The fraternal delegates of the Geref. Kerken to our Synod of 1981 said something to the effect that if the Geref. Kerken erred on the side of not believing that the Scriptures speak with sufficient clarity on certain issues facing the church (e.g. homosexualism), the CRC erred on the opposite side—in believing that the teaching of Scripture is all too clear and speaks quite decisively on such issues. While the Gereformeerden were perhaps a bit too reckless, we were much too careful.
When I first read this, I thought to myself: Ifthey only knew! We are not nearly so certain about the Scriptures as we used to be. Witness, for example, all the study committees we have appointed in the last decade. In many cases, these committees were appointed because we didn’t like what we were quite sure the Bible was saying, and so we wanted to “study” the matter some more to see if we couldn’t find room for some ideas that were more palatable to us. It may sound a bit unkind to say this, but I’m convinced that’s the way it is (take, for example, the question of women in office, the dance question, etc.). Little wonder that in many cases the results of these studies were inconclusive and unsatisfactory to many.
Regarding the homosexual question, Synod did ask the Geref. Kerken “to reconsider, in the light of what we believe to be the explicit witness of Scripture, its extremely controversial and regrettable statement of pastoral advice on the matter.” However, the Rev. John Vriend objected to the words “explicit” and “regrettable” and recommended their deletion. And the report in The Banner stated that “several Canadian delegates attempted first to delete some of the sharper language and, failing that, to refer the resolution back to the committee.” In other words, some of the delegates did not think the Scriptures spoke that clearly on the matter. In that respect the CRC is not all that much different from the Geref. Kerken.
The same can be said regarding the interpretation of the first chapters of Genesis, as this came to expression in the candidacy of Clayton Libolt. In discussing this matter, a Canadian colleague stated that “the simple people back home” could not understand what was really involved in the issue. Another said it was necessary to understand “from where he (Libolt) was coming” in order to make a proper judgment. When I hear comments like this then I can’t help but think of what Jesus said about becoming like children to enter the kingdom, and about “hiding these things from the wise and understanding and revealing them to babes” (including “the simple people back home”).
In a report of his work to the Canadian churches, the executive director of the Canadian Council of Chr. Ref. Churches, Rev. A. Van Eek, said the Council was engaged in discussion and cooperation with other churches in Canada, for in many of these churches “there is a lack of clarity on the nature and extent of biblical authority.” When I read that I thought: Let’s put our own house in order first. There isn’t all that much clarity among ourselves regarding this crucial issue. Some homework is in order.
