sermon. This is correct; yet at the present time these two elements stand far apart from each other in the service.... If our Order of Worship is adopted, the Scripture-lesson will be read at the logical and natural place."

Preaching.

Prayer.

Psalm (with or without Doxology): Here room is left for individual preference. "Praise God from whom all blessings flow" can be used in the morning service and (The Psalter) No. 197 can be used in the evening, or vice versa.

Benediction: "This and not the doxology should be the last thing in the service. One should not invert the order for the utilitarian purpose of giving the minister an opportunity to hasten to the rear of the church to be able to shake hands with the people. Apart from the fact that when the Benediction has been pronounced the Lord has, dismissed His people, as it were, we can see no good in this handshaking affair. Does it not detract from the (105) dignity of divine worship? Does it not leave the impression that the church is at least in certain respects a business-institution which needs to cultivate the favor of its customers?"

[p. 9] Baptism should be placed before the General Prayer (just prior to the G.P.)

The Committee does not recommend responsive readings. "Any one with but a little liturgical instinct feels ... that it is improper in a church service. The Scripture is God's Word and when it is read in the service God Himself is speaking to His people by the mouth of His servant. This fact is wholly obscured when the minister (representing the Lord) and the congregation read alternately. The only argument which we have ever heard used in favor of responsive reading is that it makes it easier for the people to center their attention on the lesson. We question this, but even if it were true it would be an insufficient reason for introducing it."
No orders for the second and third service, services of a special nature on week-days, and "Communion Sundays" are necessary now. This order can be used without the Service of Reconciliation on such occasions. However, on "Communion Sunday" the Service of Reconciliation is most appropriate and should be retained. This will not make the service too long, provided the Committee's recommendation that the self-examination section of the Form for the Celebration of the Lord's Supper be read on the previous Sunday is approved. The Communion Service should come (second part of Form, Psalm, Communion Proper, concluding part of Form) between the "Service of the Word" and the "Closing Service."

(106) The Committee has not mentioned choir singing because the Synod of 1926 advised against the introduction of choirs, although it left the matter ultimately up to the individual consistories. The Committee observes: 1) it is strange that Synod did not defer action in 1926 on this matter in the light of the Committee's existence; 2) this decision "embodies an unreformed principle" and it is in direct conflict with the 1926 decision that Reformed Church polity requires that the churches of our denomination should have a "uniform but flexible" order of worship (Synod must decide whether there is room in Reformed liturgical practice for an action in which one part of the congregation edifies another or in which a choir speaks for God); and 3) the decision subverts the Article of the Church Order (Art. 69—"old" C.O.) that only the Psalms of David, the Ten Commandments, the Lord's Prayer, the Twelve Articles of Faith, the Songs of Mary, Zacharias and Simeon, the (107) Morning and Evening Hymns, and the Hymn of Prayer before the sermon shall be sung in our churches. In practice not Synod, nor even the consistories will decide which Hymns and Anthems are to be sung. The choir will decide. This undercuts a fundamental principle of Reformed polity with respect to the regulation of the worship services.

[p. 10] The Committee's formal recommendations to Synod are reproduced here in full:

A. The Synod declare:
(1) That our Churches are in need of an improved order of worship:
a) Because the order and succession of the various elements in our present mode of worship is in many particulars not systematic and fails to embody properly the underlying idea that public worship is the meeting of God and His people for the purpose of exercising fellowship;
b) Because the congregation does not take a sufficiently active part in the services;
c) Because the loss of the Confession of Sin and the Absolution as in vogue in the churches of the Reformation has impoverished our public worship, robbing it of one of the essential elements of our communion with God as the assembled Churches of Jesus Christ;
d) Because in consequence of the loss of the Confession of Sin and the Absolution, the reading of the Law and of the Creed have become isolated elements with practically no liturgical value;
e) Because also the Scripture-lesson has become an isolated part of the service, separated by several elements in the service, and by at least twenty minutes in time, from the Sermon with which it should be united.
(2) That our public worship cannot really be improved by the omission of those elements which now stand alone nor by the addition of elements observed in other churches, but only by the introduction of such an order of worship which retains all the elements we now have, in which all the elements are rearranged where necessary, so that the entire service forms one organic whole, and in which no new elements are introduced which are foreign to Reformed principles and practice.
(3) That the regulation of public worship should not be left to the individual churches, since our denominational existence requires unity of doctrine, discipline, and worship. Consequently that it is the task of the Synod, representing all the churches, to alter our present form of worship, and that only minor details should be left to the individual consistories. In short, that our churches should have a uniform though flexible order of worship.
(4) That the introduction of an improved order of worship should not take place in any local church until it appears to be ripe for the change. On the other hand, the Synod cannot wait until all the churches are ready for the change in view of the greatly varying circumstances in different congregations.

[p. 11] B. The Synod decide:

(1) That it approve the following order of worship for the main service on the Lord's Day:
1. Votum 1. Psalm
2. Salutation or 2. Invocation
3. Psalm 3. Salutation
4. Reading of the Law and Summary of the Law in Matthew 22
5. Confession of Sin and Penitential Psalm (or both)
6. Absolution
7. Apostles' Creed (by Minister only or Minister and Congregation)
8. Psalm
9. General Prayer, concluded with the Lord's Prayer (the latter by Minister only or Minister and Congregation)
10. Offering and Psalm
(109) 11. Offertory Prayer (optional)
12. Scripture Lesson
13. Sermon
14. Prayer
15. Psalm (with or without Doxology)
16. Benediction

(2) That in the other services of the Lord's Day, and in the special services on week-days, the "Service of Reconciliation" (4, 5, 6, 7, 8) should be omitted. Likewise that it should be omitted when the services are in charge of unordained men such as theological students, candidates, and all others who are not qualified to administer the Sacraments.

Ground: The center and core of the service of reconciliation is the Absolution. When this is omitted, the rest is meaningless from a liturgical point of view. And since the Absolution is an authoritative declaration of the forgiveness of sins on the condition of true repentance, only an ordained Minister of the Gospel, speaking as an ambassador of Jesus Christ and servant of God, has the right to proclaim it.

(3) That the complete service shall be used on Communion Sunday, but that the first part of the Form for the Lord's Supper, consisting of the self-examination, shall be read in the Preparatory Service of the preceding Sunday, and the remainder on Communion Sunday.

[p. 12] (4) That it repeal the decision of the Synod of 1926 regarding choir-singing, and declare that there shall be no singing in our public services except by the congregation as a whole, on the ground:
(a) That there is no place for such singing according to our Reformed conception of public worship. Since God meets and fellowships with His Church in public worship, every element must be either an act of God (through the Minister) having the congregation as its object or an act of the congregation (directly or through the Minister) having God as its object. Anthem-singing by a choir or a soloist is neither. It is in reality a usurpation of the privilege and duty of the whole congregation to sing praise to God;
(110) (b) It conflicts with Article 69 of the Church Order which permits the singing of only a few hymns specifically mentioned;
(c) It conflicts with the basic principle of Article 69 of the Church Order, namely, that the Church as a whole, through the Synod, shall determine what shall be sung in our churches.

(5) That ministers and consistories are urged to take the necessary steps to introduce the new order of worship, with this understanding, however, that the peace and welfare of those churches in which there is considerable opposition, shall not be imperiled. At the same time the Classes shall strengthen the hands of the consistories by urging them, especially through the church-visitors, to make progress in the matter.
To illustrate the importance of the measure proposed in the preceding recommendation, your Committee reminds Synod of the fact that the custom of baptizing children of non-confessing members soon disappeared when the Classes by order of the Synod made it a special point of inquiry in church visitation, while the excellent report concerning the improvement of catechetical instruction, adopted at the Synod of 1912, has borne practically no fruits. The same fate threatens to overtake a more recent report on the subject presented in 1924.

(6) That in case of adoption of this report, this Committee be continued to prepare a brief directory of worship, for the convenience of ministers and congregations, and to publish the same with the understanding that it shall be incorporated in succeeding editions of our Psalter.

Your Committee would strongly urge Synod to warn our Consistories not to make any changes in their public worship other than those included in the proposed order, when this shall have been adopted; to impress upon them the fact that denominational unity and loyalty require that all the Churches shall conform to whatever decisions touching this matter shall be taken, unless they shall be proved to be contrary to God's Word; and to insist that Consistories which subsequently might desire other changes, should refrain from intro-(111)ducing them by independent action, but make known their desires through the regular channels.

[p. 13] (End quotation of "recommendations,")

The Report was signed by W. Heyns, H. J. Kuiper, L. Trap, D. Zwier, J. Van Lonkhuyzen, W. Stuart, and Y. P. De Jong. In a note the availability of a Dutch translation of the Report was indicated.



HCRCOW, Appendix III

Report of the Study Committee concerning the Order of Worship to the Synod of 1930. This DIGEST and copy of the "Directory" is taken from Supplement XIII of Acts, 1930, and pages in () are from that volume. The report was submitted to Synod in Ag., 1930, I: Reports, pp. 50-68.

(335-336) The Committee reviews the history of action toward a uniform order of worship and indicates the following elements in its mandate from the Synod of 1928: 1) the preparation of a Directory of Worship in Dutch, English, and German; 2) the preparation of an order of worship for the second service on the Lord's Day and for special services on week-days, taking into consideration the suggestions that the second Sunday service accent praise and include the Creed; 3) the counselling of Synod with respect to the order to be followed when unordained men conduct the services; and 4) the advising of Synod "in regard to the Order of Worship for Preparatory and Communion Services" (336).

In the fall of 1928, the Committee published a brief directory containing the Order of Morning worship. (337) Although the Committee adhered closely to the order adopted by the Synod of 1928, it allowed itself the liberty of changing the term "Absolution" to "Assurance of Pardon." Although the members of the Committee were convinced of the validity of the term "Absolution," they were willing to try to meet the objections raised against this term.

The Committee attempts in its report to answer four criticisms. First, objections have been raised to the effect that Synod has exceeded the authority set for it by the rules of Reformed Polity. The Committee points out that the Synod of 1926 clearly settled this issue and adduced abundant evidence in favor of the position that it had the right to determine a "uniform but flexible" order of worship (337-338). No serious attempt has been made to overthrow these grounds (338).
Second, in the published Directory the Committee included some forms for Confession and Offertory prayer which had not been submitted to Synod. The Committee acknowledges that it is to blame for some misunderstanding here, for the Preface did not make it clear that the words "Adopted by Synod" on the title page referred to the ORDER only and not to the whole Directory. (338-339) For the sake of flexibility it seemed wise to include alternate forms, and for that reason the Committee has also included alternate forms for the Assurance of Pardon in the Directory herewith being presented to Synod (339).
Third, the Committee feels that much of the objection to "Reconciliation" and "Absolution" as applied to parts of the order of worship results from the terminology used. The Committee (340) points out that "Service of Reconciliation" was never adopted by Synod. "Now although your Committee cannot admit the validity of this objection [against the term "reconciliation"], because the word reconciliation in this connection was, of course, meant by us in the sense of a renewal of the consciousness of reconciliation, of which God's people are ever again in need, yet ... we would propose that it be omitted." The Committee adds that it regrets that it did not discover the term "Assurance of Pardon" a year or two earlier.

[p. 2] (341) In reply to the objection that the Salutation already contemplates God's people as a reconciled people, the Committee writes: "But is this contradicted by the Reading of the Law, the Confession of Sins, and the Assurance of Pardon? Not at all! Certainly is the Law our rule of thankfulness, but ... it ever remains, our teacher of sin, and leads the Christian ever again to confession of sin. Applying it as a rule of thankfulness, we discover our shortcomings! ... It is a fact that Scripture teaches us that as God's redeemed people we have forgiveness ... but it is also a fact that Jesus teaches us daily to pray: 'And forgive us our debts as we forgive our debtors.'" (341)
Fourth, the Committee undertakes to reply to the criticism that the assurance of pardon is illegitimately placed in the new order because Q. 84 of the Heidelberg Catechism locates this assurance in the preaching of the Word. The Catechism does not say that assurance is and may be given only and exclusively in preaching! Following this line of argumentation consistently, one would have to declare the reading of the Law as a separate liturgical act invalid; the Law is an integral element in preaching. "What objection then can there be against incorporating the essence of the Gospel in our liturgical service? Is there any reason why the Law should be retained, but the Gospel be refused a place of honor in our liturgy?" (342)
The Committee grants that a liturgical assurance of pardon can lead to "dead formalism," but it notes that the reading of the Law is presently devoid of liturgical meaning and that the hope of restoring it to liturgical vitality lies in the use of the Confession of Sins and the Assurance of Pardon in connection with this element in worship. (342)

(343) The Committee argues that the objections have been weighed and found wanting, and pleads with Synod not to undo the work of a former Synod merely from practical considerations. Attacks on the order and uncertainty as to the shape of the order for the second service have retarded the introduction of the new order. Synod should confirm the action of 1928, but it should not force the issue in congregations not ripe for change. (344) Haste is not required, and for this reason the Committee has limited itself to the preparation of an order for the second Sunday service. The Committee presents these proposals to Synod:

"1. Synod rescinds Art. 70, q.5, of the Acta Synodi 1928 (p. 60), reading as follows: 'That ministers and consistories are urged to take the necessary steps to introduce the new Order of Worship, with this understanding, however, that the peace and welfare of those churches in which there is considerable opposition, shall not be imperiled. At the same time the Classes shall strengthen the hands of the church-visitors, to make progress in the matter,' and decides to leave the introduction of the new Order of Worship entirely to the discretion of each local church.

[p. 3] "Grounds:
a. The majority of our Churches are not ready for the introduction of the new Order.
b. By removing the element of compulsion, Churches which are not ripe for a change will not be made to feel uneasy by classical and church-visitorial admonitions and urgings to introduce the new Order, consciences will not be bound, and denominational peace and harmony will be preserved.
"2. Synod recommends anew the introduction of the Order of Worship for the first service on the Lord's Day, as adopted by the Synod of 1928 (Acta, p. 55).
"Grounds:
a. No objections have been advanced which prove that the new Order as adopted by Synod is contrary to (345) the Word of God, our Confession, or our Church Order.
b. In the Directory of Worship, a revised edition of which is herewith submitted, changes have been made, especially in the second group of elements, which make it less objectionable to the brethren who have conscientious objections to a service of reconciliation and an absolution as contained in the first edition of the Directory.
c. Churches are now using the new Order, or contemplating its introduction, can go on as at present, and will not be disturbed by a Synodical repeal of former decisions.
"3. "Synod adopts the following Order of Worship for the second service on the Lord's Day, and recommends its introduction:
1. Votum 1. Doxology
2. Salutation or 2. Invocation or Votum
3. Doxology 3. Salutation
4. Apostles' Creed (optional)
5. Praise Selection from Scripture
6. Psalm of Praise
7. Gloria Patri
8. General Prayer, concluded with the Lord's Prayer
9. Offering and Psalm
10. Offertory Prayer (optional)
11. Scripture Lesson
12. Sermon
13. Prayer
14. Response (optional)
15. Psalm (with or without Doxology)
16. Benediction
17. Doxology (if desired here).
"4. "Synod again strongly urges our consistories not to introduce any changes in their public worship other than those included in the Order adopted by Synod.

[p. 4] "Grounds:
a. By restricting future changes to those approved by Synod, the calamity of every congregation determining its own mode of worship will be averted, and our denominational unity in matters of worship will not be seriously impaired.
b. Although some churches will be using the old and others the new Order, this will be far better than to have every church in independentistic fashion do what seems good to it in its own eyes.
"5. (346) Synod approves the revised Directory of Worship as herewith submitted by the Committee for tentative use by our Churches, and authorizes its separate publication for the convenience of ministers and congregations, but decides that for the present it shall not yet be incorporated in our Psalter. "Grounds:
a. Tentative approval does not mean that Synod assumes responsibility for every form and every suggestion contained in this Directory.
b. Actual use will no doubt suggest further improvements.
"6. Synod instructs the Committee on Public Worship:
a. To prepare the Directory for the press, and to have a sufficient number of copies printed for all our consistory members.
b. To continue to give further thought to the improvement of our Public Worship, and to shed light upon it in our denominational papers.
c. To carry out the instructions of the Synod of 1928 in regard to the completion of our Order of Worship.

Respectfully [sic] submitted,
Your Committee,
W. HEYNS, Pres.
D. ZWIER, Sec'y
H. J. KUIPER [sic]
L. TRAP
W. STUART
J. MANNI."

A copy of the Directory follows. The rubrics are in italics in the report, but not in this copy. Furthermore, portions of the liturgy taken directly from the Bible are not quoted in full, but the references are given. We also refrain from reproducing wellknown extra-biblical material quoted in full in the Directory.

[p. 5] DIRECTORY OF WORSHIP
THE ORDER OF WORSHIP FOR THE FIRST SERVICE ON THE LORD'S DAY

Let the Congregation preferably be standing during the Introductory Service. The choice between the following two groups of elements is left to each Consistory.

1. Psalm Calling to Worship 1. Votum: Our help ... (Ps. 124:8)

2. Invocation or Votum 2. Salutation: Grace be unto you ...

3. Salutation: Grace be unto you ... 3. Psalm Calling to Worship
(Rom. 1:7)

4. (347) The Law of God

The Congregation now being seated, the Reading of the Law may be introduced by the Minister with these words:

Hear the Law of God as it is written in the twentieth chapter of the Book of Exodus: God spake all these words, saying: (Exodus 20:1-17).

The Reading of the Law may be followed by the reading of its Summary, found in Matt. 22:37-40 and Luke 10:27. The transition may be made by the Minister with these or similar words:

Of this holy Law of God our Lord Jesus Christ has given us a summary as follows:

(398) The Reading of the Law (and its Summary) should be followed by this or a similar exhortation:

This Holy Law of God clearly teaches us our sinfulness, which it behooves us to confess before God with contrite hearts, Let us do this as we pray:

5. Confession of Sins

Let the Congregation reverently follow the Minister in their hearts as he leads them in the Confession of Sins, using one of the following forms:

Eternal God and Gracious Father: We confess before Thy Divine Majesty that we are poor, miserable sinners, conceived in sin and born in unrighteousness, incapable in ourselves of any good and prone to all manner of wickedness. Our sins rise up and testify against us. We have transgressed all Thy commandments in thought, word, and deed. All we like sheep have gone astray, and are unworthy to be called Thy children. But we repent, O Lord, and are sorry for having provoked Thee, seeking refuge in Thine infinite grace and mercy. Calling upon Thee from the heart and trusting in the merits of our Mediator, Jesus Christ, we implore Thee to forgive us all our sins for His sake. Wash us in the pure

[p. 6] fountain of His blood, that we may become pure and white as snow. Cover our nakedness with His innocence and righteousness, unto the glory of Thy Name and the joy of our hearts. This we beseech Thee, O Father, in the Name of our Lord Jesus Christ. AMEN.

Almighty God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ: Look upon us, we pray Thee, with an eye of compassion, and be gracious unto us, as we now humble ourselves before Thee with sincere confession of our sins. We have broken Thy commandments in thought, word, and deed, and turned aside from the way of life. Righteousness belongeth to Thee, O Lord; unto us confusion of face. But unto Thee, O Lord our God, belong also mercies and forgiveness, though we have rebelled against Thee. For Thou, Lord, art good, and ready to forgive, and abundant in lovingkindness unto all them that call upon Thee. For the sake of Thy Son, our Mediator and Lord, speak pardon and peace to our souls. Let Thy mercy be upon us, O Lord, according as we hope in Thee. And with the full pardon of all our past sins, be pleased also to quicken us in the way of righteousness. Help us to forsake the world, to crucify our old nature, and to walk in a new and holy life; through Jesus Christ our Lord. AMEN.

Almighty and most merciful Father: We have inclined our hearts to keep Thy statutes alway, even unto the end. And as Thou hast put within our hearts the desire and resolve to obey Thy holy law, do Thou enable us to achieve holiness, to live soberly, righteously, and godly, to the honor and glory of Thy most holy Name. We confess before Thee our shortcomings and transgressions. We have left undone those things which we should have done, we have done those things which we should not have done. With contrite hearts we humble ourselves before Thee. Have mercy upon us, O God, according to Thy lovingkindness. Hide Thy face from our sins, and blot out our iniquities. Cast us not away from Thy presence, and take not Thy Holy Spirit from us. O most merciful Father, renew in us the consciousness that we are reconciled with Thee, and restore in us the joy of salvation; through Jesus Christ our Lord, and for His sake. AMEN.

(349) If so desired, a Penitential Psalm may be sung by the Congregation, either in place of, or following the Confession of Sins. Psalter No. 140:2 is recommended (first tune, sung slowly, the Congregation remaining seated): My transgressions I confess....

6. The Assurance of Pardon

To be said by the Minister, the Congregation remaining seated:

Unto all who thus repent and seek in Jesus Christ their salvation, the Word of God declares that all their sins are forgiven them for the sake of the merits of Christ.
On the contrary, unto those who do not repent from the heart,

[p. 7] but seek for themselves other means of salvation, the Word of God declares that the wrath of God and eternal condemnation rest upon them as long as they do not turn unto God with heartfelt repentance.

Or the Minister may use this form:

Hear the gracious words of the Gospel unto all that truly repent and believe: (John 3:16, 36) (God so loved .... He that believeth on the Son hath .... he that obeyeth not ....)

Or this:

Remember and believe the comforting assurance of the grace of God, promised in His holy Word to all that repent and turn unto Him: If we confess .... On the contrary .... (1 John 1:9, 10).

7. The Apostles' Creed

Preferably the Creed should be recited in unison by the Minister and the Congregation. Let the Congregation rise, as the Minister uses these or similar words of introduction:

Let us now together profess our catholic, undoubted, Christian faith in the words of the Apostles' Creed. Let every one say in his heart (and with his mouth): I believe....

8. Psalm

Let the Congregation remain standing, as the Minister announces the number of the Psalm without reading it, and the organist plays a very brief prelude. A Psalm should be selected which expresses the joy of forgiveness and the assurance of faith.

9. General Prayer, concluded with the Lord's Prayer

The Lord's Prayer may be recited by the Minister only, or in unison by the Minister and the Congregation: Our Father....

10. Offering and Psalm

A Psalm may be selected which expresses the same sentiments that move the worshiper to bring to God his gift of thanks.

11. Offertory Prayer

If any Consistory so desire, this Offertory Prayer may be pronounced before the Offering is taken, or it may be omitted. It is, however, recommended that it be incorporated in the service because it emphasizes the importance of the Offering as an essential part of Worship. Let the deacons, having brought the Offering to the table, remain standing, while the Minister pronounces a brief Offertory Prayer, using, if so desired, one of these forms:

O God, most merciful and gracious, of Whose bounty we have all received: We beseech Thee to accept this offering of Thy people. Remember in Thy love those who have brought it, and those for whom it is given. And so follow it with Thy blessing that it may relieve

[p. 8] those who are needy, and advance the Kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, AMEN.

Most merciful God and Father: We praise Thee Who of Thy bounty has supplied all our needs according to the riches of Thy grace in Christ Jesus our Lord. We beseech Thee to accept our offering, and to help us by Thy Holy Spirit to be good stewards of Thy manifold grace. May this offering bring a blessing to our souls, may it benefit our fellow-men, and above all, may it promote the coming of Thy Kingdom, to the glory and honor of Thy holy Name; for Jesus sake. AMEN.

12. Scripture Lesson

13. Sermon

14. Prayer

15. Psalm

This Psalm may be followed by the Doxology: "Praise God from Whom all Blessings Flow," or some other Doxology (Psalter No. 197, 410, or 413). If any Consistory so desire, the Doxology may be sung after the Benediction.

16. Benediction

The Minister may use either the Aaronitic or the Apostolic benediction: Jehovah bless thee .... (Numbers 6:24-26). The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ .... (2 Corinthians 13:14).
__________

THE ORDER OF WORSHIP FOR THE SECOND SERVICE ON THE LORD'S DAY

Let the congregation preferably be standing during the Introductory Service. The choice between the following two groups of elements is left to each Consistory.

1. Doxology (unannounced): Praise God.... 1. Votum (Ps. 124:8)

2. Invocation or Votum 2. Salutation (Romans 1:7)

3. Salutation (Rom. 1:7) 3. Doxology (unannounced):
Praise God from Whom ....
4. The Apostles' Creed

If the Creed is used in the first service on the Lord's Day, it may be omitted in this service. The Creed may be recited by the Minister only, or in unison by the Minister and the Congregation. If recited in unison, let the Congregation remain standing, as the Minister uses these or similar words of introduction:

Let us now together profess our catholic, undoubted, Christian faith in the words of the Apostles' Creed. Let every one say in his heart (and with

[p. 9] his mouth): I believe ....

5. Praise Selection from Scripture

The Congregation now being seated, let the Minister read a selection from Scripture, containing an exhortation to praise the Lord.

6. Psalm of Praise

Let the Congregation stand up and praise God with the spirit and with the understanding, making melody with their voices as well as with their hearts, unto the Lord. And at the close of the Psalm, let them remain standing and sing the Gloria Patri.

7. Gloria Patri (unannounced): Glory be to the Father ....

8. General Prayer, concluded with the Lord's Prayer

The Lord's Prayer may be recited by the Minister only, or in unison by the Minister and the Congregation: Our Father ....

9. Offering and Psalm

A Psalm may be selected which expresses the same sentiments that move the worshiper to bring to God his gift of thanks.

10. Offertory Prayer

If any Consistory so desire, this Offertory Prayer may be pronounced before the Offering is taken, or it may be omitted. It is, however, recommended that it be incorporated in the service because it emphasizes the importance of the Offering as an essential part of Worship. Let the deacons, having brought the offering to the table, remain standing, while the Minister pronounces a brief Offertory Prayer, using if so desired one of these forms:

Our Heavenly Father: We thank Thee for every good gift and every perfect gift that cometh down from Thee. To Thee we can but offer that which Thy hand first given us. Accept, we beseech Thee, this offering of thanksgiving. Grant that we who have brought it may experience that Thou, O Lord, lovest a cheerful giver. May those for whom it is given rejoice in Thy mercy, and glorify Thy Name; through Jesus Christ our Lord, AMEN.

[p. 10] Thine, O Lord, is the earth, and the fulness thereof. Thine is all the gold and silver, every beast of the forest, and the cattle upon a thousand hills. All things come to Thee, and of Thine own have we given Thee. Be pleased, we pray Thee, to receive the offering which we now present unto Thee, and use it for the advancement of Thy glorious Kingdom, and the welfare and salvation of men. We pray this in Jesus' Name. AMEN.

11. Scripture Lesson

12. Sermon

13. Prayer

14. Response (unannounced)

The Congregation remaining seated, this or a similar suitable Response may be sung. If so desired, this Response may be omitted.

Hear our prayer, O Lord ....

15. Psalm

This Psalm may be followed by one of the Doxologies found in our Psalter (e.g. No. 197, 410, or 413). If any Consistory so desire, the Doxology may be sung after the Benediction.

16. Benediction

The Minister may use either the Aaronitic or the Apostolic Benediction:

Jehovah bless thee .... (Numbers 6:24-26)

The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ .... (2 Corinthians 13:14)

Back to Top