Response to Orthodox RPC

The year 2022 was a very trying time for the First Reformed Church of Bulacan and its various outreach and mission labors.

The breakaway group who withdrew their membership from the First Reformed (Protestant) Church in Bulacan (FRCB) without even exerting nor espressing desire to further discuss and deliberate their grievances against the FRCB Consistory. This resulted  in their eventual formation of a new group which they called ‘church’. They publicly announced this group to be the First Orthodox Reformed Protestant Church, Bulacan. This separation stirred confusion and undue concern in the RPCA at a time when the FRCB is seeking possible sister-church relationship with them. Even before the FRCB Consistory have confirmed of their concerted plan to separate from the FRCB, as early as June 6, 2022 this issue already leaked into the Protestant Reformed Churches in the Philippines (PRCP). ThePRCP received advanced information of their plan, and used this occasion to spread malicious comments and disinformation against the FRCB. An objective timeline of these events will be helpful to better understand how all these events led to this protracted and lamentable scenario.

Last January 24, 2022 the Consistory of the FRCB conducted a ‘classical’ examination to two of their seminary students under Article 8 of our Church Order. Both of these seminary studentspassed their examination which was unanimously approved by the FRCB Consistory. After successfully passing their‘classical’ examination, both were declared eligible for a call in the ministry. This paved the way for Rev. John Flores to eventually accept a pending call extended to him to be theMissionary of the FRCB to Leyte, Laguna and our other outreach labors. Since both candidates, namely, Jeremiah Pascual and Emmanuel Jasojaso, passed the ‘classical’

examination, the congregation of the FRCB, from this time on,are now in a position to extend a call to one of these candidatesto be the new pastor of this congregation. 

Last February 25, 2022, after careful and prayerful consideration, Rev. John Flores accepted the call as missionary and was installed into office, leaving a vacancy in the FRCB pastorate. On March 27,2022, a general Assembly meeting was held to vote for the next Minister of the Word and Sacrament inthe FRCB from among the two eligible candidates. Candidate Emmanuel Jasojaso got the majority vote and the call was extended to him. By April 3, 2022, after prayerful consideration, he formally accepted the call to be the new pastor of the FRCB. In the 2nd worship service of April 4, 2022, Candidate Jasojaso was ordained by Rev. John Flores in the office of the Ministry of the Word and Sacrament, with Rev. Leovino Trinidad, Elder Ronald Mercado, Elder Jorge Baguhin, and Elder Eric Mescallado joining Rev. Flores in the laying of hands to the newly ordained minister. 

Thereafter, there were a series of events that took place by way of malicious allegations and demeaning criticisms coming from the ‘core’ of this newly formed group which they call ‘church.’This so-called core group is composed of relatives of candidate Jeremiah Pascual and his close friends who eventually unanimously manifested their disfavor over the fair and objective results of the recent election that legally proclaimedthe new pastor of the FRCB. These were further manifested in a concerted effort to criticize and malign several of the FRCBConsistory’s decisions soon hereafter. The congregation waswell aware of FRCB Consistory’s increasingly challenging situation then; i.e., their hands are full in addressing theirecclesiastical labors and problems due to the increasing challenges brought about by the growing outreach and mission fields that they are facing with the new pastor. This new groupnevertheless raised a series of malicious, unfounded and biased observations on the labors of the Consistory of the FRCB. Soon after the election that took place last March 27, there were malicious insinuations in the Council meeting of the FRCB thatexpressed that, apparently, Rev. Flores leaked confidentialdetails of the election results for the ministry. Two office bearers (an elder who abandoned his office by way of irrevocable resignation and a deacon who intentionally shunned communication with the Council and eventually abandoned his office and withdrew his membership) even assumed that allegedly only the immediate relatives and close friends of candidate Jeremiah Pascual voted for him, which, to them, was an unacceptable disappointment. There were insinuations andaccusations from this group of seeming hierarchy in the FRCB’sConsistory insinuating that Rev. Flores is controlling anddominating the Consistory’s decisions. He was accused of having very strong influence on the final decisions of the FRCBConsistory. Because of this, the elders of the FRCB brotherly cautioned them for making such unwarranted and malicious remarks.

The FRCB Consistory can attest that there were instances theysought advice from Rev. Flores on matters where they were not confident in addressing. Because of this, the FRCB Consistoryinvited Rev. Flores in some of their crucial meetings and granted him advisory vote, being the most experienced pastor in thecongregation. Take note that he was given only an advisory vote, i.e., he may only give his advice on any matter on the discussion but was not granted a decisive vote on the issues at hand. The decisions were entirely in the hands of the FRCB Consistory. 

On April 30, 2022, Candidate Jeremiah Pascual filed a letter of concern (take note: this is clearly not a protest) to the FRCB Consistory. The subject of the concern was an infant baptism which was administered last April 24, 2022. The FRCB Consistory was surprised that even before Candidate Pascualraised his concern on this matter, he already communicated and got advice directly from RPCA ministers in order to have an ally and gain favor on his arguments against the FRCB. Candidate Pascual’s concern was extensively discussed with him when he was summoned by the FRCB Consistory to address his letter of concern. He, however, remained adamant with his position against the Consistory’s explanation on the matter. While the Consistory promised him that the FRCB will answer his letter of concern point-by-point in writing, the FRCB Consistory did not have sufficient time and opportunity to do this before he decided to  ithdraw his membership from the FRCB. However, the FRCB Consistory wrote their official position on the matter in the form of an announcement to explain their decision to the congregation on June 4, 2022. The FRCB Consistoryannounced their firm position and admitted making a procedural error on the matter of not declaring officially the parents of the child as confessing members prior to the approval of the baptism. The Consistory are definitely convinced that this is NOT a doctrinal error on the sacrament of baptism. Candidate Pascual hastily withdrew his membership from our church last June 12, 2022 (via email) even before he was able to receive theofficial reply to his concern or even, at least, consider further discussion on this matter. Just like the rest of his newly formed group (FORPCB), he closed his doors for further discussions, clarifications and possible reconciliation with the FRCB by refusing to further communicate with our Consistory. Take note that this single meeting with Candidate Pascual was his sole basis to support his malicious and careless verdict in his publicly posted bible studies on the issues concerned. He is projecting himself as the final arbiter and judge of the truth on these issues.

Regarding the baptism that was administered last April 24, 2022, consider the following facts:

a.) The parents of the infant baptized were confessing members in good standing at the Berean Protestant Reformed Church. Her father was a former office bearer.

b.) Last February 16, 2022, the parents wrote a letter to theCouncil expressing their desire to join and attend regularly in our church and have their infant child baptized in this congregation. Because of the controversy in the PRCP (which was an aftermath of the controversy between the PRCA and the RPC in Northern America), they desired to have their child baptized at the FRCB by writing: “We, as covenant parents of this child, desire that she be baptized in a church that faithfully maintain the truths of the gospel.”

c.) The procedural error that FRCB committed is this: Upon receiving their letter of request, they did not first make a decision to accept and declare them (her parents) as confessing members of the congregation in their February 20, 2022 meeting mainly because of indecisiveness in their‘usual’ procedure of church membership. The FRCBnormally require the transferees from other reformed churches to be interviewed by the Consistory first to make sure that they are transferring to their congregation for right and legitimate reason(s) (e.g., matters of doctrine and practice), and then announce for two weeks if there are lawful objections for accepting them as confessing members of this congregation; only then do the FRCBproceed to the public confession of faith in the presence of the congregation, in accordance to Articles 28, 29 and 32 of our Belgic Confession of Faith. Their issue against this particular baptism, from our perspective is NOT a desecration of the sacrament or of the covenant; to say that would be to outrightly deny that the parents are believersand covenant parents, and that they already judge them to be outside of the covenant. Rather, the issue is that thechild’s parents are not yet officially confessing members of the congregation at that time and, therefore, the church will have no jurisdiction upon them in matters of discipline should they become delinquent (which God may graciously forbid) which they professed during the baptism ceremony. However, this was rectified when the parents were later declared as confessing members of the FRCB.

d.) Being the only Instituted Reformed congregation here in the Philippines with no neighboring churches to consult with, the FRCB realize that they are prone to commit procedural errors. But they are more than willing to rectify should they commit any such error.

e.) The parents of this child waited for almost five months since their daughter was born and were very hesitant to have their child baptized in a church which has corrupted the pure preaching of the gospel. After several weeks of attendance in the FRCB, they realized that thiscongregation faithfully maintains the truths of the gospel. This led them to request their child’s baptism and membership as well in this congregation. For the FRCB Consistory, this is a clear and sufficient indication that they understand and give due regard to the importance of the gospel and the sacrament of baptism in accordance to Article 56 of our Church Order.

f.) Unlike the concerned brother on this issue, (who happens to be a candidate for the ministry) he has never approached the FRCB Consistory to schedule his infant daughter for baptism even before this incident became an issue. He even mentioned in his letter of concern that he would hesitate to have his child baptized in the FRCB if the Consistory will not repent of this ‘error’ and apologize to the congregation. This issue was used by him as a rationale to justify his hesitation for his child’s baptism to be administered here in our church.

g.) Never in FRCB’s history did their consistory approve thebaptism of any child of unbelieving parents which, theybelieve would be a gross violation of the clear teachings of the Sacred Scriptures and the reformed Confessions. This is what candidate Pascual is boldly and carelessly accusing the FRCB. This congregation does not take for granted the Scriptures nor the reformed confessions; for in doing so is not only minimizing the importance of the sacraments but also is a manifestation of denying God Himself who instituted these sacraments. (HC, LD 25, Q&A 66)

h.) The Consistory is bothered by the brother’s position and those who withdrew their membership from this congregation in strongly believing and insisting that what the FRCB committed is apparently a gross doctrinal error rather than a mere procedural error. Their hasty verdict and careless unchristian behavior, the FRCB believes, could eventually lead them to legalism and schism.

i.) The FRCB resolved to rectify this procedural error and commit to be extra careful next time in making important decisions such as this.

Using the words of Rev. Hendrick de Cock, we ask this question for reflection: “Must the children of the faithful and upright members, who have a right to the covenant seal, remain unbaptized? Can the parents be granted permission to have their children where they can present them for baptism without any heartfelt scruples? May they be refused membership in such a congregation, when after thorough examination they desire to attend the services of that church and to partake of the seal of the covenant in the holy supper of our Lord?” (1834: Hendrick de Cock’s Return to the True Church; Marvin Kamps, p.161). 

The FRCB is not appealing here to Rev. de Cock’s authority but, rather, is driving a point of a similar and parallel context which the FORPCB ought to keep in mind so that they would not be quick to allege and outrightly condemn this matter to be a doctrinal error.

On May 28, 2022, elder Jorge Baguhin, the uncle of candidate Jeremiah Pascual, sent a letter of irrevocable resignation as an elder with NO valid doctrinal ground at all. His main reason for resigning, which he only verbally declared, is that he feels he can no longer carry on his responsibilities in the office of elder because he cannot bear to handle the way the FRCB Consistory is addressing candidate Pascual’s concern. He was also disappointed by candidate Pascual’s diminished pulpit supply schedule assignments in giving word of edification. Perhaps, hemay not be aware that it is the prerogative of the Consistory to determine the candidate’s (or even any pastor’s) preaching load for legitimate reasons. Pulpit supply assignment is a privilege of a candidate and not a right. His letter was submitted after verbally informing his fellow elders, at least twice the past weeks prior, that he has already made up his mind to step down from the office of elder even before his term of office ends. He was patiently cautioned by his fellow elders of the serious implications of this plan, which is tantamount to dereliction of duty without any weighty reason to resign from the office. He intentionally did not attend several crucial Consistory meetings during these times, without notification. Later, on June 1, 2022, he sent a letter of irrevocable withdrawal of membership, together with his entire family and refused to further meet with the Consistory to discuss further this decision. His family is composed of his wife, Rowena (a confessing member) and his four children, three of whom are confessing members of the FRCB. Other close relatives joined their cause in abandoning the church, by not even giving due regard nor respect to the authority of the elders nor to the sanctity of the Sabbath worship services and the fellowship of the communion of the saints, causing significant concern and ‘stumbling block’ to other attendees. We have strong reason to believe that this newly formed group influenced at least seven members from the fellowship in Sta. Cruz, Laguna (an official outreach work of the FRCB) without fully understanding the real issues involved. Their letters of resignation are evident that they have a common template in their grounds for their withdrawal. They would like to project that they have deep theological understanding on the issue of the baptism that was administered last April 24 as well as their careless judgment of Rev. Flores’ sermon on LD 21 last May 29, 2022 as the main reasons in their outright decision to withdraw their membership from the FRCB. By the way, that sermon on LD 21 by Rev. Flores was captioned in English by no less than candidate Jeremiah Pascual. Anyone may objectively review that sermon and decide for themselves whether that sermon is doctrinally questionable or sound. Our elders are fully convinced of the soundness of the sermon.

In April, bro. Ben Catalan questioned the validity and legality of the scheduled confession of faith of the 17 regular attendees of the RPFA (Reformed Protestant Fellowship in Albuera), Leyte. He was insisting that a mission field may not have confessing members not until after they are instituted, apparently using the rationale that they have no Consistory yet to supervise and decide on the validity of their confession. The elders patiently explained to him that the whole consistory of FRCB carefully examined these 17 individuals after completing their reformed essentials class and that they, after passing the examination conducted by these elders, will have their names announced for two weeks and publicly confess their faith by May 8,2022, DV, via zoom in the FRCB worship service, should there be no lawful objections received. Initially, the brother said that he intended to submit to the FRCB Consistory a lawful objection regarding the approval of this batch’s confession of faith, but he eventually decided not to pursue his objection.  Last May 10, 2022, bro. Ben Catalan filed what he called a ‘protest (?)’ in writing against Rev. Flores, accusing him of a public sin of apparent violation of the 9th commandment. Instead of applying Matthew 18:15-17, he insisted that the alleged ‘sin’ of ourmissionary is already public and therefore insisted that he should be outrightly and immediately disciplined (a display of utter arrogance). After a meeting with bro. Ben with the FRCB Consistory explaining that his insistence that the apparent sin as public already is poorly grounded, he was admonished during this meeting to be very careful with his accusation and was encouraged to continue with the biblically prescribed process of Matthew 18: 15-17 (i.e., if he is still unconvinced with our advice) until he either confirms in the presence of two or three witnesses that the missionary is indeed guilty of the alleged sin. Only then may he elevate his concern to the Consistory, if indeed he is convinced that the missionary is guilty of his allegation. He was sent a letter of admonition for his careless and malicious accusations against an esteemed office bearer. After the meeting, he remained adamant with his accusation and ignored the advice of the Consistory. He even insisted that the Consistory summon also deacon Matt Raguirag to support and confirm his allegations. Please note that bro. Ben Catalan was a former elder who resigned before his term as elder ended due topersonal grudges and negative impressions on the FRCB Consistory for apparently making careless and unsound decisions that he strongly disagrees with. He has been selective in submitting to the decisions of the Consistory because of his prejudice against Rev. Flores. Even deacon Raguirag is strongly and maliciously accusing and criticizing our missionary and even our new pastor (Rev. Emmanuel Jasojaso) with his uncalled for personal negative impressions. (Instead of applying the principles of Matt 18).

Last June 11, 2022, the clerk of the Consistory began receiving several letters of withdrawal from the core group supporting candidate Jeremiah Pascual, from 10 pm, up to the wee hours following the Lord’s Day (June 12). By 2 pm of this same Lord’s Day, two more letters of withdrawal were received by the clerk. They all have common grounds and reasons for theirirrevocable withdrawals and unwillingness to further communicate and dialogue with the FRCB Consistory. Their common refrain in their letters were allegations of hierarchy, their biased impressions of their accusations of obnoxious personality of Rev. Flores, their questionable judgment of Rev. Flores’ sermon given last May 29 and their insistence of their careless verdict of what they conclude as sinful desecration of the sacrament of infant baptism. What is disappointing is that they were all aware that our scheduled celebration of the Lord’s Supper was on June 12 - that very same Sunday. If they are really sincere that one of their reasons for withdrawing is that they judged the FRCB as a false church because of their insistence of the desecration of the sacraments, they could have addressed their concern to the Consistory first by way of protest and even appeals thereafter, if necessary. Besides, their blatant disregard of the Lord’s Supper, (that even deacon Raguiragrefused to communicate with the council and answer phone calls from our clerk and his deliberate absence without notification in our last two Council meetings, aware that we will be conducting a Censura Morum until his eventual withdrawal of membership) we believe, is highly doubtful whether they sincerely have high regard for the sacraments as one of the marks of a true instituted church. For them their questionable concern and hasty judgment of the infant baptism that was administered last April 24 was already sufficient proof that the FRCB already violated at least one of the marks of a true church. If such is their understanding, have they already assumed and concluded that the FRCB has no plans of rectifying their error (if there really was a doctrinal error to begin with?) or even their conclusion that the FRCB hasno plans of repenting of their sin, granting or assuming that they may be correct in their impressions? That very same Sunday (June 12, 2022), they posted in their Facebook page their newly formed group which they called ‘church’, the First Orthodox Reformed Protestant Church, Bulacan. 

Now we ask, is there really a ‘controversy’ in the FRCB or merely an unresolved issue that they never even have any plans to pursue further and to discuss and settle the real truth behind their allegations?

Last July 3, 2023, FRCB had a congregational meeting and resolved to invite the FORPCB group to a dialogue to further discuss their issues against the FRCB and hope for a common agreement as brothers in Christ without insisting on points of differences. The FRCB sent a letter of invitation for them to consider several possible dates of meetings (July 10, 17, or 24, 2022). They simply ignored the invitation and showed no sign of any interest in reconciliation. They even had all sorts of excuses to reject such invitation.

The FRCB has confirmed that they (members of the FORPCB) have communicated with some of the brethren in the RPCA regarding their plan to separate from us long before they launched their new group which they call ‘church’. Candidate Jeremiah Pascual has direct access to some office bearers in theRPCA due to his online classes in the Seminary. The FRCBseriously question where they get their authority to call their group a ‘church’. Questions like: who installed their office bearers, i.e., an elder and a deacon (Remember: their so-called elder abandoned his office prematurely and their lone deacon blatantly showed disrespect and prejudice towards his former fellow office bearers and abandoned his duties and responsibilities in the FRCB). Who will ordain their ‘minister, anticipating that they plan to ordain candidate Pascual to be their pastor? If they have already judged that the FRCB is a false church long before these events as evidenced by their special bible study on this so-called ‘controversy’, the FRCB wonder how come they still acknowledge the validity and eligibility of candidate Jeremiah Pascual for a call to the ministry. Or are they just trying to force and press on with their agenda.

Last June 19, 2022, our clerk received another letter of withdrawal from a confessing member of the FRCB who is very close to the Baguhin family. The content of the letter is very much like the reason given by the withdrawal of the Baguhinfamily and emphasized that she has already made up her mind and her decision will no longer change. Again, the sister has already closed her doors and will not be amenable to discuss further her so-called grievances against the FRCB.

The FRCB also received reports that this ‘Orthodox’ group has been getting in touch with some of this congregation’s regular attendees and families by trying to recruit them to their sinful cause. Their deceptive posts on Facebook have caused some of the outreach contacts and attendees of the FRCB to mistakenly presume that they are a mere extension of the mission labors ofthe FRCB.

Last January 18, 2023, Candidate Jeremiah Pascual continued to conduct a special lecture to his group (FORPCB) regarding this so-called ‘controversy’. They declared in their position paper that they apparently confessed that they themselves are to be blamed for having been ‘at ease with the culture and all the errors of their “mother” church (i.e., the FRCB). They declared that they have been fooled “for lack of knowledge”. Their decision to secede, they claimed, was according to God’s sovereign and eternal purpose. They wrote: “though our ‘mother’ would never admit that what transpired last April 24, 2022 was a matter of doctrine, nevertheless, they affirmed that the only legitimate reason to break with ‘mother’ is a doctrinal one.” They insisted that church membership is not a procedural matter (as if church membership does not have a procedural aspect in it). Candidate Pascual wrote: “the issue of the sacraments MUST NEVER be deemed as procedural in connection to church membership…these issues touch our Reformed religion…our biblical Reformed convictions…We maintain that as a Reformed church, we don’t deem it as merely human tradition but as practical and doctrinal expression of the Apostolic tradition (II Thess 2:15).” Is our salvation conditioned on whether the congregation we belong to stands fast and holds to the traditions which we have been taught? Is not our salvation sealed and assured by faith alone, through grace alone and in Christ alone? 

He further wrote, “no one should uphold the Scripture by demeaningly disregarding the authority and authenticity of the Reformed tradition-.” What authority does the Reformed tradition have? How about demeaningly disregarding the authority of the office bearers which our Lord Jesus Christ Himself placed in office (sinful and fallible as they are)? Furthermore, he writes: “Moreover, it is such an arrogantstatement to say that we must get away with the confessions and go back to Sola Scriptura. Such statement is careless and a manifestation of unreformed belief and behavior…they derive their authority from Scripture so that when you neglect or leave the authority of the confessions, it is inevitably desertion of Scripture.” Where did he get this declaration and who said it? Notice how they carelessly and hastily judge the FRCB without confirming the plain facts with tangible evidence. All the FRCBmeetings with them and even the FRCB’s meetings with the ministers and office bearers of the RPCA are backed by audio recordings and their declaration in this letter are grossly and maliciously distorted, unfounded, and definitely gross lies. No one from the FRCB said we should get away or throw away the reformed confessions and go back to Sola Scriptura. An elder of the FRCB simply mentioned that should there be differing interpretations or understanding of our reformed confessions, we need to go back to principles of Sola Scriptura for proper understanding. In fact, the FRCB esteems highly the Reformed confessions that their Consistory scheduled a regular bible study of the Belgic Confession of Faith apart from the regular preaching of the Heidelberg Catechism. They also have immediate plans to study the Canons of Dordrecht. Besides, no one should expect everyone to have the same level of understanding of the reformed confessions since the members (office bearers included) continue to grow in the knowledge of these important confessions at different levels.

The position paper written by candidate Pascual arrogantly presumes that the FRCB doesn’t understand the centrality and importance of the doctrine of the Covenant and even the importance of the membership of the parents of the child baptized. While it is true that at the time the child was baptized her parents were not yet officially declared as confessing members, the FRCB Consistory carefully evaluated their status and were convinced that the parents were definitely NOTunbelievers and they have strong reason to believe that they are genuinely reformed confessing members, although they have yet to be declared by the Consistory as confessing members of the FRCB later. In fact, the two office bearers of the FORPCB (former Elder Jorge Baguhin and Deacon Matt Raguirag) were, at that time, convinced of this as well as evidenced by their confident assent to the FRCB Council’s decision to push thru with the baptism ASAP. There is an audio recording of this meeting that clearly attested to this. Even if they insist that this is careless on FRCB’s part, the FRCB Consistory is directly accountable to our faithful Covenant God for whateverprocedural error it has committed. This also will not, in any way,invalidate the membership of the concerned family in the covenant of God. That public confession of faith, the FRCBstrongly believe, is not a seal of loyalty to the denomination or the congregation but to the covenant of God (universal church). Candidate Pascual makes hasty conclusions and blatant malicious insinuations that the FRCB will always carelessly baptize children of confessing members from other Reformed churches without evaluating their doctrinal position since apparently, according to him, the FRCB did this already in this case. This is clearly a case of utter presumptuousness and gross arrogance on the part of Candidate Pascual and his blind followers. They show very little or no respect at all to the office bearers of the FRCB as if they are superior in their doctrinal understanding. We do not look up to Marvin Kamps nor Hendrick de Cock nor Herman Hoeksema nor Nate Langerak, nor any brilliant or faithful theologian to be the final arbiter of sacred truths. It is not even one’s understanding of the reformed confessions, but rather the Word of God alone that will determine whether the exaggerated issue is indeed sinful or valid.

The malicious accusation of Candidate Pascual that our elders and pastor all feared Rev. Flores because we did not even rebuke him when he gave his position on the matter that flatly contradicted his biased understanding. He even wrote ‘they all feared man rather than God.’ We pray that he carefully study and apply LD 43 (Q&A 112) of the Heidelberg Catechism and that he may realize that he is grossly violating the 9thcommandment of God by “rashly judging and condemning any man rashly or unheard…and that in all other dealings that he loves the truth, speak it uprightly, confess it, and that he defends and promotes, as much as he is able, the honor and good character of his neighbor.” This is far more important than a seeming display of his careless theological superiority (?) in knowledge that exhibits his sinful exclusivity and arrogance. 

We pray that he realizes that he is not even a legitimate office bearer (as his group calls him Reverend) and that his group is not a legitimate church from the beginning since there is not a single elder that established their ‘church’. For a church to be instituted, there has to be plurality of elders. There is not even a legitimate neighboring church that guided them in establishing their group as a ‘church.’ This is a very serious issue indeed – far more serious than their careless and malicious allegations toward a legitimate church which they call their ‘mother’church. 

We wonder, Is that how they should treat their earthly mother (sinful and weak like them)? Instead of forsaking and maligning their so called ‘mother’, should they not rather seek reconciliation and humbly correct them, if necessary, out of genuine love?

“But and if ye suffer for righteousness' sake, happy are ye: and be not afraid of their terror, neither be troubled; But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear: Having a good conscience; that, whereas they speak evil of you, as of evildoers, they may be ashamed that falsely accuse your good conversation in Christ.”

(1 Peter 3:14-16)

“He that is first in his own cause seemeth just: but his neighbor cometh and searchethhim.” (Proverbs 18:17)

Last June 12, 2022 a new group introduced themselves as the First Orthodox Reformed Protestant Church in Bulacan(FORPCB). They officially launched their Facebook page after their concerted decision to break away and withdraw their membership from the First Reformed (Protestant) Church of Bulacan. This group was led by candidate Jeremiah Pascual(who passed his ‘classical’ examination last January 24, 2022 under Article 8 of the Church Order, making him eligible for a call to the ministry), former elder Ben Catalan (who resigned from the office of elder in 2021 prematurely before his term expired), former elder Jorge Baguhin (who irrevocably resigned from the office of elder and abandoned his office last May 28, 2022 and adamantly refusing to give opportunity to discuss with the consistory his grounds and legitimate reasons for resigning), and deacon Matt Raguirag, who unofficially abandoned his office as a current deacon of the FRCB just a few days before the scheduled Lord’s Supper on June 12, 2022.

Article 38 of our Church Order states: “In places where the consistory is to be constituted for the first time or anew, this shall not take place except with the advice of classis”. However, their situation here is unique since there is only one (aspiring) Reformed Protestant congregation (i.e, the FRCB) at this time with no neighboring reformed protestant church to consult with. It is understandable that this practice of the PRC or the RPC is not applicable to this group since there is no existing classis or federation. However, the principle ought to remain the same.

Under normal circumstances, the decisions of Protestant Reformed Churches in America, (and the same principles continue to apply in the RPCA) pertaining to Article 38 statesthat, “The classis shall thereupon deliberate whether such organization is possible or desirable, observing whether there be, among the signatories, persons suitable for consistory members, at the same time taking into account the neighboring churches. In case classis, with the concurrence of the delegates ad examina, decides to grant the request, it appoints a committee to carry out the organization.” (The Church Order of the Protestant Reformed Churches, page 20). This decision clearly shows how much care and prudence is put into consideration in organizing a ‘reformed’ church. 

Technically, for a ‘reformed’ church to be organized, they should have at least 2 elders and a deacon to constitute a validconsistory, even when there is no ordained minister of the Word and Sacrament yet. An elder and a deacon does not constitute a ‘valid’ consistory. Plurality of elders is the biblical norm necessary in order to prevent hierarchical tendency in the congregation. The election of office bearers shall be from a nomination made by the local calling church council (or at least by a steering committee or by a committee of membership fromthis group) and such election shall take place in harmony with Articles 22 and 24 of the Church Order. In other words, even under their unique circumstance, they should have taken utmostcare in ensuring decency and good order to even be considered a legitimate reformed church. This presupposes that such decisions require considerable time and careful consideration in organizing a legitimate ‘reformed’ church. Furthermore, being an ‘invalid’ consistory from its very onset, this group has noauthority to further install nor ordain any other office bearers to add to their current ‘so-called consistory’ just to make it appear that they are legitimate and, consequently claim their so-called ‘church’ to be ‘instituted.’

Take note that since this group took an issue with the First Reformed Church of Bulacan (i.e., a mere issue which they exaggerated to be a ‘controversy’) without even exerting efforts to engage in exhaustive deliberations or even a series of discussions to categorically come up with a sound position ondoctrine and practice pertaining to what is being disputed. It was only a matter of days or, at most 2 weeks for them to preparetheir plan of breaking away with the FRCB. We have reason to believe that they did plan for this purpose surreptitiously and ignored the prescribed manner of organizing a legitimate instituted ‘reformed’ church or even to settle whatever disputes (e.g., doctrine and practice) are concerned.

Article 22 of the Church Order prescribes that, “The elders shall be chosen by the judgment of the consistory and the deacons according to the regulations for that purpose established by the consistory. In pursuance of these regulations, every church shall be at liberty, according to its circumstances, to give members an opportunity to direct attention to suitable persons, in order that the consistory may thereupon either present to the congregation for election as many elders as are needed, that they may, after they are approved by it, unless any obstacle arise, be installed with public prayers and stipulations; or present a double number to the congregation and thereupon install the one half chosen by it, in the aforesaid manner, agreeably to the form for this purpose.” The big question is: did they, in principle, comply with this article in consideration of their unique circumstance?

With very little time after the submission of their withdrawal of membership letters on the eve of June 12, 2022, the following day, they already declared their group as an ‘instituted church’with pictures of the signing of the Formula of Subscription of the two ‘office bearers’ (an alleged elder and a deacon who just very recently abandoned his office) were posted. A group picture of their members was also posted apparently intended to mock the church where they separated themselves from. Ironically, they were so pious in flaunting their deep conviction and apparent full submission to the Reformed Creeds and Confessions, (over and above their reliance on the sound biblical principles, i.e., sola scriptura). They totally disregarded the scheduled Lord’s Supper on the day of their official institutionlast June 12, 2022. Do they really revere the confessions and objectively submit to it?

It is worth noting that their leader, (then) candidate Jeremiah Pascual has no experience whatsoever in any special office (i.e., either as elder or deacon) and is still a novice as far as the ministry and church polity is concerned. But this groupconfidently (or blindly) takes Candidate Jeremiah’sinterpretation of the confessions and his leadership, as theirseemingly infallible guide to their faith and practice. 

Take note that it was only candidate Pascual who wrote a letter of concern re: the alleged anomaly of a baptism of an infant whom he (Candidate Pascual) insists is a child of an ‘unbeliever’, even if he personally and obviously knows the parents of the child. The child’s parents were confessing members in good standing in a PR church; the father being a former office bearer in the Berean PRC before they transferred membership to the First Reformed Church of Bulacan.

There were no follow up meetings nor further discussions re: this so-called ‘doctrinal’ concern (i.e, not even a protest) after only a single meeting between candidate Jeremiah Pascual and the consistory to clarify and resolve his apparent serious concernon this matter. And yet everyone in this group who sent their letter of withdrawal of membership used this same issue as one of their main grounds for withdrawing their membership. They simply followed blindly this malicious and baseless allegation. They all claimed that the issue is such a serious matter and even made it a blown-up controversy declaring the matter as a heresy;hastily concluding that the FRCB has altogether thrown the creeds and confessions. They maliciously judged the FRCB to be guilty of ‘bibliolatry’ without even giving tangible proofs nor further deliberating, clarifying and carefully evaluating their judgment. 

Candidate Pascual, was apparently ‘ordained (?)’ in theFORPCB as a Minister of the Word and Sacrament by one former elder (not a current active elder prior to their withdrawal), together with a newly ‘installed’ elder by their so-called ‘consistory’ (legitimate?) and a deacon. He continues to regularly conduct public bible studies online on this exaggerated issue and maliciously present the consistory of the FRCB with careless and baseless biased allegations. Even his faulty critiqueof the preaching of the missionary and pastor of the FRCB isunfounded and debatable. His blatant and continuous gross violation of LD 43 is clearly evident in their FB page posts. If he really has a sincere concern on the issue with the FRCB sermonsand our understanding of the confessions, there is a proper forum for discussion and possible resolution of their concerns. But he and his followers had no intention nor desire to discuss and clarify their mere impressions on these matters further. They already made their sinful and erroneous verdict; as if they are the standard of the truth.

In the Church Order Commentary of Idzerd Van Dellen and Martin Monsma, while discussing the exceptional gifts of a candidate for the Ministry of the Word in Article 8, mentioned the second exceptional gift, humility which is emphasized in this matter. Next to godliness, “humility, from the Latin original ‘humilitas,’ is mentioned. Godliness must be accompanied by humbleness of heart. One who is exceptionally gifted stands in danger of becoming proud in word and deed. He is also in danger of over-estimating his gifts and abilities. Lack of humility would disqualify one for the ministry, though he might be exceptionally gifted otherwise.” (p.45). This presumesthat the brother is exceptionally gifted as what he thinks he is.

We acknowledge that this group has every right and duty to guard the truths of the reformed confessions with zeal; these confessions being faithful interpretation of the doctrines of the Sacred Scriptures. However, they ought to be very careful in pronouncing hasty judgments of other congregation’s doctrinal position or practice. They should refrain from making hasty conclusions or verdicts against other congregations, but instead, through careful study and deliberation they ought to patiently study the matter for the love of the truth. To make malicious and unfounded allegations against any reformed congregation (other than their group) is blatantly presumptuous and dishonoring to God. To try to influence and continually persuade other reformed congregations or denomination about an alleged error in doctrine and practice of an instituted church, especially where they used to belong, is a display of utter arrogance and betrayal. They ought to be busy in their main mandate of faithfully proclaiming the glorious gospel of Jesus Christ and Him crucified. Their incessant rantings on these unfounded issues are not edifying to their group nor to the denomination they so eagerly want to affiliate with.

Proper judgment must be carried out in a spirit of humility, in mercy and readiness to forgive, and in accordance to God’s law. We are also called to judge others only after examining ourselves first. We must be sure that we have completely turned from our own sins before we can speak to others of their sin. (Matt. 7:1-5). Because we do not know the hearts of others, we must not judge their motives (1 Cor.4:5). “Outward, superficial judgment – that is, judging simply on the basis of what appears to be the case, without knowing all the facts is rash, unfair, and undiscerning judgment which is contrary to the ninth commandment.” (Judging: The Christian’s Duty, Rev. Doug Kuiper, p.18) They ought to take heed. God hates such sinful judgment.

Lord’s day 43 of the Heidelberg Catechism, Question 112 states, “What is required in the ninth commandment?” The answer is, “That I bear false witness against no man, nor falsify any man’s words; that I be no backbiter, nor slanderer; that I do not judge, nor join in condemning any man rashly or unheard; but that I avoid all sorts of lies and deceit as the proper works of the devil, unless I would bring down upon me the heavy wrath of God; likewise, that in judgment and all other dealings I love the truth, speak it uprightly, and confess it; also that I defend andpromote, as much as I am able, the honor and good character of my neighbor.”

There is a solemn reminder in the book of Romans, “Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest: for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest doest the same things…Or despises thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance and longsuffering; not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance?”(Romans 2:1,4)

This group seems to have forgotten or has outrightly ignored that salvation is never dependent upon anyone’s own righteousness but only on the imputed righteousness of our Lord Jesus Christ. Nothing is able to pluck us out of our Father’s hand. It is good to exercise careful submission to the Word of God as well as the confessions and creeds, but even falling short of such compliance will not thwart nor frustrate God’s will for His people, specially, in the matter of their salvation. No one has the right nor the authority to judge nor claim that anycongregation is in peril as far as their salvation is concerned simply because they have tagged them as a false or apostasizingchurch; and that they presuppose that they are the only true ‘church’; at least in the Philippines as what they constantly boast!

We are exhorted in Romans 12:3 that we should not think of ourselves “more highly than we ought to think; but to think soberly, according as God hath dealt to every man the measure of faith.”

This group, who zealously and proudly call themselves Orthodox Reformed Protestant Christians, is grossly contradicting their very own confessions and church order. 

May our gracious and loving God illuminate the members of this group in their gross error and arrogance. May God grant them sincere repentance.