During the last few months, and also in former years, we have heard about and read articles on “Concerns for the Church.” This should not surprise us. The church is and should be a most important thing in our lives. We read in article 27 of the Belgic Confession, “We believe and profess one catholic or universal church, which is a holy congregation of true Christian believers, all expecting their salvation in Jesus Christ, being washed by His blood, sanctified and sealed by the Holy Spirit.” The Heidelberg Catechism further describes the church as “a community chosen for eternal life and united in true faith.” When we take a close look at the (visible) church we see many different churches and denominations. Living in a sinful world we know that sin also enters the organized church. This has over the centuries caused many tensions, divisions and brokenness in the body of Christ.

Our own Christian Reformed Church is not escaping tensions, divisions and brokenness either. Several examples of recent years drive that point home. In the early seventies there appeared among us a booklet entitled “Out of Concern for the Church.” It was a collection of five articles in which the writers articulated their concerns for the church. In the articles they lamented that “the church has failed to disturb modern society with the prophetic Word of judgement or healing; because, to an alarming degree the church has become an expression of modern society.” Their call for action and reformation was received with apprehension and distrust by some and heralded by others. Some members left their respective church to join congregations which put more stress on the Kingdom aspects of the church. It shook many into an awareness of the teaching of the Word of God that Christ is not only our Saviour but also our King.

Also in those years we witnessed the growth of the full Gospel movement which also affected our churches, especially in Canada. Several members left to form new groups of believers or to join other churches. They claimed to have received a “second blessing” and were rejoicing in “the fullness of the Spirit,” a fullness they claimed they had not found in many of the churches they left. Some indeed manifested a fuller Christian life, but others started church shopping and hopping. A few ended up confused and refrained from joining any fellowship of believers. This too shook our churches and resulted in a deeper faith commitment of many and a greater apprehension for the Reformed interpretation of the Word of God.

In the past couple of years we have witnessed the resignation of some of our ministers and the establishment of a few small congregations. They claim that the Christian Reformed Church is departing from the faith of the fathers and that the foundations of our faith are being changed.

They point to the uncertainty among us about the authority of scripture, the creation account of Genesis, the headship of man and the place of women in the church, to the confusion of many parents and their children, to the multitude of counseling clinics used by our people, to the lack of distinction in the lifestyles between our people and those of the world. One of the recurring and main complaints is about decisions made by Synods in recent years, especially the adoption of report 44 by the Synod of 1973 (on the nature and extent of Biblical authority). The adoption of this report, they claim, opened the door to other decisions which they felt were contrary to the Word of God.

We have also read a couple of years ago a booklet entitled “Our Testimony and Appeal to our Brothers and Sisters in the Christian Reformed Church,” written at the request of the Reformed Fellowship by several ministers from Iowa. We all know about the establishment last year of the Mid-America Reformed Seminary (MARS) at Orange City, Iowa.

What do we say about all these things, especially the forming of new congregations, which seems divisive and individualistic? What can the average church member like you and me do about it? I am not going to detail the reasons for the happenings and tensions among us. I prefer to leave that to the people more qualified on the subject than I am. But, I do want to point out some trends which I believe have led us into the present situations and will be presumptious enough to make some suggestions, especially pertaining to the role of the elders in our denomination.

What can we do as a church in situations I have described? I am sure that many of us share some of the same concerns as those expressed by the Rev. H. Bout (see Dec., 1982, and Jan., 1983, OUTLOOKS). But to leave the church and form small splinter groups is not the answer.

Those who pointed to what, in their opinion, are wrong trends in the C.R.C. often accuse synods of making wrong decisions. We have already pointed out what the church is, and the synod is the broadest assembly or meeting of the church. The authority of consistories is derived from Christ Jesus, the Head of the Church. The authority of classes and synod is delegated. This delegation is done by the consistories of the local congregations to classes and through classes to synods. The meetings of synods are deliberative in nature. Delegates cannot be bound by the delegating assemblies. After due deliberation with delegates from other classes and interceding prayers for the guidance of the Spirit, they will hopefully come to decisions that will do justice to the calling of the church in this world, and will promote peace and unity within the church.

I am wondering whether the local consistories and classes have not ascribed too much wisdom and insight to those who are delegated to synod and too little to those who send them. Do they (consistories and classis) not also have a measure of the Spirit? Why is it that important matters (those which affect the life and direction of the church) are in some classes not discussed at all and in others only sporadically? How does a consistory have any input into the decision-making process unless one of its own members has been delegated by classis? Have consistories paid enough attention to whom they delegate to classis and synod? What do they do about elections and appointments to the various boards and committees, especially those who are influential in determining the direction of our denomination? I find it difficult to accept that delegates to the broader assemblies do not have to reckon with the insight and wisdom of those who send them. Should it be always acceptable that delegates to broader assemblies can vote in favour of important issues if a large majority of those who send them are not in favour (and vice versa)? I think that here is where some of our problems are.

I believe that because of a lack of involvement on the part of the elders of local consistories we are seeing an erosion of our beliefs, creeds, church order, etc. Our elders should be more alert, courageous, better informed and more vocal on issues at meetings of classis and synods. They should be offered more leadership roles at the broader assemblies. They should be positive in their approach to the future and willing to work towards decisions that will glorify God and preserve and increase our church. They should demand from our seminary(ies) a training of our ministers that will result in preaching which affirms without reservations, “Thus said the Lord!”

We should decry the fact that many with apparent ease separate themselves from our church. Our church with many other denominations is still a manifestation of the true church of Christ. But we should admit that reformation and repentance are always needed. The situation demands much prayer and dedication of all church members, especially on the part of the consistory. They are the ones who are charged with the government and task of the church on the denominational level and must consider how this is carried out by the boards, committees and agencies of the church.

We all know of the disastrous consequences in other churches that pay lip service to confessions, forms of subscription, church order and above all to the “infallible” Word of God. I think that among our consistories we still have a strong-enough segment that will reverse certain objectionable trends in our church. They have the strength that needs to be exercised more, namely the strength of majority.

Finally our hope does not rest on consistories, classis or synods, but first and finally, on God who watches over His church. He in His providence is still able to raise up people among us who are becoming disillusioned with liberal experimentation in interpreting scripture. Let their voices be heard in consistories, at the broader assemblies, boards and committees and our higher institutions of learning.

Note: Mr. Hilbert Rumph’s address is Box 4, Drayton, Ontario. He has served as an elder and delegate to synod.