In this second article on “Church Growth,” Neal Hegeman, a graduate of Calvin Theological Seminary, with a Canadian background and missionary interest and some experience in Latin America, surveys the CR churches’ growth in Canada.

I. Introduction

In the first article of this series on church growth in the CRC I suggested that we should observe numerical growth and loss in the church as a means of reflection on the condition of the church. Whereas some Protestant theologians such as McGavran and others associated with the Church Growth Movement, use numbers as a motivation for church growth, the Scriptures do not push us to that extreme. As one pastor in the CRC put it, “Our obsession with numbers is fast becoming THE American Protestant heresy.”

Despite the misuse of numbers we still speak of numbers. Numerical growth does not just refer to statistics but people with whom God is visibly working. Numerical growth in the church is evidence of the Father’s grace upon us, ·a sign that the Holy Spirit is moving in and around us, and assurance that Christ’s Body, the Church, is alive. Numerical growth and loss also reminds the Christian of his responsibility in the church. A wise old elder said: “There are two types of Christians, those who build up and those who break down the Church.” We are inevitably involved in the growth and loss of the church. Finally, we speak of numerical growth and loss simply because the Bible does. In Acts we are reminded that the early church grew from a handful of apostles and disciples to 3,000–5,000 within the first days of her empowerment by the Holy Spirit. The church has not stopped counting since.

II. A Brief Historical and Theological Overview of the CCRC (Canadian CRC)

The growth of the Canadian segment of the CRC (CCRC) is an interesting witness to God’s providential use of historical events, political situations, economic conditions and theological trends, in forming and developing the CCRC. The CRC, which finds her roots in the Netherlands, came into existence through immigration. The Netherlands was experiencing economic hardships, political tension between church and state, and religious revival which led to the secession in 1843 of the Afscheiding Kerk. Some of the members of this seceding church migrated to the United States and formed the Hollandsche Gereformeerde Kerk in 1857. From the small group of the secession church in the Netherlands and the United States, immigrants came to Canada around the turn of the 20th century.

In 1908 there were three congregations of the CRC in Canada, with a total membership of 240 persons. The CCRC did not grow very fast for the next 40 years; by 1948 she had 18 congregations and a total membership of 4769. Generally church growth was biological and from transfers from other Reformed churches.

World War II became the turning point for the CCRC, not so much because her members were fighting in the war, but because the CRC received a wave of post–WW II immigrants. By 1958 there were 111 congregations and a total membership of 42,787. The first Canadian classes were formed, which included Ontario (1951), Alberta (1953), Chatham (1954), Eastern Ontario (1954) and Hamilton (1954). Some of the Canadian churches still belonged to American classes, because of their geographical distances from other Canadian CR churches.

The CRC in the United States provided the backbone for the fast-growing Canadian segment of the CRC. It provided home missionaries, classical and synodical administrat ion, theological education, encouragement for Christian Day schools, Christian literature, and a variety of other services. Even today the Canadian churches look south for much of their theological training, administrative functioning and personnel recruitment for both churches and schools.

The Canadian Christian Reformed Church is generally a post-WW II church, with most of her members and leaders coming from t he Dutch Calvinistic tradition. Even though the beginning of the CRC in the Netherlands in 1834 and the U.S. in 1857 were very pietistic and separatistic, a subsequent theological movement in Holland, the Doleantie, spearheaded by A. Kuyper, led to a more scholastic and social involvement emphasis in the CRC. Post-WW II immigrants were more representative of Kuyperianism than pietism. The Kuyperian influence inspired such movements as the CLAC, AACS, Christian school movement and strong support for CRWRC. The CCRC can be theologically categorized in different ways, but historically we can trace two distinct movements within her ranks, the pietist and Kuyperian. The pietists had their number bolstered by the transfer in of American Fundamentalists and other Reformed pietists, while the Kuyperians were benefited by transfers from social-gospel orientated churches which emphasized the Christians’ responsibility in society.

III. Analysis of CCRC Growth in the 1970’s

Being a strong homogeneous group, both theologically and ethnically, the CCRC grew strong but not large. During the 1970′s evangelism growth in all of Canada amounted to 1596. Total membership of the CCRC in 1978 was 77,445. Classis British Columbia recorded the highest total of evangelism growth (336), while Classis Quinte in Eastern Ontario had the lowest number of evangelism growth (74) during the 70’s. Evangelism growth in one year was the most successful in British Columbia, with 50 in 1973. Classis Huron in Western Ontario recorded no gain in 1972, Quinte recorded one gain in 1972 and 1974 and two in 1978. In 1959, 70 people were brought in· to the church through evangelism while in 1979 there were 169. This figure is low if we consider that evangelism growth consists of adult and children baptisms and re–affirmations of faith. On the other hand, there can be evangelism growth which is not measured by the CRC Yearbook but which appears in the numerical growth of other denominations. Persons come to a living faith in Christ through the witness of a CRC person or preaching, yet they do not join the CRC.

The strength of the CCRC can also be her weakness in certain areas of church life. The strong Kuyperian influences in the church sometimes leads to an emphasis on social change at the expense of dealing with personal change and commitment to Christ. The Kuyperian is tempted to explain Christianity in terms of a European scholastic world-and-life view (Dooyeweerdism), which is too complicated for many people and sometimes contradictory to the Scriptures. The pietists on the other hand have been known to spend so much time in contemplating the eternal decrees of election and reprobation, and assurance of salvation that they have neglected to tell others about Christ. Both extremes must be avoided.

In Home Missions, 1979 recorded 10 unorganized churches served by seven ministers and seven campus ministries, two harbour chaplains and several institutional ministries. Ministries through secular structures are more popular than the mission-ehapel approach. Again the Kuyperian/pietistic distinction comes into view where the Kuyperian seeks to have the church clergy and laity involved in the institutional secular structures while the pietist is more comfortable planting churches, developing the church in a community situation. The Kuyperian cry is to reach the politician, philosopher, educator and other influencial people in all strategic areas of life, so that Christian policies can be made and Christ may be witnessed through the structures in society. The pietist primary aim is to reach the human heart, regardless of social and political status and consequence, and form the church. The CCRC shows a representation of both emphases, and this balance between the Cultural Mandate and Evangelism Mandate must be maintained.

The Christian Reformed World Missions’ situation is very similar. Again the CCRC is better equipped to work at the structural institutional level as she tries to effect society as a whole. Christian educators, theological professors, and technicians are sent out into the mission field with more readiness than church planters, evangelists and teachers of the laity. This trend closely resembles the trend in the Netherlands. The GKN have virtually no missionaries involved in extending the church but have a number of church workers sent as medical missionaries and social workers.

The CCRC support for the CRWRC is very strong and her me mbers readily participate in foreign fields. Church growth, however, lags. There are very few people becoming members of CRC related churches in such countries as Bangladesh. The CRC has not always combined Word and Deed ministries. As a result, other denominations reap the harvest in which CRC members have faithfully laboured.

Transfer–growth during the 70’s amounted to 4,035 received and 5,440 leaving. Even though in the last years the trend is slowly reversing, that is, more people are coming in, those received by transfer and gained through evangelism barely make up for those leaving the denomination. Many young people transfer out of the CCRC through cross-denominational marriages or non-Christian marriages, others move away or are employed in areas where there is no CRC. Whereas the historic growth of the CRC came through the church as institution following her members wherever they migrated, this trend is slowing down as members are assimilated into other denominations. Transferring out is easier to do than transferring in. The CRC stance on doctrinal purity, moral discipline and social issues such as lodge membership have discouraged some from joining the church.

The highest transfer-growth occurred in BC with 227 being received in 1979. Classis Hamilton received 187 from other denominations. These same classes lost the most members as well, Hamilton losing 150 and BC losing 117. On the whole more members left the CCRC than were received.

Natural growth is the largest source of church growth. In 1959, there were 1,907 baptisms while in 1979 there were 1,309. The birth rate is high but decreasing since the post-WWII baby boom. The death rate is very low, but increasing as the post-WWII immigrants are getting older. If it were not for its strong emphasis on Christian families and education, the CRC would be in sad shape.

Church membership growth and loss is measured by professions of faith on the growth side and membership reversions on the loss side. Professions continue to increase as do the reversions, with the professions tripling the reversions. There seems to be a renewed effort in the church to “clean up” its membership rolls. Lapsed membership was introduced in the 1974 statistics, and generally there is more concern in keeping an active membership role than a nominal one. The increase of profession can be attributed to the second generation immigrant covenant persons becoming adult members in the church. Profession of faith outside of the covenant context (such as in evangelism) is minimal.

The total numerical growth and loss in the church can be measured by adding evangelism growth, transfer–in growth and natural growth through births. Loss is measured by adding the transfer-out losses and membership reversions. In the 1970’s the CCRC gained 19,804 and lost 10,380 which balances to a 9,519 gain.

The CCRC is growing, for which we can thank the Lord. The CCRC has also lost a lot of members, concerning which we must pray and examine ourselves. I am speaking as a Dutch-Canadian, who was evangelized through a campus ministry, became a Christian and transferred my baptismal papers to a local church. Even though the evangelism program was Kuyperian I became a pietist. How do you record that in church statistics? How do you account for it theologically? Was that evangelism or transfer? Was it because of the local church or campus ministry? Whatever the answer I’m thankful to the Lord for being at least one statistic in the CCRC.

The Canadian and American CRC must reflect on the statistics of the church and thank God for the signs of growth. We must also confess to the Lord our failures indicated in the losses and work and pray for our renewed faithfulness in the vineyard of the Lord. Not all the workers in the vineyard are the same, some prune the branches while others pick the fruit, but all should be working toward the same end and until the end.