Recently the classis in which I serve received a visit from a member of the faculty of Calvin Seminary. The professor in addressing the delegates to classis adopted as his theme “The Unity between Calvin Seminary and the Church.” The speaker in pleading for this unity described it as twofold. He spoke first of a confessional unity which should mark the relationship between school and church because both hold to the same confessions. He then went on to say that because church and school are both involved in the same ministries there should also be an experiential unity. In the discussion which followed the professor’s speech and in the questions which were asked by the delegates to classis it became evident that the unity described for us is sorely lacking.
Why is there a lack of unity between the church and her seminary? Why has it become necessary for faculty members to travel about the country addressing the various classes in quest of unity? The classis of which I am a member is marked by a deep commitment to the Bible as the inspired, infallible and authoritative Word of God. There is also a strong loyalty to the confessional standards of the Reformed faith. People with such a commitment and loyalty to the Word and the Creeds are often accused of being “disrupters of the peace” and “destroyers of unity.” But is such really the case? I think not!
In the discussion which took place at classis, attention was directed to the section entitled “Awards and Scholarships” in the Calvin Theological Seminary Biennial Catalog 1981–1983. On page 34 we read, “Women in Ministry Scholarship – A scholarship equivalent to one year’s tuition is available to women wishing to pursue studies in the seminary’s M.Div. program.” Earlier on page 19 of the same catalog we find a description of the M.Div. program. The catalog says: “The Master of Divinity program is designed primarily for persons wishing to prepare themselves for the ordained ministry.” Regardless of whether the “Women in Ministry Scholarship” is financed by private endowment or through quota dollars the question remains, Why would a seminary which professes to be obedient to the Word of God and loyal to the confessions of the church which supports it offer a scholarship to women for a course designed to prepare for candidacy in the ordained ministry? When questioned about it the professor could only plead ignorance.
Following the meeting of classis I reflected upon the discussion and recalled the letter written to the delegates of the Synod of 1978 by Dr. Melvin Rugen, professor of pastoral care at Calvin Seminary. In the letter in which he pleads for the candidacy of a woman graduate of the seminary Dr. Rugen writes: “God has revealed to us that He leads His church into new understandings of the Scriptures by specific cases in which actions of the Holy Spirit force new conclusions. Since three congregations and the seminary faculty have testified to the gifts of Marchiene Rienstra for ministry, and since such gifts are gifts of the Holy Spirit to be used in ministry, I urge you, the 1978 Synod, to accede to the appeal of the Church of the Servant and present Marchiene Rienstra to the churches as a candidate for the ordained ministry. I also urge you to make such changes as are necessary in the Church Order.”
One cannot think of the above mentioned letter without recalling that the president of Calvin Seminary and one of his seminary colleagues participated through the laying on of hands in the ordination of Mrs. Rienstra into the ministry of another denomination.
Just recently the Committee for Women in the Christian Reformed Church sponsored a panel discussion entitled “Synod 1981 and the Future for Women in the CRC.” The meeting was held at the Calvin Seminary building. Rev. Harold Dekker, professor of missions at Calvin Seminary, was a member of the panel. He indicated his long standing support of the “women’s movement” within the church and served them with advice as to how apart from appeal to Scripture or theology they could achieve their goal by “political strategies” some of which he enumerated.
Anyone who is involved in the parish life of the church and who has contact with the members of the church where they worship and work will know that it is actions such as those mentioned above and others which could be added that create mistrust and destroy unity. This fact was acknowledged by a member of the board of trustees who in his report to his classis wrote: “My observation is that support for and confidence in the Seminary seems to have eroded swiftly in direct relation to several. factors: a) candidate examinations, b) positions taken and publicly expressed by a number of Seminary faculty members, especially at Synodical meetings where their role is that of ‘advisors’; especially on such matters as the case of Dr. Verhey, women in office, and most recently the proposed candidacy of Clayton Libolt.” The professor who addressed our classis was hard–pressed to defend the beliefs and actions of some of his colleagues. The church finds it even more difficult to understand and accept what some of her seminary professors are doing and teaching.
If there is to be the unity for which the professor pleaded, the faculty without exception must teach and act in obedience to the Word of God and in conformity with the confessional standards of the church. This the church must demand! For this the church must pray!
Arthur Besteman is pastor of the North Street Christian Reformed Church of Zeeland, Michigan, and secretary of the Reformed Fellowship‘s Board.