Magyar Egyház, 1974 (53. évfolyam, 1-12. szám)
1974-11-01 / 11. szám
14 MAGYAR EGYHÁZ Annual Meeting of the Eastern Classis The Annual Meeting of the Eastern Classis of the Hungarian Reformed Church in America was held October 6, 1974 in Carteret, New Jersey; Dean Dr. Andrew Harsányi and chief elder John Nemish presided. After hearing the Dean’s extensive report on the life of the classis, the assembly voted to hold the annual assembly on the first Sunday in October instead of in the spring; confirmed the election of the Rev. István Török as pastor of the Perth Amboy congregation; called on the congregations to prepare uniform annual reports; voted donations to Hungarian Reformed churches and services to refugees in Belgium, Switzerland, Italy, Germany, also to the Hungarian Reformed missionary in East Africa; to Magyar Egyház, and to the Ildikó Somossy Fund; also for theological books and periodicals to Hungarian Reformed seminary libraries. John Nemish, who was elected chief elder of the denomination last spring, resigned as chief elder of the classis. The congregations elected James Kőváry (Bethlehem) to fill his unexpired term. Chief Elder Kőváry was sworn in by the Dean at this assembly. Other officers for 1974-75 elected by the assembly are: the Rev. István Török and Frank Yersegi, secretaries, the Rev. Stephen Kovács, the Rev. Stephen Szőke, Miklós Magyar and István Bajzát, members of the judiciary committee, the Rev. László Hunyady and László Ruszkay, commissioners to the General Assembly; the Rev. László Hunyady, John Marincsák, Béla Kántor and Bálint Balogh, members of the Standing Committee on Nominations. Next year’s assembly will be held in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania. PROPOSED REVISIONS . . . WHAT?!! “What?!” was the question that arose time and time again at the meeting of the combined councils of the Duquesne and McKeesport Hungarian Reformed Churches. The meeting was called after both church councils had already met to discuss the “Proposed Revision of the Constitution and By-Laws of the Hungarian Reformed Church in America.” There were present 14 councilmen, both pastors and other members of both congregations. A letter was sent to the bishop’s office, listing 11 reasons why this “Proposed Revision” was not acceptable to the members of this meeting. To mention just a few: We wish to know the committee members’ names. Terms of officers of the Classis and the Synod ar designated for periods of one, two and four years. What is the reason for the difference in the lengths of terms. A limit to the number of reelections should be also stated. A procedure of elections should be also detailed. The members of the two church councils came to discuss this “Proposed Revision” in a constructive manner. We do not feel that it is our responsibility to rewrite them, although we do feel it was our duty to send the letter, and to submit this article in our church organ. In closing we want to raise this question: Do we need the “Proposed Revision” which will become the new “Constitution and By-Laws” upon approval, which will need to be revised again if the two church bodies should merge, or should we only up-date the present “Constitution and By-Laws”? YOU think about it! We invite correspondence in this matter from other congregations to the above two churches. Submitted by F. Demes and A. Fazekas, secretaries The Sunday School children, Trenton, New Jersey
