April 3rd, 2006

<addressed to each individual appellant>

Dear br. <appellant>:
Please find below the decision of Classis in regard to your recent appeal.

Yours in Christ,

R. Schouten
Clerk of Classis

Observations

1. Appellants request Classis Pacific East to determine that the Consistorv of Abbotsford was seriously deficient according to Articles 22 and 27 of the Church Order in its interaction with the material presented by the appellants.

2. Appellants further request Classis Pacific East to determine that the Consistory should still interact with the material presented to it in accordance with Articles 22, 27 and 30 of the Church Order.

3. The appellants wrote a letter to the Consistory, dated October 4th, 2005.

4. Consistory responded in a letter dated February 4th, 2006.

Considerations

1. The appellants provide no proof that they have expressed their opinion to the Consistory, namely that Consistory has been seriously deficient in its interaction with the material. After Consistory's letter of February 4th, 2006, there is no evidence of any communication from the appellants to Consistory.

2. The appellants themselves in their own consideration 5 (pg. 3) show their familiarity with Article 30 of the Church Order, which states that Classis cannot deal with matters not completed at the minor assembly.

3. Classis cannot deal with the perceived deficiency of Consistory's interaction with the appellants, since the appellants have not communicated this to the Consistory.

Decision

The appeal is denied.

The delegates of Abbotsford abstain from voting.