The Reformed Faith is facing a critical point in its history. Within the church, liberalism on the one hand and fundamentalism on the other have made deep inroads. The results have been a loss of confidence in the trustworthiness of God’s Word because of hermeneutical maneuvering, or a reduction of the dynamic power of the Word through moralistic, dispensationalistic interpretation. The lifestyle of God’s people has been affected, on the one hand demonstrating freedom which borders on licentiousness, and on the other a legalism which is a “form of religion” which denies the “power” of it.

From outside the church, the Reformed faith is confronted with secular philosophies (which are increasingly aggressive in this autonomous age!), whose attacks are the more dangerous because of the power and omnipresence of information communications systems. Consider also , for example, what Sunday morning TV evangelists, with their access to millions of homes, have done to the average American’s view of an evangelical Christian. Office bearers in today’s church are finding that these views are beginning to permeate the view of the church’s task and calling held by many of our members.

Within the Reformed faith, those who consider themselves “conservatives” face yet another problem. That problem is that we, in an age of rapid developments and fast–paced living, are perceived as being old-fashioned, backwards-looking, and out of touch with the modern world.

It is the thesis of this article that to be anachronistic, or backwards-looking, is to be unfaithful to our conservative and Reformed heritage. I believe that to be conservative is to be contemporary!

Conservatives: Two Types

We must, of course, define what is meant by conservatism, and explain how it can and must be contemporary. Many, it is clear, believe the two terms to be antonyms. My desk dictionary defines “contemporary” as among other things, “modern” and “of the present age.” “Conservative” is defined, on the contrary, as one who is “unchanging,” “unprogressive, old-fashioned.”

In the face of such confusion, I offer several observations in the interest of clarity, and at the risk, I might add, of oversimplification.

I believe there are two types of conservative within Reformed circles. One I’ll call the Forma list. He believes that “if it was good back then it is just as good now.” He is often caricatured, somewhat accurately, as defining the marks of conservatism as being the vigorous defense of the King James Bible, praying with “Thee-Thou” pronouns, and strict “Sabbath” observance. If consistent, he will dress in traditional dress, favoring button-down shirts over other varieties because, as one Chicago merchant told my brother, “button-downs are a way of life, sir!”

Now, I must hasten to say that I am not opposed to these practices. In fact, I practice many myself. What concerns me, however, is the increasing number of people who define the essence of conservatism with such superficial criteria, quite apart from any principal or confessional standards.

On the other side, however, are the “Confessional Conservatives” (a term a mentor of mine once used). These are conservatives with a vital and vibrant world view. These share a firm and abiding commitment to certain pivotal Biblical principles.

Key Principles

I would suggest the following as key among those principles (although this list is by no means exhaustive):

1. A commitment to a certain view of Scripture. Conservatives today believe in the infallibility of the Bible. Furthermore, we use the word “inerrant” to explain what is meant by infallible, since so many play fast and loose with the meaning of that term. In addition, we believe the Bible to reveal the unity of the history of salvation. This is a view quite the opposite of most fundamentalistic evangelicals who seem to control many of the media today. Their a–historical, proof-texting method robs the Divine Word of its power, and invites the “individual revelations” so frequently touted today.

2. A commitment to a certain view of the Doctrines of Grace. Conservatives highly prize the emphasis of our forefathers on the sovereign work of God in redemption, believing that the Bible clearly teaches the depravity of man in sin. This is quite the contrary of the aggressive Arminianism now filling both airwaves and pulpits. 3. A commitment to a certain view of Faith. I mean by this term something much broader than that act of believing appropriation of God’s gifts. I mean, rather, a faith-shaped view of life, of God’s world, and of our place in it. I think confessional conservatives would characterize their faith as being covenantal and Kingdom oriented—that is, living in the awareness of the covenant relation between God and His people, and in the vital recognition of the breadth of Christ’s Kingly rule over every area of life, recognizing that all of life is holy before Him.

Within that view of faithful living, of course, the Church occupies a central place. Confessional conservatives have a “high” view of the Church, believing that the body of Christ truly holds the keys of the kingdom, and alone administers the means of grace unto the establishment and strengthening of faith in God’s people.

Now, these “key principles” are not a new definition, nor a private listing for the sake of this article. Rather, they reflect the very essence of the Reformation, for they reflect the bywords of that Reformation: Sola Scriptura, Sola Gratia, Sola Fidae!

That is why I called this brand of conservatism Confessional: it comes to expression in the Reformed Confessions of the Church. These, we believe, are not merely old documents, but accurately reflect Biblical truths which are vital for every age!

The Agenda

One of the slogans of the Reformation was: “to be Reformed is to be always Reforming.” Because that is true , confessional conservatives may never “rest on their principles,” no matter how vital they are. Always those principles must undergird contemporary calls to reformation.

When I was ordained, I was charged to “study the Word, study your people, and study the TIMES!” Indeed, Paul tells Timothy the same thing in I Tim. 4 and in II Tim. 4. Because of the times in which we live, and in the times in which we live, the church’s task is to proclaim the Gospel which is ever fresh, ever vital.

I suggest that we conservatives might serve the church well by offering an agenda for action, and to alert our people to contemporary attacks on the Reformed faith. I offer the following for your consideration:

1. Theological. While it is true that there is nothing new under the sun, and that old heresies appear in new clothes, it is also true that the new forms of old heresies often confuse. Theologically, one of the old heresies is the man centered subjectivism of Pelagius and Arminius. The new garment of today goes by a variety of different names. One of them is consensus theology. I heard quite a bit of this at Synod this summer. One eloquent (but wrong!) speech argued that women in office must be Biblically permissible because the Spirit has been leading the church into a unified consensus on the issue. One quickly sees that the premise of the argument—that in consensus lies the Spirit’s leading—is a man—weighted imbalance which denies that the Word alone is the source of all truth, and which is contradicted by history which reveals time and again that that which is popular is not necessarily that which is right!

Secondly, we need to be alert to the concept of office and ordination in its new dress. The shift has been away from the emphasis on the divine conference of office and ordination, to the human-sided emphasis on the “recognition of gifts.” Office becomes, then, less than authoritative, and is seen merely as “function” (see Report 44, 1973 Acts of Synod).

Thirdly, we need to be keenly aware of the relativism which sees Truth as understood and existing only in relation to man. This dressed–up Barthianism is the foundation for the GKN (the Reformed Church in the Netherlands) report on Scripture entitled God Met Ons.

And, we need to be sensitive to the neo-pelagianism which undergirds the positive–mental–attitude approach of men like Schuller. For Schuller, sin is defined as failing to reach one’s potential, failing to be what one can be.

1. Ecclesiastical. The modernist’s view of the church has, for a long time, been in conflict with Biblical teaching. New clothes again appear, however, requiring our attention and response. Today, the Ecumenical movement has gathered new momentum, re-defining pluriformity as egalitarianism, and erasing any clear distinctions between the True and the False church, as the Belgic Confession describes them. In contrast with this, we need to practice and promote Reformed Ecumenism. We need to pray and work for that for which Christ prayed: “that they may be one.” But we need to do so in an awareness of who “they” are: the confessing body of believers in Christ who believe His Word. In short, those who believe with us should be one with us. But those who do not, irrespective of heritage or name, ought not!

2. Also on the ecclesiastical front, the contemporary conservative must recognize the changes in society. Gone are the days when the Reformed faith was expressed almost exclusively in rural settings. Today the urban or suburban setting of the church is much more commonplace. We need to wrestle for answers to the question: “How best can we minister to people who live in today’s cities, with today ‘s fears, in today’s timetables?” For gone are the days of catechism-on–Saturday-while-the–folks-shop–in-town. Likewise, gone are the days when the CRC is almost exclusively Dutch. Minority churches, and minority membership in “Dutch” background churches, are increasing, and we ought to praise God for that. We may not be a stumbling block, limiting the church to “our kind” ethnically. We must recognize, and practice, the proper definition of “our kind”—those in Christ from every nation and tribe and people and tongue!

3. Science and Scripture. Not much needs to be said here, except that evolutionism is gradually becoming more and more accepted in many circles, and the faith in the scientific method which underlies it is seldom exposed or contradicted. Conservatives need to do more than merely promote creationism. We need to forthrightly expose the religious roots of modern scientific methodology.

This is especially urgent in view of the fact that the twin sister of an uncritical acceptance of the scientific method is the critical approach to the text of Scripture!

4. Philosophy. While there is not time or space to be exhaustive here about the new philosophies of the day, we do need to remind conservatives of the secular humanism which characterizes our age. We also need to be alert to new twists, one of which is “linguistic analysis.” The Rev. C. Starn, in the September issue of Reformed Perspective magazine, explains for us how dangerous this philosophy is when he reminds us that toleration and dialogue between different views are all considered to be essential to the discovery of truth. As a consequence, the authoritative proclamation known as preaching must be replaced by dialogue. And, says Starn, “The modern, dialogical sermon is not delivered in the conviction that it is the Lord who speaks in His Word to His people, but it is presented in the hope that former ideas (expressed in the Bible) may inspire us to find new truths in a complex society . . . . The preacher does not proclaim Truth, but the preacher and the congregation are together enroute to discovering Truth” (p. 5).

5. Lifestyle. The CRC has long had “on the books” a position on “worldly amusements.” This oft-maligned position correctly asked the question, “what ought to amuse children of God?” But, in our day, when movies are most often trash, the prohibition against movie attendance would be of little value. Today, TV and video tapes render obsolete the old categories. Conservatives need to do some pioneer work in analysis and evaluation of popular amusements in today’s world, in order to assist the people of God today.

Besides in clarifying perspectives on amusements, conservatives need to lead the way in recapturing the Reformed sense of vocation, or “calling” in the whole arena of labor. Today’s workers function almost exclusively with a pragmatic concept of work: it earns dollars, which buy happiness. We need rather to proclaim work as holy unto the Lord, and as service in His Kingdom.

Not Just An Emphasis!

Obviously, the agenda could be extended, and even multiplied. I do not intend it to be exhaustive; only stimulating. I trust, however, that you see the point: confessional conservatism must proclaim traditional, Biblical, normative Truth, but must do so in this world, to this age, in the light of today’s evils! It may not be backwards-looking traditionalism, paralyzed into inaction by the fear of disrupting the status quo. It may not be mere reactionism, existing only to criticize others’ proposed solutions to the problems of the day. If my earlier thesis is correct, that conservatism is the vital, heart-and-soul essence of the Reformed spirit; it is imperative that conservatives not be content to be an “emphasis”—the right wing counterbalancing the left—but rather see themselves as the dynamic, moving force which must give prophetic leadership in today’s church and world.

I do not suggest that we throw out the old ways; I do insist that we not view past and present as antithetical. The principles of the past—of the Reformation—are the very same confessional principles which must guide us in our prophetic calling today.

   

Note: This address was given by John R. Sittema, the pastor of the First Christian Reformed Church of Pella, Iowa, at the annual meeting of the Reformed Fellowship at the Kelloggsville C.R. Church ofGrand Rapids, Michigan, on the evening of Sept. 29, 1983.