Complaints

On July 5th and 8th, two COMPLAINTS were filed with the Executive Board regarding actions taken against Second Presbytery at the June meeting of General Synod.

With regard to the first COMPLAINT, Rev. Anthony Locke argues two points.

ECCLESIASTICALLY: there is a Form of Government (FOG) issue, for the FOG prohibits Synod from influencing the direction or outcome of a presbytery's process to dissolve. According to the FOG, the role of General Synod is limited to counseling a presbytery on the process. Without a doubt, the actions of Synod are an unlawful injunction and should be ignored. FOG 12.22: “The General Synod shall advise Presbyteries in its processes, but not the outcome [emphasis mine], of the actions of the Presbyteries, in order to: A. Organize, receive, divide, unite, transfer, dismiss, and dissolve Presbyteries in keeping with the advancement of the Church.”

LEGALLY: both the IRS and the State of South Carolina prohibit one corporation to mandate to another corporation their distribution of assets. IT IS ILLEGAL!! Second Presbytery was not organized as a Donor Advised Fund for the Synod to have a voice. Synod does not have advisory privileges over the distribution of funds. This is explicit within the laws of the IRS. See https://www.irs.gov/ charities-non-profits/charitable-organizations/donor- advised-funds Second Presbytery must comply with the non- profit laws of the IRS and the laws of the State of SC regarding the disbanding of a corporation. To follow Synod in this matter is to become complicit in their lawbreaking and makes the executive officers of Second Presbytery liable.

With regard to the second complaint, filed by Rev. Jack Van Dyk, he argues the legitimacy of the action taken by General Synod from two perspectives: (1) from the FOG, and procedurally as a member of the Executive Board and (2) as a member of the committee of the Executive Board which produced the report calling for the dissolving of Second Presbytery.

Both complaints are below and identified as
Complaint #1 and Complaint #2

---

COMPLAINT #1

To: The Principal Clerk of the General Synod of the ARP Church

We the undersigned, being members in good standing of Second Presbytery under the jurisdiction of the ARP General Synod, file this Complaint, pursuant to Book of Discipline 5.13.

On June 12, 2024, the General Synod voted to dissolve Second Presbytery, effective September 1,2024. This action was beyond the constitutional authority of General Synod.

Form of Government1 12.22 states: “The General Synod shall advise Presbyteries in its processes, but not the outcome, of the actions of the Presbyteries, in order to: A. Organize, receive, divide, unite, transfer, dismiss, and dissolve Presbyteries in keeping with the advancement of the Church... ” (Emphasis added.)

It is clear that the General Synod does not have the authority to initiate and execute the dissolution of a Presbytery. Rather, the General Synod shall advise a Presbytery if a Presbytery pursues dissolution and requests the advice of General Synod (FoG 12.22.B.).

Moreover, Second Presbytery is a corporation under the South Carolina Nonprofit Corporation Act and with the South Carolina Secretary of State (See attachment). As such, the corporation must be dissolved pursuant to either South Carolina Code of Laws Title 33-31-1401 or 33-31-1402 (See attachment), and the action by the ARP General Synod on June 12,2024, did not comply with either section. Therefore, the action of the ARP General Synod is unlawful, illegal, and unjust.

The Executive Board of the General Synod should declare this Complaint an emergency, pursuant to Manual of Authorities and Duties p. 13, and vacate the decision of the General Synod dissolving Second Presbytery.

Respectfully submitted,

Anthony Locke

[Signed by six (6) other members of Second Presbytery.]

---

COMPLAINT #2

Per:  The A.R.P.C. Book of Discipline, 5.12-13.

RE:  Against the decision of the 220^th General Assembly of the Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church to dissolve the Second Presbytery of the A.R.P.C. - and all associated Index #11 decisions tethered thereunto - without first upholding the giving of the ‘due process’ that is required to be given, per the A.R.P.C. Book of Discipline, to those presbyters and select groups of presbyters specifically named in Index #11 of the published reports that were submitted to Synod (2024).

This June 2024 dissolution decision by the General Synod also effectually served as an “act” (per B.O.D. 5.12) of roadblock - whereby the potential allegations named in Index #11 do not just suffer ‘a neglect of prosecution’, but will forever be unprosecutable once the court to which the alleged offenders are primarily/directly amenable is dissolved. For a court of the church (viz., the General Synod) to neglect to encourage the upholding of an application of the Standards of the A.R.P.C. church (viz., the Book of Discipline) in the present and/or to inhibit any legitimate future application of said church standard unto the published instances of known/stated offence (in Index #11) - before it chooses to dissolve a presbytery - is a serious error that merits a reversal of Synod’s improper ‘dissolution decision’ of Second Presbytery.

Filed by:   Rev. Jack Van Dyk, Northeast Presbytery - A.R.P.C.
Date:        July 8, 2024

GROUNDS (the “supporting reasons and evidence” - B.O.D., 5.13.A) for this COMPLAINT:

The matters of legitimate ecclesiastical discipline, contained in the Index #11 report that was supplied to all delegates of the 2024 General Synod, simply cannot be overlooked. Many of them involve Second Presbytery functioning as the court of ‘original jurisdiction’. Any dissolution of that court places all potential and alleged offences outside of the mandated ‘original jurisdiction’ prescriptions of the A.R.P.C. Book of Discipline. An ‘automatic transfer of allegations’ stipulation - to some other court of the church, upon dissolution of any ‘court of original jurisdiction’ - is simply not found in the A.R.P.C. Book of Discipline. Dissolving Second Presbytery leaves ‘unfinished business’ unfinishable.

The integrity of the court must be maintained so long as there are publicly named real and/or potential ‘outstanding offences’ yet to be prosecuted. The Report itself leaves no room for doubt that matters of serious offence and grave import are before the court. From start to finish, a total of twenty items are enumerated as being the foundational merits upon which the recommendation that Second Presbytery be dissolved rests. More than mere trifles, or singular ‘irregularities’, the Standards of the A.R.P.C. are cited as what was being violated time and time again.

• “Serious errors were made at every turn . . . ” (emphases mine)
• “The Lord has not been honored . . . ”
• “The Standards of the Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church have been exploited . . ”

(All three citations taken from: Index 11, page 11).

Some form of the phrase “deviation from our Standards” is found no less than seven times on page 2 of this Index (#11) alone.

Furthermore, Index #11 assures the reader that: “The following events all happened in time and space, and therefore, the court must contend with the reality that they present.” (Index 11, page 2, paragraph 2). Fair enough. But isn’t the court ALSO REQUIRED to ‘contend with the reality’ that both the Scriptures and the A.R.P.C. Book of Discipline present? Both of these documents specify quite clearly how the assured “reality” of Index #11 is to be dealt with. And neither of these documents state that it is to be by ‘the dissolving of a Presbytery’. That administrative act was an unjustifiable substitute for the requisite (biblical) ‘gold standard’ prescription of: confrontation, repentance (or ‘censure’), confession, forgiveness, restitution, and restoration. In like manner, the 2024 General Synod’s corpus of ‘Index #11 decisions’ created an inadvertent(?) bypassing of a following through to a judicial conclusion what is also clearly prescribed in its very own ecclesiastical standards - namely, the A.R.P.C. Book of Discipline.

When the 2024 General Synod received Index #11, a long list of what was purported to be thoroughly investigated matters (and what was, therefore, to be trusted as being confirmed ‘facts’), it ought to have immediately sought to enforce an application of the Book of Discipline to those matters - before any decision was made to dissolve Second Presbytery. It is odd that Second Presbytery is faulted, in item #1 of Index #11, for something that the 2024 General Synod itself backhandedly committed when it voted to dissolve Second Presbytery - namely, a failure to appropriately apply 4.2.A of the Book of Discipline in the face of known viable allegations.

However, the ultimate self-indictment that befell the 2024 General Synod - in its decision to receive Index #11, and to then subsequently vote to dissolve Second Presbytery - is found in the last six words of that Index (right before its Recommendations):

“ . . God’s Word has not been followed.”

IF this statement really is true, then why is the A.R.P.C. Book of Discipline not first being applied - to ALL matters of legitimately real and/or potential allegations in this Report - before the dissolving of Second Presbytery takes place? When were the ‘due process’ rights, of all of the members of the A.R.P.C. that are named in this Index #11, afforded to them - before this Index #11 ‘verdict’ of guilt was pronounced (and the ‘penalty’ of ‘dissolution of the Presbytery’ thus imposed)?

It was an error of the 2024 General Synod to have both ‘decided’ and ‘acted’ against Second Presbytery before a proper application of the Book of Discipline could be made to so many alleged violations of both Scripture and the A.R.P.C. Standards.

A REDRESS OF THE ERROR: That, upon further review, all decisions made regarding Second Presbytery - on the basis of the stated Index #11 ‘grounds’ for doing so - at the 2024 meeting of General Synod are now determined to have been made in a manner that was procedurally ‘out of order’ and/or constitutionally ‘in error’ with respect to the explicit prescriptions stated in Scripture and/or the A.R.P.C.’s Book of Discipline (as noted by the specific reasons stated throughout the ‘GROUNDS’ section above) and that all Index #11 decisions regarding Second Presbytery are thereby now rendered ‘null and void’.

AN APPENDED PLEA FOR EXPEDITED ACTION:

The Book of Discipline requires that this Complaint be taken up by General Synod (or its Executive Board) “at its next stated meeting” - OR: “at a called meeting prior to” (5.13.A).

Convenience and expediency may incline the Executive Board of General Synod to simply ‘wait’ (until the next Stated meeting to take up this matter). However, in light of the fast-approaching September 1, 2024 ‘dissolution of Second Presbytery’ date - at which time almost all of the alleged offenders and alleged offenses contained in Index 11 will automatically pass beyond the reach of biblical justice per the A.R.P.C.’s Book of Discipline Standard - it is essential that the Executive Board of General Synod hold a Called meeting within the next few weeks for the purpose of responding to this Complaint. The relationship of the dissolution date - to the date of the next stated meeting of General Synod (or even of a Stated meeting of its Executive Board) - catapults this matter (of evasion of ecclesiastical discipline and avoidance of ‘due process’) into the category of a denominational ‘emergency’. It should be declared as such by the Executive Board - inasmuch as it has occasionally made said declaration regarding a number of other matters over the course of these past 2-3 years - and then dealt with them accordingly.

In light of the above circumstance, please do honor this very reasonable request for immediate action.