The purpose of these lines is not to attempt a bit of fancy writing, to strive for literary excellence, or to entertain the indulgent reader by a bit of innocuous editorializing that cuts no ice and hits no target so that everyone may be left at peace in Zion. No, not that.
The times leave us without excuse for merely writing words, words, words. To be sure, at such a time as this we must write not merely because we have to say something but rather because we have something to say. Our purpose is to attempt to give straightforward and down-to-earth guidance for conservatives confronted with a dilemma in a changing church, more particularly the CRC.
To get right to the point, the question is whether we should advocate secession or polarization. My purpose is to definitely recommend the latter (polarization) rather than the former (secession). As best I know how, I wish in simple terms and by the question-and-answer method to point out what appears to me to be the course to follow.
QUESTION – What are the changes in the CRC that increasingly confront conservatives with a dilemma as to what to do?
ANSWER – In response to a question about this, last month, I enumerated specific times as a cause for concern. It may not be superfluous to repeat these at this time and also to add certain other matters that have come to mind since then. Here is the list:
1. Inroads being made by the so-called ‘New Hermeneutics’ in the CRC, involving the question of the historicitiy of the opening chapters of Genesis. Hermeneutics is the term used in theology for the study of the interpretation of Scripture.
2. Theistic evolution.
3. Objections to signing the Form of Subscription (this Form is on page 71 in the back of the Psalter Hymnal).
4. Dialog and other activities usurping the place of the preaching of the Word, which is the first mark of the true church.
5. Calling into question the infallibility and the inerrancy of Scripture (“Infallible—incapable of error, inerrant—free from error” –Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary, 1973).
6. Neo-Pentecostalism, tongue speaking, faith healing.
7. The initial unwillingness of the e Re to support an avowedly Reformed school for the training of ministers in Nigeria while the denomination was willing to support TCNN with its CRC -Baptist-Lutheran faculty. To this day the CRC officially gives only limited support to RTCN (Reformed Theological College of Nigeria) and it is no secret that its principal, Rev. Timothy Monsma, is not allowed to make a plea for its financial support.
8. Agitation in the CRC for open versus close Communion. If my informants are correct, open Communion is also being practiced.
9. Continued agitation to accept lodge members into the CRC.
10. The readiness of the CRC to officially approve of closer fellowship with the RCA (Reformed Church in America) without first trying to resolve the very real difference between us.
11. The failure of the CRC to come to a closer relation with the Orthodox Presbyterian Church and the Canadian Reformed Churches while we prolong our sister-church relation with the Gereformeerde Kerken in The Netherlands with their membership in the World Council of Churches and their teachings of Kuitert, Lever, and others like them.
12. Homosexuality decision of the 1973 Synod.
13. Open statement by a member of the Board of Trustees of Calvin College and Seminary: “Our campuses do not radiate enthusiasm for the Reformed heritage. There appears to be an absence of passionate commitment to the faith of the fathers” (THE OUTLOOK, Dec. 1973).
14. Inroads being made by the AACS (Association for the Advancement of Christian Scholarship). The 1973 CRC Synod, in recommending this cause and others for financial support, stated: “The number of offerings, or any amount to be given to these causes, is a matter that each council should decide.” We urge consistories to make a careful study of the writings of leaders in the AACS before taking offerings for it.
15. Public repudiation by a CRC minister of the CRC position that, in the light of Scripture, adultery is the only ground for divorce (See Reformed Journal, Dec. 1973, pp. 16, 17).
16. Finally, an elder in a CRC congregation in Grand Rapids suggests that the lack of church discipline should definitely be added to this list.
QUESTION – How are we to understand the terms, secession and polarization?
ANSWER – Secession is withdrawal from the church as an individual or as a group, either to affiliate elsewhere or to organize a new church. Polarization is used here figuratively for the attraction to a certain pole or center, in distinction from another, for the purpose of fellowship and action. Thus understood, it simply means that in a church “birds of a feather Rock together.” In Dutch one says, “Soort zoekt soort.” In a church also, not only conservatives but also liberals seek the company and support of each other. In politics it is customary to speak of the left and the right.
It is to be understood that, in church history, polarization precedes secession. This is the pattern followed in the founding of new denominations. Presumably, it could be documented without any trouble that this was the course followed in de Afscheiding (the Secession) on the part of our ecclesiastical forebears in The Netherlands in 1834, on the part of those who were used of God to bring into being our own CRC denomination in America in 1857, and also on the part of the recently organized National Presbyterian Church that has come out of the Presbyterian Church in the U. S.
QUESTION – Why do we not recommend secession from the CRC at this time?
ANSWER – It should be clearly understood also by well-meaning but at times impatient conservatives, that polarization does not and need not always and necessarily lead to secession. Impetuous leaders will be well-advised not to leap before they look, to realize that secession is serious business, and to carefully count the cost before they commit themselves and their followers to a course and a cause whose time has not yet come.
Let me hasten to add, however, that acting precipitately is not the only danger to envision. We should also count the cost of delaying firm and drastic action until the church might conceivably have passed the point of no return.
Following are some of the reasons why we as yet do not advocate secession from the CRC:
1. For most of us the CRC is our mother church. This means we owe her much. Think of all the Christian nurture that we received from childhood in the CRC, at Sunday School, in the Catechism class, from years of Christian fellowship, especially from the preaching of the Word, and also to such a great degree from the Christian schools that the CRC officially has promoted throughout the years, not only by a mandate in the Church Order that has so largely been held in honor, but also by generous financial contributions that add up to a monument to the Christian stewardship of our mother church.
At the risk then of appearing to be sentimental, especially to those whose membership in the CRC may be of a lot shorter duration, we shudder at the thought of turning our backs upon this mother church to whom we owe so much. But, of course, if it should become plain beyond a doubt that our mother has turned her back on us, then as honest and conscience-bound conservatives we must be loyal to God rather than to men and we will no longer have a choice.
2. Next, can the conservatives throughout the CRC, honestly say they have really done what they could and exhausted every possibility to bring about in our church a reformation, a housecleaning, a purge, or call it what you will? I doubt it.
In saying this, I do recognize the laudable efforts of some who have gone all the way to follow the prescribed channels to rectify a deteriorating church situation and then only to arrive at what has come to be called “the frustration of protest.” But dare we say that conservatives among us have by and large made their voices to be heard and been willing, when they had a cause, to incur the disfavor of others who resent anyone who dares to rock the boat and even the disfavor of the powers that be? I doubt it. Have we prayed fervently and without ceasing for this church of ours?
It is so easy to bemoan what is happening when we are with like-minded persons, to say that something ought to be done, and to insist that somebody ought to do something, but “please not me.”
It may very well be that the conservatives in the CRC are still in the majority. However, that majority will accomplish nothing if they are content to be a silent majority and remain at ease in Zion. We owe it to the CRC as our mother church to leave no stone unturned to effect changes that are sorely needed, and we will be called to account by our Lord unless we are willing to pay the price that doing so involves. The rank-and-file members of the CRC are also prophets, priests, and kings, and they are not to take refuge in the idea that it’s up to the ministers and elders to do what needs to be done and that they may sit idly by.
In our changing church, loneliness is the price courageous conservatives must pay so often when they find themselves standing almost alone as they stand up to be counted. May the Spirit of God graciously give courage to timid souls to make them vocal at those times when their voice is so sorely in need of being heard.
3. Secession is not justified until those concerned are convinced by sufficient evidence that a church has passed the point of no return. The pure preaching of the Word, the proper administration of the sacraments, and the faithful exercise of discipline are the marks of a true church. When these are abandoned, whether it be by a formal decision or in actual practice, conservatives will have no choice except to seek their church membership and fellowship elsewhere.
Whether it is no longer possible to reverse the trends in the CRC is something that may become evident sooner than many easygoing, complacent members are willing to believe. History proves that apostasy infiltrates so gradually and subtly that the majority do not recognize it until it is too Jate to do anything about it. It happens while they are sleeping. Apostasy is adept at gaining entrance in satin slippers while those at ease in Zion await its coming in hobnail boots.
However, until circumstances demand a secession, bona-fide conservatives should not surrender their CRC identity and holdings to those to whom all these do not belong. Indeed, like Martin Luther we too must be ready to say, “Let goods and kindred go, This mortal life also . . .,” if and when our day for this has come. But, meanwhile we are to search and examine our motivation scrupulously to determine that our grievances are not of men but truly of the Lord.
4. Then too, let no one for a moment underestimate the enormity of the task of forming a new denomination that will be entitled not only to the respect of others but especially—and this is of the essence—to the approval of our Lord. The verdict of history does not always reveal that the leaders and their followers in organizing splinter groups have been justified in their motivation. Personal grievances are at times mistaken for principles and the traditions of men for the unassailable truths of Scripture.
Moreover, let dissidents be on their guard lest some Pied Piper with charism or personal magnetism should lead them out of the fold for reasons that cannot stand the scrutiny of Scripture and therefore cannot endure the test of history. In building a tower, wise men will first stop to count the cost; even so, in launching the ship of a new denomination, one must be reasonably assured by faith and in the light of Scripture that she is seaworthy and that our Lord Jesus Christ is really aboard.
All this is not meant to discourage the hearts of those who may be eager and ready to move when they are fully convinced that to secede is an idea and a calling whose time has come. Fear is so often an evil counselor. We are not at all minded to disparage those who have felt constrained to secede from the CRC: no doubt, they were convinced they had a cause and we will accord them our respect. Meanwhile, we will appreciate it if this respect is mutual, and if they too will give those of us who stay with the CRC the same consideration. Wisdom, we are convinced, demands that we are still to bide our time, and that we too must first be sure that we have our marching orders from the Lord.
5. Finally, let it be clearly understood that, if we are to continue to be a voice and an influence and to have leverage for the defense of the Reformed faith within the CRC, we must retain our membership there as long as we are conscientiously free to do so. Our debt to the CRC is great, and we are not to sever our ties with her until we arc sure that this debt has been fully paid.
To those of us who have been in the CRC from infancy, there is so much at stake. Our church is woven into the very warp and woof of the fabric of our lives. Of father Jacob it was once said that his life “was bound up” with the lad’s [Benjamin’s] life. Even so, life without and outside of the CRC may even seem unthinkable to us.
It all reminds me of the father who had a wayward son, to whom someone once said something like this: “Believe me, if that were my boy, I would do this ,or that, or the next thing.” To which the grieving father is said to have replied: “Yes, if he were your boy, so would I. But he’s not your boy, he’s my boy.” Even so, outsiders or newcomers may so easily decide about the conservative’s dilemma in our changing church. But to those who have lived in and with the CRC all their lives the matter is not quite so simple. May God give the sorely needed wisdom, courage, and grace in this to see our calling clearly and, with His help, also to do it as we sec it.
Next month, the Lord willing, more about polarization as the course we believe we ought to follow.
The times leave us without excuse for merely writing words, words, words. To be sure, at such a time as this we must write not merely because we have to say something but rather because we have something to say. Our purpose is to attempt to give straightforward and down-to-earth guidance for conservatives confronted with a dilemma in a changing church, more particularly the CRC.
To get right to the point, the question is whether we should advocate secession or polarization. My purpose is to definitely recommend the latter (polarization) rather than the former (secession). As best I know how, I wish in simple terms and by the question-and-answer method to point out what appears to me to be the course to follow.
QUESTION – What are the changes in the CRC that increasingly confront conservatives with a dilemma as to what to do?
ANSWER – In response to a question about this, last month, I enumerated specific times as a cause for concern. It may not be superfluous to repeat these at this time and also to add certain other matters that have come to mind since then. Here is the list:
1. Inroads being made by the so-called ‘New Hermeneutics’ in the CRC, involving the question of the historicitiy of the opening chapters of Genesis. Hermeneutics is the term used in theology for the study of the interpretation of Scripture.
2. Theistic evolution.
3. Objections to signing the Form of Subscription (this Form is on page 71 in the back of the Psalter Hymnal).
4. Dialog and other activities usurping the place of the preaching of the Word, which is the first mark of the true church.
5. Calling into question the infallibility and the inerrancy of Scripture (“Infallible—incapable of error, inerrant—free from error” –Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary, 1973).
6. Neo-Pentecostalism, tongue speaking, faith healing.
7. The initial unwillingness of the e Re to support an avowedly Reformed school for the training of ministers in Nigeria while the denomination was willing to support TCNN with its CRC -Baptist-Lutheran faculty. To this day the CRC officially gives only limited support to RTCN (Reformed Theological College of Nigeria) and it is no secret that its principal, Rev. Timothy Monsma, is not allowed to make a plea for its financial support.
8. Agitation in the CRC for open versus close Communion. If my informants are correct, open Communion is also being practiced.
9. Continued agitation to accept lodge members into the CRC.
10. The readiness of the CRC to officially approve of closer fellowship with the RCA (Reformed Church in America) without first trying to resolve the very real difference between us.
11. The failure of the CRC to come to a closer relation with the Orthodox Presbyterian Church and the Canadian Reformed Churches while we prolong our sister-church relation with the Gereformeerde Kerken in The Netherlands with their membership in the World Council of Churches and their teachings of Kuitert, Lever, and others like them.
12. Homosexuality decision of the 1973 Synod.
13. Open statement by a member of the Board of Trustees of Calvin College and Seminary: “Our campuses do not radiate enthusiasm for the Reformed heritage. There appears to be an absence of passionate commitment to the faith of the fathers” (THE OUTLOOK, Dec. 1973).
14. Inroads being made by the AACS (Association for the Advancement of Christian Scholarship). The 1973 CRC Synod, in recommending this cause and others for financial support, stated: “The number of offerings, or any amount to be given to these causes, is a matter that each council should decide.” We urge consistories to make a careful study of the writings of leaders in the AACS before taking offerings for it.
15. Public repudiation by a CRC minister of the CRC position that, in the light of Scripture, adultery is the only ground for divorce (See Reformed Journal, Dec. 1973, pp. 16, 17).
16. Finally, an elder in a CRC congregation in Grand Rapids suggests that the lack of church discipline should definitely be added to this list.
QUESTION – How are we to understand the terms, secession and polarization?
ANSWER – Secession is withdrawal from the church as an individual or as a group, either to affiliate elsewhere or to organize a new church. Polarization is used here figuratively for the attraction to a certain pole or center, in distinction from another, for the purpose of fellowship and action. Thus understood, it simply means that in a church “birds of a feather Rock together.” In Dutch one says, “Soort zoekt soort.” In a church also, not only conservatives but also liberals seek the company and support of each other. In politics it is customary to speak of the left and the right.
It is to be understood that, in church history, polarization precedes secession. This is the pattern followed in the founding of new denominations. Presumably, it could be documented without any trouble that this was the course followed in de Afscheiding (the Secession) on the part of our ecclesiastical forebears in The Netherlands in 1834, on the part of those who were used of God to bring into being our own CRC denomination in America in 1857, and also on the part of the recently organized National Presbyterian Church that has come out of the Presbyterian Church in the U. S.
QUESTION – Why do we not recommend secession from the CRC at this time?
ANSWER – It should be clearly understood also by well-meaning but at times impatient conservatives, that polarization does not and need not always and necessarily lead to secession. Impetuous leaders will be well-advised not to leap before they look, to realize that secession is serious business, and to carefully count the cost before they commit themselves and their followers to a course and a cause whose time has not yet come.
Let me hasten to add, however, that acting precipitately is not the only danger to envision. We should also count the cost of delaying firm and drastic action until the church might conceivably have passed the point of no return.
Following are some of the reasons why we as yet do not advocate secession from the CRC:
1. For most of us the CRC is our mother church. This means we owe her much. Think of all the Christian nurture that we received from childhood in the CRC, at Sunday School, in the Catechism class, from years of Christian fellowship, especially from the preaching of the Word, and also to such a great degree from the Christian schools that the CRC officially has promoted throughout the years, not only by a mandate in the Church Order that has so largely been held in honor, but also by generous financial contributions that add up to a monument to the Christian stewardship of our mother church.
At the risk then of appearing to be sentimental, especially to those whose membership in the CRC may be of a lot shorter duration, we shudder at the thought of turning our backs upon this mother church to whom we owe so much. But, of course, if it should become plain beyond a doubt that our mother has turned her back on us, then as honest and conscience-bound conservatives we must be loyal to God rather than to men and we will no longer have a choice.
2. Next, can the conservatives throughout the CRC, honestly say they have really done what they could and exhausted every possibility to bring about in our church a reformation, a housecleaning, a purge, or call it what you will? I doubt it.
In saying this, I do recognize the laudable efforts of some who have gone all the way to follow the prescribed channels to rectify a deteriorating church situation and then only to arrive at what has come to be called “the frustration of protest.” But dare we say that conservatives among us have by and large made their voices to be heard and been willing, when they had a cause, to incur the disfavor of others who resent anyone who dares to rock the boat and even the disfavor of the powers that be? I doubt it. Have we prayed fervently and without ceasing for this church of ours?
It is so easy to bemoan what is happening when we are with like-minded persons, to say that something ought to be done, and to insist that somebody ought to do something, but “please not me.”
It may very well be that the conservatives in the CRC are still in the majority. However, that majority will accomplish nothing if they are content to be a silent majority and remain at ease in Zion. We owe it to the CRC as our mother church to leave no stone unturned to effect changes that are sorely needed, and we will be called to account by our Lord unless we are willing to pay the price that doing so involves. The rank-and-file members of the CRC are also prophets, priests, and kings, and they are not to take refuge in the idea that it’s up to the ministers and elders to do what needs to be done and that they may sit idly by.
In our changing church, loneliness is the price courageous conservatives must pay so often when they find themselves standing almost alone as they stand up to be counted. May the Spirit of God graciously give courage to timid souls to make them vocal at those times when their voice is so sorely in need of being heard.
3. Secession is not justified until those concerned are convinced by sufficient evidence that a church has passed the point of no return. The pure preaching of the Word, the proper administration of the sacraments, and the faithful exercise of discipline are the marks of a true church. When these are abandoned, whether it be by a formal decision or in actual practice, conservatives will have no choice except to seek their church membership and fellowship elsewhere.
Whether it is no longer possible to reverse the trends in the CRC is something that may become evident sooner than many easygoing, complacent members are willing to believe. History proves that apostasy infiltrates so gradually and subtly that the majority do not recognize it until it is too Jate to do anything about it. It happens while they are sleeping. Apostasy is adept at gaining entrance in satin slippers while those at ease in Zion await its coming in hobnail boots.
However, until circumstances demand a secession, bona-fide conservatives should not surrender their CRC identity and holdings to those to whom all these do not belong. Indeed, like Martin Luther we too must be ready to say, “Let goods and kindred go, This mortal life also . . .,” if and when our day for this has come. But, meanwhile we are to search and examine our motivation scrupulously to determine that our grievances are not of men but truly of the Lord.
4. Then too, let no one for a moment underestimate the enormity of the task of forming a new denomination that will be entitled not only to the respect of others but especially—and this is of the essence—to the approval of our Lord. The verdict of history does not always reveal that the leaders and their followers in organizing splinter groups have been justified in their motivation. Personal grievances are at times mistaken for principles and the traditions of men for the unassailable truths of Scripture.
Moreover, let dissidents be on their guard lest some Pied Piper with charism or personal magnetism should lead them out of the fold for reasons that cannot stand the scrutiny of Scripture and therefore cannot endure the test of history. In building a tower, wise men will first stop to count the cost; even so, in launching the ship of a new denomination, one must be reasonably assured by faith and in the light of Scripture that she is seaworthy and that our Lord Jesus Christ is really aboard.
All this is not meant to discourage the hearts of those who may be eager and ready to move when they are fully convinced that to secede is an idea and a calling whose time has come. Fear is so often an evil counselor. We are not at all minded to disparage those who have felt constrained to secede from the CRC: no doubt, they were convinced they had a cause and we will accord them our respect. Meanwhile, we will appreciate it if this respect is mutual, and if they too will give those of us who stay with the CRC the same consideration. Wisdom, we are convinced, demands that we are still to bide our time, and that we too must first be sure that we have our marching orders from the Lord.
5. Finally, let it be clearly understood that, if we are to continue to be a voice and an influence and to have leverage for the defense of the Reformed faith within the CRC, we must retain our membership there as long as we are conscientiously free to do so. Our debt to the CRC is great, and we are not to sever our ties with her until we arc sure that this debt has been fully paid.
To those of us who have been in the CRC from infancy, there is so much at stake. Our church is woven into the very warp and woof of the fabric of our lives. Of father Jacob it was once said that his life “was bound up” with the lad’s [Benjamin’s] life. Even so, life without and outside of the CRC may even seem unthinkable to us.
It all reminds me of the father who had a wayward son, to whom someone once said something like this: “Believe me, if that were my boy, I would do this ,or that, or the next thing.” To which the grieving father is said to have replied: “Yes, if he were your boy, so would I. But he’s not your boy, he’s my boy.” Even so, outsiders or newcomers may so easily decide about the conservative’s dilemma in our changing church. But to those who have lived in and with the CRC all their lives the matter is not quite so simple. May God give the sorely needed wisdom, courage, and grace in this to see our calling clearly and, with His help, also to do it as we sec it.
Next month, the Lord willing, more about polarization as the course we believe we ought to follow.