# Outcome of OPC GA issue on health problems?



## RamistThomist (Jun 14, 2015)

I am curious what the outcome of this was. An elder was put on trial by his Presbytery because he didn't get his sick wife to church often enough. She summarizes elsewhere: 



> [The accused] has shown delinquency in the management of his household by the regular absence of his wife and daughter from the public means of grace in the corporate worship of the visible church.
> 
> Central to this case is the defendant’s wife, a woman in her 60’s who suffers from many medically substantiated chronic conditions and was formally classed as disabled in 1999 and covered by the provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Also central to this case is extensive documentation by medical professionals substantiating the variable nature of the defendant’s wife’s illnesses and her difficulty in taking part in outside activities.



What was the outcome of this in GA? Did the general assembly rule against the man? If so, would this set a precedent


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Jun 14, 2015)

I think I read where the GA reversed the finding of guilt.


----------



## Alan D. Strange (Jun 14, 2015)

Jacob:

You can read about it here: http://www.opc.org/GA/82nd_GA_rpt.html. The case was concluded on Saturday afternoon. 

In short, the appeal of the minister in question was sustained and the verdicts of the presbytery reversed and their judgment vacated (by a rather decisive vote of the GA). In other words, the man, who had been adjudged guilty, was cleared of all judicial charges. 

Peace,
Alan


----------



## Ryan J. Ross (Jun 14, 2015)

Yes, according to the report, the assembly concluded by sustaining the appeal and, shortly thereafter, broke for ice cream.


----------



## Pergamum (Jun 14, 2015)

> Break for Ice Cream
> 
> The Assembly took a break for Blue Bunny Ice Cream (which was quite tasty)



Does this entail an OPC endorsement of the Blue Bunny Brand?

Whew!....could have led to a church split had the liberal Ben and Jerry's been promoted!


----------



## Miss Marple (Jun 14, 2015)

Ben & Jerry's is a mortal sin so far as I know.


----------



## Alan D. Strange (Jun 14, 2015)

FYI: The ice cream break was courtesy of Mid-America Reformed Seminary. 

The Assembly, both in its Committee on Appeals and Complaints and its Advisory Committee for such (both of which I am a member), as well as on the floor, gave extensive time to the matter and handled it very carefully. I am thankful for such careful churchmanship.

Peace,
Alan


----------



## bookslover (Jun 15, 2015)

I, for one, am thankful for the GA's work on this case.

My late wife was beset by several physical conditions - the basic one being muscular dystrophy - which entailed her not being able to go to church on occasion. During her many travails, our church, both congregation and the elders and deacons, expressed much compassion for her and our family. There was never any hint of resentment or offense taken at her inability to attend worship, when that happened. In fact, our church's leadership went above and beyond the call of duty to provide for her physical needs, accommodating us in several ways that cost the congregation more than a few dollars. And many others expressed their support for her and us. In the end, the Lord took her home to Himself on Tuesday, February 19, 2013. She was 57.

So, as you can imagine, I had a personal interest in how this case would turn out. I'm thankful to God that the GA took the actions it did. They deserved their ice cream.


----------



## MW (Jun 15, 2015)

Church courts have been known to lead to i-scream breaks.


----------



## Gforce9 (Jun 15, 2015)

MW said:


> Church courts have been known to lead to i-scream breaks.



......And this all leads to a food fight, where Ben and Jerry's is flying from the left to the right and Blue Bunny is sailing in the opposite direction..........


----------

