In the June 20 issue of Christian Renewal I asked ten questions about changes which have taken place within the Christian Reformed Church during the 1980’s. That article was written on the mission field while preparing to come home on a three-month home service duty. Having visited many Christian brothers and sisters, preached in 16 churches, talked with mission agency directors and college and seminary professors, as well as having been present at the 1988 Synod (in order to interpret for a Dominican pastor), my impressions and picture of what is happening are becoming clearer. Let me share them with you and see if they make sense.

The changes in Bible versions, hymnody, liturgies, church order, mission agencies, creeds, ecumenical relations, publications and denominational mandates, all point to the denominational building at 2850 Kalamazoo Ave. S.E., Grand Rapids. Even the building got a much needed facelift. The new psalter hymnal shows many of the above mentioned changes and it looks like the second and future editions will have to catch up on more changes. The 1987 first edition is already being replaced by the 1988 edition. How much in time, energies, jobs, dialogue, has it cost the church and the board of publications to put out the new Bibles, psalter hymnals, the new church order changes, etc? The denominational energies seem to be concentrated on the weekly periodical and yearly publications and the ideological discussions associated with the changes the “pro-change people” have brought about.

Change of anything at the denominational level has to be brought before synod. Did the churches ask for a new Bible translation, new creed translation, new psalter-hymn book, new ecumenical relationships, new liturgical forms, a new mission board (World Ministries) and a new denominational building? Perhaps there was a request here and there from the churches and classis, but during the 1980’s the majority of classical appeals and overtures dealt with matters such as women in office, and lately, the uncertainty of the views and teachings of three Calvin College professors concerning the doctrine of creation and evolution. The changes proposed by the appealing churches and classis were dealt with very hesitantly. One would ask the question whether synod overprotects its Committees and institutions? Several very lengthy and unsuccessful attempts were made to challenge the views of The Banner editor. One seminary professor and three Calvin college professors (representing synod-controlled schools) were protected from efforts to stop certain teachings about evolution.

Any who observe church politics must tip their hats to a small group of Grand Rapids ministers, professors, and denominational employees, who have coached the denomination into making changes, which now the denomination must live with. Will the new changes help us to be more faithful to God’s Word and Spirit and to edify the Body? Or will they have a reverse affect?

On the other hand, within the church there are many different movements of renewal and concern. The charismatic movement is very strong in certain areas of the CRC. Increasingly, CRC members are looking for fellowship with other evangelicals, be that in the form of attending other evangelical churches or going on special retreats like the cursillo movement. The movement of the concerned is also growing. The concerned are not united however, at this stage. There is the Concerned Members organization for the members of the church, there are two consistorial alliances, one from Lynwood, IL., and the other centered in Classis Hamilton. The periodicals: The Outlook, Christian Renewal and Grass Roots represent a more vocal minority. The Mid–America Seminary continues to grow, be it slowly, but its professors have made solid contributions to denominational life. These three renewal movements: charismatic, evangelical and the concerned are different from the above mentioned movement of synodical changes. The rewriting of creeds, changing Church Order, inclusive-language changes, joining of liberal ecumenical councils, are not a renewal movement but a growing trend towards an inclusive and compromising pluriformity. The CRC has quickly become a pluriform church in which many movements make their home. The liberal ecumenical camp wants to settle into the CRC and it will be interesting to see their efforts during the 1990’s.

The CRC is a pluriform church, as opposed to being uniform. This is due to its inability to maintain its Biblical and Confessional standards in a disciplined way. When congregations, ministers, professors and denominational employees deviate, the mutual accountability discipline process is too difficult to apply. Enough time, resources and e ncouragement are given to those who deviate in order to try to change the churches stance on certain issues.

What is the positive alternative to CRC bureaucracy? I learned a long time ago that when you point one finger at someone, three are pointing back at yourself. It is high time we stop depending on the denominational professionals to do the work we should be doing. Our experience with the World Missions board is that the denominational employees do a very good job and they should be applauded and encouraged as they had to adjust to many changes that were imposed upon them by the powers that were. Yet a healthy CRC would not need a super-powerful denominational building operation in Grand Rapids. It’s high time we regionalize and localize. It’s high time the classes and local churches exercise their duty of sending missionaries, preparing materials and training Church leaders, just like we have done with Christian education and congregational life.

In world missions we need to see the local congregation as the main mission agency. From the local church our missionaries should be sent and supported. How many young (or older) missionaries have joined parachurch mission organizations because their own denominational agency could not hire them nor did the local congregation have the vision to support them. At the denominational level we could have coordination and even strategy councils, but the main agency for worldwide missions must be the local church, if the CRC is going to make a dent in the great and urgent need for world evangelization. So my question is: “Is anyone stopping the local church from doing just that or is it more convenient to pay someone else to do your job? Home missions proposes to add more than 90,000 members before the year 2000 to the CRC. Realistically, that means all churches should multiply. Is Home missions willing to finance the cost of supporting the hundreds of full time workers it takes to do this job? Of course not. But why can’t the local churches simply, on their own, multiply? It will cost and takes people.

In many ways the CRC is a lethargic church, because it pays professionals to do its job. The professionals are happy to have jobs and most do their jobs well. But the real job is not getting done. Can the local church be mobilized?

I have seen parts ofthe church mobilized. We get mobilized for Christian education, the building fund, disaster-relief funds, and, paying the church budgets, quotas and professionals’ salaries. We have a good theology, to have people pay for such causes. But most ofthose causes are self edifying. What about outreaches? Is church council willing to support young or older couples who express a desire to serve the Lord throughout the world? It’s just as important to help your church missionaries who were called to world missions, be it in a place where the denomination mission is not present, than it is to pay Christian school teachers.

Some will read this as a plea for congregationalism. There is a responsible congregationalism, just as there should be responsible presbyterian rule and synodical rule. If we err in the CRC it is on the side of synodicalism and boardism. The only way to counteract synodicalism is a strong and stable Reformed congregationalism. Grand Rapids Christianity is not the answer, but the church must be all that Christ has mandated the church to be, now. With or without 2850 Kalamazoo Ave. S.E., the kingdom will come! We should give credit where credit is due to the denominational employees and support staff, but the job is not getting done, nor is it realistic to think that it will get done through denominational agencies. Why cannot the denominational professionals be consultants for the local church in how to set up their own home missions and world missions programs? On the mission field we encourage churches to multiply, pray for God to raise up leaders from the congregation (and He does), and help the churches with their mission outreaches. If most people in your town are evangelized, go where they are not. There are still a lot of places which need churches and above all, Christ.

Neal Hegeman is a CR missionary in the Dominican Republic (address: Aptd. 747-2 Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic).