Esteemed brothers:

Observations

1) In my April 21, 2006 letter I address consistory on the differences between the URC and the Can. RC with regards to admittance to the Lord's Supper table. In particular, I identify how differences between our respective church orders allow the URC to essentially adopt a much less restrictive policy of admission to the Lord's Supper table.

2) In response consistory asserts that it supports the synodical decisions to recognize the URC as a true church, and that the URC "remains a faithful reforming church organization, as is evident from the documentation in the Acts of these respective synods." Consistory also points me to pages 88 - 92 of the Acts of the 5th Synod of the URC. Further, consistory concludes that my arguments have not convinced them, and that I "do not properly substantiate my accusation that the URC fails to properly administer the keys of the kingdom."

Considerations

1) While consistory refers me to the Acts of our broader assemblies, I am not told how or where these Acts prove that the URC is a faithful reforming church organization.

2) Similarly, I am directed to the Acts of the 5th Synod of the URC, but I am not told what these Acts are supposed to substantiate.

3) Consistory does not interact with the biblical, confessional, and church orderly evidence that I present. By not doing so consistory denies me my right of appeal under Article 31 of the church order. Without an answer I am left with nothing to appeal.

4) Consistory's actions are worse than simply denying me the right of appeal. How can I accept a consistory decision as settled and binding under Article 31 of the Church Order, when I have proven this decision to be in conflict with the Word of God and the Church Order? I understand that there will be differences of opinion among us. However, when I present consistory with biblical and church orderly evidence why its decisions cannot be accepted, and still consistory forces me to accept its decisions without interacting with the evidence I present, does not consistory act in a hierarchical manner? As I quoted previously from Bound Yet Free (cf. my April 21, 2006 letter): "People are not the lords of the church. Christ is its absolute owner and commander."

Requests

1) I request that consistory as yet interact in writing with the evidence that I present in my April 21, 2006 letter.

With brotherly greetings,

Maurice Vantil